THE EFFECT OF TEACHING STRATEGIES AND STUDENTS’ ENGLISH LEARNING ATTITUDE ON STUDENTS’ ACHIEVEMENT IN WRITING DESCRIPTIVE TEXT.

THE EFFECT OF TEACHING STRATEGIES AND ENGLISH

LEARNING ATTITUDE ON STUDENTS’ ACHIEVEMENT IN

WRITING DESCRIPTIVE TEXT

A Thesis

Submitted to the English Applied Linguistics Study Program in Partial Fullfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Magister Humaniora

By:

DINI FEBRIANI

Registration Number: 8106111006

ENGLISH APPLIED LINGUISTICS STUDY PROGRAM

POST GRADUATE SCHOOL

STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN

2015

I ABSTRACT

Dini Febriani. The Effect of Teaching Strategies and Students’ English Learning Attitude on Students’ Achievement in Writing Descriptive Text. A thesis. English Applied Linguistics Study Program. State University of Medan. 2015

The objectives of this experimental research are to investigate whether : (1) students’s achievement in writing descriptive text taught by using TTW (Think-Talk-Write) strategy is higher than that taught by using PLEASE(Pick, List, Evaluate, Activate, Supply, End) strategy, (2) the descriptive writing achievement of the students with positive English learning attitude is higher than that of the students with negative English learning attitude, and (3) there is interaction between teaching strategies and English learning attitude on the students’ achievement in writing descriptive text. The population of this research is the students 2014/2015 grade X of SMAN 1 Besitang. The total number of the population is 180 students and 68 students areselected as the sample of this research by applying random cluster sampling with lottery technique. The experimental design used factorial design 2x2 with two experimental groups. The experimental group I is treated by using TTW strategy and the experimental group II is treated by using PLEASE strategy. The English learning attitude is conducted for classifying the students upon the positive English learning attitude and negative English learning attitude. Students’ achievement in writing descriptive text is measured by using writing test. The data is analyzed by applying two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) at the level of significance α = 0.05. The result shows that (1) the students’ achievement in writing descriptive text taught by using TTW is higher than that taught by using PLEASE strategy, with Sig. value is 0.000 which is < 0.05, (2) the writing descriptive text of students with positive English learning attitude is higher than that of the students with negative English learning attitude with Sig. 0,002 which is < 0.05, (3) there is no interaction between teaching strategies and English learning attitude with Sig. value is 0.079 which is <0.05. It means that the positive English learning attitude affects better to the students’ achievement in writing the descriptive text no matter what strategy is used. It can be concluded too that TTW strategy performs better and superior, which is suitable to be taught to any English learning attitude.

Key Words: TTW strategy, PLEASE strategy, English learning attitude, descriptive text.

ABSTRAK

Dini Febriani. The Effect of Teaching Strategies and Students’ English Learning Attitude on Students’ Achievement in Writing Descriptive Text. Tesis. Program Studi Linguistik Terapan Bahasa Inggris, Universitas Negeri Medan. 2015

Penelitan ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui apakah: (1) hasil belajar siswa dalam menulis teks deskriptifyang diajarkan dengan strategi TTW (berpikir-berbicara-menulis) lebih tinggi daripada hasil belajar menulis teks deskriptif siswa yang diajarkan dengan strategi PLEASE (menentukan-mendata-mengevaluasi-mengaktifkan-menyediakan-mengakhiri), (2) hasil belajar dalam menulis teks deskriptif siswa yang memiliki sikap positif terhadap Bahasa Inggris lebih tinggi daripada hasil belajar dalam menulis teks deskriptif siswa yang memilki sikap negatif terhadap Bahasa Inggris, dan (3) terdapat interaksi antara strategi pembelajaran dan sikap siswa terhadap Bahasa Inggris dalam menulis teks deskriptif. Populasi penelitian ini adalah siswa kelas X tahun ajaran 2014/2015. Jumlah populasi penelitian adalah 180 orang siswa dan 68 orang siswa terpilih sebagai sampel yang diambil dengan menggunakan cluster random sampling dengan teknik lottery. Desain penelitian adalah penelitian eskperimen dengan faktorial 2x2 dengan dua kelompok eksperimen. Kelompok eksperimen pertama diajarkan dengan strategi TTW dan kelompok eksperimen kedua diajarkan dengan strategi PLEASE. Tes sikap terhadap Bahasa Inggris dilakukan untuk mengelompokkan siswa ke dalam kelompok siswa dengan sikap positif dan negatif terhadap Bahasa Inggris. Hasil belajar siswadalam menulis teks deskriptif diukur denagn menggunakan tes menulis. Data penelitian dianalisa dengan menggunakan ANAVA dua jalur pada taraf signifikansi α = 0,05. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa (1) hasil belajar siswa dalam menulis teks deskriptif yang diajarkan strategi TTW lebih tinggi daripada hasil belajar siswa dalam menulis teks deskriptif yang diajarkan dengan strategi PLEASE dengan nilai (Sig =0.000< 0.05), (2) hasil belajar siswa dalm menulis teks deskriptif pada siswa yang memiliki sikap positif terhadap Bahasa Inggris lebih tinggi daripada hasil belajar siswa yang memilki sikap negatif terhadap Bahasa Inggris dengan nilai (Sig. 0,002 < 0.05, dan (3) tidak terdapat interaksi antara strategi pembelajaran dengan sikap siswa terhadap Bahasa Inggris dengan nilai (Sig.= 0.079 >0.05). Ini menunjukkan bahwa sikap positif terhadap Bahasa Inggris mempengaruhi secara lebih baik terhadap kemampuan siswa menulis teks deskriptif apapun strategi yang digunakan. Disimpulkan juga bahwa strategi pembelajaran TTW lebih baik dan unggul serta cocok diajarkan pada berbagai sikap terhadap Bahasa Inggris.

Kata Kunci : strategi TTW, strategi PLEASE, sikap terhadap Bahasa Inggris, teks deskriptif.

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Alhamdulillahi rabbil ‘alamin, All praises be to Allah SWT for the great blessing that have been continuously poured to the writer in the process of completing her study and this thesis.

There are many people that have been assisted, giuded, motivated, encouraged, supported, and inspired her in this endeavor. She would like to express sincere gratitude to them.

