Jurnal Siliwangi Vol. 1. No.1. Nov ISSN Seri Pendidikan

Jurnal Siliwangi Vol. 1. No.1. Nov. 2015 Seri Pendidikan

ISSN 2476-9312

i

ISSN 2476-9312


JURNAL SILIWANGI Seri Pendidikan Volume 1 No. 1,

Mei 2015

Pengarah: H. Rudi Priyadi

Rektor Universitas Siliwangi

H. Aripin

Ketua LP2M Universitas Siliwangi

Penanggung Jawab: Dewan Redaksi Ketua Anggota

: Suhardjadinata

Kepala Pusat Penelitian

: H. Yus Darusman (UNSIL) H. Dedi Heryadi (UNSIL) Hj. Titin Setiartin R. (UNSIL) Hj. Nani Ratnaningsih (UNSIL) Purwati Kuswarini (UNSIL) Siti Padjarajani (UNSIL) H. Supratman (UNSIL) Soni Tantan Tandiana (UNSIL)

Mitra Bestari

: H. Didi Suryadi (UPI) Cece Redaksi Pelaksana : Yaya Sunarya Sugandi Nurul Hiron Hj. Noneng Masitoh Yoni Hermawan H. Ebih A.R. Arhasy Hj. Enok Sumarsih Yusup Supriyono Naskah dapat dikirimkan kepada Lembaga Penelitian dan Pengabdian kepada Masyarakat (LP2M) Universitas Siliwangi Jl. Siliwangi No. 24 Kotak Pos 164 Kode Pos 46115 Tlp. (265) 33064 Fax. (265) 325812 Web. http://lppm.unsil.ac.id, E-mail:[email protected] Jurnal Penelitian Siliwangi diterbitkan secara berkala dua kali setahun oleh Lembaga penelitian dan Pengabdian pada Masyarakat Universitas Siliwangi, memuat makalah hasil penelitian pada disiplin ilmu di lingkungan Universitas Siliwangi, belum pernah dipublikasikan di jurnal lain. Tulisan hendaknya mengikuti pedoman bagi penulis (lihat Pedoman Penulisan Naskah).

ii

ISSN 2476-9312


DARTAR ISI Halaman 1 Analisis Kemampuan Berfikir Nalar Matematis Serta Kontribusinya Terhadap Prestasi Belajar Mahasiswa (Studi Terhadap Mahasiswa FKIP Pendidikan Matematika Universitas Siliwangi) A.A. Gde. Somatanaya, Sri Tirto Madawistama. ……………………………… 1 2 Pengaruh Sertifikasi Terhadap Efektivitas Pembelajarang Guru PJOK Menurut Persepsi Siswa (Studi pada SMA Negari Di Kota Tasikmalaya) Cucu Hidayat, Gumilar Mulya, Resti Agustryani ……………………………. 9 3 Kontribusi Pembelajaran Kontekstual Dengan Teknik SQ4R Terhadap Peningkatan Kemampuan Pemahaman Dan Berpikir Kritis Matematis (Penelitian Kuasi Eksperimen di Program Studi Pendidikan Matematika Angkatan 2013-2014). H. Ebih AR. Arhasy, Ratna Rustina dan Yeni Heryani ……………………… 21 4 Pelaksanaan Kurikulum 2013 Mata Pelajaran Fisika Di SMA Negeri Se Kota Tasikmalaya Menurut Persepsi Siswa H. Endang Surahman …………………………………………………………. 32 5 Pengembangan Model Alat Peningkatan Kekuatan Otot Lengan Dan Otot Tungkai Pada Siswa Sekolah Dasar Iis Marwan, Deni Setiawan, Ida Wahidah. …………………………………… 41 6 Keterampilan Mengajar Mahasiswa S1 Program Studi Pendidikan Matematika FKIP Universitas Siliwangi Ditinjau Dari Penguasaan Kelompok Mata Kuliah (Studi Terhadap Mahasiswa Program Studi Pendidikan Matematika FKIP Universitas Siliwangi) Dedeh Widaningsih, Depi Ardian Nugraha …………………………………… 53 7 Pengembangan Desain Pembelajaran Matematika Untuk Siswa SD Berbasis Aktivitas Budaya Dan Permainan Tradisional Masyarakat Kampung Naga Ipah Muzdalipah, Eko Yulianto ……………………………………………….. 63 8 Contrastive Analysis Of Using Noun Phrase In English And Indonesian Language Soni Tantan Tandiana ………………………………………………………… 75 9 Meningkatkan Kemampuan Tata Bahasa Dan Kosakata Siswa Melalui Teknik Peer Editing Yuyus Saputra ………………………………………………………………… 83

