THE EFFECT OF TEACHING TECHNIQUES AND STUDENTS PERSONALITIES ON STUDENTS ACHIEVEMENT IN HORTATORY EXPOSITION WRITING.

THE EFFECT OF TEACHING TECHNIQUES AND

STUDENTS’ PERSONALITIES ON STUDENTS’

ACHIEVEMENT IN HORTATORY EXPOSITION WRITING

A THESIS

Submitted to the English Applied Linguistic Study Program in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Magister Humaniora

By:

CHRISTINA NATALINA SARAGI Registration Number: 8106112027

ENGLISH APPLIED LINGUISTICS STUDY PROGRAM

POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL

STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN

MEDAN

ABSTRACT

Saragi, Christina Natalina . Registration Number: 8106112027. The Effect of Teaching Techniques and Students’ Personalities on Students’ Achievement in Hortatory Exposition Writing. A Thesis. English Applied Linguistic Program. State University of Medan. 2013.

The objectives of this experimental research were to investigate whether: 1) students’ achievement in hortatory exposition writing taught by using collaborative writing teaching technique was higher than taught by using clustering teaching technique. 2) students’ achievement in hortatory exposition writing with extrovert personalities was higher than those with introvert personalities, 3) there was interaction between teaching techniques and personalities on students’ achievement in hortatory exposition writing. The population of this research was the students in fifth semester of FKIP Nommensen Pematangsiantar 2013/2014academic year.

The total number of population were 280 students. There were 80 students selected as sample of this research by applying cluster random sample technique. The research design was experimental research by using factorial design 2x2. The students were divided into two experimental groups. The experimental group 1 was treated by using collaborative writing teaching technique and experimental group II was treated by using clustering teaching technique. The questionnaire was conducted for classifying the students upon the introvert and extrovert personality. Students’ achievement in hortatory exposition writing was measured by using writing test. The data were analyzed by applying two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) at the level of significance α_{= 0.05. The result reveals that (1)} students’ achievement in hortatory exposition writing taught by using collaborative teaching technique was higher than that taught by using clustering teaching technique, with Fobs= 9,35>Ftab=3.97, (2) students’ achievement in hortatory exposition writing with extrovert personality was higher than that with introvert personality with Fobs= 4,19>Ftable=3.97, (3) there is interaction between techniques and personality on students’ achievement in hortatory exposition writing with Fobs=8.20>Ftable=3.97. After computing the Tuckey test, the result showed that extrovert students got higher achievement if they were taught by using collaborative teaching technique while extrovert students got higher achievement if they were taught by using clustering teaching technique.

ABSTRAK

Saragi, Christina Natalina. Pengaruh Teknik Mengajar dan Kepribadian Siswa terhadap Hasil Belajar Siswa dalam Menulis Teks Hortatory Exposition. Tesis. Program Pascasarjana Universitas Negeri Medan, Nopember 2013.

Penelitian eksperimen ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui apakah: 1) hasil belajar siswa dalam membaca yang diajarkan dengan teknik Collaborative Writing lebih tinggi dari pada hasil belajar siswa yang diajarkan dengan teknik Clustering, 2) hasil belajar siswa yang memiliki kepribadian extrovert daripada siswa yang memiliki kepribadian introvert, 3) ada interaksi antara teknik pembelajaran dengan kepribadian siswa terhadap hasil belajar siswa dalam menulis teks hortatory exposition. Populasi penelitian meliputi seluruh mahasiswa semester v tahun ajaran 2013/2014 dengan jumlah siswa sebanyak 280 orang. Dua kelas yang berisikan 80 orang siswa diambil sebagai sampel dalam penelitian ini dengan menggunakan teknik cluster random sampling. Kelompok eksperimen diajarkan dengan teksnik pembelajaran Collaborative Writing dan kelompok kontrol diajarkan dengan teknik pembelajaran clustering. Desain penelitian ini adalah eksperimen dengan factorial 2x2 karena ada dua variabel bebas (teknik mengajar dn dua atributif (kepribadian siswa). Angket kepribadian siswa diberikan untuk mengelompokkan siswa sesuai dengan kepribadian mereka, ekstrovert dan introvert. Kemudian, hasil belajar siswa dalam menulis teks hortatory exposition diukur dengan menggunakan ANAVA dua jalur pada tarif signifikasi α_{= 0,05.} Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa (1) hasil belajar siswa dalam menulis teks deskriptif yang diajarkan dengan teknik mengajar Collaborative writing lebih tinggi daripada hasil belajar siswa yang diajarkan dengan teknik clustering dengan hasil Fhitung=9,35>Ftabel= 3,97, (2) hasil belajar siswa dalam menulis teks hortatory exposition writing yang memiliki kepribadian extrovert lebih tinggi daripada hasil belajar siswa dalam menulis yang memiliki kepribadian instrovert dengan hasil hitung Fhitung=4,19>Ftable= 3,97, (3) terdapat interaksi antara teknik mengajar dengan kepribadian siswa terhadap hasil belajar siswa dalam menulis teks deskriptif, dengan hasil hitung Fhitung= 8,20>Ftabel= 3.97. Setelah melaksanakan uji lanjut dengan menggunakan Tuckey test, hasilnya menunjukkan bahwa siswa yang memiliki kepribadian extrovert memperoleh hasil belajar yang tinggi dalam menulis teks hortatory exposition bila diajarkan dengan teknik collaborative writing dan siswa yang memiliki kepribadian introvert memperoleh hasil belajar yang tinggi jika diajarkan dengan teknik clustering.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The writer would like to express her gratitude to Almighty God for the opportunity and possibility to complete this thesis. Someone to whom she owes real debt of gratitude is Prof. Dr. Lince Sihombing, M.Pd, being the first adviser, for the valuable time spent and giving guidance, encouragement, criticism, and suggestions have been a feature of the writing process from the very beginning of this thesis.

The writer wishes to express her deepest gratitude to. Dr.Didik Santoso, M.Pd, her second adviser, for motivation, attentions, suggestion, corrections of the organization and the concept of this thesis.

