INCREASING STUDENTS’ ABILITY IN WRITING RECOUNT TEXT THROUGH PEER CORRECTION AT THE FIRST YEAR OF SMA NEGERI 5 BANDAR LAMPUNG

INCREASING STUDENTS’ ABILITY IN WRITING RECOUNT TEXT THROUGH PEER CORRECTION AT THE FIRST YEAR OF SMAN 5

BANDAR LAMPUNG

By:

JANNATUN SITI AYISAH

A Script

Submitted in a Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements for S-1 Degree

in

The Language and Arts Department of The Faculty of Teacher Training and Education

FACULTY OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF LAMPUNG

BANDAR LAMPUNG 2013

i ABSTRACT

INCREASING STUDENTS’ ABILITY IN WRITING RECOUNT TEXT

THROUGH PEER CORRECTION AT THE FIRST YEAR OF SMA NEGERI 5 BANDAR LAMPUNG

By

JANNATUN SITI AYISAH

Writing, as one of the language skill, is one of the important subjects that should be taught to students. Although it is important, writing is difficult to manage in the class because the teacher should spend a lot of time to correct students’ work. Peer correction, as one of the techniques of correction, is believed to contribute for the increasing of students’ writing skill. Therefore the objective of this research is to find out whether there is significant increase of students’ ability in writing recount text after they are taught using Peer Correction.

This quantative research was conducted at SMA Negeri 5 Bandar Lampung in academic year 2012/2013. The research took place in class X 6 which consisted of 30 students. The instruments used to gather the data were writing test (pre test and post test). The researcher conducted pre test before treatments and post test after the treatments.

The students’ mean scores in the pre-test was 57.33 and the students’ mean score in the post-test was 80.5, in which the students’ mean scores gain increased about 23.17. The result of the research shows that value (16.223) was higher than t-table (2.045). It means that there is significant increase of students’ ability in writing of recount text after being taught through peer correction. Based on the finding, it can be concluded that peer correction can give positive increase in students’ ability in writing recount text.

ADMITTED BY

1. Examination Committee

Chairperson : Dr. Muhammad Sukirlan, M.A. ………

Examiner : Dra. Editha Gloria Simanjuntak ……….

Secretary : Budi Kadaryanto, S.Pd., M.A. ……….

2. The Dean of Teacher Training and Education Faculty

Dr. H. BujangRahman, M.Si. NIP 19600315 198503 1 003

Research Title : INCREASING STUDENTS’ ABILITY IN WRITING OF RECOUNT TEXT THROUGH PEER CORRECTION AT THE FIRST YEAR OF SMAN 5 BANDAR LAMPUNG Student’s Name : Jannatun Siti Ayisah

Student’s Number : 0913042054

Department : Language and Arts Education Study Program : English Education

Faculty : Teacher Training and Education

APPROVED BY Advisory Committee

Advisor 1 Co-Advisor

Dr. Muhammad Sukirlan, M.A. Budi Kadaryanto, S.Pd., M.A.

NIP 19641212 199003 1 003 NIP 19810326 200501 1 002

The Chairperson of

Language and Arts Education Department

Dr. Muhammad Fuad,M.Hum. NIP. 19590722 198603 1 003

viii

TABLE OF CONTENT

Page

ABSTRACT ... i

SURAT PERNYATAAN ... ii

CURRICULUM VITAE ... iii

DEDICATION ... iv

MOTTO ... v

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ... vi

TABLE OF CONTENT ... viii

LIST OF TABLE ... x

LIST OF FIGURES ... xi

LIST OF APPENDICES ... xii

I. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background of the Problem ... 1

1.2 Formulation of the Problem ... 4

1.3 Objective of the Research ... 5

1.4 Uses of the Research ... 5

1.5 Scope of the Research ... 6

1.6 Definition of Terms ... 6

II. FRAME OF THEORIES 2.1 Concept of Writing ... 8

2.2 Aspect of Writing ... 9

2.3 Teaching of Writing ... 12

2.4 Text ... 13

2.5 Recount Text ... 15

2.6 Peer Correction ... 18

2.7 Teaching Recount Text through Peer Correction ... 20

2.8 The Procedure of Teaching Recount Text Writing through Peer Correction ... 21

2.9 Advantages and Disadvantages Peer Correction ... 23

2.10 Theoretical Assumption ... 24

ix III. RESEARCH METHOD

3.1 Research Design... 25

3.2 Population and Sample ... 26

3.3 Data Collecting Technique ... 26

3.4 Validity and Reliability ... 27

3.5 Research Procedure ... 29

3.6 Scoring System ... 30

3.7 The Data Analysis ... 33

3.8 Data Treatment ... 33

3.9 Hypothesis Testing ... 34

IV. RESULT AND DISCUSSION 4.1 Result of the Research ... 36

4.1.1 Result of Pre – Test ... 36

4.1.2 Result of Post – Test ... 44

4.1.3 Hypothesis Testing ... 53

4.2 Discussion ... 54

V. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS 5.1 Conclusions ... 66

5.2 Suggestions ... 67

REFERENCES ... 69 APPENDICES

x

LIST OF TABLES

Tables Page

3.1. Table of Specification ... 32

3.2. Students’ Score in Each Component of Writing ... 32

4.1. The Whole Result of Pre Test ... 37

4.2. The Distribution of Students’ Score in Content ... 37

4.3. The Distribution of Students’ Score in Organization ... 38

4.4. The Distribution of Students’ Score in Vocabulary ... 39

4.5. The Distribution of Students’ Score in Grammar ... 40

4.6. The Distribution of Students’ Score in Mechanic ... 41

4.7. The Distribution of Students’ Score in Pre Test ... 42

4.8. The Whole Result of Post Test ... 44

4.9. The Distribution of Students’ Score in Content ... 45

4.10 The Distribution of Students’ Score in Organization ... 46

4.11 The Distribution of Students’ Score in Vocabulary ... 47

4.12 The Distribution of Students’ Score in Grammar ... 48

4.13 The Distribution of Students’ Score in Mechanic ... 49

4.14 The Distribution of Students’ Score in Post Test ... 50

4.15. The Increase of Students’ Ability in Writing Recount Text ... 52

4.16. The Increase of Students’ Score ... 53

4.17. t-test Result of Pre Test and Post Test ... 54

xii

LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix

1. Lesson Plan 1 2. Lesson Plan 2 3. Lesson Plan 3

4. Instrument of Pre Test 5. Instrument of Post Test

6. Students’ Score of Pre Test in Each Component of Writing 7. Students’ Score of Post Test in Each Component of Writing 8. Reliability of Pre Test

9. Reliability of Post Test 10. Normality of Pre Test 11. Normality of Post Test 12. The analysis of hypothesis STUDENTS’ WORKSHEET

I. INTRODUCTION

This chapter discussed the reasons for conducting the research and it deals with several points, i.e. introduction that deals with background of the problem, formulation of the problems, objectives of the research, uses of the research, scope of the research, and definition of terms clarified like the following.

