guided them with several guided questions to help them to understand what they should write. The field notes below show the situation on that day.
Unfortunately, the bell rang. It showed that the English class was finished.
And there were ten students who were still writing. However, she asked them to submit their works. A student helped her to collect their works.
3. Reflection
After analyzing the observation result in Cycle 1, the researcher and the teacher had a discussion about the influence of the action to students’ writing
skills. It evaluated the teaching and learning process. The reflection would be used as a plan of actions that would be implemented in Cycle 2. There were some
positive and negative results from the observation. Overall, the teaching and learning of writing ran well. However, some students
were passive in the discussions. Some students talked to other groups to ask some information. And during the teaching and learning process, the researcher walked
around to monitor their activities. She also had to stop to each group to answer their questions. It is described in the following interview transcript. It belongs to
the process validity. After discussing the jumbled paragraphs, P asked Ss to sit on their own seats.
They had to rewrite the narrative text in Activity 10 using their own words. She then gave some guidance to them. She told them what they should write
based on the generic structure. She also gave guided questions to them to help them to understand what they should write using their own words.
Field Notes 8, April 22
nd
2015
R: “Yes ma’am, there are active groups and also passive groups. There are two groups that are still passive. Some students also ask to other groups.”
T: “That is Ok. Maybe they were not close to the groups’ members. It is only a matter of a process. They need to adapt to their groups
’ member. The students have different levels of proficiency. So by working in groups they
can help each other. R:
“Yes ma’am. I walked around to monitor their activities and to make sure that they understood. I also had to stop to each group to answer their
questions and re-explain to them. ”
Interview transcript 1, April 9
th
2015
During the teaching and learning process, students were working in groups. Working in groups made them more easily comprehend materials. They could
share their ideas to their friends. They also could ask their friends when they got difficulties. Yet, there were some students who were not actively involved in the
group discussions. Therefore, in Cycle 2, she would change the members of the groups. In this stage she interviewed them to know whether they liked working in
groups or not. This interview can be said as process validity.
To complete the catalytic validity, she also interviewed them to know their opinions about the teaching and learning process. Therefore, she could identify the
changes occurring before, during, and after the action. Their responses would be considered to modify the process for the next cycle.
From the students’ writing in the posttest, it is obvious that their writing was getting better. They were better in developing ideas and using a tense. Yet, they
still did several mistakes. Some students still did not pay attention to punctuation and capital letters. She also found that some students still made mistakes in
P: “Do you like working in groups? Or individually?” S: “Working in groups.”
Interview Transcript 14, April 29
th
2015
P: “Do you understand the materials?” S: “Yes ma’am.”
P: “Do you still have a problem? S: “Ehm… Yes, vocabulary ma’am.”
P: “What about constructing sentences.” S: “Now, I know how to construct sentences ma’am, but sometimes I am still
confused.” Interview Transcript 14, April 29
th
2015
grammar. This conclusion can be said as the outcome validity. The following is an example of students’ writing.
Figure 6: Students’ Writing in Cycle 1
The improvement of the students’ writing was also proved by their scores in the posttest in Cycle 1. In general, their writing scores were better than their
writing scores in the pretest. The frequency of the very poor category decreased. In the pretest, there were three students in the very poor category. Meanwhile
there was no student in the very poor category after Cycle 1. However, the percentage of their writing skills was not good yet. There was only one student
who was categorized as excellent. Therefore the researcher still had homework to increase their writing scores. Table 6
presents students’ writing scores in details.
Table 6: S tudents’ Writing Scores in the Posttest in Cycle 1
Scores Categories
Frequency Percentage
87.5-100 Excellent
1 3.3
75-87.4 Very good
10 33.4
62.5-74.9 Good
10 33.4
50-62.4 Fair
7 23.3
37.5-49.9 Poor
2 6.6
25-37.4 Very poor
Mean 67.50
SD 11.75
From the scoring rubric, the researcher found that the ideal mean score was 62.50 and the ideal standard deviation was 12.50.
In fact, the students’ mean score after Cycle 1 was 67.5. It was better than the ideal mean and their mean score in
the pretest. Besides, the standard deviation was 11.75. It was lower than the ideal standard deviation. It means their achievements were homogeneous. From their
writing scores, it can be concluded that some students still got difficulties to write. Although their mean score was better than the ideal mean score, their writing
skills still needed to be improved. However, comparing students’ writing scores in the pretest with those in
Cycle 1, the researcher concluded that students ’ writing scores increased
significantly because of the implementation of guided writing. The frequency on the excellent category increased from 0 to 1. On the very good category, it
increased from 3 to 10. On the good category, it increased from 5 to 10. Meanwhile, on the fair, the poor, and the very poor categories, it decreased. On
the fair category, it decreased from 13 to 7. On the poor category, it decreased from 6 to 2. On the very poor category, it decreased from 3 to 0. Moreover, their
mean score increased from 54.02 to 67.50. The following is the result of their writing scores before and after Cycle 1.
