Improving students' discussion text writing skills through teacher indirect feedback technique: a classroom action research at the twelfth grade students of SMAN 8 Kota Tangerang Selatan

(A Classroom Action Research at the Twelfth Grade Students of SMAN 8 Kota Tangerang Selatan)

A “Skripsi”

Presented to the Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teachers’ Training in a Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

for the Degree of S.Pd. in the Department of English Education

By

Agus Sufyan

NIM. 1110014000060

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH EDUCATION

FACULTY OF TARBIYAH AND TEACHERS’ TRAINING SYARIF HIDAYATULLAH STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY

JAKARTA 2015

i

IMPROVING STUDENTS' DISCUSSION TEXT WRITING

SKILLS THROUGH TEACHER INDIRECT FEEDBACK

TECHNIQUE

(A Classroom Action Research at the Twelfth Grade Students of SMAN 8 Kota Tangerang Selatan)

A “Skripsi”

Presented to the Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teachers’ Training in a Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

for the Degree of S.Pd. in the Department of English Education

By

Agus Sufyan

NIM. 1110014000060

Approved by:

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH EDUCATION

FACULTY OF TARBIYAH AND TEACHERS’ TRAINING SYARIF HIDAYATULLAH STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY

JAKARTA 2015

ii

Discussion Text Writing Skills through Teacher Indirect Feedback Technique (A Classroom Action Research at the Twelfth Grade Students of SMAN 8 Kota Tangerang Selatan) written by Agus Sufyan, student’s registration number: 1110014000060, was examined by committee on March 24, 2015 and was declared to have passed and have fulfilled one of the requirements for the degree of S.Pd. in English language Education at the Department of English Education.

iii

SURAT PERNYATAAN KARYA ILMIAH

Yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini,

nama : Agus Sufyan

nomor induk mahasiswa : 11100140000460

jurusan/prodi : Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris

alamat : Jl. Ketimun No. 40 RT. 005/009, Kel. Pd. Cabe Ilir, Kec. Pamulang, Kota Tangerang Selatan, Banten, 15418.

MENYATAKAN DENGAN SESUNGGUHNYA

bahwa skripsi yang berjudul Improving Students' Discussion Text Writing Skills through Teacher Indirect Feedback Technique (A Classroom Action Research at the Twelfth Grade Students of SMAN 8 Kota Tangerang Selatan) adalah benar hasil karya sendiri di bawah bimbingan dosen:

nama pembimbing I : 1. Dr. Alek, M.Pd.

NIP. : 19690912 200901 1 008

jurusan/ prodi : Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris nama pembimbing II : Ummi Kultsum, M.Pd.

NIP. : 19790811 200912 2 001

jurusan/ prodi : Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris

Demikian surat peryataan ini saya buat dengan sesungguhnya dan saya siap menerima segala konsekuensi apabila terbukti skripsi ini bukan hasil karya saya sendiri.

Jakarta, April 2015 Yang Menyatakan

Agus Sufyan

iv

Action Research at the Twelfth Grade Students of SMAN 8 Kota Tangerang Selatan. A Skripsi of Department of English Education at Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teachers’ Training of Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University Jakarta, 2015.

Advisors: Dr. Alek, M.Pd. and Ummi Kultsum, M.Pd.

Keywords: Teacher Indirect Feedback, Writing, Discussion Text.

The aim of this research was to find out whether teacher indirect feedback improve students of XII IPA 4’s writing skills of discussion texts. The subjects of this research were 31 students. The method used in this research was Classroom Action Research (CAR). This research was conducted by following procedures of the action research: planning, acting, observing, and reflecting. This research was conducted in two cycles consisted of three meetings per each. The data were gained through qualitative and quantitative methods. Research instruments used in this research were pre-interview guide, observation sheets, observation journals, questionnaire sheets, and tests. The results of the research showed that there was improvement on the students’ discussion text writing skills. Gradually, students’ achievement and attitude towards the implementation of the research increased. In pre-action, students’ mean score was only 72.1 and only 11 students who could pass the minimum mastery criterion (75). However, there was significant improvement that in the first cycle, the mean score was 84.74, and that of the second cycle was 87.19. Moreover, the number of students who could pass the minimum mastery criterion also increased that all students could pass it. Besides of that, based on the result of observation, the class condition in first cycle was still categorized as Good. However, it meant that there had to be some aspects that had not yet been solved. Then, in the next cycle, the aspects that needed solving could be solved and the class condition could be categorized as Very Good. In conclusion, the classroom action research and teacher indirect feedback technique could improve both students’ achievement and participation in the classroom.

v

ABSTRAK

AGUS SUFYAN (1110014000060). Improving Students' Discussion Text Writing Skills through Teacher Indirect Feedback Technique: A Classroom Action Research at the Twelfth Grade Students of SMAN 8 Kota Tangerang Selatan.

Skripsi Jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Fakultas Ilmu Tarbiyah dan Keguruan, Universitas Islam Negeri Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta, 2015.

Pembimbing: Dr. Alek, M.Pd. and Ummi Kultsum, M.Pd.

Kata Kunci: Teacher Indirect Feedback, Menulis, Teks Diskusi.

Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui apakah teacher indirect feedback meningkatkan kemampuan menulis teks diskusi siswa kelas XII IPA 4. Subjek penelitian ini adalah 31 siswa. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah Penelitian Tindakan Kelas (PTK). Penelitian ini dilakukan dengan mengikuti prosedur dalam penelitian tindakan, seperti: perencanaan, pelaksanaan tindakan, pengamatan, dan perefleksian. Penelitian ini dilakukan dalam dua siklus yang terdiri dari tiga pertemuan untuk tiap siklusnya. Data-data dikumpulkan melalui metode kualitatif dan kuantitatif. Instrument penelitian yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah pedoman wawancara, lembar observasi, jurnal observasi, lembar kuesioner, dan tes. Hasil dari penelitian menunjukan bahwa terdapat peningkatan pada kemampuan menulis teks diskusi siswa. Secara bertahap, raihan dan perilaku siswa terhadap pelaksanaan penelitian meningkat. Pada tahap

pre-action, rata-rata nilai siswa adalah 72,1 dan hanya 11 siswa saja yang mampu melewati kriteria ketuntasan minimal (75). Akan tetapi, pada siklus pertama dan kedua terdapat peningkatan yang signifikan, rata-rata nilai siswa pada siklus pertama adalah 84,74, dan pada siklus kedua adalah 87,19. Selain itu, jumlah siswa yang dapat melewati kriteria ketuntasan minimal juga meningkat, semua siswa berhasil melewati kriteria tersebut. Selain itu, berdasarkan hasil observasi, kondisi kelas pada siklus pertama dapat dikategorikan sebagai Baik. Akan tetapi, ada beberapa aspek yang belum dapat diatasi. Kemudian, pada siklus kedua, aspek-aspek tersebut dapat diatasi dan keadaan kelas pun dapat dikategorikan sebagai Sangat Baik. Sebagai kesimpulan, penelitian tindakan kelas dan teknik teacher indirect feedback dapat meningkatkan pencapaian dan juga partisipasi siswa di dalam kelas.

vi

All Praise be to Allah, who has blessed the writer in completing this paper.

Sholawat and Salam are given upon our prophet Muhammad SAW who has guided us to the truth way and brought us to the real light of life.

The writer is extremely grateful to the Almighty ALLAH. He has blessed her with his power and strength at all times until he can accomplish this Skripsi. Without his blessing, the writer realises that he is not able to accomplish this

Skripsi.

His special gratitude goes to his beloved parents, Satori and Suniah, for their all everlasting support and help all the time. Besides of that, he would like to express his gratitude and give his best appreciation to:

1. All lecturers of the Department of English Education at Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University Jakarta.

2. Nasrun Mahmud, M.Pd., and Nida Husna, M.Pd., M.A., TESOL. as the advisors, for the guidance and advice.

3. Dr. Alek, M.Pd. and Ummi Kultsum, M.Pd. for their time, guidance, correction, and suggestion.

4. Drs. Syauki, M.Pd. as the chairman of the Department of English Education. 5. Zaharil Anasy, M.Hum. as the secretary of the Department of English

Education, and also as the academic advisor.

