THE EFFECTIVENESS OF USING INDIRECT FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS WRITING OF PROCEDURE TEXT

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF USING INDIRECT FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ WRITING OF PROCEDURE TEXT (A Quasi-Experimental Study at the Second Grade of SMP Ibadurrahman Cipondoh, Tangerang)

By: Rendy Saputra 109014000135

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH EDUCATION FACULTY OF TARBIYAH AND TEACHERS’ TRAINING SYARIF HIDAYATULLAH STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY JAKARTA 2016

ABSTRACT THE EFFECTIVENESS OF USING INDIRECT FEEBACK ON STUDENTS’ WRITING OF PROCEDURE TEXT A Quasi Experimental Study at the Second Grade of SMP Ibadurrahman Cipondoh, Tangerang. A Skripsi. The Department of English Education. The Faculty of Tarbiya and Teachers’ Training of State of Islamic University Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta, 2016. This study is intended to find the effectiveness of using indirect feedback on students’ writing skill of procedure text at the second grade of SMP Ibadurrahman Cipondoh Tangerang academic year 2015/2016. The samples of this study are the 25 students in VIII 1 and 25 Students in VIII 2. The achievement of this study refers to the student English test score. Based on the aim above, the researcher formed the study into Quasi Experimental research. The students’ writing skill of procedure text was obtained after the student run the English Test. The test was formulated from student English book class VIII. For the result, the researcher got it through pre-test and post-test. In the technique of data analysis, the researcher used normality, homogeneity, and TTest. Based on the analysis of the data, it found that there was a significant difference between students’ achievement in writing of procedure text in experimental class which were given Indirect Feedback technique and the control class which were not. It could be seen from student pre-test and post-test score. The pre-test mean score of student in experimental class was 60, and the post-test mean score of student in experimental class was 72.68. Meanwhile, the pretest score in control class was 58.2, and the post-test mean score in control class was 66.36. Keyword: Indirect Feedback, Writing, Procedure Text, Experimental Study.

RENDY SAPUTRA (PBI)

v

ABSTRAK KEEFEKTIFAN MENGGUNAKAN INDIRECT FEEDBACK PADA KEMAMPUAN WRITING SISWA DALAM TEKS PROSEDUR Sebuah Studi Kuasi Eksperimen di Kelas 2 SMP Ibadurrahman Cipondoh, Tangerang. Skripsi Jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Fakultas Ilmu Tarbiyah dan Keguruan Universitas Islam Negeri Syarif Hidayatullah, 2016. Penelitian ini di maksudkan untuk mengetahui keefektifan teknik indirect feedback dalam meningkatkan kemampuan menulis siswa pada teks prosedur terhadap siswa tingkat kedua di SMP Ibadurrahman Cipondoh Tangerang tahun ajaran 2015/2016. Sample pada penelitian ini adalah 25 murid di kelas 8-1 dan 25 murid di kelas 8-2. Hasil dari penelitian ini merujuk pada nilai tes bahasa inggris. Berdasarkan tujuan yang disebutkan diatas, peneliti melakukan penelitian ini kedalam bentuk penelitian kuasi eksperimen. Kemampuan menulis siswa di nilai setelah para siswa melaksanakan tes bahasa inggris. Tes tersebut diformulasi dari buku bahasa inggris kelas 8. Untuk hasilnya, peneliti mengambilnya melalui pretest dan post-test. Untuk teknik dalam menganalisa data, peneliti menggunakan tes normality, homogeinity, dan T-Test. Berdasarkan analisis data, ditemukan perbedaan yang signifikan di dalam kemampuan menulis antara siswa di dalam kelas eksperimen yang di ajar menggunakan teknik indirect feedback dan kelas kontrol yang tidak diajarkan dengan teknik tersebut. Hal ini dapat dilihat dari perolehan nilai pre-test dan posttest. Nilai mean pre-test di kelas eksperiman adalah 60 dan nilai post-testnya adalah 72.68. Sementara itu, nilai mean pre-test di kelas control adalah 58.2 dan nilai post-testnya 66.36. Kata kunci: Indirect Feedback, Menulis, Teks Prosedur, Penelitian Eksperimental

RENDY SAPUTRA (PBI)

vi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful. Praise is to Allah the Almighty, Lord of the world who has blessed and given the strength to the researcher in completing this skripsi. Sholawat and Salam are given upon our prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), who has taken us the way of truth and brought us the true light of life. Through this occasion, the researcher would like to express her greatest honor and her gratitude to the advisors, Drs. Syauki, M.Pd. and Desi Nahartini, M. Ed., who have spread their time for giving consultation, contribution, guidance, and patience to the researcher during completing this skripsi. From the researcher’s deepest heart, the researcher was so thankful and he realized that if there were no support and motivation from people around him, the researcher could not finish this skripsi. Therefore, he would like to express his gratitude and give his best appreciation to: 1. Prof. Dr. Ahmad Thib Raya, M.A., as the Dean of the Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teachers’ Training 2. Dr. Alek M.Pd., as the chairman of the Department of English Education, Zaharil Anasy, M.Hum., as the secretary of the Department of English Education, and Nida Husna, M.Pd., M.A.TESOL., as his academic advisor. 3. A very deep thank is presented to all of the lecturers and staffs of the Department of English Education. They have given the researcher the wonderful experiences in learning, and also precious knowledge. 4. Mr. Ahmad Sodri, S.HI., as the headmaster of SMP Ibadurrahman Cipondoh, Tangerang, Syarifuddin S.Pd., as the English teacher at SMP Ibadurrahman Tangerang, the all staffs of SMP Ibadurrahman, Cipondoh Tangerang, and the students of VII 1 and VII 2 for their help during the research.

vii

5. The researcher’s parent, Marwan, and Nilmayalti. This skripsi is dedicated to them who have given him the opportunity of an education from the best institutions and support the researcher in the lifespan, their moral support, affection, and guidance to their son. 6. The researcher’s family members, his beloved sister, Yossy Afrianty, Gitra Dewanty, and Putri Septiarani, his relatives who always give their support, happiness, and spirit in finishing his study. 7. All his friends in the Department of English Education academic year 2009 for their support and friendship. He also would like to thank Arif Rahman, Salahudin Al-Ayyubi, Hamdan Rijali, Zaki Habibillah, Alde Afriyos, Andre Marta, Aldi Wandra, Dio Andri Restu, Rais Al-Hadi Iskandar, Oka Putra Pratama, Agung Sdayu, as the best friends, and the group of skripsi advisory for their support, attention and motivation during finishing this skripsi. 8. To any other people whose names cannot be mentioned one by one for their contribution to the researcher during finishing his skripsi.

And may this skripsi can be useful to the reader, particularly to the researcher. Also, the researcher realized that this skripsi is far from being perfect. It is a pleasure for him to receive constructive criticism and suggestion from anyone who read his skripsi. Jakarta,

July 2016

The Researcher

viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS COVER ..................................................................................................

i

PAGE OF APPROVAL ........................................................................

ii

ENDORSEMENT SHEET ...................................................................

iii

SURAT PERNYATAAN KARYA SENDIRI .........................................

iv

ABSTRACT ...........................................................................................

v

ABSTRAK ...............................................................................................

vi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ....................................................................

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................

ix

LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................

xii

LIST OF APPENDICES ......................................................................

xiii

CHAPTER I.

INTRODUCTION.....................................................

1

A. Background of Study..............................................

1

B. Identification of Problem ........................................

3

C. Limitation of Study.................................................

3

D. Formulation of the Problem ...................................

3

E. Purpose of Study ……………………… ................

4

F. Significance of Study…………………….. ............

4

CHAPTER II. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ...........................

5

A. Writing ....................................................................

5

1. The General Concept of Writing .........................

5

2. The Purposes of Writing ......................................

6

3. The Process of Writing ........................................

8

4. The Problems of Writing .....................................

9

B. Procedure Text........................................................

10

1. Definition of Procedure Text ..............................

10

2. Language Features of Procedure Text ................

11

3. Constructing Procedure Text ..............................

11

4. Examples of Procedure Text...............................

12

ix

C. Feedback .................................................................

14

1. Definition of Feedback .......................................

14

2. Types of Feedback ..............................................

16

a. Direct Feedback..............................................

16

b. Indirect Feedback ...........................................

18

D. Previous Studies………………………………….

19

CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .............................

21

A. Place and time of Research……… ........................ .

21

B. Design of Research……… ..................................... .

21

C. Population and Sample of the Research ................. .

22

D. Instrument and Technique of Data Collection……

22

E. Technique of Data Analysis....................................

23

1. Normality Test ..................................................

24

2. Homogeneity Test……………………………..

24

3. Hypothesis Test………………………………. .

25

CHAPTER IV. RESEARCH FINDINGS ..........................................

26

A. Description of Data ...............................................

26

1. The Data of Experiment Class ............................

26

2. The Data of Control Class ..................................

28

B. The Analysis of Data ...............................................

30

1. Normality Test .....................................................

30

2. Homogeneity Test................................................

36

3. Hypothesis Test ...................................................

37

4. Distribution of Frequency Data ..........................

43

C. The Result of Data Analysis and Discussion .........

45

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION ....................

47

A. Conclusion.............................................................

47

B. Suggestion .............................................................

47

CHAPTER V.

x

REFERENCES ......................................................................................

49

APPENDICES .......................................................................................

51

xi

LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1 Example of Writing Correction Using Direct Feedback….. Table 3.1 Analytical Scoring Rubric ……………………….……….. Table 4.1 Students’ Score of Experiment Class ................................... Table 4.2 Students’ Score of Controlled Class ..................................... Table 4.3 Calculation of Pre-test Normality in Experiment Class ....... Table 4.4 Calculation of Post-test Normality in Experiment Class ..... Table 4.5 Calculation of Pre-test Normality in Controlled Class......... Table 4.6 Calculation of Post-test Normality in Controlled Class ....... Table 4.7 Gained Score Experiment Class ………………………….. Table 4.8 Gained Score Controlled Class ……………………….…...

xii

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1

Lesson Planning ..............................................................

Appendix 2

Soal Pre-Test ...................................................................

Appendix 3

Soal Post-Test ..................................................................

Appendix 4

Materi Ajar ......................................................................

Appendix 5

Student’s Work ................................................................

Appendix 6

Pengesahan Proposal Skripsi..........................................

Appendix 7

Surat Bimbingan Skripsi..................................................

