THE EFFECT OF SKETCH AND LABEL ORGANIZER ON STUDENTS ABILITY IN WRITING DESCRIPTIVE TEXT.
THE EFFECT OF SKETCH AND LABEL ORGANIZER ON STUDENTS’
ABILITY IN WRITING DESCRIPTIVE TEXT
A THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
SarjanaPerdidikan
By:
NORITA PURBA
Registration Number: 2113121051
ENGLISH AND LITERATURE DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
2016
ABSTRACT
Purba, Norita. 2113121051. The Effect of Sketch and Label Organizer on
Students’ Ability in Writing Descriptive Text. A Thesis, Faculty of
Languages and Arts, State University of Medan. 2016.
This study deals with the effect of Sketch and Label Organizer on students’ ability
in writing descriptive text. The objective of this study was to find out if there was
a significant effect of Sketch and Label Organizer on students’ ability in writing
descriptive text. It was conducted by using experimental research. The population
of this study was tenth grade of SMA Negeri 11 Medan, which was consisted of
13 parallel classes. Two classes were taken randomly as the sample of the
research. The class X 1 was as experimental group and class X 8 was as control
group. The experimental group was taught by using Sketch and Label Organizer
strategy, otherwise control group was taught by using conventional strategy. The
instrument for collecting data was writing test. The data were analyzed by using ttest formula. The result shows that the value of t-observed is higher than the value
of t-table. (3.79>1.994 (α= 0.05)) with the degree of freedom (df) = 70. Therefore,
Sketch and Organizer significantly affects on the students’ ability in writing
descriptive text.
Keywords: Sketch and Label Organizer, Writing, Descriptive Text
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
First of all, the writer would like to express her deepest gratitude to Almighty
God, for His uncountable blessing given to the writer during her study and in
completing this thesis which entitled: The Effect of Sketch and Label Organizer on
Students’ Ability in Writing Descriptive Text. This thesis is aimed to fulfill one of
the requirements for the degree of Sarjana Pendidikan of the English Department,
Faculty of Languages and Arts, State University of Medan (UNIMED).
In completing this thesis, the writer realized that she faced some problems and
he had received the academic guidance, suggestions, and comments and got a lot of
assistance and moral support from people. Therefore, the writer expresses her
gratitude and special thanks to:
Prof. Dr. Syawal Gultom., M.Pd., as the Rector of State University of
Medan.
Dr. Isda Pramuniati, M.Hum., as the Dean of Faculty of Languages and
Arts, State University of Medan.
Prof. Dr. Hj. Sumarsih, M.Pd., as the Head of English Department
Dra. Meisuri, M.A., as the Secretary of English Department, and her
Reviewer and Examiner.
Nora Ronita Dewi, S.Pd., S.S., M.Hum., as the Head of English
Education Study Program
Prof. Dr. Berlin Sibarani, M.Pd., as her First Thesis Advisor
Dr. I Wy. Dirgeyasa, M. Hum., as her Second Thesis Advisor
Widya Andayani, S.S., M. Hum., as her Academic Advisor,
Rita Suswati, S. Pd, M.Hum., as her Reviewer and Examiner
All the Lecturers of English Department
i
Eis Sri Wahyuningsih, M.Pd., as the administration staff of English
Department
Drs. K. Lumbantoruan, M. Pd., as the Headmaster of SMA Negeri
Negeri 11 Medan
Dra. Ramewati Sibuea, the English Teacher of SMA Negeri 11 Medan
Her beloved parents, A. Purba and L. Simanullang, her wonderful
sisters, Astri Junita Purba, Evi Ritama Purba, Dian Sabam Purba,
Rorito Purba, Riris Santri Purba and Putri Dorintan Martalenta
Purba, for their endless loves and prayer that they have given to the
writer during the process of completing the thesis.
Her beloved sisters and brothers in Filadelfia Choir for every
unforgettable moment
The wonderful girls, Mey Three Purba, Jelita Sitorus, and Melita
Purba
Her friends in Reguler Dik B 2011, for their love and togetherness
throughout the four years;
The writer realizes that, this thesis still has the paucity, she warmly welcomes
any suggestions, comments, critics, and advices that will improve the quality of this
thesis. She hopes that this thesis would be useful for those who read and feel
interested in the field of this study.
