the effectiveness of peer-assessment...
TRANSCRIPT
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF PEER-ASSESSMENT THROUGH
FACEBOOK TOWARDS STUDENTS’ WRITING SKILL IN
NARRATIVE TEXT
(A Quasi-experimental Study at Tenth Grade Students of Kharisma
Bangsa School of Global Education)
A Skripsi
By:
Aziz Awaludin
1110014000067
DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH EDUCATION
FACULTY OF TARBIYAH AND TEACHERS’ TRAINING
SYARIF HIDAYATULLAH STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY
JAKARTA
2015
I
ABSTRACT
Aziz Awaludin (1110014000067). The Effectiveness of Peer-assessment
through Facebook towards Students’ Writing Narrative Text (A Quasi-
experimental Study at the Tenth Grade Students of Kharisma Bangsa School of
Global Education, South Tangerang). Skripsi of Department of English Education
at Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teachers’ Training of State Islamic Syarif
Hidayatullah Jakarta University, 2015.
Advisor I : Siti Nurul Azkiyah, Ph.D.
Advisor II: Atik Yuliyani, MA TESOL.
The objective of this research is to examine the effectiveness of using “peer-
assessment” method through “Facebook” media in improving students’ skill in
writing narrative text. Method of the study which is used in this research is a
quantitative method, i.e. a quasi-experimental study. Samples of this research are
the tenth grade students of Kharisma Bangsa in South Tangerang. They are class
10 E (standard level) as the controlled class and class 10 CD (standard level) as
the experimental class. Each class consists of 20 students. For sampling
technique, the researcher uses convenience sampling as a part of nonprobability
sampling. Instrument of this research is a written test. To attain the reliability of
the test instrument, the researcher used rubric for scoring, namely an analytic
scoring to score the students’ writing on the pre-test and the post-test. Result of
this research is that the students’ pre-test mean score (x ) of the experimental class
is 44 and the students’ post-test mean score (x ) is 71.25. On the other hand, the
students’ pre-test mean score (x ) of the controlled class is 49.25 and the post-test
mean score (x ) is 79.75. Implementation of peer-assessment through Facebook is
not an effective way for improving the students’ writing narrative text because the
experimental students’ scores are not better than that of the controlled one.
Therefore, the alternative hypothesis is rejected. Finding of statistical hypothesis
test shows that sig. (2-tailed) value of the prost-test score is bigger than α value,
0.92 > 0.05, so, the H0 (null hypothesis) of the study is accepted.
Keywords: Peer-assessment, Facebook, Writing, Narrative Text.
II
ABSTRAK
Aziz Awaludin (1110014000067). The Effectiveness of Peer-assessment
through Facebook towards Students’ Writing Narrative Text (A Quasi-
experimental Study at the Tenth Grade Students of Kharisma Bangsa School of
Global Education, South Tangerang). Skripsi Jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris
Fakultas Tarbiyah dan Ilmu Keguruan Universitas Islam Negeri Syarif
Hidayatullah Jakarta, 2015.
Pembimbing I : Siti Nurul Azkiyah, Ph.D.
Pembimbing II: Atik Yuliyani, MA TESOL.
Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk menguji efektivitas penggunaan metode “peer-
assessment” melalui media “Facebook” dalam meningkatkan keterampilan
menulis siswa unutk writing teks naratif. Metode penelitian yang digunakan
adalah riset quantitatif, yaitu studi eksperimen semu. Sampel dari penelitian ini
adalah siswa kelas sepuluh sekolah Kharisma Bangsa di Tangerang Selatan.
Mereka adalah kelas 10 E (standard level) sebagai kelas control dan kelas 10 CD
(standard level) sebagai kelas eksperimen. Setiap kelas terdiri dari 20 siswa.
Untuk teknik penentuan sampel, Peneliti menggunakan “convenience sampling”
sebagai bagian dari “nonprobability sampling”. Instrumen penelitiannya adalah
tes tertulis. Untuk mendapatkan reliabilitas instrumen, Peneliti menggunakan
rubrik untuk penilaian, yaitu penilaian analitis yang dipakai untuk menilai tulisan
siswa baik dari pre-test maupun post-test. Hasil dari penelitian ini menunjukkan
bahwa nilai rata-rata (x ) siswa kelas eksperimen dari pre-test adalah 44,
sedangkan nilai rata-rata (x ) dari post-test adalah 71,25. Di sisi lain, nilai rata-
rata (x ) siswa kelas kontrol dari pre-test adalah 49,25, sedangkan nilai rata-rata
(x ) dari post-test adalah 79,75. Penerapan peer-assessment melalui Facebook
bukanlah cara yang efektif untuk meningkatkan skor tulisan siswa dalam menulis
teks naratif. Maka dari itu hipotesis alternatif ditolak. Penemuan dari uji
hipotesis secara statistik menunjukkan nilai sig. (2-tailed) nilai prost-test lebih
besar dari nilai α, 0,92 > 0,05, jadi, H0 (hipotesis nihil) dari penelitian ini
diterima.
Kata kunci: Peer-assessment, Facebook, Writing, Narrative Text.
VI
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful
All praise be to Allah, the Lord of the worlds and the King of all kings,
who has given all creatures blessings and mercies and beautified this pleasant life
with knowledge humans search for. Salawat and salam may be addressed to the
Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, who brought conception from God to
enlighten this world.
It is really a happiness and pride that the researcher is able to complete this
final assignment, skripsi, under the title “The Effectiveness of Implementing Peer-
assessment through Facebook in Teaching Writing Narrative Text”. The
researcher presents this work for Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teachers Training and,
therefore, he gets bachelor of art degree in English education.
However, this skripsi is nothing without the help of some other people.
Therefore, here the researcher is very thankful to the following figures who
contributed very much in finishing this work:
1. H. Sukra and Setiawati, parents of the researcher who fully supports him
all this time.
2. All lectures of department of English education who taught the researcher
with plenty of precious knowledge and experience.
3. Siti Nurul Azkiyah, Ph.D. and Atik Yuliyani, MA TESOL, the two
advisors who patiently guided the researcher in completion of skripsi from
the beginning to the end.
4. Dr. Fahriany, M.Pd. and Dadan Nugraha, M.Pd., the examineers who
correct this work to make it better.
5. Zaharil Anasy, M.Hum., the researcher’s academic advisor who always
gives advises and motivation along his undergraduate program.
VII
6. Sutirto, S.Si., M.T., a headmaster of SMA Kharisma Bangsa School of
Global Education who warmly welcomed the researcher to conduct the
study in the school.
7. Isti Subandini, S.Pd., an English teacher of tenth grade students at SMA
Kharisma Bangsa who had given suggestions and criticisms for the study
and the instructions.
8. All students of class 10 CD and 10 E of Kharisma Bangsa who voluntarily
participated in this study.
9. Drs. Syauki, M.Pd., a chief of department of English education.
10. Prof. Dr. Ahmad Thib Raya, MA., a head of Faculty of Tarbiyah and
Teachers’ Training.
11. Dian Rahmawati, a partner in every business, who is loyally be there—
whenever the researcher is in need.
12. All friends of PBI B 2010. Especially, Lia, Arof, Wahyu, Ari, Abdul, Dea,
Windy, and Indri who motivate and contribute their ideas and experience
in enriching this research.
13. All family members of the researcher. In special, Aditya Setiawan and
Faiz Riyadi, younger brothers of him who always give much inspiration.
14. All members of Dershane Ciputat with whom the researcher stay. More
specially, Fery Küçük, Takdir, Tarekh, Ikhwan, Ade, and Fery Büyük who
always support and motivate him.
15. Everyone who directly and indirectly had contributed to the study.
Finally, the researcher realizes that this study is far from a word “perfect”.
Therefore, he is open for suggestion and criticism for the better of this study in the
future.
Jakarta, March 16th
, 2015
The Researcher
VIII
TABLE OF CONTENT
ABSTRACT…..................................................................................................
ABSTRAK…....................................................................................................
LETTER OF APPROVAL.............................................................................
ENDORSEMENT SHEET.............................................................................
LETTER OF AUTHENTICITY...................................................................
ACKNOWLEDGMENT.................................................................................
TABLE OF CONTENTS….............................................................................
LIST OF TABLES...........................................................................................
LIST OF FIGURES…....................................................................................
LIST OF APPENDICES.................................................................................
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION...................................................................
A. Background of the Study..................................................................
B. Identification of the Problem...........................................................
C. Limitation of the Problem................................................................
D. Formulation of the Problem.............................................................
E. Objective of the Research................................................................
F. Significance of the Research...........................................................
CHAPTER II: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK.......................................
A. Peer-assessment...............................................................................
1. Understanding of Peer-assessment.............................................
2. Advantages of Peer-assessment……..........................................
3. Disadvantages of Peer-assessment…….....................................
B. Writing.............................................................................................
C. Narrative Text..................................................................................
1. Understanding of Narrative Text...............................................
2. Generic structure of Narrative text.............................................
3. Linguistic Features of Narrative Text........................................
D. Facebook..........................................................................................
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VIII
XI
XII
XIII
1
1
4
4
5
5
5
7
7
6
8
8
9
10
10
11
12
12
IX
E. Previous Studies...............................................................................
CHAPTER III: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY........................................
A. Research Design..............................................................................
B. Time and Location of the Research.................................................
C. Population and Sample.....................................................................
D. Instrument of the Research…..........................................................
Test of Validity and Reliability of the Instrument………………..
E. Technique of Data Collection..........................................................
F. Content of the Intervention.............................................................
G. Technique of Data Analysis.............................................................
1. Normality Test………………………………….……………..
2. Homogeneity Test……………………………….…………….
3. Hypothesis Test………………………………….…………….
H. Statistical Hypothesis……………………………….……………..
CHAPTER IV: FINDING AND DISCUSSION............................................
A. Description of Data........................................................................
1. Experimental Class...................................................................
2. Controlled Class..………….....................................................
B. Test of the Hypothesis.....................................................................
1. Preliminary Analysis.................................................................
a. Normality............................................................................
b. Homogeneity......................................................................
2. Result of T-test.........................................................................
a. T-test of Pre-test Scores.......................................................
b. T-test of Post-test Scores.....................................................
c. Gained scores of Experimental and Controlled Class…….
d. T-test of the Gained Scores..................................................
C. Discussion…………….……...........................................................
13
16
16
17
17
18
18
22
22
24
24
25
25
26
28
28
29
30
31
31
31
32
32
33
34
36
37
38
X
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION & SUGGESTION.....................................
A. Conclusion……..............................................................................
B. Suggestion………………………....................................................
REFERENCES...............................................................................................
42
42
43
45
XI
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1. : Scoring Rubric for Narrative Writing……..…………………….. 20
Table 4.1. : Score of Pre- and Post-test of Experimental and Controlled Class 27
Table 4.2. : The Result of Normality Test of the Pre-test……………………. 30
Table 4.3. : Test of Homogeneity of Variance………………………………. 31
Table 4.4. : Result of T-test of Pre-Test………………………………............ 32
Table 4.5. : Result of T-test of Post-Test…..…………………….……............ 33
Table 4.6. : Gained Scores………………………............................................. 35
Table 4.7. : T-test of the Gained Scores…..…………………...………............ 36
XII
LIST OF FIGURE
Figure 3.1. : Nonequivalent Design……..………………...………….. 16
XIII
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1 : Instrument of the Research; Pre- & Post-test………… 47
APPENDIX 2 : Eliciting a Valid Sample of Writing Ability…………. 48
APPENDIX 3 : Student’s Rubric..……………………………………. 49
APPENDIX 4 : Pre- & Post-test Scores of the Experimental Class…..: 50
APPENDIX 5 : Pre- & Post-test Scores of the Controlled Class…….. 51
APPENDIX 6 : Gained Scores of the Experimental Class……………. 52
APPENDIX 7 : Gained Scores of the Controlled Class………………. 53
APPENDIX 8 : Lesson Plan 1 (Control)………………………............ 54
APPENDIX 9 : Lesson Plan 1 (Experiment)…..………………............ 60
APPENDIX 10 : Lesson Plan 2 (Control)………………………............ 66
APPENDIX 11 : Lesson Plan 2 (Experiment)…..………………............ 73
APPENDIX 12 : Lesson Plan 3 (Control)………………………............ 80
APPENDIX 13 : Lesson Plan 3 (Experiment)…..………………............ 85
APPENDIX 14 : Overview of Facebook Group………..………............ 91
APPENDIX 15 : Pre-treatment Observation Sheet……..………............ 92
APPENDIX 16 : Post-treatment Observation Sheet…....………............ 93
APPENDIX 17 : Sample of Student’s Work in Pre-test (Experiment)..... 94
APPENDIX 18 : Sample of Student’s Work Pre-test (Control)…........... 95
APPENDIX 19 : Sample of Student’s Work in Post-test (Experiment)... 96
APPENDIX 20 : Sample of Student’s Work Post-test (Control)….......... 97
APPENDIX 21 : Surat Keterangan Penelitian…..………………............ 98
APPENDIX 22 : The Researcher’s Biography....………………............ 99
1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. Background of the Study
Discussing about teaching writing skill, many questions may appear.
For example: what the effective way to teach writing is, whether students
could master writing with limited time provided, whether writing is as
important as other skills due to it is not tested in the National Examination.
Those questions can emerge and may be quite hard to answer. Writing as the
last productive skill is considered as the most difficult skill to be mastered by
EFL students. Their difficulties are not only because they must generate and
organize ideas, but also they have to turn the ideas into the target language.
Richards said that the students are considered to acquire some complicated
skills in which they have to concern to higher level skills of planning and
organizing. Also they must pay attention to lower level skills of spelling,
punctuation, word choice, and so forth.1 In this part, the writer attempts to
point out some possible causes that explain students‟ problems.
First, concerning teaching method, most of EFL teachers still
implement teachers‟ performance (teachers-centered situation) which is
contradictive with what is demanded by the curriculum. For this Carolyn
Kessler stated that “the role of teacher in traditional classroom is basically
that of instructor and knowledge transmitter. Thus, the teaching approach in
class is mainly lecture-based with teacher-centered transmissive models”.2
Because of this, classroom activities give fewer opportunities for student in
participating and ignore the learners‟ potentials and resources. It becomes a
problem because it is contradictive with the process of learning in Kurrikulum
2013 (character-based curriculum). On the other hand, the process of learning
1 Jack C. Richards, Methodology in Language Teaching: An Anthology of Current
Practice, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), p. 3. 2 Carolyn Kessler (Ed), Cooperative Language Learning: A Teacher’s Resource Book,
(New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1992), p. 5.
2
that is centered on the students is activities encouraging student enthusiasm
and desire.
Kurrikulum 2013 is aimed to encourage students-centered situation in
which they are able to learn independently. Holec defines learner autonomy
as “the ability to take charge of one‟s own learning”. In addition, in KD
(standard competency) 4.1 of English subject it is also said that, “Menyusun
teks lisan dan tulis sederhana, untuk memaparkan, menanyakan, dan
merespon cerita naratif, dengan memperhatikan fungsi sosial, struktur teks,
dan unsur kebahasaan, secara benar dan sesuai dengan konteks”3 which
means students are considered to be able to create a simple text both orally or
writtenly to expalin, question, and respond narrative story, considering social
function, text structure, and language feature correctly and based on context.
Furthermore, concerning teaching time, teachers have very limited
time to cover their very large materials with huge number of students in a
class. Based on observation conducted by the writer at several schools around
Tangerang Selatan, there are only two meetings in a week and they have only
90 minutes (per meeting) for an English class. It is not enough to cover the
four skills of English which have so many materials to teach. Besides, writing
is a process that takes time. To create a good writing work is not an easy way.
Before completing a final draft, a writer should pass some procedures, such
as: pre-writing, outlining, developing outline, proofreading, revising, and
final drafting (writing process).4 It can be imagined, how hard teachers‟ task
in designing a good lesson plan is. They must have a trick to make teaching
and learning activities run well.
Based on the statements above, the writer believes that an appropriate
method may help teacher in teaching writing and improves student
achievement in writing. There are many strategies that can be used in
teaching and learning writing. One of those methods is peer-assessment in
which students are actively involved in the process of teaching and learning
3 Kurikulum Berbasis Karakter, (Kementerian Pendidikan dan Budaya Republik
Indonesia, 2013). 4 Purdue Owl, The Writing Process, 2015, (https://owl.english.purdue.edu).