She would like to express her thanks to all lecturers who had given the valuable knowledge during her study at the English Applied Linguistics Study Program of Post Graduate Program, State University of Medan. Thanks are also directed to Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning, M.Pd, Prof. Dr Berlin Sibarani, and Dr.Sri Minda MS, her reviewers and examiners, for their valuable input to improve the thesis.

A special gratitude is also directed to her parents, Tiopan Saragi and beloved mom, Linda Tambunan, her younger sister Devi Melisa Saragi S.S, and younger brother Fernando Saragi and Yosua Saragi thanks to their support, materials, praying and endless loves.

Thanks to Lastri Wahyuni Manurung S.Pd and Roy Manurung SP, Herti manurung, Chandra, Asima, Chrisna, Evanansi, Kander, Christian, Dame, Enol, for their support, loves, prayers to the writer.Finally, the writer must admit that the content of this thesis is still far from being perfect, but she warmly welcomes any constructive ideas and critics that will improve the quality of the thesis

Medan, November 28th 2013 The writer

CHRISTINA NATALINA SARAGI

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ... i

TABLE OF CONTENTS ... ii

LIST OF TABLE ... v

LIST OF FIGURE ... vi

LIST OF APPENDICES ... vii

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ... 1

1.1 Background of Study ... 1

1.2 Identification of Problem ... 9

1.3 Problem of Study ... 9

1.4 The Objectives of Study ... 10

1.5 The Scope of the Study ... 10

1.6 The Significances of the Study ... 11

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ... 13

2.1 Theoretical Framework ... 14

2.1.1 The Students’ Achievement in Hortatory Exposition Writing ... 14

2.1.2Writing ... 14

2.1.2.1 Types of Writing ... 15

2.1.2.2 The Writing Process ... 16

2.1.2.3 Hortatory Exposition Writing ... 18

2.1.2.3.1 Generis Structure ... 19

2.1.2.3.2 Language Feature... 19

2.1.2.4Assessment of Hortatory Exposition Writing ... 20

2.1.3Teaching Technique ... 22

2.1.3.1 Collaborative Writing Teaching Technique ... 24

2.1.3.1.1 Definition of Collaborative Writing Teaching Technique ... 24

2.1.3.1.2 Principle of Collaborative Writing Teaching Technique ... 25

2.1.3.1.3 Design of Collaborative Writing Teaching Technique ... 27

2.1.3.1.3.1. Learning Objective of Collaborative Writing TeachingTechnique ... 27

2.1.3.1.3.2. Roles of Materials of Collaborative Writing Teaching Technique ... 28

2.1.3.1.3.3. Roles of Students of Collaborative Writing Teaching Technique ... 28

2.1.3.1.3.4. Roles of Teacher of Collaborative Writing Teaching Technique ... 29

2.1.3.1.3.5. Types of Learning and Teaching Collaborative Writing Teaching Technique ... 30

2.1.3.1.4. Procedure of Collaborative Writing Teaching Technique ... 31

2.1.3.1.5. Strengths of Collaborative Writing Teaching Technique ... 32

2.1.3.1.6. Weakness of Collaborative Writing Teaching Technique ... 33

2.1.4.2 Clustering Teaching Technique ... 33

2.1.4.2.1 Definition of Clustering Teaching Technique ... 34

2.1.4.2.3 Design of Clustering Teaching Technique ... 35

2.1.4.2.3.1 Learning Objectives of Clustering Teaching Technique ... 35

2.1.4.2.3.2 Roles of Material of Clustering Teaching Technique... 36

2.1.4.2.3.3 Roles of Students of Clustering Teaching Technique ... 37

2.1.4.2.3.4 Roles of Teacher of Clustering Teaching Technique ... 37

2.1.4.2.3.5Types of Learning and Teaching of Clustering Teaching Technique ... 38

2.1.4.2.4 Procedure of Clustering Teaching Technique ... 38

2.1.4.2.5Strengths of Clustering Teaching Technique ... 39

2.1.4.2.6 Weakness of Clustering Teaching Technique ... 39

2.1.5 Personality ... 41

2.1.5.1. Definitions ... 41

2.1.5.1.1 Introvert ... 43

2.1.5.1.2 Extrovert ... 45

2.2 Conceptual Framework ... 48

2.2.1 The Students’ Achievement on Hortatory Exposition Writing Taught by Using Clustering and Collaborative Writing Teaching Techniques ... 48

2.2.2 The Students’ Achievement in Writing and Students’ Personality ... 50

2.2.3The Interaction between Teaching Techniques and Students Personality on the Students’ Achievement in Hortatory Exposition Writing...53

2.3 Hypotheses ... 54

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ... 55

3.1 Research Design ... 55

3.2 Population and Sample ... 56

3.2.1 Population ... 56

3.2.2 Sample ... 56

3.3. The Instrument of Data Collection ... 57

3.3.1 Writing Test ... 57

3.3.1.1The Validity of writing Test ... 59

3.3.1.2The Reability of Writing Test ... 60

3.3.2 Students’ Personality Questionnaire ... 61

3.3.2.1 The Validity of Questionnaire ………... ... 63

3.3.2.2 Reability of Questionnaire ... 63

3.4 Procedure of Treatment ... 65

3.5 Control of the Treatment ... 65

3.6 The technique Analyzing Data ... 68

3.7 Statistical Hypothesis ... 69

CHAPTER IV DATA ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH FINDINGS ... 70

4.1 The data description ... 70

4.1.1 The Data Description ... 70

4.1.1.1 Students’ Achievement in Hortatory Exposition Writing Taught by UsingCollaborative Teaching Technique...71

4.1.1.2 Students’ Achievement in Hortatory Exposition Writing Taught by Usin Clustering Teaching Technique Personality...72

4.1.1.3 Students’ Achievement in Hortatory Exposition Writing With Extrovert Personality ... 74

4.1.1.4 Students’ Achievement in Hortatory Exposition Writing with Introvert Personality ... 75 4.1.1.5 Extrovert students’ achievement in hortatory Exposition Writing Taught

by Using Collaborative Teaching Technique ... 76

4.1.1.6 Extrovert students’ achievement in hortatory Exposition Writing Taught by Using Clustering Teaching Technique ... 78