Medan,
April 2016
The writer,
Norita Purba
Reg No. 2113121051
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .............................................................................
i
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................... iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................... iv
LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................... vii
LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................... vii
LIST OF APPENDIXES ............................................................................... viii
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION................................................................... 1
A. The Background of the Study .............................................. 1
B. The Problem of the Study .................................................... 6
C. The Objective of the Study .................................................. 6
D The Scope of the Study ......................................................... 6
E. The Significance of the Study ............................................. 6
CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE .............................................. 7
A. Theoretical Framework........................................................ 7
1. The Concept of Writing ................................................ 7
a. The Definition of Writing ........................................ 7
b. Qualities of A Good Writing ................................... 9
c. The Stages of Writing Process .................................. 10
d. Cognitive Process in Writing ................................... 11
e. Writing Assessment ................................................. 13
iv
2. Genre ............................................................................ 14
a. Descriptive Text ....................................................... 14
b. The Types of Descriptive Text ................................ 14
c. The Generic Structure of Descriptive Text .............. 15
d. The Grammatical Features of Descriptive Text
16
3. The Concept of Sketch and Label Organizer ................ 16
a. The Nature of Sketch and Label Organizer ............. 16
b. The Example of Sketch and Label Organizer ........... 17
c. Sketch and Label Organizer in Writing ….…… 18
B. The Relevant of the Study .................................................. 18
C. Conceptual Framework ....................................................... 19
D. Hypothesis .......................................................................... 21
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD ...................................................... 22
A. Research Design ................................................................ 22
B. Population and Sample ..................................................... 23
C. The Instrument of Collecting Data .................................... 23
D. The Procedures of Research ............................................. 24
E. Scoring the Test ................................................................ 26
F. The Validity, Reliability, Homogeneity and
Normality of the Test ............................................................ 28
H. Technique of Analyzing Data .......................................... 30
CHAPTER IV DATA AND DATA ANALYSIS ......................................... 32
A. Data Description ................................................................ 32
B. Data Analysis .................................................................... 35
v
C. Testing Hypothesis ........................................................... 39
C. Research Findings ............................................................. 39
E. Discussion ......................................................................... 40
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION ................................. 42
A. Conclusion......................................................................... 42
B. Suggestions ........................................................................ 42
REFERENCES ............................................................................................... 43
APPENDICES ................................................................................................ 45
vi
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1.1 The Students’ Score in Writing Descriptive Text
(Preliminary Observation) ............................................................................... 3
Table 3.1 Research Design ............................................................................... 23
Table 3.2 Scenario of Sketch and Label Organizer.......................................... 25
Table 3.3 Scenario of Conventional Strategy .................................................. 27
Table 3.4 Descriptive Writing Indicators ........................................................ 28
Table 3.5 The Coefficient of Reliability (r) ..................................................... 30
Table 4.1 Students’ Score in Pre-test ............................................................... 33
Table 4.2 Students’ Score in Post-test ............................................................. 34
Table 4.3 Homogeneity of the Data ................................................................. 36
Table 4.4 Normality of the Data ...................................................................... 37
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 2.1 The Example of Sketch and Label Organizer ................................. 17
Figure 4.1 Students’ Score in Pre-test .............................................................. 33
Figure 4.2 Students’ Score in Post-test ............................................................ 35
viii
LIST OF APPENDICES
Page
Appendix A The Pre-test and Post-test in Experimental and Control
Group……………………………………………………………. 45
Appendix B Students’ Score of Pre-test and Post-test of Experimental
Groups ………………………………………………………… 46
Appendix C Students’ Score of Pre-test and Post-test of Control groups........ 47
Appendix D The Calculation of Reliability of the Test ................................... 48
Appendix E Test for Distribution of Frequency in Experimental Group......... 50
Appendix F Test for Distribution of Frequency in Control Group .................. 53
Appendix G Test for Homogeneity of Variance of Pre-test in Experimental
and Control Groups ..................................................................... 56
Appendix H Testing Normality in Experimental Group .................................. 58
Appendix I Testing Normality in Control Group ............................................. 62
Appendix J The Calculation of t-test ............................................................... 66
Appendix K Table of Normality from 0 to Z ................................................... 69
Appendix L Table List of testing Lilliefors ..................................................... 70
Appendix M Percentage Points of the t Distribution ....................................... 71
Appendix N Lesson Plan .................................................................................. 72
Appendix O Students’ Writing ........................................................................ 85
ix
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. The Background of the Study
Writing is fundamental for human life. Writing is carried out through
everyday activities in ways writing diary, letter, report, shopping list, greeting
card, job application, and note reminder. People also write books, magazines,
newspapers, posters, advertisements, song lyrics, and poem. The activities above
show that people have used writing as a mean of communication to exchange
knowledge, opinion, threats, commands, and feelings.
Writing is another way to convey thoughts, feelings, or perceptions
besides speaking. Yet, writing and speaking are totally different in the time and
space, participants, the process, organization and language, sign and symbol, and
the product. Speaking is done directly thus when speakers are speaking; they have
to be able to pick the words to be used based on the participant. Since speaking is
done quite quick time, the errors made by speakers such as mispronounce and
grammar will be tolerated by listeners. In the other hand, writing tends to be
permanent, so the writers have to be able to pick up the words which can be
understood by readers. Moreover, the writers have to be able to use the simple yet
powerful sign and symbol, and fewer errors in their writing.