Her thankfullness is directed to Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning , M.Pd., her first advisor, for his valuable comments, encouragement, guidance, and patience for her in the process of finishing this thesis.

She is deeply grateful to Prof. Dr. Sumarsih, M.Pd., her second advisor, for her detailed and constructive comments, and for her support throughout this thesis. Her respect and admiration to her can not be adequately expressed in words.

Special thanks are addressed to.Dr.Rahmat Husein M.Ed., and Dr.Sri Minda Murni, M.S., Head and Secretary of English Applied Linguistics Study Program, for completing the administrative requirements.

She is deeply indebted to Dr. Syahron Lubis, M.A., Prof.T. Silvana Sinar, M.A., Ph.D., Dr.Rahmat Husein M.Ed, and Dr. Didik Santoso M.Pd., her reviewers for their valuable suggestions to be included in this thesis. In addition, her special gratitudes are delivered to all lectures at the English Applied Linguistics Study Program for sharing their knowledge and experiences.

She also expresses her special thanks to Muhammad Yunus S.Pd., The headmaster of SMAN 1 Besitang, for the permission to conduct the research and assisiting her in collecting the data.

She would like to express her deepest admiration to her lovely parents, Drs. Nurdin Ahmad and Dra. Dasni, her beloved sisters and brothers, Nur Fadhilah, S.Pd., Rasyidah, M.Pd., Muhammad Fauzi, S.T., Rahmatullah and Nashrullah who always pray for her, her beloved husband and daughter, Ansharullah and Aida Fathiya who have inspired her in the process of completing this thesis.

Her special gratitude is addressed to her beloved friends, Rahma Tirta, S.Pd., M. Jaini, S.Pd., and Neny Widya Sari S.Pd., for their full support and encouragement. Special gratitude is also addressed for her special friends Nurhalimah and Hestika Ginting for their full support and help.

Stabat, Februari 2016 The Writer

Dini Febriani

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Pages

ABSTRACT

i

ABSTRAK

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

v

LIST OF TABLES

x

LIST OF FIGURES

xi

LIST OF APPENDICES

xiii

CHAPTER I :INTRODUCTION

1.1The Background of the Study 1

1.2The Identification of the Problem 7

1.3The Problems of the Study 9

1.4Objectives of the Study 9

1.5The Scope of the Study 10

1.6The Significances of the Study 10

CHAPTER II : REVIEW OF LITERATURE

2.1 Theoretical Framework 11

2.1.1Students’ Achievement in Writing 11

2.1.2 Writing 13

2.1.2.1The Nature of Writing 13

2.1.2.2The Steps in Writing Process 14

2.1.2.3 Assessing Writing Work 15

2.1.3 Writing Genres 17

2.1.3.1 Descriptive Text 18

2.1.4 Theories of Learning andTeaching Strategies 21

2.1.4.1 Theories of Learning 21

2.1.4.2 Teaching Strategies 22

2.1.5 Think-Talk-Write (TTW) Strategy 22 2.1.5.1 Definition and Principle of TTW Strategy 22 2.1.5.2 The Characteristics of TTW Strategy 23

2.1.5.3 The Principles of TTW Strategy 24 2.1.5.4 The Processes of TTW Strategy 24 2.1.5.5The Strenghts and Weaknesses of TTW

Strategy 29

2.1.5.5.1 Strenghts of TTW Strategy 29

2.1.5.5.2 Weaknesses of TWW Strategy 29

2.1.6Pick-List-Evaluate-Activate-Supply-End (PLEASE)

Strategy 30

2.1.6.1 Definition and Principle of PLEASE Strategy30 2.1.6.2 The Characteristics of PLEASE Strategy 31 2.1.6.3 The Principles of PLEASE Strategy 31 2.1.6.4 The Processes of PLEASE Strategy 32 2.1.6.5 The Strenghts and Weaknesses of PLEASE

Strategy 33

2.1.6.5.1 The Strenghts of PLEASE

Strategy 33

2.1.6.5.2 The Weaknesses of PLEASE

Strategy 34

2.1.7 English Learning Attitude 34

2.1.7.1Aspect of Language Attitude 38

2.1.7.2 Relevant Researches 40

2.2Conceptual Framework 42

2.2.1 The Differences between the Students’ Achievement in Writing Descriptive Taught by Using TTW

Strategy and Taught by Using PLEASE Strategy 42 2.2.2 The Differences between the Achievement in writing

Descriptive of the Students with Positive Students’ English Learning Attitudeand Students with

Negative English Learning Attitude 44 2.2.3 The Interaction between Teaching Writing Strategy

and Students’ English Learning Attitude on the

Students Achievement in Writing DescriptiveText 46

2.3. Hypotheses of the Study 47

CHAPTER III : RESEARCH METHOD

3.1 Research Design 49

3.2 Population and Sample 50

3.2.1 Population 50

3.2.2 Sample 50

3.3 Instrumentation 50

3.3.1 Questionnaire of Students’ English Learning Attitude 51

3.3.2 Writing Test 52

3.4 Scoring System of the Test 53

3.5 Procedures of the Treatment 53

3.6 Control of the Treatment 56

3.6.1 Internal Validity 56

v

3.7 Validity 57

3.7.1. English Learning Attitude Questionnaire 57

3.7.1. Writing Test 58

3.8 Reliability 58

3.8.1 English learning Attitude Questionnaire 58

3.8.2 Writing Test 58

3.9 The Technique for Analyzing the Data 59

3.10 Statistical Hypotheses 59

CHAPTER IV : DATA ANALYSISAND DISCUSSIONS

4.1 Data Analysis 61

4.2 Requirement of Data Analysis 74

4.3 Hypotheses Testing 77

4.4 Discussions 78

4.5 The Limitation of the Research 83

CHAPTER V : CONCLUSION, IMPLICATIONS, AND

SUGGESTIONS

85

5.1 Conclusions 85

5.2 Implications 85

5.3 Suggestions 86

REFERENCES

87

LIST OF TABLES

Table

PagesTable 1.1 Average of Students’ English Score (Grade X) in SMAN 1

Besitang 3

Table 3.1 Factorial Research Design 2x2 49

Table 3.2 Indicators of Questionnaire of English Learning Attitude 52

Table 3.3 Scoring System of the Test 53

Table 3.4The Procedures of the Treatment of TTW and PLEASE Strategy 54 Table 4.1 Summary of the Research Data Description 61 Table 4.2Frequency Distribution of the Students’ Scores

