Research Findings

A. Research Findings

1. The Setting of the research

The research was held on SMP Negeri 1 Gido that is located at Jl. Pemuda No.

5 in Hiliweto Village, Gido Sub-district, Nias regency. It is around 25 kilometers from Gunungsitoli town. The total numbers of teachers were 49 persons whereby 5 persons of them were the English teachers. Meanwhile, the total number of the class were 24 in three different grades. The total numbers of the students were 904 persons. This school is one of a favorite school in Nias regency. It was accredited with A score. It had a library as the bank of teaching material. Besides, there was also free Wi-Fi connection around the school that allows each students access to networking freely to search important information such as the references of teaching material. There were several programs like extracurricular activity of this school that was ran in every week such as PRAMUKA, extra-class in the afternoon, sports, and so on. Every year, this school delegate several students to be as member of OSN competition in regency level. Two years ago, the delegation of the student of this school was successful to enrich the second position of English Olympiad, but this year, they only got as the third position.

Furthermore, the subject of the research was the eighth grade which consisted of eighth classes. The total numbers of the students of subject were 287 students. In conducting the research, the research selected A class as the subject of the research itself that was consisted of 35 students.

2. The Explanation of Each Cycle in Increasing the Students’ Ability in Writing Recount Text through Free Write Method.

a. Cycle I

Cycle I was consisted of two meetings. It depended on the teaching procedures, actions, implementations and syllabus (lesson plan). The first meeting was done on

th Monday, August 15 , 2016 and the second meeting was done on Wednesday, August th 17 , 2016. Both of meetings were held at the VIII-A class of SMP Negeri 1 Gido with

the total number of students was 35 and all of them were present. The time of each meeting was 2 x 40 minutes. To make it clear, the researcher gives the explanations about the activities that were done by the researcher in each meeting of Cycle I, as follows.

1) The First Meeting

At the first meeting, the material taught to the students was personal recount text that was focused on telling past experience. The time allocation used was 2 x 40 minutes. The procedures of the first meeting as follows.

a) Planning

In conducting Cycle I at the first meeting, the researcher prepared many things, such as: lesson plan (See Appendix 2a), observation sheet (See Appendices 10a and 11a) and field notes (See Appendix 9). The planning steps were done to avoid the misconception of the action that would be done in the classroom.

b) Action

th The action was performed on Monday, August 15 , 2016. The meeting was done in 2 x 40 minutes. After planning, the researcher conducted the action in the

classroom. The teaching-learning processes consisted of pre teaching-learning activities, whilst teaching-learning activities, and post teaching-learning activities.

For the meeting in the classroom, the researcher greeted the students, introduced himself to the students and checked the students’ presence list. Before explaining the new material, the researcher asked the students’ preparation to study in

order that they would pay attention to the material. The researcher started teaching by explaining about personal recount text especially talking about past interesting experience to the students. After that, the researcher asked the students to pay attention about the generic structure and language features that should be considered in writing recount text itself. Then, the researcher gave them example of personal recount text itself for better understanding.

After that, the researcher asked the students to practice to write by letting them to write freely about their personal interesting experience for ten minutes only. After all, the researcher collected the students’ work papers, corrected it, decided score, and wrote some important information on that as the feedback comment related to their writing. Next, the researcher evaluated the students by asking them to write freely about their unforgettable moment that happened in the past time. In finishing, the researcher provided them chances to finish it individually, and collected it after the prescribed time. Then, the researcher conclude the teaching material by herself.

Next, the researcher asked the students’ feeling after teaching-learning process. The researcher was also motivate the students to learn more at home and gave them extra-class work to be finished at their home everybody. Before closing the meeting, a students was asked by the researcher to lead in praying. Finally, the researcher close the meeting by greeting and ending conversation expression.

c) Observation

During teaching-learning process, the teacher collaborator observed the activities of the researcher of also the students. However, the result of this activities will be joined in the second meeting.

(1) Field Notes There are several weaknesses that was found by the researcher in doing Cycle

I at the first meeting, they were.

a. The students were lack of vocabulary so they get stuck in composing their writing.

b. The students were lack of grammar so it was difficulties for them to composing their writing based on the using of generic structures and language features as well.

c. The students were lack in using punctuation that actually has role in writing composition such as the using of capital letter, comma, full stop and others.

d. The researcher’s explanations were not complete because the researcher could not manage time well during teaching.

e. The students did not focused to the researcher’s explanations at all because some of them made a noisy in the classroom.

f. Some students were still included as worse writers, and a few were still blocked writers.