Appendix 8

Surat Permohonan Izin Penelitian ..................................

xiii

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

A. Background of Study In Indonesia, English is recommended as a subject tested in national exam (UN). Then, English is taught to children since they are in elementary school. It can make the children familiar with English in earlier stage for their preparation to take the next formal education in junior high school and senior high school. The English teaching and learning process in Indonesian Junior High School (SMP) is aimed to enable the students to master the functional level, such as communicate in both oral and written form. In a written form, students are demanded to be able to understand and produce some short functional texts, such as descriptive, procedure, narrative, recount, report and the writing that related to their daily life. Harmer stated that students need to know how to write letters, how to put written reports together, how to reply to advertisement – and increasingly, how to write using electronic media.1 Writing is productive skill in which the students produce the language as the result of the English learning process by doing many practices as learning experience. As Richard and Renandya stated that there is no doubt that writing is the most difficult skill for L2 learners to master. The difficulty lies not only in generating and organizing ideas, but also in translating these ideas into readable text.2 The students have to pay attention on planning and organizing as well as spelling, punctuation, word choice, etc.

1

Jeremy Harmer, How to Teach English, (Harlow: Pearson Education, 1998), p. 79. Jack C. Richard and Willy A. Renandya, Methodology in language Teaching (London: Cambridge University Press, 2002), p. 303. 2

1

2

In the teaching learning process of English language, students often face some difficulties in writing which is making their scores down, as the researcher interviewed one of the English teachers in a junior high school in South Tangerang. She said that the role of text book is not enough to help students in writing a text. In the end of writing, students often conduct improper proofreading by them own selves or peer check by his mates which is as same as their skills. The English teachers help becomes an importance aspect in assisting students’ challenge in good writing, especially in revising. The role of teacher in guiding students writing skill in the class is so significant in order to make the students have a good feedback. As Haines stated that the purpose of giving feedback to students is to help them learn. They need feedback on whatever they are doing, saying or writing to help them understand whether it is right or wrong conforms to the expected standards, is acceptable or exemplary.3 Indirect error feedback is provided when the teacher indicates the location of the error on the paper without providing the correct form. 4 Feedback on the students’ writing will make them confident to improve their writing skill by revising their writing. It is one of the solutions which concerns to give the information about students’ performance. Indirect feedback can be provided as one of the ways the feedback is given to the students, including some correction symbols and comments, within which the students can revise them later. Unfortunately, there is a problem whether the students can understand the feedback or not. Hence, it is important to make sure that the students understand the feedback appropriately, so that they can correct their mistakes by themselves. However, to anticipate the students’ confusion about the feedback, the teacher has to give an opportunity for the students to clarify the feedback in their writing paper by holding a conference in the writing 3

Catherine Haines, Assessing Students’ Written work, (London: Routledge, 2004), p. 19. Icy Lee, Error Correction in L2 Secondary writing Classrooms: The case of Hong Kong, Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 2004, p. 286. 4

3

class. Therefore, based on the background, the researcher tries to answer the questions of: -

Is there any effectiveness of indirect feedback on students’ writing of procedure text at the first grade students of SMP Plus Ibadurrahman?

B. Identification of Problem Based on the background of the study, the identified problems are: 1. Students generally had a problem with English complex vocabularies. 2. The differences between Indonesian and English grammar confused many students. 3. Students had a problem to get idea to start writing. 4. Students only cheat from other’s work to avoid mistakes. 5. The teachers had not yet found strategies to increase students’ writing skill. 6. The teacher was difficult to give students feedback when assessing their work.

C. Limitation of Problem To avoid misunderstanding and to clarify the problem, it is important to make the limitation of the study. There are several types of writing in English learning such as procedure, descriptive, narrative, recount, etc., but because of the limited time, the researcher focused the study on the effectiveness of using indirect feedback on students’ writing of procedure text that will be conducted for first grade students at SMP Plus Ibadurrahman Cipondoh, Tangerang.

D. Formulation of Problem Based on the background, the writer would like to formulate the problem as follow:

4

-

Is there any effectiveness of indirect feedback on students’ writing of procedure text at the first grade students of SMP Plus Ibadurrahman?

E. Purpose of Study The purposes of the study are formulated to answer the research questions. The purpose is to know the empirical evidence about the effectiveness of indirect feedback on students’ writing of procedure text of the first grade students at SMP Plus Ibadurrahman.

F. Significance of Study Some significances of this research, not only theoretically but also practically, go to: 1. The writer By using this method perhaps the writer will be able to help the teachers and the students understand benefits and weakness of indirect feedback. It also can be a reference for further research, especially a study about indirect feedback. And next time, the writer can choose this method as one of solution to teach English writing. 2. Teachers Teacher can evaluate clearly what the result of teaching writing English by giving indirect feedback. This study can be given to the teacher as variation in teaching English writing. 3. Students This study can be a preference to increase students’ interest and motivation in learning English writing.

CHAPTER II THEORITICAL FRAMEWORK A. Writing 1. The General Concept of Writing Writing is one of the most significant cultural accomplishments of human being. It allows us to record and convey information and stories beyond the immediate moment.4 Writing allows us to communicate at a distance, either at a distant place or at distant time. There are a lot of definitions stated by experts; Raymond states one of them, he defined that writing is more than a medium of communication.5 It means that writing is not just the way to communicate to each other but also as means of ideas and emotional expression. Writing makes word permanent, and thus expands the collective memory of human beings from the relatively small store that we can remember and pass on orally to the infinite capacity of a modern library.6 Writing is also a way of finding out what people know and what people need to learn.7 Spoken words disappear as soon as they are spoken, but writing freezes their thoughts, makes them visible and permanent so people can examine and test their quality.8 It can be seen that writing is a way of remembering because it makes word permanent and writing also is a good way to communicate because when writing, the 4

Henry Rogers. Writing Systems: A Linguistic Approach. (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing: 2005), p. 1. 5 James C Raymond. Writing is Unnatural Act. (New York: The Murray Printing Company: 1980), p. 2. 6 Ibid. 7 Ibid. 8 Ibid.

5

6

writer really thinks about what he or she want to be communicated by writing it. That is a way of keeping themselves honest because writing is a way of arguing with them.9 Writing is a process of discovering and shaping meaning.10 Experienced writers rarely gather and understand immediately all the information they need.11 From the definitions above, writing needs a process which must be surpassed by the writer. And writing is tools of human beings to share information or stories to others because someone can read it by several times. Langan stated that writing is not only talking about the post, but also the process of writing that would make a lot of writing that makes people interested. The essential writing will need a long process from the planning, drafting, writing, and revising.12 This process can be done by anyone, especially students. The stages of writing process is to help students in learning writing, so if they have already followed the writing process they will be able to acquire this skill easily and make a good writing. 2. The Purposes of Writing When someone writes something, he or she has purposes for writing. Each writer has his own purpose, in accordance with the text of which was planning to write. In addition, based on Competency StandardStandar Kompetensi (SK) and Basic Competency- Kompetensi Dasar 9

Ibid. Rise Axelrod and Charles R Cooper, The St. Martin’s Guide to Writing, (New York: St. Martin‟s Press, Inc., 1983), p. 4. 10

11 12

Ibid. John Langan, English Skill: Eight Edition, (New York: McGraw Hill Higher Education,

2006), p.20.

7

(KD), the second year students are expected to be able to express meaningful ideas in term of functional text and simple short essay in the form of descriptive and recount to interact with people in their nearest environment.13 Braine and May stated four common purposes in writing, there are; writing to inform, writing to explain, writing to persuade, and writing to amuse others.14 First, writing to inform, purposed educate the readers about a topic of which we have some knowledge.15 Writing that provides interesting details and facts to hold an audience‟s attention. It means that writers share interest knowledge to readers knows. Second, writing to explain is to describe the topic which was not clearly becomes more understandable, by using examples or other facts.16 In other words, a writer takes what is unclear and makes it clear. Then, writing to persuade is more demanding and more ambitious than many other types of writing.17 It means that writers convince the readers to accept the ideas. The last, writing to amuse other means someone who uses language and established forms well to express his or her point of view.18 It is writing to entertain and give the reader something to enjoy. When people are going to write, they may think that the purpose of writing a paper is to complete the assignment or to get a good grade.19 However, these purposes do not tell someone what to do in their paper. They might try asking themselves brief questions to increase the flow of 13

Depdiknas, Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan (School Based Curriculum) Standar Isi Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Inggris SMP dan MTS , (Jakarta: 2006) 14 George Braine and Claire May, Writing from Sources: A Guide for ESL Students, (California: Mayfield, 1996), p. 141. 15 Ibid. 16 Ibid. 17 Ibid. 18 Ibid. 19 Ibid., p. 23.

8

purposes: What do I want to tell the readers? Why am I writing this? What do I hope to accomplish? Who will read this?20 3. The Process of Writing Writing process is learning how to write by writing. This current emphasis in writing instruction focuses on the process of creating writing rather than the end product. The basic premise of process writing is that all children, regardless of age, can write. The initial focus is on creating quality content and learning the genres of writing. Langan stated that writing is a process that involves the following steps: a. Discovering a point-often through prewriting b. Developing solid support for the point-often through more prewriting c. Organizing the supporting material and writing it out in a first draft d. Revising and then editing carefully to ensure an effective, errorfree paper. Learning this sequence will give you confidence when the time comes to write. You will know that you can use prewriting as a way to think on paper and to gradually discover just what ideas you want to develop. You will understand that there are four clear cut goals-unity, support, organization, and error-free sentences to aim for in your writing. You will realize that you can use revision to rework a paper until it is a strong and effective piece of writing. And you will be able to edit a paper so that your sentences are clear and error-free.21 According to Betty, Prewriting, the first stage of the writing process, is a time of discovery you unearth ideas.22 In other words, prewriting is any activity designed to help students generate or organize their ideas before writing. The prewriting methods discussed thus far are designed to get you started: to generate ideas, to recall facts and anecdotes, to realize

20

Ibid. John Langan. loc. cit. 22 Betty Mattix Dietsch, Reasoning & Writing Well, (Ohio: McGraw Hill, 2003), p. 25. 21

9

patterns.23 However, these activities are preliminary; before beginning to write a draft; writer needs to establish a structure for the essay. It also helps the writer to generate ideas and allows him/her to see the connections among those ideas. Second step is drafting. Drafting is making draft of the goal to state main idea clearly and develop the content with plenty of specific details.24 In addition, an essay gets stronger as the drafting process continues. As the essay evolves and develops, the writer also gets more and more invested in the process and its outcome.25 No one is able to write a perfect first draft, even people who tend to write very strong first draft essays realize the need for revision and redrafting. Then, revising is rewriting a paper, building upon what has already been done, in order to make it stronger.26 The last step is editing. Editing is the stage where the students are engaged in tidying up their texts as they prepare the final draft for evaluation by checking a paper for mistakes in grammar, punctuation, usage, and spelling.27 4. The Problem of Writing Writing is not easy. Raymond stated that an experienced writer will often labor over a single paragraph for more than an hour-not counting the thought and research that went on before the actual writing.28 Therefore, many problems faced by teachers and students. The first problem is “the less proficient writer” problem.29 Less proficient writers jump the process of writing by skip the prewriting strategies to generate ideas. Students might take much time to write 23

Donald Pharr and Santi Buscemi, Writing Today: contexts and options for the real worldBrief Edition, (New York, McGraw Hill companies, Inc, 2005), p. 40. 24 Ibid., p. 43. 25 Ibid. 26 John Langan, op. cit., p. 29. 27 Jack C. Richards and Willy A. Renandya, Methodology in Language Teaching (An Anthology of Current Practice), (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), p. 319. 28 James C Raymond. op. cit., p. 7. 29 Jerry G. Gebhard, Teaching English as a Foreign or second Language (2 nd Edition), (Michigan: The University of Michigan, 2006), p. 223.

