AN ANALYSIS ON STUDENTS’ ERRORS IN USING RELATIVE PRONOUNS (Who, Whom, Which, Whose) (A Case Study in the Second Year of Fatahillah Senior High School)
By Musonah
108014000013
DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH EDUCATION FACULTY OF TARBIYA AND TEACHER’S TRAINING SYARIF HIDAYATULLAH STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY JAKARTA 2014
ABSTRACT Musonah, 108014000013, An Analysis on Students’ Errors in Using Relative Pronouns (Who, Whom, Which, Whose); A Case Study in the Second Year of Fatahillah Senior high School Jakarta Selatan, Skripsi of Department of English Education, Faculty of Tarbiya and Teachers’ Training, Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University, Jakarta, 2014. Advisor I: Sunardi Kartowisastro Dipl. Ed Advisor II: Ummi Kultsum M. Pd The objectives of the research were to know whether the students make errors in using relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose) in adjective clause and to know the types of errors by the Second Year of SMA Fatahillah. The problem was formulated into do the students make errors in using relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose) in adjective clause? What the types of errors that the students make? And What kind of relative pronoun which the students often make errors? This research used descriptive qualitative and the intruments of this research were written test and interview. Furthermore, after the writer collected the data, then analyzed them by using formula: % = x 100% So, the writer described and interpreted the data about what the types of errors that the students made in using realtive pronouns (who, whom, which, whose). The finding of this research were about the students’ errors on using relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose) by describing the frequency of error in the squence based on the most to the least frequency of errors, there were: whose, who, whom, and which. Meanwhile, the most students made error in the relative pronoun whose with the highest precentage error 39.75%. Furthermore, in the type of error, most studetns made error in misselection with 70.94%, omission 20.9%, and addition 8.97%. It can be concuded that the most students of the Second Year (Social) of Fatahillah Senior High School have not mastered yet in using relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose) of adjective clauses especially in using relative pronoun whose.
i
ABSTRAK Musonah, 108014000013, An Analysis on Students’ Errors in Using Relative Pronouns (Who, Whom, Which, Whose); A Case Study in the Second Year of Fatahillah Senior high School Jakarta Selatan, Skripsi of Department of English Education, Faculty of Tarbiya and Teachers’ Training, Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University, Jakarta, 2014. Pembimbing I: Sunardi Kartowisastro Dipl. Ed Pembimbing II: Ummi Kultsum M. Pd Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui apakah siswa membuat kesalahan-kesalahan dalam menggunakan kata ganti penghubung (who, whom, which, whose) dalam adjective clause dan untuk mengetahui jenis-jenis kesalahan yang dibuat oleh siswa kelas XI SMA Fatahillah. Masalah dalam penelitian ini adalah apakah siswa-siswa membuat kesalahan dalam penggunaan kata ganti penghubung (who, whom, which, whose) dalam adjective clause? Apa saja jenis kesalahan siswa dalam pengguanaan kata ganti penghubung (who, whom, which, whose)? Dan apa saja macam-macam kesalahan dalam penggunaan kata ganti penghubung (who, whom, which, whose) yang sering dibuat siswa? Penelitian ini menggunakan deskriptif kualitatif dan instrumen yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah tes tulis dan wawancara. Selanjutnya, setelah penulis mengumpulkan data, kemudian menganalisis data tersebut menggunakan rumus: % = x 100% Jadi, penulis mendeskripsikan dan menginterpretasikan data tersebut tentang apakah jenis-jenis kesalahan-kesalahan yang siswa buat dalam penggunaan kata ganti penghubung (who, whom, which, whose). Hasil penelitian ini tentang kesalahan-kesalahan yang dibuat oleh siswa dalam menggunakan kata ganti penghubung (who, whom, which, whose) dengan jumlah tingkat kesalahan yang digambarkan secara berurutan dari hasil yang tertinggi sampai terendah, meliputi: whose, who, whom, dan which. Sementara itu, kesalahan yang paling banyak dibuat siswa adalah dalam menggunakan kata ganti penghubung whose dengan presentase kesalahan tertinggi 39,75%. Selanjutnya, dalam jenis-jenis kesalahan, sebagian besar siswa membuat kesalahan dalam misselection dengan presentase 70,94%, omission 20,9%, dan addition 8,97%. Jadi dapat disimpulkan bahwa sebagian besar siswa kelas XI (IPS) SMA Fatahillah belum menguasai dalam menggunakan kata ganti penghubung (who, whom, which, whose) dalam adjective caluses terutama dalam menggunakan kata ganti penghubung whose.
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT In the name of Alloh, the Beneficient, the Merciful. Praise be to Alloh almighty the lord of the universe who has given chance to the writer to complete this paper. Peace and blessing be upon our prophet Muhammad SAW, his family and his followers. The writer realizes that she would never finish writing this paper without the help of some people around her; therefore, she would like to give special thanks to: her beloved parents Suparjo and Rodiyah, who always pray and support her in every part of her life especially in finishing this paper, to her brother Muamar Ma’ruf and his wife, to her sister Qurotul Aini and her husband, And then to her twins sisters Nurhidayah and Nurhasanah, and her husband M. Amri Mabruri who always help, support, and motivate her in doing this paper. The writer would like to address her gratitude to Mr. Sunardi Kartowisastro, Dipl. Ed. and Mrs. Ummi Kultsum, M. Pd. as the writer’s advisors for their time, guidance, kindness and patience in correcting and helping her in finishing this paper. She would also like to express her deep appreciation and gratitude to: 1. All lecturers, especially those of English Education Department, who have taught and educated her during her study; 2. The chairman of English Education Department, Drs. Syauki, M.Pd and his secretary, Zahril Anasy, M.Hum; 3. Nurlena Rifai, MA, Ph.D., the Dean of Faculty of Tarbiya and Teacher’s Training; 4. The head master of Fatahillah Senior High School, Mr. H. Maskuri, S.Ag, and the English teacher at Fatahillah Senior High School, Mrs. Niken Saraswati, S.Pd; 5. Her beloved friends Dyah Puji Utami, Dewi Purwanti, Shofa Shofwatul Humairah, Roghibah, Rizky Juwitasari, Lili Alfiani, Rahmy Yuniarti, Hammam Nasrudin, and Hidayatulloh. Thank you for these wonderful partnership. You all are much appreciated more than just friends; iii
For the last, she realizes that her research paper is far from being perfect, so she will accept constructive suggestion to make this research paper better.
Jakarta,
September 2014
The writer
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT
......................................................................i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
......................................................................iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
......................................................................iv
LIST OF TABLES
......................................................................vi
LIST OF CHARTS
......................................................................vii
LIST OF APPENDICES
......................................................................viii
CHAPTER I
: INTRODUCTION
A. Background of Study
......................................................................1
B. Identification of the Problem...................................................................4 C. Limitation of the Problem ......................................................................4 D. Formulation of Problem
......................................................................5
E.
Objectives of Study
......................................................................5
F.
Significance of Study
......................................................................5
CHAPTER II: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK A. Adjective Clause
......................................................................7
1. The Definition of Adjective ................................................................7 2. The Types of Adjective Clause............................................................8 B. Relative Pronouns
......................................................................9
1. The Understanding of Relative Pronous ...........................................9 2. The Types of Relative Pronouns ......................................................9 3. Error Analysis
......................................................................10
1. The Definition of Error Analysis .........................................................10 2. The Differences Between Errors and Mistakes ...................................11 3. The Sources of Error
....................................................................12
4. The Types of Errors
....................................................................13
5. The Procedure of Error
....................................................................18 v
D. Thinking Framework
........................................................................20
E. Previous Study
........................................................................21
CHAPTER III: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY A. Place and Time of Research ......................................................................23 B. Method of the Study
......................................................................23
C. Population and Sample
......................................................................23
D. Data Collecting Technique ......................................................................24 E. Instrument of the Research ......................................................................24 F. Technique of Data Analysis .....................................................................25
CHAPTER IV: RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DATA INTERPRETATION A. Finding
......................................................................26
B. Interpretation
......................................................................35
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS A. Conclusion
......................................................................37
B. Suggestions
......................................................................37
BIBLIOGRAPHY
......................................................................38
APPENDICES
vi
LIST OF TABLES
1.1
The Examples of Student’s Error in Using Relative Pronouns (who, whom, which, whom)3
2.1
The characteristics of restrictive and non restrictive relative clause8
3.1
Kinds of Relative Pronouns and the Number each Item24
3.2
The Number of Multiple Choice Items25
3.3
The Number of Completion Items25
4.1
Recapitulation of Students Types of Error in Using Relative Pronouns which Students’ Made of Multiple Choice and Completion Items26
4.2