There were also some advantages found by the researcher in doing Cycle I at the first meeting as follows.

a. Most of the students were interested in joining the teaching-learning process. This condition automatically increasing the students’ motivation in teaching-learning

process itself.

b. Most of the students followed the teaching-learning process especially in finishing task enjoyable.

d) Reflection

The first meeting in Cycle I showed that the students have weaknesses in writing composition. Closely, they were still did not know too much how to write a personal recount text correctly. Therefore, to make the students get development in learning the material teaching, the researcher improved the planning of the teaching activities. The researcher had done some improvements such as.

a. The researcher asked the students to bring their dictionary in English subject to help them to find the meaning of the unfamiliar words.

b. The researcher explained grammar especially focused on the generic structures and language features of recount text to the students. For example, the researcher provide another example of personal recount text, then the researcher guided them to identify the generic structure such as part of orientation, event and reorientation

of that example itself with description of their characteristics. Besides, the researcher was also noted to them about the language features by explaining to them about simple past tense as the recount text tenses, the using of action verb, and also the using of chronological connectors.

c. The researcher explained the importance and or the using of punctuation in writing composition to the students.

d. The researcher advised the students in order that they paid attention to the researcher’s explanation and instructions.

2) The Second Meeting

th The second meeting was held on Wednesday, 17 August, 2016. The allotted time used at the second meeting was 2 x 40 minutes. The learning material was same

with the first meeting that was personal recount text. The procedure of the second meeting as follows.

a) Planning

In doing Cycle I at the second meeting, the researcher prepared many things, such as: lesson plan (See Appendix 2a), observation sheet (See Appendices 10b and 11b) and field notes (See Appendix 9) The planning steps were done to avoid the misconception of the action that would be done in the classroom.

b) Action

th The action was performed on Wednesday, August 17 , 2016. The meeting was done in 2 x 40 minutes. As in the first meeting, the teaching-learning processes of

the second meeting also consisted of pre teaching-learning activities, whilst teaching- learning activities, and post teaching-learning activities. For the meeting in the classroom, the researcher greeted the students, introduced himself to the students and checked the students’ presence list. Before turned to the teaching-learning activity, the researcher also asked the students’ preparation in learning and motivated them also

directly to follow the teaching-learning activity itself. As the next, the researcher distributed to the students their evaluation sheet that has been collected by the researcher in the previous meeting. The researcher had already write comments on that evaluation sheet itself as the feedback of the students’ writing. Then, the researcher reviewed the material teaching. After that, the researcher guides the students to write freely about their past activity which is included as personal recount text form. By thinking first the topic of writing, then the researcher asked them to write in a prescribed time. Besides, the researcher also gave them extra time to finish it. Next, the researcher let the students to discuss with their friends about the process of their writing and allowed them to rewrite their writing for further publishing. After finishing, the researcher asked several students to share their writing in front of the classroom. Then, the researcher collected the students work paper, but unfortunately, the researcher did not check that paper at the time because of less managing the time. After that, the researcher turned to evaluate the students by letting them to write freely a personal recount text related their past experience. The researcher gave them chances to finish

it individually. After evaluation session, the researcher gives chances for the students to pose question and answer it directly. Follow on, a student was asked by the researcher to conclude the teaching material. Besides, the researcher motivated the students to learn more at home, gave them extra class work, and close the meeting by greeting.

c) Observation

The result of the observation of the researcher’s and the students’ activities and also field notes of the second meeting of Cycle I can be described as follows.

(1) Observation Sheet for the Researcher’s Activities Based on the result of the observation of the researcher’s activities, the activities which were done and undone during the teaching-learning process can be described as follows.

(b) Done : 29 activities (87.87%) from 33 activities. (c) Undone : 4 activities (12.12%) from 33 activities.

87.87 % of the students’ activities has done 4 (12.12%) activities undone during teaching-learning process, and of course those activities have affection to the result of teaching-learning process itself. So far, the degree of teaching level was categorized very good. Clearly, all the

The result of observation above shows that there were

researcher’s activities in the teaching-learning process can be shown in the next Graphic 1.

Researcer's activities

Undone Graphic 1: The researcher’s activities in second meeting of Cycle I.

Done

(2) Observation Sheet for the Students’ Activities Based on the result of the observation of the students’ activities, the activities which were done and undone during the teaching-learning process can be described as follows.