10

down their ideas. The suggestion for this problem is teacher should teach less proficient writers the writing process. Teachers also need to give full attention to them, to show them how to plan a piece of writing through prewriting activities.30 The second problem is “I can‟t write English” problem.31 Students usually give up toward writing and believe that they cannot write. The solution is teachers should apply the writing process to the students. Teachers can lead students through prewriting, drafting, and revising activities. By doing this, students can see that writing is indeed a process of development that takes time and effort.32 The last problem is “teacher response” problem. Writing teachers often spend many hours reading and marking students‟ papers.33 The suggestion for this problem is teachers can work with students on developing their written work through student-to-student conferences.34

B. Procedure Text 1. Definition of Procedure Text We use many kinds of text in daily life. Usually we read a text how to operate new things, how to prepare or make something, how to act in some circumstances like school, company, and a community, and how to get to some places. Those kinds of text are called procedure text. Procedure enables people to do things that are new to them or to make sure they do things in the correct order, and include all that needs to be done.35 It can be concluded that procedure text presents steps to do something, making something, or going somewhere.

30

Ibid., p. 224. Ibid., p. 225. 32 Ibid. 33 Ibid., p. 226. 34 Ibid. 35 www.kbs.co.ukpdfEB17.pdf‎, taken on December 3, 2013 at 06.57 a.m. 31

11

2. Language Features of Procedure Text Procedure texts can be recognized based on some language features below36: 3. The use of technical language 4. Sentences that begin with verbs and are stated as commands 5. The use of time words or numbers that tell the order for doing the procedure 6. The use of adverbs to tell how the action should be done. 3. Constructing Procedure Text There are some steps in constructing procedure text. First, on the first sentence, the introduction and aim of the procedure is being presented. Then, list of materials needed are also described. Last, the steps to do the activity are given. A procedure usually consists of37: a. The goal of the activity. This is where you tell your reader what he/she is going to achieve. b. The materials needed. It could be ingredients, tools, and equipment. c. Steps to achieve the goal. This is the main part of the procedure. d. Conclusion. We may wish to include a conclusion According to Text Types in English, the steps for constructing a procedure text are38: a. An introductory statement that gives the aim or goal b. A list of material that will be needed c. A sequence of steps in the order they need to be done.

36

Mark Anderson and Cathy Anderson, op. cit., p. 52. www.kbs.co.ukpdfEB17.pdf‎, taken on December 3, 2013 at 06.57 a.m. 38 Mark Anderson and Cathy Anderson, loc. cit. 37

12

3. Examples of Procedure Text Example of procedure text is such a. Procedure text without picture: 39

How to Install a Computer Program Safely 1. Place the floppy disk or CD-ROM containing the program in the appropriate drive! 2. Note that most of the time, a window will immediately appear asking if you want to install program. Click install! 3. If a window does not appear, open the start menu and select Setting then Control Panel! 4. Double-click Add/Remove Programs! 5. In the top part of the window that appears, click install!

b. Procedure text with picture:40

39 40

Entin Sutinah, Get Along with English, (Bandung: Erlangga, 2010), p. 48. www.wikihow.com

13

How to make Your Game Consoles Last Longer There several points to make your game consoles last longer. First, be careful with your games. Never leave a disc inside the console when you are not using it, and always put a disc back in its case. Next, keep your console away from any magnetic forces if it has an internal hard disk or any storage disk at all. This can harm the contents of the disk and corrupt game saves and other files that are important. After that, avoid exposing the console to direct sunlight, or intense heat. Just keep your console at a room temperature. Then, be careful when handling the console, you must not drop it, as doing so will damage the console parts. After that, do not touch the lens. The lens is what reads the discs you insert, and touching it will stop it from reading them properly. Then, do not play the console to long that make it overheat. Next, unplug all cables that are connected before cleaning the console. Refer to the console‟s instruction manual to find out how to clean it. Finally, store it properly. If you are not going to use your console for a very long time, unplug it and pack it away in its box.

14

C. Feedback 1. Definition of Feedback Feedback is therefore, as argued by Hyland, an inseparable, integral and central element in language learning generally and in learning to write particularly. It is the input and means that provides writers with a set of information such as the reader‟s needs and expectations and whether students‟ writings have met such expectations and more importantly, it offers an additional layer of scaffolding to extend writing skills, promote accuracy and clear ideas, and develop an understanding of written genres.41 Hyland and Hyland consider feedback is a key element of the scaffolding provided by the teacher to build learner confidence and the literacy resources to participate in target communities.42 Feedback occurs in a context of a particular kind (institutional, pedagogical); it appears

between

participants

of

particular

identities

(teacher/peer/learner); it is delivered by a particular medium (peer, conference, written comments); and it is designed to accomplish certain educational, pedagogical and social purposes. Hyland argues that the written feedback that teachers provide on their students‟ writing should be “more than marks on a page”43. Sommers stated three main purposes for which teachers provide feedback on writing: a. To inform writers as to whether their written products have conveyed their intended meanings;

41

Ken Hyland, Second language Writing, (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003), p.

207. 42

K. Hyland and F. Hyland, State of the art article: Feedback on second language students‟ writing. Language Teaching, 39, p.77. 43 Ken Hyland, op.cit, p. 184.

15

b. To give the student writer a sense of audience (their interests and expectations) and make them ameliorate their writings accordingly. c. To offer students an impetus for revision, for without comments from a critical reader, writers will feel no need to revise thoroughly if they ever think about revision.44 Sommers who thinks that such comments constitute a challenge for teachers of writing since they have to address a number of issues such as, motivating students to revise and rewrite their work using the feedback, targeting areas of failure in students‟ learning, and making students understand and incorporate teachers‟ suggestions in their writings: The challenge we face as teachers is to develop comments which will provide inherent reason for students to revise; it is a sense of revision as discovery, as a process of beginning again, as starting out new, that our students have not learned. We need to show our students how to seek, in the possibility of revision, the dissonances of discovery- to show them through our comments why new choices would positively change their texts, and thus, to show them the potential for development implicit in their writing.45 Assuming that the aspects of language actually taught in classroom are the ones teachers focus on when commenting on students‟ writing, Hyland introduces a list of the main foci of teacher written feedback. The six main foci of feedback adopted from him are: focus on language structures, focus on text functions, and focus on creative expression, focus on writing process, focus on content, and focus on genre46. However, Harmer distinguishes only two foci which provide the basis for a distinction between two types of written commentary: responding and

44

Nancy Sommers, Responding to student writing. College Composition and Communication, 33, 1982, p. 156. 45 Nancy Sommers, loc. cit. 46 Ken Hyland, loc. cit.

16

correcting47. Responding emphasizes the idea that the main concern of feedback is not primarily the accuracy of students‟ performance, but it is the content and design of their writing. Correcting, by contrast, is limited to an indication of what students fail to perform in different language aspects such as, grammar, syntax, concord, etc. Hyland points out that for any feedback type to be effective, attention to what individual students want from and the use they make of it must be paid. He, thus explains that, some students want praise, others see it as condescending; some want a response to ideas, others demand to have all their errors marked; some use teacher commentary effectively, others ignore it altogether.48 2. Types of Feedback Feedback consists of some types. One of them is teacher‟s feedback/correction. Feedback from teacher on the students‟ writing could play a vital role especially in teaching process. In this case, teacher recognizes that teachers‟ feedback is essential element in helping students improve, and an essential part of the teaching process. It indicates that under teacher‟s feedback, students will know the appropriate of the language feature for their composition, how their composition should be arranged and their composition will be better. There are two kinds of teacher‟s feedback; they are direct and indirect feedback. a. Direct Feedback Direct feedback is a technique of correcting students‟ error by giving explicit written feedback. While, indirect feedback is when the teacher/tutor alerts students to error using general comments, but gives

47

Jeremy Harmer, How to Teach Writing (Edinburgh Gate: Pearson Education Limited, Longman, 2004), p. 108. 48 Ken Hyland, op. cit, p. 180.

17

students the opportunity to fix errors themselves49. Lee (2004) defines Direct feedback is provided when the correct form is written on student‟s paper whereas indirect feedback is provided if the teacher indicates the location of the error indirectly on the paper by underlining, highlighting or circling, or indirectly by indicating in the margins that there is an error on that line but without providing the correct form.50 This type of correction takes a variety of forms such as a) cross-outs: when the teacher omits any wrong addition from students‟ original texts, b) rewrites: when the teacher rewrites a word, phrase or a sentence, providing the correct spelling, structure or form on students‟ original texts and c) additions: when the teacher adds any missing items on students‟ original texts (e.g. prefix, suffix, article, preposition, word, etc). Table 2.1: Example of Writing Correction Using Direct Feedback Technique

Direct feedback is usually given by teachers, upon noticing a grammatical mistake, by providing the correct answer or the expected response above or near the linguistic or grammatical error. Direct corrective feedback has the advantage that it provides learners with explicit guidance about how to correct their errors. This is clearly 49

Ferris, Treatment of Error in Second Language Student Writing, (Ann Arbour: University of Michigan Press. 2002), p.19. 50 Icy Lee, Error Correction in L2 Secondary writing Classrooms: The case of Hong Kong, Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 2004, p. 286.