3
to assess each other. Peer-assessment is an assessment of students that is done
by their friends, and it can be used for both formative reviews to facilitate
feedback and cumulative scoring.5 Peer-assessment as a method of writing
can enhance autonomous learning. Even though Kroll argues that teaching
writing skill with implementing written comment—like a process of peer-
assessment—is commonly not effective6, peer-assessment, according to
Falchikov, becomes a center of attention in recent years due to the rising
focus on learner autonomy in learning and assessment.7 Thus, teachers at
schools begin to use peer-assessment as one activity done by students.
Furthermore, peer-assessment used in this study is not a method that is
traditionally implemented at classrooms. As what is stated above, writing has
several processes that consume much time to do, so the writer used another
way of using peer-assessment. The writer used Facebook as a medium of
teaching that facilitates the method. This idea inspired by a study, The Effect
of Using Facebook to Assist English for Business Communication Course
Instruction, conducted by Ru-Chu Shih.8 The use of this virtual media can
make teaching writing more effective, because teachers do not need to use his
teaching time for conducting peer-assessment. Through Facebook students
can simply assess their friends‟ works outside classrooms so that teachers are
able to use their teaching time for other things. Then, after the assessment the
students know errors of their writings, so they can revise them—as one of the
writing procedures.
In addition, there is no doubt that Facebook is one of the most popular
social media used by millions of people. There are more than 500 million
5 Wenjie Qu & Shuyi Yang, A Peer and Self-assessment Project Implemented in Practical
Group Work, Journal of Language Teaching and Research, Vol. 1, No. 6, November 2010, p.
776. 6 Kroll Barbara, Second Language Writing, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1990), pp. 60-61. 7 Elena Meletiadou, The Impact of Training Adolescent EFL Learners on Their
Perceptions of Peer-assessment of Writing, Research Papers in Language Teaching and Learning,
Vol. 3, No. 1, February 2012, p. 241. 8 Ru-Chu Shih, The Effect of Using Facebook to Assist English for Business
Communication Course Instruction, TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational
Technology, January 2013, volume 12 Issue 1.
4
people all around the world and more than 50 million Indonesian people
actively use Facebook to communicate, interact, and socialize with others
directly and indirectly9. Thus, the writer sees that the campaign of “positive
Internet” to school ages is crucial. Therefore, through this study the writer
hopes that students realize to use Facebook, and other social media as well,
effectively and efficiently in wise way, not only to „play‟ and get amusement,
but also to get knowledge and other useful information for their studies.
Therefore, the model of instruction in which face to face and virtual
teaching were conducted in this study is called blended learning. Blended
learning is kind of learning that combines face-to-face learning and electronic
learning. The writer expects implementing peer-assessment through Facebook
as one type of blended learning can complete the limited teaching time owned
by teachers and encourage students‟ autonomous learning. Hopefully, this
instruction model can be a trend for education practitioners in encouraging
students‟ independent learning to improve their achievements in writing.
B. Identification of the Problem
The writer views that the factors which cause problems in writing
narrative text lie on three things: teaching method, media of instruction, and
limited time of instruction. Based on the background explained, here are the
problems listed:
1. Students‟ low achievement in writing narrative text.
2. Traditional teaching method which focuses only on teacher‟s
performance is not effective to encourage students‟ autonomous
learning demanded by the curriculum.
3. Time for teaching is limited and is considered not enough to
effectively cover all procedures of good writing.
4. Students are not really interested and feel bored in writing because
it needs long process, imagination, ideas, skill, and hard work.
9 Ibid., p. 33.
5
C. Limitation of the Problem
The focus of this study is on the implementation of method in
teaching, i.e. peer-assessment. The media Facebook is used only to facilitate
the implementation of pee-assessment. In addition, this study is also limited
to the result or achievement of students‟ writing, not on the process of
teaching or writing. Therefore, the success of the study is viewed based on
students‟ marks of their writing.
D. Formulation of the Problem
The problem is formulated based on a question: “Is peer-assessment
through Facebook effective towards students‟ writing skill in narrative text?”
E. Objective of the Research
This study is aimed to examine whether the implementation of peer-
assessment through Facebook is effective to improve students‟ achievements
in writing narrative text to students. The writer wants to analyze cause and
effect between independent variable, peer-assessment through Facebook, and
dependent variable, students’ writing skill in narrative text.
F. Significance of the Research
This study presents practical method of peer-assessment through
blended learning to be useful for education practitioners and as a contribution
to the literature about autonomous learning. In addition, the writer expects
that the study is specifically advantageous for:
1. the writer as a student-teacher/future teacher, in the way that the study
completes all requirements in getting bachelor degree in English
education,
2. other future teachers (students of English education department), in
helping them to conduct the similar study,
3. English teachers, in helping them determine what method they use, and
6
4. students of high school level, in helping them how to conduct peer-
assessment through Facebook.
7
CHAPTER II
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
A. Peer-assessment
1. Understanding of Peer-assessment
Peer-assessment is an assessment of students‟ works given by other
students. The assessment is used for both formative evaluations to provide
feedback and summative grading.1 Students‟ attention is therefore focused
on those course goals which appear to be assessed over others which are
not. In other words, in doing this kind of assessment the students are able
to take benefit from the given feedback, so they can correct or improve
their work. According to McDowell, peer-assessment is one method of
novelty which aims to improve the quality of learning and empower
students in contrast to more traditional methods which can make students
feeling disconnected from the complete assessment practice.2 Brindley and
Scoffield argue that peer-assessment also encourages independent
learning, thoughtful learning and less dependence on the teacher as the
only resource at classroom.3 It helps students to become more autonomous
learners, better able to recognize the strengths and weaknesses of their
own work; it enables assessment to become part of the learning process
rather than an adjunct to it; Involving students in the assessment process.
Donaldson and Topping state that peer-assessment: (a) boosts
students to take responsibility for their own learning and development, (b)
gives assessment as part of learning so that mistakes are seen as
opportunities rather than failures, and (c) practices the exchangeable
abilities needed for life‐long learning mainly correlated to assessment
1 Wenjie Qu & Shuyi Yang, A Peer and Self-assessment Project Implemented in Practical
Group Work, Journal of Language Teaching and Research, Vol. 1, No. 6, November 2010, p.
776. 2 Elena Meletiadou, The Impact of Training Adolescent EFL Learners on Their
Perceptions of Peer-assessment of Writing, Research Papers in Language Teaching and Learning,
Vol. 3, No. 1, February 2012, p. 241. 3 Wenjie Qu & Shuyi Yang, loc. cit., p. 777.
8
skills.4 A major reason for using peer-assessment is for its role in student
skill development, in improving learning and in helping students to
improve their performance on assessed work. Additionally, it has a place
as a means of summative assessment.
2. Advantages of Peer-assessment
There are some advantages that can be gained in doing peer-
assessment for writing. According to Rosario Hernandez, peer-assessment
has the following benefits for students as follow: (1) encouraging transfer
of learning and reflection, (2) enhancing the students learning experience,
(3) permiting students to internalize, and comprehend better the
assessment criteria, (4) removing the mystery that often portrays the
assessment process, (5) helping better learning from seeing other students‟
successes and weaknesses, and increases student responsibility, and (6)
rising student autonomy/independence.5 With the benefits mentioned peer-
assessment is considered an appropriate method to be implemented by
teachers in encouraging autonomous learning at classroom or outside of it.
3. Disadvantages of Peer-assessment
Besides its usefulness, PA also has weakness or destructive factors for
students. There are several disadvantages of peer-assessment: (1) peer
pressure and friendship can affect the consistency of grades given by
students, (2) students may have a tendency to give everyone the same
mark (for example, there may be conspiracy in return for good grades), (3)
students are not experienced in assessing each other, (4) students may
cheat in teamwork for group tasks, and (5) objectivity may not be
maintained because extroverted students can be usually be marked higher
4 Elena Meletiadou, loc. cit.
5 Rosario Hernandez, Benefits and Challenges of Using Self and Peer-assessment,
(Dublin: UCD Teaching and Learning), p. 2.
9
and quieter students got marked down.6 However, these advantages can be
avoided if teachers implement it in the right way and can manage class, so
that students understand what they should do.
B. Writing
Writing allows humans to trace and deliver information and stories
outside the immediate moment in which allowing to link at a distant place and
time.7 There are several opinions about the understanding of writing. Writing
can be defined as the use of vivid mark to represent particular linguistic word
in that it makes a sound visible.8 Jack C. Richards said, “Writing is used either
as indication of positive learning or as a means of learning.” Richards
considers writing leads to a product that can be observed and reviewed
directly, it offers response to the teacher and learner on what has been
comprehended.9 According to the several definitions of writing above, the
writer assumes that writing is a physical act process in expressing ideas and
feeling of thinking by arranging it into correct sentences to share experience.
In addition, Hedge argues that effective writing needs some stuffs, such
as: a high level of organization in the development of thoughts and
information; a high level of precision so that there is no vagueness of
meaning; the use of complex grammatical procedures for focus and
emphasize; and cheerful choice of vocabulary, grammar forms, and sentence
organization.10
With all criteria mentioned then good and effective writings
can be produced.
The writer also concludes that writing involves a highly creative use of
composing processes. Because of that explanation, writing can be seen as a
6 Center of Enhancement for Teaching and Learning, Peer-assessment, 2015
(ar.cetl.hku.hk). 7 Henry Roger, Writing System: A Linguistic Approach, (Sydney: Blackwell Publishing,
2005), p. 1. 8 Ibid, p. 2.
9 Jack C. Richard, The Language Teaching Matrix, (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1990), p. 100. 10
Tricia Hedge, Writing, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990), p.5.
10
powerful means of communication. In fact, writing is more complicated rather
than speaking because it requires some steps from composing until revising.
That is why writing can be used as an evidence of what students learned in the
teaching and learning process.
C. Narrative text
1. Understanding of Narrative Text
Narrative, or it is also called narration, is a text that tells a story. 11
It
is a short story that is artificial or even taken from the real event, like a
personal experience or experience of another person.12
Events and actions
that happen in time are things which make narrative dynamic. This kind of
text requires characters who act out events in a sequence of events
orderly.13
The organization of the events may take chronological order.
However, it may also be in another order like flash back order. A story
told in narration can be a fiction or even a real event as long as it contains
generic structures of a narrative text. Some types that are commonly told
narratively are: history, biography, autobiography and news stories.
Purpose of writing narrative text is to tell, amuse or entertain readers about
stories as well as to grab its audience to participate in the story.14
In
addition, the readers also are able to learn moral value or lesson from
stories they read.15
The main characteristic of a narrative story is that the
story contains conflict, crisis, or problem faced by its character. Then, at
the end of the story the character could solve the problem—that part is
named resolution.
11
Thomas E. Kakonis & John Scally, Writing in an Age of Technology, (London: Collier
Macmillan Publisher, 1978), p. 105. 12
J.B. Alter, Writing & Understanding for Certificate Students, (Hong Kong: Times
Educational Co. Ltd., 1980), p. 213. 13
Thomas E. Kakonis & John Scally, loc. cit. 14
Vincent Ryan Ruggiero, The Art of Writing, (California: Alfred Publishing Co. Inc.,
1981), p. 32. 15
Pardiyono, Teaching Genre-based Writing, (Yogyakarta: Penerbit Andi, 2007), p. 93.
11
It can be concluded that as one of some kinds of texts, narrative text
tells stories in which the readers are able to get enjoyment, moral value, or
eagerness. This is very important for the students to be open-minded
knowing other perspective of the world through problematic-experience of
stories.16
Therefore, teachers can involve their students to recall their past
experience to tell at classroom. The stories will be very interesting and
really amusing in that the students are not bored.
2. Generic structure of narrative text
There are steps for constructing a narrative text, such as:
a. Orientation
In this paragraph the narrator tells the audience who is in the
story, when it is happening, where it is happening and what is
going on.
b. Complication
This is the part of the story where the narrator tells about
something that will begin in a chain of events. These events will
affect one or more of the characters. The complication is the
trigger.
c. Sequence of event
This is where the narrator tells how the characters react to the
complication. It includes their feelings and what they do. The
events can be told in chronological order (the order in which they
happen) or with flashback. The audience is given the narrator‟s
point of view.
d. Resolution
In this part of the narrative the complication is sorted out or
problem is solved.
e. Coda
16
Ibid, p. 94.
12
The narrator includes a coda if there is a moral or message to be
learned from the story.17
3. Grammatical features of narrative text
Narrative usually includes the following grammatical features:
a. Nouns that identify the specific characters and places in the story.
b. Adjectives that provides accurate description of the characters and
setting.
c. Verbs that show the actions that occur in the story.
d. Time words that connect events, telling when they occurred.
D. Facebook
Facebook is an online social media which was first launced in Februari
2004. Mark Zuckerberg, a student of Harvard University, with his roommates,
Eduardo Saverin, Andrew McCollum, Dustin Moskovitz dan Chris Hughes, is
the founder of the media. Its name comes from a colloquialism for the
directory given to American university students.18
There are more than 500
million people all around the world and more than 50 million Indonesian
people actively use Facebook to communicate, interact, and socialize with
others directly and indirectly19
. Facebook users must register before using the
site, after which they may create a personal profile, add other users as friends,
exchange messages, and receive automatic notifications when they update
their profile. Additionally, users may join common-interest user groups,
organized by workplace, school or college, or other characteristics, and
categorize their friends into lists such as “People from Work” or “Close
Friends”. As of September 2012, Facebook has over one billion active users,
17
Ibid, p. 95. 18
Wikipedia, Facebook, 2015 (en.wikipedia.org). 19
Ru-Chu Shih, The Effect of Using Facebook to Assist English for Business
Communication Course Instruction, TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational
Technology, January 2013, volume 12 Issue 1., p. 33.
13
of which 8.7% are fake.20
It means that Facebook as a social online media
plays very important role for people‟s social interaction in this modern era.
In Indonesia Facebook is very popular. There are 65 million Indonesian
people who have Facebook accounts (90% of them are active users) and
Indonesia is considered the 2nd
largest country which uses Facebook21
. In
addition, almost, if not all of, senior high students actively use Facebook in
their daily lives. Mostly they use it only for amusement. However, this online
media is not only used for amusement, but also it is used for more useful
activities, like sharing information, ideas, or even experience. Therefore, in
this study Facebook is used to facilitate peer-assessment, so that students are
able to implement independent learning in their own home.
E. Previous Studies
Previous study which is related to this study is a skripsi by Zain
Zarkasih, a student of Islamic State University Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta,
under title The Effectiveness of Peer Assessment on Students’ Narrative
Writing Achievement (A Quasi-Experimental Study at the Second Grade
Students of SMAN 11 Tangerang Selatan).22
The objective of the study is to
find out whether Peer Assessment effective in teaching narrative writing at
second grade of SMAN 11 Tangerang Selatan. The sample of this study is 64
students taken from class two of SMAN 11 Tangerang Selatan. The method
used is a quantitative method and the design used in this study is quasi-
experimental design. In collecting the data, the researcher conducted pre-test
and post-test by instruction test. In analyzing the data, the writer used t-test.
The result of statistical calculation shows that t-test (to) > t-table (tt) (7.158 >
2.388). The alternative hypothesis (Ha) is accepted and null hypothesis (H0) is
rejected. Therefore, the students who were taught narrative writing using peer-
20
Wikipedia, op. cit. 21
Amelia Chen, Indonesia Is a Huge Social Media Nation, Tech in Asia, January 14,
2011 (https://www.techinasia.com/indonesia-social-media-nation/). 22
Zein Zarkasih, The Effectiveness of Peer Assessment on Students’ Narrative Writing
Achievement, (Jakarta: Islamic State University Syarif Hidayatullah, 2014).
14
assessment got higher scores than those who were not. Thus, it is concluded
that implementing peer-assessment is effective in teaching narrative writing at
the second grade students of SMAN 11 Tangerang Selatan.
