THE EFFECT OF APPLYING SIMULTANEOUS ROUNDTABLE STRATEGY ON THE STUDENTS ACHIEVEMENT IN WRITING NARRATIVE TEXT.
THE EFFECT OF APPLYING SIMULTANEOUS ROUNDTABLE
STRATEGY ON THE STUDENTS’ ACHIEVEMENT IN
WRITING NARRATIVE TEXT
A THESIS
Submitted to English and Literature Department, Faculty of Language and
Art, State University of Medan in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan
By:
ELNOVIAMY
Registration Number: 2103121012
ENGLISH AND LITERATURE DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
2015
DECLARATION
I have familiarized myself with the University’s Policy on Academic integrity.
Except where appropriately acknowledged, this thesis is my own work, has been
expressed in my own words, and has not been previously submitted for
assessment.
I understand that this paper may be screened electronically or otherwise for
plagiarism.
Medan, Januari 2015
Elnoviamy
Reg. No. 2103121012
ABSTRACT
Elnoviamy. 2103121012. The Effect Of Applying Simultaneous Roundtable
Strategy On The Students’ Achievement In Writing Narrative Text. A
Thesis. Faculty of Languages and Arts. State University of Medan.
The aim of this study is to discover the effect of applying Simultaneous
Roundtable Strategy in writing narrative text. Experimental research design is
used as the research method. This research took place at SMA Negeri 1
Perbaungan. There were 2 classes chosen as the sample with 32 students in each
class. The classes were denoted to be experimental and control group. The
experimental group was taught by using Simultaneous Roundtable Strategy and
the control group was taught by using conventional method. The instrument in
collecting the data was writing test, which was provided from pre-test and posttest. The result of the research was analyzed by using T-test formula. The result
shows that the T-test was higher than T-table (3.993>2.000) at the level of
significant 0.05 with degree of freedom (df) 62. It proves that hypothesis is
accepted that students who are taught by using Simultaneous Roundtable Strategy
is higher than the students who are taught by conventional lecture method.
Keywords : Simultaneous Roundtable Strategy, Students’ Achievement,
Narrative Text
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Beyond words, the writer would like to thank Allah SWT who has granted
countless blessing, knowledge and opportunity so that the writer can finish the
academic year and completing this thesis entitled “The Effect of Applying
Simultaneous Roundtable Strategy on the Students’ Achievement in Writing
Narrative Text” as one of the requirements for completion of Sarjana Pendidikan
(S1) at English Department, Faculty of Languages and Arts, State University of
Medan.
During the process of writing and conducting the research, many people
have contributed positive energy, thought, trust and assistance. This thesis could
have not been accomplised without the guidance, suggestion, and comment from
them, for which the writer would like to express her sincere appreciation which
directed to:
Prof. Dr. Ibnu Hajar Damanik, M.Si, the Rector of State University of
Medan.
Dr. Isda Pramuniati, M.Hum, the Dean of Languages and Arts Faculty.
Prof. Dr. Hj. Sumarsih, M.Pd, as the Head of English Department and her
Reviewer.
Dra. Meisuri, M.A as the Secretary of English Department.
Dra. Masitowarni Siregar, M.Ed, as the Head of English Education Study
Program.
Prof. Amrin Saragih, M.A., Ph.D, her Thesis Consultant.
Prof. Busmin Gurning, M.Pd, her Academic Consultant and her Reviewer.
Dra. Rahmah, M.Hum, Syamsul Bahri. S.S, M.Hum as her Reviewers.
Suhairi, M.Pd, the Headmaster of SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan and the
English Teacher Melya Prozi, S.Pd.
Suprihati, as her beloved mother, for her being the writer’s shelter of love,
for her prayer, moral and life lesson which worth the world to the writer.
Elsha Rahmadhani, as her sister who keeps reminding her about being
discipline and all her family members for their support and trust.
Riza Rifai., S.T and family for the companionship and help during the
writer’s study.
Family in HMJ BSI UNIMED for the togetherness and spirit especially
building her leadership and bringing the toughness during her academic year.
EDDC Unimed. The writer feels grateful that she has brought Unimed to
National level of debating and EDDC is more than home to her. Thank you
for the spirit in proliferating debating in our beloved UNIMED.
The four
years of study will not be the same without the existence of her friends;
Deby Arifsyah Putra, Pradiba Utari, Arindawati, Ayu Widyaningtyas as
her closest friends. Thank you for literally help me up when I am down.
Thank you for Aminah, Christin, Christine, Dessy and for Reguler C 2010
for such incredible lessons behind every lesson.
For those
whose names cannot be mentioned, yet had inspired, encouraged and gave her
support, helps, and laughters during her study years and the process of writing
of this thesis.
Finally, the writer hopes this thesis would be useful for those who read it,
especially for the students of English Department.
Medan,
January 2015
The writer,
Elnoviamy
Reg. No 2103121012
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT ...............................................................................................
i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ........................................................................ ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS.......................................................................... iv
LIST OF TABLE ...................................................................................... vi
LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................. vii
LIST OF APPENDICES .......................................................................... viii
CHAPTER I:INTRODUCTION .............................................................
A. The Background of the Study..........................................................
B. The Scope of the Study ..................................................................
C. The Problem of the Study................................................................
D. The Objective of the Study..............................................................
E. The Significance of the Study .........................................................
1
1
7
8
8
8
CHAPTER II:REVIEW OF LITERATURE ......................................... 10
A. Theoretical Framework ................................................................... 10
1. Student’s Achievement ............................................................ 10
2. Writing ..................................................................................... 11
3. Genres of Writing ..................................................................... 14
4. Narrative ................................................................................... 14
a. The Purpose of Narrative...................................................... 17
b. The Characteristics of Narrative .......................................... 18
c. Assessing Narrative .............................................................. 23
5. Strategy..................................................................................... 24
1. Simultaneous Roundtable Strategy ...................................... 25
a. The Procedure of Applying Simultaneous Roundtable
Strategy ............................................................................ 26
b. Advantages of Applying Simultaneous Roundtable
Strategy ............................................................................ 29
2. Conventional Lecture Method ............................................. 30
a. ................................................................................. The
Procedure of Applying Conventional Lecture
Strategy ........................................................................... 31
b. ................................................................................. Advanta
ges of Applying Conventional Lecture
Strategy ........................................................................... 32
B. Conceptual Framework .................................................................. 33
C. Hypothesis ....................................................................................... 35
CHAPTER III:RESEARCH METHOD .................................................