4.1.1.7 Introvert students’ achievement in hortatory Exposition Writing Taught By Using Collaborative Teaching Technique ... 79

4.1.1.8 Introvert students’ achievement in hortatory Exposition Writing Taught by Using Clustering Teaching Technique ... 80

4.1.2 Analysis Requirement Testing ... 81

4.1 2.1 Normality Test ... 81

4.1.2.2 Homogeneity Test ... 82

4.1.2.2.1Groups of Personalities and Teaching Techniques ... 82

4.1.2.2.2Group of Interaction ... 83

4.1.3 Hypothesis Testing ... 83

4.1.3.1 Students’ Achievement in Hortatory Exposition Writing that was Taught by Using Collaborative Writing is higher than Clustering Teaching Technique ... 84

4.1.3.2 Students’ Achievement in Hortatory Exposition Writing with Extrovert is Higher Than Introvert Personality ... 85

4.1.3.3 Interaction between Teaching Techniques and Personalities on Students’ Achievement in Hortatory exposition writing ... 85

4.2 Discussion ... 88

4.2.1 Students’ Achievement in Hortatory Exposition Writing Taught by Using Collaborative Teaching Technique is Higher than by Using Clustering Technique ... 88

4.2.2 Students’ Achievement in Hortatory Exposition Writing between Students with Introvert and Extrovert Personalities ... 91

4.2.3 The Interaction between Students’ Personalities and Teaching Techniques on Students’ Achievement in hortatory Exposition Writing ... 92

4.3 Limitation of the Research ... 92

CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTION ... 94

5.1 Conclusion ... 94

5.2 Implication ... 95

5.3 Suggestion ... 95

REFERENCES ... 101

List of Tables

Table Page

Table1.The Data of Students’ Achievement in Hortatory Exposition

Writing FKIP Universitas HKBP Nommensen Pematangsiantar ... 4

Table 2 Factorial Research Design 2x2 ... 52

Table 3 The Indicator of Hortatory Exposition Writing ... 54

Table 4 The Indicators of Questionnaire ... 54

Table 5 The Indicator and Instrument of Questionnaire ... 58

Table 6 Summary of Research Data Description ... 65

Table 7 Frequency Distribution of Students’ Achievement in Hortatory Exposition WritingTaught by Using Collaborative Writing Teaching Technique ... 67

Table 8 Frequency Distribution of Students’ Achievement in Hortatory Exposition Writing Taught by Using Clustering Teaching Technique... 68

Table 9 Frequency Distribution of Students’ Achievement in Hortatory Exposition Writing with Extrovert Personality ... 70

Table 10 Frequency Distribution of Students’ Achievement in Hortatory Exposition Writing with Introvert Personality ... 71

Table 11 Frequency Distribution of Students’ Achievement in Hortatory Exposition Writing with Extrovert Personality taught by using Collaborative Writing Teaching Technique ... 72

Table12 Frequency Distribution of Extrovert Students’ Achievement inHortatory ExpositionWriting Taught by Using Clustering Teaching Technique ... 74

Table 13 Frequency Distribution of Introvert t Students’ Achievement in Hortatory Exposition Writing Taught by Using Collaborative Teaching Technique Teaching Technique ... 75

Table 14 Frequency Distribution of Introvert Students’ Achievement in Hortatory Exposition Writing Taught by Using Collaborative Teaching Technique Teaching Technique ... 76

Table 15 Normality Testing ... 77

Table17 Table Group Interaction ... 79

Table 18 Total Descriptive Data with 2x2 Factorial Design ... 79

Table 19 Two-Way Anova (2 way Anova) ... 80

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 Histogram on Students’ Achievement with Extrovert Personality ... 67 Figure 2 Histogram on Students’ Achievement with Introvert Personality ... 68 Figure 3 Histogram on Students’ Achievement in Hortatory Exposition Writing

Taught by Using Collaborative writing Teaching Technique ... 69 Figure 4 Histogram on Students’ Achievement in Hortatory Exposition Writing

Taught by Using Clustering Teaching Technique ... 70 Figure 5 Histogram on Extrovert Students’ Achievement in

Hortatory Exposition Writing Taught by using

Collaborative Writing Teaching Technique... 72 Figure 6Histogram onExtrovert Students’ Achievement in Hortatory

Exposition that Taught by Using Clustering

TeachingTechnique ... 73 Figure 7 Histogram on Introvert Students’ Achievement

inHortatory Exposition Writing Taught by Using

Collaborative Writing Teaching Technique... 75 Figure 8Histogram on Introvert Students’ Achievement in Hortatory Exposition

Writing Taught by using Clustering Teaching Technique... 76

Figure 9 Interaction between Personalities and Teaching

Techniqueson Students’ Achievement in Hortatory

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1 Questionnaire Test ... 101

Appendix 2 Writing Test ... 102

Appendix 3 Lesson Plan ... 103

Appendix 4 Calculation of Try out for questionnaire ... 101

Appendix 5 Calculation of Means and Variance of Population ... 104

Appendix 6 Calculation of Writing Test ... 106

Appendix 7 Descriptive Statistics for Collaborative Writing (A1) ... 107

Appendix 8 Normality Testing ... 107

Appendix 9 Descriptive Statistics for Clustering Teaching Technique (A2) ... 108

Appendix 10 Normality Testing ... 108

Appendix 11 Homogeneity Testing for Sample (Collaborative writing-Clustering) ... 109

