THE CORRELATION BETWEEN GRAMMAR AND

WRITING ACHIEVEMENT

(A Correlation Study at the 2nd

Semester of English Language

Education Program (ELEP) Students of Universitas Brawijaya In

Academic Year 2016/2017)

UNDERGRADUATE THESIS

BY

MEDIKA FEBRIANTI

NIM 135110500111035

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION PROGRAM

FACULTY OF CULTURAL STUDIES

UNIVERSITAS BRAWIJAYA

2017

THE CORRELATION BETWEEN GRAMMAR AND WRITING

ACHIEVEMENT

(A Correlation Study at the 2nd

Semester of English Language Education Program

(ELEP) Students of Universitas Brawijaya In Academic Year 2016/2017)

UNDERGRADUATE THESIS

Presented to

Universitas Brawijaya

in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree of Sarjana Pendidikan

BY

MEDIKA FEBRIANTI

NIM 135110500111035

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION PROGRAM

FACULTY OF CULTURAL STUDIES

UNIVERSITAS BRAWIJAYA

2017

v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

All praises are always to Allah, the Lord of the world, who has given mercy, the

health, strength, and the blessing to the researcher, hence she can finish this undergraduate

thesis. Shalawat and Salam are always presented to the prophet Muhammad SAW, who

guides and brings the bright future for all people. This undergraduate thesis is presented to

English Language Education Program, Faculty of Cultural Studies Universitas Brawijaya as a

partial fulfillment of the requirement of becoming Sarjana Pendidikan (S.Pd).

The researcher delivers her gratitude to Mrs. Dian Novita Dewi, S.Pd., M,Li. as

supervisor, and Dr. Esti Junining, M.Pd. as an examiner and the head of English Education

Study Program for their patience, guidance, and education for the researcher in the

completion of her undergraduate thesis. The researcher also delivers lovely grateful to her

parents, Bapak Fatehi M.Nuch and Ibu Rahminda, her brothers and sisters, and her second

parents Bik Lelen and Mang Ical for their support and praise. Then, the researcher also wants

to express to her beloved to all of the Students of English Language Education Program,

which could not state the name one by one. The researcher also delivers her deepest gratitude

to all of the participants, the raters, and friends for their suggestion and helps during

conducting this study.

Hopefully, this undergraduate thesis can be useful for everyone, especially who

interested in English learning and education. Thank you and May Allah bless us.

Malang, July 17th

2017

The Researcher

vi

ABSTRACT

Febrianti, Medika. 2017. The Correlation Between Grammar and Writing Achievement

(A Correlation Study at the 2nd

Semester of English Language Education Program (ELEP)

Students of Universitas Brawijaya In Academic Year 2016/2017). English Language

Education Program, Faculty of Cultural Studies, Universitas Brawijaya. Supervisor: Dian

Novita Dewi, S.Pd., M.Li.

Keywords: Grammar, Writing, and Correlation between grammar and writing.

Grammar and writing are a language component and skill that should be learned by

language learners. Grammar is the rule or a system that regulate the structure and the

meaning of the sentence, while writing is communication in the written form. This study aims

at finding out the correlation between students’ grammar and writing achievement of English

Language Education Program (ELEP) Faculty of Cultural Studies, Universitas Brawijaya at

the second semester of the academic year of 2016/2017.

This study was quantitative research and used correlation as research design. The

sample were 40 students chosen by using quota sampling. The researcher applied two kinds

of test as an instrument, multiple choice of grammar and essay writing that adopted from

Peterson’s TOEFL Success book by Bruce Rogers (2005). The grammar test consists of 25

questions and writing consists of one topic instruction. Therefore, the data are in the form of

students scores taken from the tests. In this study, the data were in the form of numbers,

hence, the data were computed statistically by using Pearson Product Moment (SPSS).

The result of this study was, the coefficient correlation (ro) was - 0.024 and to was -

0.149. By N 40 and df 38, it was compared with rtable and ttable at significant 5% were

0.312 and 1.686. It verified that ro was lower than rtable (- 0.024 < 0.312) and also to was

lower than ttable (-0.149 < 1.686). It means that a very weak negative correlation or there is

no significant correlation between two variables (grammar and writing). It means that

alternative hypothesis (ha) was rejected and null hypothesis (ho) was accepted. Based on the

result, it is suggested for the further researcher to take more sample to get a more accurate

result and make a deeper investigation.

vii

ABSTRAK

Febrianti, Medika. 2017. Korelasi Antara Pencapaian Tatabahasa dan Menulis

(Penelitian Korelasi Pada Mahasiswa Program Pendididkan Bahasa Inggris Semester Kedua

Tahun Akademik 2016/2017 di Universitas Brawijaya). Program Studi Pendididkan Bahasa

Inggris, Fakultas Ilmu Budaya. Universitas Brawijaya. Pembimbing: Dian Novita Dewi,

S.Pd., M.Li.

Kata Kunci: Tatabahasa, Menulis, dan Korelasi antara tatabahasa dan menulis.

Tatabahasa dan menulis adalah komponen bahasa dan kecakapan yang harus

dipelajari pembelajar bahasa. Tatabahasa adalah peraturan atau sistem yang mengatur

struktur dan makna sebuah kalimat. Sedangkan menulis yaitu komunikasi yang dilakukan

dalam bentuk tulisan. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menemukan korelasi antara pencapaian

menulis dan tatabahasa mahasiswa Program Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Fakultas Ilmu

Budaya, Universitas Brawijaya semester kedua tahun akademik 2016/2017.

Penelitian ini adalah penelitian kuantitatif dan menggunakan disain korelasi. Sampel

berjumlah 40 mahasiswa yang dipilih menggunakan sampel kuota. Peneliti menggunakan dua

macam tes sebagai instrumen, tatabahasa dalam bentuk pilihan berganda dan menulis esei

yang diadopsi dari buku Peterson’s TOEFL Success oleh Bruce Rogers (2005). Tes

tatabahasa terdiri dari 25 soal dan untuk tes menulis terdiri dari satu topik. Sehingga data

diperoleh dari nilai tes siswa. Pada penelitian ini, data yang diperoleh berupa angka-angka,

sehingga, data dihitung secara statistik menggunakan aplikasi SPSS.

