THE USE OF DICTOGLOSS AND DICTO-COMP IN IMPROVING STUDENTS’ WRITING SKILL IN RECOUNT TEXT: A Comparative Study at Mts Negeri 2 Mataram in Academic Year 20162017

  

THE USE OF DICTOGLOSS AND DICTO-COMP IN IMPROVING

STUDENTS’ WRITING SKILL IN RECOUNT TEXT: A Comparative

Study at Mts Negeri 2 Mataram in Academic Year 2016/2017

  

A JOURNAL

Submitted as a Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for

Sarjana Pendidikan (S.Pd.) Degree in English Education Department Faculty

of Teacher Training and Education Mataram University

BY:

  

ALVI SAFARA

E1D 113 013

ENGLISH EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM

LANGUAGE AND ARTS DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION

MATARAM UNIVERSITY

2017

  

THE USE OF DICTOGLOSS AND DICTO-COMP IN IMPROVING

STUDENTS’ WRITING SKILL IN RECOUNT TEXT: A Comparative

Study at Mts Negeri 2 Mataram in Academic Year 2016/2017

ALVI SAFARA

  

E1D113013

ABSTRACT

  This study is aimed to find out and which method, between dictogloss and dicto-comp is th more effective in teaching writing skill at the 8 grade students at MTs Negeri 2 Mataram in academic year 2016/2017. The population for this research were the eight grade of MTs Negeri 02 Mataram. The eight grade students consist of 6 classes, there were 25-42 students in each class. Thus, the population of this study was 84 students. The method of this research was comparative study with pre-test and post-test design. The data collected was from the result of pre-test and post-test. There were 66 students as the sample of the research. There were 33 students in dictogloss group and 33 students of dicto-comp group. In conducting the research, the dictogloss group was taught by dictogloss technique, while the dicto-comp group was taught by dicto-comp technique. The mean score of the pretest of the dictogloss and the dicto-comp group are 45.90 and 45.75 respectively. The mean score of the post-test of the dictogloss and dicto-comp groups are 58.78 and 49.54 respectively. Furthermore, the score of t-test was 2.775 and the value of t-table was 1.671 at the confidence level 0.05 (95%) and 2.390 at the confidence level 0.01 (99%) using one

  • –tailed table test in degree of freedom (df) 64. Those result indicated that Dictogloss was more effective than Dicto- comp in improving students’ writing skill in recount text.

  Key terms: Comparative, writing skill, dictogloss, dicto-comp

  

PENGGUNAAN DICTOGLOSS DAN DICTO-COMP DALAM

MENINGKATKAN KEMAMPUAN MENULIS SISWA PADA TEKS

RECOUNT : Comparative Study di MTs Negeri 02 Mataram Tahun Ajaran

2016/2017

  

ALVI SAFARA

E1D113013

ABSTRAK

  Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui dan memilih metode antara dictogloss dan dicto-comp yang lebih efektif dalam mengajarkan kemampuan menulis siswa pada kelas 8 di MTs Negeri 02 Mataram tahun ajaran 2016/2017. Populasi pada penelitian ini yakni siswa kelas 8 di MTs Negeri 02 Mataram. Metode pada penelitian ini adalah comparative study dengan menggunakan pre-test dan post-test. Dengan demikian, pengumpulan data didapat dari hasil pre-test and post-test. Jumlah total sampel adalah sebanyak 33 siswa pada kelompok dictogloss dan 33 siswa pada kelompok dicto-comp. dalam melakukan penelitian ini, kelompok dictogloss diberikan teknik dictogloss, sedangkan kelompok dicto-comp diberikan teknik dicto-comp. Nilai rata-rata pre-test yang diperoleh pada kelompok dictogloss dan dicto-comp adalah 45.90 dan 45.75. Sedangkan nilai rata-rata post-test yang diperoleh masing-masing kelompok adalah 58.78 dan 49.54. Selanjutnya, nilai t-test adalah 2.775 dan nilai dari t-table adalah 1.671 pada tingkat 0.05 (95%) dan 2.390 pada tingkat 0.01 (99%) menggunakan tabel one-tailed dengan df (degree of

  

freedom ) 64. Hasil tersebut dapat dijelaskan bahwa teknik Dictogloss lebih efektif dari

  pada teknik Dicto-comp dalam meningkatkan kemampuan menulis siswa pada teks recount.

