AN ANALYSIS ON STUDENTS’ ABILITY AND DIFFICULTY IN WRITING NARRATIVE TEXT: A Research Study Concerning on Writing Skill of Eleventh Grade Student.
AN ANALYSIS ON STUDENTS’
ABILITY AND DIFFICULTY
IN WRITING NARRATIVE TEXT
(A Research Study Concerning on Writing Skill of Eleventh Grade Students)
A Research Paper
Submitted to the English Education Department in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for Sarjana Pendidikan Degree
By:
Tabah Ghifary Diniya
0803093
ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS EDUCATION INDONESIA UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION
(2)
AN ANALYSIS ON STUDENTS’
ABILITY AND DIFFICULTY
IN WRITING NARRATIVE TEXT
(A Research Study Concerning on Writing Skill of Eleventh Grade Students)
Oleh
Tabah Ghifary Diniya
Sebuah skripsi yang diajukan untuk memenuhi salah satu syarat memperoleh gelar Sarjana pada Fakultas Pendidikan Bahasa dan Seni
© Tabah Ghifary Diniya 2013 Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia
2013
Hak Cipta dilindungi undang-undang.
Skripsi ini tidak boleh diperbanyak seluruhya atau sebagian, dengan dicetak ulang, difoto kopi, atau cara lainnya tanpa ijin dari penulis.
(3)
PAGE OF APPROVAL
AN ANALYSIS ON STUDENTS’
ABILITY AND DIFFICULTY
IN WRITING NARRATIVE TEXT
(A Research Study Concerning on Writing Skill of Eleventh Grade Students)
By
TABAH GHIFARY DINIYA 0803093
Approved by:
Main Supervisor Co-Supervisor
Emi Emilia, M. Ed., Ph. D. Lulu Laela Amalia, S.S., M.Pd. NIP. 196609161990012001 NIP. 197504092007102001
Head of English Education Department Faculty of Language and Fine Arts Education
Indonesia University of Education
Prof. Dr. Didi Suherdi, M.Ed. NIP. 196211011987121001
(4)
ABSTRACT
The research paper entitled “An Analysis on Students’ Ability and Difficulty in Writing Narrative Text” attempted to investigate what are the
students’ abilityand difficulties in writing narrative text as a “natural” text genre.
This study is also focused on revealing what kinds of processes and circumstances that students use in their narrative seen from the transitivity system. This study was conducted in one public senior high school in Purwakarta. This study used a case study research design. The data were thirty five students’ works which are categorized into three different levels of achievement that are low, middle, and high achievers. The texts were analyzed using the Rose’s Scoring System (2007), Halliday(1985, 1994), Gerot and Wignell (1994),Levine (1993), Richard (1974), Knapp and Watkins (2005). The findings of this study show that the students’ errors on their writing are verb pattern error, sentence sprawl, and punctuation. These errors are mainly caused by over-generalization and ignorance of rule restriction that students do. Material and mental processes are spotted to be the
most appearing processes in the students’ works, whereas the occurrences of
circumstances tend to be equal.
Keywords: Students’ Error, Narrative text, Transitivity system Supervisor : Emi Emilia, M.Ed., Ph. D.
(5)
ABSTRACT
Penelitian yang berjudul “Analisis pada Kemampuan dan Kesulitan Siswa dalam Menullis Teks Naratif” ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui sejauh mana
kemampuan siswa dan apa saja kesulitan yang dialami siswa dalam menulis teks
naratif sebagai jenis teks yang “natural”. Penelitian ini juga berfokus untuk
mengungkapkan jenis processes dan circumstances apa saja yang digunakan siswa didalam teksnya ditinjau dari sistem transitivity. Penelitian ini dilaksanakan di sebuah sekolah menengah atas negeri di Purwakarta. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode study kasus. Data yang diambil merupakan 30 tulisan siswa yang kemudian dikategorikan menjadi tiga kelompok pencapaian, yaitu, rendah, sedang dan tinggi. Hasil kerja siswa tersebut kemudian dianalisis dengan
teori-teori dari Rose’s Scoring System (2007), Halliday(1985, 1994), Gerot and
Wignell (1994),Levine (1993), Richard (1974), Knapp dan Watkins (2005). Hasil penelitian menunjukan bahwa kesalahan sisawa bersumber dari verb pattern
error, sentence sprawl, dan punctuation. Kesalahan-kesalahan ini terjadi
disebabkan oleh over-generalization dan ignorance of rule restriction yang dilakukan siswa.