Appendix 12 Calculation for Test of Questionnaire ... 110

Appendix 13 Descriptive Statistics for Extrovert (B1) ... 112

Appendix 14 Normality Testing ... 113

Appendix 15 Descriptive Statistics for Introvert (B2) ... 114

Appendix 16 Homogeneity Test ... 116

Appendix 17 Interaction between Sample ... 117

Appendix 18 Descriptive Statistics for A1B1 ... 118

Appendix 19 Normality Testing for A1B1 ... 119

Appendix 20 Descriptive Statistics for A1B2 ... 120

Appendix 21 Normality Testing for A1B2 ... 120

Appendix 22 Descriptive Statistics for A2B1 ... 120

Appendix 23 Normality Testing for A2B1 ... 120

Appendix 24 Descriptive Statistics for A2B2 ... 121

Appendix 25 Normality Testing for A2B2 ... 121

Appendix 27 ANOVA 2x2 Factorial Design ... 123 Appendix 28 Hypotheses ... 126

1 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1.The Background of the Study

Writing is one of the language skills beside listening, speaking and reading that must be mastered by English learners. Writing is categorized as the productive skill together with speaking. They are called as productive skills because students are required to produce their own ideas which are expressed in written and spoken form. The rest of the skills, listening and reading skills are classified as receptive skills. It means that the learners receive the ideas which are produced by speaker and writer in spoken and written form.

As one kind of the skill in English language, Nunan (2003: 88) defines that writing is the process of thinking to invent ideas, thinking about how to express into good writing, and arranging the ideas into statement and paragraph clearly. It indicates that the learners are expected to explore the ideas and make them into good paragraph. According to Percy (2013) there are three reasons why writing must be taught to the students in English department. First, writing reinforces the students’ abilities in grammatical structures, idioms, and vocabulary that the lecturers have taught. Second, when the students write, they actually take an “adventure” with language to the beyond of what they have just learned to say. Third, when the students write, they necessarily will be involved in learning new language which means that writing is the effort to express idea and the constant

2 useeye, hand, and brain. In fact,the three reasons is the unique way of learning that should be used by students when they joint in the writing class.

In addition, based on curriculum writing in fourth semester for students in level of university teaching and learning process at this level should be done by using genre based approach. In genre based approach, students learn about several kinds of texts, namely descriptive, anecdote, recount, procedure, narrative, report, news item, analytical exposition, hortatory exposition, spoof, explanation, discussion, review, etc. Each text has its own social function, generic structure and language features. There are fifteen monologue texts that should be taught by English lecturersfor students of fourth semester. Based on the curriculum it can be said that the student should have the capabilities to write in different genre of text. In this research the writer focused on hortatory exposition writing.

Hortatory exposition writing is a text that is aimed at persuading readers or listeners about something by giving some arguments or opinions. To strengthen the explanation, the speaker or writer needs some arguments as the fundamental reasons of the given idea. In other words, this kind of text can be called as argumentation. Wyrick (2008:83) stated that the aimed to learn hortatory exposition writing for students in English department are to improve the students’ competency to generate opinion into thesis statement, to generate opinion into argumentation, and the last to formulate the arguments to be recommendation in form of writing or speaking so that can be designed a complete hortatory exposition writing based on the its generic structure.

3 In hortatory text contains thesis statements, argumentation and recommendation. In the first paragraph of a hortatory text, the writer should put a thesis statements that tell the reader about the main idea or phenomenon that will be tell in the text where it can cover overall of the text that will be deliver in the writing. Then in the next paragraph is contain the argumentations of the writer to explain the topic with shocking statement, a quotation, a description, a factual statement, comparison, a personal experience and relevant examples,. The more opinion on writing will be more interesting, because the reader tends to believe in an event where there are many opinions that support in it. The last is a concluding paragraph, in this paragraph the writer write a recommendation that purposed to make the reader believe and follow on the writing.

The generic structure in hortatory text contains thesis statements, argumentation and recommendation. In the first paragraph of a hortatory text, the writer should put a thesis statements that tell the reader about the main idea or phenomenon that will be tell in the text where it can cover overall of the text that will be deliver in the writing. Then in the next paragraph is contain the argumentations of the writer to explain the topic with shocking statement, a quotation, a description, a factual statement, comparison, a personal experience and relevant examples,. The more opinion on writing will be more interesting, because the reader tends to believe in an event where there are many opinions that support in it. The last is a concluding paragraph, in this paragraph the writer write a recommendation that purposed to make the reader believe and follow on the writing. The language feature in hortatory text focuses on generic human and non

4 human participants, use of mental processes: to state what writer thinks or feels about issue. Material processes: to state what happens, and relational processes: to state what is or should be and the last the use of simple present tense. Enumeration is sometimes necessary to show the list of given arguments: Firstly, secondly, finally and etc.

However, based on the writer’s experience when she did observation in Faculty of Teacher Training and Education HKBP of Nommensen University, it was found that many students faced problems in writing hortatory exposition text. The students got low competence; it means that the student got difficulties in developing and arranging ideas or arguments in theirthesis statement. They also unable to generate the opinion into argumentation, and the last they did not know how to formulate the argument to be recommendation in hortatory exposition text. Moreover, it could be indicated them when the students were given a topic by the teacher to write, it seemed that they got problem in developing or elaborating their ideas because they did not have enough knowledge and vocabulary to support their ideas about the topic. As the result, the students spent a long time to think what should be written. Furthermore, the students also had problems in grammatical aspect. They faced difficulties in constructing sentences in correct grammar when they did them, their sentences contained many mistakes. As a result, the students were unable to write hortatory text correctly. Besides that, the students have lack of vocabulary. When they wrote a text, they would be stuck because they did not know the appropriate word to express or say a word in English. So it can be seen the score writing of the students especially in hortatory

5 exposition writing was still low, not satisfied. It can be proven from table 1. That showed the score the students got.

Table1. Data of students’ Achievement in Hortatory exposition writing FKIP Universitas HKBP Nommensen Pematangsiantar

No Academic Year Mean Score of Writing KKM

1 2010/2011 64,16 70,00

2 2011/2012 63,49 70,00

3 2012/2013 66,38 70,00

The Total Mean Achievement of Writing 64,67

Actually, the standard writing score for English Department of Nommensen University is 70. It means that if in reality the students got under 70 of course they will be categorized as the students that having low ability in writing. The data that have been received by the writer from the writing lecturers in Faculty of Teacher Training and Education HKBP Nommensen University showed that score from four classes in three academic years earlier represent the low writing ability. The table shown that for 2010/2011 until 2012/2013 the total mean achievement of students’ score in hortatory exposition writing was 64,67. From the data, the researcher suspected that there might be something wrong in the process of the learning-teaching of Writing. So that, it’s clear, the expectation of the curriculum could not be done. The curriculum expected that all the students should have a skill of writing in different genre especially for hortatory exposition writing. From the score that the students got, it can be concluded that there was still a gap between students’ performance and curriculum expectation in order concerning the learning achievement in writing.

