A CASE STUDY OF LEARNER LANGUAGE ON WRITTEN REFLECTION OF BAHASA INGGRIS I CLASS B STUDENTS IN THEOLOGY FACULTY SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

A CASE STUDY OF LEARNER LANGUAGE ON WRITTEN REFLECTION OF BAHASA INGGRIS I CLASS B STUDENTS IN THEOLOGY FACULTY SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree in English Language Education

By: Aloysia Berlindis Lasar Student Number: 121214154

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA 2016


A Sarjana Pendidikan Thesis on

A CASE STUDY OF LEARNER LANGUAGE ON WRITTEN REFLECTION OF BAHASA INGGRIS I CLASS B STUDENTS IN THEOLOGY FACULTY SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

By Aloysia Berlindis Lasar Student Number: 121214154

Approved by:

Advisor

\

Markus Budirahatjo, MEd., Ed.D.

4 May 2016

11


A Sarjana Pendidikan Thesis on

A CASE STUDY OF LEARNER LANGUAGE ON WRITTEN REFLECTION OF BAHASA INGGRIS I CLASS B STUDENTS IN THEOLOGY FACULTY SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY By ALOYSIA BERLINDIS LASAR Student Number 121214154

Defended before the Board of Examiners On 1 June 2016 and Declared Acceptable

Board of Examiners Chairperson

: Paulus Kuswandono, Ph.D.

Secretary

: Christina Lhaksmita Anandari, S.Pd., Ed.M.

Member

: D r. E . Sunarto, MH . urn.

Member

: Christina Lhaksmita Anandari, S.Pd., Ed.M.

Member

: Markus Budiraharjo, M.Ed., Ed.D.

~ -'/~I I'

~

Yogyakarta, 1 June 2016 Faculty of Teacher Training and Education Sanata Dharma University .Dean // ,~~, , r--

~(;. ~.i' ':;1 "'. ;! .. " """y'-~"~'A II ~. . :~~/ ..Y ~ ,.~

.::

~:~_

':'.. ~~

'.

"..:"

_

7

,Rohandi, Ph.D 11l


The greatest victory is to beat yourself

I dedicate this Thesis for my incredible Mom and Dad, Oncu de Rozari & Yos Lasar, also my heart guardians, Mario Lasar and Pedro Lasar.

I, too, present this as special “thanks!” to the one I give my heart to, Dion Lamanepa

iv


STATEMENT OF WORK'S ORIGINALITY I honestly declare that this thesis, which I have written, does not contain the work or parts of the works of other people, except those cited in the quotation and the references, as a scientific paper should.

Yogyakarta, 1 June 2016

The Writer

Aloysia Berlindis Lasar 121214154

v


LEMBAR PERSETUJUAN PUBLlKASI KARYA ILMIAH UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS Yang bertandatangan di bawah ini, saya mahasiswa Universitas Sanata Dhanna: Nama

: Aloysia Berlindis Lasar

Nomor Mahasiswa

: 121214154

Demi pengembangan i1mu pengetahuan, saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dhanna karya i1miah saya yang berjudu1: A CASE STUDY OF LEARNER LANGUAGE ON WRITTEN REFLECTION OF BAHASA INGGRIS I CLASS B STUDENTS IN THEOLOGY FACULTY SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY ~

Beserta perangkat yang diperlukan (bila ada). Dengan demikian saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dhanna hak untuk menyimpan, menga1ihkan dalam bentuk media lain, menge101anya da1am bentuk pangkalan data, mendistribusikan secara terbatas, dan mempublikasikannya di internet atau media lain untuk kepentingan akademis tanpa perlu meminta ijin dari saya atau memberikan royalti kepada saya se1ama tetap mencantumkan nama saya selaku penulis. Demikian pernyataan ini saya buat dengan sebenarnya. Dibuat di Yogyakarta Pada tangga1: 1 Juni 2016 Yang menyatakan

Aloysia Berlindis Lasar

VI


ABSTRACT Lasar, Aloysia Berlindis. (2016). A Case Study of Learner Language on Written Reflection of Bahasa Inggris I Class B Students in Theology Faculty – Sanata Dharma University. English Language Education Study Program, Department of Language and Arts Education, Faculty of Teachers Training and Education, Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University. Students of Theology Faculty in Bahasa Inggris I class B are considered as second language learners. In that class, they were assigned to write reflections related to topics discussed every two weeks. Using the writings, the researcher analyzed learner language as defined by Ellis (2005). In writing a reflection, one needs to use past tense appropriately so the message and values can be well delivered. Using error analysis theory, this research elaborated learner language further in order to complete the description with focus on errors of past tense made by the students. There were two questions to be answered. There were 1) how are the written reflections of Bahasa Inggris I class B best described? and 2) to what extent did the students’ personal experiences demonstrate their mastery of using past tense as seen in the writing performance? The research used qualitative inquiry. It was in a form of case study in students of Bahasa Inggris I class B’s ten sets of writings as the sample of learner language. To answer the first research question, a rubric of writing assessment was used. In order to complete the description with specific focus of students’ mastery in using past tense, theory of error analysis also was used. To answer the second research question, the researcher used interview as the data gathering technique. In analyzing the data of interview, the researcher referred to notion of source of errors proposed by Brown (1980). The findings of this research were the description of the writings completed with the result of error analysis in past tense and the analysis of interview result. The description showed that these students achieved the lowest point in terms of accuracy. The error analysis showed that most of them made error in using form. As the confirmation, the analysis of interview result elaborated that learners’ mother tongue, limited competencies in the target language and context of language teaching that they had ever experienced impact to the error making. Keywords: learner language, written reflection, students of Bahasa Inggris I class B, past tense, personal experience

vii


ABSTRAK Lasar, Aloysia Berlindis. (2016). A Case Study of Learner Language on Written Reflection of Bahasa Inggris I Class B Students in Theology Faculty – Sanata Dharma University. Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa dan Seni, Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan, Yogyakarta: Universitas Sanata Dharma. Mahasiswa di Bahasa Inggris I Kelas B Fakultas Teologi memelajari bahasa Inggris sebagai bahasa kedua. Di kelas tersebut, mereka diberi tugas membuat refleksi tertulis berdasarkan tema-tema yang didiskusikan di kelas setiap dua minggu sekali. Menggunakan tulisan-tulisan tersebut sebagai obyek, peneliti menganalisis bahasa pelajar berdasarkan definisi yang diperkenalkan Ellis (2005). Dalam menulis refleksi, penggunaan past tense harus tepat agar pesan dan nilai refleksi bisa tersampaikan dan dimengerti dengan baik. Dengan menggunakan teori analisis kesalahan, penelitian ini juga mengelaborasi lebih jauh bahasa pelajar untuk mendukung deskripsi tersebut. Penjelasan itu kemudian difokuskan pada kesalahan penggunaan past tense yang ditemukan dalam tulisan-tulisan tersebut. Dalam penelitian ini, ada dua rumusan masalah: 1) Bagaimana refleksi tertulis mahasiswa Bahasa Inggris I Kelas B di Fakultas Teologi dideskripsikan? dan 2) Sejauh mana pengalaman pribadi para mahasiswa tersebut dalam belajar bahasa Inggris mendemonstrasikan pemahaman mereka tentang penggunaan past tense seperti yang tercermin dalam tulisan-tulisan tersebut? Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif dalam bentuk studi kasus terhadap sepuluh set refleksi tertulis dari para mahasiswa di kelas B Bahasa Inggris I sebagai sampel dari bahasa pelajar. Untuk menjawab pertanyaan pertama, peneliti menggunakan sebuah rubrik untuk mengevaluasi tulisan-tulisan tersebut lalu kemudian dideskripsikan. Hasil analisis kesalahan pada penggunaan past tense kemudian melengkapi deskripsi tersebut. Untuk menjawab pertanyaan kedua, peneliti melakukan wawancara. Untuk menganalisis hasil wawancara, peneliti merujuk pada konsep mengenai faktor penyebab kesalahan yang dijabarkan oleh Brown (1980). Temuan dari penelitian ini adalah deskripsi lengkap dengan hasil analisis kesalahan yang ditemukan dari tulisan-tulisan tersebut dan analisis pada hasil wawancara. Deskripsinya menunjukkan bahwa performa dalam hal grammar pada tulisan-tulisan ini merupakan yang terendah. Hasil analisis kesalahan pada penggunaan past tense menunjukkan bahwa kesalahan terbanyak dilakukan dalam penggunaan bentuk past. Sebagai buktinya, analisis pada hasil wawancara menunjukkan bahwa bahasa ibu, keterbatasan pemahaman konsep bahasa kedua dan konteks pembelajaran bahasa Inggris yang pernah diterima dan dialami para mahasiswa berpengaruh besar terhadap kesalahan yang mereka lakukan. Kata kunci: learner language, written reflection, students of Bahasa Inggris I class B, past tense, personal experience

viii


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Above all, I praise the Almighty God, Jesus Christ, Holy Spirit and Mother Mary for the wonderful grace and unstoppable blessings upon my life. I dedicate this as the biggest thank to my incredible parents, ema Oncu de Rozari and bapa Yos Lasar for the irreplaceble love, care and sacrifice for me. My thankfulness also goes to my beloved little brothers, Ais and Edo, for their prayers, spirits and love, especially during the process of finishing my study. My special gratitude also goes to tta Dion Lamanepa, for his love, presence and ‘lessons’ of how to be faith and tough. I believe that God’s blessing has been granted for me within the presence of Bapa Romo Datus Du’u, Pr., Om Romo Richardus Muga Buku, Pr., Bapu Anton Tukan and family, Bapa Ambar Hadipurnomo and family, and Kaka Romo Yance Sengga, Pr. I highly thank their super love and support during my study. It is an honor to have Mr. Markus Budiraharjo, M.Ed., Ed.D., as my thesis advisor so I dedicate my major gratitude for his precious and meaningful guidance from the very beginning of my thesis writing process. I am deeply grateful also for having Miss Laurentia Sumarni, S.Pd., M.Trans. St., as my academic advisor. She has spent her bunch of precious time to take care of and love me. I also grant my deep appreciation to all lecturers of PBI Sanata Dharma University. I am blessed to be the part of this big family and to get the chance of being their student. I would like to adress my great thankfulness also to all students of Bahasa Inggris I class B, Theology Faculty of Sanata Dharma

ix


University, academic year 2015/2016, especially for Fr. Nade, SSCC., Fr. Lius, CMF and Fr. Jorgi, SCJ. May God always be with them. I thank my constant companions in PBI ’12 Class F for accepting and supporting me so my dream of being a teacher has grown very well. For all members of English Mass Community and Campus Ministry I dedicate my deep gratitude for giving me chance to grow better as a person. I also would like to present my thankfullness to all members of Badan Eksekutif Mahasiswa Universitas Sanata Dharma Kabinet Menyala and the whole committee of every event we had held in unforgottable togetherness. I learned how to be a leader and ‘a man for all’ from all of them. I address my appreciation and thankfulness also to the big family of Flobamorata Paingan USD, where sweet memories, unforgotten love and meaningful experiences I found. I thank to all members of Rejoice Choir for boosting my mood and spirit everytime I am lost. For all my friends in Kuliah Kerja Nyata, Program Pengalaman Lapangan, Titanium SPD class, and Thesis class, I blow my special thanks also for standing beside me through the whole process. All crew of English Action Days, Undergraduate Conference, PROCESS 2013/2014, Gerakan 6000 Buku, would always remind me the meaning of being a servant whole-heartedly so I thank them deeply. Last but not least, I will never forget the presence of a true friend within Vania. I thank her for her support and never ending patience upon me these years. Finally, I would like to express my appreciation and gratitude for those who had helped me during my study and living in Yogyakarta, whose name cannot be mentioned one by one in here. All of them had painted beautiful x


pictures and written incredible stories in my life. I hope all of them still will be the proofreaders for the living book I am writing. May God bless them all. Sincerely, Aloysia Berlindis Lasar

xi


TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TITLE PAGE ................................................................................................ i APPROVAL PAGES .................................................................................... ii DEDICATION PAGE ................................................................................... iv STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY ........................................... v LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI ......................... vi ABSTRACT ................................................................................................... vii ABSTRAK ....................................................................................................... viii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................... ix TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................. xii LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................ xv LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................... xvi LIST OF APPENDICES .............................................................................. xvii CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION A. Research Background .......................................................................... 1 B. Research Problems .............................................................................. 5 C. Problem Limitation ............................................................................. 6 D. Research Objectives ............................................................................ 6 E. Research Benefits ................................................................................ 7 F. Definition of Terms ............................................................................. 8

xii


CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE A. Theoretical Description ....................................................................... 11 1. Analysing Learner Language ........................................................ 11 2. Error .............................................................................................. 15 a. Definition of Error .................................................................... 15 b. Types of Error .......................................................................... 16 3. Sources of Errors ........................................................................... 19 4. Past Tenses .................................................................................... 21 a. Simple Past ................................................................................ 21 b. Past Continuous ......................................................................... 21 c. Past Perfect ................................................................................ 22 d. Past Perfect Continuous ............................................................ 22 B. Theoretical Framework ....................................................................... 22 CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY A. Research Method ................................................................................. 24 B. Research Participants .......................................................................... 25 C. Research Setting ................................................................................... 26 D. Research Instruments .......................................................................... 27 E. Data Analysis Technique .................................................................... 28 F. Research Procedure .............................................................................. 29 CHAPTER IV. RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION A. Research Results ................................................................................. 32 1. Description of the Writings ........................................................... 32 xiii


2. Error Analysis on the Writings ..................................................... 36 3. Learners’ Personal Narratives ....................................................... 42 B. Discussion ........................................................................................... 57 CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Conclusions ......................................................................................... 64 B. Recommendations ............................................................................... 66 REFERENCES .............................................................................................. 69 APPENDICES ............................................................................................... 71

xiv


LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 Types of linguistic knowledge ......................................................... 12 Table 2.2 Regularization errors in the misformation category observed in second language learner production ........................................................... 19 Table 3.1 Error analysis on each learner presented in frequency and precentage ......................................................................................................... 29

xv


LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 4.1 Average Point Achieved by the Students in Each Category .................. 34 Figure 4.2 Figure 4.2 Average Point of Each Student ……………................

36

Figure 4.3 Sample of Errors Identified in Writings ........................................ 40

xvi


LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A. Interview Transcription ................................................................. 71 Appendix B. Learners’ Errors .........................................................................

80

Appendix C. Rubric for Writing ......................................................................

89

Appendix D. Frequency of Error Type ...........................................................

92

Appendix E. Sample of Students’ Written Reflections ...................................

94

xvii


CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

This research deals with the analysis of learner language produced in writing and how the personal narratives of the writers demonstrate their mastery on past tense. This chapter consists of some parts namely background of the study, research problems, research limitation, research objectives, research benefits and the description of terms.