6. Nurlena Rifa’i, MA., Ph.D., as the previous Dean of the Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teachers’ Training.

7. Prof. Dr. A. Thib Raya, MA, as the newest Dean of the Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teachers’ Training.

vii

8. Imam Supingi, S.Pd., MM., as the headmaster of SMAN 8 Kota Tangerang Selatan.

9. Irmawati, S.Ag., as the English teacher at SMAN 8 Kota Tangerang Selatan for her help help during the research.

10.Other parties that have given helps, supports, and suggestions in finishing this paper.

May this paper be useful to the readers, particularly to the writer. Also, the writer realizes that this paper is far from being perfect. It is a pleasure for him to receive constructive criticism and suggestion from anyone who reads his Skripsi.

Jakarta, April 2015

Agus Sufyan 1110014000060

viii

ENDORSEMENT SHEET ... ii

STATEMENT OF AUTHENTICITY ... iii

ABSTRACT ... iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ... vi

TABLE OF CONTENT ... viii

LIST OF TABLES ... xi

LIST OF FIGURES ... xii

LIST OF APPENDICES ... xiii

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION A. Background of the Research ... 1

B. Identification of the Problem ... 4

C. Limitation of the Research ... 4

D. Formulation of the Research ... 5

E. Objective of the Research ... 5

F. Significance of the Research ... 5

CHAPTER II THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK A. Discussion Text Writing ... 6

1. Definition of Discussion Text ... 6

2. Purpose of Discussion Text ... 7

3. Generic Structure of Discussion Text... 7

4. Language Features of Discussion Text ... 8

5. Points to note in writing discussion text ... 8

B. Teacher Indirect Feedback ... 10

1. Definition of Teacher Feedback ... 10

2. Indirect Feedback ... 11

3. Benefits of Teacher Indirect Feedback ... 11

ix

C. Procedure in Applying Teacher Indirect Feedback Technique in Teaching Discussion Text Writing to XII IPA 4 Students of

SMAN 8 Kota Tangerang Selatan ... 14

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY A. Place and Time of the Research ... 16

B. Method of the Research ... 16

1. Planning Phase ... 17

2. Acting Phase ... 17

3. Observing Phase ... 18

4. Reflecting Phase ... 18

C. Subject of the Research... 18

D. Researcher’s Role in the Research ... 19

E. Instrument of the Research ... 19

1. Pre-Interview Guide ... 19

2. Observation Sheets ... 19

3. Observation Journals ... 20

4. Questionnaire Sheets ... 20

5. Tests ... 21

F. Data Collecting Technique ... 21

1. Interview ... 21

2. Observation ... 21

3. Questionnaire ... 22

4. Test ... 22

G. Data Analysing Technique ... 22

H. Trustworthiness ... 26

I. Criteria of Success... 27

CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDINGS AND INTERPRETATION A. Research Findings ... 28

x

2. Findings during the Implementation of CAR ... 33

a. Cycle 1 ... 33

1) Planning ... 33

2) Acting ... 33

3) Observing ... 34

4) Reflecting ... 40

b. Cycle 2 ... 41

1) Planning ... 41

2) Acting ... 41

3) Observing ... 42

4) Reflecting ... 48

3. Findings after the Implementation of CAR... 48

a. Result of Questionnaire Sheets ... 49

b. Result of Writing Tests Score... 50

B. Interpretation of the Results ... 52

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION A. Conclusion ... 54

B. Suggestion ... 54

REFERENCES ... 55

xi

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1: Blueprint of Observation Journal ... 20

Table 3.2: Specification of Questionnaire... 20

Table 3.3: Likert Rating Score, Adapted from Sugiono ... 23

Table 3.4: Rubric of Observation Sheets ... 23

Table 3.5: Score Interpretation Criteria, Adapted from Riduwan and Sunarto ... 24

Table 3.6: Analytical Scoring Rubric ... 25

Table 4.1: Results of Pre-Observation Sheets ... 29

Table 4.2: Students’ Pre-Action Writing Test Scores ... 31

Table 4.3: Results of Observation Sheets of Cycle I ... 36

Table 4.4: Description of the Codes in Table 4.3 ... 38

Table 4.5: Students’ Post-Action I Writing Test Scores ... 39

Table 4.6: Results of Observation Sheets of Cycle II ... 44

Table 4.7: Description of the Codes in Table 4.6 ... 46

Table 4.8: Students’ Post-Action II Writing Test Scores ... 47

Table 4.9: Results of Questionnaire Sheets about Students’ Responses toward the Implementation of Teacher Indirect Feedback ... 49

Table 4.10: The Comparison of Students’ Writing Scores of Pre-Action Test, Post-Action Test I, and Post-Action Test II ... 50

xii

Figure 2.2: Describing Errors ... 13

Figure 2.3: Underlining and Describing Errors ... 13

Figure 2.4: Correction Symbols ... 14

xiii

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1: Students’ Name ... 58

Appendix 2: Interview Guide and Results ... 59

Appendix 3: Observation Sheets of Pre-Action ... 64

Appendix 4: Observation Journal of Pre-Action ... 67

Appendix 5: Pre-Action Test Scores ... 68

Appendix 6: Lesson Plan of Cycle 1 ... 70

Appendix 7: Observation Sheets of Post-Action 1 ... 91

Appendix 8: Observation Journal of Post-Action 1 ... 100

Appendix 9: Post-Action 1 Test Scores ... 103

Appendix 10: Lesson Plan of Cycle 2 ... 105

Appendix 11: Observation Sheets of Post-Action 2 ... 121

Appendix 12: Observation Journal of Post-Action 2 ... 130

Appendix 13: Post-Action 2 Test Scores ... 134

Appendix 14: Grid of Questionnaire Items ... 136

Appendix 15: Results of Questionnaire ... 139

Appendix 16: Documentation (Photos) ... 140

Appendix 17: Surat Bimbingan Skripsi ... 142

Appendix 18: Surat Keterangan Penelitian dari Sekolah ... 144

1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents and discusses background of the research, identification of the problem, limitation of the research, formulation of the research, objective of the research, and significance of the research.

A.

Background of the Research

As one of language skills taught, learnt, and specifically categorized as one of productive skills, writing is described as a skill including many exercises to develop and not as a completely gifted skill.1 It means that the ability to write well can actually be achieved through many repetitions, trials and errors, and also reinforcement.

However, writing does not seem to be as easy as it is said. When we speak, using our body movements or managing our voices may easily help us explain what we are intended to say. However, though we would like to say the same words we produce orally, we need some practices in writing as we can only use some mechanisms, such as punctuation, word order, etc., to help us deliver what we mean.2 Thus, our ability to use those mechanisms can be very important as we do not want our readers to misinterpret what we write.

In Indonesia, there are several types of writing that should be learnt by senior high students, such as, procedure, descriptive, narrative, recount, report, review, news item, analytical exposition, hortatory exposition, spoof, explanation, and discussion.3 It means that there are so many kinds of text that should be taught in senior high level. Specifically, from four types of text (narrative, explanation, review, and discussion) taught in the third grade, discussion text is one of the types that should be learnt. Discussion text is a kind of texts that provides two contrastive

1 _{Alan Meyers, Gateways to Academic Writing, (New York: Addison Wesley Longman, 2003),} p. 2.

2 _{James C. Raymond, Writing is an Unnatural Act, (New York: Harper & Row Publishers, Inc.,} 1980), p. 3.

3 _{Standar Isi Untuk Satuan Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah: Standar Kompetensi dan}

2

arguments about the topic and allows reader to have two contrastive viewpoints.4 Thus, readers will not be persuaded to be at one side before informed about another side.

