narrative text. The researcher calculated the score then the researcher counted the mean average of pre-test score and post-test score.
4.2.1.1 Result of Pre-Test
After the researcher got the students‟ pre-test, the researcher scored their pre-test. The researcher got data to be analyzed. The table of the stu
dents‟ pre-test result would be presented on the next page. The result of pre-test showed the highest
score was 80 and the lowest score was 32. Meanwhile, the mean of the students‟
pre-test score was 47.5 which acquired from the formula below:
Mean= The mean of each category was presented as follows:
Table 4.10 The Writing Scores of X IPA 3 Students of SMA N 3 Sragen in Pre-Test
Categories of Assessment Maximum
Score Average
Score Organization
20 10.12
Logical Development of IdeasContent
20 9.18
Grammar 20
8.62 PunctuationSpellingMechanics
20 10
StyleQuality of expression 20
9.62 Writing
100 47.5
Consequently, it meant that the mean was lower than the Criteria Minimum Score of SMA N 3 Sragen which was 75 for English. Therefore, the researcher
concluded that the students‟ pre-test achievement of writing narrative texts was under the Criteria Minimum Score of SMA N 3 Sragen.
The mean of the students‟
pre-test score showed 47.5
. The result of pre-test indicated that the students were very low in writing narrative texts.
4.2.1.2 Result of Cycle I Test
In the cycle I, after giving treatment, the researcher gave cycle I test for the students. The test was used to know the development of students‟ writing
narrative texts. It was to check the weaknesses of the students in writing narrative texts. It also was to correct the cycle I before going on the cycle II. The researcher
could address the weaknesses of cycle I in cycle II. The result of cycle I test was presented below.
Mean = Table 4.11 The Writing Scores of X IPA 3 Students of SMA N 3 Sragen
in Cycle I Test Categories of Assessment
Maximum Score
Average Score
Organization 20
15.88 Logical Development of
IdeasContent 20
15.37 Grammar
20 15.25
PunctuationSpellingMechanics 20
15.5 StyleQuality of expression
20 15.25
Writing 100
77.25
So, the result of cycle I test showed that there was only slightly improvement at the class average score. Th
e students‟ participation in the discussion was weak too, whether it was in the group discussion or the class
discussion. Not all of the group members gave comments or corrections to their friends‟ experience. Some of them were talked by themselves while one of their
group members told hisher experience. The next cycle was conducted to overcome these problems and made a better result in improving students‟ ability
in writing narrative texts.
4.2.1.3 Result of Cycle II Test
