THE EFFECT OF GROUP MENTORING TECHNIQUE ON STUDENTS ACHIEVEMENT IN WRITING HORTATORY EXPOSITION.
THE EFFECT OF GROUP MENTORING TECHNIQUE
ON STUDENTS’ ACHIEVEMENT IN WRITING
HORTATORY EXPOSITION
A THESIS
Submitted to English Department, Faculty of Language and Arts
State University of Medan, in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the
Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan
By:
AMINAH ARI FADHILA
Registration Number: 2101121001
ENGLISH DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
2014
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First and foremost, the writer would like to express thanks to Allah SWT, the
Almighty God for Blessing, Health, Protection, knowledge and opportunity that at
last she is able to complete this thesis entitled “The Effect of Group Mentoring
Technique on Students’ Achievement in Writing Hortatory Exposition” as one of
requirement for the degree of Sarjana Pendidikan (S1) at English Department,
Faculty of Languages and Arts, State University of Medan.
This thesis could have not been accomplished without the guidance, helping,
suggestion, advice, motivation and encouragement from people, for which the
writer would like to express her extremely grateful which directed to:
Prof. Dr. Ibnu Hajar Damanik, M.Si, the Rector of State University of
Medan.
Dr. Isda Pramuniati, M.Hum, the Dean of Languages and Arts Faculty.
Prof. Dr. Hj. Sumarsih, M.Pd, the Head of English Department.
Rika, S.Pd, M.Hum as the Secretary of English Department.
Dra. Masitowarni Siregar, M.Ed, as the Head of English Education
Study Program.
Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning, M.Pd, as her Thesis Consultant.
Dra. Tjut Ernidawati, M.Pd as her Academic Consultant and her
Reviewer, Dr. Anni Holila Pulungan, M.Hum and Dra. Sri Juriati
Ownie, M.A, as her Reviewers.
Herlinda, S.Pd, the headmaster of SMA Negeri 6 Medan.
Ramli Harahap, S.H and Nilawaty, S.Ag, as her beloved parents,
Gufranul Fikry Harahap as her beloved brother, Sufriadi, as her
beloved late father, H. Syamsudin, as her beloved late grandfather, Hj.
Kominah Sinaga, as her beloved grandmother, Suriawaty, S.Pd, as her
beloved auntie, Supriatno S.Pd, Serka Bambang Muliadi, and Effendi
as her beloved uncles, Meidian Safriani and Assyifa Aulia Riatno as her
beloved cousins, and all member of Syamsudin’s big family for their
eternal material and moral supports, care, prayers, laughter, smiles,
guidance, advices, best moments and love during the writers’ life.
Eomma a.k.a Christine Helena Natalia, S.Pd, as her best friend, sister,
and partner in crime, for the laughter, smiles, supports, ideas, best
moments that have been shared with the writer during the academic study
in Unimed.
Bang Jali a.k.a Mentari Tawarniate, as her best partner in crime, Mbak
Shofi a.k.a Shofiyah S.Pd, Sheildung a.k.a Ervi Luthfi Sheila Wani
Lubis, S.Pd, Ika Tonenk a.k.a Ika Ulansari, S.Pd, Imik a.k.a Ilmi
Fadhilah Rizki, S.Pd, Dayan a.k.a Dianty Vina Warni Saragih, as her
ii
beloved little family in boarding home, for the laughter, best moments,
smiles, ideas, opinions, best sharing they shared with the writer.
Mahmud Layan Hutasuhut, S.Pd, M.Hum, and Zuhari, S.T, as her
mood boosters during the academic study in Unimed.
Arindawati Sipahutar, Ayu Widyaningtyas, Batsyeba Silaen, Christin
Hakim Pasaribu, Dessy Sari Natalina Haloho, Deby Arifsyah Putra,
Elnoviamy, Fathur Rizqi Arifiani, S.Pd, Harnoi Asrin Lumban Gaol,
S.Pd, Magdalena Simanjuntak, and all members of Reguler C 2010 as
her best classmates, for all best memories, laughter, smiles, fights, debates,
teamwork, and moments they give and share with the writer during the
four years academic study in Unimed.
Ekky a.k.a Muhammad Rizky Ridha, Risqa a.k.a Risqa Indina, Icha
ak.a. Icha Ramadhani Butarbutar as her best partners during the
fighting time for the thesis.
All members of VII-1, VII-2, VII-3, X-1, X-3, and all students of SMP
Negeri 6 Kisaran, for the best moments, laughter, stories, memories,
supports, prayers, and love they have been always giving to the writers
since PPL time till now.
Nora Ronita Dewi, S.Pd, M.Hum, Marisi Debora, S.Pd, M.Hum, and
Isli Iriani Pane, S.Pd, M.Hum, as her favorite lecturers, for the
inspirations and spirits they give to the writer, and also Pak Hendra, Bu
Endah, Bu Eis, and Pak Pantas for their helps in arranging all documents
for the study.
The last, but not the least, the writer would like to address a huge gratitude
to Bapak Gubernur a.k.a Fadlan Prayitno, as her most flexible partner,
her mood booster, her stabilizer, her energizer, her spirit charger, her best
friend, greatest brother, third father, worst enemy, and best life
companion, for the supports, advices, laughter, smiles, long-night-talks,
ideas, opinions, attention, prayers, knowledge, the teaching of life and
many other things, and for always being there for the writer whenever she
needs.
Medan,
Agustus 2014
The writer
Aminah Ari Fadhila
NIM. 2101121001
iii
ABSTRACT
Ari Fadhila, Aminah. NIM: 210112001. The Effect Of Group Mentoring
Technique on Students’ Achievement in Writing Hortatory Exposition. A
Thesis. Faculty of Languages and Arts (FBS), Unimed (State University of
Medan), 2014.