  Kata kunci: Comparative, kemampuan menulis, dictogloss, dicto-comp.

1. INTRODUCTION

  Writing is considered as the most difficult aspect of language learning for

students in every grade level, because students are struggling to write their ideas

and students have to think about their ideas. According to the Standard of 2013

Curriculum for Junior High School in Indonesia, students should learn about

recount text. Recount text is a text that retells what happened, consisting of a

series of personal events.

  Based on the researcher observation at MTs Negeri 2 Mataram, the

most common problem faced by students is having lack of ideas when they try

to write paragraphs. English teacher states that the student’s ability in writing

skill is low, especially to organize their ideas, opinions, and develop paragraphs.

  

The English teacher rarely gives students writing assignment, so their writing

ability and the students’ selection of vocabulary are considered low. Also, their

grammar knowledge and punctuation used are usually inadequate.

  In order to solve students’ problem in writing recount text, the

researcher will try to use Dictogloss and Dicto-comp, also compare those

techniques. Wajnryb (1990) in Vasiljevic (2010) explains dictogloss as a

classroom activity where teacher will dictate a text and students listen carefully.

Furthermore, students write down key

  • –words and then work together to

    reconstruct the keywords into their own paragraph with their own words.

    Meanwhile, dicto-comp is also known as dictation and composition. Dicto-comp

    is the technique where the teacher reads the whole paragraph three times and the

    students are only given a chance to write their work after the teacher finished the

    third reading. The students should recall the whole story and write the story as a

    reproduction of what they heard (Oller, 1979). Finally, the researcher focus on

    research to use Dictogloss (DG) and compare with Dicto-comp (DC) as a

    technique to improve students’ ability in teaching writing recount text at second

    grade of MTs Negeri 2 Mataram.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

  1) Writing Rivers (1981:291) explains that writing is more difficult than speaking in which writing seems like “communicating into space”. In communication situated, there is a little time to think about what the speaker would saying and produce it properly.

  According to Martin (1985) writing is processes to bring the experience and thought into the reality, also into arbitrary system. It means that, to express our ideas into sentences or paragraphs, we must have ideas or experiences. Meanwhile, Coffin (2003) attempt that writing is producing something through a paper, therefore people can read, perform it, also use it. In teaching writing, the teacher encourages student to produce their ideas and thoughts into written form so that people can read it. In this case, the students could not do it by themselves therefore the teacher obligates to provide them some advices through teaching and learning process. 2) The Importance of Teaching Writing

  As a teacher, they have to deliver strategy and media which accordance to the material and students’ level. When a teacher could not adapt with the students’ ability in writing, the students will not pay attention and focus on what the teacher has presented. The teacher should have time management and classroom management when teaching writing, teachers should reduce the time when they give task for the students to write something, and use a strategy which helps teacher to abridge the exact time appropriately. Therefore, the teacher does not use much time and students will produce a good writing. 3) Definition of Recount Text

  Recount text is the genres of the text which has a general function to retell events in order to inform and entertain the reader. When we write or tell a story which happened in the past it means that we write about recount text. The types of recount text may be biographies, autobiographies, newspaper reports of events, histories, letters, diaries, journals, eye —witness

accounts of incidents, and accounts of accidents submitted for insurances

claims (Heinemann, 1997 in Husniati 2011).

  4) Dictation According t o Oller (1979), “dictation is a task which requires the

processing of temporally constrained sequences of material in the language,

divided up to the stream of speech and then refers down what is heard

requires understanding the meaning of material.” It means that dictation is

not only the activity of listening comprehension and repeating the sound in

written form. 5) Definition of Dicto-comp

  Dicto-comp is the type of dictation which actually a combination

of two forms, namely dictation and composition (Oller, 1979). Here, the

teacher reads the whole passage three times and the students are only given

chance to write their work after the teacher has finished the third reading.

The students must listen carefully each time the paragraph is read. They

should recall the whole story and write the story as a reproduction of what

they heard. The students should write it as close as possible to the original

paragraph. Teacher must prepare the students well before they do the task.