Frequency of Errors in Using Relative Pronouns that the Students Made of Multiple Choice Items30
4.3
Frequency of Errors in Using Relative Pronouns that Students Made of Completion Items31
4.4
Kinds of Error in Using Relative Pronouns that Students Made of Multiple Choice Items32
4.5
Kinds of Errors in Using Relative Pronouns that Students Made of Completion Items33
4.6
Recapitulation of Errors’ Data in Using Relative Pronouns which Students’ Made of Multiple Choice and Completion Items34
4.7
Recapitulation Frequency and Precentage Types of Errors in Using Relative Pronouns which Students’ Made of Multiple Choice and Completion Items 35
vii
LIST OF CHARTS 4.1 Recapitulation Frequency of Students’ Type of Error in Using Relative Pronouns which Students’ Made of Multiple Choice and Completion Items .............................................................................................................. 27 4.2 Recapitulation Precentage of Students’ Type of Error in Using Relative Pronouns which Students’ Made of Multiple Choice and Completion Items ...............................................................................................................28 4.3 Recapitulation Frequency of Errors in Using Realtive Pronouns which Students’ Made of Multiple Choice and Completion Items .........................34 4.4 Recapitulation Precentage of Errors in Using Realtive Pronouns which Students’ Made of Multiple Choice and Completion Items .........................35
viii
LIST OF APPENDICES
1a Interview for The English Teacher
.......................................... 41
1b The Result of English Teacher Interview
.......................................... 42
2a Structured Interview for The Student
.......................................... 44
2b The Result of Students’ Interview
.......................................... 45
ix
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
A. Background of the Study In Indonesia, English language should be learnt and it is one of complusory subject in every education level, that is Junior High School or Sekolah Menengah Pertama (SMP), Senior High School or Sekolah Menengah Atas (SMA), and even in Universities. In addition, English language includes as local content subject in educational level of Elementary School or Sekolah Dasar (SD) in the country. In teaching process in education levels is based on the guideline of rules that stated by the goverment in the curriculum. The Curriculum provides some rules about teaching English material for each level or education. It states the objective of the teaching learning process that held in Draft of Badan Standarisasi Nasional Pendidikan (BNSP) April, 12nd 2006 which consist of Standar Kompetensi (SK) or Standard Competence and Kompetensi Dasar (KD) or Basic Competence for each language skill – Listening, Reading, Speaking, and Writing. Two of
them divided into two categories,
receptive skills (listening and reading) and productive skills (speaking and writing). Besides, the four skills, the language components or sub-skills such as grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation and so on. Grammar is one of the sub-skills that should be mastered in English learning by the students. Like any other language learning situations, Indonesian students face some difficulties in learning English. The problem may have been caused by some factors that are related to one another to achieve its goals. The students are expected to develop their English skills (reading, listening, speaking, writing), memorizing vocabularies, and using appropriate structures. The material is becoming the main difficulty that students faced. Because most students assumed that English grammar is the most difficult part to be learnt. The English grammar is different from Indonesian grammar. In English there are many types of relative pronouns and they also have different function and usage. First, for person used relative pronouns who, whom, whose, or that;
1
2
who has function as subject, whom has function as object, whose has function as possessive adjective, and that has function as subject or object. Next, for a thing used which or that; which/that has function as subject or object. In Indonesia, relative pronoun yang used in any position in sentence and doesn’t change, and it also make the students are confused to use English grammar. For example: Perempuan yang memakai baju warna merah adalah adik saya. And Laki-laki yang saya temui kemarin adalah paman saya. Possible responds: *The woman whom wears red shirt is my little sister. (correct: the woman who wears red shirt is my little sister.) And *The man who I met yesterday is my uncle. (correct: the man whom I met yesterday is my uncle.) According to Penny Ur, ”There is no doubt that knowledge – implicit or explicit – of grammatical rules is essential for the mastery of language: you cannot use words unless you know how they should be put together.”1 It’s very clear that learning grammar is important for students. In English grammar, all the English words are devided into nine great classes. These calsses are called Part of Speech; they are article, noun, adjective, pronoun, verb, adverb, preposition, conjuntion, and interjection. Of these, Pronoun is the important one that occurs in a sentence. A pronoun is a word used in place of one or more than one noun. It may stand for a person, place, thing, or idea.2 Then, Frank explained that there are five classes of pronouns: personal, relative, interrogative, demonstrative, and indefinite.3 Relative pronoun is a word that is preceding a relative clause. It is an introductory word that has noun
1
Penny Ur, Grammar Practice Activities, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), p. 4 John E. Warriner, English Grammar and Composition: First Course, (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Publisher, 1982), p. 40 3 Marcella Frank, Modern English excercises for no- native speaker: Part II, Sentences adn Complex Structures , (New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc., 1972), p. 19 2
3
antecedent meanings as a person, a thing, a time, a palce, or a reason functioning as subject, object of verb, object of preposition, or possesive adjective.4 Relative pronouns is one of material that should be learnt by the students at Senior High School. The writer would like to show the common errors that the students of Fatahillah Senior High School made when they used relative pronouns. She conducted on April, 1st 2014. She gives pre-test to the students that consist of 20 questions, it is devided into two parts. First, it consists of 10 questions of multiple choice, to choose the right one whether A, B, C, or D. Second, it also consists of 10 questions asking the students to complete the sentences by filling in the blank spaces with the right relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose). The test is conducted for knowing wether the students do errors in using relative pronouns or not. For examples of completing sentences; Table 1.1 The Examples of Student’s Error in Using Relative Pronouns (who, whom, which, whom) *Aminah whom won the English Aminah who won the English debate debate came to my home.
came to my home.
*The person who I phoned last night The person whom I phoned last is my uncle.
night is my uncle.
*The letter whose came from Andi is The letter which came from Andi is on the drawer.
on the drawer.
These sentences in left column are definitely incorrect, and the right column are correct one. The first sentence in left column is incorrect because the students use relative pronoun ‘whom’ instead of ‘who’ the function as subject (Aminah came to my home. She won the English debate). The second sentence is also incorrect, because they use relative pronoun ‘who’ instead of ‘whom’ the function as object (The person is my uncle. I phoned him last night). And the last sentence is incorrect, because they use relative pronoun ‘whose’ instead of ‘which’ the usage is for thing (the letter). 4
Frank, Ibid., p. 47
4
Commonly, the various difficulties will be faced by students at school. One of the reason why the students faced difficulties in learning, it is because their learning attitude. When the teacher explained the materials some students give their attention fully, and some other did not. Furthermore, some students can receive the materials easily, and some other cannot. From the background above, the writer would like to try to write about “An Analysis on Students’ Errors in Using Relative Pronouns (Who, Whom, Which, Whose)” (A Case Study in the Second Year of Fatahillah Senior High School).
B. Identification of The Problem Based on the background of the study above, there are some problems that can be identified: 1.
Most of students in Fatahillah Senior High School still have some errors how to apply the correct relative pronouns in adjective clause.
2.
The students cannot differentiate the function of relative pronouns whether it is subject, object or possesive.
3.
The students cannot differentiate the usage of relative pronouns whether it is for person, or a thing.
C. Limitation of the Problem To avoid misunderstanding in interpreting the problem, it is necessary to make limitation of the problem. The writer limited the problem only on the students’ errors in using relative pronouns (which, who, whom, whose) of adjective clauses at the second year of Fatahillah Senior High School.
D. Formulation of the problem Based on the statement above, the writer formulates her problems as follows:
5
1. Do the students make errors in using relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose) in adjective clause? 2. What are the types of error that the students make? 3. What kind of relative pronoun which the students often make errors?
E. The Objectives of The Study According to the statement of the problem above, the objectives of the study are as follows: 1. to know whether the students make some errors in using relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose) in adjective clause or not. 2. to find out the frequency of occurence of each type of errors in using relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose) in adjective clause. 3. to find out the frequency of each kind of relative pronouns errors such as; who, whom, which, whose in adjective clause.
F. The Significances of The Study The results of this study are expected to provide useful information for: 1. English teachers The result of this study for English teachers to get clearly information about the types and sources of students’ errors in using relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose), so they will give proper treatment to decrease students’ errors in using relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose). 2. Students The students will get proper treatment in decreasing their errors in using relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose), so they can express relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose) effectively and correctly in their communication whether spoken or written.
6
3. Further researchers Other researchers who are interested in analyzing of students’ errors at Senior High School can get the basic information from this study, so they can do their research in deeper, further, and better technique.