This study aims to discover the effect of applying Group Mentoring Technique on
Student’s Achievement in writing Hortatory Exposition. It was conducted by
using experimental research design. This population was the 175 grade XI
students of SMA Negeri 6 Medan. The sample of the research was two classes
divided into two groups, experimental and control group which were chosen by
using random sampling technique. The Grade XI IPA 3 as Experimental Group
was taught by using Group Mentoring Technique and grade XI IPA 1 as control
group was taught by using Lecturing Method. The instrument used to collect the
data was by asking the students to write a Hortatory Exposition. Based on the
result of the data analysis, it was concluded that using Group Mentoring
Technique significantly affect the student’s ability in writing hortatory exposition
(t-calculated > t-table, p=0.05). The using Group Mentoring Technique made the
students write hortatory exposition correctly than by using Lecturing Method. The
calculation of t-test is 2.07 > 1.99 with df 68 and the level of significance 0.05. It
means that the using Group Mentoring Technique has significant effect on writing
hortatory exposition.
Keywords: Group Mentoring Technique, Students’ Achievement, Hortatory
Exposition
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
TABLE OF CONTENTS..............................................................................iv
LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................vi
LIST OF APPENDICES ............................................................................. vii
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION.................................................................. 1
A. The Background of the Study .............................................................. 1
B. The Problem of the Study .................................................................... 5
C. The Objective of the Study .................................................................. 5
D. The Scope of the Study ....................................................................... 5
E. The Significance of the Study ............................................................. 6
CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE ............................................. 7
A. Theoretical Framework ....................................................................... 7
1. Students’ Achievement in Writing ................................................ 7
2. Writing ......................................................................................... 9
a. Definition of Writing ............................................................. 9
b. Writing Process ..................................................................... 10
c. Purposes of Writing ............................................................. 11
3. Genre ............................................................................................ 12
a. Hortatory Exposition ............................................................. 13
b. Assessment of Hortatory Exposition ...................................... 16
4. Cooperative Learning ................................................................... 17
5. Group Mentoring Technique ........................................................ 20
a. Advantages of Applying Group Mentoring Technique ........ 21
b. Teaching Process .................................................................... 24
6. Lecture Method ............................................................................. 25
a. Advantages and Disadvantages of Teacher Mentoring
Technique .............................................................................. 25
b. Teaching Process ................................................................... 26
7. Relevant Studies ............................................................................ 27
B. Conceptual Framework ....................................................................... 28
C. Hypothesis ........................................................................................... 30
CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ..................................... 32
A. Research Design .................................................................................. 32
B. Population and Sample ........................................................................ 33
1. Population ..................................................................................... 33
iv
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
2. Sample .......................................................................................... 33
3. Source of the Data ........................................................................ 33
The Instrument of Collecting Data ...................................................... 34
The Procedure Of Test ........................................................................ 34
1. Pre-test .......................................................................................... 35
2. Teaching Process .......................................................................... 35
3. Post-test ........................................................................................ 44
Assessment and Scoring of Writing .................................................... 45
The Validity and Reliability of The Test ............................................ 46
1. Validity of the Test ....................................................................... 46
2. Reliability of the Test .................................................................... 46
The Technique of Analyzing Data ...................................................... 47
The Statistical Hypothesis .................................................................... 48
CHAPTER IV. THE DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION ................. 49
A. The Data Analysis ............................................................................... 49
B. The Reliability of the Test .................................................................... 50
C. Testing Hypothesis ............................................................................... 50
D. The Discussion ..................................................................................... 51
CHAPTER V. THE DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION .................. 53
A. Conclusion ........................................................................................... 53
B. Suggestion ............................................................................................ 53
REFERENCES ............................................................................................... 55
APPENDIX ..................................................................................................... 58
v
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A.
Appendix B.
Appendix C.
Appendix D.
Appendix E.
Appendix F.
Appendix G.
Appendix H.
Appendix I.
Appendix J.
Appendix K.
Page
Assessment of Writing ........................................................... 58
Lesson Plan 1 for Experimental Class .................................... 60
Lesson Plan 2 for Experimental Class .................................... 65
Lesson Plan 1 for Control Class ............................................. 70
Lesson Plan 2 for Control Class............................................. 75
The Total Scores of Pre-test and Post-test of Experimental
Group………………………………………………………. 80
The Total Scores of Pre-test and Post-test of Control
Group………………………………………………………. 82
The Reliability of the Test………………………...……84
Calculation of Pre-Test And Post-Test Of Experimental
Group…………………………………………………….87
Calculation of Pre-Test And Post-Test Of Control Group.... 89
T-table………………………………………………...…92
vii
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. The Background of the Study
Writing is one of the language skills that should be mastered by the
students. Based on the observation that the writer has done at SMA Negeri 6
Medan, the students still have difficulties, especially in writing. So, the writer
wants to improve the students’ achievement in writing by conducting this
research. The writer attaches the students’ writing score in two semesters,
academic year 2012-2013 below. The Minimum Criteria Mastery (KKM) which is
applied by the school is 75.
Table 1.1
The Percentage of Grade XI IPA 1 Students’ Score in Writing
Semester
KKM
Score
Students
Percentage
Mean
st
< 75
28 Students
77,7
1 Semester
51.7
2012/2013
≥ 75
8 Students
22.2
75
< 75
23 Students
63.9
2nd Semester
53.3
2013/2014
≥ 75
13 Students
36,11
Source: Students’ accumulated score of Grade XI IPA 1 students at SMA Negeri 6
Medan academic year 2013/2014 and 2014/2015
From the previous data, it can be concluded that the students’ ability in
writing is still low. It can be seen from the most of students’ score percentage was
under the KKM.