The preparation provides the students with ideas, language items, and the

organization of text (Nation, 1991). Therefore, students can focus on the

skill aspect which is writing in the case of the dicto-comp. Dicto-comp can

be done in every student proficiency level. 6) Definition of Dictogloss

  This method helps students to develop their paragraph with the key

  • –words which have been dictated by the teacher during the dictation activity (Nunan, 1991). This method also makes students more active in understanding and comprehending the text. In addition, students will make inferences thing that not directly stated in the text and identifies the type and the topic of the text. Dictogloss provides a context in which students’ grammar is improve through the productive use of grammar. Dictogloss
could be an effective way for teaching strategy because it makes students aware of their own strengths and weaknesses in learning English during the small group activity. 7) Previous Study a) The study by Shofiyah (2010). The aim of this study was to find out the empirical evidence about the effectiveness of dictogloss technique towards students’ narrative writing at the first-grade students of SMA Manba’ul Ulum. The method of this study was quantitative method. This study used quasi experimental design with pre-test and post-test. The o result of this study showed that the value of t (t-observation) was 5.26.

  The value of t t (t-table) with degree of freedom 38 in significance degree 5 % was 2.02 and in significance degree 1% was 2.71. It indicates that t o t was higher than t or 2.02 < 5.26 > 2.71. As a result, the null hypothesis (Ho) was rejected and the alternative hypothesis (Ha) was fail to be rejected. Hence, it was inferred that there was a significant difference between students’ narrative writing score who were taught by dictogloss technique and those who were not taught by using dictogloss technique.

  b) The Study by Anis (2013) entitled “The Writing Skill of the Eleventh Grade Students of SMK Tunas Harapan Pati Taught by Using Dicto- comp Technique in the Academic Year 2013/2014”. The study was an experimental research. The level of the writing skill of the eleventh- grade students of SMK Tunas Harapan Pati in the academic year 2013/2014 after being taught by using dicto-comp technique is improving although several students still performed adequately.

  Therefore, there is a significant difference between the writing skills of the eleventh-grade students of SMK Tunas Harapan Pati in the academic year 2013/2014.

3. RESEARCH METHOD

  1) Research Design

  In this research, the researcher used comparative research design as a method. 2) Population and Sample

  The population of the research was second grade students of MTs Negeri 2 Mataram in academic year 2016/2017. The eight grade students consist of 6 classes, there were 25-42 students in each class, and the total number of the students was 225. Each class consists of 42 students. Thus, the population of this study was 84 students. The technique that was used in this study was purposive sampling. The researcher used VIII C and VIII D. The students of those classes have the similarity in terms of ability and age. The researcher found it from the observation in the previous semester. 3) Method of Data Collection

  In this research, the researcher used writing test in collecting the data. The data obtained through: a.

  Pre-test.

  b.

  Treatments.

  c.

  Post-test. 4) Data Analysis Procedure

  After all of the data were collected, they were analyzed using the rubric

of assessment. Rubric of assessment is a form to check students’ ability in

teaching and learning process by indicating some points of view below.

  No. Aspects of Writing Score Description Recount Text

  1 Content

  50 Excellent to very good: clear understanding the task and the content is clear

  40 Good: understanding of the task, well developed

  30 Fair: a weak understanding, thinly developed

  20 Inadequate: little or no understanding of the task minimally developed Unacceptable: blank, off topic, illegible

  2 Lexico grammatical

  30 Excellent to very good: follows the rules features that build a text, such as: focus on specific participants, uses of material processes, circumstance of time and place, use of past tense and focus on temporal sequence.

  20 Good: it generally follows the rules that build a text

  10 Fair: enough follow the rules that build a text

  5 Inadequate: not follow the rules Unacceptable: Blank of topic, illegible

  3 Generic structure

  20 Excellent to very good: follows the rules that build a text, such as: orientation, series of events and reorientation

  15 Good: generally, it follows the rules that build a text

  10 Fair: enough follow the rules that build a text

  5 Inadequate: not follow the rules Unacceptable: blank of topic, illegible

  (adapted from Heaton: 1975)

  Subsequently, the researcher used the formula to find the t-value using the following formulas:

1. Finding out the mean score of both classes, DG group (x) and DC (y), by the totaling all of the scores in each classes.

  ∑ a.

  Mdx = N ∑dy b.