1. Done : 16 activities (94.11 %) from 17 activities.

4. Undone : 1 activity (5.88%) from 17 activities. Based on the data above, it was noticed that the most of students’ activities

were done and the degree of the students’ activities’ level was very good. For easy understanding, the next is the graphic 2 about the students’ activities in the teaching-

learning process.

entag erc 40

Researcer's activities

Done

Undone

Graphic 2: The students’ activity in teaching-learning process in second meeting of Cycle I.

(3) Field Notes Based on the result of the observation of the second meeting in Cycle I, the researcher noticed there were still activities undone by the researcher and the students. Furthermore, the researcher found some weaknesses in doing Cycle I at the second meeting, they were.

a. The students were confused about how start to write and what topic they select.

b. The students were still had no braveness in expressing their idea in writing, they looked like afraid for making mistakes. This was also caused by their vocabulary that was included low.

c. Some of students were still felt stuck when writing session. Some of them were still worse writers, and a few were still blocked writers. There were also some advantages found by the researcher in doing Cycle I at the second meeting as follows.

c. The students had enough understanding about the teaching material.

d. The students had progression about the skill and mastery teaching material itself.

d) Reflection

The second meeting in Cycle I showed that the students have weaknesses in writing composition. Closely, they were still did not know too much how to write a personal recount text correctly. Therefore, to make the students get development in learning the material teaching, the researcher improved the planning of the teaching activities. The researcher had done some improvements such as.

a. The researcher directed the students to made prewriting plan such as preparing the tools for writing, selecting the topic, gathering and organizing ideas and considering audiences. The researcher considered that prewriting plan was very important to be prepared because it decided how correct the writing was.

b. The researcher made a planning for managing the time during the teaching-learning process so that there was time for correcting the students’ work paper and reviewing the teaching material based on weaknesses of their writing.

To know the students’ progression in the Cycle I, the researcher evaluated them. As the result, it can be seen on the following Table 3.

Table 3

The Students’ Ability in Writing Recount Text through Free Write Method in the Second Meeting of Cycle I

No. Classification

Scoring

Frequency Percentage

2. Very good

4. Good enough

7. Very bad

From the calculation, it was gotten that the most of students’ mark were under the MCC score which was indicated that the teaching-learning activity in the Cycle I was failed. Yet, there were six students who passed on MCC. For detailing information, there was no one student in excellent and enough criteria (0.0%), a student in very good criterion (2.9%), three students in good criterion (8.6%), seven students in good enough criterion (20.0%), nine students in bad criterion (25.7%), and fiveteen students in very bad criterion (42.9%). For easy understanding, the next Graphic 3 is the students’ ability in writing recount text through Free Write Method in the second meeting of Cycle I.

Very good 70

Good

42.9% Good enough 50 Enough

Very bad

Excellent Very good Good Good enough Enough Bad Very bad

Graphic 3: The students’ ability in writing recount text through Free Write Method at the second meeting of Cycle I.

Based on the Minimum Competence Criterion in the English subject at the eighth grade of SMP Negeri 1 Gido indicated that the students were still unable to write the correct recount text. In addition, the average of students’ mark was 49 (See Appendix 12a) and it was included in bad criterion that was also under MCC score.

Hence, as had been written in Chapter III which said that whenever the students’ ability in writing recount text through Free Write Method could not be reached in Cycle I so it would be continued to the next cycle.

Therefore, to make the students get development in writing recount text or in other words to enhance the successful of the Cycle II, the researcher improved the lesson plan or activities that were hold in the classroom.

1. Before allowing the students to write freely about their personal experience, the researcher guided them to make a prewriting plan such as thinking for selecting the topic of writing, preparing the tools of writing, recognizing and organizing ideas, and considering audiences.

2. The researcher reviewed more clearly again about the students’ weaknesses based on the students’ evaluation sheet in the Cycle I.

b. Cycle II

As in the Cycle I, the Cycle II was also consisted of two meetings. The first meeting was held on Monday, August 22 nd , 2016 while the second meeting was held

on Wednesday, August 24 th , 2016. For clearly information about the activities of teaching-learning process toward the two meetings of Cycle II, the following is the more detail information about it.

1) The First Meeting

In the first meeting, the researcher also taught personal recount text as the teaching material. The allotted time was 2 x 40 minutes. The following were steps in conducting the first meeting of the Cycle II as follows.

a) Re-planning

In doing Cycle II at the first meeting, the researcher prepared many things, such as: lesson plan (See Appendix 2b), observation sheet (See Appendices 10c and 11c) and field notes (See Appendix 9). The planning steps were done to avoid the misconception of the action that would be done in the classroom.

b) Action

th The action was performed on Monday, August 22 , 2016 whereby the allotted time was 2 x 40 minutes. As in the Cycle I, the teaching-learning process was consisted

of pre teaching-learning activities, whilst teaching-learning activities, and post teaching and learning activities.