Harmer (2001: 255) states writing text has a number of conventions which
is separate it out from speaking. Both speaking and writing are used as the form of
communications, but they are different. Writing is used to express ideas, thoughts,
1
2
news, experiences, opinions, so others can read them. Writing is a linguistic
competence that is expressed in written form (Pardiyono: 2007).
The aim of writing is conveying the ideas or thoughts to writing form.
Writing is process of putting ideas into words, and then arranges the words into
sentences, and then combines them in to paragraph. A good writing is discovered
by combination of words which allow persons integrity to dominate their subject
with a pattern both fresh and original (Hyland: 2002). Writing required the
mastery of vocabulary, spelling, grammar, punctuation, appropriate content,
coherence. Since all that materials are difficult to master, writing becomes
difficult to be mastered.
In Indonesia, the curriculum has been changing and developing overtime.
Ministry of Education and Culture of Indonesia has already published the new
curriculum for Indonesia’s education named the 2013 curriculum. Since this
experimental research is conducted in Senior High School grade 2 so School
Based Curriculum or Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan (KTSP) is still used.
In Standard Based Curriculum (KTSP) in the Senior High School writing
is put as the part of as syllabus in the English subject. It is stated some genres of
writing to be master by student: descriptive, recount, narrative, procedure,
hortatory exposition, analytical exposition and news item. In syllabus the writer
found that student expected to be able to express meaning in short functional text
and monologue text and also in the form of hortatory exposition, analytical
exposition, and news item in the daily life context.
3
Based on the observation in SMA Negeri 6 Medan, exactly in the second
grade of natural science, writer found many students are still low in English
especially writing, this is admitted by students themselves. Moreover, writer had
interviewed the English teacher, and then the writer can conclude that student
hardly organize their idea in a right sentence. Meanwhile, based on the syllabus,
writing a hortatory exposition is one of the monolog texts that students should
achieve in the second semester, but unfortunately the teacher just gave them task
making curriculum vitae, which does not relate to the syllabus.
Based on the observation and the interview that has been done, the writer
found some identification problems below.
1) The teacher method in teaching learning process in the classroom is
Lecture Method. During the teaching learning process the students just
sit and listen to the teacher without participate actively.
2) Due to the lack of knowledge of English, the students don’t really
understand and catch the explanation and instruction the teacher gives.
Therefore they are misunderstanding of what the teacher said.
3) The students are lack of vocabularies, and still have low knowledge in
grammar and text genres. It makes them difficult to express their ideas
and thoughts in text form.
4) The last problem is the most important problem. Some students are shy
and lack of courage to ask the teacher when they don’t understand the
lesson. Besides, the teacher is vicious and it makes the students afraid
of the teacher. The teacher is always angry whenever the students
4
make mistakes and tell the students what is right rudely. So, instead of
understanding the lesson, the students are depressed during the lesson
and they got nothing when the lesson ended. And it happens
continually.
To solve the problems above, the writer needs to find an effective
technique. There are many techniques that can be applied to improve students’
writing achievement. One of them is group mentoring technique. By grouping the
students, the teacher will be easier to teach them. And the students will be
encouraged by their friends in the group, so they can improve their ability,
especially in writing. This technique is expected to be able to improve students’
writing achievement, particularly in writing hortatory exposition.
In group mentoring technique, there will be a leader or a mentor who will
be the mentor or a tutor in each group because it is impossible for the teacher to
tutor all students one by one. Then, it is easier to see their ability in working
together with their friends. Next, if there is a student who is afraid to ask to his
teacher, it will be helpful to have a friend who can teach him the lesson well.
Good and Brophy (1984:294) state in particular, high achievers in heterogeneous
groups, with the students moving into the roles of the tutor and tutee
spontaneously. Consequently, the group mentoring technique will be the right and
effective technique to be used by t IIIhe writer in the research to help the students
to get and generate ideas and knowledge, be more active and confident in the
group, and get more motivation to write, so they can improve their ability in
writing.
5
In line with the background above, the writer would like to conduct a study
with title: The Effect of Group Mentoring Technique on Students’ Achievement
in Writing Hortatory Exposition. The writer expects to find the effect of group
mentoring technique on students’ achievement in writing hortatory exposition.
B.
The Problem of the Study
Based on the background of the study, the problem of the study can be
formulated in the form of question as follows:
“Is the students’ achievement in writing hortatory exposition taught by
group mentoring technique higher than the students’ achievement taught by
Lecture Method?”
C. The Objective of the Study
This study is intended to find out whether students’ achievement taught by
the Group Mentoring Technique is higher than the students’ achievement taught
by Lecture Method in writing hortatory exposition.
D. The Scope of the Study
There are several cooperative learning techniques that can be applied to
improve students’ writing achievement. This study focuses on the applying of
Group Mentoring Technique to improve students’ achievement in writing
hortatory exposition. The object of the study is limited on the senior high school
students grade XI at SMA Negeri 6 Medan.
6
E. The Significance of the Study
The study is expected to have both theoretical and practical perspectives:
1. Theoretical perspectives
a.
The result of the research will be useful to improve the teaching
learning process; not only for hortatory exposition material, but also
the other materials.
b.
The result of this research can be used as a reference for those who
want to conduct a research about writing hortatory exposition.
