A study on the fourth semester students` writing competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragrapg in english language education study program of Sanata Dharma University.

(1)

ABSTRACT

UNTARI, ELIZABETH BUNGA DWI. 2007. A Study on the Fourth Semester Students’ Writing Competency in Writing a Topic Sentence and Supporting Sentences in an Argumentative Paragraph in English Language Education Study Program, Sanata Dharma University. Yogyakarta : Sanata Dharma University

This thesis was aimed to know the fourth semester students’ writing competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences. The topic sentence and supporting sentences were analyzed from the students’ argumentative paragraphs in which the topic sentence has to be stated.

The research questions were formulated as: 1) In what level is the fourth semester students’ writing competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph? And 2) What are the fourth semester students’ strengths and weaknesses in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph?

The method used in this study was text analysis. The diagnostic-test was given to the fourth semester students, English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University. The fourth semester students were asked to write an argumentative paragraph and the researcher analyzed the students’ composition by using the rubric prepared. The students’ score was graded into good, fair, or poor. That was the level of the fourth semester students as the answer of the first research question. The students’ scores of each item in the rubric were analyzed to know the strengths and weaknesses of the fourth semester students as the answer of the second research question.

Based on the analysis of the data, it could be concluded that: first, the majority of the fourth semester students, twenty-four of thirty six participants or 66.67%, knew how to write and formulate a topic sentence but could not develop it into good supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph. And the rest, nine of thirty-six participants or 25 % of all obtained a poor grade that means they neither know how to write a topic sentence nor develop it in good supporting sentences and only three of thirty-six participants 8.33% of them who really have the competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph. Second, there were two strengths of the fourth semester students in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph; they were 1) the ability in writing a topic sentence in a complete subject and attitude and 2) the ability of the fourth semester students in choosing a debatable statement in a topic sentence. There were two weaknesses of the fourth semester students; they were 1) the inability in controlling supporting sentences by only using the relevant statements and 2) the inability of the fourth semester students in arranging sentences into a coherence paragraph.

From the findings the researcher wanted to give some suggestions to the fourth semester students and the next Writing V lecturers to maximizing the strength of the students and improved the weaknesses of the students.

(2)

ABSTRAK

Skripsi ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui kemampuan siswa semester empat dalam membentuk kalimat utama dan kalimat pengembang. Kalimat utama dan kalimat pengembang ini dianalisa dari paragraf argumentatif yang dibentuk oleh siswa dimana kalimat utama harus dicantumkan dengan jelas.

Pertanyaan-pertanyaan yang akan dijawab dalam skripsi ini dapat diformulasikan sebagai berikut: 1) Termasuk dalam tingkatan manakah kemampuan siswa semester empat dalam merumuskan kalimat utama dan merangkai kalimat pengembang dalam argumentative paragraph? Dan 2) Apa sajakah kelebihan dan kelemahan siswa semester empat dalam merumuskan kalimat utama dan merangkai kalimat pengembang dalam argumentative paragraph?

Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah analisa teks. Tes diagnostik ini ditujukan pada siswa semester empat, Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Universitas Sanata Dharma. Siswa semester empat tersebut diminta untuk membuat paragraf argumentatif yang akhirnya nanti hasilnya akan dianalisa menggunakan rubric yang sudah disiapkan sebelumnya. Nilai siswa dari hasil analisa tersebut akan dikelompokkan dalam tingkatan-tingkatan baik, cukup dan buruk. Dan tingkatan itulah yang merupakan tingkat kemampuan siswa semester empat dalam merumuskan kalimat utama dan kalimat pengembang sebagai jawaban dari pertanyaan penelitian yang pertama. Nilai siswa pada tiap-tiap aspek yang dinilai dalam rubric dianalisa untuk mengetahui kelebihan dan kekurangan siswa semester empat dalam merumuskan kalimat utama dan merangkai kalimat pengembang sebagai jawaban dari pertanyaan penelitian kedua.

Berdasarkan analisa data, dapat disimpulkan bahwa: pertama, mayoritas dari siswa semester empat, duapuluh empat dari tiga puluh enam partisipan atau 66.67%, tahu bagaimana menuliskan kalimat utama dengan baik, namun belum dapat mengembangkannya dalam kalimat-kalimat pengembang sehingga membentuk sebuah paragraf argumentatif yang baik. Sebelas participan dari tiga puluh enam yang lainnya atau 25% dari mereka mendapatkan nilai yang buruk. Mereka sama sekali belum mengerti bagaimana menuliskan kalimat utama serta merangkai kalimat pengembang. Siswa yang benar-benar memiliki kemampuan dalam memformulasikan kalimat utama dan merangkai kalimat pengembang dalam paragraf argumentatif hanya tiga orang dari tiga puluh enam partisipan atau 8.33%. Kedua, terdapat dua kelebihan dari siswa semester empat; mereka adalah 1) kemampuan mereka dalam membentuk kalimat utama dengan subject dan attitude yang lengkap serta 2) kemampuan mereka dalam memilih kalimat utama yang debatable. Sedangkan kelemahan siswa semester empat ada dua; yaitu 1) ketidakmampuan mereka dalam mengontrol kalimat pengembang dengan hanya menggunakan kalimat-kalimat yang relefan dan 2) ketidakmampuan mereka dalam

(3)

menyusun kalimat-kalimat dalam paragraf sehingga membentuk paragraf yang koheren.

Dari temuan yang ada, penulis ingin memberikan beberapa saran kepada siswa semester empat dan dosen writing V yang berikutnya untuk memaksimalkan kelebihan yang dimiliki para siswa dan memperbaiki kekurangan yang dimiliki para siswa.

(4)

A STUDY ON THE FOURTH SEMESTER STUDENTS’ WRITING COMPETENCY

IN WRITING A TOPIC SENTENCE AND SUPPORTING SENTENCES IN AN ARGUMENTATIVE PARAGRAPH

IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM OF SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

A THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree

in English Language Education

Elizabeth Bunga Dwi Untari 021214103

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY 2007

(5)

A STUDY ON THE FOURTH SEMESTER STUDENTS’ WRITING COMPETENCY

IN WRITING A TOPIC SENTENCE AND SUPPORTING SENTENCES IN AN ARGUMENTATIVE PARAGRAPH

IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM OF SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

A THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree

in English Language Education

Elizabeth Bunga Dwi Untari 021214103

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY 2007

(6)

(7)

(8)

This thesis is dedicated to my beloved GOD, JESUS CHRIST

“Row the boat out into the deep water “Row the boat out into the deep water “Row the boat out into the deep water “Row the boat out into the deep water and let your nets down to catch some fish.” and let your nets down to catch some fish.” and let your nets down to catch some fish.” and let your nets down to catch some fish.”

“MASTER, “MASTER, “MASTER, “MASTER, we’ve worked hard

we’ve worked hard we’ve worked hard

we’ve worked hard ALL night long,ALL night long,ALL night long, ALL night long, and haven’t caught a thing. and haven’t caught a thing. and haven’t caught a thing. and haven’t caught a thing.

But if YOU tell me to, But if YOU tell me to, But if YOU tell me to, But if YOU tell me to, I will let the nets down.” I will let the nets down.” I will let the nets down.” I will let the nets down.”

Luke 5:4 – 5

Row the boat

out into the deep water

and let your nets down

to catch some fish.”

“MASTER,

we’ve worked hard

ALL night long,

and haven’t caught a

thing.