Another relevant study is Effect of Using Facebook to Assist English
for Business Communication Course Instruction by Vincent Ru-Chu Shih23
,
an associate professor at National Pingtung University of Science and
Technology, Taiwan. This study aimed to investigate the effect of
incorporating Facebook with blended learning approach for improving the
quality of learning and teaching for college students in Taiwan. The research
participants were 111 college students enrolled in an ESP course. In this case,
she conducted blended learning approach. To collect the data, the researcher
used some instruments in the study. Finally, the findings statistically showed
very significant and positive results. The improvement of achievement
between pre-test and post-test were very significant. In addition, the
qualitative results from analyzing content of the students‟ comments,
interview, and survey questionnaire also approved that most of the students
liked this type of research.
The last related study is an article entitled The Impact of Training
Adolescent EFL Learners on Their Perceptions of Peer-assessment of Writing
by Elena Meletiadou,24
a researcher from University of Cyprus. This article
examines that peer-assessment has been increasingly used as an alternative
method of engaging learners in the development of their own learning. This
paper describes part of a research project conducted in a Cypriot State EFL
Institute. Forty adolescent „English as a Foreign Language (EFL)‟ students
were involved in peer-assessment of writing in an attempt to improve their
writing performance and attitudes towards the assessment of writing. Learners
received training since they had no peer-assessment experience prior to the
23
Ru-Chu Shih, The Effect of Using Facebook to Assist English for Business
Communication Course Instruction, TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational
Technology, January 2013, volume 12 Issue 1. 24
Elena Meletiadou, The Impact of Training Adolescent EFL Learners on Their
Perceptions of Peer-assessment of Writing, Research Papers in Language Teaching and Learning,
Vol. 3, No. 1, February 2012.
15
study. The students‟ attitudes were canvassed both prior to the peer-
assessment training and at the end of it by means of a peer-assessment
questionnaire. The findings showed that students‟ response to peer-assessment
was: (a) negative before the training, and b) positive after the training. This
study concludes that peer-assessment is an innovative method and students
have to be given time, training and support to adapt to it, in order to perform
to the best of their ability and exploit its full potential.
From the three previous studies above, the study that was conducted by
the writer is different. It is seemed that the writing is going to combine the
three different researches above into one study. In experimenting effectiveness
of implementing peer-assessment through Facebook for teaching writing
narrative text, the writer adopt and adapt the method from the study done by
Zarkasih and Meletiadou, and the teaching media from Shih‟s study.
However, this study becomes completely different from the related previous
studies in terms of its method, media, and design of the methodology used.
Therefore, framework of the study is that peer-assessment method is
not traditionally implemented inside classroom, but it is done outside in which
virtual class, i.e. Facebook group, is used. However, a face to face meeting is
also needed in that teachers are able to do simulation with the students. This is
to make students ready to implement peer-assessment using Facebook. This
kind of peer-assessment is in a form of comment addressed by students for
their peers. Then, the feedback can be useful information to correct and
improve their future writings. This model is to help teachers make their
teaching time more efficient and useful—or in the other word, it is also called
blended learning. Previous related studies above are all combined and adapted
in this study, so a new model done.
16
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
A. Research Design
The writer uses a quasi-experimental research design. This is the
development design from the true experiment which is quite hard to conduct.
This quasi-experimental research does not require random assignment, so the
researcher decided to select groups that are considered representatives, of the
population, and have same characteristics. For this, the researcher discussed
with the English teacher and considered their writing scores report.
The type of the design is nonequivalent controlled group design with
pre-test and post-test. This type has been described as one of the most
common type used for quasi-experimental designs.1 This is often the case
since students are naturally organized in groups as classes within schools and
are considered to share similar characteristics.
The nonequivalent controlled group design with pre-test and post-test
is represented as:2
Figure 3.1. Nonequivalent Design
In this design both the controlled and experimental class complete a
pre-test and post-test, the experimental class students as the only group that
received the research treatment. On the other hand, the controlled class
1 John W. Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating
Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 4th
edition, (Boston: Pearson Education, Inc, 2008), pp.
309-310. 2 Ibid., p. 310.
Experiment
Control
Pre-test
Treatment
-
Post-test
17
students were not given any special treatment, but they were only taught with
usual/traditional input, or instruction.
B. Time and Location of the Research
The researcher conducted the study from January 18th
to 30th
, 2015. The
location is at Kharisma Bangsa School of Global Education in Pondok Cabe,
Tangerang Selatan City.
C. Population and Sample
The writer did the research at Kharisma Bangsa School of Global
Education. The population of the research is students of tenth grade. They are
divided into 3 classes: 10 AB (higher level), 10 CD (standard level), and 10 E
(standard level). All of the students are from science program and the total
number of students or population is 60 students—there are 20 students each
class. This population was selected considering the material “narrative text” of
this study is addressed for them.
Sampling technique used in this quantitative research is convenience
sampling as a part of nonprobability sampling. This kind of technique was
used because in convenience sampling the researcher was allowed to select
individuals because they were available, convenient; moreover, they represent
characteristics the investigation.3 In addition, the researcher chose this
sampling because it allows him to select participants as sample because of the
students’ availability to be studied at the school. The availability came when
the researcher got permission from the school principle.
Furthermore, the principle gave the two available classes to participate
in this study as sample and it is also with the permission of the English
teacher. Therefore, the researcher decided to select students from class 10 CD
and class 10 E of standard level who have the same level in English subject.
The controlled class and the experimental class were decided after having pre-
3Ibid., pp. 145-146.
18
test. Then, the students of 10 E who got lower mean score of pre-test (44
points) than that of class CD (49.25 points) became an experimental group,
while the students of 10 CD became the controlled one. It is because the
researcher considers that the lower achievement class needs more helps and
treatments to get better marks.
D. Instrument of the Research
To get the data, the writer used pre-test and post-test as the main
instrument to measure students’ writing skill in narrative text. Pre-test was
given in both classes to make sure that they have the same level of background
knowledge and to determine controlled and experimental class in the
beginning of the session (before the treatments). Then, post-test was given in
the end of the session (after the treatments) to know whether implementation
of peer-assessment using Facebook effective in teaching of narrative text or
not. Then, students’ writings were analyzed using rubric of narrative text
proposed by PARCC (Partnership for Assessment of Readiness of College and
Careers)4 with scale score from 0 to 4 points per criterion. In addition, as a
supplement, observation sheet was also used here to analyze attitudes of the
students.
Test of Validity and Reliability of the Instrument
Validity test of the instrument was done to know whether it measures
what is intended to measure to gain correct decision in designing the
instrument.5 The tests used for this instrument are face validity and content
validity. Face validity is validity which shows if appearance or form of an
instrument measures what it is meant to measure. This kind of validity is
focusing on the form or the appearance of the instrument. The instrument
4 PARCC (Partnership for Assessment of Readiness of College and Careers), Expanded
Scoring Rubric for Analytic and Narrative Writing (Grade 5-11), 2015,
(http://www.parcconline.org). 5 Peter W. Airasian, Classroom Assessment: Concept and Application, (New York:
McGrawn-Hill, 2003), pp. 16-17.
19
of this study is to measure the students’ ability in writing narrative text, so
the form or the appearance of it is open ended question (not multiple
question) in which the students are asked to write narratives.
In addition, the instrument is also validated its content through
content validity. Content validity is related to ability of an instrument in
measuring content or concept of what is desired to measure in the way that
the instrument is representative.6 An instrument which contains content
validity for sure contains face validity. Based on standard competency
(KD) 4.1 of class 10, it is mentioned that students are able to write a
simple text with its basic structures, language features, and appropriate
context. The intended content of the instrument is described in the KD and
the instrument answers it by including itself with operations mentioned in
it. The detail of eliciting validity is shown in appendix.
In addition, to obtain reliability of the instrument the researcher uses
analytic scoring by John Harris, so scoring of the test is consistent.
Reliability is a consistency of a set of measurements and an instrument.7 It
is also said that scoring using analytic scoring is the most reliable scoring
both for speaking and writing task. The researcher assessed the students’
writings using rubric in which 5 criteria of the scoring are detailed. The
rubric is from a credible source for assessment: PARCC (Partnership for
Assessment of Readiness of College and Careers). Therefore, both validity
and reliability the instrument are tested.
6 James Dean Brown, Comprehensive Guide to English Language Assessment, (New
York: McGrawn-Hill, 2003), pp. 220-221. 7 Peter W. Airasian, loc. cit., pp. 17-20
20
Table 3.1.
Scoring Rubric for Narrative Writing
Construct
Measured Score Point
4 Score Point
3 Score Point
2 Score Point
1 Score Point
0
Written
Expression
Development
of Ideas
The student
response
addresses the
prompt and
provides
effective and
comprehensive
development
of the claim,
topic and/or
narrative
elements by
using clear and
convincing
reasoning,
details, text-
based
evidence,
and/or
description;
the
development is
consistently
appropriate to
the task,
purpose, and
audience.
The student
response
addresses the
prompt and
provides
effective
development
of the claim,
topic and/or
narrative
elements by
using clear
reasoning,
details, text-
based
evidence,
and/or
description;
the
development
is largely
appropriate to
the task,
purpose, and
audience.
The student
response
addresses the
prompt and
provides some
development
of the claim,
topic and/or
narrative
elements by
using some
reasoning,
details, text-
based
evidence,
and/or
description;
the
development is
somewhat
appropriate to
the task,
purpose, and
audience.
The student
response
addresses the
prompt and
develops the
claim, topic
and/or
narrative
elements
minimally by
using limited
reasoning,
details, text-
based evidence
and/or
description; the
development is
limited in its
appropriateness
to the task,
purpose, and/or
audience.
The student
response is
underdeveloped
and therefore
inappropriate to
the task,
purpose, and/or
audience.
Written
Expression
Organization
The student
response
demonstrates
purposeful
coherence,
clarity, and
cohesion and
includes a
strong
introduction,
conclusion,
and a logical,
well-executed
progression of
The student
response
demonstrates
a great deal of
coherence,
clarity, and
cohension,
and includes
an
introduction,
conclusion,
and a logical
progression of
ideas, making
The student
response
demonstrates
some
coherence,
clarity, and/or
cohension, and
includes an
introduction,
conclusion,
and logically
grouped ideas,
making the
writer’s
The student
response
demonstrates
limited
coherence,
clarity, and/or
cohension,
making the
writer’s
progression of
ideas
somewhat
unclear.
The student
response
demonstrates a
lack of
coherence,
clarity and
cohesion.
21
ideas, making
it easy to
follow the
writer’s
progression of
ideas.
it fairly easy
to follow the
writer’s
progression of
ideas.
progression of
ideas usually
discernible but
not obvious.
Written
Expression
Clarity of
Language
The student
response
establishes and
maintains an
effective style,
while
attending to
the norms and
conventions of
the discipline.
The response
uses precise
language
consistently,
including
descriptive
words and
phrases,
sensory
details, linking
and
transitional
words, words
to indicate
tone, and/or
domainspecific
vocabulary.
The student
response
establishes
and maintains
an effective
style, while
attending to
the norms and
conventions
of the
discipline.
The response
uses mostly
precise
language,
including
descriptive
words and
phrases,
sensory
details,
linking and
transitional
words, words
to indicate
tone, and/or
domain-
specific
vocabulary.
The student
response
establishes and
maintains a
mostly
effective style,
while
attending to
the norms and
conventions of
the discipline.
The response
uses some
precise
language,
including
descriptive
words and
phrases,
sensory
details, linking
and
transitional
words, words
to indicate
tone3 and/or
domainspecific
vocabulary.
The student
response has a
style that has
limited
effectiveness,
with limited
awareness of
the norms of
the discipline.
The response
includes
limited
descriptions,
sensory details,
linking or
transitional
words, words
to indicate
tone, or
domain-
specific
vocabulary.
The student
response has an
inappropriate
style. The
student writing
shows little to
no awareness
of the norms of
the discipline.
The response
includes little
to no precise
language.
Knowledge
The student
response
demonstrates
command of
the
conventions of
standard
English
consistent with
effectively
edited writing.
The student
response
demonstrates
command of
the
conventions
of standard
English
consistent
with edited
writing. There
The student
response
demonstrates
inconsistent
command of
the
conventions of
standard
English. There
are a few
patterns of
The student
response
demonstrates
limited
command of
the
conventions of
standard
English. There
are multiple
errors in
The student
response
demonstrates
little to no
command of
the conventions
of standard
English. There
are frequent
and varied
errors in
22
of
Language
and
Conventions
Though there
may be a few
minor errors in
grammar and
usage,
meaning is
clear
throughout the
response.
may be a few
distracting
errors in
grammar and
usage, but
meaning is
clear.
errors in
grammar and
usage that may
occasionally
impede
understanding.
grammar and
usage
demonstrating
minimal
control over
language.
There are
multiple
distracting
errors in
grammar and
usage that
sometimes
impede
understanding.
grammar and
usage,
demonstrating
little or no
control over
language.
There are
frequent
distracting
errors in
grammar and
usage that often
impede
understanding.
E. Technique of Data Collection
To get the data that is related to the study, the writer used pre-test and
post-test. The two-kind test was given for getting the data of students’
achievement in writing narrative text. Form of the test is task-based writing
narrative text. The students were asked to write at least 150 words for one
narrative text. Then, their works were analyzed using rubric of narrative text
from PARCC. In order to case the computation, the researcher uses analytic
scoring by John Harris8 and convertes each score point criterion of the rubric
to the scale of which maximum point of 100 is obtained when calculated.
F. Content of the Intervention/Experiment
The research was conducted in two weeks. In the first meeting on
January 16th
, 2015, the researcher did observation in both classes. This is to
know the classes’ environment and to introduce the students to the research. In
the next meeting, the research conducted pre-test to both classes. The pre-test
was scheduled on September 17h, 2015 for 10 CD and on September 19
h, 2015
for 10 E. The pre-test scores of those classes become the first raw data of this
research by which experimental and controlled class are determined. Then, the
8 Arthur, Hughes, Testing for Language Teachers, (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2003), pp. 83-102.
23
data determines class 10 E as the experimental class and class 10 CD as the
controlled one.
After giving the pre-test, the researcher began the intervention. The
intervention was done in 6 meetings whose each period is 40 minutes.
However, two meetings are counted as one session, so there are only 3 syllabi
for each class in this study. The first treatment was given in the experimental
class on January 21st, 2015. In that time, the researcher told to the students
about the concept of drama. Then, the researcher explained objective of the
study and then explained about the nature of writing narrative text. The
activities were to know, analyze, and practice writing narrative text. Then,
students also learnt about peer-assessment and how to conduct it. At the end of
the meeting, the students were assigned to write a narrative text and submit it
in the following meeting.
In the next meeting, on January 22nd
and 23rd
, 2015, they collected their
writings to the teacher. Then, they were instructed to do simulation of peer-
assessment at classroom. This was to prepare them before conducting it on
Facebook. After that, the students were asked to add the researcher’s
Facebook account, so that he could invite them to the class group made. Then,
they had to write a story at the classroom and the following meeting their
writings were posted in the Facebook group. After that, they were asked to
implement peer-assessment on their friends’ works, so that they knew what
their mistakes were. Furthermore, in the last meeting, the teacher continued
explaining how to create a good narrative story. It was happened on January
26h, 2015. The researcher gave the treatment three times for the experimental
class, so on that day the study was completed. The teacher then showed their
writings on the group through LCD screen.
On the other hand, method used for the controlled class was a traditional
one. It was drill method in which the students wrote writing tasks at
classroom. Finally, on January 28h, 2015, the researcher conducted post-test to
the experimental class and controlled class. The post-test was similar with the
pre-test. The researcher gave writing narrative text to the students. Duration of
24
the test was 30 minutes. After the post-test was done, the researcher then did
scoring their writings using rubric.
G. Technique of Data Analysis
Technique used to analyze the data in this study is “T-test” through
SPSS (Special Package for the Social Sciences) version 18 software. This test
was used because it analyzes the t-statistic, t-distribution and degrees of
freedom to determine a p value (probability) that can be used to determine
whether the population means differ. The t-test is one of a number of
hypothesis tests. The content of the students’ works were analyzed and
assessed using rubric for narrative text. However, before T-test calculation,
the researcher did normality and homogeneity of the test. Here are steps done
to analyze the collected data:
1. Normality Test
The normality test is performed using Kolmogorov Smirnnov and
Shapiro-Wilk. The test is for the two groups, both post-test and pretest
group, to determine if the distribution of the data from the sample is
normal. Thus, the researcher used SPSS version 18 software. Trihendrari
said that if the normality Asymp. sig. is more than the level of significance
α (0.05), scores will be normally distributed. The steps are the following
bellows:
a. Open SPPS program
b. Go to variable view and fill in the columns as follows:
a) Name: write “class” in the first row. This is to indicate and
differentiate between experimental and controlled class. Write
score in second row.
b) Type column is numeric.
c) Width column is filled with “8”.
d) Decimal is changed from “2” to “0”.
e) Label column is left blank.