Kata kunci: Students’ Error, Narrative text, Transitivity system Supervisor : Emi Emilia, M.Ed., Ph. D.
(6)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ... 1
1.1 Research Background ... 1
1.2 Formulation of the Research Questions... 3
1.3 Aims of the Research ... 3
1.4 Scope of the Research ... 4
1.5 Significant of the Research ... 4
1.6 Clarification of the Related Terms ... 5
1.7 Organization of the Paper ... 5
CHAPTER II THEORETICAL FOUNDATION ... 7
2.1 Writing ... 7
2.1.1 Definition of Writing ... 7
2.1.2 The Importance of Writing ... 8
2.1.3 Aspects of Writing ... 9
2.1.4 Students’ Difficulties in Writing ... 10
2.2 Text and Genre ... 11
(7)
2.3 Grammar ... 18
2.3.1 Definition of Grammar ... 18
2.3.2 The Importance of Learning Grammar ... 18
2.4 Systemic Functional Grammar ... 20
2.4.1 Transitivity... 22
2.5 Error Analysis ... 28
2.5.1 Differences between Error and Mistakes ... 28
2.5.2 Definition of Error Analysis ... 29
2.5.3 Procedures of Analyzing Error ... 30
2.5.4 Kinds of Grammatical Error ... 30
2.5.5 Classification of Error ... 31
2.6 Conclusion Remarks ... 32
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ... 33
3.1 Formulation of Problems ... 33
3.2 Research Design ... 34
3.3 Site and Participants ... 35
(8)
3.2.1 Writing test ... 36
3.2.2 Interview ... 37
3.5 Data Analysis ... 38
3.5.1 Data Analysis on Writing Test ... 39
3.5.2 Data Analysis on Interview ... 40
3.6 Conclusion Remarks ... 40
CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS ... 41
4.1 Analysis on the Students’ Texts ... 41
4.1.1 The Schematic Structure and Linguistic Features Analysis ... 42
4.1.1 Transitivity Analysis... 54
4.1.2 Grammatical Error Analysis ... 57
4.2 Analysis on the Interview ... 69
4.2.1 Students’ Interview ... 70
4.2.2 Teachers’ Interview ... 73
4.3 Conclusion Remark ... 75
(9)
5.1 Conclusion ... 75
5.2 Recommendation ... 76
(10)
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
This chapter presents the nature of the study. It covers research background, formulation of the research questions, significances of the research, clarifications of the related terms, and the organization of the paper.
1.1 Research Background
Writing is an “absolute necessity” (Alwasilah, 2001:15). Therefore,
Alwasilah (2001) explains that writing represents many valuable aspects such as culture and civilization; and through writing phenomenon which culture is passed from one generation to another. Confirming to the English curriculum declared by the government, writing is a fundamental skill that students should master in learning English (Depdiknas, 2006).
Unfortunately, writing is generally recognized as a difficult task for almost of ESL and EFL students (Thonus, 1993:15; Rosa, 2007; Richard and Renadya, 2002, as cited in Lopa, 2012: 164). In addition, Levine (1993) explains this phenomenon might occur because both ESL and EFL students, who consider writing is difficult, do not know what and how to write, feel lack of vocabulary, fear of criticism, and want to avoid emotional confusion when they are facing a topic and a blank paper.
(11)
To facilitate students in mastering writing, narrative text is recommended in the curriculum as a text genre that students of secondary school should become skilled at (see 2006 Indonesia Curriculum: Senior High School). Thus, narrative writing is chosen as a pedagogical genre in freshmen composition course since it acts as a fundamental genre (Cheng, 2008:5). According to Derewianka (2004:40) as well as Knapp and Watkins (2005:221), Narrative continues to be such genre that students
„pick up‟ and write „naturally‟; since narrative texts serve to tell story, at
the same time, entertain and inform the readers by presenting the writer experience. This genre is characterized as a powerful, emotional and communicative text which shows the students‟ ability to use the language in retelling what a person or a group has experienced (Joyce and Feez, 2000).