A. Research Design ..............................................................................
B. Population and Sample ....................................................................
1. Population....................................................................................
36
36
37
37
2. Sample ......................................................................................
C. The Instrument of Collecting Data ..................................................
D. Assessment and Scoring of Writing ................................................
E. The Procedure of Research..............................................................
E. The Validity and Reliability of the Test ..........................................
1. Validity .....................................................................................
2. Reliability ................................................................................
F. Technique in Collecting the Data ....................................................
G. The Statistical Hypothesis ...............................................................
38
38
39
42
49
49
49
50
51
CHAPTER IV: THE DATA ANALYSIS ...............................................
A. The Data ..........................................................................................
B. Data Analysis ..................................................................................
C. Reliability of the Writing Test ........................................................
D. Testing Hypothesis ..........................................................................
E. Discussion .......................................................................................
52
52
53
55
56
57
CHAPTER IV: CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS .....................
A. Conclusion .......................................................................................
B. Suggestion .......................................................................................
59
59
59
REFERENCES ..........................................................................................
APPENDICES ...........................................................................................
61
64
LIST OF TABLES
Table
1.1
2.1
2.2
2.3
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
Page
Means of Sample Students’ English Score .....................................
Relationship Among Skills..............................................................
Advantages and Disadvantages of Simultaneous Roundtable ........
Advantages and Disadvantages of Conventional Lecture Method .
Research Design ..............................................................................
Criteria of Scoring Test ...................................................................
Maximum Score of Writing Component .........................................
Teaching Procedure for Experimental Group .................................
Teaching Procedure for Control Group ...........................................
4
12
29
32
37
40
41
44
47
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Page
2.1
Process of Writing ...........................................................................
12
2.2
Prewriting in Simultaneous Roundtable Strategy ...........................
29
LIST OF APPENDICES
Page
Appendix A:
Appendix B:
Appendix C:
Appendix D:
Appendix E:
Appendix F:
Appendix G:
Appendix H:
Appendix I
Appendix J:
Pre - Test for Experimental and Control Group ................
Post – Test for Experimental Group ..................................
Post – Test for Control Group ...........................................
The Scores of Pre – Test and Post – Test ..........................
The Calculation of T - Test ...............................................
The Reliability of the Test .................................................
Percentage Points of T - Distribution ...............................
Lesson Plan for Control Group ..........................................
Lesson Plan for Experimental Group ................................
Narrative Assesment Rubric .............................................
viii
64
65
66
67
71
78
81
82
97
115
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. Background of the Study
Language as medium of communication is used to establish social relation
and is important to learn for its function to express feelings, attitudes and ideas
also to express wishes and desires by using the system of sounds and words.
Fulwiler (2002 : 26) states that language is used all the time for many reasons.
Ideas can only be delivered by language. In the relation to this, Clark and Clark
(1997;1) state that language is fundamental instrument of communication.
English as the most used language in all over the world is important to be
mastered both in oral and written form. Since it is a requirement to communicate
and socialize with the world society, the demand of learning English is uplifting
and expected to be synergized in Indonesia.
Teaching English is related to four skills; they are listening skill, speaking
skill, reading skill and writing skill. Most teachers try to incorporate all four skills
areas into their planning, though some classes may focus more on one set of skills
or the other, due to the course and learner objectives. The main reason for
isolating these skills and discussing them separately is to highlight their
importance so students can be focus in learning each of them (Al – Jawi, 2010).
Reading and listening skill have many parallels and are referred to be receptive
skills, while speaking and writing skills are referred to be productive skills with
the outgoing products as the results (Saricoban, 1999).
As an integration of the universally recognized four language skills,
writing is frequently presumed as the hardest to master. It is a common occurrence
that students are usually less enthusiastic about an upcoming test when the task
requires them to write or to compose an essay instead of the more preferable
multiple choice test. According to Richard – Amato (2003), like reading, writing
is an interactive process involving three basic components: the audience (the
readers), other writers, and other texts whether written or oral. “Learning to write
is a complex series of process that require a range of explicit teaching
methodologies throughout all stages of learning.” (Knapp and Watkins, 2005).The
Writers need to pour his or her competences, understanding, thought and opinion
to the accomplishment of the writing text. In writing, the writer not only reflects
his/ her values, experiences, prior knowledge, culture, dream, goal and
expectation but must also consider and additional category: the audience.
(Zinnser, 2001). The complexity of the writing process becomes the main reason
why students find writing to be the hardest language skill. Thus, most students
find that writing a difficult task to carry out.
However, National Educational Curriculum now requires them students to
know and understand the basic types of writing and their essential components
and structures. The students are expected to fulfill a level of satisfactory when it
comes to educational learning of language. Thus, it is obligatory that students
need to maintain at least a decent level of graphic skill which is another way to
address writing skills.
To help students in outlining their writing products, they are thought about
the types of types of text. There are different types of writing. One way to
categorize writing is by the genre. Genre divides texts into description, narrative,
procedure, argumentation, narrative and many more. More specified objective is
required in order to have a greater chance in dealing with the problems in
students’ writing. Thus, in this particular research the researcher will focus in one
genre that the genre of narrative.
Even though the most usually known purpose of narrative is to entertain
the readers, students are hardly amused to compose a narrative text. Narrative is
significant media to students’ reflective and critical skills. Wolf (1994) believes
that narrative is not only a set of lovely stories to be read, but also a foundation for
analysis, reflection, and criticism, which can be used to be a resource for
children’s original writing.