However, discussion text is a difficult material to learn. The results of interview with the teacher showed that in writing discussion text5, the first problem mentioned by the teacher was that the students sometimes had not yet been interested to find out the data to support the arguments soon; they preferred talking and joking with their friends until the class ended. They argued that they were depressed while working under pressure, and needed a lot of time to get the inspiration and the data needed. Those are why they found it hard to collect their work in the end of the meeting. Thus, the teacher sometimes were sometimes hard to directly correct their work. Secondly, after the writing tasks became a homework, the teacher found that the students had not yet put their best performance in their writing. They put little attention about what they wrote which led to some problems such as, grammatical errors. It is true that they had not yet interested in writing because of its complexity. Thus, there were so many students that were hard to achieve Minimum Mastery Criterion (KKM) made by the teacher. Lastly, the teacher said that it had been so hard when her students asked her to give them reasons for their score since she just gave them the score without any comments or feedback. Moreover, she argued that it took a lot of time to give them comments to each work since she taught more than three class a week. As a result, students became unmotivated since some of them felt like they were hard to have clear direction about how to write well, and some others felt like their teacher had not yet found appropriate techniques to improve their skills.

Moreover, while doing pre-observation, findings showed that some students sitting in the first two front rows seriously did the test. However, those sitting in the next rows should always be supervised. Besides of that, four students in the right corner preferred to play games on their smartphone than to do the test. Moreover,

4 _{Th. M. Sudarwati and Eudia Grace, Look Ahead: An English Course for Senior High}

School Students Year XII, (Jakarta: Penerbit Erlangga, 2007), p. 122. 5_{See Appendix 2.}

five female students sitting in the third and fourth row near the door liked to chat during the test. Lastly, some students tended to do the test with their friends in group rather than work individually. In conclusion, generally, they are diligent enough in doing the test though some of them really needed supervising.6

In addition, after conducting pre-action test, twenty students failed to meet the KKM.7 It means that students’ achievement in writing needed increasing. For all those findings, the writer considered that students’ writing skills should be increased through appropriate techniques.

As teacher said that she did not provide students revising activities, then students did not have chance to enhance their writing. Thus, providing feedback is hoped that it may help students improve their skills. A study by Ferris also proved that, in helping students enhance their writing skills, almost all students believe that teacher feedback is really helpful as it provides information related to their writing.8

However, giving feedback by putting comments to writing assignment is seemed to be so hard for the teacher since it is going to consume time as she teaches more than two classes which consist of, at least, 30 students per each. Thus, teacher indirect feedback can be one of the solutions to solve the problems of, firstly, the teacher as it takes less time, and of, secondly, students’ writing skills.

To make it clear, some previous studies have proven the benefits of teacher indirect feedback. For example, Lalande’s study shows that the number of students from experimental group, who believes that the technique enhances their writing skill, is more than those of control group provided direct correction. Besides more than fifty percent of the students in experimental group agree that revising their writing increase their writing skills.9 Moreover, Chandler’s study, using the terms of “Correcting” as direct correction and “Underlining” as indirect correction, shows that indirect correction is useful to improve more to students’ accuracy, benefits teacher for the time to provide feedback, and makes students be more engaged in

6_{See Appendix 4} 7_{See Appendix 5}

8 _{Dana R. Ferris, Student Reactions to Teacher Response in Multiple-Draft Composition} Classrooms, TESOL QUARTERLY, 29(1), 1995, p. 46.

9 _{J. F. Lalande, Reducing composition errors: An experiment, Modern Language Journal,} 66(2), 1982, p. 145.

4

learning.10 Lastly, the study, conducted by Ferris as cited in Purnawarman shows that students’ success in revising their essays is greatly influenced by the feedback indirectly given by the teacher.11

Based on the preceding studies above, the writer believed that teacher indirect feedback could help students solve the problems in writing discussion text. Thus, from all the explanation above, the writer conducted research on the title: Improving Students' Discussion Text Writing Skills through Teacher Indirect Feedback Technique.

B.

Identification of the Problem

Based on the background above, the identified problems were:

1. Students were hard to finish the writing tasks given by the teacher in a short time.

2. Students preferred talking and joking with their peers than showing their effort to do the task given by the teacher.

3. Students had not yet interested in writing.

4. The teacher had not yet found appropriate techniques to improve students' writing skills.

5. The teacher found it difficult to give students feedback whenever she assessed their work.

6. The teacher only focused on scoring, but set aside feedback.

C.

Limitation of the Research

This study was focused on the improvement on students’ writing of discussion text by applying teacher indirect feedback technique in the class of XII IPA 4 at SMAN 8 Kota Tangerang Selatan, Banten.

10 _{J. Chandler, The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the} accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing, Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 2003, p. 293. 11 Pupung Purnawarman, “Impacts of Different Types of Teacher Corrective Feedback in Reducing Grammatical Errors on ESL/EFL Students’ Writing”, Dissertation in Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Virginia, 2011, p. 28, published.

D.

Formulation of the Research

Based on the research focus above, the questions of the research formulated was “Does teacher indirect feedback improve students of XII IPA 4’s writing skills of discussion text?”

E.

Objective of the Research

The objective of this research was to find out whether teacher indirect feedback improve students of XII IPA 4’s writing skills of discussion texts.

F.

Significance of the Research

Some significances of this research, not only theoretically but also practically, go to:

1. Teacher, it helps the English teacher to solve the problems in teaching writing of discussion text, to choose appropriate technique in teaching writing discussion text, and also to improve students' skills in writing, especially in writing of discussion text.

2. Students, it helps them to improve their writing skills, to achieve standard minimum score at least, and to give them clear reasons about their improvement.

3. SMAN 8 Kota Tangerang Selatan, it can be beneficial regarding to improve the education quality.

6

CHAPTER II

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

This chapter discusses definition of discussion text, purpose of discussion text, generic structure of discussion text, language features of discussion text, points to note in writing discussion text, definition of teacher feedback, indirect feedback, benefits of teacher indirect feedback, how to give indirect feedback, procedure in applying teacher indirect feedback technique in teaching discussion text writing to XII IPA 4 students of SMAN 8 Kota Tangerang Selatan.

A.

Discussion Text Writing

1.

Definition of Discussion Text

Generally, discussion text can be defined as a text that provides two contrastive arguments on issue to inform readers about what is being discussed. It supported by Mulya who defines discussion text as “a text which presents a problematic discourse discussed from different viewpoints.”1

Unlike a persuasive text designed to convey reasons of a subject and get audiences' acceptance about those reasons,2 in writing discussion text, writers are required to be fair in presenting arguments or, in other words, the writer should cover the arguments of the problems on both sides. The arguments in this kind of text usually show each strength and weakness of a subject to give readers broader insights before they make any decisions. However, not only strengths and weaknesses, Anderson and Anderson also show other contrastive views in this kind of text, for example: the positive and the negative, etc.3

Thus, the writer should be balance when providing their contrastive arguments though, in the end, she or he would decide at one side. Moreover, if so, then, as Crusius and Channell states that, for all those arguments, it allows both side to get

1 _{Eka Mulya Astuti, English Zone for Senior High School Students Year XII, (Jakarta:} Penerbit Erlangga, 2010), p. 81

2 _{Betty Mattix Dietsch, Reasoning & Writing Well: A Rhetoric, Research Guide, Reader,}

and Handbook, (Ohio: Marion Technical College, 2006), Fourth Edition, p. 7.

3 _{Mark Anderson and Kathy Anderson, Text Types in English, (Melbourne: MacMillan} Education Australia PTY LTD., 1998), Third Edition, p. 19.

acceptance about other side’s view and to make a general agreement about the issue which is shared to all the parties.4

2.

Purpose of Discussion Text

The main purpose of discussion text is, indeed, to discuss about the two different arguments on an issue. As stated by Anderson and Anderson that showing readers an issue with two contrastive points of view is the main purpose of discussion text.5 Besides, another purpose of this text stated by Sudarwati and Grace is that, in making reasonable decision, readers are firstly provided many information related to some points of view about the issue debated.6

Thus, for all those purposes, it can be concluded that the main purpose of discussion text is to providing different viewpoints to enable readers to be informed about the issue discussed.

3.