During the learning process, the presence of students‟ errors is
inevitable. Learners do make errors, and teacher can observe these errors to reveal something within the learners (Brown, 2001). This study mainly
investigates the students‟ error in writing narrative text, viewed from its
structure, linguistic features, and grammatical aspects . This study is also explores students‟ ability in writing narrative by analyzing the transitivity system, or also known as ideational metafunction. Transitivity system explains the participants involved, processes embraced, and surrounding circumstances in an event or experience to answer the question of when,
(12)
Referring to those elaborations, this research focuses on revealing
students‟ errors and difficulties in writing narrative, along with
investigating kinds of processes and circumstances that they use on their writing. This research also attempts to help teachers assess more accurately on what treatments would be necessary for ESL/EFL students in learning writing, as to help their students avoid making error.
1.2 Formulation of the Research Questions
In conducting the research, the writer will be guided by finding the answers of these questions:
1. What errors are made and difficulties are faced by eleventh grader students in writing narrative texts?
2. In terms of ideational metafunction, what kind of processes and circumstances are used by students on their writing?
3. From the obtained data, what can be proposed to help students‟ in improving their writing skill?
1.3 Aims of the Research
To summarize the research background, this study is concerned to accomplish the following purposes:
1. To investigate errors are made and difficulties are faced by eleventh grader students in writing narrative texts.
2. To discover the kinds of processes and circumstances on students‟ narrative.
(13)
3. To help students of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) in improving their English writing proficiency.
1.4 Scope of the Research
This study focuses on analyzing students‟ errors and difficulties in writing narrative text. The aspects that are concerned cover the schematic structure and linguistic features of narrative text, the grammatical aspect, as well as the ideational metafunction in term of processes and circumstances. Some principal frameworks by Richard (1974), Levine (1993) Halliday (1985, 1994), Eggins (2004), Knapp and Watkins (2005), Rose (2007), and Emilia (2005, 2010) are employed to find out and discuss the answers of the research questions.
1.5 Significant of the Research
The study is expected to give advantages in academic field, both for theoretical and practical viewpoint. Perceived from the theoretical aspect, the outcomes of the study are supposed to expand the literature reference about the analysis on students‟ narrative text. As the practical benefit, the result of the study hopefully helps teachers develop their teaching -learning process; since the study itself is aimed to observe the errors and difficulties that students have, teachers might have clues to set appropriate learning strategies for their students.
(14)
1.6 Clarification of the Related Terms
This section presents the technical terms that occur in the study in order to avoid the ambiguity, misunderstanding, and misinterpretation toward the concept presented. Those are:
1. Narrative texts: Narratives tell stories about a person or a group
overcoming problems, show how people react to experiences, and explore social and cultural values, in purpose to entertain the audience (Knapp and Watkins, 2005). In this study, students‟ narrative text refers to narrative texts written by second graders of a public senior high school in Purwakarta.
2. Error analysis: Error analysis is the fact that learners do make errors
and these errors can be observed, analyzed, and classified to reveal something within the learners (Brown, 2001).
3. Transitivity: Sometimes called as ideational metafunction, refers to a
structure for describing the whole clause, rather than just the verb and its object (Emilia, 2005.
1.7 Organization of the Paper
This research paper is organized into five chapters. Chapter I introduces the research that covers background of the study, research questions, aims of the study, significance of the study, scope of the study, clarification of the related terms, and organization of paper.
(15)
Chapter II discusses the guideline of the research. It covers theoretical frameworks from linguists and previous researches which are dealing with students‟ error analysis.
Chapter III explains the research methodology settled by the writ er in conducting the research. Steps of analyzing data are also explained within this chapter.
Chapter IV elaborates the findings from the data and the discussion to answer the proposed research questions.
Chapter V concludes the result of data analysis of the study and gives
a brief suggestion regarding to improve students‟ comprehension
especially in writing narrative text.
1.8 Conclusion Remarks
This chapter has introduced the study in general. The upbringing topic and problems that become the research background have been stated. The purposes and significances of the study in academic field have also been proposed along with the research scope and some clarification of related terms. The next chapter will mainly discuss about theories, concepts, and previous researches that are endorsed by the study.
(16)
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter presents the methodology used in this research. It starts with formulation of problems, research design, research site and participants involved. This chapter also elaborates the data collection techniques along with the procedures of how the collected data were analyzed.