2. Practical perspectives
a. For the teachers
The writer hopes that this research and technique will be inspiring
for English teacher to develop the teaching learning process; not only in
teaching writing but also other skills.
b. For the students
This study also expected to encourage the students to develop their
writing achievement, especially in writing hortatory exposition through
group mentoring technique.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
A. Conclusion
Based on the result of the data analysis, it was concluded that using
Group Mentoring Technique significantly affect the student’s ability in writing
hortatory exposition text (t-calculated > t-table, p=0.05). The using Group
Mentoring Technique made the students write hortatory exposition text
grammatically than by using Lecture Method. The calculation of t-test is 2.07 >
1.99 with df 68 and the level of significance 0.05. It means that the using Group
Mentoring Technique has significant effect on writing hortatory exposition text.
From the result of the data, it can be seen that the highest score of
experimental group was 90 and the lowest score was 61 in post-test. Meanwhile
the highest score of control group was 88 and the lowest score was 55 in post-test.
B. Suggestions
The writer point out some suggestion as following:
1. It is suggested to the English teacher, it is better to applying Group
Mentoring Technique because this technique helps the students in
understanding the hortatory exposition much better.
2. It is suggested to the students, with this technique demands a cooperative
team so it is better if they can share ideas and information before they
52
53
write, so that by applying of Group Mentoring Technique, the students can
write hortatory exposition.
REFERENCES
Ary, Donald. 2002. Introduction to Research in Education. Singapore:
Wardswirth.
Ary, Donald. 2010. Introduction to Research in Education. Singapore:
Wardswirth.
Bloom, B,S. 1996. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: the Classification of
Educational Goals. New York; Longman.
Brown, H. Douglas. 2004. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to
Language Pedagogy. San Fransisco: Pearson Longman.
Carvin, Beth N. 2011. The Hows and the Whys of Group Mentoring. Journal of
Industrial Commercial Training. I(2)
Donaldson, S. I., Ensher, E. A., & Grant- Vallone, E. J. (2000). Longitudinal
Examination of Mentoring Relationships on Organizational Commitment
and Citizenship Behavior. Journal of Career Development, 26, 233- 249.
Gandara, P., et al. 1998. Capturing Latino Students in the Academic Pipeline.
Berkeley, CA: Chicano/Latino Policy Project.
Gardiner, Coral Elizabeth. 2008. Mentoring: Towards An Improved Professional
Friendship. Unpublished Thesis. England: University of Birmingham.
Garvey, B., Alred, G. 2003. An Introduction to the Symposium on Mentoring:
Issues and Prospects. British Journal of Guidance and Counseling. I (5)
Gerrot,L. & Wignell, P. 1994. Making Sense of Functional Grammar. Cammeray:
Antipodean Educational Enterprises.
Good, T. L. Brophy, J.E. 1984. Looking in Classrooms. New York: Harper &
Row.
Harmer, Jeremy. 2001. The Practice of English Language Teaching. Third Edition.
Essex, England: Pearson Education.
Harmer, Jeremy. 2003. Just Reading and Writing Intermediate. England: Marshall
Cavendish.
Harmer, Jeremy. 2004. How to Teach Writing. Essex, England: Pearson
Education.
55
56
Hayward, Ann. 2001. Good Practice Guidelines for Learning Mentors.
Nottingham: The Department for Education and Skills.
Heaton, J.B. 1989. Writing English Language Test. New York: Longman Group
UK.
Hyland, K. 2002. Teaching and Researching Writing: Applied Linguistics in
Action Series. Pearson Education: Longman
Jadwick, D.K. 1997. The Perceptions of Effectiveness of Mentoring Relationships
in Higher Education. Unpublished Thesis. England: College of
Education.
Jones, Karrie A., Jones, Jennifer L. 2008. Making Cooperative Learning Work in
the College Classroom: An Application of the ‘Five Pillars’ of
Cooperative Learning to Post-Secondary Instruction. The Journal of
Effective Teaching An Online Journal Devoted To Teaching Excellence.
Vol. 8, No. 2. New York: Niagara University.
Kagan, Spencer. 2009. Kagan Cooperative Learning. San Clemente: Kagan
Publishing.
Linn, Robert L., Bond, Lloyd., Carr, Peggy., Harris, Douglas. 2000. Students
Learning, Students Achievement: How Do Teachers Measure Up.
Arlington: National Board for Professional Teaching Standards.
Maduewesi, B.U. 1999. General Curriculum Methodology. Nigeria: Joy
Educational Publishers.
McKimm, Judy., Jollie, Carol., Hatter, Mark. 2007. Mentoring: Theory and
Practice. Preparedness to Practice, Mentoring Scheme.
Nunan, David. 1991. Language Teaching Methodology. Sydney: Prentice Hall.
Oshima, Alice., Hogue, Ann. 1998. Writing Academic English, Third Edition.
New York: Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data.
Pardiyono. 2007. PastiBisa! Teaching Genre-Based Writing. Yogyakarta: Andi.
Pelawi, Ameta Karina. 2012. Improving the Students’ Achievement in Writing
Descriptive Paragraph through Group Mentoring Technique.
Unpublished Thesis. Medan: Universitas Negeri Medan.
Slavin, R.1995. Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research, and Practice (Second
Edition). London: A Simon & Schuster.
57
Tarigan, Henry Guntur. 1985. Prinsip-prinsip Dasar Penulis. Bandung: Penerbit
Angkasa.
Tinambunan, Wilmar. 1988. Evaluation of Student Achievement. Jakarta:
Depdikbud.