iii


ISSN 2476-9312

CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS OF USING NOUN PHRASE IN ENGLISH AND INDONESIAN LANGUAGE Analisis Kontrastif Penggunaan Frase Nomina Dalam Bahasa Inggris Dan Bahasa Indonesia Soni Tantan Tandiana Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris FKIP Universitas Siliwangi Jl. Siliwangi No 24 Kotak Pos 164 Tasikmalaya 46115 Penulis Korespondensi: Email: [email protected] Abstract; The aim of this research is to find out the use of Noun Phrase (NP) in English and Indonesian language, and the similarity as well as the differences in constructing the elements used. This research was conducted based on the fact that the students in university level frequently make some interlingual errors that is the error done by adopting the grammatical pattern of mother tongue (L1) into the target language (L2) particularly in translating NP from English into Indonesian.Research method uses content analyses. Research data are analyzed by using contrastive analysis technique. The research data resource is taken from scientific text about medical science entitled ‘Coronary Heart Disease’ and the result of its translation.The result of the research shows that there are a lot of similarities of NP usage in English and Indonesian. Such as: NP is constructed by the same elements, those are: head, determiner, modifier and prepositional phrase. The pattern of NP with pre-modifier quantitative adjective has the same form. There is the similarity of NP using prepositional phrase whether it is placed as preprepositional phrase or as postprepositional phrase. The differences, in English, NP is commonly expanded to the fore side of the head; on the other hand, in Indonesian language, it is expanded to the back side of the head. Keywords: Contrastive Analyses, Translation, Noun Phrase (NP). Abstrak; Tujuan penelitian ini untuk mengetahui penggunaan frase nomina (NP) dalam bahasa Inggris dan bahasa Indonesia, persamaan dan perbedaan pola penyusunannya serta elemen-elemen penyusunnya. Penelitian dilakukan berdasarkan temuan terjadinyai interlingual errors yaitu kesalahan yang dilakukan mahasiswa karena mengadopsi polapola gramatika L1(Bahasa Indonesia) ke dalam L2 (bahasa Inggris) atau sebaliknya pada saat penerjemahan NP. Metode penelitian menggunakan analisis isi. Data penelitian dianalisis dengan teknik kontrastif analisis. Sumber data penelitian berupa teks ilmiah mengenai bahasa kedokteran berjudul ‘Coronary Heart Disease’ yang diterjemahkan ke dalam bahasa Indonesia. Hasil analisis menunjukkan terdapat persamaan penggunaan frase nomina bahasa Inggris dan bahasa Indonesia di antaranya: frase nomina dibentuk oleh unsur-unsur yang sama seperti: nomina pusat, penjelas, penentu dan frase nomina preposisi. Bentuk frase nomina dengan penjelas depan kuantitas memiliki pola yang sama. Perbedaanya, frase nomina bahasa Inggris lebih banyak menggunakan perluasan ke depan, sedangkan dalam bahasa Indonesia perluasan ke belakang. Kata Kunci: Analisis Koontrastif, Penerjemahan, Frase Nomina (NP).

75


INTRODUCTION Most of Indonesian’s learners who study English as the target language consider it as a difficult language to learn. They find it hard to understand by the different of linguistics systems of English from Indonesian such as in the use of sentence structure. One of them is the use of Noun Phrase (NP). The pattern of constructing NP in English is different from Indonesian language. In this case, The iterlingual errors are frequently done by the students in translating NP from English into Indonesian language or vice versa. It should be clarified by contrasting deeply about the use of NP in both languages to clarify the stigma among the Indonesian English learners that English is a difficult language to learn. The analyses of NP usage in the scientific writing is important to conduct because NP is frequently used in any kinds of scientific text. Different from common or popular language, a scientific writing or scientific books tend to use simple and effective sentences. This effort is carried out to avoid the use of compound or complex sentences. In this case, NP is used to convert the compound or complex sentences into simple sentence. In this case, the use of complex noun phrases is hard to avoid. On the contrary of the complex use of NP mostly in the scientific writing, comprehending the scientific writing for the students in university is a compulsory. Kaplan (2000:273) stated that based on the result of the research done by International Federation of

ISSN 2476-9312

Information Documentation concerning the information distribution has noted that approximately 85% of science and technology information had been written in English. It shows that understanding about the use of NPs in scientific writing is important to be able to explore and to dig out the science and technology. Furthermore the learners at university level are expected not only to comprehend the information containing in the scientific writing but also to write a scientific text. A scientific text about medical science entitled ‘Coronary Heart Disease’ is elected to be analyzed as the resource of research data by the reason that it contains various kinds of NP either simple or complex one. It makes the students difficult to translate the text into Indonesian language. The phenomenon of using complex NP in scientific writing makes the learners hard to comprehend the scientific text as well as to translate it because of the different patterns of constructing the NP in both languages. In English, there are several types of phrase. James, Carl (1998:156) said that, “English possesses some forms of phrase: Noun phrase/NP, Verb Phrase/VP, Adjective Phrase/AP, Adverb Phrase/AvP, and Prepositional Phrases/PP.” Meanwhile in Indonesian language phrase consists of: Frase nomina (Noun Phrase/NP), frase verbal (Verb Phrase/VP), frase adjectival (Adjective Phrase/AP), dan frase adverbial (Adverb Phrase/AvP) (Krisdalaksana, 1993:59). The patterns of each phrase are different depending on the type of the phrase. It shows that

76


both languages posses NP constructed by their own linguistics pattern. This research will be focused on the use of NP in English scientific writing translated into Indonesian language. A phrase is the un-predicative combinations of two words or more. It is called a phrase because the structure of the words does not contain subject and predicate as the characteristic of sentence element. In accordance with the structural linguistics, NP is a set of words containing a noun as a centre (a head) (Richard, Platt and Platt, 1993:251). It shows that NP means two words or more containing a noun as a centre (a head). A NP can be arranged gradually from the easiest to the hardest one composed by a set of rules which should be comprehended by the learners. To contrast the use of NP in English and Indonesian language, this research uses contrastive analysis. Contrastive analysis theory pioneered by Fries assumed that the errors faced by the second language are caused by the different elements between the native language and the target language (Fisiak, 1981:7). The objectives of conducting contrastive analysis between the native language and the target language for the teachers are to predict the learning problems that will be faced by the students particularly in the field of translation. Contrastive analysis is the systematic study of a pair of languages with a view to identify their structural differences and similarities. In this research, it is used to find out: how NP are used in scientific writing in English and Indonesian, what similarity of NP