3.1 Formulation of Problems
To control the study in achieving its purposes, formulation of problems has to be decided. This formulation would bind the study to the subjects which are going to be investigated. As stated in Chapter I, this study is claimed to answer these questions:
a. What errors are made and difficulties are faced by eleventh grader students in writing narrative texts?
b. In term of ideational metafunction, what kind of processes and circumstances are used by students on their writing?
c. From the obtained data, what can be proposed to help students’ to improve their writing skill?
Further explanation of how the study is conducted to answer those questions, in detail will be discussed in the following sections.
(17)
3.2 Research Design
This study observed the ability, and also difficulties of eleventh grade students in writing narrative texts. It also investigated the kinds of processes and circumstances used on their writing. In accordance with the proposed research questions, this research is designed to be qualitative which settled descriptive case study.
Hatch (2002) argues that qualitative study is intended to explore reality about human behaviors within natural setting and context. A qualitative study does not start with a hypothesis, so there is no interference in the form of control or treatment to the participants (the students and the teacher). This research investigates and describes the phenomenon as it is; this term, the phenomenon refers to the errors that are made by students in composing narrative texts.
This study employed a case study as its method. Gay (1987) and Emilia (2005) explain a case study is the in-depth investigation of an individual, group, or institution, while in education, case studies were typically conducted to determine the background, environments, and characteristics of students with problem. In line with the statements, Merriam (1998) claims that a case study is ideal design to understand and interpret observation of educational phenomena. Merriam (1998:29) also
(18)
a) Particularistic, which means that a case study focuses on particular condition or phenomenon. A case study is suitable for analyzing practical problems like from daily practice.
b) Descriptive, which means that the result from case study is presenting lifelike conditions.
c) Heuristic, which means that a case study gives an insight to readers about the phenomenon under study and provide new thing or experience.
Considering the nature of a case study, the result of this study does not generalize other individuals. However, the outputs gained from this study still can be useful to propose methods to help other students. This study might find point of views of why something could be the case and see any
noticeable pattern or regularity in the students’ behaviors.
3.3Site and Participants
This research was held at one public senior high school in Purwakarta, There are some reasons for choosing this school as the research site. The first one is that the school is locally well-known for its good reputation in the town. Since this research is willing to see whether students the school face error in writing narrative texts or not, the findings of the study would be beneficial to improve students’ English comprehension and maintain the positive reputation of the school. The second reason is regarded to the accessibility
(19)
for the researcher. Since the school has comfortable distance which can be reached easily, it makes easier to cope with administrative matters for conducting research in that school.
Thirty five students of eleventh grade were chosen as respondents of the study. The students might come from various backgrounds and have different experience in writing activity, especially narratives. According to the curriculum declared by the government, eleventh grader might have taken all basic competences about narrative text during their first year.
3.4Data Collection
In a qualitative study, the data were collected in form of words or pictures rather than number (Fraenkl and Wallen, 2006; Creswell, 2007). In that case, this study employed multiple techiques of data collection. To get
the details about students’ errors in writing narrative texts, this study employed a writing test. Furthermore, an interview was also managed to strengthen the data related to the factors that cause those erro rs and difficulties exist
3.2.1 Writing test
As one of two data collection techniques engaged by this research, a writing test was distributed to the students. The students were directed to perform their writing skill on a specific topic. The writing test was set for
(20)
Students had to choose one of three optional topics that were suggested to them. Those topics were:
Their favorite story tales,
Their unforgettable harrowing / embarrassing moments, or Their happiest moment they’ve ever had.
Ninety minutes of allocation time was given to the students to complete the test. The interview was also conducted during the writing test was going on.
3.2.2 Interview
Interview was administered in order to support the accuracy of data collection and find out the difficulties that students faced. Interview is useful in a research because its ability to elicit factual information that might be hard to observe e.g. personal information, and to involve respondents reporting on themselves, telling their feeling, views, belief, etc. (Alwasilah, 2008). Moreover, interview provides real-time and face-to-face interaction between the researcher and the participants (Creswell, 2007). This
interaction serves to find out participants’ experience from their very own
point of view. For this purpose, interviewing students is expected to gain, as
many as possible, students’ perspective dealing with their difficulties in writing narrative.