Tiwari, Deepak. 2005. Encyclopedia of Modern Methods of Teaching 7. New
Delhi: Cressent
Vin-Mbah, Fidelia. I. 2012. Learning and Teaching Methodology. Journal of
Educational and Social Research. II (4) p. 114
ON STUDENTS’ ACHIEVEMENT IN WRITING
HORTATORY EXPOSITION
A THESIS
Submitted to English Department, Faculty of Language and Arts
State University of Medan, in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the
Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan
By:
AMINAH ARI FADHILA
Registration Number: 2101121001
ENGLISH DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
2014
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First and foremost, the writer would like to express thanks to Allah SWT, the
Almighty God for Blessing, Health, Protection, knowledge and opportunity that at
last she is able to complete this thesis entitled “The Effect of Group Mentoring
Technique on Students’ Achievement in Writing Hortatory Exposition” as one of
requirement for the degree of Sarjana Pendidikan (S1) at English Department,
Faculty of Languages and Arts, State University of Medan.
This thesis could have not been accomplished without the guidance, helping,
suggestion, advice, motivation and encouragement from people, for which the
writer would like to express her extremely grateful which directed to:
Prof. Dr. Ibnu Hajar Damanik, M.Si, the Rector of State University of
Medan.
Dr. Isda Pramuniati, M.Hum, the Dean of Languages and Arts Faculty.
Prof. Dr. Hj. Sumarsih, M.Pd, the Head of English Department.
Rika, S.Pd, M.Hum as the Secretary of English Department.
Dra. Masitowarni Siregar, M.Ed, as the Head of English Education
Study Program.
Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning, M.Pd, as her Thesis Consultant.
Dra. Tjut Ernidawati, M.Pd as her Academic Consultant and her
Reviewer, Dr. Anni Holila Pulungan, M.Hum and Dra. Sri Juriati
Ownie, M.A, as her Reviewers.
Herlinda, S.Pd, the headmaster of SMA Negeri 6 Medan.
Ramli Harahap, S.H and Nilawaty, S.Ag, as her beloved parents,
Gufranul Fikry Harahap as her beloved brother, Sufriadi, as her
beloved late father, H. Syamsudin, as her beloved late grandfather, Hj.
Kominah Sinaga, as her beloved grandmother, Suriawaty, S.Pd, as her
beloved auntie, Supriatno S.Pd, Serka Bambang Muliadi, and Effendi
as her beloved uncles, Meidian Safriani and Assyifa Aulia Riatno as her
beloved cousins, and all member of Syamsudin’s big family for their
eternal material and moral supports, care, prayers, laughter, smiles,
guidance, advices, best moments and love during the writers’ life.
Eomma a.k.a Christine Helena Natalia, S.Pd, as her best friend, sister,
and partner in crime, for the laughter, smiles, supports, ideas, best
moments that have been shared with the writer during the academic study
in Unimed.
Bang Jali a.k.a Mentari Tawarniate, as her best partner in crime, Mbak
Shofi a.k.a Shofiyah S.Pd, Sheildung a.k.a Ervi Luthfi Sheila Wani
Lubis, S.Pd, Ika Tonenk a.k.a Ika Ulansari, S.Pd, Imik a.k.a Ilmi
Fadhilah Rizki, S.Pd, Dayan a.k.a Dianty Vina Warni Saragih, as her
ii
beloved little family in boarding home, for the laughter, best moments,
smiles, ideas, opinions, best sharing they shared with the writer.
Mahmud Layan Hutasuhut, S.Pd, M.Hum, and Zuhari, S.T, as her
mood boosters during the academic study in Unimed.
Arindawati Sipahutar, Ayu Widyaningtyas, Batsyeba Silaen, Christin
Hakim Pasaribu, Dessy Sari Natalina Haloho, Deby Arifsyah Putra,
Elnoviamy, Fathur Rizqi Arifiani, S.Pd, Harnoi Asrin Lumban Gaol,
S.Pd, Magdalena Simanjuntak, and all members of Reguler C 2010 as
her best classmates, for all best memories, laughter, smiles, fights, debates,
teamwork, and moments they give and share with the writer during the
four years academic study in Unimed.
Ekky a.k.a Muhammad Rizky Ridha, Risqa a.k.a Risqa Indina, Icha
ak.a. Icha Ramadhani Butarbutar as her best partners during the
fighting time for the thesis.
All members of VII-1, VII-2, VII-3, X-1, X-3, and all students of SMP
Negeri 6 Kisaran, for the best moments, laughter, stories, memories,
supports, prayers, and love they have been always giving to the writers
since PPL time till now.
Nora Ronita Dewi, S.Pd, M.Hum, Marisi Debora, S.Pd, M.Hum, and
Isli Iriani Pane, S.Pd, M.Hum, as her favorite lecturers, for the
inspirations and spirits they give to the writer, and also Pak Hendra, Bu
Endah, Bu Eis, and Pak Pantas for their helps in arranging all documents
for the study.
The last, but not the least, the writer would like to address a huge gratitude
to Bapak Gubernur a.k.a Fadlan Prayitno, as her most flexible partner,
her mood booster, her stabilizer, her energizer, her spirit charger, her best
friend, greatest brother, third father, worst enemy, and best life
companion, for the supports, advices, laughter, smiles, long-night-talks,
ideas, opinions, attention, prayers, knowledge, the teaching of life and
many other things, and for always being there for the writer whenever she
needs.
Medan,
Agustus 2014
The writer
Aminah Ari Fadhila
NIM. 2101121001
iii
ABSTRACT
Ari Fadhila, Aminah. NIM: 210112001. The Effect Of Group Mentoring
Technique on Students’ Achievement in Writing Hortatory Exposition. A
Thesis. Faculty of Languages and Arts (FBS), Unimed (State University of
Medan), 2014.