A. Research Background Facing the rapid development of technology and science these days, English as it is used as a contact language - or is generally known as a lingua franca- is becoming more important for everyone. It is used widely to communicate among countries. Even literatures, verbal and non-verbal vital communication nowadays are internationally conducted in English. People then, who compete in the global areas from almost all of occupations, are required to master English well. In other words, whether we like it or not, English is becoming the minimum requirement to manage ourselves to survive. In Indonesia, English is used as a second language. It is offered in our formal education system from the early grade of schools, as a second language. As it is important for international communication purposes, English then is considered urgent to be introduced in academic processes. When the students could manage themselves to master English properly, at least they can later have a

1


2 chance to break the challenge in global life competition. English proficiency brings along that chance. According to Brown (2007), “learning a second language is a long and a complex undertaking. It makes the person will fully be affected by the struggle of switching culture, feeling, way of thinking and acting from the mother tongue into the second language” (p. 15). Further, Krashen (1981) introduces that language acquisition is very similar to the process children use in acquiring their first and second languages. It requires meaningful interaction in the target language in which speakers concern not with the form of their utterances but with the messages they are conveying and understanding. It shows that we still have the way to accomplish a good result of second language acquisition among the complexities. These days, learning English is not merely perceived as an instrument by nature. More than that, it also deals with some soft skills, such as self-reflexivity, or discussions on values or morality. Those activities are in order to provide what so called as meaningful interaction in the target language Krashen mentioned. Therefore, even though the process of helping our second language learners acquire English surely might be complicated, we have so many theories and researches to help us. We are going to find the most suitable methods for the learners of second language. Yet, the most important point to remember is that we, ourselves, hold the control of constructing meaning towards the teaching and learning processes. That is then surely hanged on teachers‟ hands. For the early stage, as what Krashen (1981) believes, one of the ways to help the learner


3 acquire the second language easier is to provide the chance to get in touch meaningfully with the target language. Teachers are required to be able to do that. There are four skills required in language learning named speaking, listening, reading and writing skills. According to Hyland (2003), writing is among the most important skills that second language students need to develop. Moreover, Troyka (1987) explains some reasons for it. First that writing is a way of thinking and learning. Second, it is a way of discovering. Third, it can create reading. Through writing, one expresses thoughts and learns to compose ideas. During the process one can also discover things in many aspects since writing itself requires the awareness of grammar and the skill of communicating ideas using words. As the result, writing produces sources of information that can be read by other people. Borrowing Canale and Swain‟s (1980) framework, a second language learner writer at least needs: grammatical competence – a knowledge of grammar, vocabulary, and the language system; discourse competence – a knowledge of genre and the rhetorical patterns that create them, sociolinguistic competence – the ability to use language appropriately in different contexts, understanding readers and adopting appropriate authorial attitudes; and strategic competence – the ability to use a variety of “communicative strategy” (Hyland, 2003). Norrish (1983) also states that when writing was the only of storing information, it was vital that people should be educated to construct grammatically acceptable sentences and be able to spell correctly (para. 8).


4 This research is conducted on the accomplishment of a language learner in second language acquisition process through writing. Ellis (2005) explains some types of data that can be studied in second language acquisition researches related to the skill that a language learner required to accomplish. “One of the types is non-linguistic performance data which involve measuring learners‟ non-verbal responses to linguistics stimuli” (p. 15). Further Ellis (2005) explains: They include measures of learners‟ reaction times to linguistic stimuli, non-verbal measures of learners‟ comprehension of linguistic input, and measures of learners‟ intuitions about the grammaticality or acceptability of sentences. These measures enable inferences to be made about learners‟ linguistic knowledge based on their ability to process language receptively. (p. 15-16) The measurement offered by Ellis then would be used to construct an overview on the learners‟ mastery of the language represented in their language production. Specifically, the product would be writing. The objects of this study are the students in an institution which enrolls education for Catholic Priests candidates (a Seminary). For these seminarians, reflection writing is a habit implemented for all of them from the early grade even as a part of daily activity. Yet, it generally is conducted in Bahasa Indonesia. Referring to the concept which holds a belief where providing the second language learner a medium to get in touch with the target language meaningfully is beneficial for second language acquisition processes, these students are introduced to write the reflection using English. The introduction activity is conducted in their English class, by Mr. Markus Budiraharjo, as a part of the subjects taken in their first semester. Referring the idea of reflection writing as a habit for these students, writing


5 English reflection then is considered properly as a tool to provide a meaningful activity in the process of acquiring English as their second language. In this study, students‟ writing as the product of learning process is analyzed especially in terms of how student use past tense. As they write reflection, past tense presence matters. The role of past tense in the reflective writing is important to reveal the story and ideas. That is why, it is important to see the capability of the objects here in this study; how they understand the use of past tense and to what extent they apply their knowledge about it in their writings. Further, as Hillier (2005) states that people not only have different level of experience and knowledge relevant to what we are having as the process of learning activities, they also have different ways of it. This works the same in their preferences. The notion gives the researcher idea to think about asking the students for their personal narratives. This may give information to help researcher forming a pattern of each student, to clarify their level of mastery in using past tenses.

B. Research Problems Referring to the previous explanations, there are some problems need to be solved. Those are: 1. How are the written reflections of Bahasa Inggris I class B students best described? 2. To what extent did students‟ personal experiences demonstrate their mastery of using past tense as seen in the writing performance?


6 C. Problem Limitation This study is limited to ten sets of written reflections and also personal experiences of first-semester students of Theology Faculty, Sanata Dharma University Academic Year 2015/2016. The sets of writings are reflection upon four different topics. The reflections are in various forms. Two of them are in forms of personal reflection, including personal opinion which is related to personal experience. Another two are in forms of homily (type of reflection made by clergy, to be shared and/or spoken). In those writings, the students are expected to retell stories (based on video/children story presented in class and Bible stories as well) then reflect them with their own opinion and finally relate it to deliver particular value or message to the readers. Therefore, the presence of past tense is important to be taken into account. The researcher considers past tense as the focus for that reason. While personal experiences that are meant in this study were revealed by the students which generally discussing their experience of learning English as second language, being introduced to concept of past tense, the learning process that they had ever got in the past and their mother tongue.

D. Research Objectives This study is aimed to provide model of learner language in second language learner‟s writing products. The results of error analysis would help readers to have a glimpse of possibility error made by the learners and to complete the description of the writings. Further, by analyzing these students mastery of using past tense then defining their personal experience that demonstrate it, this


7 study contributes to informing the students (of Bahasa Inggris I class B) about what should be improved in terms of their English and English writing skills.

E. Research Benefits This research would be beneficial for some academic parties. It is expected that this study would bring some benefits for the researcher, the students of Bahasa Inggris I class B Theology Faculty of Sanata Dharma University Academic Year 2015/2016, the ELESP students as the candidate teachers for second language learners and also future researchers. Further would be elaborated as follows: 1.

For the researcher This study is useful for the researcher in gaining the real model of second

language learner‟s writing production. It helps the researcher to get deeper understanding on how second language learning process actually can be designed later on if it is dealing with writing activity. Referring to its focus, which is past tense, this study provides data of learner‟s common error. As it represents their mastery of it, this supports the best description of learner language itself. 2. For the students For the students of Bahasa Inggris I class B, this study can bring them some enlighten in terms of their works. It is to identify their errors and reflect the causes so that they can improve. Moreover, they also can consider writing reflection as a regular activity outside class meeting as they can find the benefits:


8 easy way of learning English and also deepening their ability to reflect more and more. 3. For the ELESP students As English teacher candidates, students of ELESP also can gain some benefits from this study. It can be in form of better knowledge of second language learner‟s learning strategy and an option of teaching second language method. Those might be helpful for them later on when they are about to implement certain strategies of learning in their classes. May the result of this study also can give them sort of guideline in understanding theories in second language learning. 4. For future researchers For the future researcher, this study can be a reference to support further research on the relevant topic in the future.

F. Definition of Terms In order to help the readers having the same understanding of this study, there are some terms that needed to be explained. Those terms related to this study are: 1. Learner Language Ellis (2005) describes learner language is the oral or written language produced by learners. For the study of Second Language Acquisition, learner language serves as a primary data. 2. Written reflection


9 There are 10 sets of written reflections used here in this study. The written reflections were the products required by the lecturer of English subject (Bahasa Inggris I class B), Theology Faculty of Sanata Dharma University, Academic Year 2015/2016. Each set was written under four different topics related to themes or issues discussed in the class. Two of the topics are related to Holy Bible (in forms of homily), and the other two related to personal experience, opinion and arguments about learning strategies and children stories. 3. Students‟ personal experience In this research, the researcher conducted interview towards some participants in order to gather data. The interviews were conducted under the general topic namely „personal experience in learning English‟. The result of the interview then called as personal experience. 4. Students of Bahasa Inggris I Class B There were 22 male students undergoing their first semester in Theology Faculty of Sanata Dharma University and taking Bahasa Inggris I class with Mr. Markus Budiraharjo as the lecturer, Academic Year 2015/2016, when the data were gathered. However, only 10 out of those 22 were taken as the objects of this study. Those ten students are called here in this study „the students of Bahasa Inggris I Class B. 5. Theology Faculty of Sanata Dharma University Theology Faculty is one of the faculties in Sanata Dharma University which enrolls undergraduate and postgraduate in Philosophy and Theology. The


10 male students that are studying in the faculty are generally Catholic priest candidates (seminarians).


CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

This chapter consists of some theories from related literature that are used by the researcher to conduct the analysis in this study. The major parts of this chapter are theoretical description and theoretical framework.

A. Theoretical Description Researcher reviews on some literature to find out some theories of learner language and the language competencies required to describe written reflection of Bahasa Inggris I class B students in Theology Faculty of Sanata Dharma University and to define their personal narratives. Researcher found some major theories that meet to support the analysis on this study. 1. Analysing Learner Language According to Ellis (2005), learner language serves as a primary data for second language acquisition research. For many SLA researchers the goal of SLA is the description and explanation of L2 learners‟ competence and how this develops over time. Further he explains that there are implicit and explicit knowledge that cover what so called learners‟ competence. Implicit knowledge is the kind of knowledge we gain from our L1 (mother tongue). The implicit knowledge we produce is unconcious and spontaneous.

11


12 Implicit knowledge is the kind of knowledge we possess of our mother tongue. That is, it is unconscious and is proceduralized so that is available for automatic use in spontaneous production. (p. 5) While explicit knowledge is the vice versa. Ellis explains that explicit knowledge is produced under learner‟s consciousness. Explicit knowledge is consious and declarative. It consists of both conscious awareness of the same minor and major schemas that figure in implicit knowledge (but represented in an entirely different mental form) and of the metalanguage that can assist in verbalizing this analyzed knowledge (p. 6). Table 2.1 Types of linguistic knowledge

Type of Knowledge Implicit (procedural)

Sub-types Formulaic

Rule-based

Explicit (declarative)

Analysed Metalingual

Definitions Sequence of elements that are stored and accessed as readymade chunks Unconscious knowledge of major and minor schemas consists of abstract linguistic categories realizable lexically in an indefinite number of sentences/utterances Conscious awareness of minor and major schemas Lexical knowledge of technical and non-technical linguistic terminology.

However, Ellis (2005) raises a big question about what kind of performance of a learner‟s language that provides the most reliable and valid source of information. According to him, there are many ways of it. A researcher may depend on his intuition in term of judgements about the grammaticality of sentences presented in discovering what the learner knows about the language. Other researchers may prefer to collect samples of learner language and analyse the grammar produced.


13 On one hand some SLA researchers choose to rely on learner intuition (in the form of judgements about the grammaticality of sentences presented to them) to discovering what they know. Other researchers, especially those of a more functional orientation, prefer to collect sample of learner language. Not surprisingly analyses based n grammaticality judgements and on learner language frequently produce different results. (p. 6) As the heterogeneous of the linguistic performance in learner language, Ellis also offers several options of solution. Tarone (1983) says it is “to redefine competence as its variable” (as cited Ellis, 2005, p. 6), or to identify one type of performances as the preferred source of information about competence, or to recognize the need of multiple sources of performance data and look for points of confluence as evidence of what learner knows. In analysing learner language, Ellis also states that we can view the learner language in two entirely distinct ways; learner language viewed as the expressions and as the content. Both views may serve distinct forms of information. As researcher, Ellis states, one can choose whether, first by examining the linguistic forms produced by the learners as the evidence of what they know about the L2. Second, by viewing it as the set of propositions relating to whatever topics which are being communicated about. First view gives researcher information about learners‟ beliefs and attitudes to the target language and also their behaviour that they gain through the process of learning the language. (Ellis, 2005). In this research, error analysis was chosen in order to analyze learner language as Ellis describes. Corder (1974) then proposes the following points as the steps a researcher can do to analyse the error (as cited in Ellis, 2005, p. 57).


14 a). Collecting a sample of learner language In this step, Corder (1974) suggests that the researcher should be aware that the nature of the sample that is collected may influence the nature and distribution of the errors observed (as cited in Ellis, 2005, p. 57). However, Corder also shares other possibilities that a researcher can do to keep the originality of the data. He suggests that a researcher may wish to sample errors more generally by collecting a broad sample reflecting different learners, different types of language and different production conditions. However, it is advisable to provide full and explicit description of the learner productions that make up the sample so that the effect of different variables on errors can be examined post hoc. (p. 58) b). Identifying the errors In order to identify the errors, Ellis states that the researcher should involve the comparison between what the learner produced with what a native speaker counterpart would produce in the same context. In this research, the researcher uses general concept and rules of English past tense as what so called „a native speaker counterpart production‟ as what Ellis mentions. c). Describing the errors Corder (1974) writes that “the description of errors is essentially a comparative process, the data being the original erroneous utterances and the reconstructed utterance” (as cited in Ellis, 2005, p. 60). Again, he emphasizes that to describe the errors, the researcher needs to identify how the forms produced by the learner differ from those produced by the native‟s speaker counterparts. Further, he mentions these two steps: “the development of a set of descriptive


15 categories for coding the errors that have been identified and recording the frequency of the errors in each category” (p. 60). d). Explaining the errors In here, Ellis explains that the rule of identifying source of errors works. He mentions psychological and sociolinguistic sources of errors as what are used in research for second language acquisition. Meaning to say that, Ellis proposes that in explaining the errors, the researcher elaborates why do the students make certain errors. Further in this researcher, the researcher also looks at what other experts say about errors source in language learning process. Later would be discussed more in the part of sources of errors. e). Evaluating errors Ellis states this is not so much a stage in the analysis of learner errors as supplementary procedure. A reseacher needs to involve other steps in order to conduct an evaluation of errors (para. 67). In this research, the researcher only want to describe the writings and specifically the errors in order to provide models for language teacher about learner language. Therefore, this step is considered as not necesarry to be done here in this research. 2. Error a. Definition of Error Corder (1974) writes: “the description of errors is essentially a comparative process, the data being the original erroneous utterances and the reconstructed utterance” (p. 128). So the description of error involves the identification of the difference between what is produced by the learner and the


16 one produced by the native speaker. Here researcher refers to the two taxonomies that are introduced by Dulay, Birt and Krashen (1982). According to Dulay and Krashen, errors are the flawed side of learner speech or writing. People cannot learn language without first committing errors. To analyze error, here are the taxonomies that James (1998) states that those had been used; (1) a linguistic taxonomy and (2) a surface structure taxonomy. However, James also states that it is also possible to combine those two. Dulay and Krashen mention the other two taxonomies used for the descriptive classification of errors. Those are comparative analysis and communicative effect. Further it is explained that the discussion of these descriptive taxonomies is served to some major aims. Dulay and Krashen say: Discussion of these descriptive taxonomies is guided by two major purposes: to present error categories which rely solely on observable (rather that inferred) characteristics for their definition; and to report the findings of research conducted to date with respect to error types observed. (p.146)

b. Types of Errors 1). Error Types Based on Linguistic Category The errors are classified based on the language category which includes phonology (pronunciation), syntax and morphology (grammar), semantics and lexicon (meaning and vocabulary), and discourse (style). 2). Error Types Based on Surface Strategy Taxonomy According to Dulay, Burt, and Krashen‟s (1982: 150) surface taxonomy is based

on

„the

ways

surface

structures

are

altered‟

in

erroneous


17 utterances/sentences. There are four principal ways in which learners modify the target language: a). Omission Omission errors are characterized by the absence of an item that must appear in a well-formed utterance. Even generally any morpheme or word in a sentence is possible to be omitted, some of them are more often to appear compared among others. Content morphemes (nouns, verbs, adjectives and adverbs) are included. For example: Mr. Kopong is now our new Physics teacher. The words, Mr. Kopong, Physics, our, teacher, are the content morphemes that carry primary meaning. Reader can still understand if one says Mr. Kopong our Physics teacher On the contrary, it could not be understood if it is only grammatical morphemes (including articles, verb auxiliaries and preposition): is new Dulay and Krahsen state that language learner omits grammatical morphemes much more frequently than content words. b). Additions Additions are characterized by the pressure of an item which must not appear in a well-formed utterance. Language learners, both in first and their second language have been observed to add in three ways. First is double marking, which is a type of error that occurs when learner produces double marker in the utterance/sentences. For example: one says


18 We didn’t went there. Because two items marked for the same feature (didn’t and went indicate past tense), it is called double marking error. The second is regularization is a rule typically applies to a class of linguistic items, such as the class of main verbs or the class of nouns. For example, when learners produce sheep in form of plural as sheeps, the same way in producing words like fishes, putted, or cutted as if they are applied the same rule as the regular plural nouns. The third is simple addition errors. Actually books say that no particular features characterize simple addition, as long as the additional element is not double marking error nor regularization error. - c). Misformation. It is a type of errors which are characterized by the use of the wrong form of the morpheme or structure. Unlike in omission errors where learner supplied nothing, in misformation learner supplies something although it is incorrect. In misformation that are some sub-types there are first, regularization errors. Regularization errors are those in which a regular marker is used in place of an irregular one, such as in runned for run or gooses for geese. The second is called archi-forms which are the error made in using form. For example, the learner happens to select just one of the demonstrative adjectives in producing noun phrase. That dog That dogs So that here is selected to accompany both singular and plural form of noun. The third sub-type is alternating form. Learner may alter the morpheme in incorrect place for example the using of don’t + verb is alternated with no + verb.