ISSN 2476-9312

usage are contained in a scientific writing in both languages, and what differences of using NP are contained in a scientific writing. The research about contrastive analyses in NP has been conducted by Tobing, Roswita Lumban (2012) in her research entitled, “Konstruksi Determinan dalam Frase Nomina Bahasa Prancis dan Bahasa Indonesia.” The result of her research shows that french noun has gender (feminine/masculine) and numbers (singular/plural ). Gender and number in french have a rule of concordance that can affect the shape and meaning of a noun. In Indonesian language even though the noun has singular and plural gender concept the type and amount in Indonesian language does not appear explicitly. The form is only marked by certain semantics characteristics that can indicate gender, the singular and plural form. Based on the discussion, it can be conluded that translation involve process of interpreting or analysis of the source language (L1) and transfering the interpreted message in Target language (L2). One of the students errors in translation is in translating NP. METHOD OF THE RESEARCH The research was conducted at English Education Department of FKIP Siliwangi University Tasikmalaya. It was carried out in April to May 2015. It aims to find out: how NP are used in scientific writing in English and Indonesian, what similarity of NP usage are contained in a scientific writing in

77

ISSN 2476-9312


both languages, and what differences of using NP are contained in a scientific writing in English and Indonesian language. The research methodology uses content analysis by applying the procedures as follows: applying specifying research questions, selecting a sample of documents to analyze, developing a category, conducting content analysis, and interpreting the research result. (Geethakumari, 2000:2). The technique of analyzing the data uses contrastive analyses. James, Carl (1998:4) stated, “Contrastive analyses is a linguistics enterprise aimed at producing inverted two valued typologies (a contrastive analysis is always concern with a pair of languages) and founded on the assumption that languages can be compared.” In this research, contrastive analysis is used to contrast the use of NP in English and NP in Indonesian language containing in a scientific text. The data resource is an English scientific text entitled ‘Coronary Heart Disease’ and the result of its translation in Indonesian language. The research data are a set of NP stated in the text “Coronary Heart Disease” and in the text of ‘Penyakit Jantung Koroner’ as the result of translation. Contrastive analyses is used in this research to compare the grammatical elements of two languages both the similarities and the differences. It is used to contrast the linguistics features of two languages, in this case the use of NP in English and Indonesian language.

RESEARCH DISCUSSION

RESULT

AND

The result of analyses about the use of English NP in the text ‘Coronary Heart Disease’ shows that most of the type of NP used is pre-modifier adjective. It is called pre-modifier because it is placed before the head being modified, such as adjective, participle (verb-ing, and verb-ed) or noun. For example: the phrase optimal nutrition in the sentence, “Research of the last decade has shown that, for optimal nutrition we must not only get enough fat in our diet.” In this sentence, the head is ‘nutrition’ with pre- modifier an adjective that is ‘optimal.’ Based on the result of the analyses of the text ‘Coronary Heart Disease’, it is found that most of the NP used is pre-modifier, pre determiner or centre determiner. It is in line with the theory that, “It is called premodifier because the position is before the head, such as adjective, participle, and noun. Besides it is genitive and adverb. (Quirk et al., 1985:244). It shows that most of the English NP uses pre modifier that is expanding to the fore of the head. Based on the result of translation as the resource data, NP in Indonesian language generally uses post-expanding. Such as the phrase optimal nutrition if it is translated into Indonesian language, ‘gizi yang baik’. The head is ‘gizi’ followed by an adjective ‘baik’ as post modifier. Another sample of NP with pre-modifier, such as: ‘coronary heart disease’. In this phrase, the head, with two pre-modifiers, consists of an adjective ‘coronary’ (adjective) and a 78


noun ‘heart’. As stated in the sentence, “In many other countries, coronary heart disease is a minor problem.” The translation of the NP above is ‘penyakit jantung koroner’, such as in the sentence, “Di banyak Negara lainnya penyakit jantung koroner merupakan masalah yang jarang terjadi.” In this sentence, the head ‘penyakit’ is expanded to the back with a NP, ‘jantung koroner.’ This finding is in line with the theori stated by Hasan, Alwi that the head can be expanded to the right hand by adding post-modifier. The postexpand has various types, as follows: (1) A head can be followed by one or more other noun. The arrangement then is closed by a pronoun or by ‘ini’ or ‘itu’. But every noun only describes the previous noun. (2) The phrase consists of a head, and some post modifiers (3) A head can be followed by adjective, pronoun and demonstrative adjective ‘this’ or ‘that’. (4) If a noun is followed by an adjective, and there is no other modifier, it should use ‘yang’. (5) A head can be followed by a certain verb which can be separated by ‘yang’, ‘untuk’ or others. (6) A head can be expanded by an apposition that is a NP which the referent is the same as the noun being modified. (Hasan, Alwi, et al, 1998:24). It shows that in Indonesian language NP with modifier (a noun and adjective), the expanding is after the head. NP with single determiner demonstrative adjective is commonly used in English NP. The determiner is pre-determiner. Such as English NP ‘this disease’ in the sentence, “In some

ISSN 2476-9312

primitive areas, this disease is almost unknown.” This sentence uses single determiner that is ‘singular noun determiner’, with the head ‘disease’ and demonstrative adjective ‘this’. In Indonesian language, ‘this disease’ is translated into ‘penyakit ini’ as stated in the sentence, “Di beberapa daerah tertinggal, penyakit ini jarang ditemukan. The head is ‘penyakit’ with a single determiner ’ini’ is placed after the head. In the Text “Coronary Heart Disease”, it is also found some sentences containing prepositional phrase as premodifier such as ‘in many other countries’, in the sentence, “’In many other countries’, coronary heart disease is a minor problem.” The prepositional phrase is used as the pre-modifier. The head is ‘countries’ with the prepositional phrase as pre-modifier ‘in many other’. This sentence is translated into Indonesian language as, “Di banyak negara lainnya, penyakit jantung koroner merupakan masalah yang jarang ditemukan.” The NP is ‘Di banyak Negara lainnya’, the head is Negara with the prepositional phrase namely directive exocentric phrase or prepositional phrase ‘di’ and the quantitative adjective ‘banyak’. The prepositional phrase is placed in front of the head ‘negara’. A complex NP is commonly used in the text ‘Coronary heart Disease’. It is preceded by centre determiner or premodifier, such as in the phrase, ‘the second leading cause of death’. As stated in the sentence, “This is nearly twice the