Moreover, writing is not as easy as speaking, it is a little tougher. The
speakers can just directly adjust the words choice or the way of speaking based on
the listener. Moreover, the errors happened during speaking will not cause the
1
2
fatal misunderstanding for both speakers and listeners since speakers can give
direct clarification and the listeners can either ask clarification. While in writing
the situation is totally different. Writing is not highly contextualized since the
possibility of meeting face to face between writers and readers is very seldom.
This situation makes writers have to be wise in choosing the words. They have to
make sure that their writing can be understood by the readers. Besides, writing
acquires the good planning on what the writers will write and how they will write
it. The style of the language which is expressed in the sentences defines the
success of the writing. Writing can be said successful if the readers grasp the same
meaning or ideas as what meant by the writers is. In order to make his writing
successful; the writers must be able to write clear sentences, which are not
ambiguous, by using the correct grammar and good cohesion and coherence.
The explanation above is the reason why writing is generally known as a
complex and difficult language skill. Even, writing is frequently stated as the
hardest from other language skills such as speaking, reading, and listening.
Whereas, writing is very important both in occupational purposes and academic
purposes.
In academic field, writing always exists across curriculum. Students are
required to be able to write some kinds of writing such as descriptive, narrative,
procedure, recount, and explanation. From those kinds of genre, descriptive is the
most common existing in curriculum. According to Educational Unit Curriculum
(KTSP), students in Junior High School and Senior High School are expected to
be able to write descriptive writing. But the fact students usually get low score in
3
writing descriptive text. Whereas, descriptive is the important text people use in
daily activities. Descriptive is a genre that illustrates or pictures object, place, and
person in order to have visual appearance of it.
Based on the writer’s preliminary observation in grade X of SMA Negeri
11 Medan, many students were usually less enthusiastic about a writing test.
When interviewed the students, most of them assume writing descriptive text as a
hard work. Indeed students got low score in writing descriptive. Below is the
score of class X-1.
Table 1.1
The Students’ Score in Writing Descriptive of Class X-1
(Preliminary Observation)
Score
Numbers of Students
Percentage
≥70
9
30
≤70
Means
51
21
70
Based on the writer observation, teacher taught writing by lecturing
without included a writing strategy. Lecturing is a teaching method where teacher
gives an oral presentation of facts or principles to learners and the class usually
being responsible for note taking, usually implies little or no class participation by
such means as questioning or discussion during the class period. Lecturing occurs
whenever a teacher is talking and students are listening.
Mostly writing is learnt, not taught. The teacher’s role is to be nondirective, facilitating, and providing writers with the space to make their own
meanings through an encouraging, positive and cooperative environment with
4
minimal interference to find their own voices to produce writing that is fresh and
spontaneous. Writing requires students to be actively in learning process. Students
need a strategy to help them in writing.
Sketch and Label Organizer is a visual representation of knowledge,
structures information by arranging aspects of a concept or topic through sketch
and label. This is an interesting strategy that makes students learn to write actively
since this strategy involves drawing and labeling. Moreover, the procedure of
applying Sketch and Label Organizer is simple. Students are expected to draw
simply and label the important parts of the sketch by ideas or key information.
This strategy is effective for writing because Sketch and Label Organizer provides
clear information about the topic, helps students to gather and organize the ideas
easily. It also helps students to record and remember some important ideas during
writing.
Sketch and Label Organizer is an effective strategy for writing, even for
other competences. This is proved by the result of some researches which have
been conducted in different skill in many countries. Tayib (2015) conducted a
research in Saudi Arabia by applying graphic organizer on university students’
writing ability. It was found that graphic organizer significantly impact on
students’ writing as well as on their attitudes towards writing. Previously, Zaini,
Mocthar, and Nawawi (2010) conducted a research in Malay to investigate the
effect of graphic organizer in students’ learning in school. He found that graphic
organizer had effect on the improvement of the students’ comprehension,
performance, and motivation in learning. Shoari and Farrokki (2014) also
5
conducted a research by applying graphic organizer to improve Iranian EFL
learners’ vocabulary learning. The result showed that Graphic Organizer were
indeed conducive to EFL learners’ vocabulary.
Another research also have been conducted by Oztruck (2012) in Turkey
to investigate the effectiveness of graphic organizer on students’ reading
comprehension and found that it helped the EFL learners in the comprehension of
reading materials in English.
By considering the description above, this study was aimed to applied
Sketch and Label Organizer on students’ ability in writing descriptive text.