25
f) Value column is none.
g) Missing column is none.
h) Columns is filled with “8”.
i) Align column is “right”.
j) Measure column is “unknown”.
k) Role column is filled with “input”.
c. Click data view, in score column, compute “1” as representing
experimental class and “2” representing controlled class.
d. In score column, compute score of each class.
e. Click Analyze >> Descriptive Statistics>> Explore
f. Fill in the Dependents List with score with pre-test and then fill in
the Factor List with class.
g. Click Plots >> checklist Normality Plots with Tests, Histograms,
Power Estimation >> Continue >> Ok
2. Homogeneity Test
Homogeneity test is used to test whether the data from the two
groups have the same variant in order that the hypotheses can be tested by
T-test. Like normality test, this kind of test also uses SPSS version 18
software. The steps are the same like those of normality test.
Furthermore, after testing its normality and homogeneity the researcher
began to test the hypothesis.
3. Hypothesis Test
The writer seeks the significant differences result from the post-test
data. The writer also used SPSS 20 to calculate the t-test. In calculating t-
test, steps done are as follows:
a. Open SPPS program
b. Go to variable view and fill in the columns as follows:
26
a) Name: write “class” in the first row. This is to indicate and
differentiate between experimental and controlled class. Write
score in second row.
b) Type column is numeric.
c) Width column is filled with “8”.
d) Decimal is changed from “2” to “0”.
e) Label column is left blank.
f) Value column is none.
g) Missing column is none.
h) Columns is filled with “8”.
i) Align column is “right”.
j) Measure column is “unknown”.
k) Role column is filled with “input”.
c. Click data view, in score column, compute “1” as representing
experimental class and “2” representing controlled class.
d. Click Analyze >> Compare Means >> Independent Samples T-Test
e. Fill in Test Variables with score of pretest and post-test. Then fill in the
Grouping Variables with class and fill Define Groups with 1 and 2
f. Click Options >> fill Confidence Interval Percentage with 95%
g. Click Continue >> Ok
H. Statistical Hypothesis
The statistical hypothesis states:
a. Null hypothesis (H0) = x 1 x 2 (if mean score of the post-test of the
experimental class is smaller than that of the controlled class post-test)
or p > α (if sig. 2 tailed is greater that alpha) there is no a significant
difference between students who are treated with peer-assessment
through Facebook and those who are not treated with.
b. Alternative hypothesis (Ha) = x 1 > x 2 (if mean score of the post-test of
the experimental class is greater than that of the controlled class post-
test) or p < α (if sig. 2 tailed is greater that alpha) there is a significant
27
difference between students who are treated with peer-assessment
through Facebook and those who are not treated with.
28
CHAPTER IV
FINDING AND DISCUSSION
A. Data Description
In this research, the experimental class was the students of class 10 CD
(standard level) and the controlled class was the students of class 10 E (standard
level). There are 20 students each class. Then, the total sample is 40 students.
The pre-test and the post-test score of the students from both classes is described
in table 4.1 below:
Table 4.1.
Score of Pre- and Post-test of Experimental and Controlled Class
f = Frequency
Based on descripting table of the pre-test given to the experimental class,
there are 4 students (20% of them) getting score <30. This means that their
writing English at first was extremely poor. The most frequent scores appeared
on the table are the scores between 41-50 with frequency number 6 or 30% of
the students. On the other hand there was no student who got score >81. After
the students were given the treatment of implementing peer-assessment through
Score
Band
Experimental Class Controlled Class
Pre-Test Post-Test Pre-Test Post Test
F % F % F % f %
< 30 4 20 % 0 0 % 0 0 % 0 0 %
31 – 40 4 20 % 0 0 % 3 15 % 1 5 %
41 – 50 6 30 % 3 15 % 11 55 % 0 0 %
51 – 60 5 25 % 2 10 % 5 25 % 1 5 %
61 – 70 1 5 % 5 25 % 1 5 % 5 25 %
71 – 80 0 0 % 8 40 % 0 0 % 3 15 %
> 80 0 0 % 2 10 % 0 0 % 11 55 %
Total 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 %
29
Facebook, there is an improvement of the scores. Shown in the post-test data,
there is no student getting the scores below 30 points or even the scores between
31 and 40 points. The most frequency appearance on the table is the scores
between 71 and 80 points consisting of 8 students (40% of them) and students
who got the score above 80 points are 2 students.
From the table data of controlled class in pre-test it shows that there are 3
students who got the scores 31-40 and 55% of the them (11 students) got the
scores between 41 and 50. Furthermore, only 1 student got score between 61-70
points and there was no student who got the score above 81. From the post-test
result, it can be seen that the most appearance frequency is the scores above 80
points which consist of 11 students (55% of them) and there are 15% of them
got the scores 71-80. Then, there are 5 students who got the scores 61-70 points.
The detail of the scores can be seen on appendix.
1. Experimental Class
The pre-test given to students of experimental class is written test. It
was given to know their writing ability of narrative text before they were
given the treatment. The pre-test used is to measure a starting point of the
amount of pre-existing knowledge on the course topic (narrative text) and
also to compare with point of the post-test. Based on the test, the pre-test
mean score (x ) achieved by the students is 44 points. In addition, the lowest
score achieved in the pre-test is 20 and the highest one is only 65 points.
Therefore, this shows that there is no score reaching KKM (minimum score
criterion), 70 points.
Next, after doing pre-test, the researcher implemented peer-assessment
method through Facebook in class 10 E. Then, when the treatment finished,
the post-test was done in that class. The mean score of the post-test of the
experimental class increasingly achieves 71.25 points. The finding points
that the mean score of the post-test is higher than the mean score of the pre-
test which is only 44 points. The range between the mean score of pre-test
score and the mean score of the post-test score gains 27.25 points. The
30
student’s lowest score of the post-test achieved is 50 and the highest one was
90. This shows that there is quite significant improvement gained by the
experimental class. However, though the scores of post-test are improved
compared to the pre-test, the mean score of the experimental class is still
lower than the controlled one—the controlled class’ post-test data is
explained below. Therefore, it shows that the treatment given in the class is
not really effective compared to the traditional one.
2. Controlled Class
Based on the table data, it is shown that the students’ mean score x
achieved in the pre-test is 49.25. The lowest score of this class is 30 and the
higher score is 75. There is only 1 student who got score above KKM (75
points) and the other 19 students did not pass the minimum score (below 70
points). Therefore, this means that the students had not high ability in
writing narrative text.
After teaching was completed, students of the controlled class did the
post-test. Eventually, the students’ mean score x of the post-test achieved
in this class is 79.75 which is higher than the experimental class. It can be
seen that the difference (range) between the mean score of the post-test and
the pre-test of this class is significant. It is 30.5. The student’s lowest score
of the post-test achieved is 35 points and the highest one is 95 points.
From the explanation above, it can be concluded that the students’ mean
score of pre-test in the controlled class is higher than that of the
experimental one. Therefore, the class whose mean score is lower (Class 10
E) becomes the experimental class that was given the treatment of
implementing peer-assessment through Facebook to improve their writing
ability. On the other hand, another class whose mean score is higher (Class
10 CD) is the controlled one in which the traditional treatment was done.
Furthermore, from the data of the score of post-test in experimental
class and controlled class shown, it can be analyzed that the mean score of
the post-test in controlled class is higher than that of the controlled class.
31
Therefore, the special treatment which was given in the experimental class
is not effective than the traditional treatment given in the controlled class.
B. Test of the Hypothesis
1. Preliminary Analysis
The test done in this research was test of normality and test of
homogeneity. Normality test was conducted to determine whether the data
set is well-modeled by a normal distribution or not. Then, homogeneity test
was done to measure the differences or similarities in population of the
research. In this research, the researcher applied normality and homogeneity
test only in the pre-test data of experimental and controlled class.
a. Normality
Table below shows how the data analyzed and interpreted to test the
normality of the data.
Table 4.2.
The Result of Normality Test of the Pre-test
Tests of Normality
Class Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic df Sig. Statistic Df Sig.
Pretest experiment .132 20 .200* .960 20 .543
control .170 20 .133 .911 20 .068
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction
*. This is a lower bound of the true significance.
From table 4.2, it is shown Shapiro and Kolmogorov.Smirnov test. In
Kolmogorov.Smirnov it is shows that sig. value of the pre-test of the
experimental class is .200. However, sig. value of the pre-test of the
controlled class is .133. Meanwhile, minimum alpha (α) value is 0.05. for
32
each sig. value of the pre-tests. Therefore, sig. value of the pre-test of the
experimental class is bigger than α 0.200 > 0.05) and sig. value of the pre-
test of the controlled class is also bigger than α 0.133 > 0.05). It means that
the samples of both classes are from normal distributed population.
Based on Shapiro.Wilk test, it also shows that sig. > α. Form the
experimental class 0.543 > 0.05 and from the controlled class 0.068 > 0.05.
Therefore, the classes are normal.
b. Homogeneity
Table 4.3.
Test of Homogeneity of Variance
Levene Statistic df1 df2 Sig.
Pretest Based on Mean 2.325 1 38 .136
Based on Median 2.018 1 38 .164
Based on Median and with
adjusted df
2.018 1 36.514 .164
Based on trimmed mean 2.222 1 38 .144
The table shows the test of homogeneity using Lavene’s test. The
Lavene’s test shows that the rows based on sig. value based on mean is .136
which is above α 0.136 > 0.05). This means that both classes are
homogent.
2. Result of T-test
The statistical hypothesis states:
Null hypothesis (H0) = x 1 x 2 (if mean score of the post-test of the
experimental class is smaller than that of the controlled class post-
test) or p > α (if sig. 2 tailed is greater that alpha) there is no a
33
significant difference between students who are treated with peer-
assessment through Facebook and those who are not treated with.
Alternative hypothesis (Ha) = x 1 > x 2 (if mean score of the post-test of
the experimental class is greater than that of the controlled class post-
test) or p < α (if sig. 2 tailed is greater that alpha) there is a significant
difference between students who are treated with peer-assessment
through Facebook and those who are not treated with.
a. T-test of Pre-test Scores
The researcher uses SPSS 18 software to analyze the pre-test
scores. Table below shows how the data is analyzed:
Table 4.4.
Result of T-test of Pre-Test
Group Statistics
class N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Pretest experiment 20 44.00 12.524 2.800
control 20 49.25 9.072 2.029
Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test for Equality
of Variances
t-test for Equality of
Means
F Sig. t df
Pretest Equal variances assumed 2.325 .136 -1.518 38
Equal variances not assumed -1.518 34.635
34
t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
pretest Equal variances assumed -12.250 1.750
Equal variances not assumed -12.273 1.753
It is described that the significant level (sig.) of pre-test between
experimental class and controlled class got similar level at 0.136 and
mean of score experimental class is 44.00 and of the controlled class is
49.25. Then, the score of equal variances assumed is not similar with
the not assumed one. Also, the table shows that difference between the
lower and upper of confidence interval of the difference is only 0.003
point. It shows the pre-test score of both classes does not have
significant difference and have the same characteristic.
b. T-test of Post-test Scores
Using SPSS 18 software in analyzing the post-test scores the
researcher finds result as below:
Table 4.5.
Result of T-test of Post-Test
Group Statistics
class N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Posttest experiment 20 71.25 13.560 3.032
control 20 79.50 16.456 3.680
35
Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test for
Equality of Variances
t-test for Equality of
Means
F Sig. T df
Posttest Equal variances assumed .115 .736 -1.730 38
Equal variances not assumed -1.730 36.661
Independent Samples Test
t-test for Equality of Means
Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference
Std. Error
Difference
posttest Equal variances assumed .092 -8.250 4.768
Equal variances not assumed .092 -8.250 4.768
Independent Samples Test
t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
posttest Equal variances assumed -17.902 1.402
Equal variances not assumed -17.914 1.414
The mean score of the post-test for the experimental class is 71.25
while for the controlled class is 79.50. Result of T-test in table 4.5
shows that there is significant difference between controlled and
experiment class. Sig. (2-tailed) value of the prost-test score is bigger
36
than α, 0.92 > 0.05. It proves that the mean score of the experimental
class is lower than that of the controlled class. Furthermore, this also
means implementing peer-assessment through Facebook in teaching
writing narrative text has not better results compared to the traditional
teaching method (drilling method).
c. Gained Scores of the Experimental and Control Class
Because there is significant improvement between experimental
and controlled class, the researcher here adds information how the two
classes compare each other in gaining scores (form pre- and post-test).
The detailed table can be found in appendix.
Table 4.6.
Gained Scores
Student’s
Code
Experimental Controlled
Gained score Gained score
1 25 15
2 50 5
3 30 40
4 35 45
5 20 50
6 15 20
7 35 45
8 30 55
9 15 20
10 10 40
11 25 35
12 15 45
13 10 45
14 15 15
15 35 25
16 40 40
17 40 20
18 15 25
19 40 15
20 45 10
Average 27.25 30.5
37
The table above presents that average gained by the two classes is
high in that the experimental class gains 27.25 points and the
controlled one gains 30.5 points. This shows that actually the two
methods (peer-assessment through FB and the traditional drilling) can
improve students’ achievement. However, the controlled class’ method
is leading with range point: 3.25.
d. T-test of the Gained Scores
The researcher also implements t-test for the gained score to
examine the difference between the two groups. This seems critical to
strengthen the previous analysis. Using SPSS 18 is software used to
analyze, then the researcher finds result as below:
Table 4.7.
T-test of the Gained Scores
Group Statistics
class N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
gained experiment 20 27.2500 12.40490 2.77382
control 20 30.5000 15.03505 3.36194
Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test for
Equality of Variances
t-test for Equality of
Means
F Sig. t df
gained Equal variances assumed 2.276 .140 -.746 38
Equal variances not assumed -.746 36.677
38
t-test for Equality of Means
Sig. (2-
tailed) Mean Difference
Std. Error
Difference
95% Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Lower
gained Equal variances assumed .460 -3.25000 4.35852 -12.07337
Equal variances not assumed .461 -3.25000 4.35852 -12.08383
Because the data is homogenous (F=2.275; p>0.05), so it is
directed to see column equal variances assumed. It shows that the
difference is below 1% degree (t=-7.46; p<0.01). This means that the
experimental class has no significant difference compared to the
controlled class. Therefore, the special treatment in it is not better than
that of the controlled class. Therefore, the researcher jumps into a
conclusion that the null hypothesis (H0) of the study is accepted.
C. Discussion
Though the students of the experimental class which was treated with peer-
assessment through Facebook implementation method improved their writing
skill, but the hypothesis is rejected because their scores are not better than that
of the controlled class. The analysis above has already shown that the mean
score of the experimental class in the pre-test is 44, while the post-test score is
71.25. In addition, it is shown that sig. (2-tailed) value of the post-test is bigger
than α, 0.92 > 0.05. Therefore, the alternative hypothesis (Ha) is rejected and
null hypothesis (H0) is accepted. This means that implementing peer-assessment
through Facebook is not effective.
While, if it is compared to the previous study done by Ru-Chu Shih, the
method is effective for university students. Moreover, a theory presented by
Brindley and Scoffield in the second chapter also supports that can effectively
39
enhance students’ autonomous learning. In fact, when it is done in school ages,
it is not as good as that of the traditional drilling method. In other word, peer-
assessment through Facebook is not effective. There may be factors why this
method is not effective, so the researcher here provides the causes observed.
First, even though the experimental group students were given rubric for
assessing, almost all of them students did peer-assessment only around
grammatical area, whereas grammatical mistakes are not the main concern in
writing. However, the students did not address more fatal mistakes around
structure of texts and writing organization. Consequently, this influenced their
post-test’s writings in which there were some of them still had misconception in
differentiating recount text and narrative text, and organizing their ideas.