Generic Structure of Discussion Text

According to Warner, discussion text has three main parts, they are:

a. Statement: in this part, outlining the subject should be done by the writers in order to give readers boundaries about what is going to discuss.

b. Arguments: while providing or listing the arguments, writers should put the arguments of both sides. Thus, to make it balance, writers are not allowed to take his position on the arguments.

c. Conclusion: in this part, the writers are required to sum up all the arguments and are allowed to choose his/her preference. 7

Though Anderson and Anderson’s generic structure is the same as Warner’s, they differ only in conclusion that it allows writer to decide his/her position in the

4 _{Timothy W. Crusius and Carolyn E. Channel, The Aims of Argument: A Text and Reader,} (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2006), p. 17.

5 _{Anderson and Anderson, loc. cit.}

6 _{Th. M. Sudarwati and Eudia Grace, Look Ahead: An English Course for Senior High}

School Students Year XII, (Jakarta: Penerbit Erlangga, 2007), p. 122

7 _{Margaret Warner, More Easy Text Types: Text Types for Students who Have Little or No}

8

subject.8 Moreover, Mulya’s is also different as she states that the last paragraph can be used to give readers suggestion from the writers’ view.9

4.

Language Features of Discussion Text

Accrording to Sudarwati and Grace, below are the features in a discussion text:10

a. We may use general nouns to discuss, such as, smoking, abortion, etc.;

b. Thinking verbs may also help us show our emotion, such as, think, believe, hope, etc. (For example: ‘I believe that….’);

c. To make a good transition, me may use some connectives, such as in addition, furthermore, although, however, on contrary, because, because of, etc. (For example: ‘However, there are also disadvantages such as the cost.’);

d. Using modalities, such as, must, should, etc., can also strengthen our points (For example: ‘For all those reasons, we mustdo some action.’)

5.

Points to Note in Writing Discussion Text

In writing discussion text, we have to consider these following considerations:11 a. When deciding what the title is, we can use a question to be the title of the essay; b. Before going further to the discussion, we should lead readers to the discussion,

for example, by providing the background of the issue;

c. When providing arguments, we should support them with reasons and evidence;

d. We are not supposed to see the arguments only on one side;

e. By using modal verbs, we can make our reason stronger;

f. If we would like to favour one side in this discussion, reasons should also be provided;

g. Or if we would like to be fair, ensure that we are fair enough to both sides.

8 _{Anderson and Anderson, op. cit., p. 20.} 9 _{Mulya, loc. cit.}

10 _{Sudarwati and Grace, loc. cit.}

11 _{Progression in Discussion Texts,} https://www.babcock-education.co.uk/ldp/do_download.asp?did=303763, retrieved on March 2015.

Below is the example of discussion text about the pros and cons:12

Mobile Phones: Good or Bad? Everywhere you go nowadays, you see people using mobile phones. From school children to retired people, you see them talking in the supermarket, on trains, in the street, everywhere! So what are the advantages of mobile phones?

First of all, they are very convenient because you can phone from nearly anywhere. Another advantage is that they are really useful in emergency situations. For example, if you are alone in your car and it breaks down, you can get help quickly. In addition, you can also use your mobile to text your friends or connect to the Net.

However, there are also disadvantages such as the cost. Mobile phone calls cost more than normal calls. Furthermore, it can be annoying if you are on a train or a bus and you have to listen to someone else’s boring conversation. Finally, people can contact you anywhere, at any time, unless you switch your phone off!

In conclusion, there are both advantages and disadvantages. Personally, I feel mobile phones are a good thing because they give us more freedom and make communication easier.

12 _{Achmad Doddy, Ahmad Sugeng, and Effendi, Developing English Competencies for}

Senior High School (SMA/MA), (Jakarta: Pusat Perbukuan, Departemen Pendidikan Nasional, 2008), p. 74.

Write the subject of the essay/ discussion

First, write a general introduction to the subject of the discussion.

In the second and third paragraphs, introduce and present the advantage and disadvantage. Try to give examples. Use linking

words like

First of all to present the advantage/ disadvantage

Use words like

However to introduce a contrast and In conclusion to introduce the summary.

10

B.

Teacher Indirect Feedback

1.

Definition of Teacher Feedback

In the teaching and learning of language, feedback, indeed, takes an important role related to the improvement of students' language learning process. Thus, teachers can use feedback to give their students clear directions of what they have to improve, of why they have to improve, and of how to improve their skills. The statement is supported by Lewis who defines feedback in two perspectives. Firstly, teacher may define feedback as a tool to provide them information about students’ progress and also evaluation of their own teaching. Secondly, Lewis states that students see feedback as the comments giving them information what their strength and weakness are, why they are wrong, and what to improve.13 _{It can be concluded} that both teacher and students need feedback as the bridge for informing the ongoing process to achieve the learning goals.

In addition, Lewis’ statement about defining feedback based on students’ view is also supported by Ur as cited in Srichanyachon who defines feedback as the way teacher provides learner the information related to their learning activities in order to develop their skills.14 Moreover, Brookhart adds that feedback is a component in formative assessment informing students’ activities they are doing and helping students decide fresh targets and plans to achieve their goals.15 _{It means that by} getting feedback, students can be more evaluative about their effort in achieving their goals of learning.

It can be concluded that, generally, feedback is a mean or tool used by the teacher to inform students’ learning performances, process, and progress in achieving the goal of the learning.

13 _{Marilyn Lewis, Giving Feedback in Language Classes, (Singapore: SEAMEO Regional} Language Centre, 2002), p. 3.

14 Napaporn Srichanyachon, Teacher Written Feedback for L2 Learners’ Writing Development, Silpakorn University Journal of Social Sciences, Humanities, and Arts, 12 (1), 2012, p. 8.

15 _{Susan M. Brookhart, How to Give Effective Feedback to Your Students, (Virginia:} Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD), 2008), pp. 1—2.

2.

Indirect Feedback

Based on the form of feedback, Lee divides feedback into two kinds; direct and indirect. Direct error feedback or overt correction is provided when the teacher writes the correct form on the student’s paper, while indirect error feedback is provided when the teacher indicates the location of the error on the paper without providing the correct form.16 In other words, Ferris adds that indirect feedback is only “letting the writer know that there is a problem but leaving it for students to solve it.”17 _{Napaporn also states that when giving indirect feedback, errors are} underlined and codes or symbols are used to indicate the type of errors.18 It means that indirect feedback can be done by using codes representing a specific kind of error.

For all those explanations, it can be concluded that teacher indirect feedback is one of corrective feedbacks providing indications of errors students make by using codes but leaving no correct answer in order to let students correct by themselves.

3.

Benefits of Teacher Indirect Feedback

As one of written corrective feedback, indirect feedback is assumed that it can bring more benefits to students’ writing development. Results from Chandler study show that indirect correction is useful to improve more to students’ accuracy, benefits teacher for the time to provide feedback, and makes students be more engaged in learning.19 _{It means that indirect feedback can involve students from the} writing process until finishing process, besides it saves teachers’ time, too. Moreover, indirect feedback may also bring an effect to students’ long-term memory and decrease the number of errors as supported by Purnawarman in his study who states that indirect feedback strengthens students’ memory for longer

16 _{Icy Lee, Error Correction in L2 Secondary Writing Classrooms: The case of Hong Kong,}

Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 2004, p. 286.

17 Dana Ferris and Barrie Roberts, (2001), “Error Feedback in L2 Writing Classes: How Explicit Does It Need to Be?”, in Paul Kei Matsuda, et al., Second-Language Writing in the Composition Classroom, (Boston: Bredford/St. Martin’s, 2006), p. 382..

18 _{Srichanyachon, op. cit., p. 10.}

19 _{J. Chandler, The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the} accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing, Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 2003, p. 293.

12

period of time and brings greater opportunity to the desired result, such as decreasing students’ errors.20Moreover, by using the terms “guided learning” and “problem solving”, Corder as cited in Lalande states that indirect feedback could be more instructional for both learner and teacher as discovering the correct answer is done by the learner.21

4. How to Give Indirect Feedback

In giving indirect feedback to the errors students make, as in Chandler’s study, there are three kinds of teacher indirect feedback that can be used. They are underlining, describing, or underlining and describing, such as the figures below:22

Figure 2.1 Underlining Errors

20 Pupung Purnawarman, “Impacts of Different Types of Teacher Corrective Feedback in Reducing Grammatical Errors on ESL/EFL Students’ Writing”, Dissertation in Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Virginia, 2011, p. ii—iii, published.

