Model of Action Research Procedure of Action Research

commit to user a. Action research undertaken in small scale and localized which investigates certain problem in specific situation. b. Action research is a form of evaluation and reflective an activity which aims to change the system better. c. Action research involves practitioners, researchers, or teachers in their own classroom collaboratively. d. The changes in practice are supported by the data. Based on the characteristics of action research above, this research was appropriately conducted as classroom action research in order to bring about so cial and educational change and improvement in writing skill and students‟ learning attitude. This research was done collaboratively with an English Teacher of SMP Negeri 1 Juwiring, Klaten.

3. Model of Action Research

Kemmis and McTaggart in Nunan 1998: 18 illustrate the model of action research known as action research spiral. There are five steps in action research model, namely: a. Identifying the problems and planning actions. b. Implementing the action. c. Observing or monitoring the action. d. Reflecting the result of the observation. e. Revising the plan for the following steps. Those five steps are form one cycle. This model can be visualized in the diagram below: Figure 3.1 Model of Action Research commit to user

4. Procedure of Action Research

In conducting the research, the researcher implemented the technique which represents the stages of action research; there are six steps as follows: a. Identifying the problem First of all the steps form is identifying the problem or in another words called pre-research activity. It refers to the factor of low writing competence. The problem can be identified by using: 1 Test The first test that was given to the students was called pre-test. It was given to know the st udents‟ competence. 2 Interview with the teacher The interview was held in order to know the matter faced during teaching-learning process. 3 Observation The observation was done to know the students‟ behavior during teaching-learning process and the model and class management. b. Planning Action In this case, the teacher and the writer prepared everything related to the action: 1 Preparing the material which was organised into the Lesson Plan. 2 Preparing the teaching technique, that is YouTube Video. 3 Preparing Post test to know whether or not the students improve. c. Implementing the Action The writer implemented the teaching and learning activity of writing using YouTube video based on the lesson. d. Observingmonitoring the action commit to user It was conducted to collect the data. The English teacher observed all the activities in teaching learning process while the researcher taught the students. e. Reflecting the result of the observation Both the researcher and the English teacher made evaluation on the observation result to find out the weakness and positive results during teaching and learning process. f. Revising the plan Based on the weaknesses during the action the researcher revised the action plan for the next meeting. In scoring the data, Jacobs et.all 1981 in Reid 1993: 236 categorize five grading scales which are often used for the evaluation of students writing, namely content as the most heavily weighted; the others are organization, language use or grammar, vocabulary, and mechanics including spelling and punctuation. Table 3.1 Scoring of Writing based on ESL Composition Score Level Criteria 30-27 EXCELENT TO VERY GOOD: knowledgeable substantive development of thesis  relevant to assigned topic 26-22 GOOD TO AVERAGE: sure knowledge of subject  adequate range  limited development of thesis  mostly relevant to topic but lacks detail 21-17 FAIR TO POOR: limited knowledge of subject  little substance  inadequate development of topic 16-13 VERY POOR: does not show knowledge of subject  non- substantive  non pertinent  or not enough to evaluate 20-18 EXCELENT TO VERY GOOD: fluent expressions idea clearly statedsupported succinct well-organized logical sequencing cohesive 17-24 GOOD TO AVERAGE: somewhat copy loosely organized but main ideas stand out  limited supportlogical but incomplete sequencing 13-10 FAIR TO POOR: non-fluent ideas confused or disconnected lacks logical sequencing and development 9-7 VERY POOR: does not communicate no organization or not enough to evaluate 20-18 EXCELENT TO VERY GOOD: sophisticated rangeeffective wordidiom choice and usage word form mastery appropriate register 17-14 GOOD TO AVERAGE: adequate range occasional errors of wordidiom form, choice, usage but meaning not obscured 13-10 FAIR TO POOR: limited range frequent errors of workidiom form, choice, usage meaning confused or obscured 9-7 VERY POOR: essentially translation little knowledge of English vocabulary, idioms, word form or not enough evaluate commit to user 25-22 EXCELENT TO VERY GOOD: effective, complex constructions few errors of agreement, tense, number, word orderfunction, articles, pronouns, prepositions 21-18 GOOD TO AVERAGE: effective but simple constructions minor problems in complex constructions  several errors of agreement, tense, number, word orderfunction, articles, pronouns, prepositions, but meaning seldom obscured 17-11 FAIR TO POOR: major problem in simplecomplex constructions  frequent errors of negation, agreement, tense, number, word orderfunction, articles, pronouns, preposition andor fragments  meaning confused or obscured 10-5 VERY POOR: virtually no mastery of sentence construction rules  dominated by errors  does not communicate or not enough to evaluate 5 EXCELENT TO VERY GOOD: demonstrate mastery of conventions  few errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing. 4 GOOD TO AVERAGE: occasional errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing, but meaning not obscured 3 FAIR TO POOR: frequent errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing,  poor handwriting  meaning confused or obscured 2 VERY POOR: no mastery of conventions  dominated by errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing  handwriting illegible  or not enough to evaluate Based on the table above, the researcher adapted scoring of writing specifically in each single aspect of writing skill in table 3.2. Table 3.2 Scoring of Writing Skill Score Level Criteria 30-27 EXCELENT TO VERY GOOD: understandable and detail information of the subject 26-22 GOOD TO AVERAGE: Understandable but lacks of detail about the subject, limited supported sentences to the topic sentence 21-17 FAIR TO POOR: little information about the subject, and does not supported topic sentence 16-13 VERY POOR: does not show information of subject, and does not represent the topic. 20-18 EXCELENT TO VERY GOOD: idea clearly statedsupported of each paragraph, well-organized , logical sequencing ,cohesive 17-24 GOOD TO AVERAGE: loosely organized but main ideas stand out but limited support of it, little logical sequencing. 13-10 FAIR TO POOR: confused or disconnected, lacks logical sequencing 9-7 VERY POOR: does not communicate, no organization, not enough to evaluate 20-18 EXCELENT TO VERY GOOD: variety, effective wordidiom choice and usage, word form mastery appropriate meaning, appropriate register 17-14 GOOD TO AVERAGE: quite variety, sometimes errors of wordidiom form, choice, usage but meaning easy to understand 13-10 FAIR TO POOR: does not variety monotonous, always errors of commit to user wordidiom form, choice, usage, and meaning confused or difficult to understand. 9-7 VERY POOR: usually translate word by word, not good enough of English vocabulary, idioms, word form. 25-22 EXCELENT TO VERY GOOD: effective, grammatically, few errors of agreement, tense, number, word orderfunction, articles, pronouns, prepositions 21-18 GOOD TO AVERAGE: effective but simple, several errors of agreement, tense, number, word orderfunction, articles, pronouns, prepositions, but meaning seldom confused. 17-11 FAIR TO POOR: major problem in simplearranged a sentence, frequent errors of negation, agreement, tense, number, word orderfunction, articles, pronouns, preposition andor fragments , meaning confused 10-5 VERY POOR: does not know the grammar rule  dominated by errors. 5 EXCELENT TO VERY GOOD: few errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing. 4 GOOD TO AVERAGE: occasional errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing. 3 FAIR TO POOR: frequent errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing. 2 VERY POOR: dominated by errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing The score of every single aspect can be drawn below: No Categories Score 1 Content 30 2 Organization 20 3 Vocabulary 20 4 Grammar 25 5 Mechanics 5 Total 100

C. Techniques of Collecting Data