6 Based on the writer’s observation in that university there are two factors that made students still low in hortatory writing. Namely external and internal factors.The external factors came from lecturers. In this situation some lecturers rarely used media in teaching writing hortatory exposition text. The lecturers usedmedia, frequently the media did not help the students necessity. For example, teacher used a printed paper as a media and then shared it to each student. The lecturers asked the students to design the hortatory exposition text in different topic. In addition, the lecturer also used uninterested or monotonous technique. This situation made the students bored to learn writing. It made the students are not motivated to write.

Due to above conditions, the lecturers has to be able to anticipate those problems in order to help the students in teaching writing, especially in writing a hortatory exposition text. The lecturers are expected to be more active in facilitating their students with giving variation in teaching technique process. As it is known, that there are many teaching technique that can be applied in process of teaching learning in writing, especially in hortatory exposition writing, but in this research, the researcher used two techniques that the researcher assumed can overcome students’ problem in constructing, arranging, developing and organizing their ideas. According to Brown (2000: 7) that teaching is guiding and facilitating learning, enabling the learner to learn, setting the condition for learning. It means teaching is to guide and facilitate in learning process. Whereas technique is any of wide variety of exercises, activities, or tasks used in the language classroom for realizing lesson objectives (Brown, 2006:16). So, teaching

7 technique is the procedure or skill that the teachers do to guide or facilitate the students to overcome or completing their activities or exercises or task in the classroom. It means that teaching techniques can actualize the learning objective of writing based on the curriculum. Some researchers have found that through the effective teaching technique of writing students’ writing result will be better. This is supported by Safriyantinur (2008) who has found that the application of small group work technique in teaching writing is effective to make students’ writing achievement better.

In this research the researcher conducted a research in helping the students in writing hortatory text, especially in developing and organizing ideas of arguments in the paragraph. In purposing to help the learners, the researcher used collaborative writing and clustering teaching technique. Collaborative writing teaching technique is a powerful technique of writing that encourages cooperation, critical thinking, peer learning and active participation toward an end product. Through this technique students are put into groups where they initially work together and discover the process of writing themselves. Researches that have been done more than two decades gives the evidence that technique of Collaborative of writing positively affects for student’ thinking, learning, and social skills.. With this reason the writer tries to use and compare these techniques in her research. These techniques are also expected be able to make the improvement for students’ writing in hortatory exposition

The other technique is clustering teaching. Furthermore Rico (2000:28) stated clustering technique is a powerful tool because it taps into the right brain,

8 which drives creativity. Our right brain is where fresh ideas and original insights are generated. It gives students a way to organize thinking for writing. It means that this technique is suitable used to produce the brilliant ideas that needed by students to develop and organize arguments in hortatory paragraphs. It is another effective technique the students could use to improve their ability in writing. To cluster means to write the subject in the middle of a blank sheet of paper and draw a circle around it. Because through clustering technique, a writer could be easily to give an idea of what will be written especially helpful for visual learners. In a cluster diagram the central events or components of an essay are presented visually, more detailed events branch off the main events to provide a visual overview of the entire. The students’ writing achievement improves through clustering technique by individually.

Besides teaching techniques, personality of students as internal factors also affected to students’ achievement on hortatory exposition writing still low. Shavina (2004:3) stated that personality can be defined as concentrating on the identification, measurement, and description of such as extra cognitive personality characteristic as the motivation, emotion and character of gifted, creative, and talented individuals. As it is knownthat extrovert and introvert is the type of personality that most dominant that found in the class room based on the definition of personality that the personality of extrovert and introvert is different. According Matthew (2009:23-24) Introvert students are said to be better communicators through writing and other non-verbal techniques. Like to take the time to think before they speak, acting and writing gives them the time that they

9 need. Introvert sometimes has trouble getting their ideas across to other effectively. They find it easier to learn things through reading about it rather than experiencing it. In contrast, extrovert students are assumed to be very good communicators especially verbally, likes to be in group to gather with many people to talk to, join into the group that has already formed.According to Nunan (2003:8) defines that writing is the process of thinking to invent the ideas to design the paragraph. From the theory of personality and writing can be seen that there is collaboration of personality of someone to the process of writing. Based on the theory Extrovert or introvert someone share their ideas, knowledge, and advance our understanding of the world is differently, so when they write a text, the product that they produce is different.

Actually the personality that each student has in the classroom of course different, some of students have the extrovert personality and the others are introvert. From this situation, the lecturers in that campus always treated the students by the same teaching technique when they taught writing. Finally the students still got low in achievement in hortatory exposition writing. To face this situation the writer expected the teaching technique that she recommended is suitable for the personality of students.

So, based on the previous explanation, there is an interest to conduct a research on the effect of Clustering and Collaborative Writing and personality on students’ achievement in hortatory exposition writing

10 In relation with the background, the problem can be formulated as follows:

1. Why do the students in the fifth semester students of HKBP Nommensen University Pematangsiantar get difficulties in hortatory exposition writing skill?

2. What are the techniques to make a good writing for the fifth semester of HKBP Nommensen University Pematangsiantar?

3. Are the techniques effective to guide the students in making a good hortatory exposition writing for the fifth semester students of HKBP Nommensen University Pematangsiantar?

4. How is students’ achievement in hortatory exposition writing skill by using the techniques at the fifth semester students of HKBP Nommenesen University Pematangsiantar viewed from personality?