1.1 Background of the Problem

In Indonesia, English as compulsory subject is learnt from elementary school up to university. According to School-Based curriculum (Depdiknas, 2006: 308), it is stated that the objective of teaching learning English at Senior HighSchool is that the students are expected to be able to develop communicative competence both in written and in spoken form to achieve informational literacy level. They are also expected to be able to communicate in written form to solve problems in their daily lives.

This goes without saying that writing skill is complex to learn because this requires the students to treat several aspects. First, grammar which concerns with word order. Second, vocabulary which concerns with terms or relies on circumlocutions. Third, mechanic which concerns with punctuation and spelling. Finally, form which concerns with clarification and connectivity of ideas (Hughes,

1989:91). Harmer (1993:53) said that writing is expected to be correct and effective. He also suggests that it may be important for the teacher to consider about organizing sentences into paragraph, joining paragraphs together, and organizing general ideas into a coherent piece of discourse (Harmer 1993:53-54).

Raimes (1983:76) stated that writing is a skill in which we express ideas, and thought which are arranged in words, sentences, and paragraph using eyes, brain and hands. In addition, Linderman (1983:11) said that writing is a process of communication using conventional graphic system to convey a message to the reader. Writing is a complex skill which requires the writer to express his or her idea. In order to communicate, people use English not only in spoken form but also in written form. Writers gain creativity when they can write based on their own ideas, not copying what has already been written. In writing the writer is required to treats several aspects such as grammar, vocabulary, and mechanic.

Meanwhile, in the curriculum of SMA, the English material is taught based on the text. There are some types of text, i.e. descriptive, procedure, recount, and others. One of the English writing texts that students have to study is recount text. Recount text is a text to describe sequence of events that happened in the past, it focuses on time-order and subject of the story. The students have to able to understand and to produce a recount text based on social function and generic structure of the text. By using recount text, students are expected to be able to describe the sequence of events that happened in the past well in written form.

Gunawan (2010:2) found that the first year students of senior high school get confused about expressing their ideas in written form, particularly, in recount text

writing. When the teacher asked the students to write a recount text they got difficulties in linking several sentences into one coherent idea to create a text.

In addition, based on researcher’s pre–observation in SMA Negeri 5 Bandar Lampung, it was found that the students could not create a recount text based on the characteristic or generic structure of recount text that is sequence event, but some of them just make list of event, they did not develop it into a good paragraph. Some students still had difficulty in language used based on the generic structure of recount text, especially in transforming ireguler verb into past form. They still could not use appropriate word in writing of recount text. These problems indicated that the students lack not only in in understanding the text but also in mastery the aspect of writing. It can be seen from their daily score in writing was 60. Meanwhile the minimal Standar of Mastery Learning (KKM) that school is 70. It means that the score of the students’ writing was still unsatisfactory.

Based on the explanation above, the teacher needs compatible technique in order to make students competent language learners in learning and their achievement. Concerning this case, an English teacher should be able to implement and improve a good technique for teaching the students well, in order to make the students are able to writing a text.

According to Jacobs (1989:68), Peer Correction is a part of larger category of educational activity in which students work together in a group. In addition Scharle and Szabo (2000) have strongly suggested peer feedback to be applied for checking, especially students’ written work.

Peer Correction is a technique that enables students to get feedback, when the students correct their drafts in pairs. Each pair will check the draft and correct the mistakes based on what they have known. Peer Correction makes the students able to learn each other. Peer Correction tends to give specific and deep comments on the work. Peer Correction has also been useful for those who provide critiques, helping students to develop analytical and critical thinking abilities and become better able to judge their own writing.

In reference to the statements above, the researcher conduct this research through the research entitled “Increasing Students’ Writing of Recount Text through Peer Correction at The First Year of SMA Negeri 5 Bandar Lampung”. By using Peer Correction the researcher in this research would like to know whether there is an increase of students’ in writing of recount text after they are taught using Peer Correction.

1.2 Formulation of the problem

Referring to the background of the problem above, the researcher formulates the research problem as follows:

Is there any significant increase of students’ ability in writing recount text after being taught through peer correction at SMAN 5 Bandar Lampung?

1.3 Objective of the Research

In line with background and problem formulation above, the researcher states that the objectives of the research as:

To find out whether there is significant increase of students’ ability in writing recount text after they are taught using Peer Correction at SMAN 5 Bandar Lampung.

1.4 Uses of the Research

The researcher hopes this research can be used in:

1.4.1 Theoritically

The uses of this research are as follow:

1. To confirm and clarify the previous research about teaching of writing through peer correction.

2. To be used as a reference for those who want to conduct further research.

1.4.2 Practically

The results of this research hopefully can give:

Information sharing for SMA English teacher that there is an alternative technique beside the traditional teacher correction and to give description of how to apply the technique.

1.5 Scope of the Research

The researcher focused the research on using of Peer Correction for teaching writing recount text. Thus, the focus of the research was on finding out the increase of the students in writing of recount text after the students are taught through Peer Correction. In this research, the learning material was focused in writing recount text. The research was conducted to the first grade students of SMA N 5 Bandar Lampung in academic year 2012/2013. The researcher took one class as the sample. The class is X 6 consisting of 30 students.The scope of writing skills consists of content, organization, vocabulary, grammar, and mechanics (Jacobs et al 1981:90).

1.6 Definition of Terms

Writing

Writing is a skill in which we express the ideas, and thought arranged in words, sentences, and paragraphs using eyes, brain, and hand. (Raimes 1983:76)

Text

Text is a semantic unit that is realized in the form of word, clause, and sentence. (Derewianka1992:17)

Recount text

Recount text is a text is one of the texts that recalls and reconstruct events,experiences and achievements from from the past in a logical sequence. (Derewianka 1990)

Peer Correction

Peer correction is a part of a larger category of educational activity in which students work together in a group. (Jacobs 1989:68)

II. LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter provides explanation related theories used in this study, they are concept of writing, teaching of writing, the concept of peer correction, the benefit of peer correction, recount text, teaching of recount text, the use of peer correction in teaching recount text, the procedure of teaching recount text through peer correction, advantages and disadvantages of peer correction, theoretical assumption and the hypothesis.

2.1 Concept of Writing

Writing is a productive skill that enables the people to write their ideas based on the structures of the text. Therefore, writing is used to communicate ideas, thought in written form. There have been several experts who reveal the definition of writing.

Linderman (1982:11) defines writing as a process of communication which uses a conventional graphic system to convey a message to a reader. It means that writing is process of sending the message by using letters, punctuation, words or sentences as a graphic system. Thus the process of communication can be said successful if the reader and the writer understand the language being used in written communication. Raimes (1983:3) point out that writing reinforces the

grammatical structure, idioms, and so on which we had been teaching our students. It means that learning to write in learning how to express ideas that needs a specific skill.