  Mdy = N 2.

  The next step was calculating the square mean deviation by using the following formula.

  a.

  The square mean deviation of DG group: (∑x)2

  2

  2 ∑X = ∑dx

  • Nx b.

  The square mean deviation of DC group: (∑y)2

  2

  2 ∑Y = ∑dy

  • Ny 3.

  Then the correlation coefficient was calculated of the two mean scores whether they are categorized as significant or not, the formula below will be used:

  − t

  • – test =

  ∑ 2+ ∑ 2

  1

  1 √( )( + )

  • −2 4.

  The last step was to count the degree of freedom, the following formula will be used: df = (Nx + Ny)

  • – 2 Where: T-test = the degree of difference Mdx = the mean deviation score of samples in X (DG group) Mdy = the mean deviation score of samples in Y (DC group)

  2

= the total number of square deviation of sample in X

∑dx

  2

= the total number of square deviation of sample in Y

∑dy

  Nx = the total sample in X Ny = the total sample in Y (Arikunto, 2006) 4.

PURPOSE OF STUDY

  The purpose of this study is to: 1.

  To find out which technique is more effective between dictogloss and th dicto-comp in teaching writing recount text at the 8 grade of MTs Negeri 2 Mataram in Academic Year 2016/2017.

5. RESULTS

  The lowest score of pre-test in dictogloss group was 10 and for dicto-comp

group was 30. The highest score of the pre-test for dictogloss group was 80 while

the highest score of the pre-test in dicto-comp group was 85. The lowest score of

post-test for dictogloss was 35 and for the dicto-comp group was 30. While the

highest score of post-test for dictogloss was 90 and for dicto-comp group was 90.

Table 4.1.1 The Score of Pre-test and Post-Test of Dictogloss (X) and Dicto- comp Group (Y)

  No. Sample Pre-Test Post-Test No. Sample Pre-Test Post-Test (X1) (X2) (Y1) (Y2)

  1 ANR

  55

  80

  1 AGAB

  80

  70

  2 AAA

  50

  60

  2 BDJ

  35

  50

  3 AFR

  40

  55

  3 FR

  30

  35

  4 AHY

  40

  80

  24 NRA

  40

  85

  24 PH

  30

  45

  25 NF

  65

  23 PSH

  25 RKS

  65

  65

  26 PH

  35

  35

  26 RM

  50

  35

  50

  90

  55

  55

  20 KA

  40

  35

  20 IJ

  30

  50

  21 LD

  35

  21 NF

  70

  60

  55

  22 M

  30

  40

  22 NMAA

  55

  60

  23 MA

  27 RS

  70

  55

  33 YF

  55

  55

  32 WA

  30

  40

  32 SM

  50

  35

  45

  55

  60

  33 MRAF

  55

  65 Total 1515 1940 Total 1510 1635 MEAN

  45.90

  58.78 MEAN

  45.75

  49.54 Table 4.1.1 above shows that there were 4 students who got the minimum

  

standard score 70 in the pre-test of the dictogloss group, while 29 students got

score under 70. In the dicto-comp group, there were 2 students who got up to the

minimum standard score 70 in the pre-test, while 31 students got score under 70.

In the dictogloss group, 10 students got the minimum standard score in the post-

test and 23 students got score under 70. While in the dicto-comp group, 3 students

got the minimum standard score in post-test, and 30 students got score under 70.

  31 NSU

  35

  27 SNK

  80

  85

  90

  28 RC

  75

  65

  28 TMC

  50

  30

  29 R

  80

  31 SNA

  29 WA

  50

  60

  30 SSE

  55

  75

  30 ZAM

  45

  40

  50

  19 HMS

  30

  30

  55

  8 MR

  35

  45

  9 LMTK

  40

  45

  9 MRA

  35

  8 LMZ

  10 MA

  50

  55

  10 MT

  30

  65

  11 MSA

  45

  50

  40

  35

  30

  30

  70

  4 F

  50

  40

  5 DR

  35

  50

  5 HNA

  30

  6 FAT

  25

  30

  50

  6 LMS

  45

  65

  7 IP

  55

  50

  7 MA

  11 RRH

  40

  45

  17 GS

  50

  70

  16 DA

  45

  40

  17 HJ

  40

  55

  50

  50

  55

  18 HTS

  55

  70

  18 H

  55

  55

  19 IP

  50

  16 DR

  50

  12 AA

  35

  80

  55

  12 WMK

  30

  30

  13 AR

  55

  70

  13 BAAF

  40

  15 BHPS

  14 AEA

  10

  40

  14 BHJ

  40

  40

  15 DI

  40

  65

  After distributing the pre-test scores and post-test scores, the deviation

score was calculated in which it can be seen further in Table 4.1.2 and 4.1.3

  