For the higher level of study, narrative text is not only learned in Junior
High School or senior level but also in University level also real job field,
therefore the researcher believes that it will be important for Narrative genre to be
observed, beside that the genre will be expected to practically amuse the students
within the learning teaching process. Another agenda which is expected to be
fulfilled is that learning Narrative text at school can be an alternative way to raise
the students’ awareness of classical and local stories that now become forgotten.
Based on the researcher’s experience in Integrated Field Teaching
Program (PPLT) in 2013 to SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan, the same problem was
also found. The students were still struggling in writing narration and confused of
what to write and how to start. Moreover, the students did not have any ideas
about grammatical patterns or generic structures of Narrative text and moreover to
organize those ideas and structures into text.
The collected data by observing SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan, the minimum
competence criteria is 75. Below is the table of the means of students’ scores in
SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan in writing Narrative text.
Table 1.1
Means Of Sample Students’ English Score In
SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan
Class
XI IPA
XI IPA 1 XI IPA 2 XI IPS 1 XI IPS 2
Term
U
1
72
70
69
68
65
2
71
72
70
69
66
Source : Data from Curriculum Development Board SMA Negeri 1
Perbaunga, year : 2013-2014
The table shows that the students’ English achievement at the school is
still in need of improving. The minimum standard for passing English test for
students in grade X is 75, while from the table we can see that only class in which
all the students got a core higher than the minimum criteria.
Related to the problem described previously, the way of teaching needs to
be improved. Strategies for improving the way of teaching will be needed to
perform in the class in order to improve the students’ achievement. To overcome
the problem which occurred, it is acclaimed to use the Simultaneous Roundtable
Technique.
Simultaneous Roundtable Technique is one of cooperative learning
techniques that allow students to work in any number of groups to actively engage
in learning process to improve their understanding to the content. Each member of
the team is not only responsible for their own learning, but also to help their
teammates to learn. (Kagan : 2009)
By using Simultaneous Roundtable Techniques in teaching narrative text,
the students will be expected to be able to compose a narrative text or stories by
their own words and ideas. In teams, students will simultaneously generate
responses, then pass their ideas clockwise so each team can add to the prior
responses (Kagan, 2009). Within the simultaneous roundtable technique, students
will collaborate; work together to add some comments/ thought in order
accomplish a narrative text without being confused about what to start.
Other strategies that are relevant to Simultaneous Roundtable Strategy
have been developed to help the students in their writing achievement, they are
Round Robin and Roundtable Strategy by Kagan (2002), TPC (Think, Pairs,
Check), TPW (Think Pairs Write) and Think Pairs Share) which is developed by
Lyman (1981), and Peer Writing by Cohen (1994).
Various researches were conducted by using Simultaneous Roundtable
Strategy. As this strategy has a very big potency to solve problem of teaching in
many fields of subjects (Kagan, 2002), many researchers have developed the
classroom teaching method by using this strategy.
To begin with the related studies, Stenlev (2011) examined the use of
Simultaneous Roundtable Strategy to help teachers in teaching process. It is
suggested that the silence in doing this strategy help the students to gain the
maximum result of the study, compared to lecturing method. As the students are
asked to work by using a paper and a pen, the students are invited to thing and
generate ideas without making noise. This will promote the most conductivity in
learning process. It was concluded that Roundtable Strategy works best in
sequenced activities like writing. Activities by using this strategy will build
positive interdependence among team members and reinforce the power of
teamwork and team cohesion (Stenlev, 2011).
Siregar (2008) conducted a classroom action research in order to attempt
the improvement of student’s in writing descriptive paragraph. As the subject of
the research, class VIII-5 in SMP N2 Berastagi, North Sumatera – Indonesia, was
examined and treated by using the strategy, Yudhi (2008) found that students’
achievement kept improving. Based on two cycles which were done during the
research, Yudhi (2008 : 41) suggested that the post test result was improved from
61.43 in the post to be 75.13. Later, it is also supported that Simultaneous
Roundtable Strategy can improve students’ achievement in writing narrative
paragraph.
As the related studies revealed, it was found that Simultaneous Roundtable
Strategy gives a positive output as the result of the result. However, Simultaneous
Roundtable Strategy had never been used in experimental research to see how it is
upper handed to improve students’ achievement in writing, especially writing a
narrative test. To bring peer researchers to a new horizon of this strategy, the
researcher applied Simultaneous Roundtable Strategy to determine that this
strategy also give positive result as previous research attached.
For the consideration that the Simultaneous Roundtable Technique would
be effective to improve the students’ achievement in writing Narrative text, the
researcher would try to investigate the effect of applying this technique to the
students’ achievement in narrative writing. However the study would be expected
to show the result of the technique to be used in English language teaching
especially in teaching narrative text.
B. Scope of the Study
The main purpose of the study is to find out if the effect of applying the
simultaneous roundtable technique would significantly improve the students’
achievement in writing narrative text. Therefore, the study is focused on the
students’ achievement in the process of writing narrative text in term of
conducting ideas and combining thoughts into integrated narrative text by using
simultaneous roundtable technique.
C. Problem of the Study
Based on the background of the study, the research problem is formulated
as following:
“Is the students’ achievement in writing narrative text taught by using
simultaneous roundtable strategy significantly higher than that taught by using
conventional method?”
D. The Objective of the Study
As stated in the title and the formulated problem of the study, this research
is conducted to investigate whether there is a significant effect of using
simultaneous roundtable technique on students’ achievement in writing narrative
text.
E. The Significance of the Study
There are several aspects of the significance of the research that the
researcher hereby wishes to establish, namely:
1. Theoretically, the findings of this research will be useful for English
teachers who need another technique in developing students’ progress in
Narrative writing.
2. Practically, the implementation of the Simultaneous Roundtable
Technique will help students in improving their skills in narrative writing.