79

ISSN 2476-9312


toll of all cancers, which is the second leading cause of death.” The

= centre determiner (article)

Second = pre-determiner as ordinal number is following the centre determiner and It is followed by pre-modifier. Leading = pre-modifier Cause = pre-modifier Death

= head

The head is ‘death’ with two predeterminers (‘the’, ‘second’) and two pre-modifiers (‘leading’, ‘cause’). The sentence can be translated into, “Jumlah kematian akibat penyakit jantung koroner hampir dua kali lipat jumlah kematian yang disebabkan oleh semua jenis kanker, yang menjadi penyebab kematian terbesar kedua.” In the Indonesian NP ‘yang menjadi penyebab kematian terbesar kedua’, there is no centre determiner. The head is ‘kematian’ preceded by some premodifiers, and then followed by postmodifiers. In Indonesian language, NP is constructed without the use of central determiner (‘the’) or singular determiner (‘a’). Such as in English NP, ‘a high-fat diet’ it is translated into ‘makanan dengan kadar lemak tinggi’. The result of analysis shows that generally there are a lot of similarities between NP in English grammar and in Indonesian language.The same as the construction of NP in English, NP in Indonesian language has various

construction patterns and arranged gradually by arranging it from the easiest one to the most complex. The constituent elements are also similar, those are noun as the centre (head), and a modifier consists of different words class, as premodifier or post-modifier. Pre modifier is usually in the form of number. (Hasan, Alwi, et al, 1998:24). Besides, difference of NPs in English and Indonesian grammar are as follows: In English, a NP is commonly expanded to the fore of the ‘head’, whether as pre-modifier or predeterminer. Meanwhile, in Indonesian language, the expand is commonly done at the back of the ‘head’. Demonstrative adjective, ‘this’ or ‘that’ in English, is used as singular pre-determiner whether in Indonesian language, demonstrative ‘ini’ and ‘itu’, is placed after the ‘head’ as post determiner. In Indonesian language, it is unrecognized plural demonstrative adjective as determiner (plural noun determiner), whether in English uses ‘these’ and ‘those’. An English NP is generally preceded by a centre determiner ‘the’; otherwise in Indonesian language, it is unknown. In English NP, it can use possessive adjective as pre-modifier, but in Indonesian language, the NP with possessive adjective is in a single word. CONCLUSION Based on the result of data analysis, generally there are a lot of similarities between NP in English grammar and in Indonesian language. Some of them are as follows: NP in both languages are arranged by the same constituent elements, such as: ‘head’ as the central noun, modifier- whether as pre-modifier 80

ISSN 2476-9312


or post modifier in the form of adjective or noun, determiner- whether as predeterminer or post-determiner, prepositional phrase whether as preprepositional phrase and postprepositional phrase, and the use of quantitative adjective as modifier. In both languages grammar, prepositional phrases, whether as preprepositional phrase or postprepositional phrase has the same pattern. The use of quantitative adjective, as pre-modifier in the NPs of both languages, has the same pattern. Complex NP, with a single quantitative determiner ‘enough’ and post modifier with prepositional phrases, has the same structure. The difference of NPs in English and Indonesian grammar are as follows: In English, a NP is commonly expanded to the fore of the ‘head’, whether as premodifier or pre-determiner. Meanwhile, in Indonesian language, the expand is commonly done at the back of the ‘head’. Demonstrative adjective, ‘this’ or ‘that’ in English, is used as singular pre-determiner whether in Indonesian language, demonstrative ‘ini’ and ‘itu’, is placed after the ‘head’ as post determiner. In Indonesian language, it is unrecognized plural demonstrative adjective as determiner (plural noun determiner), whether in English uses ‘these’ and ‘those’. A complex NP in English is generally preceded by a centre determiner ‘the’; on the other hand, in Indonesian language, it is unknown. In English NP, use possessive adjective as pre-modifier, but in Indonesian language, the NP with possessive adjective is converted into a single word.

Suggestion The next reseachers are suggested to analyse the other types of phrase to enrich the theoretical bases particularly in translation class. In teaching second and foreign language particularly in teaching translation, contrastive analysis between the native language and the target language should be conducted by the teacher or researcher to predict the learning problems that will be faced by the students. Therefore the teacher are suggested to analyse the different structural or gramatical elements to find out the typical features of such elements to ease the translation process. The teacher Other research related to translation should conducted further by observing or analysing the important aspects of translation as well as the teching strategy to teach translation in university level. FEW WORDS All praises are due to Allah, the most beneficent and the mercyful. By His blessing the researcher is able to finish this articles entitled, “Contrastive Analysis of Using Noun Phrase In English and Indonesian Language.” The researcher would like to convey his sincere thanks to the whole body of Siliwangi University, particularly to the Research Institution and Community Services (LPPM) for giving the chance to publish this scientific paper. Special thanks to the 81


assessor who has given his valuable constructive correction and input. May Allah pay for their kindness. The researcher expects that the paper would give beneficent for the readers and the writer himself. BIBLIOGRAPHY Alwi, Hasan, et al. 1998. Tata Bahasa Baku Bahasa Indonesia. Jakarta:Balai Pustaka, P.24 Fisiak, Jacek. 1981. Contrastive Linguistics and The Language Teacher. Oxford: Pergammon Press, P.7 Geethakumari, 2000. Qualitatif research, http://www.qualitativeresearch. net/ index.php/fqs/ article/view/1089/2385, P.2 James,Carl.1998. Contrastive Analysis, London:Longman Group Limited, P.156