below. Table 4.1.2 shows the deviation score of Dictogloss group, while Table

4.1.3 shows the deviation score of Dicto-comp group.

  25

  40

  24 NRA

  90 20 400

  70

  23 MA

  40 10 100

  30

  22 M

  55 20 400

  35

  21 LD

  40 35 -5

  25 NF

  20 KA

  25

  50 45 -5

  19 IP

  70 15 225

  55

  18 HTS

  55 15 225

  40

  17 HJ

  70 20 400

  85 45 2025

  40

  16 DR

  55

  45.90

  60 15 225 Total 1515 1940 420 11600 MEAN

  45

  33 YF

  40 10 100

  30

  32 WA

  55 15 225

  35

  31 SNA

  75 20 400

  30 SSE

  65 25 625

  80

  80

  29 R

  75 65 -10 100

  28 RC

  70 15 225

  55

  27 RS

  35

  35

  26 PH

  50

  65 25 625

Table 4.1.2 The deviation score of Dictogloss Group

  55 15 225

  55 50 -5

  7 IP

  50 20 400

  30

  6 FAT

  50 15 225

  35

  5 DR

  70 40 1600

  30

  4 AHY

  40

  8 LMZ

  3 AFR

  60 10 100

  50

  2 AAA

  80 25 625

  55

  1 ANR

  Square Deviation Score (Dx 2 )

  Deviation Square of Pre-Test and Post-Test (Dx)

  Post-Test (X2)

  No. Sample Pre-Test (X1)

  25

  40

  40

  50

  15 DI

  40 30 900

  10

  14 AEA

  70 15 225

  55

  13 AR

  80 55 -25 625

  12 AA

  25

  5

  45

  55 15 225

  11 MSA

  25

  5

  55

  50

  10 MA

  25

  5

  45

  40

  9 LMTK

  58.78

Table 4.1.3 The deviation score of Dicto-comp Group

  21 NF

  24 PH

  80 30 900

  50

  23 PSH

  25

  5

  60

  55

  22 NMAA

  25

  60 55 -5

  50 20 400

  45 15 225

  30

  20 IJ

  25

  55 50 -5

  19 HMS

  55

  55

  18 H

  25

  5

  55

  30

  25 RKS

  17 GS

  30 ZAM

  45.75

  65 10 100 Total 1510 1635 125 5175 MEAN

  55

  33 MRAF

  50 35 -15 225

  32 SM

  55

  55

  31 NSU

  25

  45 40 -5

  60 10 100

  65

  50

  29 WA

  50 30 -20 400

  28 TMC

  25

  5

  90

  85

  27 SNK

  50 35 -15 225

  26 RM

  65

  50

  25

  No. Sample Pre-Test (Y1)

  25

  35 10 100

  25

  7 MA

  65 20 400

  45

  6 LMS

  30

  30

  5 HNA

  50 40 -10 100

  4 F

  5

  35

  35

  30

  3 FR

  50 15 225

  35

  2 BDJ

  80 70 -10 100

  1 AGAB

  Square Deviation Score (Dy 2 )

  Deviation Score of Pre- Test and Post-Test (Dy)

  Post-Test (Y2)

  8 MR

  45 10 100

  45 40 -5

  13 BAAF

  16 DA

  50

  50

  15 BHPS

  40

  40

  14 BHJ

  25

  5

  40

  35

  30

  9 MRA

  30

  12 WMK

  40 10 100

  30

  11 RRH

  65 35 1225

  30

  10 MT

  25

  5

  35

  30

  49.54 Based on Table 4.1.2 and Table 4.1.3 above, it can be seen that there is

improvement of the students’ score of both classes after accepting the treatments.