But if YOU tell me to,

I will let

I will let the nets

the nets

down.”

Luke 5:4 Luke 5:4 Luke 5:4 Luke 5:4 ––– 5– 5 5 5

'Lord Give Us the Strength'

Lord Give Us The Strength..., To suppress our fears...., Lord Give Us The Strength...., To fight our tears....,

It's a rough, tough, world..., Every day is a test...,

But powerful and proud..., We’ll always do our best...., Still more and more...., We need your support...., So Lord Give Us The Strength....,

Lord Give Us The Strength Lord Give Us The Strength..., To keep the faith….,

Lord Give Us The Strength....,

To conquer hate…, It’s a harsh, cruel road…, We travel through life…, But we feel comfort…., Guided by your light...., Still on and on….,

We pray for your love...., And to worship you...., Is our sole intent..., So Lord Give Us The Strength....,

Lord Give Us The Strength. Trade Martin,2006.

(9)

STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY

I honestly declare that the thesis I wrote does not contain the works or part of the works of other people, except those cited in the quotations and in the bibliography, as a scientific paper should.

Yogyakarta, 28 June 2007 The writer

(10)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First, I would like to thank GOD, my savior, for letting me learn a lot in the whole process of finishing my thesis. I thank Him for His blessing. This is one of the biggest lessons of my life.

Second, I would like to thank Ag. Hardi Prasetyo, S.Pd., M.A., my major sponsor, for giving me correction, advice and support in writing this thesis. I would also like to thank Laurentia Sumarni, S.Pd., my co-sponsor for the support, advice and love.

Third, I thank Ouda Teda Ena, S.Pd., M.Pd., for giving me the chance to conduct my research in his classes. For Mr. Markus, Ms. Mita, Erlita, Ayu, and Nita, I thank them for helping me pilot my rubric. I would also like to thank the students of Writing IVclass B and class C for their willingness helping me to do my research.

Fourth, I wish to express my sincere appreciation to My Family (my Pa – Robertus Sudaryanto, my Ma – Chatarina Muryani and my sister – Fransiska Dian Lina Heryanti) for giving me great love and support, especially for my mom who always stood beside me and helped me finish my thesis. I love them all. To

Galih Pramaiswara Noviartanto, I thank him for his love, care, and kindness, and for letting me share my sadness and happiness, my problems, my tears and my laughters. For all members in my house, Mas Lardi, Mbak Tini, Bimo, Angger and Dito, I thank them for always cheering me up.

Fifth, I would like to thank all of my best friends for their help and support. For my lovely best friend, Sesil, I thank her for always spending her time to listen to my heart. To Dian, I thank her for every happiness and sadness we have shared. To

(11)

Rika, my roommate, I thank her for keeping me strong and letting me learn to be happy forever. For Eryth and Che-che, I thank them for always being my friends.

Sixth, I would like to express my gratitude to all my friends who were giving me hands and supports so I could finish this thesis. For Iin, Cheche, Thyna, Rika, Tuti, Hesti, Tutut and Dita (Lampar 38 family), Wida, Sesil, Galih K., Dedi, Agus, and Gabby (EXSA family), Dani, Dedi, Agus & Ayu, Gabby, Miko, Dedi, Sesil, Cheche, Dian, Erlita, Udjo, Reni (all EEPROers), my friends in J’ taime My Enemy, Helen Keller, The Wizard of Oz, I thank them all for the marvelous and unforgettable moments in my life.

Finally, I would like to thank all who had supported me and could not be mentioned, for their help during my study in Sanata Dharma University. Last but not least, I hope this thesis will be useful for all of us.

(12)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

TITLE PAGE ... i

PAGE OF APROVAL ... ii

PAGE OF BOARD EXAMINERS ... iii

PAGE OF DEDICATION ... iv

STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY ... v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS ... viii

LIST OF TABLES ... x

LIST OF FIGURES ... xi

LIST OF APPENDICES ... xii

ABSTRACT ... xiii

ABSTRAK ... xiv

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ... 1

1.1. BACKGROUND ... 1

1.2. PROBLEM LIMITATION ... 4

1.3. PROBLEM FORMULATION ... 4

1.4. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY ... 4

1.5. BENEFITS OF THE STUDY ... 5

1.6. DEFINITION OF THE TERMS ... 6

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ... 8

2.1. THEORETICAL DESCRIPTION ... 8

2.1.1. Writing ... 8

2.1.2. Paragraph ... 9

2.1.2.1.Definition ... 9

2.1.2.2.Topic sentence ... 10

2.1.2.3.Supporting sentences ... 11

2.1.3. Argumentative Paragraph ... 12

2.1.3.1...Defini tion ... 12

(13)

2.1.3.2...T opic Sentence and Supporting Sentences in an Argumentative

Writing ... 13

2.1.4. Testing Writing ... 14

2.1.4.1. Diagnostic Test ... 15

2.1.4.2. Rubric ... 15

2.1.4.3. Validity ... 18

2.1.4.4. Reliability ... 18

2.2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ... 19

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY ... 21

3.1. METHOD ... 21

3.2. RESEARCH PARTICIPANTS ... 22

3.3. RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS ... 24

3.4. DATA GATHERING TECHNIQUE ... 27

3.5. DATA ANALYSIS PROCEDURE ... 28

3.6. RESEARCH PROCEDURE ... 31

CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ... 35

4.1. RESEARCH FINDINGS ... 35

4.1.1. Piloting of the Rubric ... 35

4.1.2. The fourth semester students’ writing competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences ... 40

4.1.3. The fourth semester students’ strength and weaknesses in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences ... 45

4.2. OTHER FINDINGS ... 52

CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS ... 54

5.1. CONCLUSIONS ... 54

5.2. SUGGESTIONS ... 55

BIBLIOGRAPHY ... 57

(14)

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 3.1 Tabulation of students’ writing competency ... 27

Table 3.2 Tabulation of students’ strengths and weaknesses ... 27

Table 4.1 Piloting result for the first section ... 37

Table 4.2 Piloting result for the second section ... 39

Table 4.3 Data analysis of the fourth semester students’ argumentative paragraph ... 41

Table 4.4 Tabulation of the participants’ score ... 43

Table 4.5 Tabulation of the participant’s score for item 1: Subject and Attitude ... 45

Table 4.6 Tabulation of the participant’s score for item 2: Debatable Statement ... 46

Table 4.7 Tabulation of the participant’s score for item 3: Support the Topic Sentence ... 47

Table 4.8 Tabulation of the participant’s score for item 4: Relevant Statement ... 48

Table 4.9 Tabulation of the participant’s score for item 5: Reasoning/Thinking ... 49

Table 4.10 Tabulation of the participant’s score for item 6: Mechanics and Grammar ... 50

Table 4.11 Tabulation of the participant’s score for item 7: Coherence ... 51

Table 4.12 Data analysis for the invalid data of the fourth semester students’ paragraph ... 53

(15)

LIST OF FIGURES

Page

Figure 2.1 Scoring Rubric ... 16

Figure 3.1 Test Instrument ... 25

Figure 3.2 Rubric for assessing writing ... 25

Figure 3.3 Research diagram ... 34

Figure 4.1 Rubric for argumentative paragraph before piloting process ... 36

(16)

LIST OF APPENDIXES

Page

Appendix 1: Letter of research permission ... 59

Appendix 2 : Piloting step 1 ... 60

Appendix 3 : Piloting step 2 ... 68

Appendix 4 : Valid data ... 74

a. Good Grade ... 74

b. Fair Grade ... 77

c. Poor Grade ... 96

(17)

ABSTRACT

(18)

ABSTRAK

(19)

menyusun kalimat-kalimat dalam paragraf sehingga membentuk paragraf yang koheren.