CHAPTER II THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
A. Adjective Clause 1. The Definition of Adjective Clause English is a foreign language which has different characteristic from our language. Learning new language means establishing new system of the language where learners have to learn many aspects of new language which are very different from their native language such as vocabulary, sound of the words (pronunciation), spelling, semantics, rules of grammar and so on. Although grammar does not belong to English skills, it is no doubt that knowledge of grammatical rules is essential to be learnt for mastering a language and it would be impossible to learn language effectively without knowing the grammar. First, before the writer giving the definition of relative pronoun, she would like to explain about adjective clause. To know adjective clause is essential because in the English Textbooks, magazines, newspapers, and the other frequently use the adjective clauses. There are many experts who state the definition of adjective clause. According to Elbaum said An adjective clause is a group of words (with subject and verb) that describes a noun.1 As Huddleston and Pullum said that a relative clause is a special kind of subordinate clause whose primary function is as modifier to a noun or nominal.2 In addition, an adjective (or relative) clause is one type of dependent clause. It modifies a noun or pronoun or occasionally a whole sentence.3 Altenberg and Vago said that a relative caluse (adjective clause) is a kind of dependent clause; it provides additional information about a noun phrase
1
Sandra N. Elbaum, Grammar in Context 2: Fourth Edition, (Boston: Thomson Heinle, 2006), p. 354 2 Rodney Huddleston and Geofrey K. Pullum, A Student’s Inroduction to English Grammar, (New York: Cambbridge University Pres, 2010), p.183 3 Patricia k. Werner and John P. Nelson, Mosaic 2 Grammar Forth Edition, (New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, 2002), p.115
7
8
in the main clause.4 An adjective clause is a dependent clause that modifies a noun. It describes, indentifies, or gives further information about a noun. (An adjective clause is also called a relative clause).5 From the definitions above, the writer concludes that adjective clause is a clause which modifies or decribeds noun or pronoun as antecedent. 2. The Types of Adjective Clauses According to Yule, relative caluse can be divided into two types restrictive clause and non restrictrive clause relative clauses. Restrictive relative clause is term for rlative clause which defines or restricts the reference of the noun.6 Furthermore, it can be understood; restricted relative caluse serves to restrict the reference of the noun phrase modified. A non-restrictive relative clause give extra information aboout antecedent.7 Non-restrictive relative clause is indicated commass arroud it. The characteristic is used because the noun‘s reference is already clear and thus the clause does not restrict it. Tabel 2.1 The characteristics of restrictive and non restrictive relative clause Restrictive
4
Non-restrictive
Defining
Non-defining
Necessary information
Extra information
No separation makers
Separations maker (e.g. commas)
Not usually after proper noun
After proper noun
Not as additional comments
Provide additonal comments
Not with quantity expressions
With quantity expression
Initial that and zero relative
Not with that or zero relative
With general antecedents
Not with general antecedents
Shorter and more common
Longer and less common
Evelyn P. Altenberg and Robert M. Vago, English Grammar, (New York: Cambbridge University Pres, 2010), p. 121 5 Betty Scrampfer Azar, Understanding and Using Grammar Third Edition, (London: PrenticeHall, Inc, 1999), p. 267 6 George Yule, Explaining English Grammar, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998), p. 240 7 Yule, Ibid, p.249
9
B. Relative Pronouns 1. The Understanding of Relative Pronouns The students used relative pronouns to join two statements that refer to the person or thing in adjective clause (relative clause). According to Frank, relative pronouns refer to noun antecedents which immediately precede them. They introduce adjective clauses in which they serve as subjects or objects.8 In the other definiton ―A relative pronoun is a pronoun that introduces a dependent clause.‖9 Example: I met a woman. She can Speak six languages. I met a woman who can Speak six languages.10 Based on the definition above the writer concluded, relative pronoun is a pronoun that is used to combine two sentences and cut the same part on it become one sentence. 2. The Types of Relative Pronouns In her Modern English Grammar, Frank explained that there are five noun antecedent meanings functioning the relative pronouns, they are: a. A person: relative pronouns used here are who (whom or whose) and that. Illustrative sentences: 1) He paid the money to the man who (or that) had done the work. (The introductory word functioning as subject) 2) He paid the man whom (or that) he had hired. (the introductory word functioning as object of verb) 3) He paid the man from whom he had borrowed the money. (The introductory word functioning as object of preposition) 4) This is the girl whose picture you saw. (The introductory word functioning as possessive adjective) b. A thing: relative pronouns used here are which and that. Illustrative sentences:
8
Frank, op. cit., p. 21 John E. Brewton et al.,The Using Good English Series 9, (Ilinois:Laidlaw Brothers Publishers, 1962), p. 355 10 Raymond Murphy and Willian R. Smalzer, Basic Grammar in Use, (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007), p. 230 9
10
1) Here is a book which (or that) describes animals. (The introductory word functioning as subject) 2) The chair which (or that) he broke is being repaired. (The introductory word functioning as object of verb) 3) She was wearing the coat for which she had paid $2,000. (The introductory word functioning as object of preposition) c. A time: relative adverb used here is when. Illustrative sentence: This is the year when the Olympic Games are held. d. A place: relative adverb used here is where. Illustrative sentence: Here is the house where I live. e. A reason: relative adverb used here is why. Illustrative sentence: Give me a good reason why you did that.11
C. Error Analysis 1. Definitions of Errors and Errors Analysis Learning foerign language is different from learning our mother tongue, and it is possible that the learners make errors in a foreign language. In this case, Dullay, Burt and Khrasen mention that errors are the flawed side of learner speech or writing. They are those part of conversation or composititon of that deviate from some selected norm of mature language performance.12 Errors in learning a new language are related to the learners‘ competence. Although it is a common thing, having poor understanding of target language will lead the learners to do mistakes and errors. When the students learn about target language, they make lots of error. It is natural part of language accquistion prosess. How to know the students‘ errors are needed the error analysis. 11
Frank, op. cit., p. 47 Heidi Dulay, Mariana Burt, and Stephen Krashen, Language Two, (New York: Oxford University Press, Inc., 1982), p.138 12
11
The fact that learners do make errors and that these errors can be observed, analyzed, and classified to reveal something of the system operating within the learner, led to a surge of study of learners‘ error, called error analysis13 Error analysis is the process based on analysis of learner‘s error in their process of second language learning. Error analysis is valuable source of information to teachers. It provides information on learner‘s error which helps teachers to correct it and also improves the effectiveness of their teaching. In other words, errors give sign to teacher and researcher whether the learning process is successful or not.
2. The Differences Between Errors and Mistakes In order to analyze learners‘ language in a proper perspective, it is important to distinct between mistakes and errors. Errors and mistakes are the two synonyms, that a little bit have same meaning, but in learning language, these words have different in meaning. There are various definitions of errors and mistakes that have been presented by linguists. However, basically those definitions have same meaning while the difference lies only on the way they formulate it. Brown states that a mistake refers to a performance error that is either a random guess a ―slip‖, in that it is a failure to utilize a known system correctly. Whereas errors of a second language learner, idiosyncrasies in the language of the learner that are direct manifestations of a system within which a learner is operating at the time. An error, a noticeable deviation from the adult grammar of a native speaker, reflects the competence of the learner.14 James stated an error arises only when there was no intention to commit one.15 Furthermore, an erroneous utterance is that which was made unintentionally, whereas when there is an intention to produce a deviant utterance call it deviance. However, Richard
13
H. Douglas Brown, Principles of Language Learning and Teaching: Third Edition, (New York: prentice Hall, Inc,. 1994), p. 224 14 Ibid p. 257 15 Carl James, Errors in Language Learning and Use: Exploring Error Analysis, (New York: Wesley Longman Inc., 1998), p. 77
12
sated mistake is made by a learner when writing or speaking which is caused of lack of attention, fatigue, carelessness, or other aspects of performance.16 Based on the definition above, the writer concluded that mistakes in using language because they slip their tongue or their spelling, lack of attention, carelessness, sick or some other factors of performance. These are easily coorected by the students themselves since they understand the concept of the language system. An error is made by a learner because of lacking ability of the target language. 3. The Sources of Error An error analysis is usesd to identify errors in second language learner production, and errors are something that cannot be avoided in learning new language. Its a natural process in this condition where it is caused of some factors. Hubard
identified
three
causes
of
errors:
mother-tongue
interference,
overgeneralization and errors encouraged by teaching material or method. 17 Meanwhile, Brown identifies that there are four sources of errors, namely interlingual transfer, intralingual transfer, context of learning, and communication strategies. a. Interlingual Transfer Interlingual transfer is a significant source of error for all learners. It is influenced by the interference of students‘ mother tongue. The knowledge and the culture of the first languge are really affecting them, so they often make errors caused by the intrerlingual factor. Students frequently use or even, mix up their first language in producing the target language. Learner may do errors as the following examples: Indonesian sentence
: Laki-laki tua yang saya jumpai kemarin malam
adalah tetangga baru saya. English sentence
16
: *The old man who I meet last night is my new neighbour.
Jack C. Richards, Error Analysis: Perspective on Second Language Acquisition, (London: Longman Group, Ltd., 1985), p. 95. 17 Peter Hubbard, et.al., A Training courses for TEFL, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1983), p. 140-142.
13
This error happens because the learners apply their native language structure into their L2. They just translate the word yang to who, and jumpai to meet in English, so, they will attempt to make *The old man who I meet last night is my new neighbour. This sentence are definately wrong the learner because they use relative pronoun ‗who‘ instead of ‗whom‘ the function as object, and use V1 (meet) instead of V2 (met) that show in the past time. Here, the correct sentence: The old man whom I met last night is my new neighbour. b. Intralingual Transfer Intralingual transfer directly related to the target language. This is the major factor in second language learning. Students have to learn a new language and acquire its new system in every aspect which is commonly different from their first language. Therefore, sometimes they will face difficulties and make errors in learning. c. Context of Learning This source of error is beyound the context of language. It refers to the learning process which is affected by the circumtance, the teacher, the source of learning, for example textbook and the learner itself. Students can make errors because of the teacher‘s wrong explanation that have been given to the students. Then, the textbook also can contribute to the students‘ errors if it is fault to present good content such as structures of words. d. Communication Strategies Learning style also related to the students‘ errors. The way they learn language could be source of errors if they are careless to produce utterences or sentences using the target language. The focus of the language improvement should not make the unnecessary errors.18 4.
The Types of Error Dulay, Burt, and Krashen described consideration of errors into three
major types of taxonomy, 1. Error Types based on linguistic category, 2.
18
Brown, op. cit., p. 265—266
14
Surface strategy Taxonomy, 3. Error types based on comparative of Taxonomy.19 The surface strategy taxonomy highlights the ways surface structures are occur. The students may omit necessary items (omission), or add unnecessary ones (additions), they may misformation items (selection) or misorder them (misordering).20 a.
Omission Omission errors are characterized by the absence of an item that must
appear in a well-formed utterance. Although any morpheme or word in a sentence is a potential candidate for omission, some types of morphemes are omitted more than others. For example omission of to be: *Aminah a smart student. Aminah is a smart student. b.
Additions Additional errors are the opposite of omission. They are characterized by
the presence of an item which must not appear in a well-formed utterance. It usually occurs in the later stages of L2 acquisition, when the learner has already acquired some target language rules. In fact, additions errors result from the all-too-faithful use of certain rules. For example addition In present error: *Aisyah and Andi goes to library. In morphology : *The books is here. c.
Double Marking Many addition errors are more accurately described as the failure to delete
certain items which are required in some linguistic constructions, but not in others. For example in past tense error: *She didn‘t went/goed In present tense error: *He doesn‘t knows my name d.
Regularization A rule typically applies to a class of linguistic items, such as the class of
main verbs or the class of nouns. In most languages, however, some members 19 20
Dulay, op. cit., p. 146 Ibid, p. 150
15
of a class are expectations to the rule. For example, the verb eat does not become eated, but ate; the noun sheep is also sheep in the plural, not sheeps. e.
Simple addition Errors are the ―grab bag‖ subcategory of additions. If an addition error is
not double marking or regularization, it is called a simple addition. No particular features characterize simple additions other than those that characterize all addition errors—the use of an item which should not appear in a well-formed utterance. For example in 3rd person singular –s: * The fishes doesn‘t live in the water in past tense (Irregular): * The train is gonna broke it f.