The interview was designed to be semi-structured. Given (2008), Field, and Morse (1985: 67 cited in Emilia 2005: 83) recommend this type of
(21)
interview to enable getting all information required while the same time allowing the participants to freely response and describe the concept. Furthermore, audiotaping was attached simultaneously to the interview activity. Creswell (2007) mentions advantages of taking audiotape while the interview is ongoing. Tape-recording allows researchers to deepen analyzing
interviewees’ statement anytime, and compare one statement to another as well. Thus, recording participants’ words ensures originality of the data as the whole data are recorded.
The interview itself involved a number of students and the in-charged teacher to be asked some questions. Regarded to the language used during the interview, Bahasa Indonesia was chosen based on the agreement with the interviewees. Having Bahasa Indonesia, instead of English as the interview language, helped the communication between the researcher and the interviewee run effectively. The probed questions attempted to reveal information related to writing narrative text s (the probed questions can be seen in appendix 4: Interview transcripts). To keep the interview remain controlled, all the students were asked the same questions, while some additional questions were enquired to the teacher.
3.5Data Analysis
(22)
provided data to find out students’ errors and kinds of processes and circumstances on their writing, whereas the interview results would reveal the difficulties that they found in writing narrative te xts.
3.5.1 Data Analysis on Writing Test
In sequence of collecting the students’ narrative texts, the researcher then
analyzed the students’ works in three-step analysis processes. At the first stage, the data was analyzed in term of its schematic structure and linguistic features by using text elements scoring system proposed by Rose (2007; cited in Emilia, 2011; 151). Alongside with observing students’ ability in composing a narrative text slightly, this initial step is intended to sort out the students’ work in finding which text is potential for further exploration.
The second stage was analyzing the students’ works based on the transitivity system which deals with how text organizes experiences. Each text was segmented into clauses and identified in terms of processes and circumstances, as the basis of identifying transitivity system by using framworks proposed by Gerot and Wignell (1994) Halliday and Mathiessen (2004).
The final analysis of the writing test explored analyzing grammatical
errors of the students’ work. To follow Stanley (1989), Knapp and Watkins
(2005), there are at least 12 common grammatical aspects to be assessed ( as stated in Chapter 2). This process would entirely detect students’ grammar
(23)
comprehension and then classified the errors according to Richard’s classification of error.
3.5.2 Data Analysis on Interview
The data gathered from the interview provided information to reveal what problems that students have in writing narrative text. After the audio records were taken, the results were transcribed and converted into written form for further elaboration. Subsequently, the transcripts were read and summarized into briefer statement in which the main sense of what was said rephrased in words. Finally, the interview data were categorized and interpreted to
discover students’ difficulties in writing narrative texts. 3.6Conclusion Remarks
This chapter has clarified the methodology of the study which covers formulation of problems, research design, site and participants, data collection, and data analysis. Case-study was used as the research design. The data of this study, in form of students’ writing and interview record, were taken from one public high school in Purwakarta, The students’ texts then were analyzed through certain phases employing various concepts from other researchers. The findings and discussion from the data will be elaborated further in chapter VI.
(24)
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This section provides conclusions and offers recommendations. The conclusions are formulated from findings and discussions of the research in answering the research problems. The recommendations, which are proposed to English teachers, are intended for the improvement of English learning process. For further researchers, the recommendations are expected for the improvement of future research, specifically in analyzing students’ writing.
5.1 Conclusion
Having analyzed the students’ narrative texts and portray how the generic structure, transitivity, and grammatical errors in the students’ texts, the conclusions taken from findings and discussions of this research are as follow.
1. In terms of general understanding, most of the students have acquired the main purpose and the schematic structures of a narrative text. This conclusion can be taken according to several research findings. Firstly, from the total 34 students, there are six students who failed to write a narrative text as they were directed. Secondly, the result of analyzing the schematic structures on students’ work proves that their texts meets the text organization requirement as a narrative. Lastly, The interview result, both from the teacher and the students confirmed the students’ knowledge of narratives
(25)
2. Regarding to the transitivity analysis, the processes and circumstances found from the students’ text are varied. Material processes seem to be the most-appearing process in students’ writing. This is to describe the serial action of events which are performed by the actor in their texts. Mental process comes as the second most-appearing process followed consecutively by relational process. In addition, the circumstances of time, manner, and place frequently appear in the students’ texts to enhance the story.
3. Students’ grammatical errors found in their works are varied. Accordingly, the occurrence of error frequency starts from the error of verb pattern, sentence sprawl, and punctuation. These errors are caused by a number of over-generalization, ignorance of rule restriction and incomplete application of rules that students do while they are writing.