19 Table 2.2 Regularization Errors in the Misformation Category Observed in Second Language Learner Production

Linguistic Misformed Reflexive pronoun Regular past Plural

Item Examples* Hisself (himself) I falled (fell) Gooses (geese) Childs (children)

*these examples are taken from raw data collected by Dulay and Burt via the Billingual Syntax Measure (lower and upper grade version) and unstructured natural conversation, unless otherwise specified.

Source: Language Two. Dulay and Krashen page 159.

d). Misordering. It is type of errors which is characterized by the incorrect placement of a morpheme or group of morphemes in an utterance/sentence. For example, he is all the time late instead of he is late all the time. 3. Sources of Errors Brown (1980) proposes three primary points as sources of errors that commonly affect the process of one‟s language learning. There are interlingual transfer, intralingual and context of learning. These three factors are used as the basis of analyzing learner‟s personal experience to answer research question number two. Furthermore, Corder (1973) also proposes similar concept of factors that make a learner produces an error namely nature of mother tongue, basis analogy, nature of teaching and teaching materials. Generally, they are quite the same with what Brown has proposed. Hence, in this study, the researcher used the theory of Brown. Where interlingual transfer can cause learner‟s errors for the interference of his/her mother tongue (L1). The strong influence of a learner‟s mother tongue can raise


20 confusion in producing same, for instance, sentences in the target language. For example, when a Bahasa speaker is learning concept of the use of past tense. He might be confused to understand that the form of a verb would be changed when it is used in a sentence, based on the time mark (tense), whether by adding –d or –ed (if regular verbs) or by using the other form (for irregular verbs). Since in bahasa, there is no concept alike. When the time is different, the words is replaced by another new word instead of having form changing in a verb as we have in English. Intralingual as mentioned by Brown (1980: 173) makes learner produces an error for the nature of the target language. There might be confusion on the learner as the presence of rules and formulas in the target language. Afterwards, Brown also stated that intralingual cause of error can be identified when there is kind of overgeneralization in using certain rules in a language done by a learner. The third, as Brown proposed is the nature of language teaching. This includes material, method and teacher of the language itself that can make learners misunderstand the concept or essence of the language or can also cause the learner to hold false belief in learning the elements of the language. In Second Language Acquisition scope, Ellis (2005) states that their concern in analysing learner language is psychological source of error. He elaborates as errors that made relating to the processing mecahnism involved in L2 use and to the nature of the L2 knowledge system (Ellis, 2005 p. 62) which similar to what Brown proposes above. Hence, we can use either what is in Brown‟s and Ellis‟.


21 4. Past Tenses Azar (1999) defines past tense as tense that indicates an activity or situation that began and ended at a particular time in the past. a. Simple Past 1). Simple past form of a verb is V2. Example: lived for live, started for start, wrote for write, died for die. Murphy (1985), explains that often the past simple ends in –ed for regular vers and many other does not ends in –ed (those are irregular verbs). I She They

enjoyed saw went

2). In questions and negatives we use did/didn’t + infinitive. Examples:

Did

you she they

enjoy? see? go?

I she didn’t they

enjoy see go

3). The past of be (am/is/are) is was/were. Examples: I/he/she/it was/wasn’t We/you/they were/weren’t

Was I/he/she/it? Were We/you/they?

b. Past Continuous We use the past continuous to say that somebody was in the middle of doing something at a certain time. The action or situation had already started before this time but had not finished. The formula is: was/were + V-ing Examples: I/he/she/it was We/you/they were

Playing Doing


22 c. Past Perfect We use past perfect to talk about things that happened before a certain starting point. For example, when Sarah arrived at party, Paul wasn’t there. He had gone home. So the starting point meant is when Sarah arrived. It happened in the past. The formula for past perfect is: had + past participle (V3)

Examples: - When we got home last night, we found that somebody had broken into the flat - At first I thought I had done the right thing, but I soon realized that I had made a serious mistake d. Past Perfect Continuous We use past perfect continuous to talk about things that happen in the past during certain period of time. For example: It was not raining when I looked out of the window; the sun was shining. But it had been raining before. That’s why the ground is wet. The formula for past perfect continuous is: had + been + -ing Examples: - When the boys came into the house, their clothes were dirty, their hair was untidy and one of them had a black eye. They had been fighting. - I was very tired when I arrived home. I had been working hard all day.

B. Theoretical Framework Writing is a complex skill. It requires not only the way of thinking and imagining what ideas to write about but also how to write it. In order to be able to produce a good writing, one is required to master various elements of the language itself so that the ideas can be delivered well. Students of Theology


23 Faculty of Sanata Dharma University had been introduced and accustomed to activity of writing and reflecting (as a part of daily activity in Seminary), eventhough it is conducted still in Bahasa. Mr. Markus Budiraharjo who was teaching English in Bahasa Inggris I class B, Theology Faculty of Sanata Dharma University, academic year 2015/2016, proposed set of assignment of writing reflection using English for the students to be done. The researcher then considered writing as the suitable tool to enrich students‟ (of Bahasa Inggris I class B) experience in learning English as their second language. Here in this study, using the theory of analysing learner language by Ellis (2005), the researcher is trying to provide a full description of the writing produced by those students. The rubric was formed with adaptation from what proposed by Brown & Bailey (1984) entitled „analytical scale for rating composition tasks‟. The rubric helps the researcher to describe the writings of these students. Further, the researcher considers the use of English past tense in the activity of writing reflection hold an important role. One could not reflect and retell the experience or events (in order to reflect or flashback) properly in writing without having a well understanding about the use of past tense. Using the theory of error analysis, the reseacher described the writings and mapped the students‟ mastery of past tense. Afterwards, Brown‟s theory which elaborates the source of error in a process of language learning is used to help researcher analyse the learner‟s personal narrative. By conducting interview, the researcher then find out the source of errors from the writers and retell their experience that clarify their mastery of English past tense as reflected in their writing.


CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

In this chapter, the researcher discusses how the research was conducted. The chapter consists of six parts which are research method, research participants, research setting, research instruments, data analysis technique, and research procedure.

A. Research Method The research method used in this study was qualitative research. Qualitative research is defined by Lichtman (2003) as a way of knowing that assumes that the researcher gathers, organizes, and interprets information with his or her own eyes and ears as filter. Lichtman (2003) also mentions that qualitative research often involves in-depth interview and/or observations of humans in natural, online, or social setting. Further, Lichtman (2003) explains that in qualitative research, the researcher constructs the reality and he/she is the central. The interpretations that might appear are based on the researcher‟s experience and background. The purpose of this method is to understand and interpret social interaction. This research was in the form of a case study, which according to Yin (2012) the case serves as the main „unit of analysis‟. The case study research is not limited to a single source of data. Therefore it also enables the implementation of triangulation evidence from multiple sources.

24


25 Sherman (1930) states that the purpose of “a qualitative research is not verification of a predetermined idea, but discovery that leads to new insights” (p. 5). Therefore, the researcher in qualitative research depends on natural setting. In this study, the research used content analysis as the method in interpreting the data. Silverman (1993) says that textual analysis which includes in content analysis method is used to understand the participants‟ categories. Therefore, the use of this method is considered relevant since this study specifically describes learners‟ writing and analysis the learner language.

B. Research Participants The researcher chose 10 first-semester students of Bahasa Inggris I class B in Theology Faculty of Sanata Dharma University, academic year 2015/2016, who took the class with Mr. Markus Budiraharjo as the participants of this research. Since only those ten that have already done writing in four topics assigned by the lecturer. The rest of the class did not complete the four topics. The four topics are namely: “Learning Strategy”, “Experience of being Forgiven”, “Homily based on the Bible” and “Reflection on Children Stories”. The participants did not know that their writings were intended to be analyzed in term of their mastery on English past tense. That was done on purpose as the researcher wanted to keep the learners produce their writing as what it is. Also this brings them chance to write with their pure understanding of past tense. Then, three out of these ten were interviewed to find the answer of question number two. Later, in


26 the discussion part, due to keep the neutrality and to respect these participants, they are then called as P1, P2, P3, P4, P5, P6, P7, P8, P9, and P10.

C. Research Setting The research was conducted in Theology Faculty of Sanata Dharma University. It is because the students of Theology Faculty are all Catholic priest candidates who have accustomed to reflection writing activity. The researcher then believes that the data, which are the writings of the students, are relevant to the study. Further, the location of the campus where the participants are studying is reachable for the researcher. That was very helpful since the researcher also needed to meet the students to gather the data. The researcher gathered the writings which were sent from the lecturer‟s email. The data started to be gathered on September 26th 2015 of which are the writings of first topic “experience of being forgiven”. The writings with the second topic which is “learning strategies” were received via email on November 4th 2015. After that, on November 13th 2015, the third writings on topic “reflection on children story” were received. The fourth writings on topic “homily based on the Bible” were received on November 23th 2015. All data were analyzed during November 2015 until February 2016. The interviews towards three participants were conducted in three different places and time. The first interview was conducted to P2, on Saturday, 16 April 2016, at 11 a.m. in Realino stage, Kampus I USD Mrican. The second interview was conducted to P9, on Monday, 18 April 2016 at 11 a.m. in Kampus V USD


27 Kentungan. While the last interview was conducted to P1 on Wednesday, 20 April 2016 at 3 p.m. in Scolatikat SCY, Kentungan.

D. Research Instruments 1). Document Merriam (2009) defines document as „a ready-made source of data easily accessible to the imaginative and resourceful investigator‟ (Merriam, 2009 p. 139). Further, Dalen (1979) explains that the materials used in document analysis can be in form of „official records or any written, printed, verbal, or pictorial form (para 290). In this research, the documents are the students‟ sets of written reflection. The writings were gathered by the researcher through email. All the writings were sent by the students via email to the lecturer then were forwarded by the lecturer to the researcher. After gathering the data, the researcher classified the writings according to the topics and the writers. In analyzing the writings, the researcher then adapted a rubric proposed by Brown & Bailey (1984) entitled „analytical scale for rating composition tasks‟ as the standard used to assess the writings. 2). Interview Guide In order to gather the data for answering the second research question, the researcher made use of interview guide as one of the instruments in this research. Ary et. Al (2010) mentions some advantages in using interview to collect data in a qualitative research. According to him, the first advantage is for the researcher. By conducting an interview, a researcher can gain „large volume of in depth data‟ in


28 relatively short time. In this research, the researcher conducted interview typically semi-structured interview. It is chosen for its flexibility and appropriateness in this study. Merriam (2009) states that semi-structured interview enables the researcher to give response directly upon the answers of interviewee. Ary et. al (2010) agrees that the interview which conducted in qualitative research typically more probing and less structured than that in quantitative research. However, in this research, the researcher still used questions list as a guide to keep the allure of the interview on the track, as can be seen in Appendix A. 3) Tools In gathering the data, the researcher also used some tools. Those tools are notebooks for taking notes, pen, and a voice recorder to record the interview.

E. Data Analysis Technique The data gathered were analyzed in the form of description. Yet before that, the researcher had done some important steps. First, the researcher collected the writings and divided them based on the topics by looking at the title of the writing. Second, the researcher read the writing one by one to confirm the topic and to make sure that the four topics were already complete. Third, the researcher made a list of the fixed writing and put codes. Then, the researcher went to the writing one by one to read and assess them using the rubric (see Appendix C). The rubric was adapted by the researcher from „analytical scale for rating composition tasks‟ by Brown & Bailey (1984). Then, to clarify the points the researcher read the writings for about two to three times each. The researcher also spent some


29 times to see and consult the result to the advisor. After that, referred to points achieved by each student, the researcher read again and started to mark errors in using past tense that found in the writing and took notes of it. After that, using the instruments presented below, the researcher starts to mark the error and then analyzed it. The theory that was used in this step is Dulay‟s on Surface Strategy Taxonomy (Dulay & Krashen, p. 146-192). The result of errors finding then was used to describe the writings of the students. Afterwards, the researcher interviewed the students and collected the answers as the data. The analysis was done using the theory of Brown (1980) on sources of errors in language learner. In describing the writing, below is the instrument that has been made by the researcher. The table was used to sum up the error found in the writings. The aims is to present more complete description of errors in using past tense made by each student. Table 3.1 Error analysis on each learner presented in frequency and precentage

Subject Number Type of error Frequency Precentage Dominant of errors made (%) type of error made P1 TOTAL 100

F. Research Procedure In order to conduct this research, the researcher has done some procedures. The procedure of conducting this research from the beginning until the end is listed as follow:


30 1. Selecting Topic First the researcher met the advisor to consult and discuss on the possible issues related to the researcher‟s interest. After some discussion sessions with the advisor, the researcher looked for possible sources of data and references of theories briefly. As the supporting possibilities collected, the researcher pointed specific topic to be studied through the research. 2. Finding Research Questions/Problems After having the topic, the researcher set some questions to help the research constructing the meaning of the research itself. However, the researcher also had asked for advices and had some personal consultation with the advisor to construct it. 3. Reviewing Related Literatures The researcher searched and referred to related literature that support the questions, methods, and findings in the research. The way to provide those supporting ideas is by reviewing it. Researcher tried to read as many book as possible to collect various references that are relevant to the topic. In the practice, some related literatures were found when all the data have been collected and started to be discussed. This was because the researcher found possibility of improving and developing ideas during the process of conducting this study. 4. Collecting Data The researcher then collected the data based on the topic, both written and oral. Written data were collected via email and the oral were gathered via interview. The interview was done three times with three different interviewees.