Hasil yang diperoleh pada penelitian ini adalah, korelasi koefisien (ro) - 0.024 dan to -

0.149. Dengan N 40 and df 38, dibandingkan dengan rtable dan ttable pada signifikan 5%

yaitu 0.312 dan 1.686. Dibuktikan dengan ro lebih kecil dari rtable (- 0.024 < 0.312) dan juga

to lebih kecil dari ttable (-0.149 < 1.686). Hal ini berarti ada korelasi negatif yang sangat

lemah (tidak signifikan) antara 2 variabel (tatabahasa dan menulis). Sehingga hipotesis

alternatif (ha) ditolak dan hipotesis null (ho) diterima. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian ini,

disarankan bagi peneliti selanjutnya untuk mengambil sampel lebih banyak sehingga

mendapatkan hasil yang lebih akurat dan memperdalam konteks penelitian.

viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TITLE PAGE .............................................................................................. i

DECLARATION OF AUTHORSHIP ....................................................... ii

SUPERVISORS’ APPROVAL ................................................................... iii

BOARD OF EXAMINERS’ APPROVAL ................................................. iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................ v

ABSTRACT................................................................................................. vi

ABSTRAK ................................................................................................... vii

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

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

LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................... xi

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

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background of the Study .................................................... 1

1.2 Problem of the Study ......................................................... 4

1.3 Objective of the Study........................................................ 5

1.4 Significances of the Study .................................................. 5

1.5 Limitation of the Study ...................................................... 5

1.6 Hypothesis ......................................................................... 5

1.7 Definition of Key Terms ..................................................... 6

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1 Grammar............................................................................ 7

2.2 Writing .............................................................................. 9

2.3 Correlation between Grammar and Writing ........................ 11

2.4 Test. ................................................................................... 12

2.5 Achievement ....................................................................... 13

2.5.1 Grammar Achievement ............................................. 14

2.5.2 Writing Achievement ................................................ 15

2.5 Previous Studies .................................................................. 16

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODS

3.1 Research Design ................................................................ 19

3.2 Data and Source of Data .................................................... 20

3.2.1 Population ................................................................. 20

3.2.2 Sample ...................................................................... 20

3.3 Research Instrument............................................................ 21

3.4 Data Collection ................................................................... 22

3.5 Data Analysis...................................................................... 24

CHAPTER IV FINDING AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Findings .............................................................................. 27

4.1.1 Student’s Achievement in Grammar ......................... 27

4.1.2 Students Achievement in Writing .............................. 28

4.1.3 Correlation Coefficient .............................................. 30

4.1.4 Testing the Hypothesis .............................................. 32

4.2 Discussion .......................................................................... 33

ix

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

5.1 Conclusion .......................................................................... 36

5.2 Suggestions ......................................................................... 36

REFERENCES ............................................................................................ 38

APPENDICES ............................................................................................. 41

x

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

Table 3.1 The Interpretation of Correlation “r” Product Moment ................ 25

Table 4.1. The Result of Scoring Reliability between Rater1 and Rater2...... 29

Table 4.2 Correlation Coefficient................................................................ 30

xi

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

Figure 2.1 The Three Dimensions of Grammar .............................................. 8

Figure 3.1 Positive Correlation Figure ........................................................... 26

Figure 3.2 Negative Correlation Figure ......................................................... 26

Figure 3.3 No Correlation Figure................................................................... 26

xii

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendices Page

1. Grammar Test ........................................................................................... 42

2. Grammar Answer Keys ............................................................................ 45

3. Writing Test ............................................................................................. 46

4. Writing Scoring Rubric ............................................................................. 50

5. Grammar Scores ....................................................................................... 52

6. Writing Scores .......................................................................................... 53

7. List of r-table Significance ........................................................................ 54

8. List of t-table Significance ........................................................................ 55

9. Berita Acara Bimbingan Skripsi ............................................................... 56

1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

This chapter provides the background of the study, problem of the study,

objective of the study, significances of the study, and definition of the key terms.

1.1 Background of the Study

A language is a tool for a human to communicate. From communication,

people can know everything by sharing each other. Nevertheless, every region or

nation has their own language. Thus, people need language as lingua franca.

English is one of the languages that used by many people in the world. People

should study English to be able to communicate with other people in the world.

People who study language who become her or his additional language are

language learners. Language learners are divided into three. First is first language

learner or native speaker. Actually, first language (L1) learner acquires the

language during early childhood or does effortlessly in studying the language.

Second is second language learner, second language (L2) learner is people who

study a language that is used in daily life or in his or her country, example Bahasa

Indonesia for Indonesian. The third is a foreign language learner. Foreign

language learner is people who study the foreign language for any purposes,

examples are for academic or occupational. English is foreign language In

Indonesia.

2

In mastering language as like English, language learners should understand

four language skills which consist of listening, reading, speaking, and writing.

However, mastery of these four skills is influenced by mastery of language

components. One of the language components that affect the mastery of language

skills is Grammar. Grammar is applied to analyze a language system, and the

study of grammar is not just considered an essential feature of language learning,

but it also helps learners to acquire another language (Rutherford, 1988 in

Purpura, 2004, p. 1). Besides, Mart (2013) says that grammar plays a crucial role

in a better language improvement. Language learners should study grammar to be

effective language users because grammar will help them to arrange meaningful

words and messages, build better sentences in speaking and writing performances,

and make sentences understandable. It means that grammar gives contribution in

improving the competence using language, especially in writing.