21 _{J. F. Lalande, Reducing composition errors: An experiment, Modern Language Journal,} 66(2), 1982, p. 140.

Figure 2.2 Describing Errors

Figure 2.3

Underlining and Describing Errors

Moreover, Oshima and Hogue add by providing correction symbols which consist of underlines and codes, such as the figure below:23

23 _{Alice Oshima and Ann Hogue, Introduction to Academic Writing, (New York: Addison} Wesley Longman, 1997), Second Edition, p. 217—218.

14

Figure 2.4 Correction Symbols

C.

Procedure in Applying Teacher Indirect Feedback Technique in

Teaching Discussion Text Writing to XII IPA 4 Students of

SMAN 8 Kota Tangerang Selatan

In this study, teacher indirect feedback technique to improve students’ discussion text writing achievement by following the procedures below. The researcher, as the teacher:

1. Delivers the materials about discussion text and how to make the framework. The teacher teaches the materials related to the definition, purposes, structure of discussion text. Moreover, students are also taught to make the framework of discussion essay.

2. Introduces teacher indirect feedback technique. Teacher explains what teacher indirect feedback technique is, how to do the technique, and also what the codes mean.

3. Provides students topics to write: teacher provides students some topics that whether they may choose themselves or are chosen by the teacher.

4. Asks students to make a framework of their own writing. Students are asked to make a framework in order to help them elaborate their writing. Students does not have to submit the framework but should have it when they want to elaborate their writing.

5. Provides students the writing sheets. The writing sheets are provided by the teacher in order to make it simple to correct and to score students’ writing.

6. Asks students to elaborate their writing. After they have got their paper, then they should elaborate their framework into a four-paragraph discussion essay.

7. Asks them to confirm or recheck their writing. Before students submit their writing, teacher allows students to ensure that their writing is good enough

8. Asks them to submit their writing. After they have rechecked their writing, students should submit their writing. It is supposed to be on the same day.

9. Provides them feedback by underlining and giving codes. After they have submitted their writing, then teacher provides them the indirect feedback by putting underlines and codes to wrong or inappropriate words.

10.Explains the codes to the students. In the next meeting, teacher gives students’

paper back and then explain what codes mean and what to do.

11.Asks them to revise their paper. After explaining the codes, teacher asks students to revise their writing. In this part, students are still allowed to elaborate their writing besides revise their writing.

12.Provides them suggestion and explanation. While revising, teacher also provides them some suggestion about what they have to do.

13.Asks them to submit their revision. Students are asked to submit their revised writing.

14.Scores and evaluates their writing. Teacher scores students’ writing by using

16

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents the description of the research method used in this study, including place and time of the research, method and design of the research, subject of the research, researcher’s role in the research, , instrument of the research, data collecting technique, data analysing technique, trustworthiness, and criteria of success.

A.

Place and Time of the Research

The research took place in SMAN 8 Kota Tangerang Selatan, located at Jl. Cirendeu Raya No. 5, Kota Tangerang Selatan, Banten, 15419. Moreover, the research was conducted only on Tuesday and Wednesday for approximately a month, which was started from January 6th until February 10th, 2015.

B.

Method of the Research

The method used in this research was Classroom Action Research (CAR). The rationale behind the application of this method is because, firstly, there were problems in the classroom, and it should be solved. Secondly, students’ improvement was also needed to succeed the learning process. Lastly, the teacher’s ability in teaching this subject needed improving.

The Classroom Action Research (CAR) procedures used in this research was Kurt Lewin's design. Among several designs that could be used in classroom action research, Lewin’s design was more comprehensible and understandable for the researcher.Moreover, generally, Kurt Lewin's design consists of cycles having four phases per each. The phases are planning, acting, observing, and reflecting. The figure below represents the cycles of Kurt Lewin's design:

Figure 3.1

A Modified Kurt Lewin’s Classroom Action Research Design1

To make them clear about what happens in each phase, below is the explanation about each phase:

1.

Planning Phase

In the beginning, after identifying and diagnosing students’ writing problems occurred in the class proven by interviewing the teacher, observing the class, and conducting the test, some plans related to how to solve the problems in the classroom were made. The plans in this planning phase included designing lesson plan, determining technique, preparing materials and media, and determining criteria of success.

The organized planning was formed into lesson plan which was, then, implemented to the students. Post-action tests were also prepared in order to know whether there were some improvements on the students’ score achievement from each test.

2.

Acting Phase

This phase was the implementation of planning phase contents. In this phase, the lesson plan made was implemented. In the first meeting, pre-action test was conducted to know students’ writing skills before teacher indirect feedback was implemented. Besides of that, it was also used to analyse the average number of

1 _{M. Djunaidi Ghony, Penelitian Tindakan Kelas, (Malang: UIN-Malang Press, 2008), p.} 64.

Observing

Planning

Reflecting

Cycle

18

words students could produce. Moreover, after the average number of words had been counted, then the range number of words students should be produced in the next tests were standardised.

In each cycle, three meetings were needed. The first cycle was conducted to deliver some materials needing achieving. Then, the second meeting was used to conduct the tests. After the data had been collected, then feedback was given on students’ paper. Lastly, the third meeting was used to revise their writing that teacher had put feedback on.

3.

Observing Phase

In this phase, observation toward implementation of the action was carried out by using observation sheets and observation journals. In this phase, the data derived from evaluation or post-action tests were also collected in order to know the changes made by the implementation of the action toward the subject of the research.

4.

Reflecting Phase

This phase was aimed to reflect the completely-done action in one cycle based on collected data. It is necessary to hold evaluation to discuss further about what had and had not yet been achieved. Thus, the scope of reflection in this research involve analysing, synthesising, and assessing collected data. This phase, then, determined the next plan, including what to do in the next cycle. Furthermore, when one cycle had not yet met the requirements of what to achieve, the next cycle should be able to cover them.

C.

Subject of the Research

The subject of the research was the students at XII IPA 4 class of SMA Negeri 8 Kota Tangerang Selatan, academic year 2014/2015. There were 14 male students and 17 female students in the classroom.

D.

Researcher’s Role in the Research

In this research, the role of researcher was not only as the researcher, but also as a lesson planner, a teacher, and a test maker collecting, analysing, and reporting the results of the study.

E.

Instruments of the Research

The instruments of this research were divided into two kinds. The first was non-test instrument including pre-interview guide, observation sheets, observation journals, and questionnaire sheets. Then, the rest was test.

1.

Pre-Interview Guide

The unstructured interview was done before implementing the CAR in order to deeply analyse the problems faced by the teachers and related to the class situation, students’ achievement, and also students’ and teachers’ attitude toward the teaching and learning process of writing.

2.

Observation Sheets

To describe students' activities in the classroom while learning discussion text, four main aspects were observed. Those aspects were related to teacher's problems when she taught discussion text. They were students' preparation (preparing the data needed), diligence, involvement in the learning process, and submission punctuality.

The first aspect, students' preparation, considered about whether students prepared the data needed for their writing. In the end of each meeting, students were asked to find the data related to the next topic in the next meeting. Generally, the teacher and the writer checked their readiness in the beginning of the class. The second aspect, students' diligence, was related to students' effort to do their writing. The effort could be seen when they focused and spent more time doing the tasks, rather than talking to and disturbing others. Moreover, the third aspect, students' involvement in the learning process, was related to whether they are active in the learning process. Asking question, giving ideas, or sharing experience were some

20

of the indicators in this aspect. The last aspect, submission punctuality, actually took important role in order to give the teacher and the writer opportunity to give feedback. Thus, students should submit their work in the end of the class. However, in order to give them more chance, the submission could also be done outside the class, but it was on the same day.

3.

Observation Journals

Observation journals were used in order to generally capture the situation in the teaching and learning process and also to add any information which were not included in the observation sheets. Besides of that, the journal was also used in the reflection process by the end of the cycle. Below is the blueprint of observation journals.

Table 3.1

Blueprint of Observation Journal

Cycle Meeting Date Activities Findings

I I

II III

4.