Writing enables the students to express their ideas clearly in sequence and in a communicative way. As Raimes stated above, writing also involves thinking activity. In addition, the close relationship between thinking and writing makes writing a valuable part of any language courses. It is supported by Ellis and Sinclair (1990 : 93) who sais that people generally write either to communicate something to other people or to communicate their own idea.

Writing as one of the language skill is one of the important subjects that should be taught for students. Writing enables the students can express their ideas or feeling clearly in sequence and in a communicative way. In writing the writer requires to treats several aspects such as content, grammar, vocabulary, and mechanic.

2.2 Aspect of Writing

Writing is a skill that complex to learn because it requires the students to treat several aspects. They are content, organization, vocabulary, grammar, and mechanic.

According to Jacobs et al (1981: 90) there are five aspects of writing:

1. Content refers to the substance of writing, the experience of the main idea (unity). It is identified by seeing the topic sentence. The topic sentence should express main idea and reflect the entire of paragraph.

2. Organization refers to the logical organization of the content (coherence). It is related to the ideas that stick together so that ideas run smoothly within paragraph.

3. Grammar refers to the use of the correct grammatical forms and syntactical pattern. It is identified form the construction of well-formed sentence.

4. Vocabulary refers to the selection or words those are suitable with the content. It can be identified by seeing the words choice or diction in order to convey ideas to the reader.

5. Mechanic refers to use of graphic conventional of the language. It is identified by seeing the usage of spelling, punctuation and capitalization witihin the paragraph.

To make more clearly, here is the example of recount text that reflects five aspects of writing:

One morning I got up with the feeling that the day was going to be an unlucky one for me. How right it was! Found that it was already 06:15 a.m. I rushed into bathroom. I did not see a piece of soap lying on the floor. I stepped on it and slipped, almost breaking my back in the process. Unfortunately, I just missed the bus. My heart sank and I knew that I would be late for school. When I reached school, my name was taken down by the teacher. The teacher scolded me for being late. To my humiliation, I was made to stand outside the class. I was so upset by the incidents that I could not study properly. But worse come. After school, I was on my way home when something hard hit me on the head. Someone had thrown a bag of fish bones out of the window and it landed on me! I was boiling with rage but could do nothing. However, luckily for me, this only raised a small lump on my head. I managed to reach home safe and sound, and did not dare to go out again for the rest day.

Referring to the example above, the reader can identify the five aspects of writing in term of recount text:

1. Content

Content refers to the substabce of recount text writing. Content provides the unity. The unity can be identify by seeing the topic sentence and controlling idea. Here, the topic sentence in the first paragraph is “ One morning I got up with the feeling that the day was going to be an unlucky one for me”. And the controlling idea is “ How right it was! Found that it was already 06:15 a.m.”

2. Organization

Some transitional expressions include for example, when I....,after school, I.... 3. Vocabulary

The words choices used in the text above communicate effectively and make favorable impression on the reader for instance: the word “ unfortunately, humiliation, safe and sound”.

4. Grammar

All sentences that are used in the text above are grammatically correct and understandable. For example: “ I was so upset by the incidents that I could not study properly”.

5. Mechanic

The paragraph above uses necessary and appropriate spelling i.e. feeling ( f-e-e-l-i-n-g), punctuation (comma and full stop) and capitalization (the first letter at the beginning sentence and name of the place)

It can be concluded that writing is a process of transferring one’s idea into written form. In this case, the students are expected to make a good paragraph. Then, to

make the text or paragraph meaningful, the students or writer must give attention to those aspects or components of writing, there are content, organization, grammar, vocabulary, and mechanic. Writing is also a valuable activities in order that the language be communicative.

2.3 Teaching of Writing

Teaching writing is more difficult than teaching other skills. In teaching this skill, the teacher should teach the aspects of writing and make sure that the students understand the aspects of writing. Teaching writing needs a long process in order to make the students master the skill.

Harmer (1983: 48) points out that there is certain particular needs to be taken into account when teaching writing, e.g. sentence organization, paragraph arrangement, and coherence in the writing itself. More specially, it is said that teaching writing requires the elements of writing skill including grammar, sentence organization, vocabulary, and mechanic (Madsen, 1983:120). Teaching writing guides students not only to write sentences in a paragraph but also to organize idea. Reffering to this, Arapoff (1966:14) says that learning to write involves not only learning to use orthographic symbol, but also primary how to select and organize experience that has occured to the writer. A purposeful selection and organization of experience require active thoughts.

It can be said that teaching writing covers not only the use of grammar such as sentence sense, word order and mechanic, i,e., the use of graphic symbols, but also teaching writing covers the organization of ideas expressed into the correct of writing (Madsen, 1983:120)

Brown (1980) states that teaching is showing or helping someone to learn how to do something providing with knowldege, causing to know or to understand. Writing is one way to communicate with other people besides speaking. When the students write a paragraph, they should write not only semantically correct but also she/he should use a correct grammar.

According to Ju (2006), teaching writing is an ongoing process. It means that teaching writing is continuous process to teach students in expressing their ideas and producing language in written form. Most people agree that writing skills are increasingly important and often not adequately taught. Teaching writing is a process for teaching and helping students how to express their ideas and produce language in written from providing with knowledge, causing to know or to understand.

From the statements above, it can be concluded that teaching writing is a process for teaching students how to express their ideas and produce language. In teaching writing, covers not only the use of grammar such as sentence sense, word order and mechanic, i,e., the use of graphic symbols, but also teaching writing covers the organization of ideas expressed into the correct of writing.

2.4 Text

Text is a semantic unit that is realized in the form of word, clause, and sentence. According to Derewianka (1990:17), text is any meaningful strech of language – oral or written form. Text type includes: text books, handouts, articles, poem, encyclopedia, dictionary, novel (extracts) and short stories. The text can be detained into some models that are recount text, descriptive text, expository text,

argumentative text, and narrative text. One factor, which accounts for differences in the text, is the purpose for which the text is being used. Here are some models of text:

1. Recount Text

Recount text is a text that describes sequence events that happened in the past, it focuses on time-order and subject of the story.For example, personal experience. 2. Descriptive Text

Descriptive text is kind of text that is used to describe about person, object, appearance, scenery, or phenomenon.

3. Expository Text

Expository Text is kind of text that aims at clarifying, teaching, or evaluating an issue.

4. Argumentative Text

Argumentative text is kind of text that aims to prove the truth or untruth of a statement or situation.

5. Narrative Text

Narrative text is retelling a story that is told by doer or other person’s point of view. It is more about writing a chronological story, whether true or just a fictional.

