53
S5 PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
54 The level of S5’s first narrative writing task was 13. It was on the level of
fair to poor organization. She improved the second narrative writing task with score 15. From the level of good to average organization, her narrative writing
improved to the score 18 which means on the level of excellent to very good
organization.
From the result of the first narrative writing task, there was no opening sentence in the b
eginning of the story. She wrote, “After the gingerbread man was cooked by the old woman, the gingerbread man was alive.” Since the text was
narrative, it should be started with “once upon a time” or “one day”. The purpose of the opening sentence was to introduce the readers about the setting of time and
also the main character in the story.
On the second narrative writing task, the organization was already good. She could describe the sequencing events in detail. Her logic played a good role in
the second writing task. It made the readers follow the story easily from those logical events. However, she still made the same mistake on the beginning of the
story. There was no opening sentence to start the story. While on the third narrative writing task, she learned from the mistake.
She began to write using an introductory sentence. The whole sentences were cohesive between each other. The sequence events were clearly stated from the
beginning until the end of the story. She also explained how the conflict appeared and was solved. Thus, she successfully made a good conclusion of the story.
55
S18 PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
56 S18 got 15 on the first narrative writing task. It was on the level of good to
average organization. Then, on the second narrative writing task she got 18 that were in the excellent to very good level of writing. Her score improved on the
third writing task that was 19.
She provided an introduction in the beginning of the story from the first narrative writing task. She also made a good organization with logical sequencing
events in the story from the beginning to the ending of the first writing task, but the length of the third paragraph was not as long as other paragraphs. It consisted
of one sentence only. She needed to pay attention to the length of each paragraph. The second narrative writing task was more detailed than the first writing
task. She mentioned that the main characters involved in the second story. The way she wrote every sentence in the second narrative writing task was fluent. She
expressed her ideas through the story in detail. An improvement could be seen between the first and the second narrative writing task. It was on the length of
paragraph. There was no paragraph that consisted of one sentence only. The length was more appropriate than the first narrative writing task.
While on the third narrative writing task, she also provided a conversation between each character in the story. It made the characterization of the characters
become more alive. The logical sequencing of events was in a good order. She could tell how the problem appeared and was solved in a good detail. She made a
good conclusion on the third narrative writing task by telling the readers how a fox, as major character died.
57
3. Student’s Improvement in the Aspect of Language Use
Improvements in the aspect of language use were assessed by the tenses- agreement and the use of article.
S10 PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
58 S10 also improved the language use in the narrative writing. His first
narrative writing task was given score 18 that was on the level of good to average language use. Then on the second narrative writing task, his score improved from
18 to 21 but still in the same level of good to average. While in the third narrative
writing task, he finally got 25. It was a very excellent score.
Actually he had already been good in language use if it was compared to other students. It could be seen from the first narrative writing task. S10 only
made mistakes on simple construction. The first mistake was on the use of article
found in the first paragraph. He wrote, “Long ago, there lived a old couple. One day, a
old woman cooked a gingerbread cake.” The article “a” should be changed into “an” because it was followed by vowel, but he forgot about the use of article
in English. Other mistakes were found on word spelling. He might not pay attention to some vocabulary used in the story.
In line with the explanation of mechanics aspect by Cali n.d. that explained most students did not pay attention on word spelling. In the first
paragraph, the word “suddently” should be changed into “suddenly”. Other mistakes were s
till found in the first paragraph on the word “lived”. It should not be followed by verb, but adjective clause as “became alive”. There was
misspelling words found on the second and fourth paragraph. In the beginning of the paragraph, he wrote “And than” that should be “then”, because he did not need
to add “and” in front of the word “then” to make a connector in each paragraph. It should not be put in the beginning of a sentence. Another mistake was found in
the third paragraph. The sentence “…but the gingerbread to fast.” did not have PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
59 meaning at all. He forgot to write the past verbal in order to make a meaningful
sentence. That was why the language use level in the first writing task was average.
The mistake in the second narrative writing task was less than the first writing task. The mistake was still on the use of connector “and than”, that should
be changed into “and then”. That was why the language use on the second writing task was on the level good.
While in the third narrative writing task, there was no mistake found in the language use. Every sentence was in a good order. He was good in using tenses
agreement. His ability on the use of the connector also improved. He used “after
that” very often in the two previous writing task, but in the third writing task, he minimized the use of connector “after that” in order not to make a monotonous
sentence.
4. Students’ Improvements in the Aspect of Mechanics
In this aspect of writing assessment, the results from most of the students on mechanics aspect were mostly the same in each narrative writing task. It was
because the range of score that was given by Jacobs et al 1981 as cited in Weigle 2002, pp. 112-114 was from scale 2 to 5. Students whose mechanic aspect
improved and who got the highest scores were taken as examples to be discussed. However, most of them had mechanics problems in capitalization and
punctuation. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
60
S11 PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
61 S11 got score 3 in the first narrative writing task. It was on the level of
good to average. Then in the second narrative writing task, she got 4 that was on the level of good to average. Then on the third narrative writing task her score was
5, which means that it was in the level of excellent to very good mechanics.
Mistakes were found on the capitalization in the first narrative writing task. She did not use capital letter in the beginning of the second paragraph.
Another mistake was found in the fourth paragraph that dealt with the capitalization agreement in the beginning of the paragraph. While in term of
writing conversation as seen on the third and fourth paragraph, she did it with a good use of punctuation and full stop in the end of the sentences.
Besides, t here was a mistake found on the word “Said” that should not be
capitalized. In the fifth paragraph of the first narrative writing task, there should be a comma after the sentence “When the gingerbread man arrived in the river,…”
to separate two activities at once. In the beginning of the sixth paragraph, the word “finally” should be capitalized. There was a mistake found in the last word
of the sixth paragraph. She capitalized all letters in the word “DIED”. She might have done this because she wanted to insist that her writing was actually done.
In the second narrative writing task, there were mistakes on the first p
aragraph. She wrote “Her name is goldilock because her hair gold colored.” From this sentence, the mechanism mistake was on the use of capitalization,
spelling and punctuation. The word “goldilock” should be written “Goldilocks”, starting with capital and
ending with “s” letter just like the title of the story. The “be” “is” should be put before the words “gold colored”. Then the hyphen also