Questionnaire Sheets

After the implementation of CAR, questionnaire sheets were distributed to add information related students’ opinion and thoughts about the learning of writing discussion text by applying teacher indirect feedback. Students’ response was divided into three answers; Agree, Not Sure, and Disagree. Indicators used in this questionnaire were as follow:

Table 3.2

Specification of Questionnaire

No. Indicators Total Items Number

Positive Negative

No. Indicators Total Items Number Positive Negative

2 Help 5 8, 9, 10, 14, 15

3 Information 2 2, 3

4 Knowledge 3 11, 12, 13

Total 13 2

5.

Tests

In this research, tests were conducted to measure students' writing skills improvement. The tests were essay tests for each and were divided into three steps; pre-action, post-action I, and post-action II. In pre-action test, students were asked to have freewriting, then the number of words produced would be used to standardise the range of number of words students had to produce.

F.

Data Collecting Technique

In this research, the data were collected from both qualitative and quantitative data to illustrate the improvement in teaching and learning process. Qualitative data were collected through interview, observation, and questionnaire to capture description about the implementation of teacher indirect feedback technique. Then, quantitative data were collected through test which was divided into two kinds; pre-test and post-pre-test.

1.

Interview

The unstructured interview was done before implementing the CAR in order to deeply analyse the problems faced by the teachers and related to the class situation, students’ achievement, and also students’ and teachers’ attitude toward the teaching and learning process of writing.

2.

Observation

During teaching and learning process in the classroom, the observation was done by using structural and open observation. Structural observation was carried

22

out by using observation sheets in order to notice the four aspects that needs observing. Besides of that, observation journals were also used as open observation in order to have further information about the other aspects that were not provided in the observation sheets.

3.

Questionnaire

Post-action questionnaire was conducted know students’ responses about the implementation of teacher indirect feedback. The result of questionnaire, then, was used to help strengthen the data used in this research.

4.

Test

To measure students' writing skills, essay tests were conducted. They were divided into two kinds; pre-action test and post-action tests. Pre-action test was conducted before the implementation of teacher indirect feedback. Then, post-action tests were conducted in order to measure students' improvement after the technique had been applied. In each test, students were asked to write an essay about the chosen topic. The topic had been informed before the post-action test to let them find things they needed.

G.

Data Analysing Technique

Analysing data was done to simplify data to be readable and interpretable data which, later, would be used to draw conclusion. In analysing data gained from questionnaire sheets, the researcher tabulated the frequency of students’ responses, to transform the data into percentage and then the data were analysed. The highest percentage could be interpreted as respondents’ tendency about the subjects, while the lowest percentage could be interpreted as a tendency that did not describe respondents’ opinions.2 _{Likert scale was used in tabulating the score as it gave a} gradation about the responses, for example, Always, Often, Sometimes, Never.3 In

2 _{Nana Sudjana, Penilaian Hasil Proses Belajar Mengajar, (Bandung: PT. Remaja} Rosdakarya, 2009), p. 128.

3

this research, the researcher modified the scale by using Agree, Not Sure, and Disagree to know students’ responses toward the implementation of teacher indirect feedback.

Table 3.3

Likert Rating Score, Adapted from Sugiono4 Positive responses Negative Responses

Agree 3 1

Not Sure 2 2

Disagree 1 3

Besides of that, in analysing the data from observation sheets, the researcher firstly tabulated the score for each aspect by using the rubric below:

Table 3.4

Rubric of Observation Sheets

No Aspects Sub-Aspects Score Assessment Criteria

1 Diligence

3 Seriously doing the task 2 Seriously doing the task if

supervised

1 Not seriously doing the task

2

Involvement in learning process

Response to teacher’s explanation

3 Actively paying attention to teacher’s explanation

2 Not really actively paying attention teacher’s explanation, sometimes 1 Not paying attention to teacher’s

explanation

Involvement in group

3 Actively involved in group discussion

2 Not really actively involved in group discussion, sometimes

24

No Aspects Sub-Aspects Score Assessment Criteria

2

Involvement in learning process

Involvement

in group 1

Not actively involved in group discussion

Interaction with the teacher

3 Often or Actively interact

2 Sometimes

1 Never

3 Preparation

3 Bring the framework and has met the criteria

2 Bring the framework but has not met the criteria

1 Do not bring the framework

4 Submission Punctuality

3 On time/On the day 2 On the next day

1 On the next two days or more

Separately, data gained from observation and questionnaire were tabulated, formed into percentage, and then analysed. Below is the formula to form the data into percentage:5

� ��� � � = _���� � � _{� � �} %

After the data had been formed into percentage, they were, then, analysed and interpreted according to the following table:

Table 3.5

Score Interpretation Criteria, Adapted from Riduwan and Sunarto6 Percentage Interval Description

81% - 100% Very Good

61% - 80% Good

5 _{Riduwan and Sunarto, Pengantar Statistika untuk Penelitian Pendidikan, Sosial,}

Ekonomi, Komunikasi dan Bisnis, (Bandung: Alfabeta, 2013), p. 23. 6_Ibid.

Percentage Interval Description

41% - 60% Enough

21% - 40% Bad

0% - 20% Very Bad

Moreover, students' tests writing ability, analytical scoring rubric adapted from J. B. Heaton was used. There are five aspects in the analytical scoring rubric, i.e., content, organization, vocabulary, language use, and mechanics. The table below is the analytical scoring rubric:

Table 3.6

Analytical Scoring Rubric7

Aspects Score Judgement

Content

30–27 knowledgeable, substantive

26–22 some knowledge of subject, adequate range 21–17 limited knowledge of subject, little substance

16–13 does not show knowledge of subject, non-substantive

Organization

20–18 fluent expression, ideas clearly stated 17–14 somewhat choppy, but main ideas stand out 13–10 non-fluent, ideas confused or disconnected

9–7 does not communicate, no organization

Vocabulary

20–18 sophisticated range, effective word choice and usage 17–14 adequate range, occasional errors, but meaning not

obscured

13–10 limited range, frequent errors

9–7 little knowledge of English vocabulary

Language Use

25–22 effective complex construction 21–19 effective but simple construction

17–11 major problems in simple/complex construction 10–5 virtually no mastery of sentence construction rules

26

Aspects Score Judgement

Mechanics

5 demonstrates mastery of conventions 4 occasional errors of spelling, punctuation

3 frequent errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization 2 dominated by errors of spelling, punctuation, etc.

In tabulating the score, each aspect in the rubric was counted. Then, to get the mean of students' writing score in each test, the formula below was used:8

Mx = Σx N Notes:

Mx = mean

�x = individual score N = number of students

To know the class percentage that could pass the minimum mastery criteria, the formula used was:9

� = � � %

Notes:

P = the class percentage F = total percentage score N = number of students

H.

Trustworthiness

To check the validity of the data, one of triangulation methods was used. Triangulation is a technique in collecting data by combining various techniques in collecting data in order to check the credibility of data.10 Thus, as supported by

8 _{Anas Sudijono, Pengantar Statistik Pendidikan, (Jakarta, PT Raja Grafindo Persada,} 2011), p. 81

9_{Ibid., p. 43.}

Mills, both qualitative and quantitative data may be involved and strengthen each other. To make it simple, triangulation is a mean to support both data as it may collaborate the strength of each data, besides it may also cover the weaknesses of each data.11 Moreover, Stainback as cited in Sugiono explains that enhancing a person’s understanding about what she or he is looking for, rather than just learning the fact of phenomena, is what triangulation for.12

Among kinds of triangulation, methodological triangulation referring to the use of more than one method for gathering data was applied in order to strengthen the data since the validity of data is established only if the conclusions from each of the methods reaches the same point. Furthermore, to do this triangulation method, the data taken from observation and questionnaire was collaborated with the results of the tests.

I.

Criteria of Success

To determine the criteria of success in each cycle, the English teacher and also the researcher decided to make requirements that the cycle would be concluded as success only if both the result of observation was categorised as very good (81%— 100%) and the Minimum Mastery Criterion could be passed by, at least, 75% of the students. In conclusion, if one of both aspects had not yet met the requirements, then the next cycle should be conducted to solve the problems having not yet been solved in the previous cycle.