1.3The Problems of the Study

Base on the background, the problem of the study can be stated as follows: 1. Is students’ achievement in hortatory exposition writing taught by

collaborative writing teaching technique higher than that taught by clustering teaching technique?

2. Is the students’ achievement in hortatory exposition writing with extrovert personality higher than students with introvert personality?

3. Is there any interaction between teaching techniques and personality to students’ achievement in Exposition writing?

11 1.4The Objectives of the Study

Based on the problem statements above, the purposes of the study are as follows:

1. To investigate whether students’ achievement in hortatory exposition writinghigher if they are taught by using collaborative writing teaching technique than clustering teaching technique

2. To investigate whether the students’ achievement in hortatory exposition writing for extrovert student is higher than introvert student

3. To investigate whether there is interaction between teaching techniques (Collaborative writing and Clustering) and Personality (extrovert and introvert) to students’ achievement in hortatory exposition writing.

1.5The Scope of the Study

However, this study is limited to clustering and collaborative writing teaching techniques on the students’ writing achievement. This study is also limited to the students’ personality, namely introvert and extrovert on students’ writing achievement. The writing genre observed in this study focused on hortatory exposition writing which is one of genre that should be achieved in curriculum on HKBP Nommensen Pematangsiantar University especially in fourth semesters. The limitation also is made for the personality in the interaction between the collaborative writing and clustering techniques and students’ personality to the students’ achievement in hortatory exposition writing

12 1.6The Significances of the Study

The result of this study will be expected to bring some significance and contribution in Teaching English writing as follows:

Theoretically, this study adds what has been found in the area a lot of positive contribution to the improvement of lecturers’ professionalism and educational institution in teaching especially in writing.

Practically, the result of this study informs English language lectures in their attempts to decide the best technique and students’ personality to improve students’ writing achievement. Students can also take benefit from being taught by the techniques and differed the students’ personality which can improve their writing achievement

989 9

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

5.1Conclusions

Based on the data analysis and the research findings at the previous chapter, it is concluded that:

1) Students’ achievement in hortatory exposition writing by using collaborative

writing teaching technique is higher than that taught by using clustering teaching technique;

2) In hortatory exposition writing, the achievement of students with extrovert

personality is higher than students with introvert personality;

3) There is significant interaction between teaching techniques and personality

on students’ achievement in hortatory writing. On the other words, it can be said that the students’ achievement in hortatory exposition writing is influenced by the teaching techniques and students’ personality.

5.2Implications

The research findings imply that the use of collaborative writing teaching technique can affect the students’ writing achievement optimally. It is proved from the research findings showing that students who are taught using collaborative writing teaching technique is higher than those who are taught using clustering teaching technique . It can encourage the students to write actively in writing process. Beside teaching techniques, personality also has effect on

999 9

students achievement. Based on the research finding the extrovert student is higher than the introvert student. Furthermore, there is interaction between teaching technique and personality. The effect of teaching techniques on students’ achievement in hortatory exposition writing depend on the students’ personalities

5.3Suggestions

There are some suggestions related with the conclusion and implications at the previous page. The suggestions are:

1. For teacher :

a. It is highly recommended for teachers to use collaborative and clustering

teaching techniques since these two teaching techniques are able to improve students’ achievement in reading comprehension.

b. It is highly recommended for teachers to use collaborative teaching

technique for a classroom dominated by students with extrovert personality while for class dominated by introvert students, teachers are recommended to use clustering teaching technique.

c. Teacher should realize that the students’ characteristics such as their

personality before choosing the teaching techniques. Thus, the teaching techniques applied are matched with what they need. As the result, their brightness is able to be explored maximally.

1009 9

2. For students:

a. Students are suggested to apply collaborative writing technique in writing. b. Students are suggested to write more by applying the technique so they will

be more skillful in writing

3. For the researcher :

For the researches who intend to conduct the research more detail hopes that the research findings can be used as a starting point of the future researchers who have the same problems and this research can be utilized as reference.

101

REFERENCES

Adamopoulos, J. (2004). Culture and interpersonal Behavior. In C. Spielberger (Ed.), Encyclopedia of applied psychology (vol. 2) (pp. 387-395). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

American Psychological Association, American Research Association and National Councilon Measurement in Education (1999).Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. Washington, D. C.

Ana Ferna´ndez Dobao, 2012.Collaborative writing tasks in the L2 classroom: Comparinggroup, pair, and individual work, Vol 21, no 40

Anderson, M. & Anderson.K.(1997).Text Type in English 2. Australia: Mcmillan Education Australia Pty.

Alwasilah. A. Chander and Senny Suzan. 2005. Pokoknya Menulis. Bandung, Pt. Kiblat Buku Utama

Arikunto, Suharsimi, Penelitian Tindakan Kelas, Jakarta: Bumi Aksara, 2009

Ary,D, 2010. Introduction to research in Education. New York:Holt, Rineheart and Winston

Best,J.W, and Khan. J.v.2003. Research in Education(9th ed). Needham Heigh, MA: Allyn and Bacon

Brown, H. Daouglas. 2000. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. 2nd ed. New York: Longman

H. Daouglas. 2006. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. New York: Longman

Cantiqa, DR. 2011. Hortatory Exposition Text in http://www.smartenglishcourse.com/online-english-course/hortatory-exposition-text/, Accessed on February, 13 2012

Corr.J.Philip and Matthews Geraki, 2009.Personality Psychology.New York: Cambridge University Press

Dawson and Essid.2010.Prewriting: Clustering in

http/www.writing2.richmond.edu/writing/wweb/cluster. html-4k. Accessed on February 13, 2012.

104

Dietsch, Betty Mattix, Reasoning and Writing Well, New York: MacGraw Hill, 2003

Feez,S& Joyze H. (2000). Writing Skilss: Hortatory Exposition Text Types.AustraliaPhoenix Education Pty Ltd.

Gerot,L., and Wignell,P (1995). Making Sense of Functional Grammar.