Taught by Using TTW Strategy 62

Table 4.3 Frequency Distribution of the Students’ Scores Taught

by Using PLEASE Strategy 63

Table 4.4 Frequency Distribution of the Students’ with Positive

English Learning Attitude 65

Table 4.5 Frequency Distribution of the Students’ with Negative

English Learning Attitude 66

Table 4.6 Frequency Distribution of the Students’ Achievement in Writing Descriptive Text on Group of Positive English Learning Attitude

Taught by Using TTW 68

Table 4.7 Frequency Distribution of the Students’ Achievement in Writing Descriptive Text on Group of Negative English Learning Attitude

ix

Table 4.8 Frequency Distribution of the Students’ Achievement in Writing Descriptive Text on Group of Positive English Learning Attitude

Taught by Using PLEASE 71

Table 4.9 Frequency Distribution of the Students’ Achievement in Writing Descriptive Text on Group of Negative English Learning Attitude

Taught by Using PLEASE 73

Table 4.10 Summary of the Result of Normality Testing 74 Table 4.11 The Result of Homogeneity Testing on Teaching Strategies 75

Table 4.12 Test of Homogeneity of Variances 76

Table 4.13 Test of Homogeneity of Variances of Group Interaction 76 Table 4.14 Data Description of Factorial Design Two - Way Anova 77 Table 4.15Summary on the Calculation Result of Two – Way Anova 77

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Pages

Figure 2.1 Teacher and Student Roles in Think-Talk-Write Strategy 28 Figure 4.1 Histogram of the Students’ Achievement in Writing

Descriptive Text by using TTW 63

Figure 4.2 Histogram of the Students’ Achievement in Writing

Descriptve Text by PLEASE Strategy 64

Figure 4.3 Histogram of the Students’ Achievement in Writing

Descripitve Text with Positive English Learning Attitude 66 Figure 4.4 Histogram of the Students’ Achievement in Writing

Descripitve Text with Negative English Learning Attitude 67 Figure 4.5 Histogram of the Students’Achievement in Writing

Descriptive Text on Group Students’ Positive English

Learning Attitude Taught by Using TTW 69 Figure 4.6 Histogram of the Students’Achievement in Writing

Descriptive Text on Group Students’ Negative English

Learning Attitude Taught by Using TTW 70 Figure 4.7 Histogram of the Students’Achievement in Writing

Descriptive Text on Group Students’ Negative English

Learning Attitude Taught by Using PLEASE 72 Figure 4.8 Histogram of the Students’Achievement in Writing

Descriptive Text on Group Students’ Negative English

xi

Figure 4.9 The Interaction between the Teaching Stategies and

English Learning Attitude on students’ Achievement

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix Pages

Appendix A The Questionnaire 92

Appendix B The Validity and Realibility of Questionnaire 95 Appendix C Description of the Students’ Score in Writing

Decriptive Text 97

Appendix D Description of Basic Statistic Calculation 99 Appendix E Summary of the Research Data Description 114 Appendix F The Reliability Computation of the Writing Test 115

Appendix G Testing Hypothesis 117

Appendix H Lesson Plan for TTW Group 118

1

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.1 The Background of the Study

English as an international language has a significant role in the various field of activities and wide influences in the world. Therefore the flow of its growth has forced the students in Indonesia to master English. It has been determined as the compulsory subject in National Curriculum.

In learning English the students as the language learners concerns with four language skills, namely listening, speaking, reading and writing. They have to master the four language skills in order to be competent in learning English.Writing is one of the four language skills that should be mastered well. Writing is sometimes used as a production mode for learning, reinforcing or testing grammatical concept (Douglas:2001). Writing is a complex operation requiring knowledge of text structure, syntax, vocabulary, and topic, and sensitivity to audience needs; so it is not surprising that many students find writing challenging. It is one of the most important language skills. It is a critical skill for students in school, college, and lifelong(Warschauer, 2010). Writing is also important for the instruction of foreign and second language learners for threereasons. First, writing well is a vital skill for academic or occupational success (National Commission on Writing,2003). Second, writing can be aneffective tool for the development of academic language proficiency as learners more readily explore advanced lexicalor syntactic expression in their written work (e.g., Warschauer, 2010). Third, writing across the curriculum can beinvaluable

2 for mastering diverse subject matter, as written expression allows learners to raise their awareness ofknowledge gaps, abstract problem-specific knowledge into schemas that can be applied to other relevant cases, andelaborate mental representations of knowledge that can be more easily retrieved, while simultaneously allowingteachers to better understand the students’ state of knowledge and thinking process and thus adjust instruction asnecessary (Yih and Nah, 2009).

The Curriculum of Educational Stratified Level ( Kurikukum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan: KTSP) of Senior High School states that the students of senior high school are expected to be able to write various genres such as narrative, descriptive, and expository writing ( Depdiknas: 2006).

In reality, most of the students have less capability in learning English, especially when they are asked to write a text. Writing a text in English is a difficult task for them. They are always having some troubles in choosing the appropriate words and lack of vocabulary. They are also weak in arranging the elements of a good text. The difficulty of writing lies in generating and organizing the idea.

The skills involved in writing are highly complex. Students have to pay attention to the level skills of planning and organizing as well as the level skills of spelling, punctuation, word choice, grammar and usage.

This goes in line with Ackerman (2006) who reports that up to 40 percent

of students in high schools are notdoing well in writing classes. Ackerman adds

3

classroom. Similarly, Witte (2007) states that students show little interest in

classroom writing activities andassignments.

This may be due to students being generally passive learners who consider that their role isto absorb knowledge as it is presented to them in the traditional classroom.As a consequence, this general agreement on the importance of writing skill and the poor performance of students inwriting has provided the challenge for educators and researchers to look for ways to teach and motivate students towrite effectively. Educators should attempt to find ways that don’t cause a writer’ block, and feel a responsibilitytowards their learners to create and maintain environments that motivate learners to continue learning even after the class end.