31 The date and the time were also different one another due to each interviewee‟s difference of available time. The interviews were conducted using open-ended questions. Therefore, the questions forms are not the same one another. They were asked based on the answers of each interviewee. However, the researcher still used the same guideline in forming the question due to keep the allure of the interview itself consistantly on the track. 5. Analyzing Data After all the data have been collected, then the researcher analyzed the data using the related literatures and theories to support. Sometimes, the researcher consulted the progress of analysis to the advisor. On the process of analysing the data, the researcher also did some rearrangement and revision due to mistakes or errors, especially in elaborating the data and its discussion. 6. Making Conclusion Conclusion was drawn based on the findings, supported by the related theories and statements from the experts. Here in this report, the researcher also put some points as the summary of the whole research that had been conducted, followed by some recommendations related to the topic of this study.


CHAPTER IV RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter contains of two major parts namely research result and discussion. In the part of research result there are description of the writings and personal narratives of the writers related to their experience of learning past tense in English presented. While in the part of discussion, the points as the result of discussing on the findings supported by related theories are provided.

A. Research Results 1. Description of the Writings There are ten sets of written reflections which serve as the data here in this study. Those reflections were written under four different topics by ten different students in the class. The first topic is ‗experience of being forgiven‘. Under this topic, the students were asked to retell their experiences in forgiving and being forgiven. In their written reflections, these students shared their stories and reflected it with their opinion. They were allowed to put themselves as a candidate of priest in writing reflection under this first topic. The second topic was ‗learning strategies‘. Under this topic, the students were asked quiet the same. They were expected to retell their experiences in learning and to share their difficulties as well as their strategies in solving those challenges. In their written reflections under this second topic, these students tried

32


33 to suggest and recommend tips and reflected the DOs and DON‟Ts in learning based on what they have experienced so far. The third topic was ‗reflection on children story‘. In this topic, the students were shown children stories in forms of videos in class. After that, the lecturer opened discussion in general regarding to those stories. As the assignment, the students were asked to choose any children story to be used in their reflection. They wrote about that particular story they have chosen and related it to their own experiences. As the result, in their writings under this third topic these students deliver the messages and values of the stories which have been related to their own opinion. The fourth topic was ‗homily based on the Bible‘. This last topic is closely related to their future profession. The lecturer asked them to choose any reading for Holy Bible and arrange a reflection in forms of written homily. Under this topic, these students worked freely based on how they interpret the readings, retell their related experiences and reflected them altogether. On all four topics, these students worked with the primary structure of a writing which at least contains of an opening, the main body and closing. Ellis (2005) states that the goal of a research in Second Language is the description and explanation of L2 learners‘ competence. Therefore using the rubric for writing proposed by Brown and Bailey (1984), the researcher assesses those written reflections. There are four main terms that Brown and Bailey (1984) emphasized namely grammar, which here in this study is called as accuracy, logical development of idea or content, organization and diction.


34 As the result of the assessment on those writings, here is the big picture that the researcher found as can be seen in the following figure.

Figure 4.1 Average Point Achieved by the Students in Each Category

The highest point is achieved in terms of content, followed by in terms of organization then diction. The lowest point is in terms of accuracy. Referring the rubric, the researcher assesses the ideas and illustrations that are delivered by the students in the writing as the content. Then the results showed that these students are able to perform the best in terms of it compared to the other terms. In the view of researcher the content of these writings are more likely good. These students generally have ideas and issues in composing their reflection and homily. Their ideas are generally interesting and fairly well developed. There is always a story in it. It probably gives big impact on how they manage to deliver the ideas. They put allure on the story and some went smooth. The correlation between their illustrations and the intended topic also exist significantly. Yet, most of them still miss some points so the ideas appeared to be incomplete.


35 In terms of organization, the researcher focuses on how these students arranging ideas. The average point in terms of organization as can be seen in the figure above represents the presence of adequate title and introduction in those writings. It works the same with the conclusion drawn there. However, these students apparently provided lack of evidence that can support the content. Generally, these students present minimally recognizable introduction. They also are sometimes not clear in stating the opening which gives impact to severe problems in ordering ideas. Some of them also provide limited supporting evidence to form more solid conclusion and logic of their reflection. While in terms of diction, these students perform fairly low average point. The researcher found that these students still misused the vocabularies. Some registers are not suitable used in expressing their ideas. For example as what is produced by P5 in one of his writing as follows: This example is very easy, but turns to be difficult when I am not consistency. This student is misused the word consistency which is a noun while in his sentence, it should be a adjective. Then as the last, in terms of accuracy which is the lowest performed by these students, the focus of assessment includes minimum requirement, punctuation, tenses and sentence structure. There are many run-on sentences found in those writings. Some fragments also found. Errors in tenses also appeared significantly. As can be seen in the figure, these students perform the lowest for average point in term of accuracy.


36 The detail performance of each student is presented in this following figure. It is the smallest scope that the researcher in trying to provide in order to describe these students‘ written reflections.

Figure 4.2 Average Point of Each Student The individual point presented in the chart has been accumulated from the points of the four writings. The researcher summed up all the four and divided them by 4 so ended up with an average point. The average point in that way represents the performance of the writer. In terms of content based on the result of assessment, all ten students achieve the average point between 50 and 70. Most of them even reach above 60. While in organization there is less than four who reach 50 and above. In term of diction, all of them achieve the average point between 44 and 71. Then for accuracy, among ten students, there is only one who achieves more than 70. Other three are in between 50 to 59 and the other six are below 50. One out of the six even is below 40. 2. Error Analysis on the Writings Based on the finding discussed in the previous section, in this section the research would report and discuss the error found in the writing, limited to error


37 made in using of past tense. This analysis would further give more detail data and explanation of the description of these writings. According to Ellis (2005), teachers need to know that their students have not yet mastered certain forms but are capable of self-correcting them. In this research, the researcher analysed the errors made by the students in using past tense to map their mastery of past tense itself. Later, in the next sub chapter, the researcher would also discuss whether these students also able to do selfcorrecting towards what they have produced using the personal narratives that clarify it. The following points are elaborated as referred to what Corder (1979) proposes about the steps on error analysis. The report and discussion are presented in the way those steps were done. 1). Sample of learner language In order to collect the learner language as the sample in this researh, the researcher took ten sets of written reflection with 4 topics in each set. The sets of writing were written by ten different students in Bahasa Inggris I class B who had been assigned in writing activity as the part of their English learning process in class with the lecturer. The researcher chosen four sets on purpose. First, as what Ellis has stated that in order to avoid the influence from the nature of the sample itself towards the distribution of error made in that sample, the researcher needs to sample error more generally by collecting a broad sample reflecting different learners, type of language and different production conditions (Ellis, 2005 p.57). Second, four is considered properly to map the learner‘s mastery. Technically,


38 when an error is found in the first writing, the researcher considers it as an error if it is found also in another writing (written by the same person) or in other word it is repeatedly appeared. That is why, four would be enough to make sure whether the writter made an error or only a mistake. In differentiating mistakes from errors, we may take a look as what experts say. Brown describes mistakes as what refers to a performance error either random guess, fatigue, inattention or a slip of tongue (Brown, 1994 p.209). While error as noted by Norrish (1978, 7-8) related to language teaching and learning, are caused by learners on the processing of knowledge in the second language rule systems. This happens because the learners still have lack of competence in the rule systems of the language they are learning. Therefore, they would not be ready to correct their errors. In this case, when the same errors are found in more than one writing (written by the same person) or even in all four writings, the researcher may be sure of the existence of errors. The first topic given is about learning strategy. In giving this first topic, lecturer asks the students to write about their experience in forgiving and being forgiven. Second, it is about students experience in learning something. In that writing, specifically the students are asked to also elaborate their obstacles and challenges then share their strategy to overcome them. Third topic is reflection on children story. In this topic, lecture gives the students some children stories in form of videos than after brief discussion in class, the lecturer asks the students to write a reflection on the story, related to their existence as a person in living their


39 lives. As the forth writing, the lecturer asks students to pick certain reading from Gospel and write a homily based on their own interpretation and further reflection. Generally, these students write about a half page as the minimum and one and a half pages as the maximum. Those writings are typed and collected via email. The lecturer gave these topics to write to the students in every couple weeks. There were no written feedbacks between the period of assigning and the time when this report is done. b). Identification of Errors. From the sample, the researcher identified the errors using the concept of error types based on surface taxonomy described by Dulay, Burt and Krashen (1982: 150). The error types found in the writings are omission, addition (double marking), archi-form (misformation), regularization (misformation), alternating form (misformation), and misordering. Omission errors made by five writers. Generally, they omitted grammatical morphemes, in this case in past form. The example of omission errors made by P3 is: I (was) very scared to tell it to the others, ... He omitted was as the to be in past form. The writer might understand that past form already marked by the presence of scared. The word scared, which is an adjective in this context might be understood as a past form (the presence of – ed). Therefore, the writer might think that this sentence needs no other past forms. The same form of omission error occurs twice in P2‘s writing. The figure below is an example of erroneous sentences made by one of the students.


40

Figure 4.3 Sample of Errors Identified in the Writings

Addition errors also found in some writings, especially in form of double marking. The writers double the past form or marks in certain sentences. For example the one that is made by P2: I used to woke up late every day. P2 understands that past form is used to every event or action that happenned and done in the past. Yet, he doubled the mark of past form itself without consider other rule of forming a habitual past sentence. This is clarified by his personal interview as follows: Pemahaman mengenai penggunaan past tense itu yang tahu adalah bahwa sesudah berlalu, walaupun sedetik yang lalu, itu menggunakan past tense. Dan kalau ada –ed berarti itu waktunya sudah lewat. Jadi indikasinya ya itu. Pokonya asal ada tanda bentuk past, nah bagi saya itu sudah benar. (I understand that we use past form for every thing that had happened in the past, even if it is just a second ago. The –ed form indicates the past. As long as I have the past form in a sentence, I consider it as right—form of a past)


41 Six out of ten made the same error (double marking). This clarifies that generally, these learners might have same concept of what P2 has. As they understand that past is applied in event or action happened and done in the past, other rules are not taken into account. Archi-form (misformation) is significantly found in these writings. All the learners produced this type of error. For example the one that done by P9: When the words were saying, I should think about the meaning. Vaguely, the sentence above is grammatically correct. But, in the context of the writing, P9 misformed the phrase were saying. From the previous paragraph we know that he is telling about his difficulties of understanding a new vocabulary in English (topic: Learning Strategy). He is trying to say that when a new word is saying, he needs to think first to find the meaning. Yet, he ends up with producing the sentence above in past form. Although the fact that he is talking about is still happening until now. That is why his phrase above considered as an error in misformation. Other archi-form error also done by P1 as follows: Have you ever find yourself in front of a strong block and it seemed you are going to give up? This sentence is considered as an imparralel because the writer misformed the first clause. He should mark both clauses with same tense (past tense). Regularization errors found also in some of these writings. Yet, the intensity of its occurance is much less than archi-form errors that found. As an example, regularization errors found in P2‘s writing. He wrote, When I am watching this movie, ...


42 Actually, he is explaining what he had been feeling during the video watching. Yet, he misform the to be as present instead of a past. In personal interview he claims that he is still confused in using past tense. Although he knows the rule and understands the concept, he sometimes still produce sentence like the one above even again and again. Pemahaman mengenai penggunaan past tense itu yang saya tahu adalah bahwa sesudah berlalu, walaupun sedetik yang lalu, itu menggunakan past tense. Dan kalau ada –ed berarti itu waktunya sudah lewat. Jadi indikasinya ya itu. Pokonya asal ada tanda bentuk past, nah bagi saya itu sudah benar. Tapi dalam aplikasinya, kecenderungan menggunakan present. Tensenya, menggunakan present. (I understand that we use past form for every thing that had happened in the past, even if it is just a second ago. The –ed form indicates the past. As long as I have the past form in a sentence, I consider it as right—form of a past. But in its practice, I still tend to use present) As the result, the most regular error made by the students is archi-form (misformation).

Dulay,

Burt

and

Krashen

(1981)

defines

archi-form

(misformation) is an error made by the learner in using form. Further, why do these students mostly made archi-form error in their writings would be elaborated in the following sub chapter. 3. Learners’ Personal Narratives In order to answer the second research question, this section presents the result of interview done by the researcher toward three students in Bahasa Inggris I class B. Ellis (2005) states that errors involve determining their sources in order to account for why those errors were made. Knowing the reasons of why the students make errors is considered as an important part in SLA research. In this research, then the researcher interviewed three of ten students related to their


43 personal narratives in learning English especially in mastering the concept and the use of past tense. Beside to find out why do they make errors in their writings, the researcher also want to draw some clarification to the description of these students‘ writings. These three interviewees are P1, P2 and P9. There is a reason why the reseacher chose these three students out of ten subjects here in this study. These three students‘ writing descriptions represent each general division in terms of their points. P1 achieves the highest score among all. He performs as the best compared to the other nine in terms of accuracy, content, organization and diction (see Chart 4.1). Therefore the researcher considers P1‘s level as best. While P9 represents those who achieve lower points in accuracy especially, and also content, as well as the organization and diction (see Chart 4.1). Yet, P9‘s errors are much less found in using of past tense. The errors commonly found are related to other elements of English (preposition, subject-verb agreement, etc). So he performs fairly good in term of past tense. The researcher considers P9‘s level as good. P2 represents those who achieves lower points in accuracy, and the error analysis result confirms that P2 produces fairly lot of errors in past tense. The researcher considers P2‘s level as poor. By having the representative of each level, the researcher expects a fairly result to clarify their performance in writing, especially here in this study. That is why these three subjects then were picked up to be interviewed. There are some sources of error explained by Brown (1980) namely interlingual transfer, intralingual factors and context of learning. While Corder


44 (1973) proposes the similar concept. He explains there are four factors that give impact to a learner in making errors while learning language namely mother tongue, basis analogy, nature of teaching and teaching materials. The questions that have been asked to the interviewee are to clarify it. First of all, the interviewees were asked about when they learned English for the first time. P1 states that he learned English for the first time when he was in fourth grade of Elementary school. English lesson that he received at that time was a formal English since it was taught at school. The other interviewee, P2 experienced the same. He managed to know English when he was in fourth grade of Elementary school. Interestingly, both P1 and P2 claim that they got additional class for English in the same time (fourth grade of Elemntary school). P2: Pertama kali belajar bahasa Inggris itu SD kelas empat kalau tidak salah e, tapi itu bukan formal. I: Berarti kursus? P2: Kursus, iyah kursus. Kursus tapi itu cuman berapa bulan e, tiga bulan, dua kali pertemuan tiga bulan, setelah itu saya off. Membosankan..membosankan. (P2: I learned English for the first time when I was in the fourth grade of Elementary school but it was not the formal one. I: Was it an English course that you join? P2: Yes, it was an English course. But, it was just for about moreless three months with two meetings each month if I‘ve not mistaken, then I quited. It was very boring for me.) Yet, different from P2, P1 did not quit that early. He finished his English course until he was in sixth grade of Elementary school. P1 claims that he even had learned about past tense –and other tenses in that English course program. P1: Eeh, di sekolah ada (bahasa Inggris, red). Terus gue dapat tambahan. I: Nah itu maksudnya. Berarti frater les-lesan bahasa Inggris gitu pas SD? P1: Iya. Tapi bener kan, pas SD kelas 4 itu gua udah dapat pelajaran yang namanya bahasa Inggris. Cuman kalau past tense ya di les-lesan itu.