Misformation Misformation errors are characterized by the use of the wrong form of the
morpheme or structure. While in omission errors the item is not supplied at all in misformation-errors the learner supplies something, although it is incorrect. For example: * The dog eated the chicken. In a past tense marker was supplied by the learner; it was just not the right one. As in the case of additions, misformation is usually not random. Thus, three types of misformation have been frequently reported in the literature: (1) regularizations; (2) archi-forms; and (3) alternating forms. 1)
Regularization errors
Regularization errors that fall under the misformation category are those in which a regular marker is used in place of an irregular one, as in runned for ran or gooses for geese. For example in the regularization errors in the misformation category observed in child L2 production: Linguistic Item Misformed
Example
Reflexive Pronoun
*Hisself (himself)
Regular Past
*I falled (fell)
Plural
*Childs (Children)
16
2)
Archi-forms
The selection of one member of a class of forms to represent others in the clas is a common characteristic of all stages of second language acquisition. We have called the form selected by the learner an archi-form. For example, a learner may temporarily select just one of the English demonstrative adjectives this, that, these, and those, to do the work for several of them: * That dog * That dogs For this learner, that is the archi-demonstrative adjective representing the entire class of demonstrative adjectives. Learner may also select one member of the class of personal pronouns to function for several others in the class. For example: * Give me that * Me hungry 3)
Alternating Forms
As the learner‘s vocabulary and grammar grow, the use of archi-forms often gives way to the apparently fairly free alternation of various members of a class with each other; Thus, we see for demonstratives: * Those dog * This cats g.
Misordering Misordering errors are characterized by the incorrect placement of a
morpheme or group of morphemes in an utterance. For example, in the utterance. He is all the time late. (all the time is misordered) James stated there are five types of errors based on target modification taxonomy, they are: a.
Omission ( O ) Here James makes distinction about Elipsis (E) and from Zero (Z)
elements which are allowed by grammar, whereas omission is ungramatical. Compare two sentences below:
17
He‘ll pass this exam but I won‘t [pass my exam]. Elipsis He‘ll pas his exam and I‘ll [ O ] too. Omission The learners tends to affect function words rather than content words in early stages. Moreover, advanced learners tend to be aware of their ignorance of content words, rather than omit one. b.
Addition First, regularization which involves overlooking exceptions and spreading
rules to domain where they do not apply. For example producing regular *buyed for bought. Second, double marking, defined as ‗failure to delete certain items which are required in some linguistic constuctions but not in other. Example: He doesn’t know*s me contains a redundant third person –s on the main verb know, redundant because the auxiliary do already carries that maker. Third, simple addition, which caters for all additions not describable as double markings or regularizations. Example: The young woman *whom sits in the corner is my sister. The learners use relative pronoun whom rather than who The young woman *whom sits in the corner is my sister. The student add morpheme –m in that sentence. The correct one is relative pronoun who which has function as subject. The young woman who sits in the corner is my sister. c.
Misformation (Misselection) This is Dulay, Burt and Krashen‘s third category, they define misformation
as use of the wrong form of a structure or morpheme, and give example: I *seen her yesterday. It is indeed that seen for saw is use of the wrong form, but they are call it misformation. It is not misformation, what the learner who produced this error has done is not misform but misselect, and these should be called misselection. d.
Misordering This category is relatively uncontroversial. Some languages have stricter
word-order regulation than others. Russian is freer than English. Modern English is less free in itd word order than old English. In English certain word classes seem to be especially sensitive to misordering, for instance adverbials,
18
interrogatives, and adjectives, example: *He every time comes late home. James called misordering with misplacement. e.
Blends This is one category that complements the target modification taxonomy. It
is typical of situations where there is not just one well-defined target, but two. The learner is undecided about which of these two targets he has ‗in mind‘. In such situations the type of error that materializes is the blend error, sometimes called the contamination or cross-association or hybridization error. Example: *according to Erica’s oppinion, which arises when two alternative grammatical forms are combined to produce an ungrammatical blend. In this example according to Erica‘s and in Erica‘s oppinion seem to have been blended.21 5. The Procedure of Error The methodology of error analysis, consisted of the following steps: a. Collection of data (either from a ‗free‘composition by students on a given theme of from examination answers); b. Identification of errors (labelling with varying degrees of precision depending on the linguistic sophistication brought to bear on the task, with respect to the exact nature of the deviation, eg dangling preposition, anomalous sequence of tenses, etc); c. Classification into error types (eg errors of agreement, articles, verb forms, etc) d. Statement of relative frequency of error types; e. Identification of the areas of difficulty in the target language; f. Therapy (remedial drills, lessons, etc).22 Moreover, Gass and Selinker identified four steps followed in conducting an error analysis: identifying errors, describing errors, explaining errors, and error evaluation.23 a.
21
Identifying errors
James, op.cit., p. 106-111 Jacek Fisiak, Contrastive Linguistics and the Language Teacher, (Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1981), p.222 23 Susan M. Gass & Larry Selinker, Second Language Aquisition: An Introductory Course, (New York: Taylor & Francis, 2008), Third Edition, p. 15 22
19
The first step in analysing learners error is to identify them. Look at the example below: Go to the Zoo My family and I go to the zoo yesterday. We saw many animals there, like tiger, giraffe, camel, elephant, birds, etc. I rode the horse. We are very happy to visit the zoo. In the first sentence the student do error, *My family and I go to the zoo yesterday. It is no difficult to see that the correct sentence should be: My family and I went to the zoo yesterday. The student write the infinitive ‗go‘, but the correct one is past tense ‗went‘. The last sentence is also incorrect, *We are very happy to visit the zoo. By comparing the two sentences we can see that the student has used are instead of were – an error in subject-verb agreement. b.
Describing errors After all the errors have been identified, they can described and calssified
into types. One way is to classify errors into gramatical catagories. James stated there are four types of errors one of all is error based surface structure taxonomy, which are omission, addition, misformation, misordering, and blends. c.
Expalining errors After identified and described the errors, next step is to explain why the
errors occur. By trying to identify source errors. Pit corder (in Hubbard, 1983) calims that there are three major causes of error, which he labels ‗transfer errors‘, ‗analogical errors‘, and ‗teaching-induced errors‘. While Hubbard propposed a different names; mother-tongue interference, overgeneralization, and errors encouraged by teaching material method.24
24
Hubbard, op.cit., p. 140-142
20
d.
Error evaluation In this step, the researcher must decide the criteria of errors which will be
corrected because some errors can be considered more serious than other. In short, the aim of evaluating errors is to distinct which errors will be corrected so the learner, which made an error, will not be stress of getting correction.
D. The Previous Related Study This research is relevant to three previous researchers. They are Ahmad Syarif, Hanifah Lestyawati and Rina Wahyu Andriyani. First study, Ahmad Syarif in his research An Analysis of Students’ Errors in Using Adjective Clause (2011) which conducted at the second year students of MAN 4 Cijeruk Bogor. The objective of his study are to know the students‘ errors in using adjective clauses and to know why do the students face such difficulies in using adjective clauses. He used the analysis by using descriptive method. He foud that most of students made error on ‗whom‘ with the average of error is 82.80%. On the other hand, the lowest one is ‗who‘ with the average 30.11% and the causes of students‘ difficulities in using adjective clause came from internal and external factor.25 Afterwards, Hanifah lestyawati conducted a case study about An Analysis on Students’ Error in Using Adjective clause (Who, Whose, Whom). The objective of her study is to identify wheather the students make error in using adjective clause with relative pronoun who, whose, whom and to find the source of errors which affects the students to make errors in using adjective clauses with relative pronoun who, whose whom in second grade of Madrasah Aliyah Pembangunan UIN. He used qualitative research which research design was a case study. The finding shows that the totals of errors produced by the learner was 175 times and misformation which recurred 107 times or 60% and misorder was commited by
25
Ahmad Syarif, An Analysis of Students’ Errors in Using Adjective Clause. 2011
21
the learner 70 times or 40%. Furthermore, the source of error that influenced in her research were interlingual, intralingual, and contex of learning.26 Furthermore, the other study was by Rina Wahyu Andriyani in An Anlysis on Students’ Error in Using Adjective Clause by second year of SMA Nusantra Plus Ciputat-Tangerang (2012). Her study categorized as a decriptive qualitative research. The objectives of her research are to know the types of errors made by the Second Year Students of SMA Nusantara Plus in using relative pronouns of adjective clause and to know the causes of errors made by the Second Year Students of SMA Nusantara Plus in using relative pronouns of adjective clause. The result of her study, the reseacher found four types of errors that students made in using relative pronoun of adjctive clause, they are; misselection (270 or 64%), misordering (88 or 21%), addition (37 or 9%), and omission (25 or 6%). Moreover, the students‘ error were caused by ignorance of rule restriction (210 or 49%), false concept hypotesized (89 or 21%), over generalization (70 or 16%), and incomplete application of rules (58 or 14%).27 Based on the related research above, it was almost same as Rina Wahyu Andriyani research that found the type of error and the method of study is descriptive qualitative. In her research, she also found the causes of error in using relative pronouns that occur in adjective clauses. Different from her research, this research only find out the type of error.
E. Thinking Framework Grammar is one of language components which is taught intensively in learning English process. It is because grammar shows some rules that describe how words and groups of words can be arranged to sentences in a particular language.28 Grammar involves a lot of language elements, relative pronouns is one of students should be master. The students used relative pronouns to join two 26
Hanifah Lestyawati, An Analysis on Students’ Error in Using Adjective clause (Who, Whose, Whom). 2012 27 Rina Wahyu Andriyani. An Anlysis on Students’ Error in Using Adjective Clause by second year of SMA Nusantra Plus Ciputat-Tangerang.2012 28 Ron Cowan, The Teacher’s Grammar of English: A Course Book and Reference Guide, (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008), p. 3
22
statements that refer to the person or thing in adjective clause (relative clause). Language system differences between Indonesian and English in expressing relative pronouns of adjective caluses. These differences sometimes influence students to apply Indonesian grammar rule in expressing English relative pronouns of adjective caluses. Based on explanations above the writer encouraged to conduct this research. She analyzed students‘ errors in using relative pronouns of adjective clauses. This analysis has been carried out to recognize the errors that were made by second year students of SMA Fatahillah. In order to find out the types of errors produced. She clasiffied the errors based on Target Modification Taxonomy proposed by James, which consists of omission, addition, misselection, misordering, and blends.