(20)

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCION

1.1BACKGROUND

Writing is a physical work of gathering words into a sentence, sentences into a paragraph, and paragraphs into a text. Writing is also a mental work of investing ideas, thinking about how to express them, and organizing them into statements and paragraphs (Nunan, 2003). Based on that understanding, a writer has to carefully manage and organize his/her writing, so that the readers will clearly understand and catch the writer’s idea.

In order to convey the idea correctly and perfectly from the writer to the reader(s), the idea should be stated in a well-organized text, or in the smaller scope, a well-organized paragraph (Muhyidin, 1988). Therefore, a good topic sentence and good supporting sentences are important requirements to make a well-organized paragraph. As stated by Muhyidin (1988), a well-organized paragraph should consist of three main parts. The first part is the topic sentence that states the main idea of the paragraph. The second part is a set of supporting sentences that develop the topic sentence by giving reasons, examples, and facts. The third part is a concluding sentence that ends the paragraph by restating and summarizing the ideas in it. However, a good paragraph does not always consist of all parts mentioned above. It may only consist of at least two parts; they are the topic sentence and the supporting sentences (Bram, 1995). In other words, the

(21)

most important parts needed to write a well-organized paragraph are a good topic sentence and a set of supporting sentences.

In some kinds of writing such as narrative and descriptive, a topic sentence usually does not need to be stated. However, in an argumentative writing, a topic sentence should be explicitly stated (Moore, 1955). A clear topic sentence which is followed by a set of supporting sentences can be helpful not only for the writers in delivering their arguments clearly but also for the readers in understanding the writers’ arguments and ideas easily.

As students of English Language Education, the students of English Language Education Study Program, Sanata Dharma University have to master the writing ability. It is so because they are prepared to face a big writing process in their study, that is a thesis, as the requirement to finish their study. They also have to master writing because they are prepared to be English teachers who teach their students to write as one of the competencies in English Language. In order to make the students master the writing ability, English Language Education Study Program gives the students opportunity to learn more about writing by providing six levels of writing. In each level, each type of writing such as descriptive, narrative, persuasive, and argumentative is addressed. Argumentative writing is the subject of Writing V in English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University which is given to the fifth semester students.

As stated in the previous paragraphs, in order to write a good argumentative writing, someone needs to know exactly how to write a topic sentence and

(22)

supporting sentences. Hence, the fourth semester students who will learn

argumentative writing in their class and will learn more in the next level (Writing V), need to know first how to write a topic sentence and a set of supporting sentences.

The fourth semester students, who will be the participants of this study, have been studying in English Language Education Study Program for almost two years. It implies that the fourth semester students have taken Writing I, Writing II, and Writing III. They have also taken supporting subjects such as Structure I, Structure II, and Structure III which help them write a good composition. This study is based on the assumption that the students have the experiences in writing a well-organized paragraph with a clear topic sentence and supporting sentences as stated in the syllabus of Writing II subject.

This study is trying to evaluate the fourth semester students’ writing competency in writing a topic sentence and a set of supporting sentences. This study will give some benefits for the students themselves and English Language Education Study Program as the institution which facilitates this study. This study gives a glance point of view about the students’ condition especially on the students’ ability in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences.

In addition, a well-organized paragraph is also influenced by the students’ grammar awareness. A good topic sentence should be clearly expressed in a grammatically correct sentence. Supporting sentences also can only be clearly understood if they are written in grammatically correct sentences. Based on this

(23)

fact, grammar awareness will also be included in this study as one of supporting points of the measurement.

Based on the explanation above, the writer wants to conduct a study in order to know whether or not the fourth semester students have the writing competency in writing a clear topic sentence and supporting sentences as the important parts in formulating an argumentative writing.

1.2PROBLEM LIMITATION

This study will be focused on the writing competency of the fourth semester students in writing a good topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative writing. By doing this research, the researcher will also find the fourth semester students’ strengths and the weaknesses in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences.

1.3PROBLEM FORMULATION

The problems that are formulated can be listed as follows:

1. In what level is the fourth semester students’ writing competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph? 2. What are the fourth semester students’ strengths and weaknesses in writing a

topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph?

(24)

In this study, the researcher wants to know in what level the fourth semester students’ writing competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph is.

Based on the study of the fourth semester students’ writing competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph, the researcher will know the students’ strengths and weaknesses of the fourth semester students in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph.

1.5BENEFITS OF THE STUDY

This thesis is expected to give contributions in some aspects. They are:

1. For the fourth semester students of English Language Education Study Program

This study will be beneficial for the fourth semester students for they will know their writing competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences as a means of making a clear argumentative writing. From this study, the fourth semester students will know what their strengths and weaknesses are, so that they will know what they should do to prepare themselves.

2. For the English Language Education Study Program Lecturers

The other benefit of this study is to help the writing V lecturers to make use of this study to help the students to maximize their writing skill in writing a topic sentence and developing it into good supporting sentences in an argumentative

(25)

paragraph and to help the students to improve their weaknesses in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph.

3. For the English Language Education Study Program

This study will give contribution to English Language Education Study Program to evaluate the curriculum, especially in writing. This study will show whether or not learning how to write a topic sentence and supporting sentences in the second semester is enough for giving the students awareness in applying topic sentence and supporting sentences in every time they write a paragraph especially argumentative paragraph.

1.6DEFINITION OF THE TERMS

1. Writing

In this study, writing refers to both a physical and a mental act. At the most basic level, writing is the physical act of committing words or ideas to some medium. On the other hand, writing is a mental work of inventing ideas, thinking about how to express them, and organizing them into statements and paragraphs that will be clear to a reader (Nunan, 2003).

2. Argumentative Writing

Argumentative writing, in this study, refers to kind of writing which shows the idea, opinion, or argument of something that is arguable (Spurgin, 1989). 3. Paragraph

In this study, a paragraph is a group of sentences which contains relevant information about one main or central

(26)

4. Topic Sentence

In this study, a topic sentence refers to a general sentence which becomes the center of the paragraph in which the other sentences in the paragraph are developed to explain this sentence and to make it more vivid (Moore, 1955). 5. Supporting Sentences

In this study, supporting sentences are sentences that develop the topic sentence by giving reasons, examples, and facts (Muhyidin, 1988).

6. Writing Competency

In this study, competency, or in the basic form competence, means that the students have the necessary ability, authority, skill, knowledge, etc in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences correctly in a good paragraph

composition. Thus, the items which will be measured in this study are the students’ competency in writing a topic sentence, supporting sentence and the grammar and coherence to support a good writing composition (Hornby, 1995).

(27)

CHAPTER 2

THEORETICAL REVIEW

This chapter will discuss the theories which underlie the study. This chapter will be divided into two parts: theoretical description and theoretical framework. The theoretical description consists of brief descriptions of the theories which are used in this study. The theoretical description will discuss four major theories: first, writing, which will discuss the theory of writing in general. Second, paragraph which will elaborate paragraph and its substances. The third is argumentative writing which will discuss about the theories of argumentative writing and argumentative paragraph. And the last is testing writing which will elaborate the theories which support the way the researcher gathers the data of this study. In the theoretical framework, the writer will adapt the theories from the theoretical description to support this study.