For the meeting in the classroom, the researcher greeted the students, asked their condition and checked the students’ presence list. The researcher was also checked the students’ preparation for learning and motivated them to be more focused

in teaching-learning activity. After that, the researcher reviewed the material teaching again to students based on the weaknesses that were noticed by the researcher in Cycle

I. After reviewing, the researcher gave them chances to pose question related to the teaching material and answer it directly. The researcher was also gave example to the students about personal recount text itself. Then, the researcher let the students to make a prewriting plan that was consisted of some integrated steps. As the first one, the researcher let them to select the topic of their writing, to think, acquire, and organize ideas, considering audiences related to the topic of their writing. After that, the

researcher asked them to start to write freely about their selected topic itself individually in the prescribed time. Then, the researcher gave extra time to the students to continue to write their draft. After that, the researcher asked the students to recheck and revise their draft, gave opportunity for the then rewrite their draft itself for more correctly. After all, the researcher collected the students’ work paper.

Next, the students were evaluated by the researcher by doing freewriting activity again. After evaluation session, the researcher asked some students to conclude the teaching material, and re-concluded directly again based on those students idea. Then, the researcher was also gave the students the opportunity for posing question and answered that question directly. Follow on, the researcher gave extra time for the students to have more practice at home. The researcher was also motivate them, asked their feeling after learning the material teaching, and guided them in praying before ending the meeting.

e) Observation

As usual, during teaching-learning process, the teacher collaborator observed the researcher and students’ activities. Besides, the researcher also wrote some

important information that existed during conducting activity. However, the result of the observation of the researcher and students activities will be joined to the second meeting. Yet, the next are several important information according to field notes.

(1) Field Notes Based on the result of the observation of the first meeting of Cycle II, the researcher noticed there were still activities undone by the students.

Furthermore, the researcher found weaknesses in doing Cycle II at the first meeting, they were.

(a) There was no time for the students to proofread their final writing before publishing. The researcher assumed that proofread may be one way for the students as the writer to make sure that their final writing was ready to be published.

(b) There was still few of students still follow the teaching learning unseriously. There were also some advantages found by the researcher in doing Cycle II at the first meeting as follows.

a. Most of the students were interested in joining the teaching-learning process. This condition automatically increasing the students’ motivation in teaching-learning process itself.

b. Most of students can express their idea easily in written text form even some mistakes were still found. Even the most of the students were still worse writers; surprisingly there were no blocked writers.

f) Reflection

The first meeting in Cycle II showed that the students still have weaknesses in writing composition. Specifically, the most of the students were still include in worse writers. However, they can express their idea in written text form more correct than before. Therefore, to make the students got development in learning the material teaching, the researcher improved the planning of the teaching activities. The researcher had done some improvements such as.

a. The researcher gave chances for the students to proofread their final writing before publishing.

b. The researcher guided them to share or discuss actively to their friends about the process of writing or every important things.

2) The Second Meeting

The second meeting was held on Wednesday, 24 th August, 2016. The allotted time was 2 x 40 minutes. The learning material was same with the first meeting that was personal recount text. The procedure of the second meeting as follows.

a) Planning

In doing Cycle I at the second meeting, the researcher prepared many things, such as: lesson plan (See Appendix 2b), observation paper (See Appendices 10d and 11db) and field notes (See Appendix 9) The planning steps were done to avoid the misconception of the action that would be done in the classroom.

b) Action

The action was performed on Wednesday, August 24 th , 2016. The meeting was done in 2 x 40 minutes. As in the first meeting, the teaching-learning processes of the second meeting also consisted of pre teaching-learning activities, whilst teaching- learning activities, and post teaching-learning activities.