B. The Problem of the Study
Based on the background of the study above, the problem of the study is
formulated as the following:
“Does Sketch and Label Organizer significantly affect on students’ ability
in descriptive text?”
C. The Objective of the Study
In the relation to the problem of the study, the objective of the study is to
find out the effect of Sketch and Label Organizer on students’ ability in writing
descriptive text for students in the tenth grade of SMA Negeri 11 Medan.
D. The Scope of the Study
This study basically limited to the students’ ability in writing descriptive
text, specifically for describing people by using Sketch and Label Organizer.
6
E. The Significance of the Study
The findings of this study were expected for:
1. Teachers who may apply this strategy as an alternative strategy in
improving the quality of teaching writing, especially for teaching writing
descriptive writing.
2. Other researchers who want to use this study as a reference for their
researches.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS
A. Conclusions
The result of calculation t-test shows that the score of t-observed (3.79) >
the score of t-table (1.994). It means that the alternative hypothesis (Ha) is
accepted. So, it is concluded that Sketch and Label Organizer significantly affects
the students’ ability in writing descriptive texts.
B. Suggestions
As the result of the study, it is suggested that:
1. The English teachers should use the strategy in their attempt to improve
students’ ability in writing descriptive text, especially for the students who
have difficulty to explore ideas and to organize the content in an orderly
manner.
2. Since this research is limited to the investigation of the Sketch and Label
Organizer on writing and how the Sketch and Label Organizer can be
developed is not known, it is suggested that a research should be done on
writing development.
42
43
REFERENCES
Ary, Donald, Jacobs, Lucy Cheser. & Razavieh, Asghar. 2002. Introduction to
Research in Education, Sixth Edition. New York: Wadsworth Group.
Ary, Donald, Jacobs, Lucy Cheser. & Razavieh, Asghar. 2010. Introduction to
Research in Education, Eighth Edition. New York: Wadsworth Group.
Best, J.W., & Kahn, J. V. 2006. Research in Education. Tenth Edition. Boston:
Pearson Education.
Brown, H. D. 2001. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to
Language Pedagogy. 2nd Ed. California: Longman.
Brown. H. D. 2004. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to
Language Pedagogy. 3rd Ed. California: Longman.
Carol, J.A, E. Wilson & G. Forlini. 2001. Writing and Grammar. New Jersey:
Prentice Hall.
Dirgeyasa, I Wayan.2014. Academic Writing: A Genre Based Perspective. Medan:
Unimed Press
Flower, Linda & Hayes, John R. 1981. A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing.
College Composition and Communication. Vol. 32, No. 4, pp 365-387
Halpern, D.F. 2004. A cognitive-Process Taxonomy for Sex Differences
Cognitive Abilities. Journal American Psychological Science. Vol. 13, No.
4, 2004.
Handini, Frida Dian & Saragih, Amrin. 2013. Improving the Students’
Achievement in Writing Descriptive Text. Register.
Harmer. J. 2003. The Practice of English Language Teaching. Cambridge:
Longman
Hyland, K. 2002. Teaching and Researching Writing. Harlow: Longman
Johnson, Keith. 2001. An Introduction to Foreign Language Learning and
Teaching. Harlow: Longman.
Kellog. R.T.2008. Training Writing Skills: A cognitive Developmental
Perspective. Journal of Writing Research, Vol 1, No 1, 2008
Knapp, Peter & Megan, Watkins. 2005. Genre, Text, Grammar: Technologies for
Teaching and Assessing. Sydney: UNSW Press.
44
Kothari, C.R. 2004. Research Methodology Methods and Technique. Second
revised Edition. New Delhi: New Age International.
Ozturk, Ozlem. 2012. The Effect of Graphic Organizer on Reading
Comprehention Achievement of EFL Learners. Pamukkale University
Journal of Education. Number 32 (II) 37 – 45
Richard-Amato & Patricia A. 2003. Making It Happen, (third edition). New York:
Pearson Education
Richards, Jack C & Renandya, Willy A. 2002. Methodology in Language
Teaching: An Anthology of Current Practice. Cambridge. Cambridge
University Press.
Roberts. Jane. 2004. 25 Prewriting Graphic Organizers and Planning Sheets.
New York. Scholastic Teaching Researching
Shoari, Elnaz & Farrokhi Farrahman. 2014. The Effect of Graphic Organizer
Strategy on Improving Iranian EFL Learners’ Vocabulary Learning. IJRLT.
I (3) 71-82.
Tayib, Abdul-Majeed. 2015. The Effect of Using Graphic Organizer on Writing.
International Journal of English Language Teaching. III(1) 11-31
Zaini, S.H., Mokhtar, S.Z. & Nawawi, M. 2010. The Effect of Graphic Organizer
on Students’ Learning in School. Malaysian Journal of Educational
Technology. Vol. 10 (1) 1-7.