  

The mean score of the pretest of the dictogloss and the dicto-comp group are

45.90 and 45.75 respectively. In addition, the mean score of the post-test of the

dictogloss and dicto-comp groups are 58.78 and 49.54 respectively. Thus, the

mean score of dictogloss group is higher than that of the dicto-comp group in the

pre-test and the post-test. It means that students’ writing skill on dictogloss group was better than the dicto-comp group.

  Otherwise, the deviation score of the dictogloss is 420 and the square

deviation is 11600. Meanwhile, the deviation score of the dicto-comp group is 125

and the square deviation is 5175. The deviation score and the square deviation of

the dictogloss group is higher than that of the dicto-comp group. Then, the

researcher computed the mean deviation score and sum of square deviation score

of both classes to decide the significance of deviation by using following

formulas: Mean deviation score of Dictogloss group and Dicto-comp group.

  ∑ ∑dy Mdx = And Mdy =

  N N 420 125 Mdx = Mdy = = 12.727 = 3.787

  33

  33 Sum of Square deviation score of Dictogloss group and Dicto-comp group.

  2 2 (∑x)2

  2 2 (∑y)2

  • Nx
  • And ∑X = ∑dx ∑Y = ∑dy

  Ny (420)2 (125)2 = 11600 - = 5175 -

  33

  33 176400 15625 = 11600 - = 5175 -

  33

  33 = 11600 = 5175

  • – 5345.454 – 473.484

    = 6254.546 = 4701.516

    After that, the researcher calculated the data to know the t-value by using the

    following t-test formula:

  − t

  • –test =

  ∑ 2+ ∑ 2

  1

  1

  • √( )( )
  • −2

  12.727−3.787 =

  6254.546+4701.516

  1

  1 √( )( ) +

  33 +33−2

  33

  33

  8.94 =

  10956.062

  2 √( )( )

  64

  33

  8.94 =

  21912.124 √( )

  2112

  8.94 =

  √10.375

  8.94 =

  3.22 = 2.775 The result shows that the t-value is 2.775. However, in order to know the meaning of this value, the researcher had to check the t

  • –table to find minimum

    coefficient for the difference in score to be significant. Before that, the researcher

    needed to decide the degree of freedom (df) as the interpretation to compare the

    critical value, t –test and t–table.

  df = (Nx + Ny)

  • – 2 = (33 + 33)
  • – 2
  • – 2 = 64 Finally, the researcher compared the result of t-test and t-table to know the significant difference of two groups using one –tailed table test.

Table 4.1.4 Degree of Freedom

  Value of t-test Value of t-table (one

  • –tailed test) Degree of

  

0.05

  0.01 Freedom (Confidence level (Confidence level of 95%) of 99%) 2.775 64 1.671 2.390 According to the t-table, it can be seen that the value of t-test is 2.775 and

the degree of freedom (df) is 64. Meanwhile, value of t-table on confidence level

of 0.05 (95%) is 1.671 and on the confidence level of 0.01 (99%) is 2.390. It

means that the effectiveness of the treatment is significant.

6. DISCUSSION

  The purpose of this research was to know which technique is more effective

between dictogloss and dicto-comp in teaching writing recount text at 8th grade of

MTs Negeri 2 Mataram in Academic Year 2016/2017.

  There were only 33 students who joined this research of each groups. The

result of the data provided by the researcher above showed that there was

difference between the deviation score of class that used dictogloss and dicto-

comp. The mean deviation score of dictogloss class was 12.727. Meanwhile,

dicto-comp class showed that the deviation score was 3.787. In other words, the

mean deviation score in dictogloss class was higher than dicto-comp class. The

value of t-test was 2.775 and the value of t-table on confidence level 0.05 (95%)

was 1.671 and t-table on confidence level 0.01 (99%) was 2.390 in the degree

freedom (df) 64. It means that, the value of t-test was higher than the t-table.

When the value of t-Test is higher or equal to the value of t-table on level 0.05

and 0.01, Ha is failed to be rejected.

  Dictogloss is more effective than dicto-comp because students in DG class were taught to written down the key

  • –words (verbs and adjectives) from the

    passage that have been dictated by the teacher. Each groups have to discuss and

    reconstructed the key –words into their own paragraph. According to Nunan

    (1991) this method also makes students more active in understanding and

    comprehending the text. In addition, students make inferences on the things that

    are not directly stated in the text and identify the type and the topic of the text.