Second, as mentioned before, studies on independent learning (more
especially the use of peer-assessment method through Facebook) are done for
adult learners, like a study done Shih on implementing peer-assessment through
Facebook towards university students of Pingtun University. The students
independently did their assignments from lecturers without any pressure. It is
very contrast in the case of younger learners. Secondary students do not really
care of homework. In addition, the researcher at class is a new comer whose
authority on the students is not as high as the real English teacher. Therefore,
controlling the students outside classroom is really hard. This is because of their
psychological factor or, in other word, their maturity as humans. This is proved
by numbers of comments on the group (see appendix)
Third, the students’ ability in assessing their friends’ works is quite limited.
This is shown in some comments made by them, for example a student just
commented a word ―correct‖ and others commented a wrong sentence, like: ―the
sentences ‘the women that getting relax’ is not exactly correct, it should be ‘the
women that was getting relax’‖. Those comments did not give any useful
information for its audience to correct his writing. If he does, he still commits
mistake.
Four, the experimental students seem that they do not learn from mistakes
they made in the previous writings. For instance, there are some texts posted on
40
Facebook group having mistakes around grammatical area, such as: ―there is a
man who waited‖ then it is corrected this way, ―the was a man who waited‖.
Unfortunately, they do not learn from that mistake. They still did the same
mistake in the post-test. However, compared to writings of the pre-test, their last
works are far better.
Five, the students seem not really familiar with peer-assessment method and
few of them even do not just made Facebook account at the time the researcher
asked. Even though the researcher had already did simulation at the classroom
about how to implement peer-assessment through Facebook. This lack of
knowledge also may cause quality of their comments or assessments on their
friends/ writings.
Last, a factor why students of the controlled class improve better their
writing skill even without special treatment is because while studying they
really paid great attention to the lectures. While the students of the experimental
class seemed neglected the lessons and were not really serious when studying.
For instance, in the middle of explaining lesson, the experimental students were
so noisy and doing other activities except studying, like walking around the
classroom, etc. On the other side, the controlled students paid their great
attention to the lesson being delivered. Therefore, they understand the lesson
well far more that the experimental students. The researcher sees that this
behavioral factor also plays important role that results in their lower
achievements.
To sum up, applying peer-assessment through Facebook to encourage
independent learning is considered effective enough to improve the student
scores, but the improvement is less than the traditional drilling method does —
unless the factors are handled, the improvement will be more. The six factors
above may explain why the alternative hypothesis is rejected. In addition, this
study is to examine a theory about independent learning and the study
successfully proves that the method is not appropriate. However, this is not
generalized for all senior high school students. This can only be implemented
for the scope of Kharisma Bangsa School of Global Education for a reason that
41
because this study does not use random sampling, so that the sample selected
cannot be generalized.
42
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION & SUGGESTION
A. Conclusion
From the data analysis using SPSS software, it is shown that implementing
peer-assessment through Facebook in writing narrative text is not better than
the traditional method. In this research, the post-test of students’ mean score (x )
in the experimental class which was treated by implementing peer-assessment
is lower than the post-test of students’ mean score (x ) in the controlled class
which was treated by traditional method. It is 71.25 > 79.5. Furthermore, it is
proven that sig.2-tailed (p) > α 0.092 < 0.05 with negative mean differences,
-8.250. This means that alternative hypothesis (Ha) is rejected and null
hypothesis (H0) is accepted. Therefore, implementation of peer-assessment
through Facebook is not effective towards students’ writing narrative text.
However, the researcher finds several observable factors. Firstly, the
experimental students were only focused on grammatical area in assessing their
friends’ writings. Next, psychologically, independent learning is rather more
suitable for adult learners than that for younger learners. Last, student
comments on Facebook are so limited that those cannot give useful information
for improving their writings. The factors above seemed to have caused the
effectiveness of this study.
B. Suggestion
Here are suggestions the researcher delivers for future studies. Hopefully,
the suggestions are useful for readers in general, and researchers and other
people involved in education specially. The suggestions are as follow:
1. For teachers:
43
a) Teachers should give clear instruction about what students are going
to do in teaching writing narrative text using peer-assessment,
especially in explaining assessment rubric, in order that they are not
confused about what to do or to assess. Simulation on peer-
assessment can be done. In addition, teachers must also consider
and be concerned about the six observable factors.
b) Teachers should use various techniques in writing narrative text, for
example playing music loudly while students are writing the text, so
that they are not bored.
2. For students:
a) Because there is similarity found between narrative and recount
text, students must really be concerned about their different generic
structures.
b) While doing peer-assessment, students are free to comment their
friends’ works. There is no hurt feeling in correcting their writings
because that is for the sake of goodness.
3. For education experts, researchers and academicians:
a) Studies on teaching and learning English for foreign language
learners like in Indonesia are crucial, and must be improved and
updated continuously to get better and relevant technique, method,
or even teaching model.
b) Theories on EFL instruction must be massively tested in the real life
and in various contexts.
44
REFERENCES
Airasian, Peter W. Classroom Assessment: Concept and Application. New York:
McGrawn-Hill, 2003.
Alter, J.B. Writing & Understanding for Certificate Students. Hong Kong: Times
Educational Co. Ltd., 1980.
Brown, James Dean. Comprehensive Guide to English Language Assessment.
New York: McGrawn-Hill, 2003.
Creswell, John W. Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating
Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Third edition. Boston: Pearson
Education, Inc., 2008.
Expanded Scoring Rubric for Analytic and Narrative Writing (Grade 5-11).
PARCC: Partnership for Assessment of Readiness of College and Careers,
(n.d.) [retrieved January 1, 2015]. Provided in:
www.bernardsboe.com/.../Preparing_for_PARCC_Partnership_for_Assessm
ent_of_Readiness_of_College_and_Careers.
Facebook. Wikipedia, February 27, 2015 [retrieved on September 10, 2014].
Provided in: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook.
Hedge, Tricia. Writing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990.
Hernandez, Rosario. Benefits and Challenges of Using Self and Peer-assessment.
Dublin: UCD Teaching and Learning.
Hughes, Arthur. Testing for Language Teachers. Second edition. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2003.
Chen, Amelia. Indonesia Is a Huge Social Media Nation, Tech in Asia, Tech in
Asia, January 14, 2011 [retrieved March, 23, 2015]. Provided in
https://www.techinasia.com/indonesia-social-media-nation.
Kakonis, Thomas E. & Scally, John. Writing in an Age of Technology. London:
Collier Macmillan Publisher, 1978.
Meletiadou, Elena. The Impact of Training Adolescent EFL Learners on Their
Perceptions of Peer-assessment of Writing. Research Papers in Language
Teaching and Learning. Vol. 3, No. 1, February 2012.
45
Pardiyono. Pasti Bisa! Teaching Genre-based Writing. Yogyakarta: Penerbit
Andi, 2007.
Qu, Wenjie & Yang, Shuyi. A Peer and Self-assessment Project Implemented in
Practical Group Work. Journal of Language Teaching and Research. Vol.
1, No. 6, November 2010.
Richards, Jack C. Methodology in Language Teaching: An Anthology of Current
Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
_______________. The Language Teaching Matrix. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1990.
Roger, Henry. Writing System: A Linguistic Approach. Sydney: Blackwell
Publishing, 2005.
Self- and Peer-assessment. CETL: Center of Enhancement for Teaching and
Learning, (n.d.) [retrieved on November 3, 2014]. Provided in:
http://celt.ust.hk/learner-centered-course-design/learning-assessment/self-
and-peer-assessment.
Shih, Ru-Chu. The Effect of Using Facebook to Assist English for Business
Communication Course Instruction. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of
Educational Technology. January 2013, volume 12 Issue 1.
Sugiyono. Metode Penelitian Pendidikan (Pendekatan Kualitatif, Kuantitatif, dan
R&D). Bandung: Penerbit Alfabeta, 2013.
The Writing Process. Purdue Owl, (n.d.) [retrieved January 9, 2015]. Provided at:
https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/section/1/1/.
Trihendradi, T. 7 Langkah Mudah Melakukan Analisis Statistik Menggunakan
SPSS 17. Yogyakarta: Penerbit Andi, 2009.
Widhiarso, Wahyu. Mengaplikasikan Uji-t untuk Membandingkan Gain Score
antar Kelompok dalam Eksperimen. Yogyakarta: Fakultas Psikologi, UGM,
2011.
Weigle, Sara Cushing. Assessing Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2002.
Ruggiero, Vincent Ryan. The Art of Writing. California: Alfred Publishing Co.
Inc., 1981.
46
Zarkasih, Zein. The Effectiveness of Peer Assessment on Students’ Narrative
Writing Achievement (A Quasi-Experimental Study at the Second Grade
Students of SMAN 11 Tangerang Selatan). Jakarta: Islamic State University
Syarif Hidayatullah, 2014.
47
APPENDIX 1
INSTRUMENT OF THE RESEARCH: PRE- & POST-TEST
WRITING TEST
Narrative Text
Choose one of the following options:
1. Write a story about your unforgettable experience.
2. Write about one of famous legends you know.
3. Narrate the plot of your favorite book/film (remember it is not an opinion
essay, it must be a narrative text).
4. Write a story with the title: “The Time We First Met”.
Tips for writing narratives:
Use all generic structures of narrative text (orientation, complication,
sequence of event, resolution, coda).
Use different verbal tenses (past simple, past continuous, past perfect).
Use time expressions (while, until, by the time, as soon as, etc.).
Use adverbs and adjectives (amazingly, sadly, luckily, happy, surprised,
curious, etc.).
Describe atmosphere and feelings as well as what happened (thrilled,
sympathetic, etc.).
Write at least 150 words.
Happy writing!
48
APPENDIX 2
ELICITING A VALID SAMPLE OF WRITING ABILITY
WRITING TEST
Narrative Text (2) type of text
(4) topics
Choose one of the following options:
5. Write a story about your unforgettable experience.
6. Write about one of famous legends you know.
7. Narrate the plot of your favorite book/film (remember it is not an opinion
essay, it must be a narrative text).
8. Write a story with the title: “The Time We First Met”.
in language testing it is not normally interesting in knowing whether students are
creative, imaginative, or even intelligent, have wide general knowledge, or have
good reasons for the opinions they happen to hold1, therefore, the researcher here
gives some themes to not to limit students’ ideas or not to benefit only some of
them
Tips for writing narratives:
Use all generic structures of narrative text (orientation, complication,
sequence of event, resolution, coda).
Use different verbal tenses (past simple, past continuous, past perfect).
Use time expressions (while, until, by the time, as soon as, etc.).
Use adverbs and adjectives (amazingly, sadly, luckily, happy, surprised,
curious, etc.).
Describe atmosphere and feelings as well as what happened (thrilled,
sympathetic, etc.).
Write at least 150 words.
the task must be representative in which five elements are included: operations,
types of text, addressees of texts, topics, dialect and lenghth of texts2
(1) operations
(5) dialect and length of texts
(6) addressees of texts: the addressee here is for the teacher or the researcher of
the course
1 Arthur Huges, Testing for Language Teachers (2
nd Ed.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
(2008), p. 90. 2 Ibid, pp. 84-85.
49
APPENDIX 3
STUDENT’S RUBRIC
Criteria 4
Advanced
3
Proficient
2
Basic
1
Not There Yet
Main Idea &
Focus
Skillfully
combines story
elements
around main
idea
Focus on topic
is profoundly
clear
Combines
story
elements
around main
idea
Focus on
topic is clear
Story elements
do not reveal a
main idea
Focus on topic
is somewhat
clear
There is no clear
main idea
Focus on topic is
not clear
Plot &
Narrative
Devices
Characters,
plot and setting
are developed
strongly
Sensory details
and narratives
are skillfully
evident
Characters,
plot and
setting are
developed
Sensory
details and
narratives are
evident
Characters,
plot and setting
are minimally
developed
Attempts to use
narratives and
sensory details
Lacks development
on characters, plot
and setting
Fails to use sensory
details and
narratives
Organization
Strong and
engaging
description
Sequencing of
details are
effective and
logical
Engaging
description
Adequate
sequencing of
details
Description
needs some
work
Sequencing is
limited
Description and
sequencing needs
major revision
Voice Voice is
expressive and
confident
Voice is
authentic
Voice is
undefined
Writer's voice is
not evident
Sentence
Fluency
Sentence
structure
enhances
meaning
Purposeful
use of
sentence
structure
Sentence
structure is
limited
No sense of
sentence structure
Conventions
A strong sense
of writing
conventions is
apparent
Standard
writing
conventions
is apparent
Grade level
appropriate
conventions
Limited use of
appropriate
conventions
50
APPENDIX 4
PRE- & POST-TEST SCORES OF THE EXPERIMENTAL
CLASS
Pre-test
Student
code
Criteria Total
I II III IV
1 15 20 15 15 65
2 5 5 5 5 30
3 5 5 5 5 20
4 10 15 10 10 45
5 15 20 15 10 60
6 15 15 15 15 50
7 10 15 15 15 55
8 15 15 15 10 55
9 5 15 15 15 50
10 5 10 10 15 40
11 5 10 10 15 40
12 5 10 10 10 35
13 15 10 15 10 50
14 5 10 15 10 40
15 5 15 10 15 45
16 5 15 10 15 45
17 10 10 10 15 45
18 15 15 15 15 60
19 5 5 5 5 30
20 5 5 5 5 20
Average 44
Post-test
Student
code
Criteria Total
I II III IV
1 25 25 20 20 90
2 25 20 15 20 80
3 10 10 15 15 50
4 20 20 20 20 80
5 20 20 20 20 80
6 10 15 20 20 65
7 25 25 20 20 90
8 25 20 20 20 85
9 5 20 20 20 65
10 5 15 15 15 50
11 5 20 20 20 65
12 5 15 15 15 50
13 5 15 20 20 60
14 5 15 15 20 55
15 20 20 20 20 80
16 25 20 20 20 85
17 20 20 20 25 85
18 20 15 20 20 75
19 20 15 20 15 70
20 10 15 20 20 65
Average 71.25
51
APPENDIX 5
PRE- & POST-TEST SCORES OF THE CONTROLLED CLASS
Pre-test
Student
code
Criteria Total
I II III IV
1 5 10 15 15 45
2 5 5 10 10 30
3 5 15 15 15 50
4 10 15 10 15 50
5 5 10 15 10 40
6 15 15 15 15 60
7 5 10 15 15 45
8 10 10 10 10 40
9 5 15 10 15 45
10 5 15 10 15 45
11 5 15 15 15 50
12 5 15 10 15 45
13 5 15 10 15 45
14 5 15 15 15 50
15 10 15 10 15 50
16 15 15 10 15 55
17 20 20 20 15 75
18 15 15 10 15 55
19 15 15 10 15 55
20 15 15 10 15 55
Average 49.25
Post-test
Student
code
Criteria Total
I II III IV
1 5 15 20 20 60
2 5 10 10 10 30
3 25 20 25 20 90
4 25 25 25 20 95
5 25 25 20 20 90
6 20 20 20 20 80
7 25 25 20 20 90
8 25 25 20 25 95
9 5 20 20 20 65
10 25 20 20 20 85
11 20 20 25 20 85
12 25 25 20 20 90
13 25 25 20 20 90
14 5 20 20 20 65
15 20 20 20 15 75
16 25 25 25 20 95
17 25 25 25 20 95
18 20 20 20 20 80
19 20 15 15 20 70
20 5 20 20 20 65
Average 79.5
52
APPENDIX 6
GAINED SCORES OF THE EXPERIMENTAL CLASS
Student’s code PRETEST POSTTEST GAINED
1 65 90 25
2 30 80 50
3 20 50 30
4 45 80 35
5 60 80 20
6 50 65 15
7 55 90 35
8 55 85 30
9 50 65 15
10 40 50 10
11 40 65 25
12 35 50 15
13 50 60 10
14 40 55 15
15 45 80 35
16 45 85 40
17 45 85 40
18 60 75 15
19 30 70 40
20 20 65 45
Average 44 71.25 27.25
53
APPENDIX 7
GAINED SCORES OF THE CONTROLLED CLASS
Student’s code PRETEST POSTTEST GAINED
1 45 60 15
2 30 35 5
3 50 90 40
4 50 95 45
5 40 90 50
6 60 80 20
7 45 90 45
8 40 95 55
9 45 65 20
10 45 85 40
11 50 85 35
12 45 90 45
13 45 90 45
14 50 65 15
15 50 75 25
16 55 95 40
17 75 95 20
18 55 80 25
19 55 70 15
20 55 65 10
Average 49.25 79.75 30.5
54
APPENDIX 8
LESSON PLAN 1: CONTROLLED CLASS
Sekolah : Kharisma Bangsa School of Global Education
Mata Pelajaran : Bahasa Inggris
Kelas/Semester : X / 2
Topik : Narrative Text
Keterampilan : Writing
Durasi : 2x40 menit
Hari/Tanggal : Senin-Rabu, 19-21 Januari 2015
A. Kompetensi Inti
KI 1: Menghayati dan mengamalkan ajaran agama yang dianutnya.