3. In addition, hopefully this study will give information for the readers and
other researchers who are inspired to further refine the application of
Simultaneous Roundtable Roundtable Technique in teaching narrative
writing or writing in general.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
A. Conclusions
After analyzing the data, it was found out that the students’ score in
writing narrative text was significantly affected by applying of Simultaneous
Roundtable Strategy. The using of Simultaneous Roundtable Strategy has
improved the students’ narrative writing to be more coherent and grammatical
than by using conventional method.
As the pre – test and the post – test were done, the students’ scores in
experimental group were more succeed to past the minimum standard level than
that in control group. Thus, Simultaneous Roundtable Strategy is expected to be
really effective in teaching narrative text both in big amount of students or
smaller.
Therefore, it is concluded that the using of simultaneous roundtable
strategy significantly raise the students’ achievement in writing a narrative text
compared to the using of conventional method.
B. Suggestion
Based on the finding of this research, the suggestions are staged as the
following:
1. It is advisable that the teachers of English to apply Simultaneous
Roundtable Strategy in teaching writing of narrative text as the strategy in
teaching learning process.
2. It suggested that the students are able to write by using Simultaneous
Roundtable Strategy, however the students need to enrich their
vocabularies to write better writing products.
REFERENCE
Al – Jawi, F. D. 2010. Teaching The Receptive Skills : Listening and Reading
Skills. Mecca : UMM Al Qura University Press.
Arikunto, S. 2003. ProsedurPenelitian :Suatu Pendekatan Praktek. Jakarta:
Rineka Cipta
Ary, Donald. 2002. Introduction to Research in Education. Singapore: Wardswith
Best, J. 1981. Research in Education. New Jersey: Prentice Hall
Bloom, B.S. 1996. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives : the Classification of
Educational Goals, New York; Longman
Brown, H. Douglas. 2001. Teaching by Principles: an Interactive Approach to Language
Pedagogy, Second Edition. New York: Longman
Clark, H. H & Clark E. V. 1997. Communities, Commonalities, and Communication.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cohen, E. G. 1994. Designing Groupwork. New York : Teachers College Press
Dietsch, B.M. 2006. Reasoning and Writing Well : A Rhetoric, Research Guide and
Handbook, Fourth Edition. New York : McGraw Hill Press
Fulwiller, Tobi. 2003. College Writing: A personal Approach to Academic Written.
Heineman: Boynton/Cook Publisher
Harmer, Jeremy. 2007. The Practice of English Language Teaching, Forth
Edition. England: Pearson Education
Jacobs, H. 1981. Testing ESL Composition : A Practical Approach. New York :
Newburry House Publisher
Kaur, J. 2009. Pre – empting Problems of Understading in English in Lingua
Franca. Newscastle : Cambridge Scholars Publishing
Kaufman, A. S. & Kaufman. N. L (2004). Kaufman Assessment Battery for
Children : Technical Manual, Second Edition. Minnesota : American
Guidelines Service
Knapp, P. & Watkins, M. 2005. Genre, Text, Grammar : Technologies for Teaching and
Assessing Writing. Sidney: University of New South Wales
Press.
Knapp, P. & Watkins, M. 1994. Context - Text – Grammar; Teacher the Genres
and Grammar of School Writing in Infants and Primary Classrooms.
Broadway : Text Production.
Harmer, Jeremy.2001. The Practice of English Language Teaching. Third Edition.
Essex, England: Pearson Education
Heaton, J.B. 1989. Writing English Language Test. New York: Longman Group
UK
Hughes, A. 2003.Testing for Language Teachers.Second Edition. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press
Hornby, A. S & Turnbull, J. 2010. Oxford Advanced Learner;s Dictionary, Eighth
Edition. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
Kagan, S. and M. Kagan.2009. Kagan Cooperative Learning. California: Kagan
Publishing.
Kagan, S, and M. Kagan. 1998. Multiple Intellegences: the Complete MI Book. San
Cemente, CA: Kagan
Lyman, F.T, Jr. 1981. The Development of Tools: The Inclusion of All Students.
Maryland: University of Maryland Press
Maduawesi, B.U. 1999. General Curriculum Methodology. Nigeria: Joy Educational
Publishers
Mifflin, H. 2005. The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. New
York; Houghton Mifflin Company
Murray, D.H. 1982. Learning by Teaching. Monclair, New Jersey: Boynton/Cook.
Murray, D. 2009. The Essential. Portsmouth: Boynton/ Cook Publisher, Inc.
Richard – Amato, P. A. 2003.Making it Happen, from Interactive to Participatory
Language Teachin : a More Critical View of Theory and Practice. New York:
Longman.
Saricoban, A. 1999. The Teaching of Listening. Internet TESL Journal, Turkey:
Hacettepe University Press 5 (12), p. 1. Retrieved October 15th, 2014.
Siregar, V. F, 2014. The Use of Cooperative Learning Type Roundtable Technique to
Improve the Ability of the Second Year Students of SMAN 10 Pekanbaru in
Writing Hortatory Exposition Text. Riau: FKIP Riau University Academic
Journal.
Smith, L. M. & Hudgins, B. B. 1964. Educational Psychology : An Application of Social
and Behavioral Theory. New York : Alfred A, Knopt
Stenlev, J. 2003. Cooperative Learning I Foreign Language Teaching. Copenhagen:
Spring Forum
Tarigan, Y. P. 2013. Improving Students’ Achievement in Writing Descriptive Paragraph
Through Simultaneous Roundtable Strategy. Medan: Unimed Library Journal
Vin-Mbah, Fidelia/ I. 2012. Learning and Teaching Methodology. Journal of Educational
and Social Research. II (4)p. 114
Webster, N. 1964. Merriam – Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, Eleventh Edition.