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
A. Place and Time of the Research This research began by doing the observation at school, this research was conducted on February, 27th to May, 6th 2014. The writer took her research at Fatahillah Senior High School, which is located on Jl. Raya Buncit – Amil No. 67 RT 02 RW 05 Jakarta Selatan.
B. Method of the Study The method of this study is descriptive qualitative. It is used to describe the students’ errors. First, the writer gave the written test to the students in the classroom. Second, the writer collected the student’ test, furthermore she analyzed them by describing the precentage of students’ errors in using realtive pronouns (who, whom, which, whose). The last, the writer interpreted the data about what are the types of errors and the most errors that students made.
C. Population and Sample Population is a significant factor in conducting research. It is the whole subject of research. Based on Encyclopedia of Educational Evaluation in Arikunto, “A population is a set (a collection) of all elements possessing one or more atributes of interest.”1 In this case, the subject of the research is the second year of Fatahillah Senior High School with the total number of the students are 146 and are divided into three classes that is both Science and Social. The writer only took one class, XI Social class, which consists of 24 students.
1
Suharsimi Arikunto, Prosedur Penelitian (Suatu Pendekatan Praktek). (Jakarta: Rienka Cipta, 1998), p. 115
23
24
D. Data Collecting Technique In this part, the writer used three techniques in collecting the data, they are: observation, test, and interview. 1. Observation The writer observed the students’ activity in teaching-learning process. 2. Test The writer gave the students worksheet to be done based on the writer’s instuctions. After they finished and collected the worksheet, the writer checked their worksheet. 3. Interview To meet the reason of students’ error in using relative pronouns, the writer used interview to teacher and to students as the technique.
E. Istrument of the Research In her research, the writer used a test on relative pronouns as an instrument to obtain the data. The test consists of 25 questions. It is divided into two parts. First, it consists of 10 questions of multiple choice, asking the students to choose the right one whether A, B, C, or D. Second, it also consists of 15 questions asking the students to complete the sentences by filling in the blank spaces with the right relative pronouns. The distribution of test and number of each items can be seen in the table below; Table 3.1 Kinds of Relative Pronouns and the Number each Items
No.
Kinds of Relative Pronouns
Number of items
1.
Who
6
2.
Whom
6
3.
Which
6
4.
Whose
7 Total
25
25
Table 3.2 The Number of Multiple Choice Items No.
Kinds of Relative Pronouns
Number of items
1.
Who
2,3,9
2.
Whom
5,7
3.
Which
1,6
4.
Whose
4,8,10 Total
10
Table 3.3 The Number of Completion Items No.
Kinds of Relative Pronouns
Number of items
1.
Who
2,6,14
2.
Whom
1,4,8,12
3.
Which
7,9,11,13
4.
Whose
3,5,10,15 Total
15
F. Technique of Data Analysis To analyze students’ answer in using relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose) of adjective clauses, the writer identified the error by using the formula as below:2 % =
x 100%
Explanation % = Percentage f = frequency of each error (frequency of wrong answer) n = sum of the Errors
2
Allan G. Bluman, Elementary Statistics: A Step by Step Approach, 5 th edition, (New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 2004), p. 68.
26
CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDING AND DATA INTERPRETATION
A. Finding The writer took one class in second year (social) of Fatahillah senior high school as the sample consisting of 24 students. The writer gave 25-items test which focused in using relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose). From the test, it is obtained the data of errors which are described as follows. Table 4.1 Recapitulation of Students Types of Error in Using Relative Pronouns which Students’ Made of Multiple Choice and Completion Items Types of Errors
Students Name
Omission
Addition
Misselection
1
2
3
4
1
1
-
4
2
1
2
6
3
1
2
6
4
1
-
10
5
2
2
11
6
3
1
5
7
1
2
6
8
1
2
8
9
3
-
6
10
2
-
6
11
1
2
7
12
2
1
7
13
3
-
3
14
3
-
5
15
4
-
9
26
27
16
2
-
10
17
2
-
10
18
3
1
4
19
2
3
8
20
1
-
6
21
3
-
6
22
3
-
6
23
-
2
12
24
2
1
5
Total
47
21
166
3. Addition
4. Misselection
Note: 1. Students Number
2. Omission
180 166
160 140 120 100 80 60
47
40
21
20 0 Misselection
Omission
Addition
Chart 4.1 Recapitulation Frequency of Students’ Type of Error in Using Relative Pronouns which Students’ Made of Multiple Choice and Completion Items After the writer classified the frequency students’ type of errors in using relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose) of adjective clauses based on the target modification taxonomy, such as; addition, ommision, and misselection. The writer calculated the number of each error type to know the precentage of occurence of each error.
28
1. Misselection %=
x 100% =
= 70. 94%
2. Omission %=
x 100% =
= 20.09%
3. Addition %=
x 100% =
= 8.97%
Furthermore, to make easier to read, she presents it in following chart below: 80 70
70.94 %
60 50 40 30
20.09 %
20
8.97 %
10 0 Misselection
Omission
Addition
Chart 4.2 Recapitulation Precentage of Students’ Type of Error in Using Relative Pronouns which Students’ Made of Multiple Choice and Completion Items
After classifying the types of error into each type, the writer would like to describe the frequency of error in using relative pronouns which students’made of multiple choice and completing items from the highest to the lowest. First, the students’errors are misselection with 166 errors or 70.94%. For example in multiple choice item number 4:
29
4. You have a cat ................... tail is very long. a. Which c. Whom b. Whose d. Who The students choose a. Which (*You have a cat which tail is very long). However, the right answer is b. Whose (You have a cat whose tail is very long). In completion item number 5: 5. This is a book ........................ author J.K Rowling. The student writes relative pronoun Whom (*This is a book whom author J.K Rowling). However, the right answer is Whose (This is a book whose author J.K Rowling). Second, in omission found in the students’ writing with 47 errors or 20.09%. For example in completion item number 8. 8. The person ............................ I phoned last night is my teacher. The student writes relative pronoun Who in their worksheet (*The person who I phoned last night is my teacher). The student ommited morpheme “m”. The right answer is Whom (The person whom I phoned last night is my teacher). Third, in addition found in the students’ writing with 21 errors or 8.97%. For example in completion item number 6. 6. The writer .......................... won the competition studied in Australia. The student writes relative pronoun Whom in their worksheet (*The writer whom won the competition studied in Australia). The student add morpheme “m”. The right answer is Who (The writer who won the competition studied in Australia). After knowing the precentage each type of errors in using relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose), the writer would like to express the frequency of errors in using relative pronouns that the students made of multiple choice items. Furthermore, to make easier to read, she presents it in following table below:
30
Table 4.2 Frequency amd Precentage of Errors in Using Relative Pronouns that the Students Made of Multiple Choice Items No.
1.
Kinds of Relative Pronouns
Item Number 2
Frequency of Error 8
Precentage of Error 25.00%
Who
3
11
34.37%
9
13
40.63%
3
32
100%
5
11
61.11%
7
7
38.89%
2
18
100%
1
6
54.55%
6
5
45.45%
2
11
100%
4
15
39.47%
8
10
26.32%
10
13
34.21%
3
38
100%
Total
2.
whom Total
3.
Which Total
4.
Whose
Total
The table above shows the frequency of error in using relative pronoun such as who, whom, which, and whose that students made of multiple choice items. There were 25.00% or 8 students who made error in item number 2. There are 11 students or 34.37% who made error in item number 3. There are 40.63% or 13 students who made error in item number 9. There are 61.11% or 11 students who made error in item number 5. There are 7 students or 38.89% who made error in item number 7. Next, there are 54.55% or 6 students who made error in item number 1. There are 5 students or 45.45% who made error in item number 6. There are 39.47% or 15 students who made error in item number 4. There are 41.66% or 10 students who made error in item 8. There are 26.32% or 13 students who made error in item number 10.
31
After knowing the frequency and precentage of errors in using relative pronouns that the students made of multiple choice items. The writer would like to express the frequency and precentage of errors in using relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose) that students made of completion items. Furthermore, to make easier to read, she presents it in following table below: Table 4.3 Frequency and Precentage of Errors in Using Relative Pronouns that Students Made of Completion Items No.
1.
Kinds of Relative
Item
Frequency of
Precentage of
Pronouns
Number
Error
Error
2
5
20.83%
6
10
41.67%
14
9
34.56%
3
24
100%
1
9
25.71%
4
8
22.86%
8
10
31.43%
12
7
20.00%
4
34
100%
7
4
18.18%
9
6
27.27%
11
5
27.73%
13
7
31.82%
4
22
100%
3
15
27.27%
5
16
29.09%
10
10
18.18%
15
14
25.46%
4
55
100%
Who
Total
2.
whom
Total
3.
Which
Total
4.
Whose
Total
32
The table above shows the frequency of error in using relative pronoun such as who, whom, which, and whose that students made of completion items. First, there are 20.83% or 5 students who made error in item number 2. There are 10 students or 41.66% who made error in item number 6. There are 9 students or 34.56% who made error in item number 14. Second, there are 25.71% or 9 students who made error in item number 1. There are 8 students or 22.86% who made error in item number 4. There are 11 students or 31.43% who made error in item number 8. There are 20.00% or 7 students who made error in item number 12. Third, there are 18.18% or 4 students who made error in item number 7. There are 6 students or 27.27% who made error in item number 9. There are 27.73% or 5 students who made error in item number 11. There are 31.82% or 7 students who made error in item number 13. The last, There were 27.27% or 15 students who made error in item number 3. There were 29.09% or 16 students who made error in item number 5. There were 18.18% or 10 students who made error in item number 10. There were 25.46% or 14 students who made error in item number 15. Table 4.4 Kinds of Error in Using Relative Pronouns that Students Made of Multiple Choice Items Frequency
Total Precentage
of Error
of Error
Whose
38
38.39%
2.
Who
32
32.32%
3.
Whom
18
18.18%
4.
Which
11
11.11%
99
100%
No.
Kinds of Relative Pronouns
1.