Writing always occupies a place in English language course. The reasons

of people need to learn and write in English are for occupational or academic

purposes. Students of English Language Education Program (ELEP) especially,

need to learn and write to prepare themselves for the final academic assignment

and paper writing. Leggette et al (2015) state that “essentially, writing is one way

to understand another’s thought process; therefore, writing is unique because of its

capability to explore the human mind.” From that statement, it can be concluded

that writing is the way of people to communicate, to give an opinion or to show

their thoughts. For the students, they should have the capability to write paper,

essay, or any assignment that is required in the written form. Thus, students

3

should master writing skill and apply their grammar knowledge in their writing.

Not only mastering language skills but also language component should be

mastered by language learners.

Based on the explanation above, it can be concluded that between

grammar and writing have a correlation. Based on the result of the study from

Syopiana (2011) shows that there is a significant correlation between students’

grammar (parallel structure) mastery and their ability in writing a narrative

paragraph at the second year of SMAN 1 Kuantan Hilir. The other one is from

Hajana (2006), he finds writing quality is significantly correlated with

grammatical competence. The fact is that the number of word order errors show a

significant correlation with the writing quality. He finds the elements that

affecting the quality of writing namely capitalization errors, paragraphing,

awkward usage, and confusing terms. From that statement, it can be concluded

that when students or people organizing word order better can increase their

writing quality.

Since the researcher wants to find out the correlation between grammar

and writing achievement, the previous studies are needed to support this study.

The researcher uses two previous studies. First, Septiani (2014) has conducted the

correlation research by the title “The Correlation Between Grammar Mastery And

Writing Ability (A Correlation Study at the 6th

Semester of English Education

Department Students of UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta).”

The result of her

study, she found that the value of rxy was 0.165 and the degree of freedom (df)

was 28. Then from the r table of Product Moment Correlation, the value of

4

significance 5% and 1% were 0.374 and 0.478. It means that the value of (rxy) is

lower than the value of (r table) of Product Moment. Whereas it indicates there is

no significant correlation between grammar mastery and writing ability. Second,

Maulana (2016) which the title is “The Correlation Between Grammar

Competence And Writing Skills of The First Year Students at SMK Negeri 6

Malang”. The results of his study, he found the value of rxy was 0.782 and it was

compared with r table in the level of significance 5%. The value of r table was

0.279 which means there is a significant correlation between grammar

competence and writing skills of first-year students at SMK Negeri 6 Malang.

They have conducted in different settings with different results.

Based on the previous studies, the researcher is interested in conducting

this study. This study will conduct at Universitas Brawijaya. The subject of this

study is Students of English Language Education Program (ELEP) at the second

semester of the academic year of 2016/2017. The researcher will give grammar

and writing test that is adopted from the TOEFL preparation book. The reason for

choosing them as the subject of this study is the researcher wants to know the

correlation between grammar and writing achievement based on the result of the

test. Besides, they are English education students that should master both of

grammar and writing courses.

1.2 Problem of the Study

Based on the description in the introduction, it can be stated that problem

of the study in this study is: “What is the correlation between grammar and

writing achievement?”

5

1.3 Objective of the Study

Based on the problem of the study, the objective of this study is to gain the

correlation between grammar and writing achievement.

1.4 Significances of the Study

This study is done to find out the correlation between grammar and writing

achievement. Besides, it is also expected to give a significant contribution to the

readers, especially for the researcher herself, English teacher or lecturer, and

further researcher.

1. For the researcher, this study hopefully can be an experience and

knowledge as the stepping stone to make better research in the future.

2. For English teacher or lecturer, this study can be a knowledge that

grammar and writing have a correlation. Therefore, it can be the

information to increase the way of teaching grammar and writing.

3. For the further researcher, this study can be a reference to make better

research with another instrument in particular subjects.

1.5 Limitation of the Study

The researcher focuses on finding the correlation between students’

grammar and writing achievement based on the result of the test given. The

research was conducted in Universitas Brawijaya. The subjects of the study were

40 students of ELEP at the second semester in academic year 2016/2017.

1.6 Hypothesis

Ha: If there is a significant correlation between grammar and writing

achievement.

6

Ho: If there is no significant correlation between grammar and writing

achievement.

1.7 Definition of the Key Terms

The following are the key terms used by the researcher in explaining the

important terms in this research,

1. Grammar: Generally the collection of regulation determining the correct word

order at the sentence level (Nunan, 2003, p. 154)

2. Writing: The way of individual creates his or her views and shares meanings

on a topic (Hyland, 2003, p. 9)

3. Correlation between grammar and writing: The condition when people have

good grammar and writing

4. Grammar achievement: Grammar score that students got from the result of

TOEFL grammar test

5. Writing achievement: Writing score that students got from the result of TOEFL

writing test

7

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

This chapter provides the theory of grammar, writing, test, achievement,

and previous studies.

2.1 Grammar

Talking about grammar, people should know the definition of it first.

Grammar is the rule to determine the correct word order in the sentence (Nunan,

2003, p. 154). In line with Brown (2000, p. 362), grammar is a regulation system

in a sentence that organizing the standard arrangement and relationship of words.

Thus from the definition above, it can be concluded that grammar is the rule or a

system that regulate the structure and the meaning of the sentence.

Grammar is necessary within communication. Celce-Murcia et al. (1999,

p. 4) view grammar with the communicative end in mind, is the introduction that

grammar is not always about a collection of forms but involves three dimensions

namely (morpho)syntax, semantics, and pragmatic. Grammatical structures do not

only have a morphosyntactic form, their function also for expressing meaning

(semantics) in context-appropriate use (pragmatics). We refer to them as the

dimensions of form, meaning, and use. They are interrelated, that is a change in

one dimension will affect a change in another.

8

Figure 2.1 The Three Dimensions of Grammar

(Murcia & Freeman, 1999)

Dealing with form, it is about how a particular grammar structure is

constructed with its morphology and its syntax. Dealing with meaning, it is to

know what a particular English grammar structure means. Pragmatics deal with

issues concerning the choices that users of a particular language make when using

the forms of language in communication. Simply pragmatics is about the forms of

language that language users choose to use in communication. Therefore based on

the explanation above, study and teach grammar is essential for using language

within communication.

