55
from their writing process. Even in the first draft, their ability to form a text was shown. They could provide appropriate information related to the topic and also
logical conclusion. As stated above, their problems were grammar and the ability to develop the ideas. Sometimes they found difficulties in expressing their ideas in
written form. As a result, their writings were sometimes misleading or confusing. The writing skill here became the problems because actually the students
were already good at some writing aspects. In the rubric the aspects assessed were focus, organization, sources, and mechanicalgrammar features. As stated in the
previous chapter, each aspect assessed different parts of the text. Focus assessed the content in each paragraphs, while organization assessed the organization of the
text introduction, arguments, conclusion and the transition. Sources were dealing with facts and supportive statements quoted or cited by the students. The last one,
mechanicalgrammatical features dealt with the grammar and punctuation errors found in the text. In conclusion, the students were already good at focus and
organization. They were also not that hopeless in sources and grammar. Considering these factors, the fact that the mean difference was not significant
was then not surprising. Even though the result of the t-test was unlikely to show significant
difference, the researcher found that the experimental group performed much better than the control group in organizing ideas.
56
4.3.2 Analysis of the Aspect of Organization
Group Statistics
Group N
Mean Std. Deviation
Std. Error Mean change_pre_post
Con
52 ,0000
,83431 ,11570
Exp
53 ,4717
,85718 ,11774
Independent Samples Test
Levenes Test for
Equality of Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig.
T Df
Sig. 1-
tailed Mean
Difference Std. Error
Difference 95 Confidence
Interval of the Difference
Lower Upper
change_pre_post Equal variances
assumed
.001 .977 -
2.857 103 .0025 -.47170
.16512 -
.79917 -
.14423
Equal variances
not assumed
- 2.857
102.994 .0025 -.47170 .16507
- .79908
- .14431
The organization of the experimental group that used GAIL differed significantly M= 0.47, SD=0.85 from the control group that used ordinary
teaching-learning activities M= 0.00, SD= 0.83, t 103 = - 2.85, p 0.05. There was a significant difference between the organization of the experimental and
control group. Specifically, these results suggested that the students that were being treated by using GAIL had better writing organization than the students that
were being treated by using the ordinary teaching-learning activities.
Table 4.9. The Result of Significance Test of Organization Aspect
57
4.3.3 The Other findings
After the researcher collected the data, there were some interesting findings noted. First, the use of peer-feedback in GAIL helped the students to
minimize grammar mistakes. Usually, the students thought that their writings were understandable and already clear. By asking some friends to give feedback,
they knew what went wrong in their writings. Besides, they also got more understandable and acceptable explanations from friends. It was very helpful for
them, because sometimes the teachers could not provide satisfying answer for students. The effect of having peer-feedback activity was noisy class. The students
moved around the class to find a friend who can help them. Another interesting finding was about the text sample provided by the
researcher. The use of contextual examples reinforced the students to use it as a model in their writings. In the early meeting, the students and the teachers
analyzed and discussed the text together. Later, in drafting process, they referred to the text as a model. Although this activity was not done by all of the students, it
showed that actually the students needed model. It helped them because then they could compare their writings to the sample text. They could also find some
persuasive expressions. The research findings had been discussed in detail in the previous
paragraphs. It presented the results of the data calculation, the chart of the tests ad also the figures. In the next chapter, there will be some recommendation and
conclusion of the research.