2.1. THEORETICAL DESCRIPTION 2.1.1. WRITING

As mentioned in the first chapter, writing means both physical and mental work. Writing is a physical work of gathering words into sentence, sentences into paragraph, and paragraphs into text. However, the physical work of writing will not be meaningful without the mental work. The mental work of writing here is the work of brain in investing ideas, thinking about how to express them, and organizing them into statements and paragraph, so that the physical work of

(28)

writing will produce meaningful writing product and the message from the writer will be clearly conveyed to the reader(s) (Nunan, 2003).

Based on that understanding, paragraph writing could be defined as the physical work of gathering words into a sentence and sentences into a paragraph, and the mental work of investing idea, thinking about how to express them and organized them into sentences to make a good paragraph. The idea invested will be stated on the main paragraph or the topic sentence and expressed in well-organized supporting sentences.

Physically, writing is a process of gathering sentences into paragraph and paragraphs into a text. Thus, paragraph is one of the important parts that

establishes a text. In order to know what paragraph is, the following description will describe briefly about it.

2.1.2. PARAGRAPH 2.1.2.1. Definition

A paragraph, physically, is a group of sentences. However, a good paragraph should contain relevant information about one main or central idea. The main or central idea here is called a topic sentence, and the relevant information about one main idea is called supporting sentences (Bram, 1995).

Muhyidin (1988) states that a paragraph consists of three main parts; they are: 1. Topic sentence

(29)

2. Supporting sentences

Supporting sentences are used to develop the topic sentence by giving reasons, examples and facts.

3. Concluding sentences

A Concluding sentence is used to end the paragraph by restating or summarizing the ideas in it.

However, a good paragraph does not always consist of the three main parts stated above. The most important elements of a paragraph are the topic sentence and a set of supporting sentences (Bram, 1995).

2.1.2.2. Topic sentence

As stated before, a topic sentence is the main idea of the paragraph (Muhyidin, 1988). A topic sentence introduces the topic of the paragraph. A good topic sentence states the idea or attitude which is called controlling idea. Controlling idea controls what the sentences in the paragraph will discuss. All sentences in the paragraph should relate to and develop the controlling idea stated. “A topic sentence should consist of a subject and an attitude. A subject is what the writer writes, and an attitude is why the writer writes” (Bram, 1995: 16).

For example:

“The BBC World Service Radio station broadcasts various highly selected programs.”

From the sentence, it is shown that ‘The BBC World Service Radio station’ is the subject of the topic sentence. It tells the reader that the paragraph will talk about the BBC as the world service radio station. Then ‘broadcasts various highly selected programs’ is the attitude. It shows the reason why the writer writes the

(30)

paragraph. The attitude also gives the boundaries in which the topic sentence will be elaborated in a set of supporting sentences. The paragraph will only talk about the various highly selected programs in BBC, so the ideas about history of BBC radio or the BBC radio staff will not be included.

The position of a topic sentence can be: 1) at the beginning (in the first sentence) of the paragraph, 2) (somewhere) in the middle of the paragraph, or 3) at the end (the last sentence) of the paragraph. Even though there are three possibilities of placing the topic sentence, most of the experts in writing suggest beginner writers to place the topic sentence at the beginning or in the first sentence of the paragraph (Bram, 1995; Muhyidin, 1988). When the topic sentence is placed at the beginning of the paragraph, the writer will have clear guidance to finish the rest of the paragraph and the writer will have good control over the contents – what information to be included. In addition the reader will be more prepared to follow and to understand the paragraph.

A good topic sentence should follow some rules as follows (Muhyidin, 1988): 1. A topic sentence is a complete sentence with a subject, a verb, and generally

a complement. It should be grammatically correct.

2. A topic sentence should have the subject which states what will be discussed in the paragraph and the attitude or controlling idea which will give the reason of writing and give the boundaries to limit information included in the paragraph.

3. A topic sentence is usually (but not always) placed in the first sentence of a paragraph.

(31)

2.1.2.3. Supporting Sentences

“Supporting sentences are a set of sentences that develop the topic sentence by giving reasons, examples, and facts,” (Muhyidin, 1988: 9). When the attitude of the topic sentence stated the boundaries of the paragraph, the supporting sentences would only develop the information in the field which was stated. Supporting sentences should completely develop the topic sentence, but should not consist of irrelevant information (Bram, 1995).

There are two kinds of supporting sentences (p.18): 1. Major supporting sentences

Major supporting sentences develop the topic sentence directly. They add some relevant, new information about the main idea.

2. Minor supporting sentences

Minor supporting sentences support the major supporting sentences directly and the main idea indirectly. It is possible not to have any minor supporting sentences in the paragraph.

It can be concluded that good supporting sentences should follow some rules: 1. Supporting sentences should elaborate the topic sentences completely 2. There are no irrelevant sentences.

There are so many kinds of writings or paragraphs, such as descriptive, narrative, argumentative, etc., however, in this study, the kind of writing that is chosen is argumentative paragraph. Thus, we need to know first about argumentative writing and argumentative paragraph.

(32)

2.1.3. ARGUMENTATIVE WRITING 2.1.3.1. Definition

An argument is supposed to be a reasoned consideration of an idea. Argumentative writing is a kind of writing which shows the idea, opinion or argument of something (Spurgin, 1989). “Through this writing, the writer tries to make sense of what the writer does not understand, tries to refuse ideas the writer believe are mistaken, tries to determine appropriate policy for future actions,” (Spurgin, 1989:1). Argument does not mean quarrel. It does imply the existence of misunderstanding or disagreement. The thing which is argued is the thing that is debatable. The thing that is not debatable is the thing that can be verified readily or that is true by definition.

Since an argumentative writing should have the possibility for doubt and disagreement from others, the arguer must try to search for an answer or facts to persuade the reader or listener. To argue is to make a case for a judgment or opinion, while to persuade is to bring about a desired response in a reader or listener. Thus, in an argumentative writing, the writer(s) needs to be able to provide a debatable topic sentence to make sure that not every reader has the same opinion, and persuasive supporting sentences from which the reader will know the writer’s idea and opinion, and also will be persuaded to agree and support the writer’s opinion and argumentation.

2.1.3.2. Topic Sentence and Supporting Sentences in Argumentative writing

A topic sentence in a paragraph consists of subject and attitude (Bram, 1995). The subject of the topic sentence in an argumentative writing is called

(33)

conclusion, and the attitude of the topic sentence is called premise (Spurgin, 1989).

Similar to the subject in a topic sentence, conclusion also gives the main idea of the paragraph. It tells about what the paragraph talks about. However, in an argumentative writing, the conclusion must be a debatable statement. It cannot be something that all of the people will agree or disagree, but a statement that can make the reader give another argument about it.

For example:

- Spider is not an insect

This statement is not a conclusion. It is not debatable. The statement can be true by definition. All people can say that it is true.

- Prostitution should be legalized

It is a debatable statement. Some people may say, “I agree with you.” But the other may say “No way!” This kind of statement is appropriate as the conclusion of the topic sentence in an argumentative writing.

However, a topic sentence which only consists of conclusion may not be a good topic sentence. A good topic sentence should consist of subject, which in this case is a conclusion, and attitude, which in this case is premise. Premise, as well as attitude, is used to support the conclusion and give boundaries to the conclusion.