18

desirable if learners do not know what the correct form is (i.e. are not capable of self-correcting the error).51 b. Indirect Feedback Indirect corrective feedback involves indicating that the student has made an error without actually correcting it.52 In other words, indirect corrective feedback emphasizes the role of students in understanding and correcting their errors rather than being provided with the corrections.

Indirect feedback is applied by underlining

students' writing errors so that students understand that there is a problem that should be 'fixed.' Teachers may use lines, circles or highlighting to indicate the location of errors. They also need to decide how explicit indirect feedback should be based on the goals they want to achieve by providing feedback. Harmer stated that in order to avoid an overabundance of red ink, many teachers use correction symbols. These also have the advantage of encouraging students to think about what the mistake is, so that they can correct it themselves.53 One of the main concerns with correction codes is that they are limited and cannot address all types of errors in students' writing. Despite of the advantages of the use of symbols, students need to be trained to understand what the symbols mean. They may not be able to recall the meaning of symbols while revising their work, which may make it difficult to re-draft adequately. To make indirect feedback more effective, Lee state that indirect feedback can be done by a symbol representing a specific kind of error (T=verb tense, Sp=spelling) and to reduce student confusion, teachers can consistently use a standard set of symbols or markings to 51

Rod Ellis, A typology of written corrective feedback types, ELT Journal, 63(2), 2009, p. 99. Ibid, p. 100. 53 Jeremy Harmer, op. cit, p. 111. 52

19

indicate place and type of error and train the students in what kinds of corrections to make based on each symbol. Furthermore, teachers should familiarize students with the system so they will not be surprised when new symbols are occurred.

D. Previous Study Lalande‟s (1982) study, which involved 60 German foreign language learners, compared two different treatments of error correction: direct correction in a traditional manner by providing correct forms to be incorporated by students into their written text, and indirect correction in the form of “guided learning strategies” by providing students with systematic marking using an error correction code. Students were asked to interpret these codes, correct their mistakes, and rewrite the entire essay upon corrective feedback. Results of his study showed that students receiving indirect corrective feedback made significantly greater gains as compared to students who received direct corrective feedback from the teacher.54 Chandler‟s (2003) study involving 31 ESL university undergraduate students shows that indirect feedback with underlining on students‟ errors is a preferred alternative to direct correction in a multiple-draft setting as indirect feedback engages the students in the correction process and engages them more cognitively during the process. It is important to note that, in her study where students were required to make corrections, both direct feedback and indirect feedback with underlining of errors resulted in significant increase in accuracy and fluency in subsequent writing over the semester. An additional finding of Chandler‟s study is that if students did not revise their writing

54

Lalande, J.F., Reducing Composition Errors: An Experiment, Modern Language Journal, 1982, p. 66.

20

based on teacher feedback about their errors, getting their errors marked was comparable to receiving no feedback as their correctness did not increase.55 Similarly, the study conducted by Ferris (2006), involving 92 ESL students in the United States receiving several types of direct feedback and indirect feedback, shows that there was a strong relationship between teacher‟s indirect feedback and successful student revisions on the subsequent drafts of their essays.56

55

Chandler, J., The Efficacy of Various Kinds of Error Feedback for Improvement in the Accuracy and Fluency of L2 student writing, Journal of Second Language Writing, 2003, p. 12. 56 Ferris, D., (2006), „Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on short- and long-term effects of written error correction‟ in K. Hyland and F. Hyland (eds.), Feedback in Second Language Writing: Contexts and issues, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY This chapter talks about the research methodology used in this study. It presents place and time of the research, design of the research, population and samples of the research, instrument and technique of data collection, and technique of data analysis.

A. Place and Time of the Research The researcher conducted the research at SMP Plus Ibadurrahman Cipondoh which is located on Jl. KH Hasyim Asy’ari, Cipondoh, Tangerang, Banten. The research was held on February 23 to March 8, 2016, by making it into 6 meetings consist of Pre-Test at the first meeting, then treatments at the second until the fifth meeting, and finished by PostTest at the last meeting.

B. Design of The Research The researcher uses quantitative method in this research. According to Creswell, quantitative research is divided into three types; experimental, correlation and survey.57 In detail, the researcher uses quasiexperimental design which allowed the experimental research to be conducted without form any new group. 58 This is suitable with the condition met by researcher in the school that prohibits him to create any new class for his research. The researcher implements indirect feedback technique in experiment class and not implements it in the control class. This study focuses on giving treatment to the experimental class by applying indirect feedback in teaching writing, and observes the result through student test. 57

John W. Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research – International Edition, (Boston: Pearson, 2002), p. 12. 58 Ibid. p. 309.

21

22

C. Population and Sample of The Research The population of the research is the first grade of SMP Plus Ibadurrahman Cipondoh. Total students of first grade at SMP Plus Ibadurrahman Cipondoh are 220 students. However, only 50 students were engaged in the research. Due to the rule of quasi experimental study, the writer selected two groups as samples of the research; experiment class and controlled class. In sampling, technique, the writer chose purposive sampling. In purposive sampling, the sample is chosen because of particular purpose. Things or people are chosen because the researcher thinks that things or people have information needed in the research.59 The researcher chose VIII 1 as the experiment class because based on teacher explanation he said that this class is lower than VIII 2, when VIII 2 as controlled class because is paralleled with other. Moreover, both of these classes are more accessible for the research. Therefore the writer chose VIII 1 and VIII 2 as the subject for the research. Both classes are consisted of 25 students.

D. Instrument and Technique of Data Collection The instrument of this research is a writing test which is scored based on a rubric by J. B. Heaton that consists of five aspects: -

13-30 (Content)

-

7-20 (Organization)

-

7-20 (Vocabulary)

-

5-25 (Language Use)

-

5 (Mechanics) Furthermore, the researcher uses the instrument to collect the data in

pretest and posttest. The researcher will give pre-test to both experimental class and control class with similar questions form before teaching and

59

Home.unpar.ac.id/hasan/SAMPLING

23

learning process, then give post-test at the end of teaching and learning process

E. The Technique of Data Analysis The researcher used T-test to find out the differences between the students’ scores which were taken from pre-test and post-test in experiment class and control class. Before calculating the hypothesis testing, the researcher first calculated students’ writing score based on Analytical Scoring Rubric, and then measured normality and homogeneity test. Analytical scoring rubric is adapted from J. B. Heaton. There are five aspects in the analytical scoring rubric, i.e., content, organization, vocabulary, language use, and mechanics. The table below is the analytical scoring rubric: Table 3.1: Analytical Scoring Rubric60 Content 30-27

EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD: knowledgeable - substantive - etc.

26-22

GOOD TO AVERAGE: some knowledge of subject- adequate range - etc.

21-17

FAIR TO POOR: limited knowledge of subject - little

16-13

VERY POOR: does not show knowledge of subject – non substantive - etc.

substance etc.

Organization 20-18

EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD: fluent expression - ideas clearly stated – etc.

17-14

GOOD TO AVERAGE: somewhat choppy -loosely

organized

but main ideas stand out - etc. 13-10

FAIR TO POOR: non-fluent - ideas confused or disconnected - etc.

9-7

VERY POOR: does not communicate - no organization - etc.

60

J. B. Heaton, Writing English Language Tests, (London: Longman,1988), p. 146.

24

Vocabulary 20-18

EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD: sophisticated range - effective word/idiom choice and usage - etc.

17-14

GOOD TO AVERAGE: adequate range - occasional errors of word/idiom form, choice, usage but meaning not obscured.

13-10

FAIR TO POOR: limited range - frequent errors of word/idiom form, choice, usage - etc.

9-7

VERY POOR: essentially translation

_ - little knowledge of English

vocabulary. Language Use 25-22

EXCELLENTTO VERY GOOD: effective complex constructions etc.

21-19

GOOD TO AVERAGE: effective but simple constructions - etc.

17-11

FAIR TO POOR: major problems in simple/complex constructions - etc.

10-5

VERY POOR: virtually no mastery of sentence construction rules - etc.

Mechanics 5

EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD: demonstrates mastery of conventions - etc.

4

GOOD TO AVERAGE: occasional errors of spelling, punctuation etc.

3

FAIR TO POOR: frequent errors of spelling punctuation, capitalization - etc.

2

VERY POOR: no mastery of conventions - dominated by errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing - etc

1. Normality Test Normality test is done towards two classes; those are experimental class and control class. Normality test is used to know whether the data from both sample groups which is examined comes from the population of normally distributed or not.

2. Homogeneity Test After normality test gives indication that data is distributed normally, so it needs to do homogeneity test. Homogeneity Test is used to know the similarity of the two conditions or population.

25

3. Hypothesis Test For The Hypothesis Test, the researcher uses T-Test to find out whether there is the differences between two variables in this study. After gaining the t-value, the researcher compares T-value and T-table. The formula of t-test is

to =

M1

: Mean of post-test of Experiment Class

M2

: Mean of post-test of Controlled Class

SE M1 : Standard Error of Experiment Class SE M2 : Standard Error of Controlled Class Testing hypothesis uses criteria with significance degree 0.05. The conclusion is gained as follows: If t-value < t-table, the Ha is accepted. If t-value > t-table, the Ha is rejected or Ho is accepted. Ha:

There is an effectiveness of Indirect Feedback technique on the students’ achievement in writing of procedure text.

Ho:

There is no effectiveness of Indirect Feedback technique on the students’ achievement in writing of procedure text.

CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDINGS This chapter talks about the findings of the research. The chapter also presents the description of the data, the analysis of the data, and the result of data analysis and discussion.

A. The Description of Data The researcher got data from students’ score in pre-test and post-test after conducting the research. The data will be described into two points as the data of experimental class and the data of controlled class.

1. The Data of Experimental Class The researcher makes a table that shows the scores of students, collected in both pre-test and post-test, from the lowest to the highest.

Table 4.1 Students’ Scores from Experimental Class

No

Students (X)

Pre-test

Post-Test

Gained Score

1.

1

52

72

20

2.

2

60

64

4

3.

3

56

68

12

4.

4

56

60

4

5.

5

60

68

8

6.

6

48

68

20

7.

7

68

72

4

26

27

8.

8

48

60

12

9.