45

(P1: Eeh, I got English at school. But also I got additional English lesson. I: Yes, that is what I mean. So you learned English when you were in Elementary school right? P1: Yes. I got English lesson when I was in the fourth grade of Elementary school. But for past tense specifically, I learned it in that course—English course) While P9, because he was born in other country and just moved to Indonesia when he was around 14 years old, he managed to know English little bit later than the other two. Beside that his experience with English was not interesting. He claims that the teacher used to ask them to memorize the English words. P9 said: saya mulai kenal bahasa Inggris waktu masih SMP kelas 1. Dan aah, saya dapat bahasa Inggris, saat itu memang ya saya menganggap bahasa Inggris ini kan satu pelajaran yang tidak terlalu apa juga untuk saya karena belum ada orientasi ke depan seperti apa. Jadi semacam hanya ikut dinamika bahasa Inggris, kelas bahasa Inggris. Dan, yaah, belum belajar, waktu itu yang pertama kali belajar bahasa Inggris itu adalah untuk vocabulary, kata-katanya walaupun sampai sekarang tidak hafalhafal juga (tertawa). Itu mulai kenal bahasa Inggris mulai kenal seperti ini, kata-katanya seperti ini terus , ehh, kalau mau tau banyak harus hafal kata-kata disuruh guru untuk hafal kata-kata saat SMP itu. Dan pengalaman pertama memang, belajar bahasa Inggris itu sesuatu yang menurut saya sulit ya, untuk lebih bisa pahami lebih dalam lagi mengenai bahasa Inggris yang bisa dipraktekan. (I managed to learn English for the very first time when I was in the first grade of Junior High School. And for me personally, at that time, I didn‘t consider English as an important subject because I didn‘t have any orientation for my future. So, at that time, I just follow the lesson and the activities in the class without really be involved. The first thing about English that I learned was vocabularies. Even though until now, I still have lack of vocabularies (laugh). That‘s how I know English for the first time. At that time, our teacher always ask us to memorize those vocabularies. Which for me, as the first experience with English, it became very difficult. Moreover how to understand and than apply it (Eng).)


46 P2 and P9 have similar case in term of mother tongue. P9 was born in Timor Leste and raised there until he was around 14 years old. Therefore, he speaks Tetun (local language). But, he explains that Tetun itself has various type namely Tetun Terik and Tetun Portu. Tetun Terik mostly adapts many words from Indonesia to be used while Tetun Portu mostly adapts many other words from Portugesee. P9 used to speak those two types of Tetun. As he explains: Bahasa ibu saya bahasa Tetun. Hhm. Bahasa Tetun. Setelah itu saya masuk eeh, SD, itu saya dibawa ke Timor Leste dan Tetun saya itu Tetun, eehh, campuran. Saya dari Tetun yang Terik ke daerah yang Tetun Portu, mau tidak mau saya harus, ehh, beda lagi. Saya harus menyesuaikan dengan Tetun Terik saya dengan Tetun, eeh, Portu. (I spoke Tetun as my first language. After I entered Elementary school, I was taken to live in Timor Leste. Therefore I started to speak mix-Tetun (Terik and Portu) Both of them are different so at that time I had to adapt.) While P2 speaks bahasa Adonara (East of Flores‘ local language). He also has various type of bahasa Adonara. For its variety of dialects and some lexical or morphemes as he explains: Bahasa daerah bahasa pertama saya. ... Baru saya kan basicnya, bahasa (L1) kan ada beberapa bahasa memang, jadi ehm, bahasa ibu ada beberapa bahasa, ada bahasa dialek Flores Adonara-Adonara Barat, kemudian Flores Adonara Timur, dan Adonara tengah. Itu kan, maksudnya masing-masing punya dialek yang berbeda. Ya, saya gunakan. Ketika berbicara dengan orang Adonara Barat, ya, sambung, kemudian Adonara Timur juga harus menyesuaikan dengan mereka. (My first language is our local language. Basically our local language is different one another even compared among disctrict. The dialects are different. For example, the one that I used to speak at home is bahasa Adonara-Barat, then also bahasa Adonara-Timur and bahasa Adonara Tengah. Each of them, based on the location, has its own dialect and I used to use all of them depend on whom I speak with)


47 Different from what P2 and P9 have, P1‘s first language is bahasa Indonesia. Eventhough he comes from a Javanesse family, his parents decide to use bahasa Indonesia as the language for communication among family members. P1 explains: Bahasa ibu saya, ya bahasa Indonesia. Kami keluarga Jawa tetapi tidak memraktekkan adat Jawa semuanya. Jadi walaupun Jawa, kami di keluarga tetep ngomong bahasa Indonesia. (My mother tongue is bahasa Indonesia. We are Javanesse, but we don‘t practice all things as what a Javanesse family usually do. Eventhough we are Javanesee, we still use bahasa Indonesia as a language for communication in our family) In dealing with learning English, a learner‘s mother tongue impacts a lot. As what Brown (1980) explains about interlingual transfer as one of three sources of error, it is proved. P2 and P9 claim that it was fairly difficult to start learning and understanding English past tense because of the big difference concept of their mother tongues and English itself. P2 states: Secara teori paham tetapi secara ketika practice nya itu yang sulit. Kadang, mungkin karena konsepnya dalam konsep Indonesia ya sehingga misalnya, “saya juga:,” I also”. Gitu, Begitu. Jadi konsepnya dalam bahasa Inggris sehingga ketika hendak memikirkan untuk membicarakan sesuatu, pasti menterjemahkan dulu, ya terbawa, konsepnya terbawa, sehingga harus terjemahkan dulu dari kata per kata, sehingga kadang membingungkan juga untuk menerapkannya dalam tense. (Theoretically I understand but to apply them, I think it‘s difficult. Sometimes it is because I still hold Indonesian concept, for example, ―saya juga‖, -he translates- ―I also‖. I find that in English we have different concept but everytime I try to use English, I translate it into bahasa first. That is why sometimes the concept follows. I end up with my own confusion then) Similar to that, P9 also states: Aahh, SMP kelas 2 itu saya sudah diperkenalkan dengan tenses. Dan waktu itu tenses dasar yang saya tahu itu simple present, present


48 continuous dan past. Past pun simple past. Itu SMP. Itu dasar, kira-kira saya SMP kelas 2 lah, kira-kira seperti itu. Hhm, dan saat itu, saya hanya bisa menangkap simple-nya (read: present tense). Tapi past-nya itu masih sulit. Past-nya memang sulit, saat itu memang sulit. Saya pikir itulah kesulitan bagaimana merubah, bagaimana merubah satu kata sederhana simple ke past itu, saat itu memang kesulitan saya sejak awal, tentang seperti itu, perubahan kata. Karena konsepnya berbeda, dari bahasa Indonesia) (I was introduced to English tenses when I was in the second grade of junior high school. But it was just the basic. And, at that time, I think I only could understand well about present tense while past tense even is still difficult until now. How to change the form in present to past is difficult for me. Because from the very beginning, my problems is in changing the form of a word and it is different from what we have in bahasa) The different concept between English and their mother tongue here specifically goes to the changing form or a verb based on the time marking of a sentence. In Tetun, bahasa Adonara and even bahasa Indonesia, we do not change the verb eventhough the time is different when a certain sentence is uttered or produced. This creates bunch of confusion when they are to deal with English tenses concept. Among their confusion, these students admit that English then was becoming higher and higher required as they entered their Congregation. P2 explains: Tapi ketika masuk kongregasi kan memang tuntutan utama harus bahasa Inggrisnya karena bahasa Internasional. Jadi sempat membuat saya kewalahan juga dengan basic bahasa Inggris yang ala kadarnya kemudian yang sampai ke tingkat itu yang waktu SMA itu, eh, waktu di Kongregasi itu bulan-bulan e, tahun pertama itu kami dapat tiga dosen bahasa Inggris. Itu, grammarnya guru khusus, dosen khusus, kemudian ehm, pronunciationnya juga khusus kemudian dia dalam membuat tulisan juga khusus. Itu. (But when I joined Congregation, English became the main requirement. So it was little bit difficult for me to adapt since the basic knowledge of


49 English that I got from high school was not adequate. In our Congregation, for initial months we had helped by three lecturers for English. Each of them helped us in grammar, pronunciation and writing of English) P9 also explains that, in Seminary, not also English that he got to learn more and deeper but also reflection activity. He tells: Dalam seminari, kami diwajibkan membuat refleksi setiap hari. Itu dari tingkat awal masuk sudah begitu. Dan itu nanti sampai tahap akhir memang harus punya refleksi tertulis setiap hari. Maka boleh saya katakan, kami sudah cukup terbiasa dengan kegiatan berefleksi. Dulu ketika awal, saya masih awal, saya membuat refleksi selama satu bulan penuh, setiap hari, dalam bahasa Inggris. Setiap hari satu halaman. Dan dari situ, paling tidak secara praktis saya bisa membuat tulisan-tulisan bahasa Inggris karena terbiasa. Sampai sekarang, dalam satu minggu, setiap hari Kamis, saya membuat refleksi dalam bahasa Inggris sehingga kebiasaan dengan bahasa Inggris. Di komunitas juga kami memiliki hari bahasa Inggris itu hari senin, selasa dan kamis. Jadi semua repertoa doadoa dan misa pada hari-hari tersebut, kami pakai bahasa Inggris. Kecuali kalau hari selasa, karena kami misa dengan umat sehingga bahasa Indonesia. Tetapi untk ibadat pagi, doa-doa dan nyanyian semua dalam bahasa Inggris. Dan hari Kamis, itu kami membuat refleksi dalam bahasa Inggris untuk disharingkan dalam komunitas. Jadi refleksi tertulis itu bisa disharingkan kepada saudara-saudara dalam komunitas. (In Seminary, we are required to write a reflection every day, from the very beginning. So i can say that we are accustomed to reflection writing. At that time, in my initial period of entering Seminary, I used to write English reflection. But it was only for about one month. But I think it is helpful for me in learning how to write a reflection in English. Until now, every Thursday,I still write a reflection using Englis. In our community – Congregation- we have English days, which are Monday, Tuesday and Thursday. So every activity are in English such as daily mass, brevire and prayers. Except when we have mass with other people from outside – Congregation- we use bahasa. But other than that, we use English. Every Thursday, we also have to share our English reflection to other members. So on Thursday, we share what we have written in our reflection to other brothers in community, using English) The fact that, not only required but in Seminary or their Congregation, the exposure of English is constructing through various activities. Based on P9‘s experience, the activity of reflecting using English also done to help them getting


50 involved to English more and more. P1‘s experience then is quiet the same. He tells that in Seminary, they got a pretty good practice in tenses, including past tense. He explains: Itu beneran agak nambah waktu di kelas 1. Karena dia jago banget. S3. Gurunya di Mertoyudan. ... H‟mm. Jadi dia itu pake buku yang udah lama banget, dan itu buku itu semacam kumpulan tenses gitu. Itu cetakan lama. Setiap pembahasan ada soal-soal kayak kalimat gitu. (In first grade of high school in Seminary, I got more (of English). Our teacher was very fluent, Mertoyudan (High School Seminary). He used to use an old book, typically a compilation of English tenses. It was published long time ago, I guess. Each part of discussion, there are questions to answer)

When these students are asked about their own understanding in English past tense, each of them answered in quiet the same way. Most of them are not very comfortable to say that they understand and master it well. While, the thing that differ them one another is their experience of learning it in the past. They share what they had and learned before. P2 for instance, explains his learning experience at school as he began to learn English intensively. Ya, monoton, ikut di buku, kemudian tugasnya pun paling menterjemahkan, Sekedar terjemahkan dan itu kesannya membosankan dari kelas satu sampai kelas dua, kemudian kelas tiga, ganti guru tetapi itu saya rasa bahwa gurunya itu terlalu pintar berbahasa Inggris sementara tidak menyesuaikan dengan kami yang pemula. Jadi itu juga kesannya membosankan. Lalu waktu masuk SMA di Seminari, memang menarik di Seminari itu pada saat bulan-bulan awal itu kami belajar mulai penggunaan tenses, grammar iya, tenses-tenses, Itu, tapi karena gurunya kan Pater, iya kan, jadi hampir setiap hari itu hanya bahas mengenai tenses, sedangkan aplikasinya dalam, misalkan untuk buat tulisan ataupun itu kurang, hanya belajar saja, itu SMA Seminari, kelas satu hingga dua. (It was monotonous. Our teacher just copied what written in books and only gave us assignment on translating. Translating is so boring for me, from my first until second grade of senior high school that was only


51 activity our teacher gave. Then in third grade the teacher was changed. But, I think he was too smart so that the method that he used was quiet difficult for us to understand. So it was also so boring. When I entered Seminary, English became more interesting. The lecturer, whose a priest taught me abou tenses, and grammar. But, the activities were also in practicing questions on that. We never had practice to really use it in speaking or writing. I feel that it was not enough for me to be able to apply those tenses appropriately then.)

Further about his understanding in past tense P2 states: Pemahaman mengenai penggunaan past tense itu yang tahu adalah bahwa sesudah berlalu, walaupun sedetik yang lalu, itu menggunakan past tense. I:Kalau Past continuous? P2: Past continous sampai sekarang masih membingungkan. ... itu juga saya sampai sekarang saya tidak tahu kapan menggunakan have been, kapan menggunakan has been, itu masih suatu kesulitan bagi saya. (My understanding in using of past tense as far as I know is if it is something that had happened in the past, even it is only about seconds, we should use past form. I: How about past continuous? P2: Past continuous is confusing for me. ... I also don‘t know when to use have been and has been. Those are still difficult for me.) The similar story is revealed from P9 when he was asked the same question. P9 explains that his teacher in junior high school tends to give them command to memorize the vocabularies as well as the tenses or rules in English. He tells: Dulu itu kan kalau di SMP, guru omong apa ya kita peracaya saja. Metode yang digunakan oleh guru saya waktu itu adalah menghafal. Dan bagi saya saya merasa itu tidak cocok. Kalau untuk orang yang gamapang menghafal ya baik, tetapi kalau seperti saya yang tidak suka menghafal itu sangat sulit. Guru saya selalu suruh kami hafal, misalkan contoh kalau present itu formula nya harus subjek tanpa predikat dan itu, dan itu harus dihafal. Formulanya harus dihafal dan kekurangan saat itu adalah praktis formula, yang masuk dalam praktek, misalkan saya diajarkan formula past tense, tetapi untuk masuk dan menggunakan past tense itu kurang. Apalagi bicara, itu kurang. Sehingga formula itu hanya semacam untuk belajar saja begitu. Kita diberi untuk menghafal tetapi tidak pernah