For example:

(34)

‘Aspirin should be banned’ is the conclusion of the topic sentence; while ‘because excessive amounts of it are poisonous’ is the premise. This premise gives support to the conclusion and gives boundaries to the supporting sentences that the supporting sentences are still in the boundaries of the topic “the poisonous excessive amounts in an aspirin”.

In order to gather the data, the researcher needs to conduct a test. Thus, the researcher needs to know the basic understanding about testing writing.

2.1.4. TESTING WRITING

The best way to test the students’ writing competency is to get the students to write (Hughes, 1989). In this study, the researcher will conduct a diagnostic test in order to gather the data. This test is used to know the basic competence of the students.

2.1.4.1.Diagnostic Test

Diagnostic test is used to identify students’ strengths and weaknesses. It is intended primarily to ascertain what further teaching is necessary (Hughes, 1989). It means that by using the diagnostic test, the researcher is tried to identify the students’ basic competence to know the students’ strengths and weaknesses to diagnose what items to be improved.

2.1.4.2. Rubric

Testing writing is a subjective matter. However, it could be minimize using a rubric. “Rubric is a tool in performance assessor kit which tells potential performers and judges what elements of performance matter most and how the work to be

(35)

judged. The result will be distinguished in form of relative quality.” (Wiggins, 1988:153)

A scoring rubric is the established criteria, including rules, principles, and illustrations, used in scoring responses to individual items and clusters of items of performance assessment. It has three main functions: establishing objective criteria of judgment, providing established expectations to teachers and students, and maintaining focus on content and standards of a student work.

There are several elements of useful rubrics, and each is discussed in turn below (Huba & Freed, 2000).

a. Level of Mastery

Columns which describe the level of students’ work b. Dimensions of Quality

The rows of each figure list the dimensions of quality that are important in reaching the goal of the project or program.

c. Organizational Grouping

The dimensions of quality are grouped into several groups. This helps students understand that they will be evaluated on complex abilities that are multidimensional.

d. Commentaries

For each aspect of qualities, the rubric provides a commentary describing the defining features of work at each level of mastery.

(36)

In the commentaries, it is described for the students the likely consequences of performing at the level of quality in a real-life setting.

A scoring rubric developer can have three options: adopt, adapt, or start from the beginning. If an existing rubric which matches of with the items can be found, it may be adopted. Otherwise, it may be modified to fit the need. Since the researcher could not formulate the rubric by herself, the researcher adapts the rubric from several sources. The researcher adapts the rubric stated in From: Huba & Fred (2000), Stiggins (2001) and other sources from Internet. The rubric was adapted and formulated as follows:

Figure 2.1 Scoring Rubric

Score Descriptions No Items

3 2 1

Topic Sentence 1. Subject and

attitude

There are a subject and an attitude

There is a subject but not an attitude

There is no topic sentence

2. Debatable statement

The topic sentence is clear and debatable

The topic sentence is too general and predictable

The topic sentence is unclear or absent Supporting Sentences

3. Support the topic sentence

clearly and completely develop the topic sentence unclear or incomplete in developing the topic sentence Totally not supporting the topic sentence 4. Relevant

statement

There is no irrelevant sentence

There is one irrelevant sentence

There are two or more irrelevant sentences. 5. Reasoning/

Thinking

Persuasive, often insightful

adequate Inadequate, confusing overall Grammar and Coherence

6. Mechanics and Grammar

All sentences are complete and grammatical, and have no errors in punctuation,

For the most part, sentences are complete and grammatical, and have maximum 4

For the most part, sentences are not complete and grammatical and have more than 5

(37)

capitalization, and spelling errors in punctuation, capitalization, and spelling errors in punctuation, capitalization, and spelling

7. Coherence The sentences are logically

arranged, each sentence moves on naturally and use the

appropriate transition signals

The sentences are logically arranged but lack of transition signals which make the sentences cannot flow together easily

The writer cannot read easily because of the bumpy jumping ideas and sentences. There is no transition signal

Scoring rubrics development is an integrated process of writing, revising, piloting and trying it out. After the researcher write and revise the rubric, the researcher pilot the rubric. After every effort has been made to clarify the scoring categories, other teachers may be asked to use the rubric and the anchor papers to evaluate a sample set of responses. Any discrepancies between the scores that are assigned by the teachers will suggest which components of the scoring rubric require further explanation. Any differences in interpretation should be discussed and appropriate adjustments to the scoring rubric should be negotiated. This process is called as piloting process. This process is used to make sure the validity and reliability of the rubric.

2.1.4.3. Validity

A test is said to be valid if it measures accurately what it is intended to measure (Hughes, 1989).

There are four types of validity (Hughes, 1989): a. Content Validity

(38)

A test is said to have content validity if its content constitutes representative sample of the language skills, structures, etc, with which it is meant to be concerned.

b. Criterion – Related Validity

A test is said to have criterion-related validity if the result on the test agree with those provided by some independent and high dependable assessment of the candidate’s ability.

c. Construct Validity

A test is said to have construct validity if it can be demonstrated that it measures just the ability which it is supposed to measure.

d. Face Validity

A test is said to have face validity if it looks as if it measures what it is supposed to measure.

2.1.4.4. Reliability

A rubric should also has reliability aspect, or in this case, scorer reliability. Scorer reliability means anyone scorer would give the same score on the two occasions and this would be the same score as would be given by another scorer on either occasion (Hughes, 1989).

2.2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

The theories in the theoretical description will be used as the basic guideline to answer the research questions in this thesis. The first question of this research is in what level the fourth semester students’ writing competency in writing a topic sentence and a set of supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph is. As the

(39)

guideline for the researcher, the theory of writing and paragraph gives general understanding to the researcher in analyzing the students’ writing. The characteristic of a topic sentence and supporting sentences give the researcher knowledge about what characteristics the students should cover to be included as the one who has the competency in writing a topic sentence and a set of supporting sentences. The theories of argumentative writing specify what kind of writing is used by the researcher as the kind of writing that is tested. The theories of a topic sentence, supporting sentences and argumentative writing will be combined to make a rubric to measure the writing competency of the fourth semester students in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentence. The theory of testing writing, especially theory of rubric, will give a glance understanding on how to make a rubric. And to make the rubric valid and reliable, it is needed the theory of validity and reliability. The second research question of the study is what the strengths and the weaknesses of the fourth semester students’ writing competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences are. It can be answered based on the analysis of each item in the rubric which is arranged based on the theories of topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph. From the result of the analysis the researcher can see the strengths and the weaknesses of the students as the data to answer the second question stated in the problem formulation.

(40)

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY

In this chapter, the researcher would discuss the methodology that was used by the researcher to conduct the research on the fourth semester students’ writing competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph in their Writing V class of English Language Education Study Program, Sanata Dharma University. This chapter consists of six parts. The first part is method that discusses the type of research chosen to find the answer to the research questions. The second part is research participants, which elaborates the subject of the research as well as the sampling method. The third part is research instruments. This part shows the research tools that were used by the researcher to gather the data from the research participants. The fourth part is data gathering technique, which discusses the techniques that were used by the researcher to gather the research data. The fifth part is data analysis technique, which gives the guidelines for the researcher on how the findings were analyzed to answer the research questions. And the last part is research procedure, which summarizes the procedure taken in conducting the study.