  Meanwhile in the DC group, students were not allowed to write before the

researcher finished reading the paragraph three times. Dicto-comp is known as

traditional dictation exercise which students write what they remembered. It is

supported by Wishon and Burks (1968), dicto-comp extent the students write the

passage which has been dictated by the teacher and rewrite the passage

contextually with structural correctness. Because this kind of technique, the

students were getting lack of memorizing the passage and rewrite the passage

meaningfully.

  Based on those explanation, the researcher finally concluded that the Null

Hypothesis (Ho) that states, “Dictogloss is not more effective in improving

students’ writing skill specifically in recount text” is rejected. Whereas,

Alternative Hypothesis (Ha) which states “Dictogloss is more effective in

improving students’ writing skill specifically in recount text” is failed to be

rejected by ignoring the score of mean deviation and sum of square of deviation of

DG and DC classes. Therefore, there is a significant difference between the

students’ performance of DG group and DC group.

7. CONCLUSION

  Based on the analysis and discussion from the previous chapter, it is

concluded that Null Hypothesis (Ho) that states “Dictogloss is not more effective

th

than Dicto-comp in teaching writing recount text at the 8 grade of MTs Negeri 2

Mataram in Academic Year 2016/2017” is rejected and the alternate Hyphotesis

(Ha) which state “Dictogloss is more effective than Dicto-comp in teaching

th

writing recount text at the 8 grade of MTs Negeri 2 Mataram in Academic Year

2016/2017” is failed to be rejected. It was seen from the mean score of post-test of

dictogloss group was higher than the dicto-comp 58.78 and 49.54. In addition, the

score of t

  • –test was 2.775 and the value of t–table was 1.671 at the confidence

    level 0.05 (95%) and 2.390 at the confidence level 0.01 (99%) in degree of

    freedom 64. In conclusion, the value of t –test was higher than t–table after

    compared. Thus, it proved that dictogloss is more effective in improving students’

    writing recount text.

Dokumen yang terkait

THE USE OF PICTURE SERIES IN IMPROVING STUDENTS’ SPEAKING RECOUNT TEXT SKILL AT THE FIRST GRADE OF SMAN 1 PAGELARAN

0 15 59

THE USE OF AUDIO VISUAL AIDS IN IMPROVING STUDENTS’ VOCABULARY MASTERY IN WRITING DESCRIPTIVE TEXTS : A Quasi-Experimental Study at the Second Year Students of a Junior High School in Bandung.

3 6 38

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF PEER FEEDBACK TECHNIQUE IN IMPROVING STUDENTS’ WRITING SKILL IN WRITING NARRATIVE TEXTS.

3 18 38

THE USE OF JOURNAL WRITING IN IMPROVING STUDENT’S WRITING SKILL OF RECOUNT TEXT Digital Repository Universitas Negeri Medan

0 3 11

THE USE OF JOURNAL WRITING IN IMPROVING STUDENT’S WRITING SKILL OF RECOUNT TEXT Digital Repository Universitas Negeri Medan

0 1 4

THE USE OF JOURNAL WRITING IN IMPROVING STUDENT’S WRITING SKILL OF RECOUNT TEXT Digital Repository Universitas Negeri Medan

0 1 15

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DICTOGLOSS IN TEACHING WRITING SKILL VIEWED FROM STUDENTS’ MOTIVATION Dian Pertiwi

0 0 15

THE ROLE OF SCHEMATA CONTENT IN TRANSLATION A Comparative Study at Second Grade of Senior High School of Madrasah 2 Mataram in Academic Year 2013/2014 - Repository UNRAM

0 0 11

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF PICTURES WITH QUESTIONS IN IMPROVING STUDENTS’ ABILITY IN WRITING DESCRIPTIVE TEXT: A Pre-Experimental Study at First Grade Students of SMPN 2 Alas Barat in Academic Years 2014/2015 - Repository UNRAM

0 0 8

STUDENTS’ DIFFICULTIES IN READING ENGLISH RECOUNT TEXT : A Study at Eighth Grade of SMPN 11 Mataram in Academic Year 2015/2016 - Repository UNRAM

0 0 15