ABILITY IN WRITING DESCRIPTIVE TEXT
A THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
SarjanaPerdidikan
By:
NORITA PURBA
Registration Number: 2113121051
ENGLISH AND LITERATURE DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
2016
ABSTRACT
Purba, Norita. 2113121051. The Effect of Sketch and Label Organizer on
Students’ Ability in Writing Descriptive Text. A Thesis, Faculty of
Languages and Arts, State University of Medan. 2016.
This study deals with the effect of Sketch and Label Organizer on students’ ability
in writing descriptive text. The objective of this study was to find out if there was
a significant effect of Sketch and Label Organizer on students’ ability in writing
descriptive text. It was conducted by using experimental research. The population
of this study was tenth grade of SMA Negeri 11 Medan, which was consisted of
13 parallel classes. Two classes were taken randomly as the sample of the
research. The class X 1 was as experimental group and class X 8 was as control
group. The experimental group was taught by using Sketch and Label Organizer
strategy, otherwise control group was taught by using conventional strategy. The
instrument for collecting data was writing test. The data were analyzed by using ttest formula. The result shows that the value of t-observed is higher than the value
of t-table. (3.79>1.994 (α= 0.05)) with the degree of freedom (df) = 70. Therefore,
Sketch and Organizer significantly affects on the students’ ability in writing
descriptive text.
Keywords: Sketch and Label Organizer, Writing, Descriptive Text
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
First of all, the writer would like to express her deepest gratitude to Almighty
God, for His uncountable blessing given to the writer during her study and in
completing this thesis which entitled: The Effect of Sketch and Label Organizer on
Students’ Ability in Writing Descriptive Text. This thesis is aimed to fulfill one of
the requirements for the degree of Sarjana Pendidikan of the English Department,
Faculty of Languages and Arts, State University of Medan (UNIMED).
In completing this thesis, the writer realized that she faced some problems and
he had received the academic guidance, suggestions, and comments and got a lot of
assistance and moral support from people. Therefore, the writer expresses her
gratitude and special thanks to:
Prof. Dr. Syawal Gultom., M.Pd., as the Rector of State University of
Medan.
Dr. Isda Pramuniati, M.Hum., as the Dean of Faculty of Languages and
Arts, State University of Medan.
Prof. Dr. Hj. Sumarsih, M.Pd., as the Head of English Department
Dra. Meisuri, M.A., as the Secretary of English Department, and her
Reviewer and Examiner.
Nora Ronita Dewi, S.Pd., S.S., M.Hum., as the Head of English
Education Study Program
Prof. Dr. Berlin Sibarani, M.Pd., as her First Thesis Advisor
Dr. I Wy. Dirgeyasa, M. Hum., as her Second Thesis Advisor
Widya Andayani, S.S., M. Hum., as her Academic Advisor,
Rita Suswati, S. Pd, M.Hum., as her Reviewer and Examiner
All the Lecturers of English Department
i
Eis Sri Wahyuningsih, M.Pd., as the administration staff of English
Department
Drs. K. Lumbantoruan, M. Pd., as the Headmaster of SMA Negeri
Negeri 11 Medan
Dra. Ramewati Sibuea, the English Teacher of SMA Negeri 11 Medan
Her beloved parents, A. Purba and L. Simanullang, her wonderful
sisters, Astri Junita Purba, Evi Ritama Purba, Dian Sabam Purba,
Rorito Purba, Riris Santri Purba and Putri Dorintan Martalenta
Purba, for their endless loves and prayer that they have given to the
writer during the process of completing the thesis.
Her beloved sisters and brothers in Filadelfia Choir for every
unforgettable moment
The wonderful girls, Mey Three Purba, Jelita Sitorus, and Melita
Purba
Her friends in Reguler Dik B 2011, for their love and togetherness
throughout the four years;
The writer realizes that, this thesis still has the paucity, she warmly welcomes
any suggestions, comments, critics, and advices that will improve the quality of this
thesis. She hopes that this thesis would be useful for those who read and feel
interested in the field of this study.