From some examples above, it can be said that the genre of the text ( genre refers to the particular text types ). The genre of a text is partly determined by the culture in which the text is used, since different cultures achieve their purposes through language in different ways (Derewianka: 1990). Besides, texts differ not

only in term of their purpose but also differ according to particular situation in which they are being used.

Based on the curriculum, there are some types of genres include in English for Senior High School text book (descriptive, procedure, narrative, recount, and report text). The material for first grade students is taught by recount, narrative, and procedure text. The researcher focuses on recount text.

2.5 Recount text

Recount text is used to tell an experience in the past, obviously recount text uses past form. Recount text does not use conflict, but it uses series of event as characteristic. Recount text with complete generic structure will be constructed by structuring orientation, events and reorientation.

According to Siswanto (2005: 202) recount is a text that tells someones’s past experiences in a chronological order. Derewianka (1990:15) also asserts in recount, we construct past experience. A recount is the unfolding of a sequence of events overtimes. It is used to tell past events for the purpose of informing or entertaining. It is focus on a sequence of events. In general is begun with an orientation. It provides the backgrounds information needed to understand the text such as who was involved, where it happened and when it happened. Then, the recount unfolds with series of events ( ordered in a chronological sequence). At various stages, there may be some personal comments on the we call it re-orientation.

The generic structure of recount text (Derewianka, 1990: 145):

1. Orientation – scene setting opening, it given the readers the background information needed to understand the text such as who was involved, where it happened, and when ot happened.

2. Events – recount of the events as they accured, for example, I saw a book...these events may be elaborated on by adding, for example, descriptive details.

3. Reorientation – a closing statement: When I get back, I told my mom (with elaboration in more sophisticated text)

To be clearer, here is the example of recount text that reflects the generic structure:

My Holiday Orientation:

Last two weeks, I spent my holiday. I went to my grandmother’s house. My grandmother lived in the village. I went with my family. I met with my nephew and my cousin. We went to my grandmother house every year.

Events:

On the first day, my grandmother cooked my favorite food for me. I liked it very much. In the afternoon, I helped my grandfather in the garden. He planted many kinds of vegetables. On the second day, my cousin invited me to join running competition. Unfortunately, I won the competition. It was great experience. On the third day, my family and I went back to our house.

Re-orientation:

We were enjoying our holiday in our grandmother’s house, because there was very naturally place to enjoy.

Source: Th. M. Sudarwati, Eudia Grace. 2007. An English Course for Senior High School Students Year X. Jakarta: Erlangga.

Furthermore, Derewianka (1990) identified that there are five types of recount text, they are:

1. Personal Recount

Telling about activities whereas the writer or speaker involves or do by him or herself (i.e., oral anecdote, diary entry) use the first person pronouns (I, we). Personal responses to the events can be included, particularly at the end. Details are often chosen to add interest or humor.

2. Factual Recount

Record the particulars of an incident (i.e., report of a science experiment, police report, news report, historical account). A factual recount is concerned with recalling events accurately. It can range from everyday tasks such as a school accident report to a formal, structured research tasks such as historical recount. The emphasis is on using language that is precise, factual and detailed, so that the reader gains a complete picture of the event, experience or achievements. This type uses the third person pronouns (he, she, it, and they). Details are usually selected to help the reader reconstruct the activity or incident accurately. Sometimes the ending described the outcome of the activity (i.e., science experiment). Details of time, place and manner may need to be precisely stated, i,e.: at 2.35 pm., between Jhonson St and Park Rd, the man drove at 80 kph. The passive voice may be used, i.e., the beaker was filled with water. It may be appropriate to include explanations and justifications.

3. Imaginative Recount

Imaginative or literary recounts entertain the reader by recreating the events of an imaginary world as though they are real. “ A day in my life a family pet”, for

example. Emotion language, specific detail and first person narration are used to give the writing impact and appeal.

4. Procedural Recount

A procedural recount records the steps taken in completing a task or procedure. The use of technical terms, an accurate time sequence and first person narration (I or we), give credibility to the information provided. Examples include a flow chart of the actions required for making bread, a storyboard a videotaped script or advertisement, the steps taken to solve mathematical problem.

5. Biographical Recount

A biographical recount tells the story of person’s life using a third person narrator (he, she, and they). In this case of an autobiography, first person narration (I, we) is used. It is usually factually accurate and records specific names, times, places, and events, a purely factual, informative biography, however, would lack the appeal provided by personal responses and memorable anecdotes. There is often evaluation of the subject’s achievements in the final section.

From five types of recount text above, the focus of the research is personal recount since it tells the activities whereas the writer or speaker involves or do by herself or himself. The theme that will be used about personal recount such as students’ experience especially bad experience and good experience.

2.6 Peer Correction

One more significant issue of classroom teaching comes up with peer correction. It is now acknowledged by most of the practitioners that students’ involvement in classroom should be enhanced to better learning, and involvement indeed

increases when students give feedback to each others’ performances (Gower and Philips, 1995).

According to Jacobs (1989:68) peer correction is a part of a larger category of educational activity in which students work together in a group. Jacobs is positive that this addition of roles increase learners’ insight into the writing process. Thus peer work prepares them to write without a teacher there to correct their errors.

Also, peer feedback takes the focus away from the teacher and thus initiates a transfer of roles from the teacher to the students. Finally, since peer correction offers opportunities to the students to be responsible for their own learning, it is also advocated by the practitioners who believe in learner autonomy. Scharle and Szabo (2000) have strongly suggested peer feedback to be applied for checking, especially, students’ written work. They have provided an outline of how it can be applied in classroom; once students finish writing, the teacher gives one essay (or any written work) to each student and students are asked to evaluate each others’ work. They correct the errors and send notes to the respective authors about what they have corrected.

Many students find it difficult to see their own mistakes so that receiving feedback from the teacher in a form of comments and corrections in the text they have produced can be helpful. However, some students may find it very discouraging if they get a piece of written work back and it is covered in red ink, underlining and crossings-out (Harmer, 1998:84). Peer correction may be very efficient in writing, because the students work together on correcting each other’s work, the discussion helps each one to learn from his or hers own mistakes. Many

students have difficulty in seeing their own mistakes, even if a teacher has given them a signal as to what sort of a mistake it is. Cooperation helps students develop an ability to see their own mistakes and can give the students more chances to know about the correct way in order to make their writing betterr. Peer correction offers opportunities to the students to be responsible for their own learning. They correct the errors and send notes to the respective authors about what they have corrected.

Peer correction is a technique that enables the students work in pair. It gives opinions and suggestion so that the students are able to get feedback from their pair. The researcher assumes that peer correction can be done in teaching writing. This technique can give the students more chances to know about the correct way in order to make their writing better.

2.7 Teaching Recount Text Writing through Peer Correction

Teaching writing is a process to teach students to express their ideas in written form. Based on Edelstein and Pival (1998) there are three steps in teaching recount text through peer correction.