Massachusetts : Merriam – Webster’s Inc, later to be Encyclopedia Britannica
Company
Weiner. B. 1977. An Attributional Approach for Educational Psychology. New York :
Academic Press
Wolf, Shelby A. &MarylGaarhart. 1994. Writing What You Read: Narrative Assessment
as a Learning Event. Language Arts 71,6. Pg.425. ProQuest Research Library
Zinnser, William K. 2001. On Writing Well: the Classic Guide to Writing Nonfictiion,
The Sixth Edition. New York: Harper Collins Publisher
STRATEGY ON THE STUDENTS’ ACHIEVEMENT IN
WRITING NARRATIVE TEXT
A THESIS
Submitted to English and Literature Department, Faculty of Language and
Art, State University of Medan in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan
By:
ELNOVIAMY
Registration Number: 2103121012
ENGLISH AND LITERATURE DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
2015
DECLARATION
I have familiarized myself with the University’s Policy on Academic integrity.
Except where appropriately acknowledged, this thesis is my own work, has been
expressed in my own words, and has not been previously submitted for
assessment.
I understand that this paper may be screened electronically or otherwise for
plagiarism.
Medan, Januari 2015
Elnoviamy
Reg. No. 2103121012
ABSTRACT
Elnoviamy. 2103121012. The Effect Of Applying Simultaneous Roundtable
Strategy On The Students’ Achievement In Writing Narrative Text. A
Thesis. Faculty of Languages and Arts. State University of Medan.
The aim of this study is to discover the effect of applying Simultaneous
Roundtable Strategy in writing narrative text. Experimental research design is
used as the research method. This research took place at SMA Negeri 1
Perbaungan. There were 2 classes chosen as the sample with 32 students in each
class. The classes were denoted to be experimental and control group. The
experimental group was taught by using Simultaneous Roundtable Strategy and
the control group was taught by using conventional method. The instrument in
collecting the data was writing test, which was provided from pre-test and posttest. The result of the research was analyzed by using T-test formula. The result
shows that the T-test was higher than T-table (3.993>2.000) at the level of
significant 0.05 with degree of freedom (df) 62. It proves that hypothesis is
accepted that students who are taught by using Simultaneous Roundtable Strategy
is higher than the students who are taught by conventional lecture method.
Keywords : Simultaneous Roundtable Strategy, Students’ Achievement,
Narrative Text
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Beyond words, the writer would like to thank Allah SWT who has granted
countless blessing, knowledge and opportunity so that the writer can finish the
academic year and completing this thesis entitled “The Effect of Applying
Simultaneous Roundtable Strategy on the Students’ Achievement in Writing
Narrative Text” as one of the requirements for completion of Sarjana Pendidikan
(S1) at English Department, Faculty of Languages and Arts, State University of
Medan.
During the process of writing and conducting the research, many people
have contributed positive energy, thought, trust and assistance. This thesis could
have not been accomplised without the guidance, suggestion, and comment from
them, for which the writer would like to express her sincere appreciation which
directed to:
Prof. Dr. Ibnu Hajar Damanik, M.Si, the Rector of State University of
Medan.
Dr. Isda Pramuniati, M.Hum, the Dean of Languages and Arts Faculty.
Prof. Dr. Hj. Sumarsih, M.Pd, as the Head of English Department and her
Reviewer.
Dra. Meisuri, M.A as the Secretary of English Department.
Dra. Masitowarni Siregar, M.Ed, as the Head of English Education Study
Program.
Prof. Amrin Saragih, M.A., Ph.D, her Thesis Consultant.
Prof. Busmin Gurning, M.Pd, her Academic Consultant and her Reviewer.
Dra. Rahmah, M.Hum, Syamsul Bahri. S.S, M.Hum as her Reviewers.
Suhairi, M.Pd, the Headmaster of SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan and the
English Teacher Melya Prozi, S.Pd.
Suprihati, as her beloved mother, for her being the writer’s shelter of love,
for her prayer, moral and life lesson which worth the world to the writer.
Elsha Rahmadhani, as her sister who keeps reminding her about being
discipline and all her family members for their support and trust.
Riza Rifai., S.T and family for the companionship and help during the
writer’s study.
Family in HMJ BSI UNIMED for the togetherness and spirit especially
building her leadership and bringing the toughness during her academic year.
EDDC Unimed. The writer feels grateful that she has brought Unimed to
National level of debating and EDDC is more than home to her. Thank you
for the spirit in proliferating debating in our beloved UNIMED.
The four
years of study will not be the same without the existence of her friends;
Deby Arifsyah Putra, Pradiba Utari, Arindawati, Ayu Widyaningtyas as
her closest friends. Thank you for literally help me up when I am down.
Thank you for Aminah, Christin, Christine, Dessy and for Reguler C 2010
for such incredible lessons behind every lesson.
For those
whose names cannot be mentioned, yet had inspired, encouraged and gave her
support, helps, and laughters during her study years and the process of writing
of this thesis.
Finally, the writer hopes this thesis would be useful for those who read it,
especially for the students of English Department.
Medan,
January 2015
The writer,
Elnoviamy
Reg. No 2103121012
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT ...............................................................................................
i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ........................................................................ ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS.......................................................................... iv
LIST OF TABLE ...................................................................................... vi
LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................. vii
LIST OF APPENDICES .......................................................................... viii
CHAPTER I:INTRODUCTION .............................................................
A. The Background of the Study..........................................................
B. The Scope of the Study ..................................................................
C. The Problem of the Study................................................................
D. The Objective of the Study..............................................................
E. The Significance of the Study .........................................................
1
1
7
8
8
8
CHAPTER II:REVIEW OF LITERATURE ......................................... 10
A. Theoretical Framework ................................................................... 10
1. Student’s Achievement ............................................................ 10
2. Writing ..................................................................................... 11
3. Genres of Writing ..................................................................... 14
4. Narrative ................................................................................... 14
a. The Purpose of Narrative...................................................... 17
b. The Characteristics of Narrative .......................................... 18
c. Assessing Narrative .............................................................. 23
5. Strategy..................................................................................... 24
1. Simultaneous Roundtable Strategy ...................................... 25
a. The Procedure of Applying Simultaneous Roundtable
Strategy ............................................................................ 26
b. Advantages of Applying Simultaneous Roundtable
Strategy ............................................................................ 29
2. Conventional Lecture Method ............................................. 30
a. ................................................................................. The
Procedure of Applying Conventional Lecture
Strategy ........................................................................... 31
b. ................................................................................. Advanta
ges of Applying Conventional Lecture
Strategy ........................................................................... 32
B. Conceptual Framework .................................................................. 33
C. Hypothesis ....................................................................................... 35
CHAPTER III:RESEARCH METHOD .................................................