4. To give an evaluation on students writing is a crucial issue. Students may not notice to the errors and mistakes that they made. This causes students to repeat the same errors and mistakes in the future
5.2 Recommendation
There are some recommendations which can be useful for English teachers and further researchers. The recommendations, which are based upon findings of the research, are as follows.
1. It is suggested that teachers use other approaches of teaching writing in accordance with the genre that is being taught. Teaching grammar rules separately would lead students to be unable to write a complete and
(26)
functional text. In the other side, giving a material about texts by ignoring the supporting aspects may lead students’ works to be less communicative or even fail to deliver its message.
2. Teachers are suggested to pay attention with the transitivity system of the students’ works. Assessing this aspect may investigate the quality of their writing. Based on this assessment, teachers would gain information which is helpful to improve students’ writing ability.
3. For another further research, it is important to make other attempt in other
SFL aspects, such as the thematic system and/or mood system. Besides, further research may portray the other kinds of genres. Afterward, next research may focus on problems of the implementation of teaching writing.
(27)
Bibliography
Alwasilah, A. C. (2008). Pokoknya Qualitative. Jakarta: PT. Dunia Pustaka Jaya.
Arikunto, Suharsimi. (1995). Manajemen Penelitian. Rineka Cipta. Jakarta.
Bavali, and Sadighi. (2008). Chomsky Universal Grammar and Halliday’s
Systemic Functional Linguistic: An Appraisal and a Compromise . Shiraz
Branch: Azad University.
Bawarshi, Anis S., and Reiff, Marry Jo. (2010). Genre: An Introduction to
History, Theory, ResearcH, and Pedagogy. USA: Potlor Press.
Brown, H. Douglas. (2001). Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to
Language Pedagogy
Brown, H. Douglas. (2007). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching . Fourth Edition. New York: Person Education.
Butt, D., Fahey, R., Feez, S., Spinks, S., Yallop, C. (2000). Using functional grammar. An explorer’s guide. 2nd Edition. Sydney: National Centre for English Teaching and Research. Macquarie University.
Christie, F., and Derewianka, B. (2008). School discourse. London: Continuum.
Corder, S.P. (1981). Error Analysis and Interlanguage. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Cohen, Andrew D. (1994) . Assessing Language Ability in The Classroom. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publiher
(28)
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing
Among Five Approaches 2nd ed.. California: SAGE Publications.
Damayanti, I.L, A.B. Muslim, and I. Nurlaelawati. (2008). Analisis Relevansi
Mata Kuliah English For Young Learners dengan Kebutuhan Pembelajaran Bahasa Inggris di Sekolah Dasar. A Research Report UPI:
Unpublished
Depdiknas (2006). Standar Kompetensi. Mata pelajaran Bahasa Inggris.
Sekolah Menengah Atas dan Madrasah Aliyah. Jakarta: Depdiknas.
Derewianka, B. (1990). Exploring how texts works. Newton: PETA.
Derewianka, B. (1998). A Grammar Companion. For Primary Teacher. Newton: PETA
Derewianka, B. (2003). ‘Trends and issues in Genre-Based Approaches‘. RELC
Journal. Vol. 34 No. 2. August, 2003.
Eggins, S. (1994). An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics . London: Printer Publishers, Ltd.
Ellis, Rod. (1985). Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Oxford University Press.
Emilia, E. (2005). A Critical Genre Based Approach to Teaching Academic
Writing in a Tertary EFL Context in Indonesia. A Ph.D thesis submitted to
the University of Melbourne
(29)
Emilia, E. (2010). Teaching Writing, Developing Critical Learners. Bandung : Rizqi Press
Frankael, J. K. and Wallen, N. E. (2006). How to Design and Evaluate Research
in Education, 6th ed.. New York: McGraw Hill.
Feez, S. and Joyce H. (2000). Writing Skills. Narrative and nonfiction text types. Melbourne: Phoenix Education Pty. Ltd
Gay, L.R. (1987). Educational Research: Competence fo Analysis and
Appication. Ohio: Merril Publishing Company
Gerot, L. & Wignel, P. (1994). Making Sense of Functional Grammar. Australia
Given, L. M. (2008). The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods . California: SAGE Publications.