Those steps can be described as follows:

a. Pre-writing activity

First, the teacher explains goals and objectives of instruction. Then, teacher gives explanation about recount text and five aspects of writing that used to make an effective recount text clearly; they are, content refers to substance of writing, organization refers to the logical organization of the content, grammar refers to the use of the correct grammatical, vocabulary which refers to the word selection,

and mechanic refers to use graphic conventional of the language. Then, the teachers gives the students the topics that should be developed into simple recount text.

In this process, the students are asked to make an outline first before their write recount text. They should decide the topic sentences and then explain it with the supporting sentences. The example of outline can be seen as follows:

Topic sentence: (Orientation)

Last two weeks, I went to Bali to have picnic. Supporting sentence: (Series of events)

1. At the hotel, we didn’t come to our room directly. 2. On the second day, we visited Sanur Beach. 3. We watched some foreign tourist activities. 4. We went back to the hotel.

Conclusion Sentence: (Re-orientation)

Although it was tiring day, I was so very happy.

b. Writing activity

When they finish their outline, they should start their writing based on the outline they have made. The students are asked to write recount text in terms of orientation, series of event and descriptions. The teacher still guides them to consider five aspects evaluated.

c. Rewriting

After the students finish their writing, the teacher conducted peer correction in order to evaluate the students work. The students are asked to share their work each other to their chair mate. Each student should give an evaluation about the content, organization, grammar, vocabulary, and mechanic. After the teacher gives feedback to their work, the students return the work to the owner in order

to rewrite their work.

2.8 The procedure of Teaching Recount Text Writing through Peer Correction

Based on the notion proposed by Edelstein and Pival (1998) it was concluded that this study used three steps in teaching recount text through peer correction.

Those steps can be described as follows: Activities:

1. Pre activity

a. The teacher opened the class by greeting.

b. The teacher brainstormed to the topic being discussed with the students.

c. The teacher explained about the recount text in detail pertaining several aspects. 2. While activity

a. The teacher gave the students an example of recount text. b. The teacher asked the students to read through the text.

c. The teacher discussed with the studentsabout the generic structure and aspects of writing based on the text are given.

d. The teacher asked the students to check whether the students understand the teacher’s explanation.

e. The teacher asked the students to write a recount text by choosing the topic that they want to tell. They should write it in every other lines providing the space for their peer to write down suggestion and markings. After that the students get their writing back.

f. Then, the teacher asked the students to exchange their writing with their peer that has chosen by teacher based on the students ability.

g. The students read his partner’s draft and make suggestion regarding things that have been selected as error type. If an item is believed to be incorrect, students are to put a line through it and write what they think is correct form above or below it. And then if they are not sure about what the mistake is, they give a circle. In this research the students correct all aspect of writing analyze the content, organization, vocabulary, grammar and mechanics.

h. After that the students met their pairs to discuss their suggestion. The discussion may result in their writing the revise suggestion.

i. Then the teacher asked the students to rewrite the revision drafts based on their peer’s comment and they just conclude discussion.

j. After rewriting, the students sat in pairs and checked their each pair once more. 3. Post activity

a. The students collected their writing.

b. The teacher asked the students what they have learned. c. The teacher closed the meeting.

2.9 Advantages and Disadvantages of Peer Correction

According to Jacobs in Fatriana (1996: 15) and Chaudron in Raja (2004: 24) the advantages of peer correction can be summarized as follows:

1. Peer correction makes students responsible on what they are doing. 2. Peer correction encourages the students to be more active in the learning process.

3. Peer correction increases the students’ confidence in learning English and using their ability of English.

4. Peer correction adds variety to the range of learning situation. 5. Peer correction helps the students become more autonomous. .

While, the disadvantages of peer correction can be summarized as follows:

1. Peer correction is energy consuming and time consuming

that makes

students

feel uncomfortable.

2. Due to the students’ lack of language ability, the students may make a mistake in correcting their peer’s works and it can cause another problem to solve.

3. Peer correction deprives the students of the opportunity to correct the error themselves. Moreover, some students hate to be corrected by their peers although they do not mind being corrected by the teacher.

2.10 Theoretical Assumption

Based on the problem and the theories above, the researcher assumes that peer correction is an appropriate technique to give an increase students’ ability in writing recount text. Peer Correction enables the students to correct their own writing. It is possible for them to know where the mistakes are and how to correct it. By using peer correction, the students not only get a feedback, they also get a self confidence to make their writing better. Therefore the researcher assumes that teaching writing recount text through peer correction can increase students’ in writing recount text.

Based on the review of related literatures above, the researcher formulated the hypothesis that Peer Correction significantly increase students’ ability in writing of recount text.

III. RESEARCH METHOD

This chapter discusses about following topics: research design, population and sample of the research, how the writer collects the data, research procedure, validity and reliability, scoring system, data analysis, data treatment, hypothesis testing.

3.1 Research Design

Since this research is quantitative research, the researcher applied peer correction in teaching. The research wants to find out the increase of students’ ability in writing of recount text after they are taught using peer correction. The research used the one-group pretest posttest as research design. This was used to compare the students’ ability in pre-test and post-test after the treatment was given. The one-group pretest posttest design referring to Hatch and Farhady (1982:20) is represented as follows:

T1 X T2

T1 : Pretest, students’ first draft

X : Treatment, is the application of peer correction in the class. The Researcher conducts three treatments in this research.

3.2 Population and Sample

The population of this research was the students of the first grade of SMA Negeri 5 Bandar Lampung in the academic year of 2012/2013. There were seven classes of first year students. The first year students of SMA N 5 Bandar Lampung have the same ablity. The sample was selected by lottery, so that all of the first year classes got the same chance to be the sample. The researcher used only one class. The sample of this research was X 6 consisted of 30 students, 14 males and 16 females.

3.3 Data Collecting Technique

Based on the formulation of the problem in the first chapter, the research tried to compile the data through data collecting technique, which is test of writing recount text.

a. Writing Test of Recount Text

The test was given to the student in writing test. According to Harris (1969:69), writing test is one testing devices which requires the students to compose their own and extend responses to problem set by the teacher. Writing test measures certain writing abilities more effectively than doing objectives test. Therefore, the researcher used writing test to get data of students’ ability in writing recount text, by applying it in class.

Instruction that were used by the teacher to examine the writing test:

a. Write a recount text that consists of orientation, series of events and re-orientation (optional).

b. Chose one of topics below:

- Good experience (happy, travelling, surprise, beach, camping, etc.) - Bad experience (embarrasing, frightened, sad, etc.)

c. Recheck your work before you submit your work to the teacher.

3.4 Validity and Reliability

In this section there are two parts that will be discuss further that is validity and realibility.