Medan,
April 2016
The writer,
Norita Purba
Reg No. 2113121051
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .............................................................................
i
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................... iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................... iv
LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................... vii
LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................... vii
LIST OF APPENDIXES ............................................................................... viii
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION................................................................... 1
A. The Background of the Study .............................................. 1
B. The Problem of the Study .................................................... 6
C. The Objective of the Study .................................................. 6
D The Scope of the Study ......................................................... 6
E. The Significance of the Study ............................................. 6
CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE .............................................. 7
A. Theoretical Framework........................................................ 7
1. The Concept of Writing ................................................ 7
a. The Definition of Writing ........................................ 7
b. Qualities of A Good Writing ................................... 9
c. The Stages of Writing Process .................................. 10
d. Cognitive Process in Writing ................................... 11
e. Writing Assessment ................................................. 13
iv
2. Genre ............................................................................ 14
a. Descriptive Text ....................................................... 14
b. The Types of Descriptive Text ................................ 14
c. The Generic Structure of Descriptive Text .............. 15
d. The Grammatical Features of Descriptive Text
16
3. The Concept of Sketch and Label Organizer ................ 16
a. The Nature of Sketch and Label Organizer ............. 16
b. The Example of Sketch and Label Organizer ........... 17
c. Sketch and Label Organizer in Writing ….…… 18
B. The Relevant of the Study .................................................. 18
C. Conceptual Framework ....................................................... 19
D. Hypothesis .......................................................................... 21
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD ...................................................... 22
A. Research Design ................................................................ 22
B. Population and Sample ..................................................... 23
C. The Instrument of Collecting Data .................................... 23
D. The Procedures of Research ............................................. 24
E. Scoring the Test ................................................................ 26
F. The Validity, Reliability, Homogeneity and
Normality of the Test ............................................................ 28
H. Technique of Analyzing Data .......................................... 30
CHAPTER IV DATA AND DATA ANALYSIS ......................................... 32
A. Data Description ................................................................ 32
B. Data Analysis .................................................................... 35
v
C. Testing Hypothesis ........................................................... 39
C. Research Findings ............................................................. 39
E. Discussion ......................................................................... 40
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION ................................. 42
A. Conclusion......................................................................... 42
B. Suggestions ........................................................................ 42
REFERENCES ............................................................................................... 43
APPENDICES ................................................................................................ 45
vi
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1.1 The Students’ Score in Writing Descriptive Text
(Preliminary Observation) ............................................................................... 3
Table 3.1 Research Design ............................................................................... 23
Table 3.2 Scenario of Sketch and Label Organizer.......................................... 25
Table 3.3 Scenario of Conventional Strategy .................................................. 27
Table 3.4 Descriptive Writing Indicators ........................................................ 28
Table 3.5 The Coefficient of Reliability (r) ..................................................... 30
Table 4.1 Students’ Score in Pre-test ............................................................... 33
Table 4.2 Students’ Score in Post-test ............................................................. 34
Table 4.3 Homogeneity of the Data ................................................................. 36
Table 4.4 Normality of the Data ...................................................................... 37
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 2.1 The Example of Sketch and Label Organizer ................................. 17
Figure 4.1 Students’ Score in Pre-test .............................................................. 33
Figure 4.2 Students’ Score in Post-test ............................................................ 35
viii
LIST OF APPENDICES
Page
Appendix A The Pre-test and Post-test in Experimental and Control
Group……………………………………………………………. 45
Appendix B Students’ Score of Pre-test and Post-test of Experimental
Groups ………………………………………………………… 46
Appendix C Students’ Score of Pre-test and Post-test of Control groups........ 47
Appendix D The Calculation of Reliability of the Test ................................... 48
Appendix E Test for Distribution of Frequency in Experimental Group......... 50
Appendix F Test for Distribution of Frequency in Control Group .................. 53
Appendix G Test for Homogeneity of Variance of Pre-test in Experimental
and Control Groups ..................................................................... 56
Appendix H Testing Normality in Experimental Group .................................. 58
Appendix I Testing Normality in Control Group ............................................. 62
Appendix J The Calculation of t-test ............................................................... 66
Appendix K Table of Normality from 0 to Z ................................................... 69
Appendix L Table List of testing Lilliefors ..................................................... 70
Appendix M Percentage Points of the t Distribution ....................................... 71
Appendix N Lesson Plan .................................................................................. 72
Appendix O Students’ Writing ........................................................................ 85
ix
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. The Background of the Study
Writing is fundamental for human life. Writing is carried out through
everyday activities in ways writing diary, letter, report, shopping list, greeting
card, job application, and note reminder. People also write books, magazines,
newspapers, posters, advertisements, song lyrics, and poem. The activities above
show that people have used writing as a mean of communication to exchange
knowledge, opinion, threats, commands, and feelings.
Writing is another way to convey thoughts, feelings, or perceptions
besides speaking. Yet, writing and speaking are totally different in the time and
space, participants, the process, organization and language, sign and symbol, and
the product. Speaking is done directly thus when speakers are speaking; they have
to be able to pick the words to be used based on the participant. Since speaking is
done quite quick time, the errors made by speakers such as mispronounce and
grammar will be tolerated by listeners. In the other hand, writing tends to be
permanent, so the writers have to be able to pick up the words which can be
understood by readers. Moreover, the writers have to be able to use the simple yet
powerful sign and symbol, and fewer errors in their writing.