11 _{Geoffrey E. Mills, Action Research: A Guide for the Teacher Researcher, (Boston:} Pearson Education, Inc., 2011), Fourth Edition, p. 93.

28

CHAPTER IV

RESEARCH FINDINGS AND INTERPRETATION

This chapter presents research findings before, during, and after the implementation of classroom action research to improve students' discussion text writing skills through teacher indirect feedback techniqueand also interpretation of the results.

A.

Research Findings

1.

Findings before the Implementation of CAR

Before implementing the research, any kinds of information were gathered through teacher interview, questionnaire, observation, and also pre-action test.

a.

Result of Interview

The English teacher was interviewed on Tuesday, June 24, 2014 at 10 am. It was done to know generally the class situation, students’ achievement, and also students’ and teachers’ attitude toward the teaching and learning process of writing.

Three problems were pointed out based on teacher’s interview. Firstly, problem mentioned was that the students sometimes had not yet been interested to prepare what they were going to write; they preferred talking and joking with their friends until the class ended. They argued that they were depressed while working under pressure, and needed a lot of time to get the inspiration and the data needed. Thus, it was hard for them to collect their work in the end of the meeting and for the teacher to directly correct their work. Secondly, after the writing tasks became a homework, the teacher found that the students had not yet put their best performance in their writing. They just wrote what they wanted to write, neglected the text structure, and put little attention about what they wrote which led to some problems, for example, grammatical errors. It is true that they had not yet interested in writing because of its complexity. Thus, there were so many students that were hard to achieve minimum mastery criterion (KKM) made by the teacher. Lastly, the teacher said that it had been so hard when her students asked her to give them

reasons for their score since she just gave them the score without any comments or feedback. Moreover, she argued that it took a lot of time to give them comments to each work since she taught more than three class per week. As a result, students became unmotivated since some of them felt like they were hard to have clear direction about how to write well, and some others felt like their teacher had not yet found appropriate techniques to improve their skills.

It could be concluded that four aspects need considering; they are students’ preparation to write, diligence in doing writing tasks, involvement while learning writing skills, submission punctuality.

b.

Result of Pre-Observation

Pre-observation was conducted to observe the process of pre-action writing test before implementing the action. It was held on Tuesday, January 6th, 2015, and started from 07.00—08.30 a.m. The class consisted of 31 students; 17 male students and 14 female students. Below is the result of pre-observation.

Table 4.1

Results of Pre-Observation Sheets

Students’ Number Diligence Submission Punctuality

S1 2 3

S2 2 3

S3 3 3

S4 2 3

S5 2 3

S6 2 3

S7 2 3

S8 2 3

S9 1 3

S10 2 3

S11 2 3

30

Students’ Number Diligence Submission Punctuality

S13 2 3

S14 1 3

S15 1 3

S16 3 3

S17 2 3

S18 2 3

S19 2 3

S20 2 3

S21 2 3

S22 2 3

S23 2 3

S24 1 3

S25 3 3

S26 1 3

S27 1 3

S28 2 3

S29 3 3

S30 2 3

S31 2 3

Each Aspect’s Score

Total 60 93

Percentage 64.52% 100%

Overall Aspects’ Score

Total 153

Percentage 82.26%

Based on the result of pre-observation above, generally, it could be concluded that the teaching and learning process was Very Good. However, the description could be seen in one aspect, submission punctuality. Another aspect, students’

diligence, could actually be concluded that they are diligent enough. Most students seriously did the test though teacher should always supervise what they were doing.

Moreover, based on teacher’s observation journal, some students sitting in the first two front rows seriously did the test. However, those sitting in the next rows should always be supervised. Then if the teacher did not pay attention or supervise them, some students preferred to play games on their smartphone than to do the test. For example, four students in the right corner preferred to play games on their smartphone than to do the test. Besides of that, they also liked to chat with their friends during the test. For example, five female students sitting in the third and fourth row near the door liked to chat during the test. Lastly, some students tended to do the test with their friends in group rather than work individually. In conclusion, generally, they are diligent enough in doing the test though some of them really needed supervising.

c.

Pre-Action Test

Lastly, pre-action test was done in January 6, 2015 at 07.00—8.30 a.m. This test was actually conducted in order to mainly prove what the teacher had said about the class situation when writing test being conducted and about students’ achievement which were found below the standard. Findings showed that almost half of the class could not reach the Minimum Mastery Criterion (75). Below is the students’ pre-action writing test scores:

Table 4.2

Students’ Pre-Action Writing Test Scores

Students’ Number Scores Number of Words

S1 73 231

S2 76* 247

S3 86* 297

S4 61 253

S5 79* 289

32

Students’ Number Scores Number of Words

S7 77* 260

S8 75* 257

S9 57 225

S10 72 290

S11 73 220

S12 71 283

S13 73 281

S14 53 254

S15 68 280

S16 86* 226

S17 74 292

S18 72 267

S19 72 239

S20 77* 245

S21 74 241

S22 72 251

S23 78* 289

S24 63 262

S25 82* 243

S26 59 288

S27 57 294

S28 69 242

S29 81* 296

S30 73 235

S31 74 287

Mean: 72.1 261.65

Based the result of pre-action test, it could be concluded that there were still 20 students having not yet met the Minimum Mastery Criterion (75). The minimum score gained was 53, while the highest was 86. From the data above, it could be concluded that students of XII IPA 4 needed to improve their writing skills. Besides of that, the range number of words students could write was between 220—297 words, with the average number of words students could produce was 262 (261.65). Then, as the test was also designed to standardise the range number of words for the next cycles, the researcher decided the range number of words between 200— 300 words.

2.

Findings during the Implementation of CAR

a.

Cycle 1

1)

Planning

In this phase, a lesson plan was designed to try solving problems in the teaching and learning process of writing skills. The problems needed solving were not only about the students’ achievement but also students’ attitude in the classroom. It was started from making a lesson plan consisted of standard competence, basic competence, and indicators that will be reached by the students. In addition, the selected material and exercises were also determined into a lesson plan. Besides of that, based on the findings in the pre-observation, as students liked to chat with their friends during the test and tended to do the test with their friends in group rather than work individually, then they would be divided into some groups in order to make the learning process be more active. Lastly, the teacher decided to take three meetings in this cycle. The first one is for teaching and learning about discussion text, the second one was for conducting the test, and the last day was used for students to revise their writing the teacher had given feedback on.

2)

Acting

The action in the first cycle was completely done in three meetings; January 7th, 13th, and 20th, 2015. The teaching and learning process was done based on the lesson

34

plan having been made. The first one was the introduction to the materials. Students were introduced with the schematic structure which they should also made. Moreover, based on the findings in the pre-observation, as students liked to chat with their friends during the test and tended to do the test with their friends in group rather than work individually, then they were divided into some groups in order to make the learning process be more active. The groups consisted of five students per each and were freely chosen by students. Then, three topics to discuss were also distributed. After that, they were asked to make a framework of the text and then presented it by choosing one representative person. After all, the teacher provided five topics for students to choose. Then, as a homework, they were asked to make a framework based on the topics students chose. In this meeting, three aspects were observed, they were students’ response to teacher’s explanation, active discussion in group, and active interaction with the teacher.

In the second meeting, firstly students were asked to submit their own framework they would use for their own writing. While teacher was examining the frameworks, students were preparing for everything they needed for the writing test. After that, the frameworks were given back to students and then they were asked to exemplify the framework they had made into a four-paragraph discussion text. After this meeting, students’ writing was corrected and feedback was given by the teacher outside the classroom. In this meeting, three aspects were observed, they were students’ preparation, diligence in doing the test, and submission punctuality. In the third meeting, students’ writing was distributed. Then, teacher explained the codes given on their paper in order to make students understand the meaning of all codes. Then, they were asked to directly revise their own writing. In this meeting, three aspects were observed, they were students’ response to teacher’s explanation, diligence, and submission punctuality.