Based on the researcher’s observation during four semester in the school

year 2012/2013 and 2013/2014, the students of State Senior High School (Sekolah Menengah Atas Negeri: SMAN) 1 Besitang have difficulties in learning

English. The data obtained from SMA Negeri 1 Besitang show that the students achievement in English including their achievement in writing skill does not

achieve the Minimal Mastery Criterion (Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal : KKM).

Students should achieve score 70 as minimum score. But in fact most of the students have low achievement in English, as shown in Table 1.1.

Table 1.1Average of Students’ English Score (Grade X) in SMAN 1 Besitang

Academic Year 2012/2013 2013/2014

Class / Semester I II I II

X1 68 68 66 67

X 2 66 67 65 66

4 Table 1.1 shows that the scores of those three different classes are divided by the total number of the students that result the average scores of each class.From table 1.1 it is concluded that the students’ achievement does not

achieve the minimal Mastery Criterion (Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal: KKM )

determine which is 70.

Based on the observation in the classroom and interview with the teacher and students, the researcher finds that the students have difficulties in learning English especially when they are asked to write a descriptive text. They have difficulties in writing and fulfill the characteristics of the descriptive text including the social function, generic structure and language features.

A descriptive text is a text which describes particular person, things and places. The basic competence that should be reached by the students of Senior High School is to make them are able to arrange a descriptive text based on the linguistic features and the generic structures of the text. There are two generic structures of this text, they are identification and description. Meanwhile, the linguistic features of a descriptive text are the use of spesific relevant, simple present tense, adjective clause and relating verbs.

Besides that, there are problems that came from the teacher. The teacher has low professional development, used inappropriate teaching strategies and media. In teaching writing, the teacher mostly emphasizes his teaching on the product of writing. The teacher starts the learning activities by explaining the topic. A model is only provided very occasionally. The students then are asked to write a text in a certain time allotted. The teacher waits for the students writing product without giving any guidance. Finally the students submit their writing to

5 the teacher to be graded. Consequently, students feel bored and do not interested with the materials in writing. Therefore their writing achievement is unsatisfying.

Suitable teaching strategies are needed to achieve the goal of teaching writing, because the achievement of the goal depends on the strategies that the teacher applies. There are many strategies which can be applied in teaching writing. Two of them are Think-Talk-Write (TTW) and PLEASE strategies.

Think-Talk-Write is a strategy that facilitating the exercise of language both oral and written fluently. This strategy based on the interpretation that learning is a social action. Think-Talk-Write Strategy encourages the students to think, talk, and write based on the particular topic. Think-Talk-Write Strategy is used to develop the writing fluently and exercise the language before write them. Think-Talk-Write Strategy was introduced by Huinker and Laughlin. According to Huinker and Laughlin in Zulkarnaini (2011), “The think-talk-write strategy builds in time for thought and reflection and for the organization of ideas and the testing of those ideas before students are expected to write. The flow of communication progresses from student engaging in thought or reflective dialogue with themselves, to talking and sharing ideas with one another to writing”.

The second strategy is PLEASE strategy.“PLEASE” strategy is one of the strategies suggested to be taught through SRSD model. The “PLEASE” strategy was developed to address specific difficulties inparagraph writing which are mostly related to prewriting planning, composition, andparagraph revision (Welch, 1992). The “PLEASE” strategy is a mnemonic thatprovides learners with a road map for writing a paragraph. It reminds learners to carryout several steps for writing paragraphs (Graham and Harris, 2007). The first step ofthe “PLEASE”

6 strategy, “P”, stands for the action “PICK”. At this step students learnto Pick their topic, Pick their audience and, Pick the type of the paragraph. Thesecond letter, “L”, refers to “LIST”. Students are taught various techniques for ideageneration about the topic before starting to write. The third step of the strategy, “E”,represents “EVALUATE” for ongoing evaluation of the process. At this stage,students are taught to check if their list is complete and how they can organize theirnotes. The forth step, “A”, reminds students “ACTIVATE” their paragraph with atopic sentence. Students are taught how to write a precise and effective introductorysentence. The fifth step, “S”, cues students to SUPPLY supporting ideas for their paragraphs based on the list that they have generated for the second step. The finalletter, “E”, reminds students to END with a concluding sentence and EVALUATEtheir work (Welch, 1992).

Yet the success of students’ writing achievement does not only depend on the teaching strategies but also depend on the students’ attitude toward learning English itself. Attitudes could be viewed as a tendency to respond positively or negatively towards a certain thing, idea, person, situation etc. Gardner ( 1985) defined attitudes as “ an evaluative reaction to some referent, inferred on the basis of the individuals beliefs or opinions about the referent” As for education, Brown (2000) noted that teachers should recognize that all students possess positive and negative attitudes in varying degrees, adding that the negative attitudes can be changed by thoughtful instructional methods, such as using materials and activities that help students achieve an understanding and appreciation of the foreign culture, a fact that might be reflected on the process of learning the foreign language.

7 Thus, attitudes could highly influence how individuals approach many situations in life, including foreign language learning. It is believed that individuals with positive attitudes usually progress more rapidly in foreign language learning. Attitudes are closely related to our beliefs and are based upon experiences, thus, the researcher believes that effective language teaching strategies can encourage students to be more positive towards the learning process in general and learning EFL in particular.

The two strategies was applied to different students’ learning attitude it is affected to their achievement in writing. Besides those strategies, the researcher carry the descriptive writing. It is based on Senior High School syllabus for tenth grade. That is why the researcher considers conducting the research using that genre of text.

Based on the gap between the expectation and the reality and also the explanation of some theories above, there is an interest to conduct a research on the effect of teaching writing strategies and the students’ learning attitude on the students achievement in writing descriptive text.