KI 2: Menghayati dan mengamalkan perilaku jujur, disiplin, tanggungjawab,
peduli (gotong royong, kerjasama, toleran, damai), santun, responsif dan
pro-aktif dan menunjukkan sikap sebagai bagian dari solusi atas berbagai
permasalahan dalam berinteraksi secara efektif dengan lingkungan sosial
dan alam serta dalam menempatkan diri sebagai cerminan bangsa dalam
pergaulan dunia.
KI 4: Mengolah, menalar, dan menyaji dalam ranah konkret dan ranah abstrak
terkait dengan pengembangan dari yang dipelajarinya di sekolah secara
mandiri, dan mampu menggunakan metoda sesuai kaidah keilmuan.
B. Kompetensi Dasar dan Indikator
KD 1.1: Mensyukuri kesempatan dapat mempelajari bahasa Inggris sebagai
bahasa pengantar Komunikasi internasional yang diwujudkan dalam
semangat belajar.
KD 2.1: Menunjukkan perilaku santun dan peduli dalam melaksanakan
Komunikasi interpersonal dengan guru dan teman.
KD 2.2: Menunjukkan perilaku jujur, disiplin, percaya diri, dan bertanggung
jawab dalam melaksanakan Komunikasi transaksional dengan guru dan
teman.
KD 2.3: Menunjukkkan perilaku tanggung jawab, peduli, kerjasama, dan cinta
damai, dalam melaksanakan Komunikasi fungsional
KD 3.1: Menganalisis fungsi sosial, struktur teks, dan unsur kebahasaan dari
teks pemaparan jati diri, sesuai dengan konteks penggunaannya.
55
Indikator:
Memahami pengertian teks naratif
Menganalisis struktur teks naratif yang baik dan benar
Menyimpulkan pengertian teks naratif yang telah dipelajari
Membedakan teks naratif dengan teks recount
Memahami hakikat teks naratif dengan menyebutkan struktur dasarnya
C. Tujuan Pembelajaran
Selama dan setelah mengikuti kegiatan pembelajaran melalui metode ceramah
dan presentasi siswa mampu:
1. Memahami apa itu teks naratif berikut struktur dasar dan unsur
kebahasaanya
2. Menganalisis suatu teks naratif dengan memerhatikan prinsip-prinsipnya
3. Mampu membedakan teks naratif dengan teks-teks lain
D. Materi Pembelajaran
Materi fakta : Cerita (yg terkait dengan kehidupan sehari-hari)
Materi konsep : Pengertian teks naratif (teori)
Materi prinsip : Latihan mengidentifikasi sebuah cerita
Materi prosedur : Orientation, Complication, Resolution, Coda (generic
structures)
(Bahan ajar terlampir)
E. Metode Pembelajaran
Strategi pembelajaran : Task-based Learning
Pendekatan : Scientific
Metode : Ceramah
F. Media, Alat dan Sumber Pembelajaran
Media : -
Alat/ Bahan : Infocus, Laptop
Sumber Belajar : Buku Bahasa Inggris “Aim High: Oxford”, Internet
G. Materi Pokok:
Definition
A narrative is a text that tells a story to entertain the audience.
Narrative can be presented as written or spoken texts. Written
narratives often take the form of novels. The story is usually told by a
narrator.
56
Generic Structures
Orientation
Complication
Sequence of events
Resolution
Coda
Example
Snow White
Once upon a time there lived a little girl named Snow White. She lived
with her Aunt and Uncle because her parents were dead.
One day she heard her Uncle and Aunt talking about leaving Snow
White in the castle because they both wanted to go to America and
they didn’t have enough money to take Snow White.
Snow White did not want her Uncle and Aunt to do this so she decided
it would be best if she ran away. The next morning she ran away from
home when her Aunt and Uncle were having breakfast. She ran away
into the woods.
Then she saw this little cottage. She knocked but no one answered so
she went inside and fell asleep. Meanwhile, the seven dwarfs were
coming home from work. They went inside. There they found Snow
White sleeping. Then Snow White woke up. She saw the dwarfs. The
dwarfs said, “what is your name?” Snow White said, “My name is
Snow White.”
Doc, one of the dwarfs, said, “If you wish, you may live here with us.”
Snow White said, “Oh could I? Thank you.” Then Snow White told the
dwarfs the whole story and finally Snow White and the 7 dwarfs lived
happily ever after.
57
H. Langkah-langkah Kegiatan Pembelajaran:
Pertemuan I: 2x40 Menit
No Kegiatan Deskripsi Alokasi waktu
1 Pendahuluan Doa
Mengecek kehadiran
Menyampaikan tujuan
pembelajaran dan penelitian
Menyampaikan metode dan
kegiatan belajar
15 menit
2 Kegiatan Inti Mengamati
Guru menjelaskan definisi teks
naratif: struktur dasarnya,
karakteristik kebahasaannya.
Dan memberikan contoh salah
satu legenda naratif: “Snow
White.”
Guru mengarahkan siswa
untuk membuka buku “Aim
High” (hal. 17) dan
membacakan cerita tentang
“Niki Lauda”. Siswa
mendengarkan mengamati
dengan seksama sembari
memperhatikan fungsi sosial,
struktur teks, unsur
kebahasaan, maupun format
penulisannya.
Menanya
Dengan bimbingan dan arahan
guru, siswa mempertanyakan
antara lain: tujuan sebuah
cerita dan perbedaan antara
teks naratif dan teks recount,
dan atau fungsi keduanya.
25 menit
58
Mengeksplorasi
Siswa diarahkan untuk
menganalisa penulisan teks
naratif yang baik di buku “Aim
High” dan juga dari cerita-
cerita rakyat yang mereka
ketahui.
Mengasosiasi
Siswa menghubungkan
pengetahuan tentang
cerita/legenda yang telah
dimiliki dengan pelajaran,
terutama coda dari cerita yang
disampaikan.
Siswa memperoleh umpan
balikan (feedback) dari guru
dan teman tentang struktur dan
unsur kebahasaan teks.
Mengomunikasikan
Siswa berlatih
mengidentifikasi teks naratif
dengan memperhatikan
struktur dasarnya, dan unsur
kebahasaan yang benar di
bahan bacaan yang ada.
20 menit
3 Penutup Membuat kesimpulan
Evaluasi
Penugasan: menulis sebuah
teks naratif dengan tema
bebas
10 menit
I. Penilaian
Penilaian sikap : Siswa memperhatikan dengan seksama pemaparan
guru dan mampu bekerja sama dengan guru dan
atau teman sejawat.
59
Penilaian pengetahuan : Siswa mampu memaparkan teks naratif berikut
struktur dasarnya, tata bahasa, kosa kata, dan ejaan
dengan benar.
Penilaian keterampilan : Siswa mampu menulis teks naratif yang sederhana.
Mengetahui,
Kepala Sekolah,
Sutirto, S.Si., M.T.
Pondok Cabe, 19 Januari 2015
Guru Peneliti Bahasa Inggris,
Aziz Awaludin
60
APPENDIX 9
LESSON PLAN 1: EXPERIMENTAL CLASS
Sekolah : Kharisma Bangsa School of Global Education
Mata Pelajaran : Bahasa Inggris
Kelas/Semester : X / 2
Topik : Narrative Text
Keterampilan : Writing
Durasi : 2x40 menit
Hari/Tanggal : Rabu, 21 Januari 2015
A. Kompetensi Inti
KI 1: Menghayati dan mengamalkan ajaran agama yang dianutnya.
KI 2: Menghayati dan mengamalkan perilaku jujur, disiplin, tanggungjawab,
peduli (gotong royong, kerjasama, toleran, damai), santun, responsif dan
pro-aktif dan menunjukkan sikap sebagai bagian dari solusi atas berbagai
permasalahan dalam berinteraksi secara efektif dengan lingkungan sosial
dan alam serta dalam menempatkan diri sebagai cerminan bangsa dalam
pergaulan dunia.
KI 4: Mengolah, menalar, dan menyaji dalam ranah konkret dan ranah abstrak
terkait dengan pengembangan dari yang dipelajarinya di sekolah secara
mandiri, dan mampu menggunakan metoda sesuai kaidah keilmuan.
B. Kompetensi Dasar dan Indikator
KD 1.1: Mensyukuri kesempatan dapat mempelajari bahasa Inggris sebagai
bahasa pengantar Komunikasi internasional yang diwujudkan dalam
semangat belajar.
KD 2.1: Menunjukkan perilaku santun dan peduli dalam melaksanakan
Komunikasi interpersonal dengan guru dan teman.
KD 2.2: Menunjukkan perilaku jujur, disiplin, percaya diri, dan bertanggung
jawab dalam melaksanakan Komunikasi transaksional dengan guru dan
teman.
KD 2.3: Menunjukkkan perilaku tanggung jawab, peduli, kerjasama, dan cinta
damai, dalam melaksanakan Komunikasi fungsional
KD 3.1: Menganalisis fungsi sosial, struktur teks, dan unsur kebahasaan dari
teks pemaparan jati diri, sesuai dengan konteks penggunaannya.
61
Indikator:
Memahami pengertian teks naratif
Menganalisis struktur teks naratif yang baik dan benar
Menyimpulkan pengertian teks naratif yang telah dipelajari
Membedakan teks naratif dengan teks recount
Memahami hakikat teks naratif dengan menyebutkan struktur dasarnya
C. Tujuan Pembelajaran
Selama dan setelah mengikuti kegiatan pembelajaran melalui metode ceramah
dan presentasi siswa mampu:
4. Memahami apa itu teks naratif berikut struktur dasar dan unsur
kebahasaanya
5. Menganalisis suatu teks naratif dengan memerhatikan prinsip-prinsipnya
6. Membedakan teks naratif dengan teks-teks lain
D. Materi Pembelajaran
Materi fakta : Cerita (yg terkait dengan kehidupan sehari-hari)
Materi konsep : Pengertian teks naratif (teori)
Materi prinsip : Latihan mengidentifikasi sebuah cerita
Materi prosedur : Orientation, Complication, Resolution, Coda (generic
structures)
(Bahan ajar terlampir)
E. Metode Pembelajaran
Strategi pembelajaran : Task-based Learning
Pendekatan : Scientific
Metode : Ceramah
F. Media, Alat dan Sumber Pembelajaran
Media : -
Alat/ Bahan : Infocus, Laptop
Sumber Belajar : Buku Bahasa Inggris “Aim High: Oxford”, Internet
G. Materi Pokok
Definition
A narrative is a text that tells a story to entertain the audience.
Narrative can be presented as written or spoken texts. Written
narratives often take the form of novels. The story is usually told by a
narrator.
62
Generic Structures
Orientation
Complication
Sequence of events
Resolution
Coda
Example
Snow White
Once upon a time there lived a little girl named Snow White. She lived
with her Aunt and Uncle because her parents were dead.
One day she heard her Uncle and Aunt talking about leaving Snow
White in the castle because they both wanted to go to America and
they didn’t have enough money to take Snow White.
Snow White did not want her Uncle and Aunt to do this so she decided
it would be best if she ran away. The next morning she ran away from
home when her Aunt and Uncle were having breakfast. She ran away
into the woods.
Then she saw this little cottage. She knocked but no one answered so
she went inside and fell asleep. Meanwhile, the seven dwarfs were
coming home from work. They went inside. There they found Snow
White sleeping. Then Snow White woke up. She saw the dwarfs. The
dwarfs said, “what is your name?” Snow White said, “My name is
Snow White.”
Doc, one of the dwarfs, said, “If you wish, you may live here with us.”
Snow White said, “Oh could I? Thank you.” Then Snow White told the
dwarfs the whole story and finally Snow White and the 7 dwarfs lived
happily ever after.
63
H. Langkah-langkah Kegiatan Pembelajaran:
Pertemuan 1: 2x40 Menit
No. Kegiatan Deskripsi Alokasi waktu
1 Pendahuluan Doa
Mengecek kehadiran
Menyampaikan tujuan
pembelajaran dan penelitian
Menyampaikan metode dan
kegiatan belajar
15 menit
2 Kegiatan Inti Mengamati
Guru menjelaskan definisi teks
naratif: struktur dasarnya,
karakteristik kebahasaannya.
Dan memberikan contoh salah
satu legenda naratif: “Snow
White.”
Guru mengarahkan siswa
untuk membuka buku “Aim
High” (hal. 17) dan
membacakan cerita tentang
“Niki Lauda”. Siswa
mendengarkan mengamati
dengan seksama sembari
memperhatikan fungsi sosial,
struktur teks, unsur
kebahasaan, maupun format
penulisannya.
Menanya
Dengan bimbingan dan arahan
guru, siswa mempertanyakan
antara lain: tujuan sebuah
cerita dan perbedaan antara
teks naratif dan teks recount,
dan atau fungsi keduanya.
25 menit
64
Mengeksplorasi
Siswa diarahkan untuk
menganalisa penulisan teks
naratif yang baik di buku “Aim
High” dan juga dari cerita-
cerita rakyat yang mereka
ketahui.
Mengasosiasi
Siswa menghubungkan
pengetahuan tentang
cerita/legenda yang telah
dimiliki dengan pelajaran,
terutama coda dari cerita yang
disampaikan.
Siswa memperoleh umpan
balikan (feedback) dari guru
dan teman tentang struktur dan
unsur kebahasaan teks.
Mengomunikasikan
Siswa berlatih
mengidentifikasi teks naratif
dengan memperhatikan
struktur dasarnya, dan unsur
kebahasaan yang benar di
bahan bacaan yang ada di buku
untuk kemudian bias
bermanfaat ketika melakukan
peer-assessment.
20 menit
3 Penutup Membuat kesimpulan
Evaluasi
Penugasan: menulis sebuah
teks naratif dengan tema
bebas
10 menit
I. Penilaian
Penilaian sikap : Siswa memperhatikan dengan seksama pemaparan
guru dan mampu bekerja sama dengan guru dan
atau teman sejawat.
65
Penilaian pengetahuan : Siswa mampu memaparkan teks naratif berikut
struktur dasarnya, tata bahasa, kosa kata, dan ejaan
dengan benar.
Penilaian keterampilan : Siswa mampu menulis teks naratif yang sederhana.
Mengetahui,
Kepala Sekolah,
Sutirto, S.Si., M.T.
Pondok Cabe, 21 Januari 2015
Guru Peneliti Bahasa Inggris,
Aziz Awaludin
66
APPENDIX 10
LESSON PLAN 2: CONTROLLED CLASS
Sekolah : Kharisma Bangsa School of Global Education
Mata Pelajaran : Bahasa Inggris
Kelas/Semester : X / 2
Topik : Narrative Text
Keterampilan : Writing
Durasi : 2x40 menit
Hari/Tanggal : Rabu-Jumat, 21-23 Januari 2015
A. Kompetensi Inti
KI 1: Menghayati dan mengamalkan ajaran agama yang dianutnya.
KI 2: Menghayati dan mengamalkan perilaku jujur, disiplin, tanggungjawab,
peduli (gotong royong, kerjasama, toleran, damai), santun, responsif dan
pro-aktif dan menunjukkan sikap sebagai bagian dari solusi atas berbagai
permasalahan dalam berinteraksi secara efektif dengan lingkungan sosial
dan alam serta dalam menempatkan diri sebagai cerminan bangsa dalam
pergaulan dunia.
KI 4: Mengolah, menalar, dan menyaji dalam ranah konkret dan ranah abstrak
terkait dengan pengembangan dari yang dipelajarinya di sekolah secara
mandiri, dan mampu menggunakan metoda sesuai kaidah keilmuan.