3)

Observing

In this phase, the teacher observed the four aspects that should be improved in the teaching and learning process. In the first meeting, findings showed that most students paid little attention to teacher’s explanation. Though they listened to

teacher’s explanation, sometimes they preferred talking to their friends, playing games on their gadgets. Even, some students paid no attention at all on teacher’s explanation. Two students were sleeping. Others went outside for the number one, but went back to class very late. Besides of that, students’ interaction with the teacher was also still low. Though some of them had tried to ask the teacher, the frequency was still rare. After that, when they were grouped, some students liked to be in group with those who have sufficient knowledge about English, for example, Students 3, 5, and 16. However, when they had been in group, they did not want to be involved in the group and spent more time joking and chatting with their friends. Besides, after observing some students, students 17 and 21 could be classified as silent students. The positive thing was that they still did what teacher asked. In addition, while they presented the results of their discussion, the situation were conducive and students paid full attention.

In the second meeting, generally overall activities could be categorised as Very Good. All students could submit their work on time. When the bell rang as a sign that the subject was over, the submitted their work. However, while checking students’ homework, teacher found that most students had a trouble making framework of the text. It could be seen as some of them actually brought their framework but did not meet the criteria and some others, even, did not bring and make the framework. However, there were still some students bringing and making a good framework. After that, generally, students did the test seriously though some of them should be supervised by the teacher. An important thing that should be noted was that some students who did not bring or make the framework found difficulties in doing the test as they were confused about what they had to write. This problem should be solved in the next cycle.

In the third meeting, generally, students were very diligent in revising their work though some of them still needed supervising. While teacher was explaining the codes or feedback codes on students’ paper, most students were seriously listening to teacher’s explanation. However, teacher also noticed that some students felt confused about the codes given by the teacher, then they prefer asking their peer than asking the teacher though sometimes they had to ask the teacher too. Lastly,

36

students’ submission punctuality still needed to be considered. There were still some students who could not submit their revised writing on time; they took two or more than two days to revise their writing. To observe this aspect, observation was not only done in the classroom, but also outside classroom. To make it clear, below is the results of observation sheets of the first cycle:

Table 4.3

Results of Observation Sheets of Cycle I Students’

Number

Meeting I Meeting II Meeting III

A B C A B C A B C

S1 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 3

S2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2

S3 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 2

S4 3 3 2 2 2 3 3 3 2

S5 2 2 1 3 2 3 3 2 3

S6 2 2 1 2 3 3 2 2 3

S7 1 1 1 2 1 3 2 2 3

S8 2 2 1 2 3 3 2 2 2

S9 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 3 1

S10 2 1 1 2 2 3 2 3 1

S11 2 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 2

S12 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 3 3

S13 2 3 2 2 2 3 3 3 1

S14 1 2 1 1 2 3 2 2 3

S15 2 2 2 1 2 3 2 2 3

S16 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

S17 3 2 3 1 3 3 2 2 1

S18 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 3

S19 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 2 3

Students’ Number

Meeting I Meeting II Meeting III

A B C A B C A B C

S21 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3

S22 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 1 1

S23 2 2 1 3 3 3 2 2 3

S24 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 1

S25 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 1 3

S26 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 1 1

S27 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 2 3

S28 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3

S29 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 2 3

S30 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

S31 2 3 3 1 3 3 3 3 3

Each Aspect’s Score in Each Meeting

Total 64 66 54 64 73 93 79 72 72

Percent.

(%) 68.82 70.97 58.06 68.82 78.49 100 84.95 77.42 77.42 Overall Aspects’ Score in Each Meeting

Total 184 230 223

Percent.

(%) 65.95% 82.44% 79.93%

Overall Aspects’ Score for Overall Meetings Percent.

38

Notes:

Table 4.4

Description of the Codes in Table 4.3

Codes Meeting I Meeting II Meeting III

A Students’ response to

teacher’s explanation

Students’ preparation

Students’ response to teacher’s explanation

Codes Meeting I Meeting II Meeting III

B Discuss actively in

group

Students’ diligence Students’ diligence

C

Active interaction with the teacher

Students’ submission punctuality

Students’ submission punctuality

Based on the data analysis of table 4.3 above, it could be concluded that students’ overall activities in the first cycle was 76.12% which could be categorised as Good. In the first meeting, students’ overall activities was 65.95 which could be categorised as Enough. The first aspect, students’ response to teacher’s explanation was 68.82% could be categorised as Enough, the second aspect was 70.97% which could be categorised as Good, however, the third aspects was only 58.06% which could be categorised as Bad.

Moreover, in the second meeting, students’ overall activities was 82.44 which could be categorised as Very Good. The first aspect, students’ response to teacher’s

explanation was 68.82% which could be categorised as Enough, the second aspect was 78.49% which could be categorised as Good, and the third aspects was only 100% which could be categorised as Very Good. Lastly, in the third meeting, students’ overall activities was 79.93% which could be categorised as Good. The first aspect, students’ response to teacher’s explanation was 84.95% which could be categorised as Very Good, the second aspect was 77.42% which could be categorised as Good, and the third aspects was only 77.42% which could be categorised as Good.

Besides data from observation sheets, students’ post-action writing test I scores were also used to observe students’ writing improvement. Below is the students’ post-action writing test I scores:

Table 4.5

Students’ Post-Action I Writing Test Scores Students’ Number Post-Action I Scores

S1 87*

S2 78*

S3 93*

S4 92*

S5 89*

S6 79*

S7 85*

S8 77*

S9 94*

S10 82*

S11 89*

S12 76*

S13 86*

S14 81*

S15 78*

S16 93*

S17 76*

S18 89*

S19 82*

S20 92*

S21 84*

S22 76*

S23 86*

40

Students’ Number Post-Action I Scores

S25 91*

S26 79*

S27 90*

S28 85*

S29 81*

S30 78*

S31 86*

Total 2627

Mean: 84.74

*Students who could pass the Minimum Mastery Criterion (75)

Based on the result of Students’ Post-Action I Writing Test Scores above, it could be concluded that after revising their writing, all students could pass the Minimum Mastery Criterion (75). Besides of that, the average score was also increased to 84.74 while in pre-action test, the average was only 72.1 which meant that it was still under the Minimum Mastery Criterion.

4)

Reflecting

After the first cycle had been conducted, the conclusion of this cycle was drawn. It could be seen that students’ writing score in this cycle actually could be improved. However, there were still many things that should be improved. In the first meeting, all of the aspects observed needed to be observed as they had not yet meet the criteria of success. Moreover, in the second meeting, students’ preparation should be improved in the next cycle. Lastly, in the last meeting, students’ submission punctuality should be noted to get improved. After reflecting the teaching and learning process in the first cycle, it could be concluded that next cycle needed to be conducted to solve the problems having not yet been solved in the first cycle.

b.

Cycle 2

1)

Planning

In this phase, a lesson plan was designed to try solving problems having not been solved in the first cycle. Though students’ achievement had met the requirement for criteria of success, there were still students’ response to teacher’s explanation, students’ participation in group, students’ interaction with the teacher, students’ preparation, and students’ submission punctuality after revising their work that still needed to be improved. Thus, the next cycle should be done to solve those problems.

Generally, the second cycle was almost the same as the previous one. However, some changes were planned and had been inserted in the lesson plan of the second cycle in order to enhance students’ activities. Firstly, as students did not prepare well for the test, then in the second cycle the teaching process was focussed on making the framework of what they wanted to elaborate. It was hoped that it might solve the problems of students’ preparation and submission punctuality as they might be more prepared. Secondly, as students were tended to be more passive and to spend their time talking, joking, and chatting with their close friends in group, the teacher himself divided the students to prevent students being with their close friend. It was hoped that it might solve the problems of students’ participation in their group and also interaction with the teacher. Lastly, the teacher decided to take three meetings in this cycle. The first one is for teaching and learning about making a good framework, the second one was for conducting the test, and the last day was used for students to revise their writing the teacher had given feedback on.

2)

Acting

The action in the second cycle was completely done in three meetings; January 27th, January 28th, and February 10th, 2015. The teaching and learning process was done based on the lesson plan having been made. The first meeting was about making a good framework. Students were taught about how to make a good framework step by step. Moreover, based on the findings in the first cycle, as