Sydney:AntipodeanEducational Enterprises

Gebhard, Jerry G, Teaching English as a Foreign or second Language (2nd Edition), Unitedstate of America: The University of Michigan, 2006

Glasswell, K., Parr, J., & Aikman, M. (2001).Development of the asTTle writing assessment rubrics for scoring extended writing asks. Project asTTle Technical Report 6.UniversityofAuckland/Ministry of Education.

Harmmer, J. 2004. How to teach writing. London: Longman

Halliday, M. A. K. Second edition.Functional Grammar. London: Sydney University

Hyland. 2003. Second Language Writing. New York: Cambridge university press

Jeannie L. Steele and Patty Steele, 1991, The Thinking-Writing Connection: Using Clusteringto Help Students Write Persuasively.vol 32, No:1

Kessler, Greg et al. 2012.”Collaborative Writing Among Second Language Learner In Academic Web- Based Projects”.The journal Language Learning & Technology of Volume 16, Number 1 pp. 91–109

Kemal,Namık,ahbaz et. Al. 2011.“The efficiency of cluster method in improving the

creative writing skill of 6th grade students of primary school”. Journal of Educational Research and Reviews.Vol. 6(11), pp. 702-709

Lowly, Curtis, 2004.Collaborative Writing. Wikipedia Available at http // enwikipedia.org// collaborative writing# evolution February 22,2008

Langan, John, English Skills Seventh Edition, New York: McGraw-Hill, 2001

Matthews, Gerrad et al. 2003.Personality Traits.British: Cambridge

Marshall, Martin, N. 1996. Sampling for qualitative Research. Oxford: Oxford University Press

105

Meade, viky.How to Use Clustering to Jump Start Your Writing in http://www.meadecomm.com/ clustering.html. _{Accessed on February 13,}

2012.

Mehdi,Soleiman M, 2010, “_{The impact of personality traits on the writing} performance of Iranian EFL learners". The journal of Asian ESP Journal.Autumn. Volume 6 Issue 2

Nunan (Ed.),1992Collaborative language learning and teaching (pp. 100–117). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press

.

___________. 2003. Practical English Language Teaching. Singapore: Mc Graw Hill

Nazzario, Luis A.,et al. 2010, Bridge to Better Writing. Boston: Wadswoth 20 Channel Center Stree Boston, MA 02210. Canada: by Nelson Education.

Oshima, Alice, Ann Hogue. 1999. Writing Academic English. New York: Addison Wesley Longman.

Richard,J C. 2002.Methodology in Language Teaching. New York: Cambridge University press

Rico, Gabriel Lusser. 2000. Writing the Natural Way. Los Angeles: St. Martin’ Press

Reid,Joy M., 1993. Teaching ESL Writing. New York: Penguin Putnam Inc

Rinasyah, Erni et al. 2012. “Using Clustering Technique To Improve The Ability Of The Second Year Students Of SMAN 4 PEKANBARU In Composing Hortatory Exposition text”.Journal of Academic.

Safyantinur,Mutia,. 2008, The Effect of Small Group Work Technique On Students’ WritingAchievement, Unpublished Thesis.Medan :Faculty of Language and Arts, State of University Medan

Salvador A and Carmen DasíThe definition of achievement and the construction of tests forits measurement: A review ofthe main trends Universitat de València, Spain

Shavina, Larisa V. 2004. Beyond Knowledge: Extra cognitive Aspects of Developing HighAbility. New Jersey London: Lowrence Erlbaum

Vivi, et al, 2013 TEACHING WRITING A HORTATORY EXPOSITION TEXT TOSENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS: Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra Inggris FBS, Universitas Indonesia

106

Voss, Ralph F and Michael L. Keene. The Heath Guide to Collage Writing. 1992.D.C. Heathand Company.2-3

Wyric.J. (2008).Steps to Writing Well with Additional Reading. Boston: Thomson Wardswoth.

Yong Mei Fung, etal.,2010. Collaborative Writing Technique Feature, Vol 41

Yunita, s c,et al,2012. Teaching TechniqueThrough Tree Diagram Technique: UniversitasTanjung Pura

Wakamoto, N. (2000). Language learning strategy and personality variables.

International Review of Applied Linguistics, Vol. 38, No.1, pp. 71-81.

Wilz, B. (2000).Relationship between personality type and grade point average

of technical college students. Unpublished master’s thesis. Stout: University of Wisconsin. Retrieved 27.07.2012 from

http://www2.uwstout.edu/content/lib/thesis/2000wilzb.pdf

Weigle,S,C.2002. Assessing Writing. United Kingdom, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

students achievement. Based on the research finding the extrovert student is higher than the introvert student. Furthermore, there is interaction between teaching technique and personality. The effect of teaching techniques on students’ achievement in hortatory exposition writing depend on the students’ personalities

5.3Suggestions

There are some suggestions related with the conclusion and implications at the previous page. The suggestions are:

1. For teacher :

a. It is highly recommended for teachers to use collaborative and clustering teaching techniques since these two teaching techniques are able to improve students’ achievement in reading comprehension.

b. It is highly recommended for teachers to use collaborative teaching technique for a classroom dominated by students with extrovert personality while for class dominated by introvert students, teachers are recommended to use clustering teaching technique.

c. Teacher should realize that the students’ characteristics such as their personality before choosing the teaching techniques. Thus, the teaching techniques applied are matched with what they need. As the result, their brightness is able to be explored maximally.

2. For students:

a. Students are suggested to apply collaborative writing technique in writing. b. Students are suggested to write more by applying the technique so they will

be more skillful in writing

3. For the researcher :

For the researches who intend to conduct the research more detail hopes that the research findings can be used as a starting point of the future researchers who have the same problems and this research can be utilized as reference.

REFERENCES

Adamopoulos, J. (2004). Culture and interpersonal Behavior. In C. Spielberger (Ed.), Encyclopedia of applied psychology (vol. 2) (pp. 387-395). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

American Psychological Association, American Research Association and National Councilon Measurement in Education (1999).Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. Washington, D. C.

Ana Ferna´ndez Dobao, 2012.Collaborative writing tasks in the L2 classroom: Comparinggroup, pair, and individual work, Vol 21, no 40

Anderson, M. & Anderson.K.(1997).Text Type in English 2. Australia: Mcmillan Education Australia Pty.