Total
33
The table above shows that many students made error in using relative pronouns (who, whom, which, and whose) of adjective clauses in multiple choice. The highest frequency of errors occured in relative pronoun whose with 38 errors or 38.39%. Next, relative pronoun who with 32 errors or 32.32%. Furthermore, relative pronoun whom with 18 errors or 18.18%. The last, relative pronoun which with 11 erorrs or 11.11%. Table 4.5 Kinds of Errors in Using Relative Pronouns that Students Made of Completion Items Frequency
Total Precentage
of Error
of Error
Whose
55
40.74%
2.
Whom
34
25.18%
3.
Who
24
17.78%
4.
Which
22
16.30%
135
100%
No.
Kinds of Relative Pronouns
1.
Total
The table above shows that many students made error in using relative pronouns (who, whom, which, and whose) of adjective caluses in completing items. The highest frequency of errors occured in relative pronoun whose with 55 erorrs or 40.74%. Next, relative pronoun whom with 34 errors or 25.18%. Furthermore, relative pronoun who with 24 erorrs or 17.78%. The last, relative pronoun which with 22 erorrs or 16.30%. So, the recapitulation shows many students made error in using relative pronoun;who, whom, which, and whose of multiple choice and completion item described as follow;
34
Table 4.6 Recapitulation of Errors’ Data in Using Relative Pronouns which Students’ Made of Multiple Choice and Completion Items No.
Kinds of Relative Pronouns
Frequency of Error
Precentage of Error
1.
Whose
93
39.75%
2.
Who
56
23.93%
3.
Whom
52
22.22%
4.
Which
33
14.10%
Total
234
100%
100 90
93
80 70 60
56
50
52
40
33
30 20 10 0 Whose
Who
Whom
Which
Chart 4.3 Recapitulation Frequency of Errors in Using Realtive Pronouns which Students’ Made of Multiple Choice and Completion Items
35
45 40
39.75%
35 30 23.93%
25
22.22%
20 14,10%
15 10 5 0 Whose
Who
Whom
Which
Chart 4.4 Recapitulation Precentage of Errors in Using Realtive Pronouns which Students’ Made of Multiple Choice and Completion Items
B. Interpretation In this part, the writer would like to show the result of data analyzed that the type of errors in using relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose) f adjective caluses as follows: Table 4.7 Recapitulation Frequency and Precentage Types of Errors in Using Relative Pronouns which Students’ Made of Multiple Choice and Completion Items Frequency
Precentage
of Errors
of Errors
Misselection
166
70.94%
2.
Omission
47
20.09%
3.
Addition
21
8.97%
234
100%
No.
Type of Errors
1.
Total
The table above shows that there are students did errors in the type of misselection with 166 errors or 70.94%. Second, in omission with 47 errors or 20.09%. The last, in addition with 21 errors or 8.97%.
36
The students also made such errors because they learned and proceed new language data in their mind, it also produces a new rules, so they made errors in using relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose) of adjective clauses because they still confused to diferenciate the usage of relative pronouns whether it is as a person or a thing, they also cannot determine the function whether it is as subject, object, or possesive. Furthermore, they did not know the meaning of the sentences. Therefore, from their written test result which consisting multiple choice items and completion items, most of Second Year (Social) of Fatahillah Senior High School got the wrong in using relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose) in a sentence. In conclusion, the students have not mastered yet in understanding relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose) of adjective caluses.
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION A. CONCLUSION Based on the data from finding research, it is concluded that many students make errors both in the multiple choice items and completion items on using relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose) of adjective clauses. From the result of the data type of errors in multiple choice items and completion items of relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose) that the students make error in misselection (166 errors or 70.94%). Then, in omission (47 errors or 20.09%). Furthermore, in addition (21 errors or 8.97%). Moreover, the most students made error in using relative pronoun whose with the highest precentage 39,75% or 93 errors. The study reveals there are many students that do not understand how to use relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose) correctly. Espesially on using relative pronoun whose. They are still confused and find difficulties differencing the usage of relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose) whether they are functioning as persons or things, they also cannot determine the function whether they are as subject, object, or possessive. Furthermore, they do not know the meaning of the sentences. So, the process of teaching-learning in using relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose) of adjective clauses at Second Year (Social) of Fatahillah Senior High School was not done successfully by the researcher as observer. B. SUGESSTION By knowing the types of the students’ error, the writer would like to give some suggestions as follow: 1. The teacher should give more explanation and example related to relative pronouns material. 2. The teacher should give many excercises about relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose) of adjective clauses. 37
38
3. The teacher should prepare the material teaching for students and remind her students: to have more times in practicing English and to give more attention about the function and the usage of relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose) of adjective clauses. 4. It would also, hopefully useful for other researcher to know the students’ gramatical errors of relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose) especially in relative pronoun whose.
BIBLIOGRAPHY Altenberg, Evelyn P. and Robert M. Vago, English Grammar, New York: Cambbridge University Pres, 2010. Arikunto, Suharsimi. Prosedur Penelitian (Suatu Pendekatan Praktek). Jakarta: Rienka Cipta, 1998. Azar, Betty Scrampher. Understanding and Using Grammar Third Edition, London: Prentice-Hall Inc., 1999. Bluman, Allan G. Elementary Statistics: A Step by Step Approach, 5th edition, New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 2004. Brewton, John E. et al. The Using Good English Series 9, Ilinois:Laidlaw Brothers Publishers, 1962. Brown, H. Douglas. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching: Third Edition, New York: prentice Hall, Inc,. 1994. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching: Fifth Edition, New York: Pearson Education Inc., 2007. Cowan, Ron. The Teacher’s Grammar of English: A Course Book and Reference Guide, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008. Dulay, Heidi, Mariana Burt, and Stephen Krashen. Language Two, New York: Oxford University Press, Inc., 1982. Elbaum, Sandra N. Grammar in Context 2: Fourth Edition, Boston: Thomson Heinle, 2006. Fisiak, Jacek. Contrastive Linguistics and The Language Teacher, New York: Pergamon Press Ltd., 1981. Frank, Marcella. Modern English excercises for no- native speaker: Part II, Sentences and Complex Structure, New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc., 1972.
39
Hubbard, Peter, et.al., A Training Courses for TEFL, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1983. Huddleston, Rodney and Geofrey K. Pullum. A Student’s Inroduction to English Grammar, New York: Cambbridge University Pres, 2010. James, Carl Errors in Language Learning and Use: Exploring Error Analysis, New York: Wesley Longman Inc., 1998. Murphy, Raymond and Willian R. Smalzer. Basic Grammar in Use, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007. Richards, Jack C. Error Analysis: Perspective on Second Language Acquisition, London: Longman Group, Ltd., 1985. Selinker, Larry & Susan M. Gass. Second Language Aquisition: An Introductory Course, New York: Taylor & Francis, 2008. Ur, Penny. Grammar Practice Activities, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988. Werner, Patricia K. and John P. Nelson. Mosaic 2 Grammar Forth Edition, New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, 2002. Yule, George. Explaining Engllish Grammar, New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.
40
Appendix 1a: Interview for The English Teacher
The Question Guide to Interview the English Teacher
1. Bagaimana pendapat ibu mengenai materi relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose) yang diajarkan ke kelas XI? Apakah menurut ibu materi ini mudah dipahami siswa? 2. Apa strategi yang ibu gunakan dalam mengajarkan materi ini? 3. Apakah ibu menemukan kesalahan-kesalahan siswa dalam mengajarkan materi ini bu? 4. Kesalahan seperti apa yang sering dilakukan oleh siswa dalam menggunakan relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose)? 5. Dalam penggunaan relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose) manakah yang sering sekali siswa melakukan kesalahan bu? Menurut ibu mengapa itu merupakan hal yang paling sulit?
41
Appendix 1b: The Result of English Teacher Interview
Interviewer
: Musonah
Interviewee
: Niken Saraswati, S.Pd.
Date and Time
: 16 Juni 2014, 13.30 – 14.00 WIB
Place
: Ruang Perpustakaan
1. Materi relative pronouns diajarkan dikelas dua SMA, kebetulan saya guru pengampu. Kesulitan siswa biasanya siswa itu bingung, yang pertama karena mungkin mereka tidak tahu maksudnya/susah menterjemahkan arti dari setiap katanya itu. Yang kedua, mereka kebingungan menggunakan relative pronounsnya sendiri, seperti penggunaan who, whom, which, whose mereka biasanya kebingungan meletakan relative pronounsnya itu dibagian apa, biasanya disitu saya menemukan kesalahan siswa. 2. Strategi yang digunakan biasanya dengan membuat sebuah contoh kalimat yang memang biasa dengan kegiatan sehari-hari, supaya mereka dapat membedakan yang mana pengguanan untuk orang, yang mana penggunaan utk benda dan kedudukannya, misalkan penggunaan relative pronouns sbg subject, object atau sebagai possesive, kalimatnya itu sebisa mungkin dibuat mudah supaya mereka cepat paham. Membuat kalimat yang langsung dipraktekan contoh: buku yang berwarna hijau diatas meja. 3. Pastinya banyak, misalkan penggunaan relative pronounsnya itu sendiri. Misalnya didalam kalimat itu yang diminta diubah untuk kata ganti orang sebagai subject “who” kadang mereka mengguunakannya yang lain, tidak menggunakan who, mereka menggunakan which, atau whose. Salahnya disitu penempatan sebagai relative pronoun sebagai subject, object atau poessive. 4. Biasanya seperti itu tadi mereka slah menempatkan yang seharusnya sebagai penggnati subject, object, atau posessive. Jadi tertukar-tukar biasanya seperti itu, atau salah penempatan. Jadi kalimat dalam relative pronouns itu sendiri siswa sebenarnya harus tahu dulu mana yang induk kalimat dan mana yang
42
anak kalimat. Mereka bisa menempatkan sebagai pengganti subject, object, atau posessive. 5. Yang sering yaitu whose yang sebagai kata ganti posessive, itu kan kata ganti kepunyaan. Siswa biasanya kebanyakan melakukan kesalahan jadi ini berhubungan dengan materi yang tentang kepemilikan. Ini harus diulang lagi siswa harus belajar lagi mengenai kata ganti kepemilikan, jadi dalam kalimat itu harus dijelaskan dengan detail seperti misalkan pada kalimat Andi’s book artinya buku milik Andi, pasti dalam kalimat relative pronouns diganti whose.