A. Research Design ..............................................................................
B. Population and Sample ....................................................................
1. Population....................................................................................
36
36
37
37
2. Sample ......................................................................................
C. The Instrument of Collecting Data ..................................................
D. Assessment and Scoring of Writing ................................................
E. The Procedure of Research..............................................................
E. The Validity and Reliability of the Test ..........................................
1. Validity .....................................................................................
2. Reliability ................................................................................
F. Technique in Collecting the Data ....................................................
G. The Statistical Hypothesis ...............................................................
38
38
39
42
49
49
49
50
51
CHAPTER IV: THE DATA ANALYSIS ...............................................
A. The Data ..........................................................................................
B. Data Analysis ..................................................................................
C. Reliability of the Writing Test ........................................................
D. Testing Hypothesis ..........................................................................
E. Discussion .......................................................................................
52
52
53
55
56
57
CHAPTER IV: CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS .....................
A. Conclusion .......................................................................................
B. Suggestion .......................................................................................
59
59
59
REFERENCES ..........................................................................................
APPENDICES ...........................................................................................
61
64
LIST OF TABLES
Table
1.1
2.1
2.2
2.3
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
Page
Means of Sample Students’ English Score .....................................
Relationship Among Skills..............................................................
Advantages and Disadvantages of Simultaneous Roundtable ........
Advantages and Disadvantages of Conventional Lecture Method .
Research Design ..............................................................................
Criteria of Scoring Test ...................................................................
Maximum Score of Writing Component .........................................
Teaching Procedure for Experimental Group .................................
Teaching Procedure for Control Group ...........................................
4
12
29
32
37
40
41
44
47
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Page
2.1
Process of Writing ...........................................................................
12
2.2
Prewriting in Simultaneous Roundtable Strategy ...........................
29
LIST OF APPENDICES
Page
Appendix A:
Appendix B:
Appendix C:
Appendix D:
Appendix E:
Appendix F:
Appendix G:
Appendix H:
Appendix I
Appendix J:
Pre - Test for Experimental and Control Group ................
Post – Test for Experimental Group ..................................
Post – Test for Control Group ...........................................
The Scores of Pre – Test and Post – Test ..........................
The Calculation of T - Test ...............................................
The Reliability of the Test .................................................
Percentage Points of T - Distribution ...............................
Lesson Plan for Control Group ..........................................
Lesson Plan for Experimental Group ................................
Narrative Assesment Rubric .............................................
viii
64
65
66
67
71
78
81
82
97
115
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. Background of the Study
Language as medium of communication is used to establish social relation
and is important to learn for its function to express feelings, attitudes and ideas
also to express wishes and desires by using the system of sounds and words.
Fulwiler (2002 : 26) states that language is used all the time for many reasons.
Ideas can only be delivered by language. In the relation to this, Clark and Clark
(1997;1) state that language is fundamental instrument of communication.
English as the most used language in all over the world is important to be
mastered both in oral and written form. Since it is a requirement to communicate
and socialize with the world society, the demand of learning English is uplifting
and expected to be synergized in Indonesia.
Teaching English is related to four skills; they are listening skill, speaking
skill, reading skill and writing skill. Most teachers try to incorporate all four skills
areas into their planning, though some classes may focus more on one set of skills
or the other, due to the course and learner objectives. The main reason for
isolating these skills and discussing them separately is to highlight their
importance so students can be focus in learning each of them (Al – Jawi, 2010).
Reading and listening skill have many parallels and are referred to be receptive
skills, while speaking and writing skills are referred to be productive skills with
the outgoing products as the results (Saricoban, 1999).
As an integration of the universally recognized four language skills,
writing is frequently presumed as the hardest to master. It is a common occurrence
that students are usually less enthusiastic about an upcoming test when the task
requires them to write or to compose an essay instead of the more preferable
multiple choice test. According to Richard – Amato (2003), like reading, writing
is an interactive process involving three basic components: the audience (the
readers), other writers, and other texts whether written or oral. “Learning to write
is a complex series of process that require a range of explicit teaching
methodologies throughout all stages of learning.” (Knapp and Watkins, 2005).The
Writers need to pour his or her competences, understanding, thought and opinion
to the accomplishment of the writing text. In writing, the writer not only reflects
his/ her values, experiences, prior knowledge, culture, dream, goal and
expectation but must also consider and additional category: the audience.
(Zinnser, 2001). The complexity of the writing process becomes the main reason
why students find writing to be the hardest language skill. Thus, most students
find that writing a difficult task to carry out.
However, National Educational Curriculum now requires them students to
know and understand the basic types of writing and their essential components
and structures. The students are expected to fulfill a level of satisfactory when it
comes to educational learning of language. Thus, it is obligatory that students
need to maintain at least a decent level of graphic skill which is another way to
address writing skills.
To help students in outlining their writing products, they are thought about
the types of types of text. There are different types of writing. One way to
categorize writing is by the genre. Genre divides texts into description, narrative,
procedure, argumentation, narrative and many more. More specified objective is
required in order to have a greater chance in dealing with the problems in
students’ writing. Thus, in this particular research the researcher will focus in one
genre that the genre of narrative.
Even though the most usually known purpose of narrative is to entertain
the readers, students are hardly amused to compose a narrative text. Narrative is
significant media to students’ reflective and critical skills. Wolf (1994) believes
that narrative is not only a set of lovely stories to be read, but also a foundation for
analysis, reflection, and criticism, which can be used to be a resource for
children’s original writing.