1.2 The Identification of the Problem

According to the explanation presented in the background of the study, the identification of the problems is stated as follows: (1) Does Think-Talk-Write strategy significantly affect students’ achievement in writing descriptive text? (2) Does PLEASEstrategy significantly affect students achievement in writing descriptive text? (3) Does students’ learning attitude significantly affect students’ achievement in writing descriptive text? (4) How is the students’ achievement

8 taught by using Think-Talk-Write strategy? (5) How is the students’ achievement taught by using PLEASE strategy? (6) Is the students’ achievement in writing descriptivetext taught by using Think-Talk-Write strategy higher than the students taught by PLEASE strategy? (7) Is the achievement of the students with positive learning attitude inwriting descriptive writing higher than that of the students with negative learning attitude? (8) How is the achievement in writing descriptivetext of the students with positive learning attitude taught by Think-Talk-Write strategy? (9) How is the students’ achievement in writing descriptivetext of the students with positive learning attitude taught by using PLEASEstrategy? (10) Do teaching writing strategies and students’ learning attitude significantly affect the students’ achievement in writing descriptive text? (11) What are the factors which influence students’ achievement in writing descriptive text? (12) Is there any interaction between Think-Talk-Write and PLEASE strategies and students’ learning attitude to students’ achievement in writing descriptive text?

9

1.3 The Problems of the Study

This study explores the effect of Think-Talk-Write (TTW) and PLEASE strategy and students’ English learning attitude on students’achievement in writing descriptive text. Thus this study attempts to find the answers to the following questions:

1. Is students’ achievement in writing descriptive text taught by

usingThink-Talk-Write (TTW) strategy higherthan thatof PLEASE strategy?

2. Is the achievement in writing descriptive text ofstudents with positive

English learning attitude higher than that of negative English learning attitude?

3. Is there any interaction between teachingstrategies and English learning

attitude to students’ achievement in writing descriptive text?

1.4 The Objectives of the Study

In line with the research problems above, the objectives of the study are to find out whether:

1) Students’ achievement in writing descriptivetext taught by using

Think-Talk-Write (TTW) strategy is higher than thatof PLEASE strategy.

2) Students’ achievement in writing descriptive text of the students with

positive English learning attitude is higherthan that of negative English learning attitude

3) There is interaction between teachingstrategies and English learning

10

1.5 The Scope of the Study

There are many teaching writing strategies that can be applied in teaching writing. In this study the teaching strategies are limited to Think-Talk-Write (TTW)and PLEASEstrategy. This study is limited to the writing process stage prewriting. This study is also limited to the effect of students’ English learning attitude on their descriptive writing achievement.Therefore, this study is limited on the effect of TTW and PLEASE teaching strategies and students’ English learning attitude on students’ achievement in writing descriptive text.

1.6 The Significances of the Study

Through this research, it is expected that the effect ofThink-Talk-Write (TTW) and PLEASEstrategies and students' English learning attitude are clearly revealed out. It is hoped that it can provide valuable informations, which may have theoretical as well as practical value for English language teachers and learners.

Theoretically, the result of this research support the theory ofThink-Talk-Write (TTW) and PLEASE strategies in improving the students’ ability in writing. Meanwhile, practically the result of the research guides the English language teachers in their attempt to decide the appropriate strategies that should be applied in enhancing the students' descriptive writing achievement. The English teachers can get informations of the application of Think-Talk-Write (TTW) and PLEASE Strategyas alternative teaching strategies in teaching writing. It is also expected to give contribution for those who are interested in performing further study in other field of research.

85

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

5.1 Conclusions

Based on the research findings and discussion stated before, it can be concluded that:

1. The students’ achievement in writing descriptive text taught by using

TTW is higher than that taught by using PLEASE Strategy.

2. The writing achievement of the students with positive English learning

attitude is higher than that of the students with negative English learning attitude.

3. There is no interaction between teaching strategies and English learning attitude to the students’ achievement in writing descriptive text. It means that the positive English learning attitude affects better to the students’ achievement in writing the descriptive text no matter what strategy is used.It can be concluded too that TTW performs better and superior, which is suitable to be taught to any English learning attitude.

5.2 Implications

The first finding shows that the students’ achievement in writing descriptive text taught by using TTW is significantly higher than that of the students taught by using PLEASE Strategy. Thus, this result implies to the English teachers’ choice of teaching strategy. It is better for the English teacher to apply TTW in writing descriptive text because it encourages the students to

86 explore their capability to write a text by doing some steps that include the various activities. They can make it in discussion then draw the conclusions as the guide for them to begin write a text.

The second finding of this research shows that the achievement in writing descriptive text of the students with positive English learning attitude is significantly higher than that of the students with negative English learning attitude. Therefore, the teachers should pay more attention to the students’English learning attitude so that the students can obtain better learning achievement.

Finally,the third research finding of this study shows that there is no interaction between teaching strategies and English learning attitude. It implies that positive English learning attitude can be taught by both strategies and they perform better.

5.3 Suggestions

In line with the conclusion and implications drawn, there are some suggestions given as follows:

1. The English teachers are recommended to apply both strategies, TTw and

PLEASE strategies to improve students’ achievement in writing descriptive text

2. The English teacher should be aware to the students English learning attitude as the important factor for the students in writing achievement, positive encouragement of the teacher in applying the teaching strategies can be a motivation for the students to have positive English learning attitude.

87

REFERENCES

Ackerman, J. D. 2006. Motivation For Writing Through Blogs. Master of Arts. Akincilar, Vildan. 2010.The Effect of ‘ PLEASE’ strtaegy Training through The

Self-Regulated StrategyDevelopment (SRSD) Model on Fifth Grade EFL Students’ Descriptive Writing: Strategy Training on Planning.A Disertation

Ansari.2003. Menumbuhkembangkan Kemampuan Pemahaman dan Komunikasi

Matematika Siswa SMU melalui Strategi Think Talk

Write,Disertation,(Online).

Ary, D., & Rajaviah, A. 2010. Introduction to Research in Education. New York Holt, Rinchart and Winston

Baker, C. 1992. Attitudes and language. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters

Badger, R. & G. White. 2000. A process genre approach to teaching writing. ELT Journal, 54(2): 153-160.

Benson, M. J. 1991. Attitudes and Motivation towards English: A Survey of JapaneseFreshmen. RELC Journal, 22(1), 34-48.