All of the time, teaching grammar which people know or mean is teaching

descriptive and prescriptive grammar. Weaver (n.d., p. 7) states that teaching

descriptive and prescriptive grammar are teaching sentence elements and

structure, usage, sentence revision, and punctuation and mechanics via grammar

book or workbook, or perhaps a computer program. The reasons why people teach

MEANING

What does it mean?

(Meaningful-ness)

USE

When/Why is it used?

(Appropriatenes)

FORM

How is it formed?

(Accuracy)

9

grammar are because (1) the study of grammar is important because language is

supreme human achievement that deserves to be studied, (2) it can be an

important vehicle for learning to study something the way a scientist does, (3) it

will help form the mind by promoting “mental discipline”, (4) it will help student

to get better score on standardized tests that include grammar, usage, and

punctuation, (5) it will help people master another language more readily, (6) it

will help people master the socially prestigious conventions of spoken and/or

written usage and (7) it will help people become better users of the language,

means more effective as listeners and speakers, and especially as readers and

writers. From the reasons above it can be summarized that studying grammar is

important because it will improve automatically the ability of language users to

use language effectively, get higher scores on standardized tests, and help them

mastery of another language.

2.2 Writing

Writing is communication in the written form. From writing, people can

express themselves. People can share their ideas, thoughts, experiences, and much

more. Sokolik in David Nunan (2003, p. 88) defines writing by a series of

contrasts, it is both a physical and a mental act, its purpose is both to express and

impress, it is both a process and a product. At the most basic level, writing is the

physical act of making words or ideas to some medium. On the other hand,

writing is the mental work of discovering ideas, thinking how to utter them, and

organizing them into statements and paragraphs that will be clear to a reader. For

the purpose of writing, writers serve two masters: themselves, and readers or the

10

audience. The process of writing is imagined, organize, draft, edit, read, and

reread. This process is often cyclical, and sometimes disorderly. Finally, the

products of the writing are an essay, letter, story, or research report. Hence, people

can take the idea that writing is a process of organizing the ideas into statement or

paragraphs to medium for themselves or the readers in a form of an essay, letter,

story, or research report.

According to Linse (2005, p. 102), steps of the writing process consists of

the five stages namely prewrite, write, revise, edit, and publish. Prewrite is the

first step, students or learners prepare to write and collect their thoughts or ideas.

This step will make students do not worry to write if it is done properly. Second is

write, it is the step to write down all of the ideas. Here, the students do not worry

about form or correctness or even the order. The aim is to put the ideas on paper

as soon as possible. Third is revise, it steps to check and organize the piece of

writing so the ideas are logical and flow together. Fourth is edit, this step is for

teacher, classmates, or others to help learners proofread their work to make sure

that there are not any content, grammatical or spelling errors. Fifth is published,

this step rewrites the piece of writing in the form of the student book, paper, and

computer so that it can be showed or shared.

The reasons for teaching writing to English as a foreign language (EFL)

students are reinforcement, language development, learning style, and writing as a

skill (Harmer, 1998, p. 79). Reinforcement, some students acquire language in a

purely oral/aural way, but most of us benefit greatly from seeing the language

written down. The visual demonstration of language construction helps to get the

11

new languages to memory. Language development, the process of writing helps

people learn as people go along. The mental activity people have done in order to

construct properly written texts is all part of the ongoing learning experience.

Learning style, some students are quick at picking up the language just by looking

and listening. Some others, it may take a longer. For many learners, writing is

appropriate to think things to produce language in a slower way. Meanwhile, it

can also be a rush and bother of interpersonal face-to-face communication.

Writing as a skill, students need to know how to write letters, how to put written

reports together, how to reply to advertisements and how to write using electronic

media.

1.3 Correlation between Grammar and Writing

In language teaching and learning, Haussamen, Benjamin, Kolln, and

Wheeler (2003) in Suthiwartnarueput and Wasanasomsithi (2012) suggest that the

meaning of a language associated with its grammatical knowledge need to be

learned by non-native English students. The reason is without grammatical

knowledge, students are likely conveying their ideas in a wrong way thus affect

the meaningfulness of their communication. Therefore, it indicates the relation

between grammar and writing does exist. Suthiwartnarueput and Wasanasomsithi

(2012) say that writing competence is contributed by grammatical competence.

Hence, students’ writing can be better if it is helped by understanding grammar

rules and usage. The participants of their study were Thai EFL students majoring

sports science, 83 first-year students undergraduate students at a university in

Nakhon Pathom Province, Thailand. Sixty-one student in this group were male

12

and twenty-two of them were female. Based on their result, facebook enhanced

the students’ grammatical and writing competence. Furthermore, grammar and

writing had a relationship.

Meanwhile, concerning the nature of written communication, Harmer

(2004, p.7) explains:

When we are engaged in spoken communication, we often decide

what to say as the conversation continuous on the basis of what our

co-participant are saying...instead of being able to get our points

across unhindered, we may be constantly interrupted and so have to

proceed in a less structured way than we had anticipated...writing,

however, is as we have seen, significantly different.

The statements indicate that in speaking, sometimes, clarification and repetition

are possible to correct ungrammatical expression that has been said. Besides,

speaking context such as the speakers’ tone, gestures, and facial expression

usually support spoken communication. Speaking context say everything thus

grammatical way is not really necessary. In written communication, the case is

different. The readers cannot ask something that confusing them in a piece of

written work. So, they are totally dependent upon what they read. Hence,

grammar and writing are dependent each other. The role of grammar remains as

one of the essential component of effective written communication.

2.4 Test

According to Brown (2003, p. 3) “test is a method of measuring a person’s

ability, knowledge, or performance in a given domain”. First, a test is a method, it

is an instrument that requires performance of the test taker. Second, the test must

measure the general ability or specific competencies or objectives. Third, a test

13

measures an individual’s ability, knowledge, or performance. Testers should know

who the test-takers are and their background, thus testers can make an appropriate

test for the test taker and know how to interpret their scores. Fourth, a test

measure performance, but the result also imply the test taker’s ability. The last is a

test measure a given domain. A well-constructed test is an instrument that

provides an accurate measure of the test taker's ability in a particular domain.