ISSN 2476-9312

Kaplan, Robert. 2000. Why is English Global Language, Language in a Global Context. Singapore:SEAMEO RLC, P. 273 Krisdalaksana, Harimurti. 1998. Beberapa Prinsip Perpaduan Laksem dalam Bahasa Indonesia. Yogyakarta:Kanisius, P. 59 Quirk, Randolph, et al. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman. P.244 Richard, Jack and Platt and Platt, 1993. Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics. Singapore:Longman. P.251 Tobing, Roswita Lumban 2012, Konstruksi Determinan dalam Frase Nomina Bahasa Prancis dan Bahasa Indonesia dalam Jurnal Humaniora.Volume 24 No. 2 Juni 2012:221-230

82

Jurnal Siliwangi Vol. 1. No.1. Mei 2015

Seri Pendidikan

ISSN

ENHANCING STUDENTS’ GRAMMAR AND LEXICAL COMPETENCE THROUGH PEER EDITING (Penelitian Tindakan Kelas Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Semester IV Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan Universitas Siliwangi) Meningkatkan Kemampuan Tata Bahasa Dan Kosakata Siswa Melalui Teknik Peer Editing Yuyus Saputra Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan Penulis Korespondensi: E-mail: [email protected] Abstract; This research aimed at finding whether peer editing can enhance: (1) grammar and lexical competence in writing class of the first grade students of English Department of Siliwangi University whereas many students still have scores under minimum criteria accomplishment; and (2) to investigate the strengths and the weaknesses of peer editing applied in writing class whereas there are some technique used but they do not make any good solution. The method used in this research was classroom action research and was conducted in three cycles from April 5th until June 1st 2014.The procedures included identifying problem and planning, implementing action, observing, and reflecting. Data of the research was analysed through two kinds of analysing data. Quantitave data was analysed using descriptive statistics while qualitative one was analysed through the following steps, data reduction, data display, drawing conclusion and verification. The results of all cycles conducted as follows; In cycle I, the average score of grammar was 36 , lexical competence was 36.In cycle II it became 40 for grammar, 39 for lexical competence. In the cycle III it became 41 for grammar, 41 for lexical competence. Other findings show that the strenghts of peer editing when it is implemented in writing class, was the students gain independence and it is less threatening than teacher feedback. However, the weaknesses of the technique are, some students are too polite to correct their friends’ work, feel inferior to his/her peers, different level of their knowledge that causes different quality of each editing result such as making errors in correcting. Keywords: Peer Editing, Writing, Grammar and Lexical Competence Abstrak; Penelitian ini bertujuan apakah peer editing bisa meningkatkan: (1) tata bahasa dan kosa kata pada mata kuliah menulis di semester IV Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan Universitas Siliwangi, mengingat masih banyak siswa yang mendapatkan nilai di bawah KKM disebabkan lemahnya penguasaan siswa dalam dua indikator tersebut; dan (2) mengetahui kelebihan dan kekurangan dari teknik peer editing di dalam kelas menulis.Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah penelitian tindakan kelas (PTK) yang dilakukan dalam tiga putaran mulai tanggal 5 April sampai dengan tanggal 1 juni 2014 yang meliputi identifikasi masalah dan perencanaan, implementasi, observasi dan refleksi. Ada dua jenis data yang dikumpulkan yaitu kuantitatif dan kualitatif data. Kuantitatif data dianalisis dengan menggunakan statistics deskripsi sedangkan data kualitatif dianalisis dengan menggunakan data reduksi, data display, pengambilan kesimpulan dan verifikasi. 83


Seri Pendidikan

ISSN

Hasilnya adalah sebagai berikut; putaran pertama indikator tata bahasa mencapai nilai 36 dan kosakata juga mendapatkan 36. Pada putaran kedua nilai tata bahasa meningkat menjadi 40 dan kosakata 39. Pada putaran terakhir tata bahasa mencapai nilai 41 dan kosakata mencapai nilai 41. Di sini terlihat bahwa ada peningkatan di setiap putaran. Penemuan lainnya adalah peer editing ternyata membuat siswa lebih mandiri dan menumbuhkan persaingan yang sehat diantara mereka. Adapun kekurangannya, ada beberapa siswa yang merasa ragu-ragu dan takut menyakiti perasaan temannya ketika dia harus membetulkan hasil tulisan temannya. Perbedaan pengetahuan juga menimbulkan adanya kesalahan-kesalahan dalam menyunting. Kata Kunci: Peer Editing, Menulis, Tata Bahasa dan Kosakata INTRODUCTION writing activity is one of the characteristics of educated people and has an important role in daily life nowadays. Dealing with teaching and learning writing, there are still many problems and handicaps to face by both the learners and teachers though many models, methods, and techniques have been applied by the teacher to improve the quality of teaching and learning and solve the problem in it. Therefore, I conduct the research namely a classroom action research to cope with the problem occurring in his classroom. Writing is one of English skills that must be mastered. Writing which was one considered the domain of elite and well educated has become an essential tool for people of walks of life in today global community (Weigle, 2002:x). Having done the pre-research, it was obtained the students’ writing problems both in grammar and lexical resource. The data shows that grammar is 27, lexical resource is 30, coherence and cohesion is 37 and task achievement is 37 which means both grammar and lexical resource are still far from the criteria of success to achieve, 70. Regarding to grammar, there are some

errors which are made by the students especially in sentences and verb for example in present tense “ he very respect” and in present perfect tense “the darkness has hold the power.” The other one is part of speech, for example “after become a champion” and “Ainun is beautiful girl”. While another one lexical resource, the students’ errors in this indicator is mostly in spelling for example “beautifull” which should have been “beautiful” and the other one is diction for example “he very loves his mother.” Subsequently, I am trying to look for and apply an appropriate technique that can overcome the problem. The technique is peer editing or peer correction. Peer editing/reviewing is a learning strategy in which a student evaluates another student's work and provides feedback (University of Guelfh, 2013: 1). This technique is part of collaborative method. The technique tends to focus on the process of learning writing. Meanwhile the characteristics of this technique is: (1) identifying the features of good and poor writing in the work of others; (2) developing critical evaluation skills that the students can apply to their own writing; (3) building