Halliday, M. A K, (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London, Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. (2nd Ed). London: Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M.A.K., Mathiessen, C.M.I.M. (2004). An Introduction to
Functional Grammar. (3rd Ed). Revised by Mathiessen, C.M.I.M.
London, Edward Arnold
Harmer, J. (2001). The Practice of English Language Teaching. Pearson Education Limited.
(30)
Harmer, J. (2004). How to Teach Writing. Malaysia. Pearson Limited.
Hatch, J. A. (2002). Doing Qualitative Research in Education Settings. New York: State University of New York Press.
Hughes, Arthur. (1989). Testing for Language Teacher. United Kingdom Cambridge University Press..
Knapp, P., and Watskin, M. (2005). Genre, Text, Grammar. Australia: University of New South Wales Press Ltd.
Lado, Robert. (1961). Language Testing. Longman Group Limited. Hong Kong.
Levine, Mel. (1993). Developmental Variatioan an Lwaening Disorders. Educators Publishing Service. Incorporated
Lock, G. (1996). Functional English Grammar: An Introduction for Second
Language Teachers. Cambridge Univ. Press.
Lopa, Vista Mesa. (2012). Students’ Ability in Writing Descriptive Text. Bandung. Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.
King, and Stanley. (1989). Writing common error. From www.reaseachheaven.com/commonerror.htm accessed on April 2013
Madsen, Harold S. (1983). Techniques in Testing. Oxford University Press. Hong Kong.
(31)
Merriam, S. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in
education. Revised and expanded from: Case study research in education.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Morris, William. (1981). The Grolier International Dictionary. Massachusetts. Houghton Mifflin Company.
Nunan, D. (1992). Research Methods in language learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Nunan, D. (1989). Second Language Teaching and Learning. USA: Heinle & Heinle Publisher. Cambridge.
Richard, Jack C. (1974). ERROR ANALYSIS: Perspective on Second
Language Acquisition. Longman Group Limited. Singapore.
Riesky. (2010). Reseach Method, A Compilation of Learning Material. Indonesia Universiti Of Education: Unpublished
Tarigan, Henry Guntur and Djago Tarigan. (1990). Pengajaran Analisis
Kesalahan Berbahasa.
Thomson, A.J. and A.V. Martinet. (1986). A Practical English Grammar. Oxford University Press. Hong Kong.
Thonus, T. (1993).”Tutors as teachers: Assisting ESL/EFL students in the writing center.” TheWriting Center Journal, 13, p. 13-26.
(32)
Yuliana. (2008). Students’ Error Analysis in Writing Narrative text. Bandung. Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia: Unpublished.
Yuniarto, Anto. (2007). An Error Analysis on the Use of Auxiliary Verbs: Do,
(1)
Tabah Ghifary Diniya, 2013
Bibliography
Alwasilah, A. C. (2008). Pokoknya Qualitative. Jakarta: PT. Dunia Pustaka Jaya.
Arikunto, Suharsimi. (1995). Manajemen Penelitian. Rineka Cipta. Jakarta.
Bavali, and Sadighi. (2008). Chomsky Universal Grammar and Halliday’s Systemic Functional Linguistic: An Appraisal and a Compromise . Shiraz Branch: Azad University.
Bawarshi, Anis S., and Reiff, Marry Jo. (2010). Genre: An Introduction to History, Theory, ResearcH, and Pedagogy. USA: Potlor Press.
Brown, H. Douglas. (2001). Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy
Brown, H. Douglas. (2007). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching . Fourth Edition. New York: Person Education.
Butt, D., Fahey, R., Feez, S., Spinks, S., Yallop, C. (2000). Using functional grammar. An explorer’s guide. 2nd Edition. Sydney: National Centre for English Teaching and Research. Macquarie University.
Christie, F., and Derewianka, B. (2008). School discourse. London: Continuum.
Corder, S.P. (1981). Error Analysis and Interlanguage. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Cohen, Andrew D. (1994) . Assessing Language Ability in The Classroom. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publiher
(2)
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches 2nd ed.. California: SAGE Publications.
Damayanti, I.L, A.B. Muslim, and I. Nurlaelawati. (2008). Analisis Relevansi Mata Kuliah English For Young Learners dengan Kebutuhan Pembelajaran Bahasa Inggris di Sekolah Dasar. A Research Report UPI: Unpublished
Depdiknas (2006). Standar Kompetensi. Mata pelajaran Bahasa Inggris. Sekolah Menengah Atas dan Madrasah Aliyah. Jakarta: Depdiknas.