For the higher level of study, narrative text is not only learned in Junior
High School or senior level but also in University level also real job field,
therefore the researcher believes that it will be important for Narrative genre to be
observed, beside that the genre will be expected to practically amuse the students
within the learning teaching process. Another agenda which is expected to be
fulfilled is that learning Narrative text at school can be an alternative way to raise
the students’ awareness of classical and local stories that now become forgotten.
Based on the researcher’s experience in Integrated Field Teaching
Program (PPLT) in 2013 to SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan, the same problem was
also found. The students were still struggling in writing narration and confused of
what to write and how to start. Moreover, the students did not have any ideas
about grammatical patterns or generic structures of Narrative text and moreover to
organize those ideas and structures into text.
The collected data by observing SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan, the minimum
competence criteria is 75. Below is the table of the means of students’ scores in
SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan in writing Narrative text.
Table 1.1
Means Of Sample Students’ English Score In
SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan
Class
XI IPA
XI IPA 1 XI IPA 2 XI IPS 1 XI IPS 2
Term
U
1
72
70
69
68
65
2
71
72
70
69
66
Source : Data from Curriculum Development Board SMA Negeri 1
Perbaunga, year : 2013-2014
The table shows that the students’ English achievement at the school is
still in need of improving. The minimum standard for passing English test for
students in grade X is 75, while from the table we can see that only class in which
all the students got a core higher than the minimum criteria.
Related to the problem described previously, the way of teaching needs to
be improved. Strategies for improving the way of teaching will be needed to
perform in the class in order to improve the students’ achievement. To overcome
the problem which occurred, it is acclaimed to use the Simultaneous Roundtable
Technique.
Simultaneous Roundtable Technique is one of cooperative learning
techniques that allow students to work in any number of groups to actively engage
in learning process to improve their understanding to the content. Each member of
the team is not only responsible for their own learning, but also to help their
teammates to learn. (Kagan : 2009)
By using Simultaneous Roundtable Techniques in teaching narrative text,
the students will be expected to be able to compose a narrative text or stories by
their own words and ideas. In teams, students will simultaneously generate
responses, then pass their ideas clockwise so each team can add to the prior
responses (Kagan, 2009). Within the simultaneous roundtable technique, students
will collaborate; work together to add some comments/ thought in order
accomplish a narrative text without being confused about what to start.
Other strategies that are relevant to Simultaneous Roundtable Strategy
have been developed to help the students in their writing achievement, they are
Round Robin and Roundtable Strategy by Kagan (2002), TPC (Think, Pairs,
Check), TPW (Think Pairs Write) and Think Pairs Share) which is developed by
Lyman (1981), and Peer Writing by Cohen (1994).
Various researches were conducted by using Simultaneous Roundtable
Strategy. As this strategy has a very big potency to solve problem of teaching in
many fields of subjects (Kagan, 2002), many researchers have developed the
classroom teaching method by using this strategy.
To begin with the related studies, Stenlev (2011) examined the use of
Simultaneous Roundtable Strategy to help teachers in teaching process. It is
suggested that the silence in doing this strategy help the students to gain the
maximum result of the study, compared to lecturing method. As the students are
asked to work by using a paper and a pen, the students are invited to thing and
generate ideas without making noise. This will promote the most conductivity in
learning process. It was concluded that Roundtable Strategy works best in
sequenced activities like writing. Activities by using this strategy will build
positive interdependence among team members and reinforce the power of
teamwork and team cohesion (Stenlev, 2011).
Siregar (2008) conducted a classroom action research in order to attempt
the improvement of student’s in writing descriptive paragraph. As the subject of
the research, class VIII-5 in SMP N2 Berastagi, North Sumatera – Indonesia, was
examined and treated by using the strategy, Yudhi (2008) found that students’
achievement kept improving. Based on two cycles which were done during the
research, Yudhi (2008 : 41) suggested that the post test result was improved from
61.43 in the post to be 75.13. Later, it is also supported that Simultaneous
Roundtable Strategy can improve students’ achievement in writing narrative
paragraph.
As the related studies revealed, it was found that Simultaneous Roundtable
Strategy gives a positive output as the result of the result. However, Simultaneous
Roundtable Strategy had never been used in experimental research to see how it is
upper handed to improve students’ achievement in writing, especially writing a
narrative test. To bring peer researchers to a new horizon of this strategy, the
researcher applied Simultaneous Roundtable Strategy to determine that this
strategy also give positive result as previous research attached.
For the consideration that the Simultaneous Roundtable Technique would
be effective to improve the students’ achievement in writing Narrative text, the
researcher would try to investigate the effect of applying this technique to the
students’ achievement in narrative writing. However the study would be expected
to show the result of the technique to be used in English language teaching
especially in teaching narrative text.
B. Scope of the Study
The main purpose of the study is to find out if the effect of applying the
simultaneous roundtable technique would significantly improve the students’
achievement in writing narrative text. Therefore, the study is focused on the
students’ achievement in the process of writing narrative text in term of
conducting ideas and combining thoughts into integrated narrative text by using
simultaneous roundtable technique.
C. Problem of the Study
Based on the background of the study, the research problem is formulated
as following:
“Is the students’ achievement in writing narrative text taught by using
simultaneous roundtable strategy significantly higher than that taught by using
conventional method?”
D. The Objective of the Study
As stated in the title and the formulated problem of the study, this research
is conducted to investigate whether there is a significant effect of using
simultaneous roundtable technique on students’ achievement in writing narrative
text.
E. The Significance of the Study
There are several aspects of the significance of the research that the
researcher hereby wishes to establish, namely:
1. Theoretically, the findings of this research will be useful for English
teachers who need another technique in developing students’ progress in
Narrative writing.
2. Practically, the implementation of the Simultaneous Roundtable
Technique will help students in improving their skills in narrative writing.
3. In addition, hopefully this study will give information for the readers and
other researchers who are inspired to further refine the application of
Simultaneous Roundtable Roundtable Technique in teaching narrative
writing or writing in general.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
A. Conclusions
After analyzing the data, it was found out that the students’ score in
writing narrative text was significantly affected by applying of Simultaneous
Roundtable Strategy. The using of Simultaneous Roundtable Strategy has
improved the students’ narrative writing to be more coherent and grammatical
than by using conventional method.