43
Appendix 2a: Structured Interview for The Student
The Question Guide to Interview the Students
1. Bagaimana pendapat kamu tentang materi relative pronouns? 2. Relative pronous (who, whom, which, whose) manakah yang sering diajarkan oleh guru kalian? 3. Apakah kamu mengalami kesulitan dalam menggunakan realtive pronouns (who, whom, which, whose)? 4. Penggunaan relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose) manakah yang menurut kalian paling sulit dipahami? 5. Mengapa kamu sulit dalam menggunakan relative pronouns (who, whom, which, whose) ini? 6. Dari soal yang telah diberikan menurut kalian nomor berapakah yang paling sulit? 7. Mengapa soal tersebut menurut kalian sangat sulit?
44
Appendix 2b: The Result of Students’ Interview Interviewer
: Musonah
Interviewee
: Student A, B and C
Date and Time
: 22 Mei 2014, 09.30 – 10.00 WIB
Place
: Ruang kelas XI IPS
Student A 1. Lumayan sulit membedakannya. 2. Yang sering diajarkan who. 3. Sangat sulit. 4. Who dan whom. 5. Karena tidak bisa membedakannya. 6. 4 (II), 12 (II), 10 (I) 7. Karena membingungkan. Student B 1. Pendapat saya lumayan agak ngerti. 2. Semuanya. 3. Ya (whose) 4. Whose. 5. Karena membedakannya yang sulit. 6. 4,5,8 (II) 7. Karena artinya tidak tahu. Student C 1. Mudah. 2. Semuanya. 3. Iya. 4. Whose. 5. Karena masih keliru dan bingung. 6. 5 (II). 7. Karena masih suka tertukar-tukar, saya belum terlalu memahaminya.
45
Relative Pronouns (who, whom, which, and whose) Name: I.
Class:
Score:
Choose the best answer with relative pronouns Who, Whom, Which, and Whose! 1. The stairs .................... lead to our rooms are slippery. a. Who
c. Which
b. Whose
d. Whom
2. The man ....................... wears the green shirt is talking with his wife of the phone. a. Which
c. Who
b. Whom
d. Whose
3. The young woman .................. went to the Cinema yesterday was killed. a. Who
c. Whose
b. Whom
d. Which
4. You have a cat..................... tail is very long. a. Which
c. Whom
b. Whose
d. Who
5. Mrs. Zainab Abdulloh, ...................... I like very much, is my teacher. a. Whose
c. Who
b. Which
d. Whom
6. The book ............................. is on the table is mine. a. Who
c. Whose
b. Which
d. Whom
7. The man .................................. I saw was Mr. Alif Akbar. a. Which
c. Who
b. Whose
d. Whom
8. I have a friend ........................... mother works at the Bank. a. Who
c. Which
b. Whom
d. Whose
9. Danu, ........................... is my friend, is a good boy. a. Who
c. Whom
b. Whose
d. Which
Relative Pronouns (who, whom, which, and whose)
10. The woman......................... car I want to buy is my mother’s old friend. a. Who
c. Whose
b. Whom
d. Which
II. Complete those sentences with the relative pronouns (who, whom, which, and whose) correctly. 1. The woman ............................. Sally is going with has ever been to India. 2. The man ............................. came yesterday is my uncle. 3. The boy ........................... toy Dava broken yesterday is my cousin. 4. I am waiting for the man ............................. you are talking about. 5. This is a book ......................... author J.K Rowiling. 6. The writer ............................... won the competition studied in Australia. 7. The novel ............................... you bought yesterday is very interesting. 8. The person .............................. I phoned last night is my teacher. 9. The parcel ............................... arrived today was from my aunt. 10. The girl .............................. bag was stolen, went to the police station. 11. The letter ............................ came from Andi yesterday is on the drawer. 12. The woman ............................ I saw at cinema, is Mrs. Anita Hasibuan. 13. The food ............................... we ate last week was very delicious. 14. The girl .................................. wears the yellow shirt is my little sister. 15. The old man ............................................ glasess lost is my grand father.
Relative Pronouns (who, whom, which, and whose) Answer Keys I. Choose the best answer by using relative pronouns Who, Whom, Which, and Whose! 1. c. Which 2. b. Who 3. a. Who 4. b. Whose 5. d. Whom 6. b. Which 7. d. Whom 8. d. Whose 9. a. Who 10. c. Whose II. Complete the sentences by using relative pronouns (who, whom, which, and whose) correctly. 1. Whom 2.
Who
3.
Whose
4.
Whom
5.
Whose
6.
Who
7.
Which
8.
Whom
9.
Which
10. Whose 11. Which 12. Whom 13. Which 14. Who 15. Whose
PROFIL SEKOLAH
YAYASAN PENDIDIKAN & SOSIAL “ FATAHILLAH ”
SMA FATAHILLAH (TERAKREDITASI “A”) Alamat :Jl. Raya Buncit No. 67 KalibataPancoranJakarta-Selatan 12740 Telp / Fax. (021).7940492, Email :
[email protected]
YAYASAN PENDIDIKAN & SOSIAL “ FATAHILLAH ”
SMA FATAHILLAH (TERAKREDITASI “A”) Alamat :Jl. Raya Buncit No. 67 KalibataPancoranJakarta-Selatan 12740 Telp / Fax. (021).7940492, Email :
[email protected]
A. Visi SMA Fatahillah Menjadikan Insan yang Beriman, Bertaqwa, Berilmu Amaliah dan Beramal Ilmiah B. Misi SMA Fatahillah 1. Menumbuhkan penghayatan terhadap ajaran agama sebagai sumber kearifan dalam bertindak. 2. MeningkatkankualitasKegiatanBelajarMengajar yang dilandasidenganImtaqdanIptek agar mampubersaingdalam era globalisasi. 3. Mendidik sesuai dengan bakat, kreativitas, dan minat peserta didik agar dapat tumbuh dan berkembang serta dapat diterima di lingkungan masyarakat. 4. Menciptakan kegiatan belajar mengajar yang dapat memotivasi siswa untuk berinisiatif, kreatif dan inovatif sesuai dengan kaidah ilmu yang dimiliki. C. Tujuan SMA Fatahillah 1. Tujuan Umum Meningkatkan kecerdasan, pengetahuan, kepribadian, akhlak, yang berlandaskan IMTAQ serta keterampilan berbasis teknologi informasi dan kemampuan berkomunikasi peserta didik untuk hidup mandiri dan mengikuti pendidikan lebih lanjut. 2. TujuanKhusus a. Mempersiapkan peserta didik agar menjadi manusia yang memiliki imtaq, mandiri, berwawasan kebangsaan, dan kemasyarakatan, sasling menghargai dan menghormati serta hidup berkerukunan dalam kebhinekaan. b. Membekali peserta didik agar memiliki keterampilan berbasis teknologi informasi dan komunikasi serta mampu mengembangkan diri secara mandiri. c. Menanamkan sikap ulet, gigih dan sportivitas yang tinggi kepada peserta didik dalam berkompetisi dan beradaptasi dengan lingkungan global. d. Membekali peserta didik dengan ilmu pengetahuandan teknologi agar mampu menjadi manusia yang berkpribadian, cerdas, berkualitas, dan berprestasi dalam bidang akademik, keagamaan, olahraga dan seni, dan melanjutkan ke jenjang pendidikan yang lebih tinggi. e. Membekali peserta didik dengan kompetensi dan potensi kearifan budaya lokal. f. Memiliki standar minimal pelayanan pendidikan.