This study aims to discover the effect of applying Group Mentoring Technique on
Student’s Achievement in writing Hortatory Exposition. It was conducted by
using experimental research design. This population was the 175 grade XI
students of SMA Negeri 6 Medan. The sample of the research was two classes
divided into two groups, experimental and control group which were chosen by
using random sampling technique. The Grade XI IPA 3 as Experimental Group
was taught by using Group Mentoring Technique and grade XI IPA 1 as control
group was taught by using Lecturing Method. The instrument used to collect the
data was by asking the students to write a Hortatory Exposition. Based on the
result of the data analysis, it was concluded that using Group Mentoring
Technique significantly affect the student’s ability in writing hortatory exposition
(t-calculated > t-table, p=0.05). The using Group Mentoring Technique made the
students write hortatory exposition correctly than by using Lecturing Method. The
calculation of t-test is 2.07 > 1.99 with df 68 and the level of significance 0.05. It
means that the using Group Mentoring Technique has significant effect on writing
hortatory exposition.
Keywords: Group Mentoring Technique, Students’ Achievement, Hortatory
Exposition
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
TABLE OF CONTENTS..............................................................................iv
LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................vi
LIST OF APPENDICES ............................................................................. vii
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION.................................................................. 1
A. The Background of the Study .............................................................. 1
B. The Problem of the Study .................................................................... 5
C. The Objective of the Study .................................................................. 5
D. The Scope of the Study ....................................................................... 5
E. The Significance of the Study ............................................................. 6
CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE ............................................. 7
A. Theoretical Framework ....................................................................... 7
1. Students’ Achievement in Writing ................................................ 7
2. Writing ......................................................................................... 9
a. Definition of Writing ............................................................. 9
b. Writing Process ..................................................................... 10
c. Purposes of Writing ............................................................. 11
3. Genre ............................................................................................ 12
a. Hortatory Exposition ............................................................. 13
b. Assessment of Hortatory Exposition ...................................... 16
4. Cooperative Learning ................................................................... 17
5. Group Mentoring Technique ........................................................ 20
a. Advantages of Applying Group Mentoring Technique ........ 21
b. Teaching Process .................................................................... 24
6. Lecture Method ............................................................................. 25
a. Advantages and Disadvantages of Teacher Mentoring
Technique .............................................................................. 25
b. Teaching Process ................................................................... 26
7. Relevant Studies ............................................................................ 27
B. Conceptual Framework ....................................................................... 28
C. Hypothesis ........................................................................................... 30
CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ..................................... 32
A. Research Design .................................................................................. 32
B. Population and Sample ........................................................................ 33
1. Population ..................................................................................... 33
iv
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
2. Sample .......................................................................................... 33
3. Source of the Data ........................................................................ 33
The Instrument of Collecting Data ...................................................... 34
The Procedure Of Test ........................................................................ 34
1. Pre-test .......................................................................................... 35
2. Teaching Process .......................................................................... 35
3. Post-test ........................................................................................ 44
Assessment and Scoring of Writing .................................................... 45
The Validity and Reliability of The Test ............................................ 46
1. Validity of the Test ....................................................................... 46
2. Reliability of the Test .................................................................... 46
The Technique of Analyzing Data ...................................................... 47
The Statistical Hypothesis .................................................................... 48
CHAPTER IV. THE DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION ................. 49
A. The Data Analysis ............................................................................... 49
B. The Reliability of the Test .................................................................... 50
C. Testing Hypothesis ............................................................................... 50
D. The Discussion ..................................................................................... 51
CHAPTER V. THE DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION .................. 53
A. Conclusion ........................................................................................... 53
B. Suggestion ............................................................................................ 53
REFERENCES ............................................................................................... 55
APPENDIX ..................................................................................................... 58
v
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A.
Appendix B.
Appendix C.
Appendix D.
Appendix E.
Appendix F.
Appendix G.
Appendix H.
Appendix I.
Appendix J.
Appendix K.
Page
Assessment of Writing ........................................................... 58
Lesson Plan 1 for Experimental Class .................................... 60
Lesson Plan 2 for Experimental Class .................................... 65
Lesson Plan 1 for Control Class ............................................. 70
Lesson Plan 2 for Control Class............................................. 75
The Total Scores of Pre-test and Post-test of Experimental
Group………………………………………………………. 80
The Total Scores of Pre-test and Post-test of Control
Group………………………………………………………. 82
The Reliability of the Test………………………...……84
Calculation of Pre-Test And Post-Test Of Experimental
Group…………………………………………………….87
Calculation of Pre-Test And Post-Test Of Control Group.... 89
T-table………………………………………………...…92
vii
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. The Background of the Study
Writing is one of the language skills that should be mastered by the
students. Based on the observation that the writer has done at SMA Negeri 6
Medan, the students still have difficulties, especially in writing. So, the writer
wants to improve the students’ achievement in writing by conducting this
research. The writer attaches the students’ writing score in two semesters,
academic year 2012-2013 below. The Minimum Criteria Mastery (KKM) which is
applied by the school is 75.
Table 1.1
The Percentage of Grade XI IPA 1 Students’ Score in Writing
Semester
KKM
Score
Students
Percentage
Mean
st
< 75
28 Students
77,7
1 Semester
51.7
2012/2013
≥ 75
8 Students
22.2
75
< 75
23 Students
63.9
2nd Semester
53.3
2013/2014
≥ 75
13 Students
36,11
Source: Students’ accumulated score of Grade XI IPA 1 students at SMA Negeri 6
Medan academic year 2013/2014 and 2014/2015
From the previous data, it can be concluded that the students’ ability in
writing is still low. It can be seen from the most of students’ score percentage was
under the KKM.