Moreover, writing is not as easy as speaking, it is a little tougher. The
speakers can just directly adjust the words choice or the way of speaking based on
the listener. Moreover, the errors happened during speaking will not cause the
1
2
fatal misunderstanding for both speakers and listeners since speakers can give
direct clarification and the listeners can either ask clarification. While in writing
the situation is totally different. Writing is not highly contextualized since the
possibility of meeting face to face between writers and readers is very seldom.
This situation makes writers have to be wise in choosing the words. They have to
make sure that their writing can be understood by the readers. Besides, writing
acquires the good planning on what the writers will write and how they will write
it. The style of the language which is expressed in the sentences defines the
success of the writing. Writing can be said successful if the readers grasp the same
meaning or ideas as what meant by the writers is. In order to make his writing
successful; the writers must be able to write clear sentences, which are not
ambiguous, by using the correct grammar and good cohesion and coherence.
The explanation above is the reason why writing is generally known as a
complex and difficult language skill. Even, writing is frequently stated as the
hardest from other language skills such as speaking, reading, and listening.
Whereas, writing is very important both in occupational purposes and academic
purposes.
In academic field, writing always exists across curriculum. Students are
required to be able to write some kinds of writing such as descriptive, narrative,
procedure, recount, and explanation. From those kinds of genre, descriptive is the
most common existing in curriculum. According to Educational Unit Curriculum
(KTSP), students in Junior High School and Senior High School are expected to
be able to write descriptive writing. But the fact students usually get low score in
3
writing descriptive text. Whereas, descriptive is the important text people use in
daily activities. Descriptive is a genre that illustrates or pictures object, place, and
person in order to have visual appearance of it.
Based on the writer’s preliminary observation in grade X of SMA Negeri
11 Medan, many students were usually less enthusiastic about a writing test.
When interviewed the students, most of them assume writing descriptive text as a
hard work. Indeed students got low score in writing descriptive. Below is the
score of class X-1.
Table 1.1
The Students’ Score in Writing Descriptive of Class X-1
(Preliminary Observation)
Score
Numbers of Students
Percentage
≥70
9
30
≤70
Means
51
21
70
Based on the writer observation, teacher taught writing by lecturing
without included a writing strategy. Lecturing is a teaching method where teacher
gives an oral presentation of facts or principles to learners and the class usually
being responsible for note taking, usually implies little or no class participation by
such means as questioning or discussion during the class period. Lecturing occurs
whenever a teacher is talking and students are listening.
Mostly writing is learnt, not taught. The teacher’s role is to be nondirective, facilitating, and providing writers with the space to make their own
meanings through an encouraging, positive and cooperative environment with
4
minimal interference to find their own voices to produce writing that is fresh and
spontaneous. Writing requires students to be actively in learning process. Students
need a strategy to help them in writing.
Sketch and Label Organizer is a visual representation of knowledge,
structures information by arranging aspects of a concept or topic through sketch
and label. This is an interesting strategy that makes students learn to write actively
since this strategy involves drawing and labeling. Moreover, the procedure of
applying Sketch and Label Organizer is simple. Students are expected to draw
simply and label the important parts of the sketch by ideas or key information.
This strategy is effective for writing because Sketch and Label Organizer provides
clear information about the topic, helps students to gather and organize the ideas
easily. It also helps students to record and remember some important ideas during
writing.
Sketch and Label Organizer is an effective strategy for writing, even for
other competences. This is proved by the result of some researches which have
been conducted in different skill in many countries. Tayib (2015) conducted a
research in Saudi Arabia by applying graphic organizer on university students’
writing ability. It was found that graphic organizer significantly impact on
students’ writing as well as on their attitudes towards writing. Previously, Zaini,
Mocthar, and Nawawi (2010) conducted a research in Malay to investigate the
effect of graphic organizer in students’ learning in school. He found that graphic
organizer had effect on the improvement of the students’ comprehension,
performance, and motivation in learning. Shoari and Farrokki (2014) also
5
conducted a research by applying graphic organizer to improve Iranian EFL
learners’ vocabulary learning. The result showed that Graphic Organizer were
indeed conducive to EFL learners’ vocabulary.
Another research also have been conducted by Oztruck (2012) in Turkey
to investigate the effectiveness of graphic organizer on students’ reading
comprehension and found that it helped the EFL learners in the comprehension of
reading materials in English.
By considering the description above, this study was aimed to applied
Sketch and Label Organizer on students’ ability in writing descriptive text.
B. The Problem of the Study
Based on the background of the study above, the problem of the study is
formulated as the following:
“Does Sketch and Label Organizer significantly affect on students’ ability
in descriptive text?”