52 dilakukan. Untuk mendalami itu secara terus menerus, kalau tidak praktis kan susah. (When I was in junior high school, we obliged whatever teachers say. The method in teaching English that was used for us is memorizing. And for me it doesn‘t work much. For those who can easily memorize things, it probably would be okay. But for me, I don‘t like memorizing. Though, our teacher used to ask us to memorize, for example the formula for present tense or other concept. The teachers asked us to memorize without real practising. So it turns to be very difficult for me to apply it in a sentence. For example in past tense. I only memorized it without really understand the function of it. In my opinion, in order to get the understanding of the concept, we really need to practice how to apply it into real form. If it is not, it would be difficult.) Both P2 and P9 claim that their teacher in high school tend to give kind of boring activities and only focus on the materials without further consider the students‘ understanding. Add, they reveal that the method for them are helpless since need more chance to practice and further explanation to understand instead of memorizing and drilling with written questions. While P1 experience some difference in learning English since his very first time. The English course that he took when he was in Elemnetary school helps a lot for its method of finding ‗shortcuts‘ in understanding concepts in English. As he explains: Saat itu tuh, ada bahas „pedang bengkok‟ itu buat present. Pedang bengkok itu S, jadi kalau S kan pedang bengkok. Jadi kami hafalinnya itu. Jadi kalau present gitu kan pakai pedang bengkok. Misal, Ogi takes ... nah ini ni pakai pedang bengkok. Kalau nggak, kalau misalnya di double atau dia apa gitu, nah itu nggak pake pedang bengkok. Saat itu tuh, gue ngerasa nah itu gua udah tahu tuh. Nah, jadi Alfa itu menyediakan cara yang lebih mudah gua ngerti dan inget. (There was a part of discussing something called ‗pedang bengkok‘ as a representative of letter ‗s‘. So, we were taught that if it is in present than the ‗pedang bengkok‘ should be used. For example, ―Ogi takes‖, nah, there ‗pedang bengkok‘ exists. If it is not in present than the ‗pedang bengkok‘


53 should not be used. So, Alfa (the English course that P1 joined) provides easy ways of understanding concepts in English. It was helpful for me)

As what he explained, can be seen that P1 experience different method compared to what is experienced by P2 and P9 and the fact claims that the method that applied when P1 started learning English helps him more in understand concepts in English. The researcher then tried to ask these students about their experience if doing the writing reflection assigned by the lecturer in their Bahasa Inggris I class last semester. Each of them answers differently. P2 states that actually he expects a written feedback for what he had written. Since for him, written feedback is easier to remember so that he will know his mistakes and errors. He says: kemarin yang buat refleksi itu bagus, itu memang sangat membantu sekali ya untuk membuat refleksi dalam bahasa Inggris. Tetapi ketika di sana, hanya sekedar mengumpulkan. Tidak ada feedback, kemudian tidak ada memberi kami untuk, menyampaikan kepada kami gambaran sedikit apa yang sudah kami sharingkan itu. Sehingga, istilahnya, mentok di situ. (In doing the reflection assignment, I think it was very helpful. That assignment gives me chance to practice writing reflection in English. But, there was no feedback from the lecturer. Even any explanation about the ‗DOs and DON‘Ts‘ which actually we expect as the follow up of that assginment. So it was not improved.) P9 shares something different. He says that in doing the assignment, he actually avoided using past tense. He did it because he is still confused about how and when to apply past tense in sentences especially in writing a reflection. It is seen as he explains: Kalau refleksi, seingat saya itu saat menyusun itu, hal yang saya pikirkan begini, saat ini saya menulis, saya akan mengatakan kepada orang, atau


54 memberikan materi kepada orang, memberikan renungan ini kepada orang sudah di waktu yang akan datang dan saya akan bekerja di hari ini. Saya membawa teks yang hari ini saya kerjakan untuk hari esok. Artinya, teks ini untuk hari esok itu sudah past. Itu kesulitan pertama yang saya temukan. Dan menggunakan past tense secara tertulis seperti itu, saya menemukan kesulitan. Awalnya, bagaimana mengatakan ini, apalagi ambil lagi ayat dari kitab suci yang sudah ditulis beratus-ratus juta tahun yang lalu untuk dihadirkan di sini dalam waktu present nah itu sesuatu yang sulit dan itu membuat apa, semacam, ya saya bisa katakan bagi saya membingungkan juga karena saya berpikir, masih, masih seperti ini, karena itu tadi, membawa sesuatu yang masa lampau ke saat ini itu sulit. Nah tapi saya berusaha dengan paling tidak apa yang bisa saya buat lah. Jadi waktu itu saya memang tidak banyak menggunakan past tense. Teks saya itu tidak banyak menggunakan past tense, lebih banyak saya membawa ke present karena itu saya bisa lebih pahami dan saya merasa lebih mudah untuk menyampaikan karena itu saat ini. Sehingga memang banyak kesalahan-kesalahan yang sebetulnya itu kalimatnya harus past, saya buatkan present. Saya semacam menghindari untuk buat jadi past karena susah untuk saya mengerti. (In doing the assignment, I thought like this. When I write that reflection, I share reflection, experience and materials to people in the future. So, when this written reflection is about to use in the future and the tense that I use is present that would be irrelevant. Then, the reading that I use in my reflection comes from Bible which speaks abouth events that had happened in thousand years ago. That makes me so confused in determining the tenses I use in that assignment. But I tried my best at hat time, in doing that assignment. I worked on it but I avoided using past tense. That is why there in my reflection, you may find lots of present form instead of past form. Using present makes me easier to write and understand my own allure of the reflection. I admit that some errors I made commonly happen when I use present instead of past in telling events that had happened) As the final statement, the researcher asked these students to share their opinions about how important to understand English well not only verbal, but also written, for them as the candidate of Catholic Priest. They also share their expectation of method in teaching and learning English based on what they had experienced before.


55 As what has been quoted previously, that P2 expects feedback in the process of learning English, especially the written one. He further also refers to what he had experienced when he was in junior and senior high school that teachers should not be changed as the students moved to next grade. He thinks that if there is only one teacher that teach them English from the first until the third grade, the process of learning English would be more effective. Since the teacher would be able to monitor students‘ progress and also control the materials that are given in the process of learning. As the result, there will not be any repetition in giving materials and teacher also can improve the method and technique in teaching based on students‘ progress and need. His opinion can be seen as he explains: Satu problem nya itu juga bahwa setiap guru kan tiap kelas, setiap tingkat berbeda. Kelas satu guru berbeda, kelas satu gurunya berbeda, kelas tiga gurunya berbeda. Jadi guru yang bawa kami dari kelas satu itu maksudnya tidak mengover apa yang sudah kami pelajari di kelas satu sehinga nanti di kelas dua itu kecenderungan tetapi ulangnya dalam hal yang lain. Ulangnya dalam hal yang lain sehingga dalam, membuat kami bingung. Tercampur aduk, tidak fokus. Sehingga guru yang satu dengan dia punya kapasitas yang satu nanti dia punya cara mengajarnya begini, nanti berikutnya kami sudah merasa ya setidaknya sudah merasa in dengan guru ini tapi nanti ketika naik kelas dua ganti lagi guru lagi. Guru ini dengan dia punya type yang begini, cara mengajarnya begini, jadi itu yang buat saya bosan. (One problem for me is at school, teacher that teaches us English is different each grade. The one in first grade is different from the one in second and third grade. This makes some of our teachers could not monitor the materials and control our progress. As the result, teacher then repeats the materials that we have had before in the previous grade but in different way or method. This creates chaos in our understanding about the material itself and tends to be boring) For the importance of English writing skill, P2 agrees that they –the candidates of priest- need to learn and understand it well. As they have possibilities to receive


56 mission abroad. He thinks that English writing skill should be prepared from now. P2 states: untuk kami para frater, kemampuan bahasa Inggris tidak cukup kalau hanya menguasai yang komunikatif saja, tetapi kemampuan menulis juga. Siapa tahu besok-besok kami diberi tugas misi ke luar negeri, komunikasi lewat tulisan juga pasti sangat penting. Makanya kami butuh itu, untuk bisa lebih berkembang. (for us as the candidates of priests, it is not enough to master only English for communication. Writing skill is needed too. As if we probably would required to go abroad and run our mission.) P2 realises the importance of mastering English writing skill. He has future orientation which is to become a misionarist. The similar thought also revealed by P9 as he tells: Ketika sampai di sini, ketika saya mendapat kelas ini, saya pertama mendapat kelas ini, dan saya berpikir mungkin ada hal-hal yang baru yang saya bisa dapatkan karena saya memahami bahwa saya dituntut untuk mampu berhadapan dengan teks (teks bahasa Inggris, red). Karena di Filsafat, kami mulai berhadapan dengan teoi-teori teologi dan konsepkonsep teologi yang mau tidak mau harus dari sana, dari bahasa sana (Latin, Yunani, Jerman, Italia, red) Memang bahasa Inggris tidak menjadi bahasa dasarnya gereja tetai kebanyakan teks bahasa Latin itu otentisitasnya itu ditentukan oleh bahasa Inggris. Jadi teks-teks dokumendokumen itu Gereja, biasanya selalu dalam bahasa Latin dan bahasa Inggris. Dan mau tidak mau harus salah satu bahasa. (As I arrived here and joined this class (English class, red) I think I could get more knowledge. I realise that here I am required to be able to understand texts. In Theology, we are facing theories which provided mostly in English. Eventhough English is not the original language that Church is using but, generally, its documents that originally written in Latin, Greece, Germany, Italy) are first translated and verified firstly in Latin and English. That is why, whether we like it or not, we need to understand one of them) As what is explained by P9, the fact that these students‘ future profession requires also direct contact to written document in other languages. Interestingly,


57 P1 even believes that English can be a transfer language to those other languages. He tells: Yaa, karena buat gua penting banget sebenarnya paham grammar tu. Buat calon Imam, soalnya kita butuh buat baca tulisan ilmiah, iya kan, banyak juga nih skripsi kakak-kakak pake bahasa Inggris. Dokumen-dokumen gereja. Nah, kalau nggak ngerti grammar ntar orang ngertinya beda ya. Dan orang itu kan, lha, biasanya Inggris itu yang kedua ya. Dalam dokumen-dokumen itu biasanya yang pertama, Prancis, Jerman, Latin, Italia. Nah, mereka begitu tahu, satu kata merea terjemahkan begini, lalu ketika ke bahasa Indonesia, nanti maknanya bisa beda lagi. Sehingga setidaknya kita harus tahu versi yang mendekatinya itu apa. Nah tu biasanya tersedia dalam bahasa Inggris yang kedua itu. Maka paling tidak kita harus tahu, biar ngerti. Kalau kita nggak tahu yang kedua itu, kita nggak bakal tahu makna yang paling mendekatinya itu apa. Maka, buat gua, penting tuh metode yang menekankan grammar buat kita calon Imam. (For me understanding English grammar is very important. For priest candidates it is important because we need to read scientific articles and journal. Moreover, our seniors‘ thesis are almost written in English. Apostolical documents are also presented in English. If we cannot understand the grammar, we cannot understand the document well. Generally, English is second language that is used. The documents are originally written in France, Deutch, Latin, Italy, etc. It is important to understand every single word and its context. If not, then the translation might be different, when it is taken to bahasa Indonesia. English helps us to understand at least the approximate meaning. If we don‘t master the transfer language, we would misinterpret them. So in my opinion, the method that emphasizes the grammar understanding in important for us as the priest candidates)

B. Discussion Learning language nowadays is not merely focused only on the technical things. Many experts try to elaborate that grammar, tenses and many other rules are not longer be the final goal of teaching and learning language process. However, in preparing a learner to survive with future profession or occupation, language skills including writing matters. In producing a good writing, one needs


58 to master the language‘s rules, concept, formula or in other words what people generally called it as grammar or structure. Yet, this study would not be focus on grammar or structure as the goal of a teaching and learning language process. It is used to describe learner language and map their mastery in one of English feature called past tense. This study analyses written products specifically written reflection. Therefore, past tense then is considered as important to master by the writers. As we know that in reflection, one shares ideas, values which related to experience. Obviously, past tense here should be used properly so that the messages and the value that the writer is sharing can be well transferred and understood. Moreover, by seeing how the learners as the subject of this study write their reflection and then analyzing the error of past tense that occurs, researcher than would be able to provide a model of learner language. The involvement of these learners‘ personal narratives in experience of learning English generally and past tense specifically would complete the model of learner language a sort of clarification. From that, it is expected that either language learners as well as language teachers of English can learn from the data and the analysis in this study. In order to describe the writings as the subject of this study, the researcher use a rubric. Refering to the explicit knowledge of a learner language proposed by Ellis (2005), the researcher forms a rubric that is used to assess the writings. The rubric, as had been explained in the previous section contains of four focuses namely accuracy, content, organization and diction.


59 Generally, these students achieves best points for content. Based on the data, these student achieves in average 58.45 for accuracy, which is the highest average point among all four terms that assessed. Content here as the element that is assessed in these writing covers what are the ideas and illustrations of messages that these students use in writing their reflection. It is clarified that they actually have been accustomed to reflecting, orally and verbally. Three interviewees claim that they are required to have a written reflection every day which produced using bahasa, even since the first day they started studying and living in Seminary. By having reflection writing as a habit, there is no doubt that these students could perform fairly good in picking their ideas to share. However, referring to the rubric proposed by Brown & Bailey (1984), 58.45 cannot be considered as good enough. There are still quiet lot of grammatical problems appeared and influenced reader‘s understandings toward the writings. Students of Bahasa Inggris I class B need to consider this point as what to be improved. The second best point is achieved mostly all of them in term of organization with the average point is 54.57. Generally, these students faced problem in organizing their ideas. They are more likely missed to put some particular ideas in the appropriate part, such as illustration is in the body of their writing instead of in the opening or introduction part. Or in other cases, some put conclusion in the early part without confirming it again in the next paragraphs. This creates confusion when the ideas mentioned in the beginning never showed again until the end. Also, sometimes, the writer even forgets their main ideas. The main ideas are not even stated clearly. In the contrary, some of them repeat the


60 same ideas quiet a lot. Much more that it should. The repetition then blurs the main idea that the writer is actually going to deliver. Through the rubric used in this study, the average point then confirmed that students need to develop more on the ideas and pay attention more on the existence of the idea itself. In diction, these students achieves quiet low with the average point is 52,9. In the writings, still found relatively lot of vocabularies misused. The students need to improve their awareness of part of speech of each word in English. Yet, the lowest average point is in accuracy. The point for accuracy is 52,72. Through the rubric, it can be seen that these students still produce run-on sentences. Even the messages are getting through the readers but that problems affect the understanding and later the communication between writer and the readers. As the result error analysis, mostly the errors found in past tense are typically archi-form (misformation). According to Dulay (1982), archi-form errors are made by the learner in using form. Based on the findings, most of the errors made by the students are in using form. Even there are some of the students found to make errors only in using form. The personal narratives of the three persons that have been interviewed show and clarify it. In order to make it clearer, the discussion on this would be elaborated based on source of errors explained by Brown (1980). 1. Interlingual transfer Brown (1980) defines interlingual transfer is one of the source of learners‘ error in learning a language. Corder (1973) uses the term mother tongue. Both of these experts explain that a learner can make an error because the impact of the


61 mother tongue of the learner itself. Two out of three subjects that had been interviewed used to speak their local language as their mother tongues. Both of them even speaks their mother tongues in more than one types in terms of dialect. The first one started to learn bahasa Indonesia before he formally attended elementary school and then started to know and learn English when he just attended junior high school. Therefore, his mother tongue is his local language, then bahasa Indonesia becomes his second language and English becomes his third language. The second one also claims the same. His first language is his local language as well as his second language (bahasa Indonesia) and his third language which is English. Only one of those three that has bahasa Indonesia as his first language and then English as his second language. The first two (P2 and P9) perform not as better as the third (P1) does. In their personal narratives, also claimed by those who have local language as the first language that it is difficult to understand and apply concept of past tense once they are learning English. That is because they don‘t have such the same concept of tenses in their local language. While, the third one, whom perform much better in using past tense compared to other two claims that it is quiet easier to apply the concept of past tense in English because it is similar to his first language (bahasa Indonesia). 2. Intralingual According to Brown (1980), students can produce an error because of the nature of the target language. In cases of the three subjects that had been interviewed found that intralingual is one of the sources of errors they produce. P2 and P9, beside that they have local language as first language, they also did not


62 have as long period of time in learning English as P1 has. P1 has already introduced to English tenses (including past tense) when he was in Elementary school. It is obvious that the longer a learner learn the target language, the bigger chance of him to understand the concept of that language. In performance, P2 and P9 produce more errors in forming past tense compared to P1 does. When it is clarified in the interview, P2 and P9 claim that they find it difficult to understand the concept of past tense due to the lack of practice and chance to apply that concept into real sentences, orally and verbally. They expect more practice adn drilling in using it (past tense) instead of only learn about it theoretically. 3. Context of learning Brown (1980) mentions context of learning as the third possible source of error that made by a learner. This refers to the materials and method of teaching in the target language that received and experienced by the learner. The personal narratives of the three interviewees are quiet similar one another. Each of them reveals that their experince in learning English from the very beginning is not always interesting and challenging. Most of them tells the same story when talking about their learning experience in the past. P2 sees that the method of teaching English that was used by his teacher both in Elementary and Junior high school is always boring. While his experience in Senior high school, as he sees, that there was lack of chance to really practice and apply what they have learned from books and drilling. The focus of the discussion was mostly in the theory of tenses itself (including past tense). P9 emphasized his experience of being asked to memorize words and rules of English in his early period of learning English as


63 boring and frsutrating. Since he claims that he is not good in memorizing things then that sort of method in teaching him English creates no improvement in his English. P1, even though doesn‘t clearly states about his opinion in the method of his teachers that teach him English, also mentions that he expect more from it. Especially in the portion of practising and appyling what he was learning about English and its tenses, including past tense.


CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter contains of two parts. The first part provides the conclusions derived from the findings and the discussion. The second part provides some recommendations drawn by the researcher for some related parties. All are adressed within the scope of the case study on learner language in written reflection produced by ten students of Bahasa Inggris I class B in Theology Faculty-Sanata Dharma University.

A. Conclusions Based on the findings and discussion, it can be concluded these following points: 1. Writing description Generally, the students of Bahasa Inggris I class B perform well in pouring content in their writings. As the impact of having a habit in writing reflection, they could extract the value and relate it with their own reflection. While in term of organization, not all of them could perform well. There are some misplacing and repetitions of ideas. They need to be more careful in forming each part of a writing such as opening, body and closing. Those three are the primary parts of a good writing. Based on what are found and assessed in their writing, these students tend to miss some points in each part. In term of diction, these students also need to improve. There are still found some unsuitable words and

64


65 terms used in the writings. In term of accuracy, the average point achieved by these students is the lowest among the other three. Since in accuracy, grammar and structure are the focus and the writings are typically reflection, then past tense is considered as a feature that holds important role. Therefore, further analysis is conducted on errors made in using past tense to clarify this description. Personal narratives of the students later also used to complete the clarification. 2. Analysis of the error in using past tense Based on the analysis, it is found that mostly these students make errors in using form or as Dulay explains called as archi-form (misformation). It happens when the learner use wrong form of words, in this case past form, in sentences. There are some other errors that are made by these students namely, a). double marking (addition) where the learner doubles particular morphemes or words or time marker in forming sentence with past tense, b). misordering where the learner put wrong order of a lexical or morpheme in a sentence with past tense, c). regularization in misformation where the learner misform a past form of a word, d). omission where the learner omits any past morpheme in sentences, e). alternating form where learner put or alter a morpheme in incorrect place. Yet, above all, the archi-form (misformation) is the most significant errors that found made by these students. 3. Clarification from the students’ personal narratives Based on the result of interview, it is discussed that learners experience in learning English gives impact in how they perform in their writing. In case of error in past tense they have made, they claim that nature of mother tongue, nature


66 of the target language (English) and context of learning influence how they understand and master the concept of past tense as well as the ability of applying it in their writing. Referred to what Brown (1980) explains about those sources of errors, it is clarified that: a). nature of mother tongue can bring confusion when the learner has to deal with concept in the target language, which in this case, is really different one another, b). nature of target language also can bring confusion to the learner when the learner is not accustomed enough to learn and apply that concept in real practices, c). context of learning that forms the allure of leaning experience especially in English concept also can lead the learner to confusion. When it is only focus on the theory to be memorized or to be drilled without any further real practice and application, the learners find it difficult to understand and later to be able to use the feature (past tense) in their language production.

B. Recommendations In this part, the researcher would like to give some suggestions to some parties. They are the students of Bahasa Inggris I Class B, future researchers and the English Language Education Study Program. 1. The Students of Bahasa Inggris I class B This study has explained some description of the writings produced by these students. Based on what have been found the students of Bahasa Inggris I class B better to spend more time to practice writing in English. As the candidate of priest, later, they would be required to master not only English for


67 communication but also for reflection, both oral and written. Besides that, it is needed for them to practice more in applying tenses as possible as the can. Since practicing would give them chance to improve day by day. 2. Future researchers For future researchers, this study can be used as a reference in conducting other research related on Education and learner language as well as second language acquisition. There are some findings found in this study that can be researched further. For example in the writings of the students, also found errors in subject-verb agreement, prepositions, and any other feature of English. Future researcher might conduct a research which focuses on that related to how a learner language improves in the process of learning the target language. Also, we have found that there are some factors that give impact learners’ errors during the process of learning a language. In those factors there are various forms or aspects that found as the sources of errors. Future research probably may conduct research in that aspects to help both students or language learners and language teachers improve their method in teaching and learning English. 3. The English Language Education Study Program This study can help the study program to consider teaching practice or internship for students of ELESP as an English tutor or teacher in other departments (such as theology, math education, or other departments in Sanata Dharma University) in a quiet long period of time, as a part of a compulsory subject offered in the study program. Since the internship later can provide real model of learner language and broader background of language that other


68 departments’ students hold. Different from what the study program has done these years which called PPL, internship in other departments in campus provides more complete experience. By involving the students of ELESP, which are expected to be an English teacher in the future, to the real process of acquiring English as a second language on those who are preparing for other profession than a teacher, the experience and the knowledge of these teacher candidates may be enriched and broadened.


REFERENCES Anderson, M. & Larsen-Freeman, D. (2011). Technique and principles in language teaching. Oxford University Press. Ary, D. Lucy. C., & Razavieh, A. (1979). Introduction to research in education. New York: Hort, Rinehart and Winston, Inc. Brown, H. D. (1987). Principles of language learning and teaching. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc. Brown, H. D. (2004). Language assessment; principal and classroom practices. Longman: San Francisco State University. Corder, S. P. (1979). Techniques in applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dalen, D. B. V. (1979). Understanding educational research, an introduction. 4th Ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Inc. Dulay, H., Burt, M., & Krashen, S. (1982). Language two. New York: Oxford University Press. Ellis, R. & Barhuizen, G. (2005). Analyzing learner language. New York: Oxford University Press. Gass, M. S. (2001). Second language aqcuisition an introductory course. 2nd Ed. New York: Oxford University Press. Harris, D. P. (1969). Testing english as a second language. New York: Georgetown University. Hillier, Y. (2005). Reflective teaching in further and adult education (2nd Ed.) New York: Continuum.

69


70 Hyland, K. (2003). Second language writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Krashen, Stephen D. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford: Oergamon Press. Lichtman, M. (2003). Qualitative research education: a user’s guide. London: Sage Publication Ltd. Marshall, Catherine., Rossman, Gretchen B. (2006). Designing qualitative research. 4th Ed. California: Sage Publication Inc. Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: a guide to design and implementation. California: Jossey-Bass. Murphy, R. (1985). English grammar in use. 2nd Ed. London: Cambridge University Press. Norrish, J. (1983). Language learners and their errors. London: Macmillan Press. Sherman, R. (1998). Qualitative research in education: focus and method. New York: The Falmer Press. Silverman, D. (2001). Interpreting qualitative data. California: Sage Publication Inc. Troyka, L. (1987). Handbook for writers. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc. Yin, R.K. (2012). Case study research. London: Sage Publication.


APPENDIX A

INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPTIONS

71


72 Interviewee Gender Date/Time

I

: P2 : Male : Saturday, April 16th 2016.

: Jadi, hal pertama yang saya ingin tahu, kapan pertama kali Frater

belajar bahasa Inggris? P2

: Pertama kali belajar bahasa Inggris itu SD kelas empat kalau tidak salah

e, tapi itu bukan formal. I

: Berarti kursus?

P2

: Kursus, iyah kursus. Kursus tapi itu cuman berapa bulan e, tiga bulan,

dua kali pertemuan tiga bulan, setelah itu saya off. Membosankan..membosankan. I

: Lalu dapat formalnya?

P2

: Dapat formalnya SMP, SD kelas 6 sudah dapat tapi masih yang abjad,

nama-nama hari, yang dasar. Saya SMP nya di Santisima Hokeng, 2006. Di SMP mulai belajar intensif, tapi cara mengajar gurunya yang kurang bagus. I

: Seperti apa tu? Maksudnya apakah monoton, ikut di buku atau?

P2

: Ya, monoton, ikut di buku, kemudian tugasnya pun paling

menterjemahkan, P2

: Sekedar terjemahkan dan itu kesannya membosankan dari kelas satu

sampai kelas dua, kemudian kelas tiga, ganti guru tetapi itu saya rasa bahwa gurunya itu terlalu pintar berbahasa Inggris sementara tidak menyesuaikan dengan kami yang pemula. Jadi itu juga kesannya membosankan. Lalu waktu masuk SMA di Seminari, memang menarik di Seminari itu pada saat bulan-bulan awal itu kami belajar mulai penggunaan tenses, grammar iya, tenses-tenses, Itu, tapi karena gurunya kan Pater, iya kan, jadi hampir setiap hari itu hanya bahas


73 mengenai tenses, sedangkan aplikasinya dalam, misalkan untuk buat tulisan ataupun itu kurang, hanya belajar saja, itu SMA Seminari, kelas satu hingga dua. Kemudian saya lanjutkan, saya kan dikeluarkan dari seminari jadi lanjutkan di SMA di luar itu, SMA di luar itu bahasa Inggrisnya sangat membosankan, saya keluar dari SMA Seminari kemudian lanjut di SMA Darius Larantuka, dan itu yang sangat membosankan. Karena cara mengajarnya sama kaya Pak -----. Terlalu tinggi, bisa dikatakan terlalu tinggi juga, itu dan hampir setiap hari mendikte, sesuai dengan apa yang, apa yang dia mau. Jadi, jadi tidak memberi ruang kepada kami untuk mengekspresikan pengetahuan Inggris kami. Bahkan untuk, ehm, palingan disuruh menghafal paragraf lalu menceritakan kembali I

: Oya?

P2

: itu, SMA kemudian, tense itu juga tidak disentuh sehingga masih, masih

bingung.masih bingung penggunaan tense-tense nya itu. Lebih kepada mendikte. Sehingga pelajaran bahasa Inggrisnya itu tidak terlalu mendalam. Saya kan jurusan bahasa, saya kan jurusan bahasa tetapi lebih spesifiknya lebih tertarik dengan bahasa Jerman. Hanya bahasa Inggrisnya memang kualitaas gurunya bagus tetapi cara mengajarnya yang kurang bagus sehingga membuat saya tidak ada daya tarik untuk tidak belajar bahasa Inggris. Tapi ketika masuk kongregasi kan memang tuntutan utama harus bahasa Inggrisnya karena bahasa Internasional. Jadi sempat membuat saya kewalahan juga dengan basic bahasa Inggris yang ala kadarnya kemudian yang sampai ke tingkat itu yang waktu SMA itu, eh, waktu di Kongregasi itu bulan-bulan e, tahun pertama itu kami dapat tiga dosen bahasa Inggris. Itu, grammarnya guru khusus, dosen khusus, kemudian ehm,


74 pronunciationnya juga khusus kemudian dia dalam membuat tulisan juga khusus. Itu. I

: Itu selama satu tahun frater?

P2

: Selama satu tahun. Selama satu tahun, satu minggu empat kali

pertemuan, tiga dosen empat kali pertemuan. Intensif, iya. Tapi itulah bahwa, mungkin kelemahan kami di sana, kecenderungan, memang ada saat-saat untuk berbahasa Inggris ya, tetapi kecenderungan untuk menggunakan bahasa Indonesia. Sehingga lebih sering bahasa Indonesia walaupun itu aah, aturannya bahwa hari itu adalah khusus untuk bahasa Inggris tapi nyatanya ehh, bahasa Indonesia. Kemudian, waktu di ini juga kami diajarkan untuk membuat sharing-sharing dalam bahasa Inggris, refleksi-refleksi dalam bahasa Inggris. Tapi masalahnya ketika kami berbuat salah tidak dikoreksi. Tidak dikoreksi, iya. Misalnya dalam tulisan waktu itu dia menggantikannya tetapi tidak memberi keterangan misalnya ini kesalahan apa yang di sini, di sini, sehingga kurang memuaskan juga bagi saya. Itu tahun-tahun pertama mulai belajar bahasa Inggris di kongregasi. Tetapi memang waktu di dalam kongregasi saya merasa pengalaman bahasa Inggris saya mulai, eh, sudah artinya di atas dari yang SMA lah, walaupun sedikit, ada perubahan. I

: Lebih produktif?

P2

: Jadi, iya, lebih produktif, lebih banyak menulis dalam bahasa Inggris,

kemudian ada hari khusus berbahasa Inggris yang saya mencoba untuk berbahasa Inggris tetapi itulah kecenderungan orang Indonesia. Jadi, satu yang, sesuatu yang menjadi pergumulan bagi saya juga karena ketika berbicara bahasa Inggris tetapi


75 dialeknya masih Flores. Itu jadi satu dilema bagi saya untuk berbicara dalam bahasa Inggris. Sehingga waktu ada, dua tahun yang lalu ada kunjungan dari pastor-pastor dari luar negeri, itu yang memang benar kami dibanting habishabisan dalam satu minggu hanya khusus untuk belajar bahasa Inggris supaya nanti bisa berkomunikasi dengan pastor-pastor itu. Tetapi hanya begitulah, hanya percakapan-percakapan lebih-lebih dalam persiapan itu ya, persiapan untuk berkomunisi dengan para pastor dari Inggris itu kami hanya diberi kesempatan untuk bercakap-cakap, bercakap-cakap saja, sedangkan untuk mengoreksi kadang campur aduk, ehh, itu, dia punya tensenya itu. Amburadul semua, mana yang itu past, present, future. I

: Tapi pada dasarnya frater sebenarnya memahami? Secara teori paham?

P2

: Secara teori paham tetapi secara ketika practice nya itu yang sulit.

Kadang, mungkin karena konsepnya dalam konsep Indonesia ya sehingga misalnya, saya juga, I also. Gitu, Begitu. Jadi konsepnya dalam bahasa Inggris sehingga ketika hendak memikirkan untuk membicarakan sesuatu, pasti menterjemahkan dulu, ya terbawa, konsepnya terbawa, sehingga harus terjemahkan dulu dari kata per kata, sehingga kadang membingungkan juga untuk menerapkannya dalam tense. I

: Bahasa ibu frater apa?