Alwasilah. A. Chander and Senny Suzan. 2005. Pokoknya Menulis. Bandung, Pt. Kiblat Buku Utama

Arikunto, Suharsimi, Penelitian Tindakan Kelas, Jakarta: Bumi Aksara, 2009 Ary,D, 2010. Introduction to research in Education. New York:Holt, Rineheart

and Winston

Best,J.W, and Khan. J.v.2003. Research in Education(9th ed). Needham Heigh, MA: Allyn and Bacon

Brown, H. Daouglas. 2000. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. 2nd ed. New York: Longman

H. Daouglas. 2006. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. New York: Longman

Cantiqa, DR. 2011. Hortatory Exposition Text in

http://www.smartenglishcourse.com/online-english-course/hortatory-exposition-text/, Accessed on February, 13 2012

Corr.J.Philip and Matthews Geraki, 2009.Personality Psychology.New York: Cambridge University Press

Dawson and Essid.2010.Prewriting: Clustering in

http/www.writing2.richmond.edu/writing/wweb/cluster. html-4k. Accessed on February 13, 2012.

Dietsch, Betty Mattix, Reasoning and Writing Well, New York: MacGraw Hill, 2003

Feez,S& Joyze H. (2000). Writing Skilss: Hortatory Exposition Text Types.AustraliaPhoenix Education Pty Ltd.

Gerot,L., and Wignell,P (1995). Making Sense of Functional Grammar. Sydney:AntipodeanEducational Enterprises

Gebhard, Jerry G, Teaching English as a Foreign or second Language (2nd Edition), Unitedstate of America: The University of Michigan, 2006 Glasswell, K., Parr, J., & Aikman, M. (2001).Development of the asTTle writing

assessment rubrics for scoring extended writing asks. Project asTTle Technical Report 6.UniversityofAuckland/Ministry of Education. Harmmer, J. 2004. How to teach writing. London: Longman

Halliday, M. A. K. Second edition.Functional Grammar. London: Sydney University

Hyland. 2003. Second Language Writing. New York: Cambridge university press Jeannie L. Steele and Patty Steele, 1991, The Thinking-Writing Connection: Using

Clusteringto Help Students Write Persuasively.vol 32, No:1

Kessler, Greg et al. 2012.”Collaborative Writing Among Second Language Learner In Academic Web- Based Projects”.The journal Language Learning & Technology of Volume 16, Number 1 pp. 91–109

Kemal,Namık,ahbaz et. Al. 2011.“The efficiency of cluster method in improving the

creative writing skill of 6th grade students of primary school”. Journal of Educational Research and Reviews.Vol. 6(11), pp. 702-709

Lowly, Curtis, 2004.Collaborative Writing. Wikipedia Available at http // enwikipedia.org// collaborative writing# evolution February 22,2008 Langan, John, English Skills Seventh Edition, New York: McGraw-Hill, 2001

Matthews, Gerrad et al. 2003.Personality Traits.British: Cambridge

Marshall, Martin, N. 1996. Sampling for qualitative Research. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Meade, viky.How to Use Clustering to Jump Start Your Writing in http://www.meadecomm.com/ clustering.html. _{Accessed on February 13,} 2012.

Mehdi,Soleiman M, 2010, “_{The impact of personality traits on the writing} performance of Iranian EFL learners". The journal of Asian ESP Journal.Autumn. Volume 6 Issue 2

Nunan (Ed.),1992Collaborative language learning and teaching (pp. 100–117). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press

.

___________. 2003. Practical English Language Teaching. Singapore: Mc Graw Hill

Nazzario, Luis A.,et al. 2010, Bridge to Better Writing. Boston: Wadswoth 20 Channel Center Stree Boston, MA 02210. Canada: by Nelson Education. Oshima, Alice, Ann Hogue. 1999. Writing Academic English. New York:

Addison Wesley Longman.

Richard,J C. 2002.Methodology in Language Teaching. New York: Cambridge University press

Rico, Gabriel Lusser. 2000. Writing the Natural Way. Los Angeles: St. Martin’ Press

Reid,Joy M., 1993. Teaching ESL Writing. New York: Penguin Putnam Inc

Rinasyah, Erni et al. 2012. “Using Clustering Technique To Improve The Ability Of The Second Year Students Of SMAN 4 PEKANBARU In Composing Hortatory Exposition text”.Journal of Academic.

Safyantinur,Mutia,. 2008, The Effect of Small Group Work Technique On Students’ WritingAchievement, Unpublished Thesis.Medan :Faculty of Language and Arts, State of University Medan

Salvador A and Carmen DasíThe definition of achievement and the construction of tests forits measurement: A review ofthe main trends Universitat de València, Spain

Shavina, Larisa V. 2004. Beyond Knowledge: Extra cognitive Aspects of Developing HighAbility. New Jersey London: Lowrence Erlbaum

Vivi, et al, 2013 TEACHING WRITING A HORTATORY EXPOSITION TEXT TOSENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS: Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra Inggris FBS, Universitas Indonesia

Voss, Ralph F and Michael L. Keene. The Heath Guide to Collage Writing. 1992.D.C. Heathand Company.2-3

Wyric.J. (2008).Steps to Writing Well with Additional Reading. Boston: Thomson Wardswoth.

Yong Mei Fung, etal.,2010. Collaborative Writing Technique Feature, Vol 41 Yunita, s c,et al,2012. Teaching TechniqueThrough Tree Diagram Technique:

UniversitasTanjung Pura

Wakamoto, N. (2000). Language learning strategy and personality variables. International Review of Applied Linguistics, Vol. 38, No.1, pp. 71-81. Wilz, B. (2000).Relationship between personality type and grade point average

of technical college students. Unpublished master’s thesis. Stout: University of Wisconsin. Retrieved 27.07.2012 from

http://www2.uwstout.edu/content/lib/thesis/2000wilzb.pdf

Weigle,S,C.2002. Assessing Writing. United Kingdom, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press