Derewianka, B. (1990). Exploring how texts works. Newton: PETA.
Derewianka, B. (1998). A Grammar Companion. For Primary Teacher. Newton: PETA
Derewianka, B. (2003). ‘Trends and issues in Genre-Based Approaches‘. RELC Journal. Vol. 34 No. 2. August, 2003.
Eggins, S. (1994). An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics . London: Printer Publishers, Ltd.
Ellis, Rod. (1985). Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Oxford University Press.
Emilia, E. (2005). A Critical Genre Based Approach to Teaching Academic Writing in a Tertary EFL Context in Indonesia. A Ph.D thesis submitted to the University of Melbourne
(3)
Tabah Ghifary Diniya, 2013
Emilia, E. (2010). Teaching Writing, Developing Critical Learners. Bandung : Rizqi Press
Frankael, J. K. and Wallen, N. E. (2006). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education, 6th ed.. New York: McGraw Hill.
Feez, S. and Joyce H. (2000). Writing Skills. Narrative and nonfiction text types. Melbourne: Phoenix Education Pty. Ltd
Gay, L.R. (1987). Educational Research: Competence fo Analysis and Appication. Ohio: Merril Publishing Company
Gerot, L. & Wignel, P. (1994). Making Sense of Functional Grammar. Australia
Given, L. M. (2008). The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods . California: SAGE Publications.
Halliday, M. A K, (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London, Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. (2nd Ed). London: Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M.A.K., Mathiessen, C.M.I.M. (2004). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. (3rd Ed). Revised by Mathiessen, C.M.I.M. London, Edward Arnold
Harmer, J. (2001). The Practice of English Language Teaching. Pearson Education Limited.
(4)
Harmer, J. (2004). How to Teach Writing. Malaysia. Pearson Limited.
Hatch, J. A. (2002). Doing Qualitative Research in Education Settings. New York: State University of New York Press.
Hughes, Arthur. (1989). Testing for Language Teacher. United Kingdom Cambridge University Press..
Knapp, P., and Watskin, M. (2005). Genre, Text, Grammar. Australia: University of New South Wales Press Ltd.
Lado, Robert. (1961). Language Testing. Longman Group Limited. Hong Kong.
Levine, Mel. (1993). Developmental Variatioan an Lwaening Disorders. Educators Publishing Service. Incorporated
Lock, G. (1996). Functional English Grammar: An Introduction for Second Language Teachers. Cambridge Univ. Press.
Lopa, Vista Mesa. (2012). Students’ Ability in Writing Descriptive Text. Bandung. Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.
King, and Stanley. (1989). Writing common error. From
www.reaseachheaven.com/commonerror.htm accessed on April 2013
Madsen, Harold S. (1983). Techniques in Testing. Oxford University Press. Hong Kong.
(5)
Tabah Ghifary Diniya, 2013
Merriam, S. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. Revised and expanded from: Case study research in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Morris, William. (1981). The Grolier International Dictionary. Massachusetts. Houghton Mifflin Company.
Nunan, D. (1992). Research Methods in language learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Nunan, D. (1989). Second Language Teaching and Learning. USA: Heinle & Heinle Publisher. Cambridge.
Richard, Jack C. (1974). ERROR ANALYSIS: Perspective on Second Language Acquisition. Longman Group Limited. Singapore.
Riesky. (2010). Reseach Method, A Compilation of Learning Material. Indonesia Universiti Of Education: Unpublished
Tarigan, Henry Guntur and Djago Tarigan. (1990). Pengajaran Analisis Kesalahan Berbahasa.
Thomson, A.J. and A.V. Martinet. (1986). A Practical English Grammar. Oxford University Press. Hong Kong.
Thonus, T. (1993).”Tutors as teachers: Assisting ESL/EFL students in the writing
center.” TheWriting Center Journal, 13, p. 13-26.
(6)
Yuliana. (2008). Students’ Error Analysis in Writing Narrative text. Bandung. Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia: Unpublished.
Yuniarto, Anto. (2007). An Error Analysis on the Use of Auxiliary Verbs: Do, Does, Did. Universitas Mohammadiyah Purwokerto