When starting to teaching, the researcher greeted the students, introduced himself to the students and checked the students’ presence list. Before turned to the

teaching- learning activity, the researcher also asked the students’ preparation in learning and motivated them also directly to follow the teaching-learning activity itself. Then, the researcher distributed to the students their evaluation sheet that has been collected by the researcher in the previous meeting. The researcher had already write

comments on that evaluation sheet itself as the feedback of the students’ writing. Then, the researcher reviewed the material teaching. After that, the researcher guided the students to write freely about their past activity which is included as personal recount text form. By thinking first the topic of writing, then the researcher asked them to write in a prescribed time. Besides, the researcher also gave them extra time to finish

it. Next, the researcher let the students to discuss with their friends about the process of their writing and allowed them to rewrite their writing for further publishing. After finishing, the researcher gave chances for the students to proofread their final writing. Here, the proofreader was the teacher collaborator that always observed the researcher in during teaching-learning activity. After proofreading, the researcher asked several students to share their writing in front of the classroom. Then, the researcher collected the students work paper.

After that, the researcher turned to evaluate the students by letting them to write freely a personal recount text related their past experience. The researcher gave them chances to finish it individually. Moreover, the researcher was also asked the students to proofread their final writing to the proofreader namely the teacher- collaborator before submitting. After evaluation session, the researcher gave chances for the students to pose question and answered it directly. Follow on, a student was asked by the researcher to conclude the teaching material. Besides, the researcher motivated the students to learn more at home, gave them extra class work, and close the meeting by greeting.

c) Observation

The result of the observation of the researcher’s and the students’ activities and also field notes of the second meeting of Cycle I can be described as follows. (4) Observation Sheet for the Researcher’s Activities Based on the result of the observation of the researcher’s activities, the activities which were done and undone during the teaching-learning process can be described as follows. (a) Done : 34 activities (100%) from 34 activities. (b) Undone : 0 activities (0%) from 34 activities.

The result of observation above shows that all researcher’s activities had already done (100%) during teaching-learning activity. So, the degree of the researcher’s activities in teaching-learning activity was included in very high criterion. Clearly, all the researcher’s activities in the teaching-learning process can be shown in the next Graphic 4.

Researcer's activities

Undone Graphic 4: The researcher’s activities in second meeting of Cycle II.

Done

(5) Observation Sheet for the Students’ Activities Based on the result of the observation of the students’ activities, the activities

which were done and undone during the teaching-learning process can be described as follows.

1. Done : 19 activities (100%) from 19 activities.

4. Undone : 0 activity (0%) from 19 activities.

Based on the data above, it was noticed that all of the students’ activities were done and the degree of teaching-learning activity was included on very high criterion. To make clear for understanding, the next is the graphic 5 about the students’ activities in teaching-learning process.

Researcer's activities

Undone

Done

Graphic 5: The students’ activity in teaching-learning process in second meeting of

Cycle II.

(6) Field Notes

Based on the result of the observation of the second meeting in Cycle II, the researcher noticed all activities were done by the researcher and the students. Besides, the researcher found weakness in doing Cycle II at the second meeting namely, there were some students still did not bring dictionary in the class at the time. They were two persons only. Yet, the researcher noticed also some advantages in conducting the second meeting of Cycle II as follows.

c. The students had high understanding about the teaching material.

d. The students had progression about the skill and mastery teaching material itself. Besides they can write correctly, they were also can share their idea spokenly in front of the classroom.

e. The students had great enthusiasm in learning the material teaching.

d) Reflection

The second meeting of Cycle II showed that the students have progression in writing skill especially in writing recount text by using Free Write Method. The researcher had great preparation before conducting the teaching-learning process whereby she can did all of things or activities in the classroom. Moreover, the students also had great motivation to learn, the most of them were active, creative, and cooperative in learning. Besides, the other surprise thing was the students have progression in mastering the teaching material which can be known through evaluation whereby its result was presented at the following Table 4.

Table 4

The Students’ Ability in Writing Recount Text through Free Write Method in the Second Meeting of Cycle II

NO Classification

Scoring

Frequency Percentage

2 Very good

4 Good enough

7 Very bad

0-44

From the calculation, it was gotten that the most of students’ mark were up to the MCC score which was indicated that the teaching-learning activity in the Cycle II was successful. For detailing information, there was no one student in excellent, enough, bad and very bad criteria (0.0%), five students in good enough criterion (14.3%), seventeen students in good criterion, and thirteen students in very good criterion. For easy understanding, the following Graphic 6 is the students’ ability in writing recount text through Free Write Method in the second meeting of Cycle II.

Very good 70

Good

Good enough

Very bad 20

Excellent Very good Good Good enough Enough Bad Very bad

Criteria

Graphic 6: The students’ ability in writing recount text through Free Write Method at the second meeting of Cycle I.