P2

: Bahasa daerah bahasa pertama saya. Ada perbedaan antara konsep bahasa

Lamaholot (interviewee’s L1) dengan bahasa Indonesia saja sudah beda, apalagi dengan bahasa Inggris. Baru saya kan basicnya, bahasa (L1) kan ada beberapa bahasa memang, jadi ehm, bahasa ibu ada beberapa bahasa, ada bahasa dialek


76 Flores Adonara-Adonara Barat, kemudian Flores Adonara Timur, dan Adonara tengah. Itu kan, maksudnya masing-masing punya dialek yang berbeda. Ya, saya gunakan. Ketika berbicara dengan orang Adonara Barat, ya, sambung, kemudian Adonara Timur juga harus menyesuaikan dengan mereka. I

: Kita kembali sedikit ke past tense. Saya mau tahu secara umum

pemahaman frater tentang past tense bagaimana? P2

: Pemahaman mengenai penggunaan past tense itu yang tahu adalah bahwa

sesudah berlalu, walaupun sedetik yang lalu, itu menggunakan past tense. Dan kalau ada –ed berarti itu waktunya sudah lewat. Jadi indikasinya ya itu. Pokonya asal ada tanda bentuk past, nah bagi saya itu sudah benar. Tapi dalam aplikasinya, kecenderungan menggunakan present. Tensenya, menggunakan present. I

: Past continuous?

P2

: Past continous sampai sekarang masih membingungkan. Kalau dalam

penggunakan itu ya kadang saya temukana dalam pengalaman, misalnya kalau sudah ada kata to, ada to di depan, berarti tidak, verb nya harus verb 1. Tapi itu bukan dalam apa e, dalam pengalaman sehari-hari ketika dikoreksi oleh temanteman itu kemudian kalau untuk menggunakan, itu juga saya sampai sekarang saya tidak tahu kapan menggunakan have been, kapan menggunakan has been, itu masih suatu kesulitan bagi saya. Itu waktu teori, pernah diajarkan tapi kapan menggunakan itu yang mungkin sudah diajarkan tetapi pada saat itu saya ngelamun atau bagaimana saya juga tidak tahu. Iya, practicenya, practice memang kurang.


77 I

: Terus, eeh, kalau misalnya frater mulai bingung saat writing. Apa yang

frater lakukan? P2

: Kalau untuk penggunaan have, has nya itu saya tahu. Kalau have kan

untuk orang pertama, orang kedua. Sedangkan has kan untuk orang ketiga tunggal. Tapi kecenderungan itu nanti pada saat practicenya itu bingung. Pada saat menulisnya. Meskipun have, has nya tetapi menempatkan pada saat mana menggunakna ini yang tidak tahu. Itu yang tidak tahu, I

: setelah ikut kelas bahasa Inggris di sini, bagaimana? Semakin jauh atau

dekat pemahamannya dengan yang benar? P2

: Merasa justru semakin jauh. Semakin jauh. Mengawang-awang. Baru

omong nya, mungkin karena, iya, lompat-lompat, itu sudah, dan kecenderungan campur. Indonesia-Inggris, Indonesia-Inggris sehingga bingung. Ya bingung. I

: Lalu frater ingin seperti yang mana?

P2

: Kalau Inggris, sebaiknya Inggris semua supaya biar kita menganalisanya

kan juga bagus kan. Bisa berusaha untuk belajar dari yang sudah dia bicarakan itu tadi tapi karena campur-campur sehingga bingung. Bukan Cuma untuk saya sendiri, untuk teman-teman yang terkhusus dari confrik saya juga saya, begitu, bahwa bahasa Inggrisnya Pak --- memang dia orangnya basicnya Inggris tetapi terlalu tinggi untuk kami. I

: Kembali ke frater punya pengalaman belajar bahasa inggris dulu.

Apakah ada guru ideal yang cara mengajarnya paling nyaman dengan frater? P2

: Itu kelas tiga SMA, eh, SMP, dan kelas tiga SMA tapi bukan baru satu

problem nya itu juga bahwa setiap guru kan tiap kelas, setiap tingkat berbeda.


78 Kelas satu guru berbeda, kelas satu gurunya berbeda, kelas tiga gurunya berbeda. Jadi guru yang bawa kami dari kelas satu itu maksudnya tidak mengover apa yang sudah kami pelajari di kelas satu sehinga nanti di kelas dua itu kecenderungan tetapi ulangnya dalam hal yang lain. Ulangnya dalam hal yang lain sehingga dalam, membuat kami bingung. Tercampur aduk, tidak fokus. Sehingga guru yang satu dengan dia punya kapasitas yang satu nanti dia punya cara mengajarnya begini, nanti berikutnya kami sudah merasa ya setidaknya sudah merasa in dengan guru ini tapi nanti ketika naik kelas dua ganti lagi guru lagi. Guru ini dengan dia punya type yang begini, cara mengajarnya begini, jadi itu yang buat saya bosan. Saya juga termasuk orang yang cepat bosan. Saya kan bukan, harus aktif, harus ada sesuatu yang dikerjakan begitu. I

: Bagaimana dengan metode yang frater harapkan?

P2

: Kalau untuk metodenya pak --- kemarin yang buat refleksi itu bagus, itu

memang sangat membantu sekali ya untuk membuat refleksi dalam bahasa Inggris. Tetapi ketika di sana, hanya sekedar mengumpulkan. Tidak ada feedback, kemudian tidak ada memberi kami untuk, menyampaikan kepada kami gambaran sedikit apa yang sudah kami sharingkan itu. Sehingga, istilahnya, mentok di situ. Mentok di kumpul, setelah itu mungkin dia ambil nilai, setelah itu sudah. Begitu. Saja, tidak ada feedback untuk kami. Misalnya dalam hal ini, penggunaan ini, ini, ha, kalau misalkan kemarin dengan ---- kan mantaplah, kita sampaikan, kita baca, kemudian ada feedback nya nah itu yang biasanya kalau yang feedback nya itu yang sering kita ingat, kan. Padahal untuk kami para frater, kemampuan bahasa Inggris tidak cukup kalau hanya menguasai yang komunikatif saja, tetapi


79 kemampuan menulis juga. Siapa tahu besok-besok kami diberi tugas misi ke luar negeri, komunikasi lewat tulisan juga pasti sangat penting. Makanya kami butuh itu, untuk bisa lebih berkembang. I

: Oke, baik. Terimakasih frater untuk interview hari ini. Terimakasih

banyak frater sudah meluangkan waktu membantus saya. P2

: Sama-sama. Sukses selalu.


APPENDIX B

LEARNERS’ ERROR

80


81 S

Type of Error

P1

O A

Mo Mf

P2

O A

Subcategor y of error DM RegA SimpA RegMf Archi

Af DM

Erroneous sentences

1. Have you ever find yourself in front of a strong block and it seemed you are going to give up?

Researcher’s notes

Inconsistency indicates the writer doesn’t sure how to use past tense in this sentence. 2. I move gradually, step In the previous by step. sentences, the writer uses past tense because the event happens in this 3. They realize that the sentence also had true friendship is the already done in past. greatest teasure So it should be moved. Idem. 1. I used to woke up late This should use the every day concept of habitual past. The writer probably doesn’t understand that used to indicates the past habit already so that the verb 2 is not needed anymore. 2. However, we were tend Add, the writer to say ... shoul know that toform uses base verb. 3. If i got it, sometimes I That is why this is felt struggled or confused. considered as misformation error too (see the column of misformation error below)


82 It is doubled because the writer uses were before a verb. The writer doubles the verbs here, also this sentence raises confusion to the readers because it inconsistency of the tenses used. That is why this also is considered as an error in misformating.

Mo

RegA SimpA -

Mf

RegMf

Archi

One day my school have The writer probably planned a program, called misorders the phrase Jalan Santai. have planned because what happenned in the past is the school had a plan of a program. Not the plan itself. When I am watching this It happened in the movie, ... past so it should be was 1. I used to woke up late every day This sentence should 2. If he got angry with me, be parallel. Smile  I just smile and said ... smiled 3. I found the value It doesn’t need to be contained said, ... in verb 2 since the 4. Who also took part ... idea discussed in this sentence is actually a general 5. If i got it, sometimes I turth. felt struggled or confused. 6. Because my desired to The writer follow the competition was misunderstood that a so strength, I gave much noun cannot be time to improve my skill. treated like a verb. 7. Finally, I can present a Can should be


83

P3

O

Af -

A

DM

Mo Mf

P4

RegA SimpA RegMf Archi

O

Af -

A

DM

silver medal for my group. 8. The other way is when I faced some difficulties, I am often asked how to keep the difficulties that can be overcome. 1. I (was) very afraid 2. I (was) very scared to tell it to the others, ... 3. I (was) very scared to tell it ... 1. I’m was in pretending area 2. ...when I go into the monestary I was faced it. 1. ..that among Jews has become a culture when the Sabbath one should not engage in activities that are very heavy. 2. ...when I go into the monestary I was faced it. 3. I’m surprised ... From the video, I (was) impressed about the loyality of Mary and Joseph, especially to do the best for the God plans. 1. Rosa was lived in her cage. 2. This experience was happened when I was seven years old. 3. So, she can roamed freely an grow up happily. 4. She was created of all just for us. 5. God was gived in her soul ...

could.

The writer omits the to be

This sentence was expected to tell the event happened in the past but the writer didn’t use the past form for the verb go Idem. Idem.


84

Mo Mf


Af

P5

O

-

A

DM

Mo Mf


1. When she walk out from This sentence was the zoo, she thought and expected to tell the cried “friends!”. event happened in the past but the 2. She met and disturbs the writer didn’t use the ice cream vendor, the past form for the seller of coconut, she verb go entered in the shop of TV Idem. screen and also make a traffic jam. 3. When I get my holidays There is to home, he always inconsistency of requested me to visit his using the past form. house and told me many things. 4. I have feel it. Idem. 5. I was given food and Not parralel. watch TV comfortably. I gave a pocket money before went to school or many foods was given to me when in my home weren’t food. Jesus wants (to) invites us to be seriously when we are going to pray Jesus wants invites us to be seriously when we are going to pray 1. Since we was a child , Missformed. Also we got the love from our there is confusion parents. whether the writer 2. After that, I am afraid to wants to use meet with my father. singular or plural. 3. I try to be brave to meet him and tell him my mistake. 4. My father come to me


85

P6

O

Af -

A

DM

Mo Mf

P7


O A

Af DM

Mo

RegA SimpA -

and said, “I loved you my son, don’t be afraid because you is the best son.” 5. I prefer to my father to be a good man in my school. She (is) left by her husband 1. They were had many problems in their lives but she has to pay the college fee. 2. She was always happy and gave me her cute smile everytime I saw her,

1. They were had many problems in their lives but she has to pay the college fee. 2. I did angry with my mother. 3. ... either she allow, or did not allow me. 4. ... because my behaviour that always went home at midnight. 1. I will knew purpose of the experience what is said to me. 2. I will brought come to grief in my life every day From the films were gave

The writer doubles verb in past form here. The doubling happens in the tense used. Was indicates past while always requires verb base (present usually)

The verb should be in past. Wrong formation. It should be a past to be.

This might be a


86

Mf

P8

O A

Mo Mf

RegMf Archi

Af DM RegA SimpA RegMf Archi

teacher, ... I misunderstanded them. 1. The meaning of this idea is Jesus has gave notice His life in the future. 2. When he said like that, I am sure that people who listened to His voice didn’t understand His purposed. 3. From the films were gave teacher, ... 4. I was knew as a naughty boy. 5. I always apposed their adviced. 6. I always looked for the happiness time outside my home. 7. I cannot controlled my self. 8. They have start to study it very well. 1. Once upon a time there is a man who works as a fisherman. 2. One day, when the fisherman goes to work, the fisherman catches a fish which can speak in human language. 3. The magic fish asks the fisherman to let him go. 4. When the fisherman come back home, he tells to his wife. 5. And you know, his wife is very angry with the fisherman. 6. When his wife hears a

misordering error. The form should be verb 3; given The writer probably is confused with the form of verb and noun. This might be also a misformating error.

The writer misforms the past form of cannot. It should be in past form.


87

P9

O A

Mo Mf

P10

O A

Af DM RegA SimpA RegMf Archi

Af DM

news from the fisherman about the magic fish, she tells the fisherman to go back again .... 7. The fisherman does that. 8. After that, the fisherman stands in the shore then telling it to the fish. 9. And the fish grants the fisherman’s wife desire. 10. .. he sees that he has a big house. 11. The fisherman’s wife is not satisfy. 12. She sees that a big house is not perfect. 13. She tells hers desire to her husband again that she wants a stone castle. 14. The fisherman goes more with another will of his wife: A stone castle. 15. The fish answers. 16. After that, the fisherman goes back home and he sees that there are many servants, ... When the words were Related to the saying, I should think context in the about the meaning. paragraph, the writer should use a present instead of a past because that is what always the writer does (it is a repeated action) -


88

Mo Mf


Af

The little pianist has a This sentence is not great desire to play piano parallel. and dreamed of becoming a pianist someday. -

Notes: P1 stands for participant 1, the rests are the same. O stands for Omission A stands for Addition Mo stands for Misordering Mf stands for Misformating DM stands for Double Marking

RegA stands for Regularization of Addition SimpA stands for Simple addition error RegMf stands for Regularization of Misformating Archi stands for Archi-form Af stands for Alternating form


APPENDIX C

RUBRIC OF WRITING

89


90 Rubric of Writing as adapted from Brown and Baley (1984) Elements Accuracy (grammar)

Content (logical development of ideas)

Organization

≥75 ≥50≤74 Advanced Ideas are proficiency in getting through English the reader but grammar; grammar some problems are grammar apparent and problems have a negative don’t effect on influence communication communicatio ; run-on n, although sentences or the reader is fragments aware of present them; no fragments or run-on sentences, no more than two inappropriate tenses used Essay Essay addresses the addresses the assigned issues but topic; the misses some ideas are points; ideas concrete and could be more thoroughly fully developed; no developed; extraneous some material; extraneous essay reflects material thoughts present Appropriate Adequate title, title, effective introduction, introductory and conclusion; paragraph, body of essay topic is stated, is acceptable, leads to body; but some transitional evidence may expressions be lacking, used; some ideas arrangement aren’t fully

≥25≤49 ≤24 Numerous Severe serious grammar grammar problems problems interfere interfere with greatly with communicatio the message; n of the reader can’t writer’s ideas; understand grammar what the review of writer was some areas trying to say; clearly unintelligible needed; sentence difficult to structure read sentences

Ideas incomplete; essay does not reflect careful thinking or was hurriedly written; inadequate effort in area of content

Essay is completely inadequate and does not reflect college-level work; no apparent effort to consider the topic carefully Shaky or Absence of minimally introduction recognizable or introduction; conclusion; organization no apparent can barely be organization seen; severe of body; problems with severe lack ordering of of supporting ideas; lack of evidence;


91

Diction

of materials shows plan (could be outlined by reader); supporting evidence given for generalization and conclusion logical are complete Attempts variety; good vocabulary; not wordy; register OK; style fairly concise

developed; sequence is logical but transitional expressions may be absent or misused

supporting evidence; conclusion weak or illogical; inadequate effort at organization

writer has not made any effort to organize the composition (could not be outlined by the reader)

Some vocabulary misused; lacks awareness of register; may be too wordy

Poor expression of ideas; problems in vocabulary; lacks variety of structure

Inappropriate use of vocabulary; no concept of register or sentence variety

Source: adapted from ‘analytical scale for rating composition tasks (Brown & Bailey, 1984, pp. 39-41)


APPENDIX D

FREQUENCY OF ERROR TYPE

92


93


APPENDIX E

SAMPLE OF STUDENTS’ WRITTEN REFLECTIONS

94


95


96


97

A CASE STUDY OF LEARNER LANGUAGE ON WRITTEN REFLECTION OF BAHASA INGGRIS I CLASS B STUDENTS IN THEOLOGY FACULTY SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

Recommend Documents