9

64

76

12

10

10

64

76

12

11

11

70

84

14

12

12

48

76

28

13

13

60

84

24

14

14

56

72

16

15

15

64

80

16

16

16

70

88

18

17

17

64

72

8

18

18

48

52

4

19

19

65

68

3

20

20

65

84

19

21

21

64

68

4

22

22

60

65

5

23

23

70

88

18

24

24

72

84

12

25

25

48

68

20

Σ

1500

1817

317

X

60

72.68

12.68

The table presents the scores of students in the experiment class included pre-test and post-test scores. It also mentions the result for minimum score, maximum score, and total score of both pre-test and posttest. The minimum score of pre-test is 48, the maximum score is 72, and

28

the total score is 1500. The results for post-test are 52 as the minimum, 88 as the maximum, and 1817 as the total score. Besides that, the total score of gained score is 317, the mean of pre-test is 60, the mean of post-test is 72.68, and the mean of gained score is 12.68.

2. The Data of Controlled Class The table of controlled class also mentions the result of students’ score in both pre-test and post-test. It shows the scores gained by students. Table 4.2 Students’ Scores from Controlled Class Gained

No

Students (X)

Pre-test

Post-Test

1.

1

60

72

12

2.

2

65

70

5

3.

3

64

68

4

4.

4

60

64

4

5.

5

60

70

10

6.

6

57

70

13

7.

7

65

73

8

8.

8

60

68

8

9.

9

60

67

7

10

10

43

50

7

11

11

70

76

6

12

12

72

75

3

13

13

50

66

16

14

14

64

76

12

Score

29

15

15

60

72

12

16

16

60

70

10

17

17

52

57

5

18

18

62

68

6

19

19

51

66

15

20

20

59

65

6

21

21

52

59

7

22

22

52

55

3

23

23

48

57

9

24

24

50

61

11

25

25

59

64

5

Σ

1455

1659

204

X

58.2

66.36

8.16

The table presents the scores of students in the control class included pre-test and post-test scores. It also mentions the result for minimum score, maximum score, and total score of both pre-test and post-test. The minimum score of pre-test is 43, the maximum score is 72, and the total score is 1455. The results for post-test are 50 as the minimum, 76 as the maximum, and 1659 as the total score. Besides that, the total score of gained score is 204, the mean of pre-test is 58.2, the mean of post-test is 66.36, and the mean of gained score is 8.16.

30

B. The Analysis of Data After collecting and describing data, the researcher analyzed the data and presents the result in three points; normality test, homogeneity test, and hypothesis test.

1. Normality Test The normality test is aimed to know whether the data is normally distributed or not. To do the normality test, the researcher uses Liliefors. After finishing the normality test, he got two kinds of value; Lmax and Ltable. The both values are going to be used to see the normality of the data. The researcher uses this criterion to see the normality of data: H1: L > Ltable H0: L ≤ Ltable Note: H1 = Data is not normally distributed H0 = Data is normally distributed a. The Normality Test of Experiment Class Table 4.3 Calculation of Pre-test Normality in Experiment Class No.

X

f

fX

fX2

p=f/n

∑P

z = (XiX)/s

ф

T=ф-∑p

1

48

5

240

11520

0.2000

0.2000

-1.56454

0.0594

0.1406

2

52

1

52

2704

0.0400

0.2400

-1.04302

0.1492

0.0908

3

56

3

168

9408

0.1200

0.3600

-0.52151

0.3015

0.0585

4 5 6 7 8 9 Total

60 64 65 68 70 72

4 5 2 1 3 1

240 320 130 68 210 72

14400 20480 8450 4624 14700 5184

0.1600 0.2000 0.0800 0.0400 0.1200 0.0400

0.5200 0.7200 0.8000 0.8400 0.9600 1.0000

0 0.521512 0.65189 1.043025 1.303781 1.564537

0.5 0.6982 0.7422 0.8508 0.9032 0.9406

0.02 0.0218 0.0578 0.0108 0.0568 0.0594

∑X=

∑F=

∑fX=

∑fX =

2

31

555

S= S2= rata2(x)= Lmax= Ltable=

25

1500

91470

7.67 58.8 60 0.0908 0.173

∑

∑ [ ]

[

]

√

The Liliefors shows that the significant degree of 0.05 in L(0.05)(25) = 0.173 H1: L > 0.173 H0: L ≤ 0.173 In the table 4.3, the Lmax value is 0.0908. Therefore, H0 is accepted because the result shows that Lmax is lower than Ltable (0.1406< 0.173). It means that the data in experiment class pre-test is normally distributed.

32

Table 4.4 Calculation of Post-test Normality in Experiment Class No.

X

f

fX

fX2

p=f/n

∑P

z = (XiX)/s

ф

T=ф-∑p

1

52

1

52

2704

0.04

0.04

-2.26506

0.0119

0.0281

2

60

2

120

7200

0.08

0.12

-1.38883

0.0838

0.0362

3

64

1

64

4096

0.04

0.16

-0.95071

0.1711

0.0111

4 5 6 7 8 9 10

65 68 72 76 80 84 88

1 6 4 3 1 4 2

65 408 288 228 80 336 176

4225 27744 20736 17328 6400 28224 15488

0.04 0.24 0.16 0.12 0.04 0.16 0.08

0.2 0.44 0.6 0.72 0.76 0.92 1

-0.84118 -0.5126 -0.07448 0.363636 0.801752 1.239869 1.677985

0.2005 0.305 0.4721 0.6406 0.7881 0.8907 0.9525

0.0005 0.135 0.1279 0.0794 0.0281 0.0293 0.0475

∑F=

∑fX=

∑fX =

Total

∑X= 709

S= S2= rata2(x)= Lmax= Ltable=

25

2

1817

134145

9.13 83.42 72.68 0.135 0.173 ∑

∑ [ ]

[

√

]

33

The Liliefors shows that the significant degree of 0.05 in L(0.05)(25) = 0.173 H1 : L > 0.173 H0 : L ≤ 0.173 In the table 4.4, the Lmax value is 0.135. Therefore, H0 is accepted because the result shows that Lmax is lower than Ltable (0.135< 0.173). It means that the data in experiment class post-test is normally distributed. b. The Normality Test of Control Class Table 4.5 Calculation of Pre-test Normality in Control Class No.

X

f

fX

fX2

p=f/n

∑P

z = (XiX)/s

ф

T=ф-∑p

1

43

1

43

1849

0.04

0.04

-2.22548

0.0102

0.0298

2

48

1

48

2304

0.04

0.08

-1.49341

0.0681

0.0119

3

50

2

100

5000

0.08

0.16

-1.20059

0.1151

0.0449

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

51 52 57 59 60 62 64 65 70 72

1 3 1 2 7 1 2 2 1 1

51 156 57 118 420 62 128 130 70 72

2601 8112 3249 6962 25200 3844 8192 8450 4900 5184

0.04 0.12 0.04 0.08 0.28 0.04 0.08 0.08 0.04 0.04

0.2 0.32 0.36 0.44 0.72 0.76 0.84 0.92 0.96 1

-1.05417 -0.90776 -0.1757 0.11713 0.263543 0.556369 0.849195 0.995608 1.727672 2.020498

0.1469 0.1841 0.4325 0.5438 0.6026 0.7088 0.7995 0.8389 0.9573 0.9783

0.0531 0.1359 0.0725 0.1038 0.1174 0.0512 0.0405 0.0811 0.0027 0.0217

∑F=

∑fX=

∑fX =

Total

∑X= 753

S= S2= rata2(x)= Lmax=

6.83 46.6 58.2 0.1359

25

1455

2

85847

34

Ltable=

0.173 ∑

∑ [ ]

[

]

√

The Liliefors shows that the significant degree of 0.05 in L(0.05)(25) = 0.173 H1 : L > 0.173 H0 : L ≤ 0.173 In the table 4.5, the Lmax value is 0.1359. Therefore, H0 is accepted because the result shows that Lmax is lower than Ltable (0.1359< 0.173). It means that the data in control class pre-test is normally distributed.

Table 4.6 Calculation of Post-test Normality in Control Class No.

X

f

fX

fX2

p=f/n

∑P

z = (XiX)/s

ф

T=ф-∑p

1

50

1

50

2500

0.04

0.04

-2.46757

0.0069

0.0331

2

55

1

55

3025

0.04

0.08

-1.71342

0.0436

0.0364

3

57

2

114

6498

0.08

0.16

-1.41176

0.0793

0.0807

4

59

1

59

3481

0.04

0.2

-1.11011

0.1335

0.0665

35

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Total

61 64 65 66 67 68 70 72 73 75 76 ∑X= 978

S= S2= rata2(x)= Lmax= Ttable=

1 2 1 2 1 3 4 2 1 1 2

61 128 65 132 67 204 280 144 73 75 152

3721 8192 4225 8712 4489 13872 19600 10368 5329 5625 11552

∑F=

∑fX=

∑fX =

25

0.04 0.08 0.04 0.08 0.04 0.12 0.16 0.08 0.04 0.04 0.08

0.24 0.32 0.36 0.44 0.48 0.6 0.76 0.84 0.88 0.92 1

-0.80845 -0.35596 -0.20513 -0.0543 0.096531 0.24736 0.54902 0.850679 1.001508 1.303167 1.453997

0.2119 0.3632 0.4207 0.4801 0.5359 0.5948 0.7054 0.8023 0.8413 0.9032 0.9265

2

1659

111189

6.63 43.91 66.36 0.0807 0.173 ∑

∑ [ ]

[

]

√

The Liliefors shows that the significant degree of 0.05 in L(0.05)(25) = 0.173

0.0281 0.0432 0.0607 0.0401 0.0559 0.0052 0.0546 0.0377 0.0387 0.0168 0.0735

36

H1 : L > 0.173 H0 : L ≤ 0.173 In the table 4.6, the Lmax value is 0.0807. Therefore, H0 is accepted because the result shows that Lmax is lower than Ltable (0.0807< 0.173). It means that the data in control class post-test is normally distributed.

2. Homogeneity Test In order to know the homogeneity of the data, the researcher did the homogeneity test. To do the homogeneity test, he analyzed the score of pre-test and post-test collected in both experimental and control classes using Fisher-test. Hypothesis: -

H0 : F < Ft

-

H1 : F > Ft

Notes: -

H0: The experimental class is homogenous to the control class

-

H1: The experimental class is not homogenous to the control class In addition, the F value is calculated with the following formula: = Here are the results of the calculation of F-test both in terms of pre-

test and post-test. First, the homogeneity test of pre-test data is presented as follows: Because the values of

are already obtained from the

calculations provided in Table 4.3 and Table 4.5 (i.e. in this case,

37

), the calculation of F-test for pre-test data can be directly conducted. The F-test calculation is as follows: = 1.2618 ≈ 1.26 With

=n-1=25-1=24, and

=n-1=25-1=24, the Ft value at

95% level of significance (α=0.05) obtained is 1.98 (see Appendix). Due to the fact that F < Ft (0.05), (24), (24) = (1.26 <1.98), H0 is accepted. Therefore, it can be concluded that the pretest data of experimental class and control class is considered homogenous. Second, the homogeneity test of the post data is presented as follows: Based on Table 4.4 and Table 4.6, the values for

and

obtained respectively are 83.42 and 43.91. The calculation of F-test for the post data is as follows: = 1.8998 ≈ 1.90 Likewise, with

=n-1=25-1=24, and

=n-1= 25-1=24, the Ft

value at 95% level of significance (α=0.05) obtained is 1.98 (see Appendix). Due to the fact that F < Ft (0.05), (24), (24) = (1.90 <1.98), H0 is accepted. Therefore, it can be interpreted that the post-test data of the experimental class and control class is considered homogenous as well.