B. Kompetensi Dasar dan Indikator
KD 1.1: Mensyukuri kesempatan dapat mempelajari bahasa Inggris sebagai
bahasa pengantar Komunikasi internasional yang diwujudkan dalam
semangat belajar.
KD 2.2: Menunjukkan perilaku jujur, disiplin, percaya diri, dan bertanggung
jawab dalam melaksanakan Komunikasi transaksional dengan guru dan
teman.
KD 2.3: Menunjukkkan perilaku tanggung jawab, peduli, kerjasama, dan cinta
damai, dalam melaksanakan Komunikasi fungsional
KD 3.1: Menganalisis fungsi sosial, struktur teks, dan unsur kebahasaan dari
teks pemaparan jati diri, sesuai dengan konteks penggunaannya.
Indikator:
Memahami hakikat teks naratif yang benar sehingga mampu
membuatnya dalam bentuk tulisan
67
KD 4.1: Menyusun teks lisan dan tulis sederhana, untuk memaparkan,
menanyakan, dan merespon cerita naratif, dengan memperhatikan
fungsi sosial, struktur teks, dan unsur kebahasaan, secara benar dan
sesuai dengan konteks.
Indikator:
Mampu membedakan teks naratif dengan teks-teks lain, khususnya
recount
Memahami hakikat teks naratif dengan menyebutkan struktur
dasarnya, terutama orientation dan complication
Bisa menulis sebuah cerita naratif yang baik dan benar
C. Tujuan Pembelajaran
Selama dan setelah mengikuti kegiatan pembelajaran melalui metode peer-
assessment dan presentasi siswa mampu:
7. Memahami 2 struktur utama teks naratif: orientation dan complication
8. Mampu memproduksi tulisan berupa teks naratif yang baik dan benar
D. Materi Pembelajaran
Materi fakta : Kisah rakyat yang melegenda dan kisah yang pernah
dialami siswa
Materi konsep : Pengertian orientation dan complication dari teks naratif
(teori)
Materi prinsip : Latihan menulis orientation dan complication untuk
sebuah cerita
Materi prosedur : Memahami pengertian dasar teks naratif dan
menuliskannya
(Bahan ajar terlampir)
E. Metode Pembelajaran
Strategi pembelajaran : Task-based Learning
Pendekatan : Scientific
Metode : Drilling
F. Media, Alat dan Sumber Pembelajaran
Media : -
Alat/ Bahan : Infocus, Laptop
Sumber Belajar : Buku Bahasa Inggris “Oxford: Aim High”, Internet
68
G. Materi Pokok
What is narrative?
A narrative is a text that tells a story to entertain the audience.
Narrative can be presented as written or spoken texts.
The story is usually told by a narrator.
If the narrator is one of the characters in the story is said to be told in
the first person.
If a person outside the story is the narrator, then the story is being told
in the third person.
First step
Start with delivering “orientation” or introduction of the text
In this part the narrator tells the audience who is in the story,
when it is happening, where it is happening and what is going
on.
Second step
Thrill your reader with emotional “complication”
This is the part of the story where the narrator tells about
something that will begin in a chain of events. These events
will affect one or more of the characters. The complication is
the trigger or problem.
The difference between narrative and recount text
“Snow White”
(Orientation)
Once upon a time there lived a little girl named Snow White. She lived
with her Aunt and Uncle because her parents were dead.
(Complication & Sequence of Event)
One day she heard her Uncle and Aunt talking about leaving Snow
White in the castle because they both wanted to go to America and
they didn’t have enough money to take Snow White.
Snow White did not want her Uncle and Aunt to do this so she decided
it would be best if she ran away. The next morning she ran away from
69
home when her Aunt and Uncle were having breakfast. She ran away
into the woods.
(Resolution)
Then she saw this little cottage. She knocked but no one answered so
she went inside and fell asleep. Meanwhile, the seven dwarfs were
coming home from work. They went inside. They found Snow White
sleeping. Then Snow White woke up. She saw the dwarfs. The dwarfs
said, “What is your name?” Snow White said, “My name is Snow
White.”
Doc, one of the dwarfs, said, “If you wish, you may live here with us.”
Snow White said, “Oh could I? Thank you.” Then Snow White told
the dwarfs the whole story and finally Snow White and the 7 dwarfs
lived happily ever after.
“Visiting Semirang”
On Sunday, I and my best friend, Sari, visited Semirang Waterfall in
Ungaran. It was the first time for me to visit the waterfall.
When we arrived at the hill, I felt so fresh and I could enjoy the scene.
The air was so pure and all I could see only green and green.
In Ungaran, we took a little bit trekking to find Semirang Waterfall. It
was too bad for me because the distance to see the waterfall was too
far.
After taking so far distance, we found Semirang Waterfall. What a
beautiful waterfall. We enjoyed the nice water in the rain forest
surrounding the waterfall.
Hearing the sound of falling water made me peace and relax. It was
also excellent drowning out background sound. Playing with the water
made me feel so happy.
Finally, the time was over. It was time for us to go home. It was an
unforgettable moment. I really enjoyed it.
70
H. Langkah-langkah Kegiatan Pembelajaran:
Pertemuan II: 2x40 Menit
No Kegiatan Deskripsi Alokasi
waktu
1 Pendahuluan Doa
Mengecek kehadiran
Menyampaikan tujuan
pembelajaran
Menyampaikan metode
dan kegiatan belajar
15 menit
2 Kegiatan Inti Mengamati
Guru menjelaskan dan
menekankan 2 struktur
dasar teks naratif: 1)
orientation dan
complication. Kemudian
guru memberikan dari
kedua struktur di cerita
“Snow White” untuk
diamati.
Guru mengarahkan siswa
untuk membuka buku
“Aim High” (hal. 18) dan
memerhatikan cerita “Jesse
Owen”. Siswa membaca
dan mengamati dengan
seksama sembari
memperhatikan orientation
dan complication dari
cerita tersebut.
Menanya
Guru kemudian
menstimulus siswa
menanyakan hal berkaitan
2 struktur dasar tersebut
dengan teks yang telah
25 menit
71
dibaca.
Mengeksplorasi
Siswa diminta untuk
menyebutkan legenda
rakyat yang mereka
ketahui dan kemudian
mengeksplorasinya dengan
memaparkan orientation
dan complication dari
cerita itu.
Mengasosiasi
Siswa mengasosiasikan
pemahaman yang telah
didapat dengan
memaparkan orientation
dan complication dari
cerita yang ada di buku.
Mengomunikasikan
Siswa mengomunikasikan
dengan guru akan tulisan-
tulisan yang telah mereka
buat.
20 menit
3 Penutup Membuat kesimpulan
Evaluasi
Penugasan: menulis
sebuah teks naratif
dengan tema “The Man
Who Can’t be Moved”
10 menit
I. Penilaian
Penilaian sikap : Siswa memperhatikan dengan seksama pemaparan
guru.
Penilaian pengetahuan : Siswa mampu menjelaskan orientation dan
complication dari teks naratif.
Penilaian keterampilan : Siswa mampu mengoreksi dan memberikan
masukan terhadap tulisan teman sejawatnya.
72
Mengetahui,
Kepala Sekolah,
Sutirto, S.Si., M.T.
Pondok Cabe, 21 Januari 2015
Guru Peneliti Bahasa Inggris,
Aziz Awaludin
73
APPENDIX 11
LESSON PLAN 2: EXPERIMENTAL CLASS
Sekolah : Kharisma Bangsa School of Global Education
Mata Pelajaran : Bahasa Inggris
Kelas/Semester : X / 2
Topik : Narrative Text
Keterampilan : Writing
Durasi : 2x40 menit
Hari/Tanggal : Kamis-Jumat, 22-23 Januari 2015
A. Kompetensi Inti
KI 1: Menghayati dan mengamalkan ajaran agama yang dianutnya.
KI 2: Menghayati dan mengamalkan perilaku jujur, disiplin, tanggungjawab,
peduli (gotong royong, kerjasama, toleran, damai), santun, responsif dan
pro-aktif dan menunjukkan sikap sebagai bagian dari solusi atas berbagai
permasalahan dalam berinteraksi secara efektif dengan lingkungan sosial
dan alam serta dalam menempatkan diri sebagai cerminan bangsa dalam
pergaulan dunia.
KI 4: Mengolah, menalar, dan menyaji dalam ranah konkret dan ranah abstrak
terkait dengan pengembangan dari yang dipelajarinya di sekolah secara
mandiri, dan mampu menggunakan metoda sesuai kaidah keilmuan.
B. Kompetensi Dasar dan Indikator
KD 1.1: Mensyukuri kesempatan dapat mempelajari bahasa Inggris sebagai
bahasa pengantar Komunikasi internasional yang diwujudkan dalam
semangat belajar.
KD 2.2: Menunjukkan perilaku jujur, disiplin, percaya diri, dan bertanggung
jawab dalam melaksanakan Komunikasi transaksional dengan guru dan
teman.
KD 2.3: Menunjukkkan perilaku tanggung jawab, peduli, kerjasama, dan cinta
damai, dalam melaksanakan Komunikasi fungsional
KD 3.1: Menganalisis fungsi sosial, struktur teks, dan unsur kebahasaan dari
teks pemaparan jati diri, sesuai dengan konteks penggunaannya.
Indikator:
Mampu bekerja sama dengan teman sebaya untuk melakukan peer-
assessment
74
Memahami hakikat teks naratif yang benar sehingga mampu
mengomentari karya temannya
Bisa memberika masukan yang berguna dan konstruktif terhadapt
tulisan teman
KD 4.1: Menyusun teks lisan dan tulis sederhana, untuk memaparkan,
menanyakan, dan merespon cerita naratif, dengan memperhatikan
fungsi sosial, struktur teks, dan unsur kebahasaan, secara benar dan
sesuai dengan konteks.
Indikator:
Membedakan teks naratif dengan teks recount
Memahami hakikat teks naratif dengan menyebutkan struktur
dasarnya, terutama 2 fokus struktur: orientation dan complication
Mampu menulis sebuah cerita naratif yang baik dan benar
C. Tujuan Pembelajaran
Selama dan setelah mengikuti kegiatan pembelajaran melalui metode peer-
assessment dan presentasi siswa mampu:
9. Mampu menulis teks naratif yang baik dan benar
10. Dapat memahami dengan baik rubrik siswa khusus teks naratif
11. Bisa melakukan peer-assessment terhadap tulisan teman sejawatnya
D. Materi Pembelajaran
Materi fakta : Kisah rakyat yang melegenda, baik cerita lokal maupun
internasional
Materi konsep : Pengertian orientation dan complication dari teks naratif
(teori) dan pengertian peer-assessment
Materi prinsip : Latihan mengidentifikasi tulisan teman sejawat
menggunakan rubrik
Materi prosedur : Menulis teks naratif kemudian menukarnya dengan teman
(Bahan ajar terlampir)
E. Metode Pembelajaran
Strategi pembelajaran : Task-based Learning
Pendekatan : Scientific
Metode : Peer-assessment
F. Media, Alat dan Sumber Pembelajaran
Media : -
Alat/ Bahan : Infocus, Laptop
75
Sumber Belajar : Buku Bahasa Inggris “Oxford: Aim High”, Internet
G. Materi Pokok
What is narrative?
A narrative is a text that tells a story to entertain the audience.
Narrative can be presented as written or spoken texts.
The story is usually told by a narrator.
If the narrator is one of the characters in the story is said to be told in
the first person.
If a person outside the story is the narrator, then the story is being told
in the third person.
First step
Start with delivering “orientation” or introduction of the text
In this part the narrator tells the audience who is in the story,
when it is happening, where it is happening and what is going
on.
Second step
Thrill your reader with emotional “complication”
This is the part of the story where the narrator tells about
something that will begin in a chain of events. These events
will affect one or more of the characters. The complication is
the trigger or problem.
The difference between narrative and recount text
“Snow White”
(Orientation)
Once upon a time there lived a little girl named Snow White. She lived
with her Aunt and Uncle because her parents were dead.
(Complication & Sequence of Event)
One day she heard her Uncle and Aunt talking about leaving Snow
White in the castle because they both wanted to go to America and
they didn’t have enough money to take Snow White.
Snow White did not want her Uncle and Aunt to do this so she decided
76
it would be best if she ran away. The next morning she ran away from
home when her Aunt and Uncle were having breakfast. She ran away
into the woods.
(Resolution)
Then she saw this little cottage. She knocked but no one answered so
she went inside and fell asleep. Meanwhile, the seven dwarfs were
coming home from work. They went inside. They found Snow White
sleeping. Then Snow White woke up. She saw the dwarfs. The dwarfs
said, “What is your name?” Snow White said, “My name is Snow
White.”
Doc, one of the dwarfs, said, “If you wish, you may live here with us.”
Snow White said, “Oh could I? Thank you.” Then Snow White told
the dwarfs the whole story and finally Snow White and the 7 dwarfs
lived happily ever after.
“Visiting Semirang”
On Sunday, I and my best friend, Sari, visited Semirang Waterfall in
Ungaran. It was the first time for me to visit the waterfall.
When we arrived at the hill, I felt so fresh and I could enjoy the scene.
The air was so pure and all I could see only green and green.
In Ungaran, we took a little bit trekking to find Semirang Waterfall. It
was too bad for me because the distance to see the waterfall was too
far.
After taking so far distance, we found Semirang Waterfall. What a
beautiful waterfall. We enjoyed the nice water in the rain forest
surrounding the waterfall.
Hearing the sound of falling water made me peace and relax. It was
also excellent drowning out background sound. Playing with the water
made me feel so happy.
Finally, the time was over. It was time for us to go home. It was an
unforgettable moment. I really enjoyed it.
77
H. Langkah-langkah Kegiatan Pembelajaran:
Pertemuan II: 2x40 Menit
No. Kegiatan Deskripsi Alokasi waktu
1 Pendahuluan Doa
Mengecek kehadiran
Menyampaikan tujuan
pembelajaran
Menyampaikan metode dan
kegiatan belajar
15 menit
2 Kegiatan Inti Mengamati
Guru menjelaskan dan
menekankan 2 struktur dasar
teks naratif: 1) orientation dan
complication. Kemudian guru
memberikan dari kedua di
cerita “Snow White” untuk
diamati.
Guru mengarahkan siswa
untuk membuka buku “Aim
High” (hal. 18) dan
memerhatikan cerita “Jesse
Owen”. Siswa membaca dan
mengamati dengan seksama
sembari memperhatikan
orientation dan complication
dari cerita tersebut.
Siswa dikenalkan dengan peer-
assessment: pengertian,
kegunaan, dan prosedur
pelaksanaannya.
Menanya
Guru kemudian menstimulus
siswa menanyakan hal
berkaitan 2 struktur dasar
tersebut dengan teks yang telah
dibaca.
25 menit
78
Mengeksplorasi
Siswa diminta untuk
menyebutkan legenda rakyat
yang mereka ketahui dan
kemudian mengeksplorasinya
dengan memaparkan
orientation dan complication
dari cerita itu.
Mengasosiasi
Siswa mengasosiasikan
pemahaman yang telah didapat
dengan memaparkan
orientation dan complication
dari teks yang dibuat teman
sejawatnya (bagian dari peer-
assessment).
Siswa memperoleh umpan
balikan (feedback) teman
teman sejawat tentang
orientation dan complication
untuk tulisan mereka.
Mengomunikasikan
Siswa mempelajari masukan-
masukan yang diberika
temannya dan kemudian
mengomunikasikan dengan
guru.
Siswa kemudian dikenalkan
dengan peer-assessment
melalui Facebook dan cara
praktis pelaksanaannya.
20 menit
3 Penutup Membuat kesimpulan
Evaluasi
Penugasan: menulis sebuah
teks naratif dengan tema “The
Man Who Can’t be Moved”
dan unggah ke grup Facebook
yang tersedia
10 menit
79
I. Penilaian
Penilaian sikap : Siswa memperhatikan dengan seksama pemaparan
guru dan mampu bekerja sama dengan teman
sejawat dalam melakukan peer-assessment.
Penilaian pengetahuan : Siswa mampu menjelaskan orientation dan
complication dari teks naratif.
Penilaian keterampilan : Siswa mampu mengoreksi dan memberikan
masukan terhadap tulisan teman sejawatnya.