Harmer (2001: 255) states writing text has a number of conventions which
is separate it out from speaking. Both speaking and writing are used as the form of
communications, but they are different. Writing is used to express ideas, thoughts,
1
2
news, experiences, opinions, so others can read them. Writing is a linguistic
competence that is expressed in written form (Pardiyono: 2007).
The aim of writing is conveying the ideas or thoughts to writing form.
Writing is process of putting ideas into words, and then arranges the words into
sentences, and then combines them in to paragraph. A good writing is discovered
by combination of words which allow persons integrity to dominate their subject
with a pattern both fresh and original (Hyland: 2002). Writing required the
mastery of vocabulary, spelling, grammar, punctuation, appropriate content,
coherence. Since all that materials are difficult to master, writing becomes
difficult to be mastered.
In Indonesia, the curriculum has been changing and developing overtime.
Ministry of Education and Culture of Indonesia has already published the new
curriculum for Indonesia’s education named the 2013 curriculum. Since this
experimental research is conducted in Senior High School grade 2 so School
Based Curriculum or Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan (KTSP) is still used.
In Standard Based Curriculum (KTSP) in the Senior High School writing
is put as the part of as syllabus in the English subject. It is stated some genres of
writing to be master by student: descriptive, recount, narrative, procedure,
hortatory exposition, analytical exposition and news item. In syllabus the writer
found that student expected to be able to express meaning in short functional text
and monologue text and also in the form of hortatory exposition, analytical
exposition, and news item in the daily life context.
3
Based on the observation in SMA Negeri 6 Medan, exactly in the second
grade of natural science, writer found many students are still low in English
especially writing, this is admitted by students themselves. Moreover, writer had
interviewed the English teacher, and then the writer can conclude that student
hardly organize their idea in a right sentence. Meanwhile, based on the syllabus,
writing a hortatory exposition is one of the monolog texts that students should
achieve in the second semester, but unfortunately the teacher just gave them task
making curriculum vitae, which does not relate to the syllabus.
Based on the observation and the interview that has been done, the writer
found some identification problems below.
1) The teacher method in teaching learning process in the classroom is
Lecture Method. During the teaching learning process the students just
sit and listen to the teacher without participate actively.
2) Due to the lack of knowledge of English, the students don’t really
understand and catch the explanation and instruction the teacher gives.
Therefore they are misunderstanding of what the teacher said.
3) The students are lack of vocabularies, and still have low knowledge in
grammar and text genres. It makes them difficult to express their ideas
and thoughts in text form.
4) The last problem is the most important problem. Some students are shy
and lack of courage to ask the teacher when they don’t understand the
lesson. Besides, the teacher is vicious and it makes the students afraid
of the teacher. The teacher is always angry whenever the students
4
make mistakes and tell the students what is right rudely. So, instead of
understanding the lesson, the students are depressed during the lesson
and they got nothing when the lesson ended. And it happens
continually.
To solve the problems above, the writer needs to find an effective
technique. There are many techniques that can be applied to improve students’
writing achievement. One of them is group mentoring technique. By grouping the
students, the teacher will be easier to teach them. And the students will be
encouraged by their friends in the group, so they can improve their ability,
especially in writing. This technique is expected to be able to improve students’
writing achievement, particularly in writing hortatory exposition.
In group mentoring technique, there will be a leader or a mentor who will
be the mentor or a tutor in each group because it is impossible for the teacher to
tutor all students one by one. Then, it is easier to see their ability in working
together with their friends. Next, if there is a student who is afraid to ask to his
teacher, it will be helpful to have a friend who can teach him the lesson well.
Good and Brophy (1984:294) state in particular, high achievers in heterogeneous
groups, with the students moving into the roles of the tutor and tutee
spontaneously. Consequently, the group mentoring technique will be the right and
effective technique to be used by t IIIhe writer in the research to help the students
to get and generate ideas and knowledge, be more active and confident in the
group, and get more motivation to write, so they can improve their ability in
writing.
5
In line with the background above, the writer would like to conduct a study
with title: The Effect of Group Mentoring Technique on Students’ Achievement
in Writing Hortatory Exposition. The writer expects to find the effect of group
mentoring technique on students’ achievement in writing hortatory exposition.
B.
The Problem of the Study
Based on the background of the study, the problem of the study can be
formulated in the form of question as follows:
“Is the students’ achievement in writing hortatory exposition taught by
group mentoring technique higher than the students’ achievement taught by
Lecture Method?”
C. The Objective of the Study
This study is intended to find out whether students’ achievement taught by
the Group Mentoring Technique is higher than the students’ achievement taught
by Lecture Method in writing hortatory exposition.
D. The Scope of the Study
There are several cooperative learning techniques that can be applied to
improve students’ writing achievement. This study focuses on the applying of
Group Mentoring Technique to improve students’ achievement in writing
hortatory exposition. The object of the study is limited on the senior high school
students grade XI at SMA Negeri 6 Medan.
6
E. The Significance of the Study
The study is expected to have both theoretical and practical perspectives:
1. Theoretical perspectives
a.
The result of the research will be useful to improve the teaching
learning process; not only for hortatory exposition material, but also
the other materials.
b.
The result of this research can be used as a reference for those who
want to conduct a research about writing hortatory exposition.