84


Seri Pendidikan

constructive criticism (Barkley, 2005: 251). By the technique, the students are able to help each other to correct or edit their work. Also, there is no time for them to play and chat. They are not be busy chatting anymore, but they can concentrate on their work and be busy correcting and editing their friends work as well. RESEARCH METHOD The research was conducted in English Department Faculty of Education and Teacher’s training Siliwangi University which is situated in eastern Priangan of West java on jalanSiliwangi No. 24 Tasikmalaya. It is conducted on April 5th until June 1st 2014 at the first grade students of English Department Siliwangi University Tasikmalaya. The research instrument used test and observation. Test is used to know the scores of the students before the technique applied, during teaching and learning process and post test is used after the technique was applied. Meanwhile, observation is used to know the strength and the weaknesses of the technique and to know the class condition during implementation of the technique. Method of the research is a classroom action research that is conducted in three cycles and each cycle consists of four meetings that includes planning, acting, observing, and reflecting. Here is the elaboration of the method used.

ISSN

McNiff and Whitehead (2002:41) draws a modelas figure 1. He describes the steps in two cycles.

The figure portrays planning, acting, observing, and reflecting then the cycle continues, showing a change in thinking as well as a change in action. The change in thinking can also be called learning; openness to learning is a necessary condition for action research. Adapted from McNiff and Whitehead (2002:46), the procedure of each step can be explained as follows: 1. Planning The activities are: a. Pre-observation toward the teaching writing class at first semester in English department FKIP Siliwangi university b. Preparing the material, syllabus, making lesson plan, and designing the steps in conducting the action c. Preparing list of students’ name and scoring d. Preparing sheets for classroom observation e. Preparing test 2. Acting The teacher implemented the action of the teaching writing by using peer editing technique. In this step, the researcher implements the activities written in the lesson plan. 3. Observing In this step, the collaborator observed the students’ activities

85


Seri Pendidikan

while teaching and learning process occurred. The result of the observation was recorded on observation sheets as the data. The collaborator also supported the researcher by suggesting and advising some ways in teaching process. 4. Reflecting After carrying out the teaching process, the researcher recites the occurrence in classroom as the reflection of the action. She evaluates the process and the result of the implementation of peer editing technique in writing class. The data of this research are two categories, such as quantitative and qualitative data. In getting the quantitative data, the researcher carried out some activities. A test was conducted several times due to the action research that was done in some cycles. The test was done for a pre-test and post-test in every cycle. The test was scored based on the writing assessment enclosed in each lesson plan. However, another was collected by some techniques of qualitative data collection including: observation, document analysis, questionnaire, and interview. The data which were collected in the study consisting of the information gained in pre-research, the process and the result of action research implementation. The whole application of the data collection used in this study was summarized as follows: 1. Observation The act of observing recognizes that “live action” provides powerful

ISSN

insights for researchers. By doing observation, researcher can get document and reflect systematically upon classroom interaction, and events, as they actually occur rather than as we think they occur. 2. Document analysis Documents are really accessible source of data in action research. In some cases the data collection would include studying documentary evidence such as policies, minutes of meetings, teachers’ planning records and students’ work (Koshy, 2005:96). There is a wide range of documents that could be related to the research focus, including list of student’s English score, lesson plans, classroom materials, forms of reflection, and result of questionnaires. There are two kinds of data that were analysed, qualitative and quantitative data. According to Koshy (2005:113), there are some steps in analyzing qualitative data: 1. Data reduction Data reduction refers to the process of selecting, focusing, simplifying, abstracting and transforming the data that appear in the written up field notes or transcriptions. The action researcher is continually engaged in data reduction throughout the enquiry until the conclusions are presented. a. Data display Data displays can include different types of graphs, charts and networks. The purpose is to make organised information into an immediately available, accessible, compact form so that the analyst can see what is

86


happening and either draw conclusions or move on to the next step of analysis which the display suggests to be useful. b. Conclusion drawing and verification

In which: n: the number of students, and X and Y: the students’ score RESEARCH RESULT 1. Research Findings

In gathering the quantitative data, I used test. Both pre-test and post-test are aimed to know whether students writing ability reached the progress or not. Then, the researcher analyzed it using descriptive statistics. The scoring rubric was based on IELTS. The data from writing test was individual data, and the formulas are: X = Y=

ISSN

Seri Pendidikan

Based on my observation, the writing process of the students in English Department Siliwangi University where the writer teaches is still disorganized. The writer’s statement emerges after visiting one of the writing classes. The researcher found some situations in writing process which influence the learning process. It can be seen in the table below:

∑𝑋 𝑛

∑𝑌 𝑛

Table 1 Pre-test Summary Aspects

Grammar

Lexical Resource

Coherence and Cohesion

Task Achievement

27

30

37

37

To achieve successful learning, in writing class, it concerns on two aspects: the teaching learning writing process and the students’ performance and it is described in the table in the following table. Table 2 Criteria of Success, Data Source, and Instruments The Criteria of success

Data source

Instrument

The process:

1. The students’ statements about their attitude toward the implementation of peer editing in writing class 2. The students’ involvement in class activities 3. The students’ responses during the implementation of peer editing in writing class

Questionnaire

The score of the students’ writing test

Writing Test

1. All first grade students (100%) of Class A respond positively during the implementation of peer editing in writing class 2. All first grade students (100%) of Class A are motivated during the action The students’ writing achievement:

Observation sheet (including field note)

87


The Criteria of success

ISSN

Seri Pendidikan

Data source

Instrument

The average of all students is equal or above the minimum passing criterion, which is 70.

