42
Table 4.1. The Results of Students’ Narrative Writing Skill continued
SN NARRATIVE
WRITING TASK 1 NARRATIVE
WRITING TASK 2 NARRATIVE
WRITING TASK 3 C
O L
M S
C O
L M
S C
O L
M S
21 21 14 19 5
73.75 -
- -
- 17
11 13
4 56.25
22 21 12 15 3
63.75 -
- -
- 19
10 11
4 55
23 22 13 19 4
72.5 24 17 18
4 78.75
- -
- -
24 22 15 17 3
71.25 27 18 19 3
83.75 29 19
22 3
92.5
25 25 18 22 3
85 24 19 18
4 81.25 27
19 23
5 92.5
26 26 18 23 5
90 21 14 24
5 80
28 19
24 5
95
27 24 15 19 5
78.75 22 13 21 5
76.25 28 18
24 5
93.75
28 14 9
10 2
43.75 13 7
8 2
37.5 -
- -
- 29 24 17 23
3 83.75
- -
- -
22 15
18 3
72.5
30 13 7
10 4
42.5 -
- -
- 22
10 18
3 66.25
31 25 17 17 3
77.5
26 18 19 3
82.5
24 16
21 4
81.25
32 22 15 20 4
76.25 23 16 20 4
78.75 25 17 19 3 80
33 25 16 18 2
76.25 25 17 18
2
77.5
22 15
20 2
73.75
34 16 8
10 2
45 -
- -
- 16
8 12
2 47.5
35 17 10 18 5
62.5
23 14 19 4
75
19 13
21 5
72.5
Notes:
SN : Student Number
C : Content
O : Organization
L : Language Use
M : Mechanics
S : Scores
Table 4.1 shows the whole three meetings of students’ narrative writing tasks in one cycle. From 35 students, there were 20 students who followed the
whole three meetings and finished the narrative writing tasks completely. 15 students did not complete the whole tasks. In this case, this research focused on
those 20 students see Table 4.2 on the next page as participants of this research since they completed the whole tasks.
43
Table 4.2. Students who Finished the Whole Narrative Writing Tasks
SN NARRATIVE
WRITING TASK 1 NARRATIVE
WRITING TASK 2 NARRATIVE
WRITING TASK 3 C
O L
M S
C O
L M
S C
O L
M S
1 22 13 12 2
61,25 24 15 18 4
76.25 24 17
21 4
82,5 2 24 17 21
5 83,75 26 18 20
5 86.25 26
19 21
5 88,75
3 22 17 22 4
81,25 24 15 23 4
82.5 22
16 18
4 75
5 24 13 18 5
75 25 15 17
5 77.5
27 18
22 5
90
7 24 17 23 5
86,25 26 18 21 5
87.5 29
20 24
5 97,5
10 23 17 18 4
77,5 25 15 21
5 82.5
27 18
25 5
93,75 11 24 17 22
3 82,5
26 18 22 4
87.5 27
19 21
5 90
13 22 14 21 5
77,5 27 18 24
5 92.5
28 19
23 5
93,75 15 22 14 18
4 72,5
22 17 17 3
73.75 25 18
21 2
82,5 16 22 15 22
4 78,75 22 14 21
4 76.25 26
18 21
4 86,25
18 23 15 20 4
77,5 25 18 17
4
80
27 19
21 3
87,5 20 19 12 22
5 72,5
24 17 22 5
85 27
19 22
5 91,25
24 22 15 17 3
71,25 27 18 19
3
83.75 29
19 23
3
92,5 25 25 18 22
3 85
24 19 18 4
81.25 27 19
23 5
92,5 26 26 18 23
5
90
21 14 24 5
80
28 19
24 5
95
27 24 15 19 5
78,75 22 13 21 5
76.25 28 18
24 5
93,75 31 25 17 17
3
77,75 26 18 19
3
82.5
24 16
21 4
81,25 32 22 15 20
4 76,25 23 16 20
4 78.75 25
17 19
3 80
33 25 16 18 2
76,25 25 17 18
2
77.5
22 15
20 2
73,75 35 17 10 18
5 62,5
23 14 19 4
75 19
13 21
5 72,5
Notes:
SN : Student Number
C : Content
O : Organization
L : Language Use
M : Mechanics
S : Scores
After observing 20 students’ narrative writing tasks, the improvement of
the students’ narrative writing tasks were seen in the S column. The scores were achieved by the total scores of four writing aspects in terms of content,
44 organization, language use and mechanics. Those four writing aspects were taken
from Composition Profile of Writing Scoring Rubric by Jacobs et al 1981 as cited in Weigle 2002, p. 116.
There were five aspects of writing rubric assessment written by Jacobs et al 1981 as cited in Weigle 2002, p. 116. There were content, organization,
language use, vocabulary and mechanics. Besides, four aspects were focused by eliminating the vocabulary aspect to assess those 20 students. Those students were
helped through the list of words in the worksheet. They were allowed to see the list of words during the narrative writing activities in class.
From those 20 students, there were 12 students whose narrative writing improved. There were only 8 students whose narrative writing skill did not
improve. From those 12 students, there were 10 students whose narrative writing skill improved in each aspect of writing. Those 10 students were taken as
examples to discuss their improvements of narrative writing skill in terms of content, organization, language use and mechanics. Those 10 students were
divided into six different parts. Those s
ix different parts of students’ narrative writing skill improvements were completed with the pictures screenshots of digital storytelling video and
students’ handwriting. Those screenshots of pictures were shown from the first narrative writing task to the third narrative writing task. They were compared in
order to analyze the narrative writing skill improvements. In addition, the research results and discussion were also provided bellow each screenshot. They were
described in the next page. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