3.1. METHOD

The method that was used by the researcher to find out the students’ writing competency in writing a topic sentence and the supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph was a text analysis. The researcher’s curiosity in knowing the students’ writing competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting

(41)

sentences in an argumentative paragraph could be easily answered by measuring and analyzing the students’ result in making a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph. Thus, the researcher asked the fourth semester students in Writing IV classes to write an argumentative paragraph which would be analyzed using the instrument. The instruments would be explained in sub-chapter 3.3.

In this test, the researcher used diagnostic-test to identify students’ strengths and weaknesses. Diagnostic test was intended primarily to ascertain what further teaching is necessary (Hughes, 1989). The diagnostic test was used here by the researcher to know the fourth semester students’ writing competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences as the basic requirement to formulate an argumentative writing, which is taught in Writing V. It meant that the researcher asked the students to write an argumentative paragraph using the topics provided by the researcher. The researcher gave two topics which could be chosen by the students to give the boundaries of the subject matter. The topics were in the form of a word or a clause and not a sentence to make sure that the researcher did not give any clue for the participants in writing a topic sentence. The topics which were given to the participants were “The Educational Level of Indonesian President” and “Polygamy”. These topics were chosen with consideration of the fact that the researcher wanted to measure the students writing competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph. Thus the topics chosen were debatable topics.

(42)

3.2. RESEARCH PARTICIPANTS

The participants of this study were the fourth semester students of English Language Education Study Program, Sanata Dharma University who were attending Writing IV classes. The fourth semester students were chosen based on some reasons: First, the researcher assumed that the fourth semester students had the experiences in writing a well-organized paragraph with a clear topic sentence and supporting sentences because they had taken Writing I, Writing II, and Writing III. They had also taken other subjects such as Structure I, Structure II, and Structure III which help them write a good composition. Second, because they were studying Writing IV in this semester, and they would study about argumentative writing in Writing V in which a topic sentence and supporting sentences should be clearly stated and developed.

Considering the limitation on the manpower, ability, chance, and time factors, the researcher could not analyze all the members of fourth semester students. Therefore, the researcher used cluster random sampling. “When the population is spread out in some clusters which each of cluster has the same or almost the same characteristics, one or some clusters can be taken randomly as the sample” (Translated from Gulo, 2002: 93). Thus, the samples taken for the random sampling were not based on the total population of the fourth semester students, but based on the clusters or in this case were the Writing IV classes. There were five classes of Writing IV, and the researcher only chose two classes randomly to represent the whole fourth semester students. The two classes were considered enough to represent the whole population with the assumption that each class had the same or

(43)

almost the same characteristics in writing competency because they had taken the same classes of writing, and they had taken almost the same subjects in their studies.

Since the subject of the research was the fourth semester students who were attending Writing IV classes, for those who were attending Writing IV classes but not from the fourth semester students were not counted as the research participants. The total research respondents were fifty-one respondents, who were from class B and D of Writing IV in English Language Education Study Program, Sanata Dharma University.

3.3 RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS

The first instrument that was used to collect the data from the research participants was the test sheet. The test sheet was a form in which the participants wrote their argumentative paragraph which would be analyzed by the researcher to answer the research questions. The instrument could be seen in figure 3.1.

To analyze the participants’ writing composition, the researcher used a rubric. “Rubric is a tool in performance assessor’s kit which tells potential performers and judges what elements of performance matter most and how the work to be judged. The result will be distinguished in form of relative quality.” (Wiggins, 1988: 153).

The rubric used to measure the fourth semester students’ writing competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph

(44)

was adapted from several sources. (From: Huba & Fred (2000), Stiggins (2001) and other sources from Internet) The rubric can be seen in figure 3.2.

Since the rubric was adapted from several sources. Thus, the rubric had to be piloted to make sure that it was reliable. The rubric was piloted using the same datum and the same rubric, measured by seven different persons.

Figure 3.1 Test Instrument

Choose one of the following topics to make an argumentative paragraph. Formulate your argument only in one paragraph.

1. Educational level of Indonesian President 2. Polygamy

Write in the following space:

_________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________

(45)

Figure 3.2 Rubric for assessing writing

RUBRIC FOR ARGUMENTATIVE PARAGRAPH Score Descriptions

No Items

3 2 1

Topic Sentence 1. Subject and

attitude

There are a subject and an attitude

There is a subject but not an attitude

There is no topic sentence

2. Debatable statement

The topic sentence is clear and debatable

The topic sentence is too general and predictable

The topic sentence is unclear or absent Supporting Sentences

3. Support the topic sentence

clearly and completely develop the topic sentence unclear or incomplete in developing the topic sentence Totally not supporting the topic sentence 4. Relevant

statement

There is no irrelevant sentence

There is one irrelevant sentence

There are two or more irrelevant sentences. 5. Reasoning/

Thinking

Persuasive, often insightful

adequate Inadequate, confusing overall

Grammar and Coherence

6. Mechanics and Grammar

All sentences are complete and grammatical, and have no errors in punctuation, capitalization, and spelling

For the most part, sentences are complete and grammatical, and have maximum 4 errors in

punctuation, capitalization, and spelling

For the most part, sentences are not complete and grammatical and have more than 5 errors in

punctuation, capitalization, and spelling

7. Coherence The sentences are logically

arranged, each sentence moves on naturally and use the

The sentences are logically arranged but lack of transition signals which make the sentences cannot

The writer cannot read easily because of the bumpy jumping ideas and sentences. There

(46)

appropriate transition signals

flow together easily

is no transition signal

The result of the students’ writing composition analysis was tabulated to answer the first question formulated in the problem formulation. The tabulation could be seen in table 3.1. In order to answer the second research question, the students’ result was tabulated for each item of the rubric. By tabulating each item, it could be seen in which items the students had the strengths and the weaknesses. The tabulation could be seen in table 3.2.

Table 3.1 Tabulation of students’ writing competency

Score for Item No. No.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Total Score Grade

Table 3.2 Tabulation of students’ strengths and weaknesses

Item 1: Subject and attitude Score Number of

Participants

Percentage of the number of Participants 1

2 3

3.4 DATA GATHERING TECHNIQUE

Data used by the researcher in conducting this study were derived from two aspects, they were:

(47)

1. Students’ Composition

The main aspect from which the researcher obtained the data to answer the research questions was from the students’ composition. As mentioned before, the researcher obtained the data by asking the fourth semester students to write an argumentative paragraph using the topics provided. The researcher entered Writing IV class B and class D which had been chosen randomly and asked the students in those classes to write an argumentative composition. The students’ compositions were used as the data for the researcher to be analyzed.

The schedule of the research could be seen as follows: a. Class D

Day and Date : Friday, March 23, 2007 Time : 11 a.m.

b. Class B

Day and Date : Monday, March 26, 2007 Time : 7 a.m.

2. Literature Review

Literary review was done to get the theoretical discussion to support the research. This literary review was mainly done to find out the theory and the characteristics of a topic sentence and supporting sentences which were the focus of this research. Thus, this research had the basic theory to support it. The literary review was also done to find any information related to the research. Literary review included searching on the related books and the previous research as the comparison.

(48)

3.5DATA ANALYSIS PROCEDURE

In answering the problem formulation, the data collected were analyzed. The analysis followed some steps:

1. Analyzing the Students’ Paragraphs

The data obtained from testing the students’ writing competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in the form of students’ argumentative paragraphs were analyzed by using the rubric formulated in the research instrument (figure 3.2). Each student’s paragraph was scored based on the rubric. The rubric consisted of seven items, and each item consisted of three scores; they were 3, 2, and 1. Thus, the maximal score of each student was 3 x 7 = 21, and the minimum score of each student was 1 x 7 = 7.