Berwick, R. & Ross, S. 1989. Motivation after Matriculation: Are Japanese Learners still Alive after Examination Hell? JALT Journal, 11(2), 193-210 Best, J.W, and Kahn J. V. 2002. Research in Education I (7th _{ed) New York:}

Longman

Brown, H.Douglas. 2000. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching (4th _ed). New York: Longman

Brown, H.Douglas. 2001. Teaching by Principle: An interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy, Second Edition. New York: Addison Wesley Longman

Brown, H. Douglas. 2004. Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom Practices. New York: Longman

Butt, D., Fahey, R., Feez, S., Spinks, S., and Yallop, C. (2000). Using functional grammar. An explorer‟s guide. 2nd Edition. Sydney: National Centre for English Teaching and Research. Macquarie University.

Choy, S. C. & Troudi, S. 2006. An investigation into the changes in perceptions of and attitudes towards learningEnglish in a Malaysian college. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education,18(2), 120-130.

88 De Bot, K., Lowie, W. & Verspoor, M. 2005. Second language acquisition: An

advanced resource book. London: Routledge.

Derewianka, B. 1990. Exploring How Texts Work. Newton: Primary English Teaching Association.

Direktorat Pendididkan Menengah Umum. 2006. Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan (KTSP). Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan Nasional

D. Nessel, M Jones,and C.Dixon, 1989. Thinking Trough the Language Arts. Macmillan

Feng. R. & Chen, H. 2009. An Analysis on the Importance of Motivation and

Strategy in Postgraduates English Acquisition.

EnglishLanguageTeaching.2, 93-97.

Gardner, R., & Lambert, W. 1972. Attitudes and motivations in second languagelearning. Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House

Gardner, R. 1980. On the validity of affective variables in second language acquisition:conceptual and statistical considerations. Language Learning, 30 (2), 255-270.

Gardner, R. C. 1985. Social psychology and second language learning: The roles of attitudes and motivation. London: Edward Arnold.

Gardner, R.C. 2004. Attitude/Motivation Test Battery: International AMTB Research Project. The University of Western Ontario, Canada

Gerot, L., and Wignell, P. 1994. Making Sense of Functional Grammar. Sydney:GerdStabler.

Halmaheri. (2004). Mengembangkan Kemampuan Komunikasi Matematika

Melalui Strategi Think-Talk-Write (TTW) dalam Kelompok Kecil (Studi Eksperimen di SMPN 3 Kuantan Kabupaten Kuantan Singingi Propinsi Riau). A Thesis.

Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (1992). Self-regulated strategy development: A part of the writing process. In M. Pressley, K. R. Harris, &J. T. Guthrie (Eds.), Promoting academic competence and literacy in school (pp. 277–309). New York: Academic Press.

Huinker , D.& Laughlin, C. 1996 „Talk your way into writing‟in P. Elliot&MKenny (eds) Communication in Mathematics‟, K-12 and beyond, National

Graham, S., Harris, K.R. & Mason, L. 2005. Improving the writing performance, knowledge, and self-efficacy of struggling young writers: The effects of

89

self-regulated strategy development, Contemporary

EducationalPsychology, 30 (2), 207-241.

Gu, Y., & Johnson, R. K. (1996). Vocabulary learning strategies and language learning outcomes. Language Learning, 46, 643-697

Heaton, J.B. 1990. Writing English Language Tests London : Longman Holmes, J. (1992). An introduction to sociolinguistics. New York: Longman

Group UK Limited

Huinker dan Laughlin .(1996) .Dalam Yamin dan Ansari .2009.Taktik

Mengembangkan Kemampuan Individual Siswa. Jakarta :Gaung Persada Pers

Kara, A. 2009. The Effect of a „Learning Theories‟ Unit on Students‟ Attitudes towards Learning.AustralianJournal of Teacher Education, 34(3), 100-113.

Karahan, F. 2007. Language attitudes of Turkish students towards the English languageand its use in Turkish context. Journal of Arts and Sciences Say, 7 May, 73-87.

Kame'enui, Edward. Et al. 2002Effective Teaching Strategies That

AccommodateDiverse Learners. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson

Education.

Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan. Direktorat Jenderal Pendidikan Menengah. 2013. Kurikulum 2013. Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan Nasional

Knapp, Peter and Megan Watkins. 2005. Genre, Text, Grammar. Sydney: University of New South Wales.

Littlewood, W. (1983). Communicative language teaching: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Littlewood, W. (1984). Foreign and second language learning, language acquisition research and its implications for the classroom. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Liu, M. 2007. Chinese students‟ motivation to learn English at the tertiary level, Asian EFL Journal

Malallah, S. 2000. English in an Arabic Environment: Current Attitudes to English among Kuwait University Students,International Journal of Bilingual Education andBilingualism, 3(1), 19-43.

McAndrews, S.L. 2008. Diagnostic Literacy Assesment Strategies. International Reading Association.

90

Mukminatus, Zuhriyah. 2012. The Effectiveness of Think-Talk Write (TTW) to Teach Writing Viewed from Students’ Intelligence (An Experimental Study in the Fourth Semester of English Department of Teacher Training and Education Faculty of Islamic University of Kadiri (UNISKA) Kediri in the Academic Year of 2011/2012).

Momani, M. (2009). The Jordanian Secondary Stage students Achievement in Reading Comprehension according to their views towards Learning English as a Foreign Language. Journal of Human Sciences, 42, 1-36. [Online]

Nafisah, N., and Kurniawan, E. (2007). Writing for General Commucication. Bandung: UPI Press.

Oscamp, B. 1977. Attitudes and opinions. Englewood Cliffs, N, J: Prentic-Hall. Pardiyono. (2007). Pasti Bisa! Teaching Genre Based Writing. Yogyakarta: Andi

Offset

Sanjaya, Wina. (2006). Strategy Pembelajaran : Berorientasi Standar Proses Pendidikan. Jakarta : Kencana Prenada Media.

Santangelo, T., Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2007). Self-Regulated Strategy Development: A validated model to support students who struggle with writing,Learning DisabilitieS: A Contemporary Journal, 5 (1), 1–20. Silver and Smith .(1996). Dalam Yamin dan Ansari taktik mengembangkan

kemampuan individual siswa .Jakarta :Gaung Persada Pers

Sullivan, N. & Robert, S. (2007). Effects of Japanese National Identification on Attitudes toward Learning English and Self-Assessed English Proficiency, Paperpresented at the annual meeting of the InternationalSociety of Political Psychology, Classical Chinese Garden,Portland,OregonUSA Suleiman, M. F. 1993. A Study of Arab Students'Motivations and Attitudes for

Learning English as aForeign Language, Unpublished PhD Dissertation,

Arizona State University

The National Commission on Writing in America‟s Schools and Colleges.2003. The College Board.