Therefore a test defining as a tool that its purpose or function is to measure or

assess someone’s ability, knowledge, and performance. One of the examples of

the test is Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL).

TOEFL is a standardized test. TOEFL test is used to measure the English

proficiency of people who do not speak English (Weigle, 2002, p. 141). TOEFL

was launched in 1964 in the US on five sections with only multiple choice

questions and used for academic placement purposes (Azizi and Majdeddin,

2014). Then, in 1976 it was replaced by a three section version namely Listening,

Structure and Written Expression, and Reading Comprehension. After that, in

1986 direct test of writing was added to the test. The computer version of TOEFL

was introduced in 1998 and the internet-based version was introduced in 2005

(Educational Testing Service, 2007a in Azizi and Majdeddin, 2014). So, TOEFL

IBT is the last version of TOEFL test.

2.5 Achievement

An achievement is usually shown by the students’ scores at the end of the

teaching and learning process. To know the students’ achievement, the teacher

14

uses a test to measure students’ knowledge. That test is achievement test.

Achievement tests are used at the end of a course of instruction to know if

students have learned the skills and lesson covered in that class (Bailey, 2005,

p.188). So, achievement test is made based on the curriculum or syllabus. It is

about the review of the entire lesson. Although it is about the review of the lesson

that has taught, the test does not mean has been given before. It just gives a

similar type of questions. After the test distributed and the result of the test got, it

will be an information for the teacher to evaluate the learning process. Here, the

researcher uses grammar and writing test from TOEFL preparation book to gain

the students’ achievement.

2.5.1 Grammar Achievement

Based on the key term, grammar achievement is grammar score that is got

from the result of TOEFL grammar test. Thus, here people should know the aim

of grammar test. The aim of each grammar test is to gain and provide information

on how the student knows and can use grammar to express the meaning in some

situation where the target language is used (Purpura, 2004, p. 147). So, it

measures how students use grammar in communication.

There are stages in developing a test. Bachman and Palmer (1996) in

(Purpura, 2004, p. 155) categorize test development into three stages: design,

operationalization, and administration. In the design stage, involves the entire of

information and making decisions about the whole test process. The outcome of

the design stage is a design statement that should contain (1) a description of the

15

purpose of the test, (2) a description of the TLU (Target Language Use) domains

and task types, (3) a description of the test takers, (4) a definition of the construct

to be measured, (5) a plan for evaluating test usefulness and (6) a plan for dealing

with resources. stage 2 operationalization, the operationalization of grammar test

development describes how entire test involving some grammar task is assembled,

and how the individual tasks are specified, written and scored. The outcome of

this stage is both a blueprint for the complete test including scoring materials and

a draft version of the actual test. Stage 3 test administration and analysis, this final

stage of developing grammar test involves the administration of the test to

individual students or small groups, and then to a large group of examinees on

trial basis. In short, so many duties for the testers or teacher develops a test until

gets the score. In this study, the researcher uses the test in the form of multiple

choice which consists 25 questions to gain the grammar achievement.

2.5.2 Writing Achievement

Based on the key term, writing achievement is writing a score that got

from the result of TOEFL writing test. According to Brown (2003, p. 220), there

are four types of writing performances namely imitative, intensive (controlled),

responsive, and extensive. First is imitative, in this performance, the learner

should master in the basic tasks of writing letters, words, punctuation, and very

brief sentences. At this stage, the form is the primary while context and meaning

are a secondary concern. Second is intensive (controlled), this performance

focuses on skills in producing appropriate vocabulary within a context,

collocations and idioms, and correct grammatical features up to the length of the

16

sentence. Here, meaning and context are something important. Third is

responsive, the assessment tasks here are connecting sentences into a paragraph

and creating a logically connected sequence of two or three paragraphs. Genres of

writing include brief narratives and descriptions, short reports, lab reports,

summaries, a brief response to reading, and interpretations of charts or graphs.

Here, the focus attentions is mostly at the discourse level with a strong emphasis

on context and meaning. Fourth is extensive, extensive writing is the successful

management of all the processes and strategies for all the purposes of writing, the

length of an essay, a term paper, research project report, or even a thesis. Here, the

focus is on achieving a purpose, organizing and developing ideas logically, using

details to support ideas and etc to achieve a final product. Focus on grammatical

forms is limited to occasional editing or proofreading of a draft. In conclusion,

writing achievement can be gained from the students’ performance in writing test

and it will be an information for the teacher to evaluate the learning process. In

this study, the researcher uses test consisting one essay topic to gain the students’

writing achievement. The topic is about the types of favorite movies. After the

tests are distributed and the work collected, the researcher asks someone others to

rate students’ writing. The raters rate students’ writing based on scoring rubric on

the scale of 1 until 6.

2.6 Previous Studies

Several studies were conducted by some experts about grammar and

writing achievement. Here the researcher will make the correlation between both

17

of it. Their research findings will be elaborated briefly to support and give a

foundation for this study.

First, the study entitled “The Correlation Between Grammar Mastery And

Writing Ability (A Correlation Study at the 6th

Semester of English Education

Department Students of UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta).”

It had written by Reni

Septiani in 2014. The purpose of this research was to know whether there was a

significant correlation between grammar mastery and writing ability. This

research used the quantitative method and correlation design. This research

applied a purposive sampling technique, with the total number of the sample was

30 students. The data was gained through test and documentation score of sixth-

semester students in the writing course. The score was taken from the subject

lecturer. The data were analyzed by using product moment Pearson. The findings

of the research showed that there was no significant correlation between grammar

mastery and writing ability. The data showed that most of the students got a

minimum score of grammar but they got a good score in writing. From the result,

the researcher summarized that grammar mastery gave less contribution and had

very low correlation to the ability of writing.