2.

Implementation of Research

In this part, findings of action research are explained consisting of three cycles having four stages: planning, implementing the action, observing, and reflecting. It is also clearly described each point of the cycle which was conducted by the researcher, and the result of test in each cycle resulted differently. a. Cycle 1 1) Planning the Action Some preparations were initially done by the researcher and his partner, observer, before implementing the action, as follows: lesson plans, instruments, observation sheets, and writing exercises for the students. In the lesson plan, the technique used is peer editing. It has a topics implemented in this cycle, descriptive text which is explained in detail in the lesson plan. The first meeting was about the explanation of peer editing and how to edit peer’s work. These are expected not only to make them thorough in checking each other works, but also to motivate students to be critical. 2) Implementing the Action Teaching writing using peer editing was implemented in Writing 2 class of English Department, FKIP, Siliwangi University Tasikmalaya into four meetings, April 10th, 17th, 24th, and

30th 2014. As mentioned in the previous stage in planning, the topic in meeting one and other three meetings are different. And the purpose of the lesson is that the students are able to write well. However, the teacher focused on both in grammar and lexical resource as stated in the formulation of problem. 3) Observing In this step the teacher is usually assisted by a collaborator, his partner, to observe the result of the implementation of peer-editing in writing calss. he collected two kinds of data, as mentioned in planning, namely numerical and verbal data. The numerical data were obtained from the students’ writing score and some parts of observation sheet that consist numerical data. The information showing the students’ attitude and the whole part of teaching learning activity during the implementation of peerediting represented in the verbal data. The average of writing in the pre-test which has been obtained is grammar 27 and Lexical competence 30, and compared to the result of post test in cycle I, there is an enhancement as it is described on the table below. Table 3 Cycle 1 Summary Aspects Grammar

Lexical Resource


Task Achievement

88


36

36

36

ISSN

Seri Pendidikan

36

4) Reflecting The criteria of success deals with two points: students’ writing achievements and teaching writing process. The result of post test shows that there are only five students reaching the criteria of success, 70. It means that these students have successfully passed the test. However, they need to keep having this score until the next cycle which the researcher will conduct. The data on the students’ final products were obtained from the writing test after giving the students’ treatment four meetings. It was described in part of observation that there were 26 students having score under the criteria of success. In other words, this problem has to be enhanced in order that those who reached low score can be better in the next test they face. b. Cycle 2 1) Planning the Action The instruments are also prepared consisting of some exercises and ended by writing test after this cycle has finished to be conducted. There are two major activities in the class. For one, the students are instructed to edit their friends’ works which had already been done at home. Having done it, some of them were invited to present their editing guided by the teacher to avoid miss editing. The observation sheets are also prepared in order to obtain a qualitative data from his collaborator, and it is given to collaborator every meeting. There are

two kinds of data obtained from this sheet, as follows, numerical and verbal data. 2) Implementing the Action Teaching writing using peer editing was implemented in Writing 2 class of English Department, FKIP, Siliwangi University Tasikmalaya into four meetings, May 8th, st, 10th, and 14th 2014. The topic in meeting one until the meeting four is still the same, about recount text, but what makes different in this cycle is related to the subtopic of the lesson. The purpose of the lesson is that the students are able to write well. 3) Observing There are two writing indicators developed in this research in accordance with IELTS writing band descriptor such as, grammar (including mechanic) and lexical competence. The average of writing in the pre-test which has been obtained is grammar 27 and lexical competence 30 and compared to the result of post test in cycle I, there is an enhancement in it; moreover, in this cycle the result has enhanced too. However, individually, there no students who had not reached its criteria, and it improves significantly compared to the previous cycle result. Table 4 Cycle 2 Summary Aspects Grammar

Lexical Resource


Task Achievement

40

39

38

39

89


ISSN

Seri Pendidikan

4) Reflecting The criteria of success deals with two points: students’ writing achievements and teaching writing process. The result of post test shows that there are 30 students, reaching the criteria of success, 70 which means that these students have successfully passed the test. Compared to the previous result of test, it has a better result in which there were 26 students passing the test at that time. However, they need to keep having this score until the next cycle which the researcher will conduct. c. Cycle 3 1) Planning the Action The instruments are also prepared consisting of some exercises and ended by writing test after this cycle has finished to be conducted. There are two major actitivities in the class similar to the previous cycle. The students are initially instructed to edit their friends’ works which had already been done at home. After they had finished doing this activity, some of them were invited to present their editing guided by the teacher to avoid miss editing. The observation sheets are also prepared in order to obtain a qualitative data from his collaborator, and it is given to collaborator every meeting. There are two kinds of data obtained from this sheet, as follows, numerical and verbal data. 2) Implementing the Action Teaching writing using peer editing was implemented in Writing IV class of English Department, FKIP, Siliwangi University Tasikmalaya into four meetings, May 22th, 24th, 5th, and

6th 2014. As mentioned in the previous stage in planning, the topic in meeting one until meeting two is similar, and the purpose of the lesson is that the students are able to write well. However, the teacher focused either in grammar or lexical resource as stated in the formulation of problem. 3) Observing There are two writing indicators developed in this research in accordance with IELTS writing band descriptor such as, grammar (including mechanic) and lexical resource. The average of writing in the pre-test which has been obtained is grammar 27 and lexical competence 30, and compared to the result of test in cycle 1 and 2, this last cycle has the most satisfying result; in other words, none of the students reached under the criteria of success described at the beginning of this chapter. The clear and more detail results will be drawn into the following paragraphs Table 5 Post Test Summary Aspects Grammar

Lexical Resource


Task Achievement

41

41

40

40

4) Reflecting The criteria of success deals with two points: students’ writing achievements and teaching writing process. The result of post test shows that there are all students, reaching the criteria of success, 70 which means that these students have successfully passed the post test.

