D. General Findings
In this part, the data of the research findings are discussed in details. There are qualitative and quantitative data. The qualitative data dealt with the
general findings of the research on each cycle, while the quantitative data described the students’ result in writing. The next parts were findings found by the
researcher in a series of the use of collaborative writing to improve students’
writing skills. 1. Cycle 1
a. In terms of idea and development, most of students could generate ideas.
However, there were some students who found it hard to generate ideas in writing. Additionally, some students understood the component and the
purpose of a narrative text. b.
In terms of spelling, students became aware of this aspect. However they sill needed got more vocabulary input in order to give them much knowledge of
spelling.. c.
In terms of organization aspects, some students could find and identify the generic structure of a narrative text.
d. In terms of vocabulary aspects, students’ vocabulary mastery improved. Most
of them were able to use new words that they got from the teaching and learning process especially irregular verbs.
e. In terms of capitalization and punctuation, students were able to make
significant improvements. At first, they were not really aware of these aspects, yet, after they were told to pay attention to those aspects, they know
the importance of those aspects. Most of them did it well, even though there still were some of them who failed to put full stop and capital letters.
f. In terms of sentence structure, students made some improvements. They were
able to write sentences using the simple past tense though there were students who found difficulties in writing sentences using the simple past tense,
because they still confused and forgot to change V1 into V2. Overall, it was definitely much better than before the implementation.
2. Cycle 2
a. In terms of idea and development, all students could generate ideas. They did
notfind significant difficulty in generating ideas. They knew what they would write.
b. In terms of spelling, almost all students did good job. From the vocabulary
input as well as texts given, they got much knowledge of spelling. They were also aware of this aspect.
c. In terms of organization aspects, all students could find and identify the
generic structure of a narrative text. They seemed get full understanding and apply their knowledge of the generic structure of narrative texts.
d. In terms of vocabulary aspects, students’ vocabulary mastery improved as
they got many new words during the teaching and learning process. Most of them were able to use appropriate words in writing sentences of the simple
past tense. e.
In terms of capitalization and punctuation, almost all students were fully aware of these aspects. They did a good job. Before submitting their writing,
students managed to write better by checking their writing. There were only few of them who forgot to put punctuation and missed the capital letters.
f. In terms of the sentence structure, almost students made significant
improvements. They were able to write sentences using simple past tense. They were able to find the correct form of verbs in past tense. They no
longerfound difficulties in writing simple past tense like they faced before the implementation and in Cycle 1. They also made sentences in a good order.
There were some additional findings found by the researcher and collaborator during the research. The findings are presented as follows.
a. The use of the
collaborative writing improved students’ motivation in the teaching and learning process since they could share their knowledge to their
friends. They were more actively involved in the teaching and learning process as well. It could be seen from their participation in the class during the teaching and
learning process. b.
The use of the collaborative writing enhanced students’ creativity where they
could share their opinion, ideas, and thought when they took part in a group discussion. In addition, the collaborative writing technique also gained their self-
confidence to ask anything to their friends and even to the researcher since the researcher guaranteed them that they would not be blamed if they made mistakes
or gave wrong answers.
3. Summary of Cycle 1 and Cycle 2
The results of this action research can be summarized in the next page.
Table 6. The Comparison of the Pre-Condition, Cycle 1, and after Cycle 2 No
Pre-Condition Cycle 1
Cycle 2
1. Students did not feel
motivated in
learning English
since they think that English is a difficult
subject to learn.
Actions: The researcher
used classroom English. She
guaranteed the
students to not blame them when they made
mistakes. She also gave a reward to the students
who answered or gave their opinion bravely.
Successful Actions: The
implementation of
collaborative writing
technique provided fun activities
where they
could enjoy
learning writing. The students
could share their ideas and thoughts when they
did the activities with their
groups. Additionally,
The rewards made students
become more participate actively.
Unsuccessful Actions:
there were some students who
did not
feel motivated because they
Actions: The researcher
used classroom English. She
guaranteed the
students to not blame them when they made
mistakes. She also gave a reward to the students
who answered or gave their opinion bravely.
Successful Actions:
Students were motivated to
learn English,
especially in writing. They
showed their
enthusiasm in writing collaboratively.
They also participated actively
during the teaching and learning process.
Kategori