C. Participants of the Research
The participants were the researcher in collaboration with all the research members. They were the school principal, the English teacher, the
researchers, and the students of SMP 3 Berbah; especially the students of class VIII D in the academic year of 20132014. The research involved all 22
students of class D grade VIII. The English teacher of grade VIII was also involved in this research.
The English teacher participated in this research as a collaborator. The teacher observed the research, gave information in the thematic reconnaissance step,
gave opinions about the plans that were implemented and the implementation of peer response in the teaching-learning process. The collaborator also became
the second rater for students’ score.
D. Instruments of the Research
The instruments used in this research are presented below. 1. Interview Guideline
The interview guideline was used to interview the English teacher and the students during the research. The interview was done in the
reconnaissance and action steps. 2. Observation Checklist
The observation checklist was used to check the application of peer response in the teaching and learning process. The researcher and
collaborators put mark to the statements of writing processes which had been done.
3. Writing Tests Students’ writing tests were used as the instrument to get the
information about the students’ writing ability after the peer response was applied. The tests could inform whether there was improvement of the
students’ writing ability after implementing the peer response.
E. Data and Technique of Collecting Data
There were two types of data in this research. They were qualitative and quantitative data. The qualitative data were the description of the process
during the action. They were obtained by interviewing the English teacher and the students of class VIII D, observing the teaching and learning English
process in class VIII D, and also the documentation. The results of the observation were in the form of field notes. The data from the interviews were
in the form of interview transcripts.
Meanwhile, the photograph
documentations were to support the data mentioned previously. Those were also supported by student’s writing task submitted back by the researcher.
Besides, the quantitative data were the result of the students’ writing
before, and after the action. It was a kind of writing test to see the difference of students writing before and after implementing the technique. It included a pre-
test that was done to get the score of the test before the treatment. Later on, there was a post-
test to obtain the score of the students’ writing after the
treatment. It was not only to see the improvement of students writing scores, but also to see their improvement inside their writing composition.
In the reconnaissance step, the researcher observed the learning process of the class together with the collaborator to get information related to the
English teaching and learning process. The researcher also interviewed the English teacher and the students to know more about the difficulties happened
in the teaching and learning process. In the planning step, the researcher had a dialogue with the English
teacher as the collaborator to decide what kind of technique to apply in order to solve the problems, here, to improve the writing ability of grade VIII students
in the school. To achieve the democratic and process validity of the study, the researcher asked for the collaborator’s opinion and suggestion.
The next step was action and observation. The teaching was done by the researcher, while the observation was conducted by the collaborator. To
achieve dialogic and outcome validity, besides the observation, some interviews
were conducted after
the implementation.
The researcher
interviewed the English teacher and the students about the implementation of peer response
to improve the students’ writing ability. After the action step was done, the researcher reflected on the results of
the action. The results of the studen ts’ writing were evaluated together with the
collaborator. What was improved and what to be improved in the next cycle were discussed with the English teacher as the collaborator. The researcher
used documentation to record the students’ activities in producing the written
texts. The process of documentation in the implementation was done by the collaborator. Content and outcome validity were expected to be achieved
in this process.
F. Technique of Data Analysis
Kategori