3. Hypothesis Test After knowing that the data is normally distributed and homogenous, then he did the hypothesis test. The hypothesis test is used to see whether there is a significant difference between experiment and control class. The writer used t-test to do the hypothesis test. The formula of t-test is as follows

38

Note: ∑



M1

: mean of variable X, the formula is:



M2

: mean of variable Y, the formula is:



SEM1: standard error mean of variable X, the formula is:

∑

√



SEM2: standard error mean of variable Y, the formula is:

√



SD1

: standard of deviation score of variable X, the formula is: ∑ √



SD2

: standard of deviation score of variable Y, the formula is: ∑ √

39

That is the main formula of t-test to do the hypothesis test. Before using the formula, the researcher also used some calculation procedure, such as: a. Determining mean of variable X ∑

b. Determining mean of variable Y ∑

c. Determining standard of deviation score of variable X

√

∑

√

√ √

40

d. Determining standard of deviation score of variable Y √

∑

√ √ √

e. Determining standard error mean of variable X

√ √

√

f. Determining standard error mean of variable Y

√ √

√

41

g. Determining standard error of different mean of variable X and mean of variable Y √ √ √ √

h. Determining t0 (t-test)

i. Determining degree of freedom (

)

(

)

The value of df 48 at the degree of significance 5% (t-table) is 2.011. j. The testing of hypothesis The statistical hypothesis of the research is:

42

H0: Using indirect feedback is not effective in teaching writing of procedure text than without using it. Ha: Using indirect feedback is effective in teaching writing of procedure text than without using it. The criterion used to analyze the hypothesis test is, such as: 1. If the t-test (t0) > t-table (tt) in the significance degree of 0.05, H0 (null hypothesis) is rejected. 2. If the t-test (t0) < t-table (tt) in the significance degree of 0.05, H0 (null hypothesis) is accepted.

43

4. Distribution of Frequency Data a. The Distribution Frequency of Experiment Class Highest score = 28 Lowest score = 3 Distance (rentangan), r = Highest score – Lowest score

= 28 – 3 = 25 Interval class (kelas interval), k = 1 + 3.3 log n = 1 + 3.3 log 25 = 1 + 3.3 (1.398) = 1 + 4.613 = 5.613 = 5 Interval, i =

i=

=5

Condition (syarat) = k.i ≥ r + 1 = 5 x 5 ≥ 25 + 1 = 25 ≤ 26 (declined) Therefore, i = 5 + 1 = 6 Table 4.7 Gained Score Experiment Class No 1 2 3 4 5 ∑

fr =

x 100%

Gained Score 3–8 9 – 14 15 – 20 21 – 26 27 – 32 –

Frequency 9 6 8 1 1 25

fr(%) 36 24 32 4 4 100%

44

b. The Distribution Frequency of Control Class Highest score = 16 Lowest score = 3 Distance (rentangan), r = Highest score – Lowest score

= 16 – 3 = 13 Interval class (kelas interval), k = 1 + 3.3 log n = 1 + 3.3 log 25 = 1 + 3.3 (1.398) = 1 + 4.613 = 5.613 = 5 Interval, i =

i=

= 2.6

Condition (syarat) = k.i ≥ r + 1 = 5 x 2.6 ≥ 13 + 1 = 13 ≤ 14 (declined) Therefore, i = 2.6 + 1 = 3.6 = 4 Table 4.8 Gained Score Controlled Class No 1 2 3 4 5 ∑

fr =

x 100%

Gained Score 3–6 7 – 10 11 - 14 15 - 18 19 - 22 –

Frequency 10 8 5 2 0 25

fr(%) 40 32 20 8 0 100%

45

C. The Result of Data Analysis and Discussion According to the calculation above, the researcher concludes that the data is normally distributed and homogenous. The normality of the data can be seen at the t-table (0.173) is higher from the L-max score of experiment class pre-test (0.0908), experiment class post-test (0.135), controlled class pre-test (0.1359), and controlled class post-test (0.0807). Also, the homogeneity of experiment and controlled class pre-test can be seen from F < F α (n1-1, n2-1) or F < Ft (0.05), (24), (24) = (1.26 <1.98) or while the homogeneity of experiment and controlled class post-test can be seen from F < F α (n1-1, n2-1) or F < Ft (0.05), (24), (24) = (1.90 <1.98). The calculation also shows the result of hypothesis test. The researcher used t-test formula in the significance degree (α) of 5% to do the test. Then, he got the result that t-test (6.75) > t-table (2.011). It means that the t-test is higher than t-table. It states that the alternative hypothesis (Ha) is accepted and the null hypothesis (H0) is rejected. Teaching learning process in the first grade is purposed to make students write procedure text well organized and well grammatically. The data had shown that students could write better structure and grammatically using indirect feedback. By this consideration, this technique can be applied in English language teaching. This is in line with Ellis’ research results; she said that indirect corrective feedback involves indicating that the student has made an error without actually correcting it.61 It is also in line with Harmer’s statement that in order to avoid an overabundance of red ink, many teachers use correction symbols. These also have the advantage of encouraging students to think about what the mistake is, so that they can correct it themselves.62 This final result, answer the question whether indirect feedback effective or not in teaching 61

Rod Ellis, A typology of written corrective feedback types, ELT Journal, 63(2), 2009, p.

100. 62

Jeremy Harmer, How to Teach Writing (Edinburgh Gate: Pearson Education Limited, Longman, 2004), p. 111.

46

writing skill of procedure text. There is significant effect in indirect feedback to teach writing procedure text at second grade students of SMP Plus Ibadurrahman Tangerang.

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION This chapter talks about the conclusion of the research. The chapter also identifies some suggestions resulted from the research.

A. Conclusion This research was held by using quasi-experimental design which is aimed to find out whether indirect feedback is effective to improve student’s writing achievement. Based on the statistical calculation at the previous chapter, there is a significant effectiveness in teaching writing of procedure text by using indirect feedback technique. The result shows that the value of t-test (6,75) is higher than ttable (2,011) at the significance level 5%, it means that the Null Hypothesis (H0) is rejected and the Alternative Hypothesis (Ha) is accepted. Finally, indirect feedback technique is effective to improve student’s achievement in writing of procedure text at the second grade of SMP Ibadurrahman Cipondoh, Tangerang.

B. Suggestion The researcher wants to give the following suggestions based on the conclusion above: 1. The teachers should employ various teaching methods and techniques in order to make teaching and learning process more fascinating, pleasurable and effective for students. 2. The students have to practice more in writing in order to earn a good writing. 3. The teachers might apply indirect feedback as one of effective techniques to help students increase their writing achievement, besides their long-term memory, and self-learning.

47

48

4. Teachers or other researchers might conduct indirect feedback for other kinds of writing, classes, and any education levels to enhance their students’ writing achievement. The researcher hopes the suggestions can give positive contribution for improving teaching and learning process especially in writing.

REFERENCES

Betty Mattix Dietsch, Reasoning & Writing Well, Ohio: McGraw Hill, 2003. Catherine Haines, Assessing Students’ Written work, London: Routledge, 2004. Chandler, J., The Efficacy of Various Kinds of Error Feedback for Improvement in the Accuracy and Fluency of L2 student writing, Journal of Second Language Writing, 2003. Depdiknas, Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan (School Based Curriculum) Standar Isi Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Inggris SMP dan MTS , (Jakarta: 2006. Donald Pharr and Santi Buscemi, Writing Today: contexts and options for the real world-Brief Edition, New York: McGraw Hill companies, Inc, 2005. Entin Sutinah, Get Along with English, .Bandung: Erlangga, 2010. Ferris, ‘Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on shortand long-term effects of written error correction’ in K. Hyland and F. Hyland (eds.), Feedback in Second Language Writing: Contexts and issues, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. Ferris, Treatment of Error in Second Language Student Writing, (Ann Arbour: University of Michigan Press. 2002. George Braine and Claire May, Writing from Sources: A Guide for ESL Students, California: Mayfield, 1996. Henry Rogers. Writing Systems: A Linguistic Approach. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing: 2005 Home.unpar.ac.id/hasan/SAMPLING Icy Lee, Error Correction in L2 Secondary writing Classrooms: The case of Hong Kong, Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 2004. Jack C. Richard and Willy A. Renandya, Methodology in language Teaching (London: Cambridge University Press, 2002.