Second, Maulana (2016) which the title is “The Correlation Between

Grammar Competence And Writing Skills of First Year Students at SMK Negeri

6 Malang”. The objective of this research was to know whether or not there was a

significant correlation between grammar competence and writing skill of the first

year students at SMK Negeri 6 Malang. The sample in this research was 34

students taken from X Rekayasa Perangkat Lunak (RPL) 2 and X Rekayasa

18

Perangkat Lunak (RPL) 4. The instruments to collect the data were test and

documentation score of the first year of Rekayasa Perangkat Lunak (RPL)

students in the writing course. The findings of the research revealed that there was

a significant correlation between students’ grammar competence and their writing

skill. The researcher summarized that grammar competence gave more

contribution to the writing skill of the students. Based on the two previous studies

above, it can be concluded that they have conducted research in different settings

with a different result.

The gap between this study and previous studies were (1) this study was

conducted in Universitas Brawijaya, while the studies from Septiani and Maulana

were conducted in UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta and SMK Negeri 6 Malang,

(2) this study used grammar and writing tests as instruments, while the previous

studies used grammar test and documentation score of writing course as

instruments, (3) this study used quota sampling as a sampling technique with 40

students of English Language Education Program (ELEP) at the second semester

in the academic year of 2016/2017 as sample, while the previous studies used

purposive sampling as a sampling technique with 30 students at the sixth semester

of English Education Department Students of UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta

and the first-year of Rekayasa Perangkat Lunak (RPL) students at SMK Negeri 6

Malang as sample. To sum up, the gap between this study and previous studies

were in the area of setting, instrument, and sampling technique and amount of

sample.

19

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODS

This chapter discussed the research method. The research method was

used to find out the result of this study. Furthermore, this chapter included

research design, data and source of data, research instrument, data collection and

data analysis.

3.1 Research Design

This research used the quantitative method. It meant that the researcher

collected and analyzed the data statistically to find out the correlation between

two variables namely the students’ grammar and writing scores of English

Language Education Program (ELEP) Faculty of Cultural Studies, Universitas

Brawijaya in the academic year of 2016/2017. According to Creswell (2012, p.

13), two of the major characteristics in quantitative research are collecting

numeric data and analyzing trends, comparing groups, or relating variables using

statistical analysis.

This study was categorized into correlative type. As (Creswell, 2012, p.

21) states that correlational designs are actions in quantitative research in which

investigators calculate the degree of relationship between two or more variables

using the statistical procedure of correlation analysis. Therefore, the researcher

20

correlated two variables; they were grammar achievement as X variable and

writing achievement as Y variable.

3.2 Data and Source of Data

3.2.1 Population

According to Creswell (2012, p. 142) population is all of the people who

have the same characteristics in a group. The population of this study was students

of English Language Education Program (ELEP) at the second semester of the

academic year of 2016/2017, consisting of 150 students, were divided into five

classes (A-E Class). They have the same characteristics; they are students of

ELEP, they are students at the second semester of the academic year of

2016/2017, and they are students in the same batch. The reason why the

researcher chooses them as the subject in this study is because the researcher

wants to gain the correlation between students’ grammar and writing in the early

they become the university students.

3.2.2 Sample

According to Creswell (2012, p. 142 ) sample is a subgroup of the target

population. The minimum standard sample in correlation is 30 participants

(Dornyei, 2011, p. 99) in line with Creswell (2012, p. 146) approximately 30

participants are required by an educational researcher for a correlational study.

The researcher took 40 Students for the sample. Hence, it had exceeded the

minimum sample. The researcher used quota sampling in this study. Quota

sampling is the technique that concern on the quota that has been established. It is

21

easy to apply because of the focus just in fulfillment the quota which was 40

students of ELEP.

3.3 Research Instrument

In a research or study, the instrument had the important role and as a tool

to collect the data. Research instrument might be different from one study to

another. Thus, constructing research instrument carefully in an appropriate

manner was greatly fundamental. There were many kinds of research instrument

namely the forms of the test, questionnaire, observation sheet, document analysis,

records of interview and interview sheet, etc. The instrument that was used in this

research were test. According to Arikunto (2013, p. 266) instrument in the form of

test can be used to measure the basic competence and achievement. For measuring

basic competence such as a test to measure intelligence (IQ), etc. For achievement

test that was usually used at school could be divided into two, namely (1)

teacher-made test and (2) standardized test. The researcher used a standardized

test which was CBT (Computer-Based Test) Toefl. The researcher took the

TOEFL Test from Peterson’s TOEFL Success book by Bruce Rogers (2005). The

researcher used TOEFL test because it was already standardized for measuring the

students’ English capability. Moreover, TOEFL had been acknowledged for its

reliability and validity, therefore the test could be applied in this study. This study

used grammar and writing test. The grammar test consisted 25 questions in the

form of multiple choice and writing consisted one essay topic. The topic was

about the types of favorite movies.

22

3.4 Data Collection

The researcher conducted the grammar and writing test. The test was

adopted from the preparation of CBT book. The researcher took the structure and

writing test. The structure test consisted 25 questions in the form of multiple

choice and writing consisted one essay topic. The topic was about the types of

favorite movies. The time to do the structure test was 20 minutes and writing test

was 30 minutes. In collecting the data, the following steps were applied. First, the

researcher took 40 participants. Second, the researcher conducted the tests to those

participants. The time allotment in doing the test was an hour; 5 minutes for the

preparation and gave an instruction, 50 minutes for doing grammar and writing

test, and 5 minutes for closing and collecting the students’ works. Third, the

researcher checked the students’ grammar answer by looking at the grammar

answer keys (See Appendix 2) and then calculated the students’ grammar scores

using the formula:

S: Final Score CA: Number of Correct Answers

N: Number of Questions (Arifin, 2013 cited from Maulana, 2016)

And for the writing scores, the raters would be someone others used CBT Toefl

essay writing scoring rubric by ETS (Educational Testing Service). This scoring

rubric is used to score essay writing holistically, means the essay is not judged

according to individual mistakes but by the overall effectiveness of the writing

itself. Some points that are scored namely topic, organization, development,

𝑆 =𝐶𝐴

𝑁× 100

23

clarity, unity, etc in scale 1 until 6. Scale 1 strongly indicates the inability to write

an acceptable essay while 6 strongly indicates the ability to write a well-

organized, well-developed, and logical essay, for the detail (See Appendix 4).