3.4.1 Validity

A test can be said valid if the test measures the object to be measured and suitable with the criteria (Hatch and Farhady, 1982:250). According to Hatch and Farhady (1982: 251), there are two basic types of validity, content validity and construct validity. Content validity is concerned with whether the test is sufficiently representative and comprehensive for the test. In the test, students arrange a recount text of the event. The materials were adopted from students’ handbook for the first year students SMA.

Construct validity is the process of determining the extent to which test performance can be interpreted in terms of one or more constructs. In this research, the researcher administed a writing test and the technique, and gave scores of students’ writing based on five aspects of writing: content, organization, grammar, vocabulary, and mechanic.

Therefore, one test is valid because the writing test is composed based on indicators and the objectives in the syllabus of the School – Based Curriculum

2006. The test was made by considering indicators and the objectives in the syllabus of the School – Based Curriculum 2006 and also contained five aspects of writing.

1.4.2 Reliability

In ensuring the pre-test and post test scores, the reseacher used inter-rater reliability-taking other was from the English teacher in the school besides the score from the researcher herself. The researcher calculated the data by using Spearman Rank Correlation that the formula can be seen as follows:

� = 1− 6. �

2

( 2−₁₎

Where:

r = Coefficient of rank correlation

d = Difference of rank correlation

N = Number of students (Sugiyono, 2006: 228)

The researcher using standard of reliability (Arikunto, 1998: 260)

0.8 – 1.0 = very high

0.60 – 0.79 = high

0.40 – 0.59 = medium

0– 0.19 = very low

3.5 Research Procedure

The procedure of this research as follows:

1. Determining the sample of the research

The population of the research is the first year of SMA N 5 Bandar Lampung. First year students were choosen because recount text material had been learned by them in based on 2006 English curriculum. It was chosen one class out of seven classes of 10thgrade students of SMA N 5 Bandar Lampung as the research sample. The experimental class consists of 30 students. In determining the experimental class, simple probability sampling was used. In this research, class X 6 was chosen as the sample of the research.

2. Preparing the Pretest Materials

In this research, there was one pretest to 10th grade of Senior High School student. Pretest was used to measure the aspects of content, organization, vocabulary, grammar, and mechanic. The topics were “good experiences and bad experiences”. The materials were taken from the students’s handbook based on 206 Senior High School English Curriculum of KTSP.

3. Conducting the Pre-test

The pre-test was conducted to measure student’s preliminary ability before treatment. Here, the students in experimental class were assigned to write recount text which consists orientation, series of events, and re- orientation.

2. Giving Treatments

There were three times treatments conducted in this research. Each treatments had been conducted for 2 x 45 minutes consisting of procedures of teaching writing through peer correction.

3. Conducting the Post-test.

In order to see increase of students’ writing ability, the post-test was conducted in experimental class after they were being the treatment.

4. Analyzing the Test Result (Pre-test and Post-test)

After scoring pretest and postest, the data were analyzed by using SPSS software program. It was used to find out the means of pre-test and post-test and how significant the increasing was.

3.6 Scoring System

In scoring the student’s draft, the researcher uses the scoring criteria (adopted from Harris, 1979: 68-89)

1. Content : the substance of the writing, the idea expressed (unity). 2. Grammar : the employment of grammatical forms and syntacticpatterns. 3. Organization: the organization of content (coherence).

4. Vocabulary : the selection of word that suitable with the content. 5. Mechanic : the conventional devices used to clarify the meaning.

Scoring criteria (adopted from Harris, 1979: 68-89)

Aspect Criteria Score

Content - Excellent. All developing sentences

support main idea.and relevant to assign topic.

- Good. There are at least three developing

20 15

sentences support main idea and relevant to assign topic.

- Fair. There are at least two developing sentences support main idea and mostly relevant to the topic but lack detail. - Poor. There are at least one developing

sentence support main idea and inadequate developing of topic. - Very poor. There is no developing

sentence support the main idea.

10 5 0

Grammar - Excellent. All sentences written in the

correct grammar

- Good. There are at least three sentences written in the correct grammar

- Pair. There are at least two sentences written in the correct grammar - Poor. There is at least one sentence

written in the correct grammar - Very poor. No sentence written in the

correct grammar 20 15 10 5 0

Organization - Excellent. All supporting are well

developed and the relationship writing ideas flow smoothly because of sufficient transitional signals.

- Good.There are at least three supporting sentences are developed in chronological order.

- Fair. There are at least two supporting sentences are developed and paragraph writing is lack of logical sequencing idea. Poor.

- There is at least one supporting sentences written and has lottle or no attemp at connectivity.

- Very poor. No supporting sentences written in chronological order

20 15 10 5

0

Vocabulary - Excellent. All vocabulary used correctly

- Good. 75% vocabulary used correctly - Fair. 50% vocabulary used correctly - Poor. 25% vocabulary used correctly - Very poor. No vocabulary used correctly

20 15 10 5 0

Mechanic - Excellent. All punctuation, spelling, and

capitalization used correctly

- Good. 75% punctuation, spelling, and capitalization used correctly

- Fair. 50% punctuation, spelling, and capitalization used correctly

- Poor. 25% punctuation, spelling, and capitalization used correctly

- Very poor. No punctuation, spelling, and capitalization used correctly

20 15 10 5 0

To simplify the idea above, here are the scoring criteria used in writing skill:

Table 3.1 Table of Specification in Writing Test:

Writing Aspect Criteria in writing test Score

Content Make an effective recount text by seeing the topic sentence and controlling the idea

20%

Organization Use the transitional words in spatial order 20%

Grammar Use past tense, correct grammatical and syntactic pattern 20%

Vocabulary Use the suitable words 20%

Mechanics Use correct graphic conventional of the language, including, spelling, punctuation, capitalization, and paragraphs

20%

Based on the explanation above, the researcher evaluated the aspects of recount text writing based on content, grammar, organization, vocabulary, and mechanics. The lower score is 0 and the highest score is 100.

Table 3.2 Students’ Score in Each Component of Writing

No Name Content Organization Grammar Vocabulary Mechanic Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

25 26 27 28 29 30

3.7 The Data Analysis

The researcher computed students’ score in order to find out the students’ achievement in writing recount text by using peer correction:

1. Scoring the pretest and posttest and tabulate the result. 2. Finding the mean of pretest and posttest, as follows:

m = �

m : mean

∑d: total score students N : number of students

3. Drawing conclusion from tabulates result of the test given by comparing the means of pretest and post test.

3.8 Data Treatment

a. Normality Test

The researcher used normal test to treatment the data. This test was used to Measure whether the data are normally distributed or not. The criteria of normal distribution are:

Ho: The distribution of the data is normal Ha: The distribution of the data is not normal

The Hypothesis is accepted if the result of the normality test is higher than 0.05 (sig> α). In this case the researcher used the One Sample – Kolmogorov – Smirnov Test (SPSS 15) to test the normality test.