49

50

James C Raymond. Writing is Unnatural Act. New York: The Murray Printing Company: 1980. J. B. Heaton, Writing English Language Tests, London: Longman,1988 Jeremy Harmer, How to Teach English, Harlow: Pearson Education, 1998. Jeremy Harmer, How to Teach Writing (Edinburgh Gate: Pearson Education Limited, Longman, 2004. Jerry G. Gebhard, Teaching English as a Foreign or second Language (2nd Edition), Michigan: The University of Michigan, 2006. John Langan, English Skill: Eight Edition, (New York: McGraw Hill Higher Education, 2006. John W. Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research – International Edition, Boston: Pearson, 2002. Ken Hyland, Second language Writing, (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003. K. Hyland and F. Hyland, State of the art article: Feedback on second language students’ writing. Language Teaching. Lalande, J.F., Reducing Composition Errors: An Experiment, Modern Language Journal, 1982 Nancy Sommers, Responding to student writing. College Composition and Communication, 33, 1982. Rise Axelrod and Charles R Cooper, The St. Martin’s Guide to Writing, New York: St. Martin’s Press, Inc., 1983. Rod Ellis, A typology of written corrective feedback types, ELT Journal, 63(2), 2009. www.kbs.co.ukpdfEB17.pdf‎‎ www.wikihow.com

APPENDICES

51

RENCANA PELAKSANAAN PEMBELAJARAN (RPP)

Nama Sekolah Mata Pelajaran Kelas Standar Kompetensi

Kompetensi Dasar

Jenis teks Judul Aspek/Skill Alokasi Waktu

: SMP Ibadurrahman : Bahasa Inggris : 8.2 (Kelas Kontrol) : 12. Mengungkapkan makna dalam teks tulis fungsional dan esei pendek sangat sederhana berbentuk descriptive dan procedure untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan terdekat : 12.2 (Menulis) Mengungkapkan makna dan langkah retorika dalam esei pendek sangat sederhana dengan menggunakan ragam bahasa tulis secara akurat, lancar dan berterima untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan terdekat dalam teks berbentuk descriptive dan procedure : Procedure Text : Playing Cassette : Menulis : 2x40 menit

1. Tujuan Pembelajaran (Indikator) Pada akhir pembelajaran, siswa dapat: a. Melengkapi teks Procedure b. Menyusun teks dan Menulis teks berbentuk Procedure  Karakter siswa yang diharapkan :

Dapat dipercaya (Trustworthines) Rasa hormat dan perhatian ( respect ) Tekun (diligence) Tanggung jawab (responsibility) Berani (courage)

2. Materi Pembelajaran: Terlampir 3. Metode Pembelajaran: Direct Feedback 4. Langkah-langkah Kegiatan a. Kegiatan Pendahuluan Apersepsi :  Menyapa siswa dengan mengucapkan selamat pagi  Menanyakan kabar siswa  Tanya jawab singkat tentang hari ini (saat pengajaran berlangsung)

Motivasi :  Menjelaskan pentingnya materi yang akan dipelari berikut kompetensi yang harus dikuasi siswa b. Kegiatan Inti Eksplorasi Dalam kegiatan eksplorasi, guru:  Menjelaskan materi tentang Procedure Text  Memberikan contoh Procedure Text  Memberikan sesi tanya jawab yang bersumber dari procedure text tersebut  Mengambil kesimpulan tentang tujuan pembelajaran procedure text Elaborasi Dalam kegiatan elaborasi, guru:  Membiasakan peserta didik membaca dan menulis yang beragam melalui tugas-tugas tertentu yang bermakna;  Memberi kesempatan untuk berpikir, menganalisis, menyelesaikan masalah, dan bertindak tanpa rasa takut;  Memfasilitasi peserta didik berkompetisi secara sehat untuk meningkatkan prestasi belajar;  Memfasilitasi peserta didik melakukan kegiatan yang menumbuhkan kebanggaan dan rasa percaya diri peserta didik. Konfirmasi Dalam kegiatan konfirmasi, guru:  Memberikan umpan balik positif dan penguatan dalam bentuk lisan, tulisan, isyarat, maupun hadiah terhadap keberhasilan peserta didik,  Memfasilitasi peserta didik melakukan refleksi untuk memperoleh pengalaman belajar yang telah dilakukan,  Memfasilitasi peserta didik untuk memperoleh pengalaman yang bermakna dalam mencapai kompetensi dasar:  Berfungsi sebagai narasumber dan fasilitator dalam menjawab pertanyaan peserta didik yang menghadapi kesulitan, dengan menggunakan bahasa yang baku dan benar;  Membantu menyelesaikan masalah;  Memberikan motivasi kepada peserta didik yang kurang atau belum berpartisipasi aktif.

c. Kegiatan Penutup Dalam kegiatan penutup, guru:  bersama-sama dengan peserta didik dan/atau sendiri membuat rangkuman/simpulan pelajaran;  melakukan penilaian dan/atau refleksi terhadap kegiatan yang sudah dilaksanakan secara konsisten dan terprogram;  menyampaikan rencana pembelajaran pada pertemuan berikutnya.

5. Sumber belajar Buku Scaffolding Grade VII 6. Penilaian Indikator Pencapaian Kompetensi  Mampu memahami dan mengidentifikasi dasardasar procedure text.  Mampu menjawab soal procedure text.

Teknik Penilaian Objective test

Bentuk Instrumen/ Soal Instrumen Lembar soal  Arrange the step based on tertulis pictures  Fill in the blanks

Cara penilaian: Activity 1 = 10 soal, jika benar semua 10 x 10 = 100 Activity 2 = 10 soal, jika benar semua, Activity 3 = 5 soal, jika benar semua, 5 x 20 = 100 Total nilai = 300 : 3 = 100

10

x

10

=

100

Guru Bahasa Inggris

Tangsel, 23 Februari 2016 Peneliti

Syarifuddin, S.Pd.

Rendy Saputra



Kompetensi Dasar


: SMP Ibadurrahman : Bahasa Inggris : 8.2 (Kelas Kontrol) : 12. Mengungkapkan makna dalam teks tulis fungsional dan esei pendek sangat sederhana berbentuk descriptive dan procedure untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan terdekat : 12.2 (Menulis) Mengungkapkan makna dan langkah retorika dalam esei pendek sangat sederhana dengan menggunakan ragam bahasa tulis secara akurat, lancar dan berterima untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan terdekat dalam teks berbentuk descriptive dan procedure : Procedure Text : More About Sun Shine : Menulis : 2x40 menit


Dapat dipercaya (Trustworthines) Rasa hormat dan perhatian (respect) Tekun (diligence) Tanggung jawab (responsibility) Berani (courage)


Motivasi :  Menjelaskan pentingnya materi yang akan dipelari berikut kompetensi yang harus dikuasi siswa b. Kegiatan Inti Eksplorasi Dalam kegiatan eksplorasi, guru:  Memberikan latihan menulis Procedure Text  Memberikan sesi tanya jawab yang bersumber dari procedure text tersebut  Mengambil kesimpulan tentang tujuan pembelajaran procedure text Elaborasi Dalam kegiatan elaborasi, guru:  Membiasakan peserta didik membaca dan menulis yang beragam melalui tugas-tugas tertentu yang bermakna;  Memberi kesempatan untuk berpikir, menganalisis, menyelesaikan masalah, dan bertindak tanpa rasa takut;  Memfasilitasi peserta didik berkompetisi secara sehat untuk meningkatkan prestasi belajar;  Memfasilitasi peserta didik melakukan kegiatan yang menumbuhkan kebanggaan dan rasa percaya diri peserta didik. Konfirmasi Dalam kegiatan konfirmasi, guru:  Memberikan umpan balik positif dan penguatan dalam bentuk lisan, tulisan, isyarat, maupun hadiah terhadap keberhasilan peserta didik,  Memfasilitasi peserta didik melakukan refleksi untuk memperoleh pengalaman belajar yang telah dilakukan,  Memfasilitasi peserta didik untuk memperoleh pengalaman yang bermakna dalam mencapai kompetensi dasar:  Berfungsi sebagai narasumber dan fasilitator dalam menjawab pertanyaan peserta didik yang menghadapi kesulitan, dengan menggunakan bahasa yang baku dan benar;  Membantu menyelesaikan masalah;  Memberikan motivasi kepada peserta didik yang kurang atau belum berpartisipasi aktif.


5. Sumber belajar Buku English in Focus for Grade VII 6. Penilaian

No

Students

1

1

Aspects Content Organization Vocabulary Language Use

Mechanics

13-30

5

7-20

7-20

5-25

Total

Cara penilaian: Masing-masing aspek memiliki bobot nilai: - 13-30 (Content) - 7-20 (Organization) - 7-20 (Vocabulary) - 5-25 (Language Use) - 5 (Mechanics) Jika Semua aspek berbobot nilai tertinggi, maka total nilai = 30+20+20+25+5 = 100

Guru Bahasa Inggris

Syarifuddin, S.Pd.


Rendy Saputra



Kompetensi Dasar


: SMP Ibadurrahman : Bahasa Inggris : 8.2 (Kelas Kontrol) : 12. Mengungkapkan makna dalam teks tulis fungsional dan esei pendek sangat sederhana berbentuk descriptive dan procedure untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan terdekat : 12.2 (Menulis) Mengungkapkan makna dan langkah retorika dalam esei pendek sangat sederhana dengan menggunakan ragam bahasa tulis secara akurat, lancar dan berterima untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan terdekat dalam teks berbentuk descriptive dan procedure : Procedure Text : Oreo Milkshake Recipe : Menulis : 2x40 menit






5. Sumber belajar Buku Scaffolding Grade VII

6. Penilaian 3 soal, jika benar semua maka 3 x 100 = 300 : 3 = 100

Guru Bahasa Inggris

Syarifuddin, S.Pd.

Tangsel, 1 Maret 2016 Peneliti

Rendy Saputra



Kompetensi Dasar


: SMP Ibadurrahman : Bahasa Inggris : 8.2 (Kelas Kontrol) : 12. Mengungkapkan makna dalam teks tulis fungsional dan esei pendek sangat sederhana berbentuk descriptive dan procedure untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan terdekat : 12.2 (Menulis) Mengungkapkan makna dan langkah retorika dalam esei pendek sangat sederhana dengan menggunakan ragam bahasa tulis secara akurat, lancar dan berterima untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan terdekat dalam teks berbentuk descriptive dan procedure : Procedure Text : Fried Eggs : Menulis : 2x40 menit








Guru Bahasa Inggris

Syarifuddin, S.Pd.