C. The Objective of the Study
In the relation to the problem of the study, the objective of the study is to
find out the effect of Sketch and Label Organizer on students’ ability in writing
descriptive text for students in the tenth grade of SMA Negeri 11 Medan.
D. The Scope of the Study
This study basically limited to the students’ ability in writing descriptive
text, specifically for describing people by using Sketch and Label Organizer.
6
E. The Significance of the Study
The findings of this study were expected for:
1. Teachers who may apply this strategy as an alternative strategy in
improving the quality of teaching writing, especially for teaching writing
descriptive writing.
2. Other researchers who want to use this study as a reference for their
researches.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS
A. Conclusions
The result of calculation t-test shows that the score of t-observed (3.79) >
the score of t-table (1.994). It means that the alternative hypothesis (Ha) is
accepted. So, it is concluded that Sketch and Label Organizer significantly affects
the students’ ability in writing descriptive texts.
B. Suggestions
As the result of the study, it is suggested that:
1. The English teachers should use the strategy in their attempt to improve
students’ ability in writing descriptive text, especially for the students who
have difficulty to explore ideas and to organize the content in an orderly
manner.
2. Since this research is limited to the investigation of the Sketch and Label
Organizer on writing and how the Sketch and Label Organizer can be
developed is not known, it is suggested that a research should be done on
writing development.
42
43
REFERENCES
Ary, Donald, Jacobs, Lucy Cheser. & Razavieh, Asghar. 2002. Introduction to
Research in Education, Sixth Edition. New York: Wadsworth Group.
Ary, Donald, Jacobs, Lucy Cheser. & Razavieh, Asghar. 2010. Introduction to
Research in Education, Eighth Edition. New York: Wadsworth Group.
Best, J.W., & Kahn, J. V. 2006. Research in Education. Tenth Edition. Boston:
Pearson Education.
Brown, H. D. 2001. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to
Language Pedagogy. 2nd Ed. California: Longman.
Brown. H. D. 2004. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to
Language Pedagogy. 3rd Ed. California: Longman.
Carol, J.A, E. Wilson & G. Forlini. 2001. Writing and Grammar. New Jersey:
Prentice Hall.
Dirgeyasa, I Wayan.2014. Academic Writing: A Genre Based Perspective. Medan:
Unimed Press
Flower, Linda & Hayes, John R. 1981. A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing.
College Composition and Communication. Vol. 32, No. 4, pp 365-387
Halpern, D.F. 2004. A cognitive-Process Taxonomy for Sex Differences
Cognitive Abilities. Journal American Psychological Science. Vol. 13, No.
4, 2004.
Handini, Frida Dian & Saragih, Amrin. 2013. Improving the Students’
Achievement in Writing Descriptive Text. Register.
Harmer. J. 2003. The Practice of English Language Teaching. Cambridge:
Longman
Hyland, K. 2002. Teaching and Researching Writing. Harlow: Longman
Johnson, Keith. 2001. An Introduction to Foreign Language Learning and
Teaching. Harlow: Longman.
Kellog. R.T.2008. Training Writing Skills: A cognitive Developmental
Perspective. Journal of Writing Research, Vol 1, No 1, 2008
Knapp, Peter & Megan, Watkins. 2005. Genre, Text, Grammar: Technologies for
Teaching and Assessing. Sydney: UNSW Press.
44
Kothari, C.R. 2004. Research Methodology Methods and Technique. Second
revised Edition. New Delhi: New Age International.
Ozturk, Ozlem. 2012. The Effect of Graphic Organizer on Reading
Comprehention Achievement of EFL Learners. Pamukkale University
Journal of Education. Number 32 (II) 37 – 45
Richard-Amato & Patricia A. 2003. Making It Happen, (third edition). New York:
Pearson Education
Richards, Jack C & Renandya, Willy A. 2002. Methodology in Language
Teaching: An Anthology of Current Practice. Cambridge. Cambridge
University Press.
Roberts. Jane. 2004. 25 Prewriting Graphic Organizers and Planning Sheets.
New York. Scholastic Teaching Researching
Shoari, Elnaz & Farrokhi Farrahman. 2014. The Effect of Graphic Organizer
Strategy on Improving Iranian EFL Learners’ Vocabulary Learning. IJRLT.
I (3) 71-82.
Tayib, Abdul-Majeed. 2015. The Effect of Using Graphic Organizer on Writing.
International Journal of English Language Teaching. III(1) 11-31
Zaini, S.H., Mokhtar, S.Z. & Nawawi, M. 2010. The Effect of Graphic Organizer
on Students’ Learning in School. Malaysian Journal of Educational
Technology. Vol. 10 (1) 1-7.