3.9 Hypothesis Testing

After collecting the data, the researcher recorded and analyzed them in order to find out whether there was an increasing in students’ ability in writing or not after the treatment.The researcher used Paired Sample T-test to know the level of significance of the treatment effect.

The formulation is:

� = � = �

�_(�獦2₋�₁₎

and

∑x2d = ∑d2–( �)

2

Md = mean from the differences pretest and posttest (posttest-pretest) Xd = deviation of each subject (d – md )

∑x2d = total of quadratic deviation N = subjects on sample

(Arikunto, 2010: 349-350) The criteria are:

Ho = There is no increase of students’ recount text writing by using Peer Correction.

(α> 0.05)

Ha = There is an increase of students’ recount text writing by using Peer Correction.

The criteria is Ha (alternative hypothesis) is accepted if alpha level is lower than 0.05(α < 0.05).

V. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS

This final chapter presents the conclusion of the research findings and suggestions for English teacher who want to try to use peer correction as the alternative technique to teach writing and for those who want to conduct similar research.

5.1 Conclusions

The purpose of this research is to find out whether there is significant increase of students’ ability in writing recount text after they are taught using Peer Correction. Based on the research, it was concluded that:

1. There is significant increase of students’ ability in writing recount text after being taught through peer correction. It can be seen that t-value (16.223) was higher than t-table (2.045). The students’ mean scores in pre test was 57.33 and the students’ mean scores in post test was 80.5. In which the students’ mean scores gain increased about 23.17.

2. Based on the treatments correction, there is an increase of students’ ability in writing of recount text from the aspect of writing.

a. Content

The mean of content aspect in pre test 13.16 and in the post test 18. The increased of content was 4.84.

b. Organization

The mean of content aspect in pre test 12.83 and in the post test 15.50. The increased of content was 2.67.

c. Vocabulary

The mean of content aspect in pre test 12.83 and in the post test 15.83. The increased of content was 3.

d. Grammar

The mean of content aspect in pre test 11.50 and in the post test 15. The increased of content was 3.5.

e. Mechanic

The mean of content aspect in pre test 7.33 and in the post test 16.16. The increased of content was 8.83.

5.2Suggestion

1. Suggestions for English Teachers

a. The English teachers are suggested to use peer correction for increasing the students’ ability in writing recount text since, through peer correction, the students become more active and autonomous in the learning process. Moreover, the application of peer correction in learning writing also broadens the students’ insight toward the learning process.

b. The English teachers who want to apply peer correction are suggested to focus on certain aspects of ability to increase. It is done in order to ease the students to do peer correction. If the teachers do not focus on certain aspects of ability,

the students will get confused since there are aspects of ability that they have to look for.

c. The English teachers who want to apply peer correction should be aware of the students’ failure in doing correction toward the ability that they find in their peer’s work. Therefore, the teachers should make sure that the students as soon as possible so that the teacher can make a revision toward the mistakes made by the students in doing correction and let the students know about it as soon as possible.

2. Suggestion for further researcher

a. In this research, the researcher conducted peer correction to help students In Senior High School, especially in recount text. Further researchers can conduct this technique on different level of students.

b. Further research can try to investigate whether peer correction strategy can be applicable with another kind of text.

REFERENCES

Arapoff, Nancy. 1975. Writing a Thinking Process. English Teaching Forum. Washington: University Press.

Arikunto, Suharsimi. 2010. Prosedur penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. Jakarta. Rineka Cipta.

Brown, H. Douglas. 1980. Principle of Language Learning and Teaching. Prentince Hall inc: New Jersey.

Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan. 2006. Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan. Jakarta: Depdikbud.

Derewianka, Beverly. 1990. Exploring How Texts Work. New South Wales. Primary English Teaching Association.

Edelstein, Michael E and Pival. 1998. The Writing Commitment. New York. Harcourt Broce Javanovich Publisher.

Ellis, Gail and Sinclair, Barbara. 1990. Learning to Learn English: Cambridge University Press.

Fatriana, N. 1996. A Comparative Study between Peer Correction and Self

Correction in Improving Students’ skill in Writing a Descriptive

Paragraph at the Second seven of SMUN 2 T. Karang. Paper

(Unpublished) B.Lampung: Lampung University.

Gower, D. and Philips, S. 1995. Walters: Teaching Practice Handbook. London: Macmillan.

Gunawan, A. 2010. Improving Students’ Ability in Writing Recount Text through Guided Questions at the First Year of SMA N 5 seputih Agung.Lampung University: Unpublished Script.

Hammond. E. R. 1983. Teaching Writing. New York: Mc. Graw-Hill Book Company.

Harmer, J. 1983. The Practice of English Language Teaching. New York: Longman Group Limited.

Harris, David P. 1979. Testing English as A Second Language. New York: Grow Hill Press.

Hatch, E and Farhady, Husein. 1982. Research Design and Statistic for Applied Linguistic. London: New Burry House, Inc.

Hughes, Arthur. 1989. Testing for Language Teachers. Cambridge: University of Cambridge Publisher.

Jacobs, Holly D., Deanna R. Wormuth, Hartfiel V. Fage and Jane B Hughey. 1981. Testing ESL Composition A Practical Approach. London: Newbury House Publisher, inc.

Jacobs, G.1989. Misscorrection in Peer Feedback in Writing Class: RELC Journal.

Ju, Yang Don. 2006. For The Effective Teaching of English Writing. Seoul: The College English Teachers Association of Korea.

Linderman, G Erika. 1982. What is Writing; a Rethorical for Writing Teachers. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Madsen, Harold. 1963. TESOL Technique and Procedures. Cambridge: Newbury House Publishers.

Putri, Annisa. 2012. The Influence of Peer Correction in Students’ Descriptive Text Writing at the First Year of SMK Negeri 2 Metro. Lampung University: Unpublished Script.

Raja, Patuan. 2004. Jurnal Pendidikan da Pembelajaran: Students’ Perception of the implementation of the Process Approach in the Teaching of

Writing.ISSN 1693-2463 Vol. 2, No. 1. B. Lampung: Lampung

University.

Raimes, Ann. 1983. Technique in Teaching Writing. New York. Oxford University press.

Scarle and A Szabo. 2000. Learner Autonomy. Ed Penny Ur. London: Cambridge University Press.

Siswanto, Joko. 2005. Let’s Talk VII. Bandung: Pakar Raya.

Smalley, R and Ruetten. 1986. Refining Composition Skills: Rhetoric and Grammar for ESL Students. New York: University of New Orleans.

Sugiyono. 2006. Statistika untuk Penelitian. Bandung: Afabeta.

Turmudi, Dedi. 2003. Improving Students’ Achievement in Past Form and Past Participle of Verb Through Peer Correction Technique at Class III IPA Madrasah Aliyah Al- Fatah 2002, Natar South Lampung.