Rendy Saputra



Kompetensi Dasar


: SMP Ibadurrahman : Bahasa Inggris : 8.1 (Kelas Eksperimen) : 12. Mengungkapkan makna dalam teks tulis fungsional dan esei pendek sangat sederhana berbentuk descriptive dan procedure untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan terdekat : 12.2 (Menulis) Mengungkapkan makna dan langkah retorika dalam esei pendek sangat sederhana dengan menggunakan ragam bahasa tulis secara akurat, lancar dan berterima untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan terdekat dalam teks berbentuk descriptive dan procedure : Procedure Text : Playing Cassette : Menulis : 2x40 menit


Dapat dipercaya (Trustworthines) Rasa hormat dan perhatian ( respect ) Tekun (diligence) Tanggung jawab (responsibility) Berani (courage)

2. Materi Pembelajaran: Terlampir 3. Metode Pembelajaran: Indirect Feedback 4. Langkah-langkah Kegiatan a. Kegiatan Pendahuluan Apersepsi :  Menyapa siswa dengan mengucapkan selamat pagi  Menanyakan kabar siswa  Tanya jawab singkat tentang hari ini (saat pengajaran berlangsung)

Motivasi :  Menjelaskan pentingnya materi yang akan dipelari berikut kompetensi yang harus dikuasi siswa b. Kegiatan Inti Eksplorasi Dalam kegiatan eksplorasi, guru:  Menjelaskan materi tentang Procedure Text  Memberikan contoh Procedure Text  Memberikan sesi tanya jawab yang bersumber dari procedure text tersebut  Mengambil kesimpulan tentang tujuan pembelajaran procedure text Elaborasi Dalam kegiatan elaborasi, guru:  Membiasakan peserta didik membaca dan menulis yang beragam melalui tugas-tugas tertentu yang bermakna;  Memberi kesempatan untuk berpikir, menganalisis, menyelesaikan masalah, dan bertindak tanpa rasa takut;  Memfasilitasi peserta didik berkompetisi secara sehat untuk meningkatkan prestasi belajar;  Memfasilitasi peserta didik melakukan kegiatan yang menumbuhkan kebanggaan dan rasa percaya diri peserta didik. Konfirmasi Dalam kegiatan konfirmasi, guru:  Memberikan umpan balik positif dengan menggunakan Indirect Feedback dalam menilai hasil kerja peserta didik  Memfasilitasi peserta didik melakukan refleksi untuk memperoleh pengalaman belajar yang telah dilakukan,  Memfasilitasi peserta didik untuk memperoleh pengalaman yang bermakna dalam mencapai kompetensi dasar:  Berfungsi sebagai narasumber dan fasilitator dalam menjawab pertanyaan peserta didik yang menghadapi kesulitan, dengan menggunakan bahasa yang baku dan benar;  Membantu menyelesaikan masalah;  Memberikan motivasi kepada peserta didik yang kurang atau belum berpartisipasi aktif.


5. Sumber belajar Buku Scaffolding Grade VII 6. Penilaian Indikator Pencapaian Kompetensi  Mampu memahami dan mengidentifikasi dasardasar procedure text.  Mampu menjawab soal procedure text.

Teknik Penilaian Objective test

Bentuk Instrumen/ Soal Instrumen Lembar soal  Arrange the step based on tertulis pictures  Fill in the blanks

Cara penilaian: Activity 1 = 10 soal, jika benar semua 10 x 10 = 100 Activity 2 = 10 soal, jika benar semua, Activity 3 = 5 soal, jika benar semua, 5 x 20 = 100 Total nilai = 300 : 3 = 100

Guru Bahasa Inggris

Syarifuddin, S.Pd.

10

x

10

=


Rendy Saputra

100



Kompetensi Dasar


: SMP Ibadurrahman : Bahasa Inggris : 8.2 (Kelas Eksperimen) : 12. Mengungkapkan makna dalam teks tulis fungsional dan esei pendek sangat sederhana berbentuk descriptive dan procedure untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan terdekat : 12.2 (Menulis) Mengungkapkan makna dan langkah retorika dalam esei pendek sangat sederhana dengan menggunakan ragam bahasa tulis secara akurat, lancar dan berterima untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan terdekat dalam teks berbentuk descriptive dan procedure : Procedure Text : More About Sun Shine : Menulis : 2x40 menit




Motivasi :  Menjelaskan pentingnya materi yang akan dipelari berikut kompetensi yang harus dikuasi siswa b. Kegiatan Inti Eksplorasi Dalam kegiatan eksplorasi, guru:  Memberikan latihan menulis Procedure Text  Memberikan sesi tanya jawab yang bersumber dari procedure text tersebut  Mengambil kesimpulan tentang tujuan pembelajaran procedure text Elaborasi Dalam kegiatan elaborasi, guru:  Membiasakan peserta didik membaca dan menulis yang beragam melalui tugas-tugas tertentu yang bermakna;  Memberi kesempatan untuk berpikir, menganalisis, menyelesaikan masalah, dan bertindak tanpa rasa takut;  Memfasilitasi peserta didik berkompetisi secara sehat untuk meningkatkan prestasi belajar;  Memfasilitasi peserta didik melakukan kegiatan yang menumbuhkan kebanggaan dan rasa percaya diri peserta didik. Konfirmasi Dalam kegiatan konfirmasi, guru:  Memberikan umpan balik positif dengan menggunakan Indirect Feedback dalam menilai hasil kerja peserta didik  Memfasilitasi peserta didik melakukan refleksi untuk memperoleh pengalaman belajar yang telah dilakukan,  Memfasilitasi peserta didik untuk memperoleh pengalaman yang bermakna dalam mencapai kompetensi dasar:  Berfungsi sebagai narasumber dan fasilitator dalam menjawab pertanyaan peserta didik yang menghadapi kesulitan, dengan menggunakan bahasa yang baku dan benar;  Membantu menyelesaikan masalah;  Memberikan motivasi kepada peserta didik yang kurang atau belum berpartisipasi aktif.


5. Sumber belajar Buku English in Focus for Grade VII 6. Penilaian Content 30-27

EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD: knowledgeable - substantive - etc.

26-22

GOOD TO AVERAGE: some knowledge of subject- adequate range - etc.

21-17

FAIR TO POOR: limited knowledge of subject - little

16-13

VERY POOR: does not show knowledge of subject – non substantive - etc.

substance etc.

Organization 20-18

EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD: fluent expression - ideas clearly stated – etc.

17-14

GOOD TO AVERAGE: somewhat choppy -loosely

organized

but main ideas stand out - etc. 13-10

FAIR TO POOR: non-fluent - ideas confused or disconnected - etc.

9-7

VERY POOR: does not communicate - no organization - etc.

Vocabulary 20-18

EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD: sophisticated range - effective word/idiom choice and usage - etc.

17-14

GOOD TO AVERAGE: adequate range - occasional errors of word/idiom form, choice, usage but meaning not obscured.

13-10

FAIR TO POOR: limited range - frequent errors of word/idiom form, choice, usage - etc.

9-7

VERY POOR: essentially translation-little knowledge of English vocabulary.

Language Use 25-22

EXCELLENTTO VERY GOOD: effective complex constructions etc.

21-19

GOOD TO AVERAGE: effective but simple constructions - etc.

17-11

FAIR TO POOR: major problems in simple/complex constructions - etc.

10-5

VERY POOR: virtually no mastery of sentence construction rules - etc.

Mechanics 5

EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD: demonstrates mastery of conventions - etc.

4

GOOD TO AVERAGE: occasional errors of spelling, punctuation etc.

3

FAIR TO POOR: frequent errors of spelling punctuation, capitalization - etc.

2

VERY POOR: no mastery of conventions - dominated by errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing - etc

Cara penilaian: Masing-masing aspek memiliki bobot nilai: - 13-30 (Content) - 7-20 (Organization) - 7-20 (Vocabulary) - 5-25 (Language Use) - 5 (Mechanics) Jika Semua aspek berbobot nilai tertinggi, maka total nilai = 30+20+20+25+5 = 100

Guru Bahasa Inggris

Syarifuddin, S.Pd.


Rendy Saputra



Kompetensi Dasar


: SMP Ibadurrahman : Bahasa Inggris : 8.2 (Kelas Eksperimen) : 12. Mengungkapkan makna dalam teks tulis fungsional dan esei pendek sangat sederhana berbentuk descriptive dan procedure untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan terdekat : 12.2 (Menulis) Mengungkapkan makna dan langkah retorika dalam esei pendek sangat sederhana dengan menggunakan ragam bahasa tulis secara akurat, lancar dan berterima untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan terdekat dalam teks berbentuk descriptive dan procedure : Procedure Text : Oreo Milkshake Recipe : Menulis : 2x40 menit








Guru Bahasa Inggris

Syarifuddin, S.Pd.


Rendy Saputra



Kompetensi Dasar


: SMP Ibadurrahman : Bahasa Inggris : 8.2 (Kelas Eksperimen) : 12. Mengungkapkan makna dalam teks tulis fungsional dan esei pendek sangat sederhana berbentuk descriptive dan procedure untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan terdekat : 12.2 (Menulis) Mengungkapkan makna dan langkah retorika dalam esei pendek sangat sederhana dengan menggunakan ragam bahasa tulis secara akurat, lancar dan berterima untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan terdekat dalam teks berbentuk descriptive dan procedure : Procedure Text : Fried Eggs : Menulis : 2x40 menit








Guru Bahasa Inggris

Syarifuddin, S.Pd.


Rendy Saputra

#instrumentPre-PostTest

Name : _______________________________________ Class : _______________________________________

How to Make Juice (1st)

(5th)

(2nd)

(6th)

(3rd)

(4th)

(7th)

Instruction: Arrange the pictures above and write the procedure text of “how to make juice”!

__________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ WWW.KISAHKAMU.INFO

_______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________

#materiajar1

STUDENTS WORKSHEET Activity 1 Rearrange this jumbled text. The pictures will help you to arrange it. Do it in pairs.

http://www.slideshare.net/piianchasenyumnyateruzt/students-worksheet-procedure-text

#materiajar1

Activity 2 Complete the paragraphs using the appropriate sentence connectors. These are the steps how to operate your Microsoft Windows XP computer. (1)

______________, switch on your computer. Wait for The

Microsoft Windows XP desktop to appear. (2)

____________ click the START button on the bottom-left corner

hand task bar, select the PROGRAM and click. (3) ____________, the Ms Word screen will appear. (4) _____________, you can start typing. To save a document or a file, you can start typing. (5) ____________, select and click FILE in the upper-left hand corner task bar. Then, select SAVE as if you want to save the file for the first time. Name the file and (6) ____________, click the SAVE button. Now, after you have finished working with your computer, you may turn it off by doing the following steps. (7) ________, save your work. (8) __________, click the CLOSE button. (9) ___________, click start and select TURN OFF button. (10) ____________, the computer will end its program. Activity 3 Supply the following pictured-instructions with the appropriate imperative verbs. Serving an ‘easy’ instant boiled noodles

(1)________the noodles into boiling water and _______ slowly for 3 minutes.

(2) Meanwhile,______ all the seasonings into a bowl. ______the noodles and the gravy into the bowl and

(3)________ thoroughly. (4) ______some fried onions into the noodles. (5)_______ the noodles while they are hot.

http://www.slideshare.net/piianchasenyumnyateruzt/students-worksheet-procedure-text

#materiajar1

STUDENTS WORKSHEET

Write a procedure text with your partner. Choose one topic on the following. a. b. c. d. e. f.

How to make a delicious food How to make a fresh drink How to play a game How to operate computer/gadget How to make an origami/handicraft How to create a social

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF USING INDIRECT FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS WRITING OF PROCEDURE TEXT

Recommend Documents