As the pre – test and the post – test were done, the students’ scores in
experimental group were more succeed to past the minimum standard level than
that in control group. Thus, Simultaneous Roundtable Strategy is expected to be
really effective in teaching narrative text both in big amount of students or
smaller.
Therefore, it is concluded that the using of simultaneous roundtable
strategy significantly raise the students’ achievement in writing a narrative text
compared to the using of conventional method.
B. Suggestion
Based on the finding of this research, the suggestions are staged as the
following:
1. It is advisable that the teachers of English to apply Simultaneous
Roundtable Strategy in teaching writing of narrative text as the strategy in
teaching learning process.
2. It suggested that the students are able to write by using Simultaneous
Roundtable Strategy, however the students need to enrich their
vocabularies to write better writing products.
REFERENCE
Al – Jawi, F. D. 2010. Teaching The Receptive Skills : Listening and Reading
Skills. Mecca : UMM Al Qura University Press.
Arikunto, S. 2003. ProsedurPenelitian :Suatu Pendekatan Praktek. Jakarta:
Rineka Cipta
Ary, Donald. 2002. Introduction to Research in Education. Singapore: Wardswith
Best, J. 1981. Research in Education. New Jersey: Prentice Hall
Bloom, B.S. 1996. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives : the Classification of
Educational Goals, New York; Longman
Brown, H. Douglas. 2001. Teaching by Principles: an Interactive Approach to Language
Pedagogy, Second Edition. New York: Longman
Clark, H. H & Clark E. V. 1997. Communities, Commonalities, and Communication.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cohen, E. G. 1994. Designing Groupwork. New York : Teachers College Press
Dietsch, B.M. 2006. Reasoning and Writing Well : A Rhetoric, Research Guide and
Handbook, Fourth Edition. New York : McGraw Hill Press
Fulwiller, Tobi. 2003. College Writing: A personal Approach to Academic Written.
Heineman: Boynton/Cook Publisher
Harmer, Jeremy. 2007. The Practice of English Language Teaching, Forth
Edition. England: Pearson Education
Jacobs, H. 1981. Testing ESL Composition : A Practical Approach. New York :
Newburry House Publisher
Kaur, J. 2009. Pre – empting Problems of Understading in English in Lingua
Franca. Newscastle : Cambridge Scholars Publishing
Kaufman, A. S. & Kaufman. N. L (2004). Kaufman Assessment Battery for
Children : Technical Manual, Second Edition. Minnesota : American
Guidelines Service
Knapp, P. & Watkins, M. 2005. Genre, Text, Grammar : Technologies for Teaching and
Assessing Writing. Sidney: University of New South Wales
Press.
Knapp, P. & Watkins, M. 1994. Context - Text – Grammar; Teacher the Genres
and Grammar of School Writing in Infants and Primary Classrooms.
Broadway : Text Production.
Harmer, Jeremy.2001. The Practice of English Language Teaching. Third Edition.
Essex, England: Pearson Education
Heaton, J.B. 1989. Writing English Language Test. New York: Longman Group
UK
Hughes, A. 2003.Testing for Language Teachers.Second Edition. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press
Hornby, A. S & Turnbull, J. 2010. Oxford Advanced Learner;s Dictionary, Eighth
Edition. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
Kagan, S. and M. Kagan.2009. Kagan Cooperative Learning. California: Kagan
Publishing.
Kagan, S, and M. Kagan. 1998. Multiple Intellegences: the Complete MI Book. San
Cemente, CA: Kagan
Lyman, F.T, Jr. 1981. The Development of Tools: The Inclusion of All Students.
Maryland: University of Maryland Press
Maduawesi, B.U. 1999. General Curriculum Methodology. Nigeria: Joy Educational
Publishers
Mifflin, H. 2005. The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. New
York; Houghton Mifflin Company
Murray, D.H. 1982. Learning by Teaching. Monclair, New Jersey: Boynton/Cook.
Murray, D. 2009. The Essential. Portsmouth: Boynton/ Cook Publisher, Inc.
Richard – Amato, P. A. 2003.Making it Happen, from Interactive to Participatory
Language Teachin : a More Critical View of Theory and Practice. New York:
Longman.
Saricoban, A. 1999. The Teaching of Listening. Internet TESL Journal, Turkey:
Hacettepe University Press 5 (12), p. 1. Retrieved October 15th, 2014.
Siregar, V. F, 2014. The Use of Cooperative Learning Type Roundtable Technique to
Improve the Ability of the Second Year Students of SMAN 10 Pekanbaru in
Writing Hortatory Exposition Text. Riau: FKIP Riau University Academic
Journal.
Smith, L. M. & Hudgins, B. B. 1964. Educational Psychology : An Application of Social
and Behavioral Theory. New York : Alfred A, Knopt
Stenlev, J. 2003. Cooperative Learning I Foreign Language Teaching. Copenhagen:
Spring Forum
Tarigan, Y. P. 2013. Improving Students’ Achievement in Writing Descriptive Paragraph
Through Simultaneous Roundtable Strategy. Medan: Unimed Library Journal
Vin-Mbah, Fidelia/ I. 2012. Learning and Teaching Methodology. Journal of Educational
and Social Research. II (4)p. 114
Webster, N. 1964. Merriam – Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, Eleventh Edition.
Massachusetts : Merriam – Webster’s Inc, later to be Encyclopedia Britannica
Company
Weiner. B. 1977. An Attributional Approach for Educational Psychology. New York :
Academic Press
Wolf, Shelby A. &MarylGaarhart. 1994. Writing What You Read: Narrative Assessment
as a Learning Event. Language Arts 71,6. Pg.425. ProQuest Research Library
Zinnser, William K. 2001. On Writing Well: the Classic Guide to Writing Nonfictiion,
The Sixth Edition. New York: Harper Collins Publisher