The users of mind mapping were better to have more practice to accustom to use mind mapping for the reasons that the users knew the use of mind mapping
effectively.
2. The Results of the Interview
In this part, the researcher would provide the interview results of students’ perception on mind mapping as prewriting strategy to foster students’ writing
skills. Respondent A said that mind mapping as a prewriting strategy had two
types. They were the manual
1
and the mind mapping software
2
. According to him, the mind mapping software was more complicated than the manual one. It
was complicated because he had spent a lot of time to make it. Since the user had not really mastered the instructions to work with the mind mapping
software. Therefore, he frequently used the manual mind mapping besides it was simpler than the software; it also led the user to be more creative in
drawing and coloring. However, both kinds of mind mapping had the same function. It was to foster the user in exploring ideas easily.
He added when he used mind mapping, he could divide between the most supported ideas and not supported ideas easily because mind mapping was very
systematic. In his opinion, the users could put some colors and pictures to make
1
It was also called traditional mind mapping that using paper and colored pens. Buzan, 2003, p. 227.
2
It was also called computer mind mapping software that the user put the data via computer screen with a digital pen. Buzan, 2003, p. 227.
mind mapping more interesting. The interviewee used mind mapping not only in writing subject but also in reading subject and in his teaching preparation. He
suggested the teacher should teach the step of this strategy and the students were better to inure using this strategy because the strategy was very helpful
and effective especially if it was used in prewriting. This suggestion based on his experience that a class used mind mapping if only the teacher asked them to
make mind mapping. However, respondent B never used mind mapping as prewriting strategy
except the teacher asked her to use the strategy to be submitted. She thought that using mind mapping is tiring because she was not used to be systematic.
She preferred to use free writing, because the strategy challenged her to write more and more in her mind.
Even though she never used mind mapping except the teacher asked her to use, based on the theory that she got from the lecture, she thought that mind
mapping was a good strategy to be used because the strategy was very systematic and mind mapping could help the users to map their ideas
specifically. She also had a notion that mind mapping did not let the users to miss the specific ideas. She suggested having a high motivation to use mind
mapping in prewriting step, the user could make a book of his mind mapping. In other words, the user gathered all mind mapping that he had made and bound
them all to be a book.
Respondent C had used mind mapping as prewriting strategy but she rarely used it. She thought that mind mapping was not helpful to use because it let her
to be confused to explore ideas and to pick out the important ideas. However, she thought that mind mapping was the effective way to use to
foster students’ writing skill though she rarely used the strategy. According to her, mind mapping was a systematic strategy based on her experience in
prewriting step. The users had to know what ideas had to be put on it. She believed that mind mapping helped the users to have new points of idea.
Respondent D used three strategies in prewriting step. He used brainstorming as the first strategy, listing as the second strategy and mind
mapping as the third strategy. He put mind mapping in the last step because in his opinion the use of mind mapping was to evaluate his ideas in his prewriting
step. He usually used mind mapping strategy in prewriting step to evaluate the position of his ideas. Based on his experiences and his knowledge got by
reading a kind of writing book discuss on the use of mind mapping in prewriting step, he said that mind mapping was a systematic strategy.
According to him, mind mapping as a prewriting strategy could lead the users to explore the detailed ideas based on the big topic or general topic. He suggested
mind mapping could also be applied in all product skills, not only in writing but also in speaking. Since, mind mapping could facilitated the users explore their
ideas with certain burden.
B. DISCUSSION
1. Students’ perceptions on mind mapping as prewriting strategy to foster
students’ writing skills
The researcher could draw conclusion, based on the data gained, that most of the respondents had positive perception on the use of mind mapping as the
strategy in prewriting step. That meant respondents were familiar with mind mapping as prewriting strategy and facilitated using mind mapping in prewriting.
However, it did not mean respondents were often to use mind mapping in prewriting.
In the researcher’s opinion, mind mapping was one of the very systematic strategies which helped the users to lead in appearing ideas. In fact that the
working system of mind mapping were writing a general big topic in the middle of the paper, making some branches from it which were as subtopics or more
specific ideas, then from the branches of the specific ideas, the users could always have the more and more specific ideas. Therefore, by mind mapping, in
researcher’s opinion, the users would not miss detailed ideas. Since mind
mapping was a systematic prewriting strategy with its branches and helped the users in building up ideas, thus, mind mapping could be a prewriting strategy to
foster students’ writing skills. Based on the questionnaire data, most of the respondents agreed towards the
statement that they were familiar with mind mapping as a strategy in prewriting step. However, a part of respondents disagreed that they often used mind mapping
