87
CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
There are two main parts in this chapter. In the first part, the researcher presents the conclusions of the research which are drawn from the data analysis.
Then, in the second part, the researcher presents recommendations for students in Paragraph Writing class, lecturers in Paragraph Writing class and future
researchers who are interested to follow up this research.
A. Conclusions
The objectives of this study were to find out subject-verb agreement errors made by students in Paragraph Writing class of ELESP and to find out the factors
that caused students in Paragraph Writing class of ELESP to make those subject- verb agreement errors. Therefore, there were two main conclusions to present in
this section.
1. The Students’ Subject-Verb Agreement Errors
As an attempt to answer the first research question, subject-verb agreement errors made by students in Paragraph Writing class of ELESP, the
researcher conducted document analysis. The documents to analyze were the students’ written work. From the data gathered, the researcher found twenty-eight
28 subject-verb agreement errors in the students’ written work. Those errors were included in three types of errors based on the surface structure taxonomy.
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
88 The first type of error was omission. In omission category, the researcher found
five 5 errors or 17.9 of the total errors. The second type of error was addition. Under addition category, the researcher did not find any errors on regularization.
However, the researcher found one 1 error or 3.6 of the total errors on double- marking and found two 2 errors or 7.1 of the total errors on simple addition.
From these findings, the researcher could say that there were three 3 errors or 10.7 of the total errors which belonged to addition category, which was the
second type of error. The third type of error was misinformation. Under misinformation category, the researcher found that the students did not make any
errors on regularization. However, the researcher found twenty 20 errors or 71.4 of the total errors on archi formsalternating forms. Therefore, the
researcher could say that there were twenty 20 errors or 71.4 of the total errors which belonged to misinformation category.
Furthermore, after analyzing the students’ written work, the researcher did not find any errors under misordering category. Therefore, the research results
showed that most of the errors belonged to misinformation category 71.4 and were subsequently followed by omission category 17.9, and addition category
10.7.
2. The Factors that Caused the Students to Make Subject-Verb Agreement
Errors
The researcher conducted a semi-structured interview in order to answer the second research question, the factors that caused students in Paragraph
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
89 Writing class of ELESP to make those subject-verb agreement errors. The
participants of the interview were eight students who made various subject-verb agreement errors in their written work. After interviewing the interviewees, the
researcher found that there were five major errors that caused the students in class B of Paragraph Writing at ELESP in 2010 2011 academic year to make subject-
verb agreement errors. Those five major factors were interlingual error, ignorance of rule restrictions, incomplete application of rules, false concepts hypothesized,
and carelessness. The interlingual error became the first factor causing the students to make
the errors. The errors on subject-verb agreement could happen because the students were still influenced by Indonesian language, which is their mother
tongue, when they wrote an English sentence. Consequently, they might forget to consider the subject-verb agreement when they wrote an English sentence.
Ignorance of rule restrictions became the next factor causing the students to make the errors. It was because the students analogized certain grammatical rule of
English language then considered it the same as that of subject-verb agreement. Then, when the students wrote an English sentence, they applied the rule resulting
from their analogy to the context that it should not be applied. In addition, making subject-verb agreement errors was unavoidable because of incomplete application
of rules: most of the students surely and confidently thought that they would be able to write an English sentence whose subject-verb agreement was correct
without either reread or relearnt the rules of subject-verb agreement anymore. Actually, they should have realized that the rules of subject-verb agreement were
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
90 possibly required to apply when they wrote an English sentence and even when
they did their Progress Test II. Furthermore, false concepts hypothesized became the fourth factor causing
the students to make the errors. It was admitted that the students still found it difficult to consider whether the pronoun, it, was singular or plural. Besides, to
differentiate whether a noun was countable or uncountable became another difficulty which most of the students faced. Then, the students also found it
difficult to consider whether a subject whose form is a noun followed by the adjectives, e.g., color, size, has singular or plural meaning. Therefore, those cases
led the students to make the subject-verb agreement errors. The last factor causing the students to make subject-verb agreement errors was carelessness. Carelessness
deals with the students’ motivation. The students admitted that the factors that could decrease their motivation were not only caused by the lecturer, e.g., the
lecturer could not explain the learning material clearly to the students and did not give the feedback to the students, but also were caused by the students
themselves, e.g., they were unwilling to recheck the sentences which they had written.
B. Recommendations
Kategori