From the analyzing of the result of the second meeting of Cycle II, it was gotten that all of students’ mark were higher than MCC score. It was indicated that the

teaching-learning process of Cycle II was successful. Recognizing to this successfulness, it can be said that applying Free Write Method in teaching-learning activity of the research increased the students’ ability in writing skill especially in

writing recount text. Since the data shown that Free Write Method as the method of teaching writing increased the students’

3. The Classification of the Students’ Ability in Writing Recount Text

Based on the result of the data analysis, the researcher would classify the students’ ability in writing descriptive paragraph through Free Write Method at the

eighth grade of SMP Negeri 1 Gido. The classification is seen in Table 5 as follows:

Table 5

The Students’ Ability in Writing Recount Text by using Free Write Method in Cycle I and Cycle II

Cycle II Classification Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Cycle I

0% Very good

17 48.6% Good enough

0% Very bad

0% Students number

In summary, the table above contained information that in Cycle I, the most of students’ mark were lower than MCC score which was mean that the students cannot write personal recount text correctly, while in Cycle II, all of the students’ mark were

higher than MCC score which was mean that all of the students can write personal recount text correctly even some mistakes may be found anyway. To simplify, the result of the students’ ability both in Cycle I and Cycle II is presented in the following Graphic 7.

Cycle I Cycle II

Excellent

Very good

Good

Good enough

Enough

Bad Very bad

Criteria

Graphic 7: The Percentage Degree of Classification of the Students’ Ability in Writing Recount Text in Cycle I and Cycle II.

4. Thee Researcher’s Activities of All Cycles

Reflecting to the observation sheet of the researcher’s activities, the researcher noticed all her activities during conducting the research and presents it in the following Table 6.

Table 6

The Researcher’s Activities of All Cycles

No. Cycles

1 Cycle I

2 Cycle II Done

To simplify the data table above, the next is Graphic 8 about the percentage degree about the researcher’s activities in all cycles (Cycle I and Cycle II).

70 entag 60 erc 50 P 40

Cycle I

Cycle II

Graphic 8: The percentage degree of the researcher’s activities in all cycles.

5. The Students’ Activities in All Cycles

Based on the observation toward the students’ activities in Cycle I and Cycle

II, so the researcher presents it through the following Table 7.

Table 7

The Students’ Activities of All Cycles

No. Cycles

1 Cycle I

2 Cycle II

Done

Undone

68

To simplify the data table before, the following is Graphic 9 about the percentage degree about the students’ activities in all cycles (Cycle I and Cycle II).

1st Meeting/C-I 2nd Meeting/C-II 1st Meeting/C-I 2nd Meeting/C-II

Graphic 9: The percentage degree of the students’ activities in all cycles

6. The Field Notes of the Students’ Activities in All Cycles

Based on the data of field notes of all cycles, the researcher simplified it as in the following Table 8 as follows.

Table 8

The Field Notes of the Students’ Activities in all Cycles

Description

Cycle Meeting

Weaknesses

Advantages

Most of students were lack of

Most of the students were

vocabulary, lack of grammar,

interested in joining the

lack of the using of

teaching-learning activity.

1 punctuation, included as worse writers who write incorrectly and a few are blocked writers who cannot write anything.

Most students were still get

The students had enough

stuck in writing session, it is

understanding about the

difficult for them to start to

teaching material, and they

2 write. The most of them were

were also had progression

also have no braveness in

in mastery the skill.

writing, they afraid for making mistakes. Most of the students showed

Most of students felt enjoy

progression in writing skill

in following the teaching-

which can be seen on their

learning process. They also

evaluation sheet, they can

able to start to write by

1 express their idea in written text selecting the topic, until

form. But, unfortunately, there create their first draft. They was no time to proofread their

had braveness in writing.

II final writing before publishing. Some students did not bring

The students had dictionary in teaching-learning progression in writing, they process. Recognition that

mastery the teaching

2 dictionary is words bank, so

material, they can write

actually it was strongly

correctly, and the they had

expected to be owned for all

great enthusiasm in

students.

learning.

70

7. The Average of the Students’ Ability In Writing Recount Text through Free Write Method at the Eighth Grade of SMP Negeri 1 Gido in 2016/2017 of Cycle

I and Cycle II

Based on the data analysis of evaluation sheet of the research, the researcher noticed the average of the students’ ability in writing recount text through Free Write Method (See Appendices 12a and 12b) . In Cycle I, the average of students’ ability was

49 and it was included on bad criterion and lower than MCC score. However, the students’ ability had progression in Cycle II whereby the average of their marks was

83 and it was included on good criterion and higher than MCC score.