After getting the scores from the raters, the researcher calculated the mean or

average scores and converted it into 100 using the formula:

S: Final Score HS: The Highest Score

GS: The Getting Score (Adapted from Arifin, 2013 cited from Maulana, 2016)

To know the consistency in scoring or scoring reliability between two

raters, the researcher used Alpha Cronbach formula as follows, but the researcher

calculated used SPSS:

𝑟1 1=

𝑘

𝑘−1 1−

𝜎𝑏2

𝜎2𝑡

𝑟11 = reliability of instrument

Σ 𝜎𝑏2 = number of test variant

k = number of test item

𝜎𝑡2 = total variant

(Arikunto, 2013, p. 239)

𝑆 =𝐺𝑆

𝐻𝑆× 100

24

According to Sugiyono (2006) in Syarifudin (2010, p. 70), an instrument is

reliable if the reliability coefficient more than 0.60.

3.5 Data Analysis

In analyzing the data, the researcher used correlation product moment

which is developed by Carl Pearson. “Correlation product moment is used to

show whether there is a correlation between X variable and Y variable”. The

symbol of the correlation product moment is “r”. The result of this study

calculated using SPSS (Statistical Product and Service Solution). In order to get

the result of this study, the researcher did some steps below:

a. The researcher collected both of the test scores.

b. The researcher correlated both of the test scores used SPSS, for the

information this formula is used if someone wants to do manually:

Arikunto (2013, p. 317)

N = Number of Participants

X = Students’ Grammar Scores

Y = Students’ Writing Scores

ΣX = The Sum Scores of Grammar

ΣY = The Sum Scores of Writing

ΣX2 = The Sum of the Squared Scores of Grammar

ΣY2 = The Sum of the Squared Scores of Writing

25

ΣXY = The Sum of Multiplied Score between X and Y This formula is

used to find index correlation “r” product moment between X and Y

variables (rxy)

c. The researcher calculated the significance between two variables, the

formula of the significance is:

adopted from Carl Pearson

t = t value n = Number of Participants

r = Value of Correlation Coefficient

d. The researcher interpreted the index scores of “r” correlation. Product

moment (rxy) usually uses the interpretation such as below:

Table 3.1 The Interpretation of Correlation “r” Product Moment

(Sugiyono, 2011 cited from Septiani, 2014)

e. The researcher made the conclusion from the result of correlation both of

students’ grammar and writing scores.

The score of “r” product

moment (rxy)

Interpretation

0.00-0.199 There is a correlation between X and Y,

but the correlation is very weak.

0.20-0.399 There is a correlation between X and Y,

but the correlation is weak.

0.40-0.599 There is a correlation between X and Y.

The value is medium.

0.60-0.799 There is a high correlation between X

and Y.

0.80-1.000 There is a very high correlation between

X and Y.

26

Figure 3.1 Positive Correlation Figure

The correlation in the same direction is called positive correlation. Increasing the

X value is followed by the increasing Y value.

Figure 3.2 Negative Correlation Figure

The correlation in opposite direction is called negative correlation, increasing the

X value is followed by decreasing Y value or vice versa.

Figure 3.3 No Correlation Figure

If there is no relationship between the two variables such that the value of one

variable change and the other variable remain constant is called no or zero

correlation.

27

CHAPTER IV

FINDING AND DISCUSSION

This chapter presented the result of this study which was including the

student‟s achievement in grammar, student‟s achievement in writing, correlation

coefficient, and testing the hypothesis.

4.1 Findings

In this finding, the researcher presented the answer to the problem of the

study. However, this would be the presentation of students‟ achievement in

grammar and writing and also the correlation between them.

4.1.1 Student’s Achievement in Grammar

The grammar test was conducted on 12th

of May 2017. The grammar test

used was taken from Peterson‟s TOEFL Success book by Bruce Rogers (2005).

The researcher used Mrs. Dian Novita‟s class which was guided speaking class.

The test began at 16.30 WIB until 16.50 WIB. So, the test was conducted for 20

minutes. The ways of the researcher conducted the test was first, the researcher

opened the class, then, distributed the test. Next, the researcher explained the

instruction of the test and the students began doing the tests. After the students

finished the test, the researcher collected students‟ work and because the students

in that class did not fulfill the sample of this study, the researcher conducted the

test outside the class.

28

The result of grammar test was calculated to know the student's final

scores. The way the researcher checking the answer sheet of grammar

achievement was the correct answers of student‟s divided number of questions

(25) times 100. The result of the grammar test showed the average or mean score

of students‟ grammar test was 42.7. From 40 students, 19 students passed the

mean score while 21 students were in the below of the mean score.

4.1.2 Students Achievement in Writing

The writing test was conducted on 19th

of May 2017. The writing test was

also taken from Peterson‟s TOEFL Success book by Bruce Rogers (2005). The

researcher used the same class which was Mrs. Dian Novita‟s class. The test

began at 16.00 WIB until 16.30 WIB. So, the test was conducted for 30 minutes.

The ways of the researcher conducted the test was first, the researcher opened the

class, then, distributed the test. Next, the researcher explained the instruction of

the test and the students began doing the tests. After the students finished the test,

the researcher collected students‟ work. The researcher also conducted the test

outside the class to fulfill the sample of this study.

The result of writing test was calculated to get the students‟ final scores.

The result of the writing test showed the average or mean score of students‟

writing test was 46.75. From 40 students, 19 students passed the mean score while

21 students were in the below of the mean score.