Travers, John P. (1970). Fundamental of Educational Psychology. Scranton, Pennsylvania: International

Van Els, T., Bongaerts, T., Extra, G., Van Os, C., & Jansen-Van Dieten, A. (1984). Applied linguistics and the learning and teaching of foreign languages. London: Edward Arnold

91

Wenden, A. 1991. Learner strategies for learner autonomy. London: Prentice Hall

Widdows, S. & Voller, P. 1991. PANSI: A Survey of the ELT Needs of Japanese University Students,CrossCurrents, 18(2), 127-141

Warschauer, M. (2010). New tools for teaching writing. Language Learning & Technology14(1), 3-8

Welch, M. (1992). The “PLEASE” strategy: a metacognitive learning strategy for improving the paragraph writing of students with mild learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 15, (2), 119-128.

Witte, S. 2007. That's online writing, not boring school writing: Writing with blogs and the Talkback Project.Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy Yamin,Martinis,dkk.2008. Taktik PengembangaIndividualSiswa.Jakarta:G.P.Pers Yih, M. B., & Nah, E. A. 2009. Writing Web Logs in the ESL Classroom: A

Study of Student Perceptions and the Technology Acceptance Model 47.

Asian Journal of University Education, Vol.5, No.1, June, ISSN

1823-7797

Zaragoza, N & Vaughn, S. 1992. The Effect of Process Writing Instruction on

three 2nd- Grade Students with Different Achievement Profiles. Learning

Disabilities Research, 7, 184-193

Zulkarnaini (2011). Model Kooperatif Tipe Think Talk Write (TTW) untuk Meningkatkan Kemampuan Menulis Karangan Deskripsi dan Berfikir Kritis No.2, August.

explore their capability to write a text by doing some steps that include the various activities. They can make it in discussion then draw the conclusions as the guide for them to begin write a text.

The second finding of this research shows that the achievement in writing descriptive text of the students with positive English learning attitude is significantly higher than that of the students with negative English learning attitude. Therefore, the teachers should pay more attention to the students’English learning attitude so that the students can obtain better learning achievement.

Finally,the third research finding of this study shows that there is no interaction between teaching strategies and English learning attitude. It implies that positive English learning attitude can be taught by both strategies and they perform better.

5.3 Suggestions

In line with the conclusion and implications drawn, there are some suggestions given as follows:

1. The English teachers are recommended to apply both strategies, TTw and PLEASE strategies to improve students’ achievement in writing descriptive text

2. The English teacher should be aware to the students English learning attitude as the important factor for the students in writing achievement, positive encouragement of the teacher in applying the teaching strategies can be a motivation for the students to have positive English learning attitude.

REFERENCES

Ackerman, J. D. 2006. Motivation For Writing Through Blogs. Master of Arts. Akincilar, Vildan. 2010.The Effect of ‘ PLEASE’ strtaegy Training through The

Self-Regulated StrategyDevelopment (SRSD) Model on Fifth Grade EFL Students’ Descriptive Writing: Strategy Training on Planning.A Disertation

Ansari.2003. Menumbuhkembangkan Kemampuan Pemahaman dan Komunikasi

Matematika Siswa SMU melalui Strategi Think Talk

Write,Disertation,(Online).

Ary, D., & Rajaviah, A. 2010. Introduction to Research in Education. New York Holt, Rinchart and Winston

Baker, C. 1992. Attitudes and language. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters

Badger, R. & G. White. 2000. A process genre approach to teaching writing. ELT

Journal, 54(2): 153-160.

Benson, M. J. 1991. Attitudes and Motivation towards English: A Survey of JapaneseFreshmen. RELC Journal, 22(1), 34-48.

Berwick, R. & Ross, S. 1989. Motivation after Matriculation: Are Japanese Learners still Alive after Examination Hell? JALT Journal, 11(2), 193-210 Best, J.W, and Kahn J. V. 2002. Research in Education I (7th _{ed) New York:}

Longman

Brown, H.Douglas. 2000. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching (4th _ed). New York: Longman

Brown, H.Douglas. 2001. Teaching by Principle: An interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy, Second Edition. New York: Addison Wesley Longman

Brown, H. Douglas. 2004. Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom

Practices. New York: Longman

Butt, D., Fahey, R., Feez, S., Spinks, S., and Yallop, C. (2000). Using functional grammar. An explorer‟s guide. 2nd Edition. Sydney: National Centre for English Teaching and Research. Macquarie University.

Choy, S. C. & Troudi, S. 2006. An investigation into the changes in perceptions of and attitudes towards learningEnglish in a Malaysian college. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher

De Bot, K., Lowie, W. & Verspoor, M. 2005. Second language acquisition: An

advanced resource book. London: Routledge.

Derewianka, B. 1990. Exploring How Texts Work. Newton: Primary English Teaching Association.

Direktorat Pendididkan Menengah Umum. 2006. Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan

Pendidikan (KTSP). Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan Nasional

D. Nessel, M Jones,and C.Dixon, 1989. Thinking Trough the Language Arts. Macmillan

Feng. R. & Chen, H. 2009. An Analysis on the Importance of Motivation and

Strategy in Postgraduates English Acquisition.

EnglishLanguageTeaching.2, 93-97.

Gardner, R., & Lambert, W. 1972. Attitudes and motivations in second

languagelearning. Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House

Gardner, R. 1980. On the validity of affective variables in second language acquisition:conceptual and statistical considerations. Language Learning, 30 (2), 255-270.

Gardner, R. C. 1985. Social psychology and second language learning: The roles

of attitudes and motivation. London: Edward Arnold.

Gardner, R.C. 2004. Attitude/Motivation Test Battery: International AMTB Research Project. The University of Western Ontario, Canada

Gerot, L., and Wignell, P. 1994. Making Sense of Functional Grammar. Sydney:GerdStabler.