2. Tabulating the Students’ Score

The score of each student was tabulated by using the instrument in table 3.1. From the tabulation, the total score of each participant could be known. The total score ranged between 7 up to 21. The total scores of the participants were graded into three levels: good, fair, and poor. The range of leveling was counted by subtracting the maximal score with the minimal score minus 1 divided by the sum of the level. The minimal score minus 1 was used to make sure that the minimal score was counted as the point which was included in the measurement. The measurement could be seen as follows:

Max. score – (min. score – 1) level

(49)

3 = 15 : 3 = 5

Thus, it could be concluded that the score range of each level was: Good : 17 – 21

Fair : 12 –16 Poor : 7 – 11

3. Analyzing the Data to Answer Research Question Number 1

From the tabulation, the students who obtained the good, fair, and poor grade were counted. The measurement answered these following questions:

a. How many students are included in Good grade? b. What is the percentage?

c. How many students are included in Fair grade? d. What is the percentage?

e. How many students are included in Poor grade? f. What is the percentage?

The result of the data analysis was elaborated in the form of narrative paragraphs to answer the first research question: in what level the fourth semester students’ writing competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph was.

4. Tabulating Each Item in the Rubric

This part specified the items that showed the strength and the weakness of the fourth semester students in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph. This part used the instrument in table 3.2. Each

(50)

tabulation was used to tabulate the score of each item in the rubric. Thus, there were seven tabulations since there were seven items in the rubric. The tabulation showed, for the specific item, how many students obtained score 3, how many students obtained score 2 and how many students obtained score 1.

5. Analyzing the Tabulation to Answer Research Question Number 2

From the tabulation of each item, it could be clearly seen the items in which the students were strong (most of the students obtained score 3) and the items in which the students were weak (most of the students obtained score 1). From the tabulation, the researcher analyzed the result by using these following questions:

a. In which item(s) is/are the students’ strength(s)? b. What is the description of each item?

c. It can be concluded that the students’ strength(s) is/are … d. In which item(s) is/are the students’ weakness(s)?

e. What is the description of each item?

f. It can be concluded that the students’ weakness(es) is/are …

The answer to those questions would be elaborated in the form of narrative paragraphs to answer the second research question: what the students’ strengths and weaknesses in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph were.

3.6RESEARCH PROCEDURE

This research followed some procedures in conducting this study. There were six stages to be followed to conduct this study. The stages would be elaborated as follows:

(51)

1. Literature Review

The researcher reviewed some literatures in order to choose the topic and the problem of this study. The literature review was also used to get the supporting theories of this research so that the research had the background theory to support it. The literature review was done from November - December 2006.

2. Writing the Proposal

The next step after doing the literature review was writing the proposal of the study. The proposal consisted of three chapters; they were chapter one for introduction, chapter two for theoretical review and chapter three for methodology. This proposal was compiled to give boundaries of the study and the guidelines in conducting the research. This step was done from January – March 2007.

3. Conducting a Test

Having written the proposal, the researcher conducted a test. Before conducting the test, the researcher stated the sampling of the participants. The researcher chose randomly which Writing IV class that would be used as the participants to do the test. After choosing two classes, the researcher conducted the test in those classes. Through the test, the researcher asked the fourth semester students in those classes to write an argumentative paragraph based on the topics provided. The researcher did not tell them what characteristics would be judged to make sure that the result will be originally based on the students’ basic writing competency. This step was done in March 2007.

(52)

After conducting the test, the researcher chose one of the students’ paragraphs to test the reliability of the rubric as formulated in figure 3.2. The paragraph was copied and given to seven persons to be scored using the rubric. Those seven persons were those who had the competence on language teaching. When those persons gave the same score or at least the scores were still in the same level (good, fair or poor), the rubric was reliable. However, if the result did not meet the requirements stated before, the rubric was not reliable and it should be improved until the result was reliable. This step was done in March and April 2007.

5. Analyzing the data

In this step, the data that was in the form of students’ composition were analyzed. The analysis followed the steps which had been explained in the data analysis technique (Chapter III). This step was done in April 2007.

6. Giving suggestion

This study was made to give benefits for some aspects. Thus, in this part the researcher would give conclusion of the research, restated the result of the study and gave some support or suggestion to those who get the beneficial aspects of this study. This step was done in April 2007.

(53)

_{Literature Review} (December 2006)

Writing the proposal (January – March 2007)

Doing test (March 2007)

Testing the rubric (March 2007)

Positive Result Negative Result

Rewrite the rubric until the result is positive

(March – April 2007) Analyzing the data

(April 2007) Analyzing the students’

paragraph

Tabulating the students’ score

Analyzing the result to answer Research Question Number 1 Tabulating each item of question

in the rubric Analysing the tabulation to answer research question number

Giving Suggestion (April 2007) Figure 3.3 Research diagram

(54)

CHAPTER 4

RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter presents the findings of the research and the discussion of the findings to answer the research questions stated in Chapter I. The main concern of this research is to know the fourth semester students’ writing competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph in English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University. This concern is formulated in two research questions. First, in what level the fourth semester students’ writing competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph is, and second, what the fourth semester students’ strengths and weaknesses in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph are.

4.1. RESEARCH FINDINGS

The data of the research were collected on March 23 and 26, 2007 in Writing IV class B and class D. The data were taken from a test which was done by the participants in a form of an argumentative paragraph. The total number of the data was 51 which consisted of 36 valid data and 15 invalid data. The invalid data were those which were not in a form of an argumentative paragraph.

(55)

The data were analyzed using the rubric stated in Chapter III figure 3.2. Since the rubric was adapted from several sources, the rubric should be piloted to check its validity and its reliability. Seven persons were asked to check the validity and reliability of the rubric. The piloting process was divided into two parts. In the first part, there were four persons checked the validity and the reliability of the rubric. From the first part, the researcher found that the rubric was neither reliable nor valid. Thus, the researcher improved the rubric based on the improvement suggested in the first part. In order to check the reliability and the validity of the new rubric, the researcher asked three persons to check them. This process was the second part of piloting process.

The rubric which was adapted from several sources and used for the first part of the piloting process could be seen in figure 4.1 below:

Figure 4.1 Rubric for argumentative paragraph before piloting process Score Descriptions

No Items

3 2 1

Scor

e

Topic Sentence

1. Subject and attitude

there are a subject and an attitude

There is a subject but not the attitude

There is no topic sentence

2. Arguable statement The topic sentence is clear and arguable The topic sentence is too general and predictable The topic sentence is unclear or absent 3. Grammar

Awareness The sentence is complete and grammatical There are simple grammatical mistakes but not change the whole meaning of The sentence is incomplete and grammatically error or absent

(56)

the sentence Supporting Sentences

4. Support the topic sentence clearly and completely develop the topic sentence unclear or incomplete in developing the topic sentence Totally not supporting the topic sentence

5. Relevant statement

There is no irrelevant sentence

There is one irrelevant sentence

There are two or more irrelevant sentences. 6. Reasoning/

Thinking

Persuasive, often insightful

Adequate Inadequate, confusing overall 7. Grammar

awareness

All sentences are complete and

grammatical, and they flow together easily.

