clxiv tea he s pe fo a e. The Appli atio of CQG“ especially Control Composition, Question and
A s e , a d “e te e Co i i g e e good to i p o e stude ts iti g o pete e fo usi g
on accuracy. It made students became aware of understanding and the form and the use of grammar in writing. At the same time, they were not only encouraged to do self correction to
their own draft, but also to rewrite the previous draft more effectively. For Guided Composition, it was g
ood to i p o e stude ts iti g o pete e fo usi g o ge e ati g ideas. B ha i g clues through Guided Composition, students were encouraged to generate their ideas into a
good text. Co e i g ith stude ts pe fo a e, stude ts e a e o e a ti e a d were
motivated to improve their writing competence. When they got difficulty in finding the meaning of new vocabulary, they were active to discuss it in groups or to ask the teacher. In correcting the
mistakes of the drafts, they were not shy anymore to discuss it in groups. CQG“ helped the
teacher guide the students systematically in improving their writing competence. It also helped the teacher improvise their way of teaching.
3. The Weaknesses of CQG“
Initially, students did not appreciate much the activities, because they thought they liked writing but they could not be free to express their ideas or imagination. Before the students had
good language competence in writing CQG“ did not let the students express their ideas freely
in writing to a oid the i te fe e e of the g a
a of stude ts fi st la guage. Co se ue tl , it was not suitable to be used to teach students who had good language competence. To apply
CQG“ effe ti el , the tea he had to e a eful i p epa i g odels of the te t as input or an exposure for the students to experience good models of writing.
4. The Effectiveness of Applying CQG“ for Teaching Writing
clxv CQG“ hi h sta ds to Co t olled Co positio , Questio a d A s e , Guided
Composition, and Sentence Combining are the techniques used in teaching writing starting from very controlled activities to the freer ones. As a whole, they were not supposed to be applied
strictly from Controlled Compositions to Sentence Combining respectively. But the teacher might select which one was suitable with his or her need in teaching writing. The following technique
was based on the activity done in cycle 1, cycle 2, cycle 3, and cycle 4. a
In general, the four techniques were applied integrally with another language skill, reading. “i e CQG“ as te h i ues i tea hi g
iti g was suitable for production stage, the teacher had to select the material as an input for students to exposure the new language
items which were very useful to practice their writing. b
Following the presentation stage, the teacher focused on the certain language items to be interna
lized the stude ts efo e appl i g CQG“ . c
Then, the teacher chose o e of the te h i ues i CQG“ to e applied to the students. d
Before proceeding the next topic of teaching writing at every meeting, the teacher encouraged the students to correct themselves their previous drafts which have been
checked, identified the mistakes, and given code u de the tea he s supe isio
e The content of material or the text for presentation stage contained language items that will
be the main focus of teaching writing. f
The teacher selected the topi that lose to the stude ts a kg ound daily experience g
Before the students applied the new language items for writing activity, the teacher gave students ample practice to use the new language items. The aim of this activity was to avoid
the i te fe e e of the stude ts fi st la guage to the English sentence pattern h
E e te h i ue i CQG“ ould be modified in many ways to be suitable with the s
tude ts eed.
clxvi
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION, IMPLICATION AND SUGGESTION
A. Conclusion
Based o the fi di gs of i p o i g stude ts E glish iti g skill th ough CQG“ i this research, the researcher drew some conclusions. The major conclusion of this research was that
the i ple e tatio of CQG“ had a ad a tages to help stude ts i p o e thei iti g competence and encourage them to be more active in writing class. Based on the result of the
esea h a o e, the o lusio ould e d a i to th ee poi ts as follo s: CQG“ ould i p o e stude ts
iti g o pete e, CQG“ ould ake the stude ts o e a ti e to
involve in the process of learning writing and the teacher could be more creative and innovative i tea hi g iti g, a d The e e e so e st e gths a d eak ess of usi g CQG“ i iti g
class. The conclusion could be described in the following descriptions. 1.
CQG“ ould i p o e stude ts iti g o pete e; stude ts iti g e e i p o ed grammatically, both from cycle to cycle, they wrote less mistakes in vocabulary, tenses,
syntax, agreement, and pronoun. They also wrote some more and longer paragraph with more sentences and bett
e i o te t. The , stude ts iti g a hie e e t as also
improved from pre-test to post test. 2.
CQG“ ould ake stude ts o e a ti e to i ol e i the p o ess of lea i g iti g. Students were more active in asking to the teacher about their problem of
writing. When they got stuck to find the new vocabulary or to apply the correct grammar, they were more confident to ask for help to the teacher individually
or through discussing in groups. The number of the students who involved in discussing and doing self
correction to their own drafts increased gradually from cycle one to cycle four. 179