Halmaheri. (2004). Mengembangkan Kemampuan Komunikasi Matematika Melalui Strategi Think-Talk-Write (TTW) dalam Kelompok Kecil (Studi Eksperimen di SMPN 3 Kuantan Kabupaten Kuantan Singingi Propinsi

Riau). A Thesis.

Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (1992). Self-regulated strategy development: A part of the writing process. In M. Pressley, K. R. Harris, &J. T. Guthrie (Eds.), Promoting academic competence and literacy in school (pp. 277–309). New York: Academic Press.

Huinker , D.& Laughlin, C. 1996 „Talk your way into writing‟in P. Elliot&MKenny (eds) Communication in Mathematics‟, K-12 and beyond, National

Graham, S., Harris, K.R. & Mason, L. 2005. Improving the writing performance,

self-regulated strategy development, Contemporary

EducationalPsychology, 30 (2), 207-241.

Gu, Y., & Johnson, R. K. (1996). Vocabulary learning strategies and language

learning outcomes. Language Learning, 46, 643-697

Heaton, J.B. 1990. Writing English Language Tests London : Longman Holmes, J. (1992). An introduction to sociolinguistics. New York: Longman

Group UK Limited

Huinker dan Laughlin .(1996) .Dalam Yamin dan Ansari .2009.Taktik

Mengembangkan Kemampuan Individual Siswa. Jakarta :Gaung Persada

Pers

Kara, A. 2009. The Effect of a „Learning Theories‟ Unit on Students‟ Attitudes towards Learning.AustralianJournal of Teacher Education, 34(3), 100-113.

Karahan, F. 2007. Language attitudes of Turkish students towards the English

languageand its use in Turkish context. Journal of Arts and Sciences Say,

7 May, 73-87.

Kame'enui, Edward. Et al. 2002Effective Teaching Strategies That

AccommodateDiverse Learners. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson

Education.

Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan. Direktorat Jenderal Pendidikan Menengah. 2013. Kurikulum 2013. Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan Nasional

Knapp, Peter and Megan Watkins. 2005. Genre, Text, Grammar. Sydney: University of New South Wales.

Littlewood, W. (1983). Communicative language teaching: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Littlewood, W. (1984). Foreign and second language learning, language

acquisition research and its implications for the classroom. New York:

Cambridge University Press.

Liu, M. 2007. Chinese students‟ motivation to learn English at the tertiary level, Asian EFL Journal

Malallah, S. 2000. English in an Arabic Environment: Current Attitudes to English among Kuwait University Students,International Journal of

Bilingual Education andBilingualism, 3(1), 19-43.

McAndrews, S.L. 2008. Diagnostic Literacy Assesment Strategies. International Reading Association.

Mukminatus, Zuhriyah. 2012. The Effectiveness of Think-Talk Write (TTW) to

Teach Writing Viewed from Students’ Intelligence (An Experimental Study

in the Fourth Semester of English Department of Teacher Training and Education Faculty of Islamic University of Kadiri (UNISKA) Kediri in the Academic Year of 2011/2012).

Momani, M. (2009). The Jordanian Secondary Stage students Achievement in Reading Comprehension according to their views towards Learning English as a Foreign Language. Journal of Human Sciences, 42, 1-36. [Online]

Nafisah, N., and Kurniawan, E. (2007). Writing for General Commucication. Bandung: UPI Press.

Oscamp, B. 1977. Attitudes and opinions. Englewood Cliffs, N, J: Prentic-Hall. Pardiyono. (2007). Pasti Bisa! Teaching Genre Based Writing. Yogyakarta: Andi

Offset

Sanjaya, Wina. (2006). Strategy Pembelajaran : Berorientasi Standar Proses Pendidikan. Jakarta : Kencana Prenada Media.

Santangelo, T., Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2007). Self-Regulated Strategy Development: A validated model to support students who struggle with writing,Learning DisabilitieS: A Contemporary Journal, 5 (1), 1–20. Silver and Smith .(1996). Dalam Yamin dan Ansari taktik mengembangkan

kemampuan individual siswa .Jakarta :Gaung Persada Pers

Sullivan, N. & Robert, S. (2007). Effects of Japanese National Identification on

Attitudes toward Learning English and Self-Assessed English Proficiency,

Paperpresented at the annual meeting of the InternationalSociety of

Political Psychology, Classical Chinese Garden,Portland,OregonUSA

Suleiman, M. F. 1993. A Study of Arab Students'Motivations and Attitudes for

Learning English as aForeign Language, Unpublished PhD Dissertation,

Arizona State University

The National Commission on Writing in America‟s Schools and Colleges.2003. The College Board.

Travers, John P. (1970). Fundamental of Educational Psychology. Scranton, Pennsylvania: International

Van Els, T., Bongaerts, T., Extra, G., Van Os, C., & Jansen-Van Dieten, A. (1984). Applied linguistics and the learning and teaching of foreign

Wenden, A. 1991. Learner strategies for learner autonomy. London: Prentice Hall

Widdows, S. & Voller, P. 1991. PANSI: A Survey of the ELT Needs of Japanese

University Students,CrossCurrents, 18(2), 127-141

Warschauer, M. (2010). New tools for teaching writing. Language Learning &

Technology14(1), 3-8

Welch, M. (1992). The “PLEASE” strategy: a metacognitive learning strategy for improving the paragraph writing of students with mild learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 15, (2), 119-128.

Witte, S. 2007. That's online writing, not boring school writing: Writing with blogs and the Talkback Project.Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy Yamin,Martinis,dkk.2008. Taktik PengembangaIndividualSiswa.Jakarta:G.P.Pers

Yih, M. B., & Nah, E. A. 2009. Writing Web Logs in the ESL Classroom: A

Study of Student Perceptions and the Technology Acceptance Model 47. Asian Journal of University Education, Vol.5, No.1, June, ISSN 1823-7797

Zaragoza, N & Vaughn, S. 1992. The Effect of Process Writing Instruction on

three 2nd- Grade Students with Different Achievement Profiles. Learning Disabilities Research, 7, 184-193

Zulkarnaini (2011). Model Kooperatif Tipe Think Talk Write (TTW) untuk Meningkatkan Kemampuan Menulis Karangan Deskripsi dan Berfikir Kritis No.2, August.