Universitas Lampung. 2009. Pedoman Penulisan Karya Ilmiah. Universitas Lampung. Bandar Lampung: Lampung University.

Walz, C. Joel. 1982. Error Correction Techniques for the Foreign Language Classroom. Washington DC: Center For Applied Linguisrics.

http://recounttext.blogspot.com/2011/04/recount-text http://wikipedia.org/wiki/recounttext

V. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS

This final chapter presents the conclusion of the research findings and suggestions for English teacher who want to try to use peer correction as the alternative technique to teach writing and for those who want to conduct similar research.

5.1 Conclusions

The purpose of this research is to find out whether there is significant increase of students’ ability in writing recount text after they are taught using Peer Correction. Based on the research, it was concluded that:

1. There is significant increase of students’ ability in writing recount text after being taught through peer correction. It can be seen that t-value (16.223) was higher than t-table (2.045). The students’ mean scores in pre test was 57.33 and the students’ mean scores in post test was 80.5. In which the students’ mean scores gain increased about 23.17.

2. Based on the treatments correction, there is an increase of students’ ability in writing of recount text from the aspect of writing.

a. Content

The mean of content aspect in pre test 13.16 and in the post test 18. The increased of content was 4.84.

b. Organization

The mean of content aspect in pre test 12.83 and in the post test 15.50. The increased of content was 2.67.

c. Vocabulary

The mean of content aspect in pre test 12.83 and in the post test 15.83. The increased of content was 3.

d. Grammar

The mean of content aspect in pre test 11.50 and in the post test 15. The increased of content was 3.5.

e. Mechanic

The mean of content aspect in pre test 7.33 and in the post test 16.16. The increased of content was 8.83.

5.2Suggestion

1. Suggestions for English Teachers

a. The English teachers are suggested to use peer correction for increasing the students’ ability in writing recount text since, through peer correction, the students become more active and autonomous in the learning process. Moreover, the application of peer correction in learning writing also broadens the students’ insight toward the learning process.

b. The English teachers who want to apply peer correction are suggested to focus on certain aspects of ability to increase. It is done in order to ease the students to do peer correction. If the teachers do not focus on certain aspects of ability,

the students will get confused since there are aspects of ability that they have to look for.

c. The English teachers who want to apply peer correction should be aware of the students’ failure in doing correction toward the ability that they find in their peer’s work. Therefore, the teachers should make sure that the students as soon as possible so that the teacher can make a revision toward the mistakes made by the students in doing correction and let the students know about it as soon as possible.

2. Suggestion for further researcher

a. In this research, the researcher conducted peer correction to help students In Senior High School, especially in recount text. Further researchers can conduct this technique on different level of students.

b. Further research can try to investigate whether peer correction strategy can be applicable with another kind of text.

REFERENCES

Arapoff, Nancy. 1975. Writing a Thinking Process. English Teaching Forum. Washington: University Press.

Arikunto, Suharsimi. 2010. Prosedur penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. Jakarta. Rineka Cipta.

Brown, H. Douglas. 1980. Principle of Language Learning and Teaching. Prentince Hall inc: New Jersey.

Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan. 2006. Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan. Jakarta: Depdikbud.

Derewianka, Beverly. 1990. Exploring How Texts Work. New South Wales. Primary English Teaching Association.

Edelstein, Michael E and Pival. 1998. The Writing Commitment. New York. Harcourt Broce Javanovich Publisher.

Ellis, Gail and Sinclair, Barbara. 1990. Learning to Learn English: Cambridge University Press.

Fatriana, N. 1996. A Comparative Study between Peer Correction and Self

Correction in Improving Students’ skill in Writing a Descriptive Paragraph at the Second seven of SMUN 2 T. Karang. Paper (Unpublished) B.Lampung: Lampung University.

Gower, D. and Philips, S. 1995. Walters: Teaching Practice Handbook. London: Macmillan.

Gunawan, A. 2010. Improving Students’ Ability in Writing Recount Text through Guided Questions at the First Year of SMA N 5 seputih Agung.Lampung University: Unpublished Script.

Hammond. E. R. 1983. Teaching Writing. New York: Mc. Graw-Hill Book Company.

Harmer, J. 1983. The Practice of English Language Teaching. New York: Longman Group Limited.

Harris, David P. 1979. Testing English as A Second Language. New York: Grow Hill Press.

Hatch, E and Farhady, Husein. 1982. Research Design and Statistic for Applied Linguistic. London: New Burry House, Inc.

Hughes, Arthur. 1989. Testing for Language Teachers. Cambridge: University of Cambridge Publisher.

Jacobs, Holly D., Deanna R. Wormuth, Hartfiel V. Fage and Jane B Hughey. 1981. Testing ESL Composition A Practical Approach. London: Newbury House Publisher, inc.

Jacobs, G.1989. Misscorrection in Peer Feedback in Writing Class: RELC Journal.

Ju, Yang Don. 2006. For The Effective Teaching of English Writing. Seoul: The College English Teachers Association of Korea.

Linderman, G Erika. 1982. What is Writing; a Rethorical for Writing Teachers. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Madsen, Harold. 1963. TESOL Technique and Procedures. Cambridge: Newbury House Publishers.

Putri, Annisa. 2012. The Influence of Peer Correction in Students’ Descriptive Text Writing at the First Year of SMK Negeri 2 Metro. Lampung University: Unpublished Script.

Raja, Patuan. 2004. Jurnal Pendidikan da Pembelajaran: Students’ Perception of the implementation of the Process Approach in the Teaching of

Writing.ISSN 1693-2463 Vol. 2, No. 1. B. Lampung: Lampung University.

Raimes, Ann. 1983. Technique in Teaching Writing. New York. Oxford University press.

Scarle and A Szabo. 2000. Learner Autonomy. Ed Penny Ur. London: Cambridge University Press.

Siswanto, Joko. 2005. Let’s Talk VII. Bandung: Pakar Raya.

Smalley, R and Ruetten. 1986. Refining Composition Skills: Rhetoric and Grammar for ESL Students. New York: University of New Orleans.

Sugiyono. 2006. Statistika untuk Penelitian. Bandung: Afabeta.

Turmudi, Dedi. 2003. Improving Students’ Achievement in Past Form and Past Participle of Verb Through Peer Correction Technique at Class III IPA Madrasah Aliyah Al- Fatah 2002, Natar South Lampung.

Universitas Lampung. 2009. Pedoman Penulisan Karya Ilmiah. Universitas Lampung. Bandar Lampung: Lampung University.

Walz, C. Joel. 1982. Error Correction Techniques for the Foreign Language Classroom. Washington DC: Center For Applied Linguisrics.

http://recounttext.blogspot.com/2011/04/recount-text http://wikipedia.org/wiki/recounttext