90


Seri Pendidikan

The students’ improvement on each skill was gained through peer editing technique in writing process. Besides, the technique has changed and created a new atmosphere in teaching and learning in writing class that can be seen from the students’ perspective on it. However, there are still a challenge in it that the teacher had better choose students’ peer appropriately, there are some students who are reluctant to correct, because they are afraid of breaking their friendship. According to Asifa Sultana (2009: 13), Some students might feel reluctant to correct their friends’ errors because correcting friends’ errors might harm their relationship. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION The results of all cycles conducted have been enhancement based on indicators of writing focusing on grammar (including mechanics) and lexical resource. In cycle I, the average score of post-test was grammar 36 and lexical competence 36, in cycle II each became grammar 40 and lexical competence 39, and in the cycle III each became the highest, grammar 41 and lexical competence 41. Based on its enhancements score from first cycle to the last cycle, it can be concluded that peer editing in writing class can enhance students’ writing ablity, specifically

ISSN

their grammar and lexical resource. The students are able to write grammatically. In teaching English, teachers should be creative in making the activity done in the classroom. They can vary their teaching methods. One of them is peer editing because it can position the students at the center stage. They become more independent in joining the class. It is appropritate for all levels, but the point they need to highlight here is that the students skill have to be balance. BIBLIOGRAPHY Barkley, Elizabeth F, Cross K.Patricia & Claire Howell Major. 2005. Collaborative Learning Techniques, A Handbook for College Faculty. Jossey-Bass A Wiley Imprint, p.251 Koshy, Valsa. (2005). Action Research for Improving Practice, A Practical Guide. Paul Chapman Publishing, p.113

McNiff, Jean & Whitehead, Jack. 2002. Action Research, Principles and Practice. London and New York: Routledge Falmer. Taylor & Francis Group, p.41 - 46 University of Guelfh. (2013). How to Use Peer Editing in Your Class. Canada: Mclaughlin Library, p.1 Weigle, Sara Cushing. 2002. Assessing Writing. Cambridge University Press,,p.

91


Seri Pendidikan

ISSN

PEDOMAN PENULISAN NASKAH Jurnal Siliwangi diterbitkan oleh Lembaga Penelitian dan Pengabdian pada Masyarakat (LPPM) Universitas Siliwangi. Naskah yang dikirim ke jurnal Siliwangi harus asli dan bukan naskah yang sudah dibublikasikan di jurnal lain. Format Naskah Naskah ditulis dalam bahasa Indonesia dengan mengikuti pedoman penulisan bahasa Indonesia yang baik dan benar, atau bahasa Inggris dengan memenuhi tata aturan grammar yang baik dan benar. Naskah diketik menggunakan aplikasi Microsoft words. Naskah diketik dengan jarak antar baris 1,5 spasi untuk isi, sedangkan Abstrak dan Daftar Pustaka diketik dengan jarak antar baris 1 spasi. Jenis font menggunakan Times New Romans. Keterangan Tabel, Gambar, diposisikan di tengah (center) dengan jarak antar baris adalah 1 spasi. Ukuran kertas adalah A4, batas tiap halaman kiri-kanan dan atas-bawah masing-masing adalah 3 cm. Tata letak naskah ditulis dalam dua kolom dengan jumlah halaman naskah maksimal 10 halaman satu balik. Sistematika Judul bahasa Indonesia, judul bahasa Inggris, Penulis, Atribut, Abstrak, Pendahuluan, Bahan dan Metode atau Metodologi, Hasil dan Pembahasan, Kesimpulan dan Saran, Daftar Pustaka.Ucapan terimakasih. Judul: Ringkas, jelas dan menunjukkan adanya kajian/analisis terhadap masalah/topik yang dikaji, hurup kapital, ukuran font 12. Penulis : beri kode angka 1,2, 3 dst mengindikasikan afiliasi instansi penulis Atribut : Nama dan institusi penulis, alamat kontak (telp, faks, E-mail). Cantumkan afiliasi dan alamat institusi. Nama penulis korespondensi diberi tanda * dan E-mail korespondensi di bawah institusi. Abstrak: ditulis dalam bahasa Indonesia dan bahasa Inggris dengan jarak antar baris 1(satu) spasi; ditulis dalam satu paragraf (200-250) kata yang mencangkup konsep yang dikaji, problem yang terkait dan solusi alternatif (untuk ide-ide konseptual) atau masalah, metode dan hasil (untuk hasil penelitian). Kata Kunci: maksimum 6 (enam) kata, ditulis terpisah 1,5 spasi di bawah abstrak, kata/istilah/pengertian yang penting. Pendahuluan : Merupakan analisis situasi mengenai masalah yang dikaji, yang ditunjang oleh referensi relevan dan menjastifikasi mengapa masalah perlu ditelaah dan untuk apa. Bahan dan Metode/Metodologi: penjelesan singkat mengenai dimana lokasi penelitian,kapan penelitian dilaksanakan, bahan atau intrumen apa yang digunakan dan metode apa yang digunakan untuk melakukan penelitian atau memecahkan masalah. Hasil dan Pembahasan : Pemaparan hasil secara runut dan komprehensif yang mengarah pada pemecahan masalah yang dikaji/teliti. Kesimpulan dan Saran: kesimpulan ditulis singkat,jelas dan sistematik sesuai runtutan paparan dalam Hasil dan Pembahasan dan menjawab masalah yang diteliti/dikaji. Sementara, sasaran diberikan sesuai dengan apa yang menjadi masalah dalam penerapan metode dan hasil yang didapat. Daftar Pustaka: pustaka yang dikutip dari sumber terbaru minimal 5 tahun terakhir.

92

Jurnal Siliwangi Vol. 1. No.1. Nov ISSN Seri Pendidikan

Recommend Documents