Instrument penilaian : Rubrik khusus teks naratif dari PARCC
(Partnership for Assessment of Readiness of
College and Careers) untuk guru dan juga siswa.
Mengetahui,
Kepala Sekolah,
Sutirto, S.Si., M.T.
Pondok Cabe, 22 Januari 2015
Guru Peneliti Bahasa Inggris,
Aziz Awaludin
80
APPENDIX 12
LESSON PLAN 3: CONTROLLED CLASS
Sekolah : Kharisma Bangsa School of Global Education
Mata Pelajaran : Bahasa Inggris
Kelas/Semester : X / 2
Topik : Narrative Text
Keterampilan : Writing
Durasi : 2x40 menit
Hari/Tanggal : Senin, 26 Januari 2015
A. Kompetensi Inti
KI 1: Menghayati dan mengamalkan ajaran agama yang dianutnya.
KI 2: Menghayati dan mengamalkan perilaku jujur, disiplin, tanggungjawab,
peduli (gotong royong, kerjasama, toleran, damai), santun, responsif dan
pro-aktif dan menunjukkan sikap sebagai bagian dari solusi atas berbagai
permasalahan dalam berinteraksi secara efektif dengan lingkungan sosial
dan alam serta dalam menempatkan diri sebagai cerminan bangsa dalam
pergaulan dunia.
KI 4: Mengolah, menalar, dan menyaji dalam ranah konkret dan ranah abstrak
terkait dengan pengembangan dari yang dipelajarinya di sekolah secara
mandiri, dan mampu menggunakan metoda sesuai kaidah keilmuan.
B. Kompetensi Dasar dan Indikator
KD 1.1: Mensyukuri kesempatan dapat mempelajari bahasa Inggris sebagai
bahasa pengantar Komunikasi internasional yang diwujudkan dalam
semangat belajar.
KD 2.2: Menunjukkan perilaku jujur, disiplin, percaya diri, dan bertanggung
jawab dalam melaksanakan Komunikasi transaksional dengan guru dan
teman.
KD 2.3: Menunjukkkan perilaku tanggung jawab, peduli, kerjasama, dan cinta
damai, dalam melaksanakan Komunikasi fungsional
KD 3.1: Menganalisis fungsi sosial, struktur teks, dan unsur kebahasaan dari
teks pemaparan jati diri, sesuai dengan konteks penggunaannya.
81
KD 4.1: Menyusun teks lisan dan tulis sederhana, untuk memaparkan,
menanyakan, dan merespon cerita naratif, dengan memperhatikan
fungsi sosial, struktur teks, dan unsur kebahasaan, secara benar dan
sesuai dengan konteks.
Indikator:
Memahami resolution dan coda untuk sebuah teks naratif
Menunjukkan resolution dan coda dari cerita yang ada di buku
pelajaran
Menulis sebuah cerita yang memuat minimal 2 struktur: resolution dan
coda
C. Tujuan Pembelajaran
Selama dan setelah mengikuti kegiatan pembelajaran melalui metode ceramah
dan presentasi siswa mampu:
12. Dapat menunjukkan resolution dan coda dari cerita-cerita yang terdapat di
buku dan legenda yang diketahui
13. Mampu memproduksi tulisan yang berisi resolution dan coda
D. Materi Pembelajaran
Materi fakta : Cerita-cerita yang diambil dari kisah hidup seseorang
Materi konsep : Pengertian resulotion dan coda dari teks naratif (teori)
Materi prinsip : Latihan mengidentifikasi resulotion dan coda dari buku
Materi prosedur : menerapkan resulotion dan coda pada tulisan pribadi
(Bahan ajar terlampir)
E. Metode Pembelajaran
Strategi pembelajaran : Task-based Learning
Pendekatan : Scientific
Metode : Drilling
F. Media, Alat dan Sumber Pembelajaran
Media : -
Alat/ Bahan : Infocus, Laptop
Sumber Belajar : Buku Bahasa Inggris “Oxford: Aim High”, Internet
G. Materi Pokok
Third step
Try to create unpredictable ending, “resolution”
82
In this part of the narrative the complication is sorted out or
problem is solved.
Example
‘Doc, one of the dwarfs, said, “If you wish, you may live here with us.” Snow
White said, “Oh could I? Thank you.” Then Snow White told the dwarfs the
whole story and finally Snow White and the 7 dwarfs lived happily ever after.’
Forth step
Coda
The narrator includes a coda if there is a moral or message to be
learned from the story.
Exercise
Identify resolution of Buck story about
“The Call of the Wild” in AIM HIGH: OXFORD book
(page 20)
H. Langkah-langkah Kegiatan Pembelajaran:
Pertemuan III: 2x40 Menit
No Kegiatan Deskripsi Alokasi waktu
1 Pendahuluan Doa
Mengecek kehadiran
Menyampaikan tujuan
pembelajaran
Menyampaikan metode dan
kegiatan belajar
15 menit
2 Kegiatan Inti Mengamati
Guru menerangkan dan
memfokuskan 2 struktur dasar
teks naratif: 1) resolution dan
25 menit
83
coda. Kemudian guru
memberikan dari kedua di
cerita “Snow White” untuk
diamati.
Guru menyuruh siswa untuk
membuka buku “Oxford: Aim
High” (hal. 20) dan
memerhatikan cerita “The Call
of the Wild”. Siswa membaca
dan mengamati dengan
seksama sembari
memperhatikan resolution dan
coda dari cerita itu.
Menanya
Guru kemudian merangsang
siswa menanyakan hal
berkaitan 2 struktur dasar
tersebut dengan teks yang telah
dibaca.
Siswa diminta menanyakan
hal-hal belum mereka
mengerti.
Mengeksplorasi
Siswa diminta untuk
menceritakan kisah film/buku
yang mereka ketahui dan
kemudian menggalinya dengan
memaparkan resolution dan
coda dari cerita tersebut.
Mengasosiasi
Siswa menghubungkan
pemahaman yang telah
dipunya dengan
menghubungkan pengertian
resolution dan coda dengan
cerita yang ada di buku
Mengomunikasikan
Siswa mengomunikasikan
tulisan yang telah mereka buat
dengan guru.
20 menit
84
3 Penutup Membuat kesimpulan
Evaluasi
Mengingatkan untuk bersiap
menghadapi post-test di
pertemuan selanjutnya
10 menit
I. Penilaian
Penilaian sikap : Siswa memperhatikan dengan seksama pemaparan
guru dan mampu bekerja sama dengan teman
sejawat.
Penilaian pengetahuan : Siswa mampu menjelaskan resolution dan coda
dari teks naratif temannya.
Penilaian keterampilan : Siswa mampu menulis resolution dan coda untuk
sebuah cerita.
Mengetahui,
Kepala Sekolah,
Sutirto, S.Si., M.T.
Pondok Cabe, 26 Januari 2015
Guru Peneliti Bahasa Inggris,
Aziz Awaludin
85
APPENDIX 13
LESSON PLAN 3: EXPERIMENTAL CLASS
Sekolah : Kharisma Bangsa School of Global Education
Mata Pelajaran : Bahasa Inggris
Kelas/Semester : X / 2
Topik : Narrative Text
Keterampilan : Writing
Durasi : 2x40 menit
Hari/Tanggal : Senin, 26 Januari 2015
A. Kompetensi Inti
KI 1: Menghayati dan mengamalkan ajaran agama yang dianutnya.
KI 2: Menghayati dan mengamalkan perilaku jujur, disiplin, tanggungjawab,
peduli (gotong royong, kerjasama, toleran, damai), santun, responsif dan
pro-aktif dan menunjukkan sikap sebagai bagian dari solusi atas berbagai
permasalahan dalam berinteraksi secara efektif dengan lingkungan sosial
dan alam serta dalam menempatkan diri sebagai cerminan bangsa dalam
pergaulan dunia.
KI 4: Mengolah, menalar, dan menyaji dalam ranah konkret dan ranah abstrak
terkait dengan pengembangan dari yang dipelajarinya di sekolah secara
mandiri, dan mampu menggunakan metoda sesuai kaidah keilmuan.
B. Kompetensi Dasar dan Indikator
KD 1.1: Mensyukuri kesempatan dapat mempelajari bahasa Inggris sebagai
bahasa pengantar Komunikasi internasional yang diwujudkan dalam
semangat belajar.
KD 2.2: Menunjukkan perilaku jujur, disiplin, percaya diri, dan bertanggung
jawab dalam melaksanakan Komunikasi transaksional dengan guru dan
teman.
KD 2.3: Menunjukkkan perilaku tanggung jawab, peduli, kerjasama, dan cinta
damai, dalam melaksanakan Komunikasi fungsional
KD 3.1: Menganalisis fungsi sosial, struktur teks, dan unsur kebahasaan dari
teks pemaparan jati diri, sesuai dengan konteks penggunaannya.
86
KD 4.1: Menyusun teks lisan dan tulis sederhana, untuk memaparkan,
menanyakan, dan merespon cerita naratif, dengan memperhatikan
fungsi sosial, struktur teks, dan unsur kebahasaan, secara benar dan
sesuai dengan konteks.
Indikator:
Memahami 2 fokus struktur teks naratif: resolution dan coda
Memproduksi cerita yang memuat minimal 2 unsur dasar narasi:
resolution dan coda
Mengimplementasikan peer-assessment pada tulisan teman sejawat
Mengambil manfaat (berupa koreksian) dari komentar teman-
temannya di Facebook
C. Tujuan Pembelajaran
Selama dan setelah mengikuti kegiatan pembelajaran melalui metode ceramah
dan presentasi siswa mampu:
14. Bisa menulis cerita yang memuat resolution dan coda
15. Mampu menulis dan memposting teks naratif di beranda grup Facebook
16. Dapat memberikan komentar terhadap hasil tulisan teman sebagai
feedback yang kemudian digunakan untuk memperbaiki tulisannya
D. Materi Pembelajaran
Materi fakta : Cerita-cerita yang diambil dari kisah hidup seseorang
Materi konsep : Pengertian resulotion dan coda dari teks naratif (teori)
Materi prinsip : Latihan mengidentifikasi resulotion dan coda dari tulisan
teman sejawat dan buku
Materi prosedur : Memahami feedback dari teman dan kemudian
menjadikannya perbaikan untuk tulisan pribadi
(Bahan ajar terlampir)
E. Metode Pembelajaran
Strategi pembelajaran : Task-based Learning
Pendekatan : Scientific
Metode : Peer-assessment
F. Media, Alat dan Sumber Pembelajaran
Media : -
Alat/ Bahan : Infocus, Laptop
Sumber Belajar : Buku Bahasa Inggris “Oxford: Aim High”, Internet
87
G. Materi Pokok
Third step
Try to create unpredictable ending, “resolution”
In this part of the narrative the complication is sorted out or
problem is solved.
Example
‘Doc, one of the dwarfs, said, “If you wish, you may live here with us.” Snow
White said, “Oh could I? Thank you.” Then Snow White told the dwarfs the
whole story and finally Snow White and the 7 dwarfs lived happily ever after.’
Forth step
Coda
The narrator includes a coda if there is a moral or message to be
learned from the story.
Exercise
Identify resolution of Buck story about
“The Call of the Wild” in AIM HIGH: OXFORD book
(page 20)
H. Langkah-langkah Kegiatan Pembelajaran:
Pertemuan III: 2x40 Menit
No. Kegiatan Deskripsi Alokasi waktu
1 Pendahuluan Doa
Mengecek kehadiran
Menyampaikan tujuan
pembelajaran
Menyampaikan metode dan
kegiatan belajar
15 menit
88
2 Kegiatan Inti Mengamati
Guru menerangkan dan
memfokuskan 2 struktur dasar
teks naratif: 1) resolution dan
coda. Kemudian guru
memberikan dari kedua di
cerita “Snow White” untuk
diamati.
Guru menyuruh siswa untuk
membuka buku “Oxford: Aim
High” (hal. 20) dan
memerhatikan cerita “The Call
of the Wild”. Siswa membaca
dan mengamati dengan
seksama sembari
memperhatikan resolution dan
coda dari cerita itu.
Siswa diperlihatkan dengan
hasil peer-assessment yang
telah mereka lakukan di
Facebook.
Menanya
Guru kemudian mernagsang
siswa menanyakan hal
berkaitan 2 struktur dasar
tersebut dengan teks yang telah
dibaca.
Siswa diminta menanyakan
hal-hal belum mereka
mengerti.
25 menit
Mengeksplorasi
Siswa diminta untuk
menceritakan kisah film/buku
yang mereka ketahui dan
kemudian menggalinya dengan
memaparkan resolution dan
coda dari cerita tersebut.
Mengasosiasi
Siswa menghubungkan
pemahaman yang telah
dipunya dengan menunjukkan
20 menit
89
resolution dan coda dari teks
yang dibuat teman sejawatnya
yang telah mereka nilai.
Siswa diminta menjadikan
umpan balikan (feedback)
teman untuk memperbaiki
tulisannya di masa yang akan
datang.
Mengomunikasikan
Siswa mempelajari masukan-
masukan yang diberika
temannya dan kemudian
mengomunikasikan dengan
guru.
3 Penutup Membuat kesimpulan
Evaluasi
Mengingatkan untuk bersiap
menghadapi post-test di
pertemuan selanjutnya
10 menit
I. Penilaian
Penilaian sikap : Siswa memperhatikan dengan seksama pemaparan
guru dan mampu bekerja sama dengan teman
sejawat dalam melakukan peer-assessment.
Penilaian pengetahuan : Siswa mampu menjelaskan resolution dan coda
dari teks naratif temannya.
Penilaian keterampilan : Siswa menganalisa masukan yang diberikan teman
sejawatnya.
Instrument penilaian : Rubrik khusus teks naratif dari PARCC
(Partnership for Assessment of Readiness of
College and Careers) untuk guru dan juga siswa.
90
Mengetahui,
Kepala Sekolah,
Sutirto, S.Si., M.T.
Pondok Cabe, 26 Januari 2015
Guru Peneliti Bahasa Inggris,
Aziz Awaludin
91
APPENDIX 14
OVERVIEW OF FACEBOOK GROUP
Visit the group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/1592353290978382/
92
APPENDIX 15
PRE-TREATMENT OBSERVATION SHEET
Date:___________________
Class identification:
Facilitation at classroom:
Student attitudes:
Teacher attitudes:
Class environment:
93
APPENDIX 15
POST-TREATMENT OBSERVATION SHEET
Date:___________________
Class identification:
Students’ attitudes when the treatment is given:
Students’ attitudes to the tasks assigned:
Number and content of comments on students’ writings:
Students’ responses to the feedbacks:
THE RESEARCHER’S BIOGRAPHY
Aziz Awaludin was born on Monday, October 2nd
,
1989 in Bogor. He began his formal education at
SD Negeri 3 Pingku in Parung Panjang and
continued his study at Pondok Modern Ummul
Quro Al-Islami in Bogor. After graduated from the
boarding school he did not directly pursue his
bachelor degree, but he was assigned by the school
to devote himself for one year at Al-Ansor Islamic
Boarding School in Padangsidimpuan City, North
Sumatera. However, he realized that education is very important and that it can
change his life to be better. Thus, after striving very hard, in 2010 he became a
university student of English Education Department in Syarif Hidayatullah
Islamic State University Jakarta.
Other than studying English education at the university, he was actively involved
in leadership organization HMI (Himpunan Mahasiswa Islam), writing forum FLP
(Forum Lingkar Pena), board of student organization of the department, and other
social organizations. Also, he enriched himself with knowledge of research and
language in Research and Language Development Program held by the university
for three months. Along his undergraduate program he grabbed several
achievements, such as: 1) nominated as an outstanding student 2014 in Faculty of
Tarbiyah and Teacher’s Training by dean of the faculty, 2) achieving Student
Achievement Award 2014 for his work Kamus Santri (a three-language dictionary
in Bahasa Indonesia, English and Arabic) by rector of the university, 3)
participating Summer Camp 2011 in Turkey for a month, and 4) awarded as the
best graduate of English Education Department in the 96th
graduation ceremony
2015.
He believes the best person in the world is a person who is beneficial for others,
“khairunnaas(i) „anfauhum linnaas(i).”
The researcher can be reached by:
Email : [email protected]
Twitter : @Aziz_Awe