2. Practical perspectives
a. For the teachers
The writer hopes that this research and technique will be inspiring
for English teacher to develop the teaching learning process; not only in
teaching writing but also other skills.
b. For the students
This study also expected to encourage the students to develop their
writing achievement, especially in writing hortatory exposition through
group mentoring technique.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
A. Conclusion
Based on the result of the data analysis, it was concluded that using
Group Mentoring Technique significantly affect the student’s ability in writing
hortatory exposition text (t-calculated > t-table, p=0.05). The using Group
Mentoring Technique made the students write hortatory exposition text
grammatically than by using Lecture Method. The calculation of t-test is 2.07 >
1.99 with df 68 and the level of significance 0.05. It means that the using Group
Mentoring Technique has significant effect on writing hortatory exposition text.
From the result of the data, it can be seen that the highest score of
experimental group was 90 and the lowest score was 61 in post-test. Meanwhile
the highest score of control group was 88 and the lowest score was 55 in post-test.
B. Suggestions
The writer point out some suggestion as following:
1. It is suggested to the English teacher, it is better to applying Group
Mentoring Technique because this technique helps the students in
understanding the hortatory exposition much better.
2. It is suggested to the students, with this technique demands a cooperative
team so it is better if they can share ideas and information before they
52
53
write, so that by applying of Group Mentoring Technique, the students can
write hortatory exposition.
REFERENCES
Ary, Donald. 2002. Introduction to Research in Education. Singapore:
Wardswirth.
Ary, Donald. 2010. Introduction to Research in Education. Singapore:
Wardswirth.
Bloom, B,S. 1996. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: the Classification of
Educational Goals. New York; Longman.
Brown, H. Douglas. 2004. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to
Language Pedagogy. San Fransisco: Pearson Longman.
Carvin, Beth N. 2011. The Hows and the Whys of Group Mentoring. Journal of
Industrial Commercial Training. I(2)
Donaldson, S. I., Ensher, E. A., & Grant- Vallone, E. J. (2000). Longitudinal
Examination of Mentoring Relationships on Organizational Commitment
and Citizenship Behavior. Journal of Career Development, 26, 233- 249.
Gandara, P., et al. 1998. Capturing Latino Students in the Academic Pipeline.
Berkeley, CA: Chicano/Latino Policy Project.
Gardiner, Coral Elizabeth. 2008. Mentoring: Towards An Improved Professional
Friendship. Unpublished Thesis. England: University of Birmingham.
Garvey, B., Alred, G. 2003. An Introduction to the Symposium on Mentoring:
Issues and Prospects. British Journal of Guidance and Counseling. I (5)
Gerrot,L. & Wignell, P. 1994. Making Sense of Functional Grammar. Cammeray:
Antipodean Educational Enterprises.
Good, T. L. Brophy, J.E. 1984. Looking in Classrooms. New York: Harper &
Row.
Harmer, Jeremy. 2001. The Practice of English Language Teaching. Third Edition.
Essex, England: Pearson Education.
Harmer, Jeremy. 2003. Just Reading and Writing Intermediate. England: Marshall
Cavendish.
Harmer, Jeremy. 2004. How to Teach Writing. Essex, England: Pearson
Education.
55
56
Hayward, Ann. 2001. Good Practice Guidelines for Learning Mentors.
Nottingham: The Department for Education and Skills.
Heaton, J.B. 1989. Writing English Language Test. New York: Longman Group
UK.
Hyland, K. 2002. Teaching and Researching Writing: Applied Linguistics in
Action Series. Pearson Education: Longman
Jadwick, D.K. 1997. The Perceptions of Effectiveness of Mentoring Relationships
in Higher Education. Unpublished Thesis. England: College of
Education.
Jones, Karrie A., Jones, Jennifer L. 2008. Making Cooperative Learning Work in
the College Classroom: An Application of the ‘Five Pillars’ of
Cooperative Learning to Post-Secondary Instruction. The Journal of
Effective Teaching An Online Journal Devoted To Teaching Excellence.
Vol. 8, No. 2. New York: Niagara University.
Kagan, Spencer. 2009. Kagan Cooperative Learning. San Clemente: Kagan
Publishing.
Linn, Robert L., Bond, Lloyd., Carr, Peggy., Harris, Douglas. 2000. Students
Learning, Students Achievement: How Do Teachers Measure Up.
Arlington: National Board for Professional Teaching Standards.
Maduewesi, B.U. 1999. General Curriculum Methodology. Nigeria: Joy
Educational Publishers.
McKimm, Judy., Jollie, Carol., Hatter, Mark. 2007. Mentoring: Theory and
Practice. Preparedness to Practice, Mentoring Scheme.
Nunan, David. 1991. Language Teaching Methodology. Sydney: Prentice Hall.
Oshima, Alice., Hogue, Ann. 1998. Writing Academic English, Third Edition.
New York: Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data.
Pardiyono. 2007. PastiBisa! Teaching Genre-Based Writing. Yogyakarta: Andi.
Pelawi, Ameta Karina. 2012. Improving the Students’ Achievement in Writing
Descriptive Paragraph through Group Mentoring Technique.
Unpublished Thesis. Medan: Universitas Negeri Medan.
Slavin, R.1995. Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research, and Practice (Second
Edition). London: A Simon & Schuster.
57
Tarigan, Henry Guntur. 1985. Prinsip-prinsip Dasar Penulis. Bandung: Penerbit
Angkasa.
Tinambunan, Wilmar. 1988. Evaluation of Student Achievement. Jakarta:
Depdikbud.
Tiwari, Deepak. 2005. Encyclopedia of Modern Methods of Teaching 7. New
Delhi: Cressent
Vin-Mbah, Fidelia. I. 2012. Learning and Teaching Methodology. Journal of
Educational and Social Research. II (4) p. 114