For the most part,

sentences are complete and grammatical, and they flow together easily. Readers can follow the writing, but they are distracted by some grammatical errors. Some sentences are incomplete or halting. TOTAL SCORE

The result of the first part piloting process could be seen in table 4.1 below: Table 4.1 Piloting result for the first section

SCORE FOR EACH ITEM PERSON

NO. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

TOTAL SCORE

1. 3 3 2 3 2 2 2 17

2. 3 3 2 3 2 2 2 17

3. 3 2 2 3 2 2 2 16

4. 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 17

From the result, there were two items which still had different scores. The items were the arguable statement item and relevant statement item. The four

(57)

persons who checked the reliability and validity of the rubric were also asked to give comments and suggestion by answering some questions as follows:

1. Is there any unclear description in each score of each item? If there is, please mention.

2. If there is any unclear description, please give your suggestion!

3. Is there any item which should be omitted from the rubric? What is it / are they? Why?

4. Do you have any item that has not been mentioned in this rubric? What is it / are they? Why?

5. free comment:

Those questions were given to make sure which item or description that should be improved to make the rubric more reliable. The revisions could be listed as follows: 1. The word “arguable” was changed into “debatable”. It is the correct term for the

argumentative paragraph.

2. There were formerly two items of grammar awareness; they were grammar awareness which measured the topic sentence’s grammar and structure and grammar awareness which measured the supporting sentences’ grammar and structure. However, it was thought as redundant. Thus, the two items of grammar awareness were merged into one item of mechanics and grammar which measure the whole paragraph.

3. The “coherence” item was added. An essay will not be a good essay if there is no coherence between sentences and paragraph.

4. “Mechanics” was included in the grammar item.

(58)

Figure 4.2 Rubric of the argumentative paragraph

Score Descriptions No. Items

3 2 1

Score

Topic Sentence

1. Subject and attitude

there are a subject and an attitude

There is a subject but not the attitude

There is no topic sentence

2. Debatable statement The topic sentence is clear and debatable The topic sentence is too general and predictable

The topic sentence is unclear or absent Supporting Sentences

3. Support the topic sentence clearly and completely develop the topic sentence unclear or incomplete in developing the topic sentence Totally not supporting the topic sentence 4. Relevant

statement

There is no irrelevant sentence

There is one irrelevant sentence

There are two or more irrelevant sentences. 5. Reasoning/

Thinking

Persuasive, often insightful

Adequate Inadequate, confusing overall

Grammar and Coherence

6. Mechanics and Grammar All sentences are complete and grammatical, and have no errors in punctuation, capitalization, and spelling

For the most part, sentences are complete and grammatical, and have maximum 4 errors in punctuation, capitalization, and spelling

For the most part, sentences are not complete and grammatical. Some sentences are

incomplete/haltin g and have more than 5 errors in punctuation, capitalization, and spelling

7. Coherence The sentences are logically arranged, each sentence moves on naturally and use the appropriate transition signals The sentences are logically arranged but lack of transition signals which make the sentences cannot flow together easily

The reader cannot read easily because of the bumpy jumping ideas and sentences. There is no transition signal

(59)

TOTAL SCORE

The piloting result of the second part could be listed in table 4.2 below:

Table 4.2 Piloting result for the second section

SCORE FOR EACH ITEM PERSON

NO. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

TOTAL SCORE

1. 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 17

2. 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 17

3. 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 17

From the piloting result, it could be seen that the score for each item was the same among three persons who checked the rubric. The three persons who checked the rubric in the second part were also asked to give some comments and suggestions. However, the result was good and there was no more revision needed.

The second piloting result showed that the rubric was reliable. It could be said so because each person who checked the rubric could give the same score for each item. The rubric was also said to be valid because it had the content validity. A rubric is said to have content validity if its content measures a representative sample of the language skill, structures, etc. with which it is meant to be concerned. “A test is said to be valid if it measures accurately what it is intended to measure,” (Hughes, 1989: 22). The rubric in this research exactly measured what was intended to be known in this study; it was the students’ competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph. Thus, it could be said that the rubric which was used in this research was valid and reliable.

(60)

4.1.2. The Fourth Semester Students’ Writing Competency in Writing a Topic Sentence and Supporting Sentences in an Argumentative Paragraph

The first research question: in what level the fourth semester students’ writing competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragraph is could be answered by analyzing the data using the rubric explained above.

The result of the data analysis was in a range of scores between 7 up to 21. The whole scores of valid data of the fourth semester students’ argumentative paragraph is presented in table 4.3 below.

Table 4.3 Data analysis of the fourth semester students’ argumentative paragraph

Score for Item No. Participants’

Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Total Score Grade

1. 3 3 2 1 2 1 2 14 FAIR

2. 3 1 1 1 1 2 1 10 POOR

3. 3 3 2 1 2 2 2 15 FAIR

4. 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 8 POOR

5. 3 3 2 1 2 2 1 14 FAIR

6. 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 11 POOR

7. 3 3 2 1 2 2 2 15 FAIR

8. 3 3 2 1 2 2 1 14 FAIR

9. 3 2 1 1 1 2 1 11 POOR

10. 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 16 FAIR

11. 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 19 GOOD

12. 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 10 POOR

13. 3 3 2 1 1 2 2 14 FAIR

14. 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 10 POOR

(1)

Participant Number : 9

(2)

Participant Number : 12

(3)

Participant Number : 14

(4)

Participant Number : 19

(5)

Participant Number : 20

(6)

Participant Number : 31

A study on the fourth semester students` writing competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragrapg in english language education study program of Sanata Dharma University.

Luke 5:4 – 5

Row the boat

Row the boat

Row the boat

Row the boat

out into the deep water

out into the deep water

out into the deep water

out into the deep water

and let your nets down

and let your nets down

and let your nets down

and let your nets down

to catch some fish.”

to catch some fish.”

to catch some fish.”

to catch some fish.”

“MASTER,

“MASTER,

“MASTER,

“MASTER,

we’ve worked hard

we’ve worked hard

we’ve worked hard

we’ve worked hard

ALL night long,

ALL night long,

ALL night long,

ALL night long,

and haven’t caught a

and haven’t caught a

and haven’t caught a

and haven’t caught a

thing.

thing.

thing.

thing.

But if YOU tell me to,

But if YOU tell me to,

But if YOU tell me to,

But if YOU tell me to,

I will let

I will let

I will let

I will let the nets

the nets

the nets

the nets

down.”

down.”

down.”

down.”

'Lord Give Us the Strength'

Grammar and Coherence

Scor

e

Score

Grammar and Coherence

Parts

Dokumen yang terkait

Students` perception on the use of blog in basic writing class in English Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University.

Students` perception of the use of internet in writing VI course in english language education study program of Sanata Dharma University.

A study on grammatical awareness in student`s writing in the English Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University.

A study of word-order errors in noun phrase constructions in the first semester students` writing at the english language education program of Sanata Dharma University.

A Study on the fourth-smester students` english paragraph writing in Sanata Dharma University.

The acquisition of noun premodification in the writing of the first semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University.

Paragraphing and positioning topic sentences among fourth semester students of English department of Sanata Dharma University : A Gender study.

A Study on the general competence of the seventh semester students of Sanata Dharma University in the writing language seminar papers.

A study on the fourth semester students` writing competency in writing a topic sentence and supporting sentences in an argumentative paragrapg in english language education study program of Sanata Dharma University - USD Repository

Learning strategies in writing used by writing III students of the english language education study program of Sanata Dharma University - USD Repository

Dokumen yang Anda mencari sudah siap untuk unduhkan