SEJARAH SINGKAT Yayasan Pendidikan dan Sosial Fatahillah yang terbentuk pada tanggal 25 April 1978 dengan Notaris R. Soerojo Wongsowidjojo, SH dengan para pendiri KH. Muallim Mukhtar bin H. Sairun, H. Nazaruddin Mian, KH. Romli Sairi, KH. Achfas Arsad dan Abdul Rahman Sami, membidani terlahirnya Satuan Pendidikan tingkat menengah atas yang bernama “SMA Fatahillah”. SMA Fatahillah didirikan pada tanggal 1 Juni 1987. Sejak saat itu SMA Fatahillah dipimpin oleh HM. Alakfi, SH hingga kini terus mempertahan jati diri Yayasan di tengah pergumulan ibukota yang sarat dengan kemajuan IPTEK. Secara geografis SMA Fatahillah berada di Jl. Raya Buncit No. 67 Jakarta Selatan, tepatnya di Jl Raya Buncit – Amil No. 67 RT 02 RW 05 kelurahan Kalibata Pulo Kecamatan Pancoran Jakarta Selatan. Kondisi Jakarta Selatan yang asri merupakan tempat yang sangat kondusif untuk kegiatan belajar mengajar. Sejak awal berdirinya SMA Fatahillah mengusung visi yang tidak hanya mencerdaskan siswa dari sisi kemampuan kognisi semata, tetapi juga turut membentuk manusia yang mampu “membaca” dirinya sebagai hamba Allah yang siap berkiprah sebagai khalifatullah fil ardhi. Dalam perkembangannya, SMA FATAHILLAH telah dipimpin oleh beberapa Kepala Sekolah dengan masa tugasnya sebagai berikut : No
NAMA
TAHUN
1
H. M. Alakfi, SH
1987 – 2007
2
H. Maskuri, S.Ag
2007 – sekarang
Pada saat ini SMA FATAHILLAH memiliki 2 program yaitu : a. Program Ilmu Alam b. Program Ilmu Sosial SMA FATAHILLAH juga memiliki 7 program ekstrakurikuler, yaitu : 1. Pramuka 2. Rohis 3. English Club 4. Basket 5. Futsal 6. Pencak Silat 7. Hadroh 8. Tari Saman dan muatan lokal yang diberikan yaitu kewirahusaaan untuk jurusan IPS dan statistika untuk jurusan IPA
IDENTITAS SEKOLAH 1. Nama Sekolah Nama Sekolah
: SMA FATAHILLAH
Alamat Sekolah
: Jl. Raya Buncit No.67 Kel. Kalibata Kec. Pancoran Jakarta Selatan
No. Telp/Fax
: (021) 7940492
Web-Site
: www.sma-fatahillah.sch.id
e-mail
:
[email protected]
Kotamadya
: Kota Administrasi Jakarta Selatan
Provinsi
: DKI Jakarta
2. Status Sekolah
: SWASTA
3. Data Siswa a. Data jumlah siswa dan rombongan belajar. KELAS
JUMLAH SISWA
X – MIPA
27
X – IPS
28
XI – IPA
15
XI – IPS
24
XII – IPA
17
XII – IPS
32
6 Rombongan Belajar
143
PROFIL KEPALA SEKOLAH
Data Pribadi
Nama
: H. Maskuri, S.Ag
Tempat, tanggal lahir : Subang, 3 Maret 1973 Alamat lengkap
: Jl. Amil No. 30 B RT 02/05 Kel. Kalibata Pancoran Jakarta Selatan
E-mail
:
[email protected]
Pendidikan
Sarjana (S-1) Fakultas Tarbiyah Jurusan PAI IAIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta tahun 1997
Pengalaman Mengajar 1. 1990 – 1992
Mengajar di MDA Miftahul Jannah Pamanukan Subang
2. 1996 – 1998
Mengajar di SMKN 45 Jakarta Barat
3. 1997 – 2002
Mengajar di SMA Yadika 1 Tanjung Duren Jakarta Barat
4. 1997 – 2003
Mengajar di SMK Yadika 2 Tanjung Duren Jakarta Barat
5. 1998 – 2001
Mengajar di Elrahmah Education Centre (D3) Jakarta Selatan
6. 1998 – 2000
Mengajar di SMA Yadika 5 Joglo Jakarta Barat
7. 1999 – 2011
Mengajar di SMP Yadika 5 Joglo Jakarta Barat
8. 1996 –Sekarang
Mengajar di SMA Fatahillah
D A F T A R G U R U D A N K A R Y A W A N S M A F A TA H I L L A H JL. RAYA BUNCIT KALIBATA PULO NO. 67 PANCORAN JAK-SEL TELP/FAX. 021-7940492 TAHUN PELAJARAN 2013/2014
NO.
NAMA
L/P
TEMPAT TGL LAHIR
BID. STUDI
PEND. AKHIR
ALAMAT
MULAI TUGAS
JABATAN
STATUS
GURU 1
H. MASKURI, S.Ag
L
Subang, 03-03-1973
Agama Islam
SL. IAIN Pend.Ag.Islam 1997
Kalibata Pulo Rt 002/05 Pancoran Jak-Sel
21 Agustus 1996
Kepala Sekolah
GTY
2
SITI HAJAR, ST
P
Jakarta, 15-09-1976
Kimia
SL. Tehnik Pangan 2000
Kalibata Pulo Rt 004/05 Pancoran Jak-Sel
13 Nopemb 2000
Wakil Kurikulum
GTY
3
Drs. ASMAWI
L
Jakarta, 07-10-1959
PPKn
SL. IKIP PMP-LS 1988
Jati Padang Rt 002/02 No.50 Ps. Minggu Jak-Sel
20 Juli 1992
Guru
GTY
4
Hj. FATIMAH RASYID, S.Pd
P
Jakarta, 20-10-1974
Matematika/Statistik
SL. IKIPM Matematika 1997
Jl. Damai Ciganjur Jagakarsa Jakarta Selatan
21 Juli 1996
Pembina Lab
GTY
5
ALI IBRAHIM, S.Pd
L
Jakarta, 16-04-1971
Fisika
SL. IKIPM Fisika 1998
Jl. Minangkabau Dalam Rt 006/14 No.4 Jak-Sel
21 Juli 1996
Wakil Kesiswaan
GTY
6
ABDUL MANAN, S.Pd
L
Jakarta, 11-08-1967
Geografi/Sosiologi
SL. STKIP IPS 1996
Jl. Kalibata Utara Rt 009/07 No.54 Pancoran Jak-Sel
20 Juli 1998
Guru
GTY
7
Drs. DADI
L
Kuningan, 14-04-1962
Sejarah/Sosiologi
SL. UNPI PMP/KN 1989
Pejaten Raya Rt 006/05 Ps. Minggu Jak-Sel
17 Juli 2001
Guru
GTY
8
LUTFIAH, S.Pd
P
Jakarta, 17-08-1973
Ekonomi/Kewirausahaan
SL. IKIPM Pend. Usaha 1997
Kalibata Pulo Rt 011/05 Pancoran Jak-Sel
17 Juli 2001
Guru
GTY
9
Dra. FAUZIANNA SIREGAR
P
P.Siantar, 28-08-1960
Kimia
F.P MIPA 1986
Jl. Timbul Rt 001/03 No.33 Cipedak Jagakarsa
20 Januari 2003
Guru
GTY
10
NUNUNG LESTARI, S.Pd
P
Jakarta, 26-11-1981
Matematika/Statistik
SL. UNJ/Matematika/04
Jl. H.Saleh II Rt 007/02 No.54 Sukabumi Selatan Kbn Jeruk
04 Agustus 2004
Pembina Perpus
GTY
11
NITA ROSITA, S.Kom
P
Jakarta, 07-12-1981
TIK
S1. Univ. Budi Luhur 2005
Jl. Kalibata Pulo Rt 002/05 Pancoran Jak-Sel
01 September 2005
Guru
GTY
12
NIKEN SARASWATI
P
Jakarta, 28-07-1977
Bahasa Inggris
S1. UHAMKA 2007
Jl. Yunus No.23 Sukabumi Utara, Kebon Jeruk Jak-Ut
17 Januari 2007
Guru
GTT
13
MUHAMMAD SHIDDIQ R, BA
L
Jakarta, 08-06-1954
Bahasa Arab
SM IAIN Bahasa Arab
Jl. Bangka Raya Gg.Amal I Rt.005/05 Mamp.Prapatan Jak-Sel
09 Februari 2009
Guru
GTY
14
LISA NIARA, S.Pd
P
Jakarta, 01-06-1986
Bahasa Indonesia
S1. UNINDRA. Bhs.Indo 2008
Bambu Kuning Blok E5 No.3, Bojong Gede bogor 16320
13 Juli 2009
Guru
Honorer
15
FEBRIYANTI, S.Pd
P
Jakarta, 10-02-1985
Bahasa Indonesia
S1. UNINDRA. Bhs.Indonesia 2011
Ciputat RT.002/05 No.48 Tajur, Ciledug, Tangerang
05 Desember 2011
Guru
Honorer
16
AHMAD TAUFIKUL HILMI, S.Pd
L
Jakarta, 15-10-1982
Penjas Orkes
S1. UNINDRA Ekonomi 2008
Jl. Buncit Raya Kalibata Pulo Rt. 004/05 No.26
03 September 2012
Pembina OSIS
Honorer
17
FAIZA ELJANNATI
P
Jakarta, 25-07-1992
Biologi
S1. UIN Syarif Hidayatulloh Biologi
Jl. Buncit Raya Kalibata Pulo Rt. 002/05 Jak-Sel
08 Mei 2013
Guru
Honorer
18 19
ABDURRAHMAN IBROHIM
L L
Jakarta, 06-05-1991 Jakarta, 31 Juli 1988
Sosiologi Agama Islam
S1. UIN Syarif Hidayatulloh IPS S1. STAI AL-Hikmah PAI
Jati Padang Rt 002/02 No.50 Ps. Minggu Jak-Sel Jl. Buncit Raya Kalibata Pulo Rt. 006/05 Pancoran, Jak-Sel
20 Agustus 2013 05 September 2013
Guru Guru
Honorer Honorer
Bendahara
PTY
KARYAWAN 20
ROSFALANI
L
Jakarta, 23-12-1982
-
SLTA 2000
Kalibata Pulo Rt 009/05 Pancoran Jak-Sel
13 Agustus 2004
21
ACHMAD KAFRAWI
L
Jakarta, 31-08-1976
-
SLTA 1996
Kalibata Pulo Rt 009/05 Pancoran Jak-Sel
15 Juli 2009
Staff TU
PTY
22
FIRDAUS
L
Jakarta, 27-02-1980
-
SLTA 1999
Kalibata Pulo Rt 004/05 Pancoran Jak-Sel
15 Januari 2013
Staff TU
PTY
23
HASANUDDIN
L
Jakarta, 20-03-1964
-
SLTP 1984
Pejaten Barat Rt 003/04 Ps.Minggu Jak-Sel
17 Juli 1989
Penjaga Sekolah
PTY
Jakarta, Juli 2013 Kepala SMA Fatahillah
H. MASKURI, S.Ag
STRUKTUR ORGANISASI SMA FATAHILLAH Tahun Pelajaran 2013/2014
KOMITE SEKOLAH
KEPALA SEKOLAH
ABDURROZAK. M
H. MASKURI, S.Ag
WAKA BID. KURIKULUM
WAKA BID. KESISWAAN
SITI HAJAR, ST
ALI IBRAHIM, S.Pd
BENDAHARA & SIE SARANA
TATA USAHA ACHMAD KAFRAWI
ROSFALANI
FIRDAUS
PEMBINA OSIS
Ka. PPATQ Drs. DADI
A. TAUFIKUL HILMI, S.Pd
WALI KELAS
GURU PIKET
PEMBINA LAB
PEMBINA EKSKUL
DEWAN GURU
SISWA / I Garis Komando Garis Koordinasi
BP
PEMBINA PERPUSTAKAAN