29

To know the consistency in scoring or scoring reliability between two

raters, the researcher calculated used SPSS. The result of scoring reliability as

follows.

Table 4.1 The Result of Scoring Reliability between Rater1 and Rater2

Case Processing Summary

N %

Cases Valid 40 100.0

Excludeda 0 .0

Total 40 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's Alpha N of Items

.677 2

Based on the table as follows, ‟Case Processing Summary‟ table explained

that the total data validity up to 40 by percentage 100% and there was no excluded

data. It meant that the data was valid. „Reliability Statistics‟ table explained that

the result of reliability by Cronbach Alpha technique. The result of reliability was

0.677, (0.677 > 0.60), it indicated that the writing scores from the raters were

reliable (Sugiyono, 2006 in Syarifudin, 2010, p. 70).

30

4.1.3 Correlation Coefficient

To find out the correlation coefficient between students‟ achievement in

grammar and writing, the researcher used SPSS. From the computation using

SPSS, the result was described as follows:

Table 4.2 Correlation Coefficient

Grammar Writing

Grammar Pearson Correlation 1 -.024

Sig. (2-tailed) .885

N 40 40

Writing Pearson Correlation -.024 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .885

N 40 40

The result showed that the correlation coefficient (ro) was -0.024 and sig.

(2-tailed) value was 0.885. According to Syarifudin (2010), there is significant

correlation if significant value or probability (p) lower than 5 % (0.05). Therefore,

it indicated that the correlation between two variables was no significant, negative

and very weak. The next step found the degree of freedom (df) using the formula:

df = N – 2 –> 40 – 2 = 38. Then, to finding out the value of r, the researcher used

rtable at the significant standard 5% with N 40 is 0.312 (See Appendix 7).

However, the result showed that ro was lower than rtable (ro < rtable = -0.024 <

0.312. It meant the two variables had a very weak negative correlation. The

31

correlation coefficient between them was very weak because closed on “0” and it

could be ignored.

After that, the result of coefficient correlation (ro) had to be compared

with ttable to find the significant of the variables. This step also used to clarify the

correlation between variable X (Grammar Achievement) and variable Y (Writing

Achievement) was accepted. It could be calculated by the formula as follows:

In which: t = t value

r = -0.024

n = 40

Therefore, it was calculated that:

t = 𝑟 𝑛−2

1− 𝑟2

t = −0.024 40−2

1− (−0.024 )2

t = −0.024 38

1−0.000576 -

t = −0.024 𝑥 6.16

0.999424

t = −0.14784

0.99 = -0.149

32

The result of computation showed that to was -0.149. With df 38, the result

of to compared to ttable at the significant level 5% is 1.686 (See Appendix 8).

The correlation could be interpreted as to < ttable = -0.149 < 1.686. It meant that

to was lower than ttable. On the other hand, there was very weak negative

correlation and the correlation between variable X (Grammar Achievement) and

variable Y (Writing Achievement) from the result of ro was accepted.

4.1.4 Testing the Hypothesis

Based on the objectives of the study, this study conducted to gain the

correlation between grammar and writing achievement. The researcher made the

hypothesis. Those were an alternative hypothesis (Ha) and the null hypothesis

(Ho). Ha was accepted meant there was a significant correlation between grammar

and writing achievement. Ho was accepted meant there was no significant

correlation between grammar and writing achievement. It was explained by the

formulation below:

The hypothesis mentioned that the alternative hypothesis (Ha) was

accepted if to was higher than ttable (to > ttable) on the other side, rejected if to

was lower than ttable (to < ttable). In this study, to was lower than ttable (to <

ttable = -0.149 < 1.686) in significance 5% (See Appendix 8). It meant that the

alternative hypothesis (Ha) was rejected and the null hypothesis (Ho) was

Ha: to > ttable

Ho: to < ttable

33

accepted. Thus, it indicated that there was no significant correlation between

grammar and writing achievement.

4.2 Discussion

Based on the objective of this study, this study was conducted to know the

correlation between students grammar and writing achievement. The average of

the students‟ grammar score was 42.7 and the average of the students‟ writing

score was 46.75. It meant that their achievement almost similar.

After knowing the achievement of each student about grammar and writing

tests, the researcher found the correlation between grammar and writing

achievement. Based on the statistic computation, it showed that the correlation

coefficient (ro) was -0.024 which meant that the correlation very weak and

negative. It indicated that the correlation coefficient closed on “0” and it could be

ignored and the negative correlation coefficient suggested inverse correlation

(Dornyei, 2011, p. 223) in line with Creswell (2012, p. 345) “negative correlation

(indicated by a “-“ correlation coefficient), the points move in the opposite

direction; that is, when X increases, Y decreases, and when X decreases, Y

increases.” Hence the X high score correlated with the Y low score and vice versa.

This finding was in line with the finding of Septiani (2014) that found there was

no significant correlation between grammar mastery and writing ability. The data

showed that most of the students got a minimum score of grammar but they got a

good score in writing.

34

The finding of this study was compared with two previous studies which

were used by the researcher. Septiani (2014) entitled “The Correlation Between

Grammar Mastery And Writing Ability (A Correlation Study at the 6th

Semester of

English Education Department Students of UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta) and

Maulana (2016) entitled “The Correlation Between Grammar Competence And

Writing Skills of First Year Students at SMK Negeri 6 Malang”. The result of

Septiani (2014), she found that there was no significant correlation between

grammar mastery and writing ability. It was in line with the findings of this study.

The difference was Septiani found (ro) positive but in this study, the researcher

found (ro) negative. Conversely, Maulana (2016) found that there was a

significant positive correlation between grammar competence and writing skills of

first-year students at SMK Negeri 6 Malang. Thus, previous studies and present

study were conducted in different settings with different results.

According to the statistical calculation that was analyzed, it could be

concluded that there was no significant correlation between grammar and writing.

The very low correlation indicated that if students who had a minimum level of

grammar did not mean they also got poor achievement in writing and vice versa.

There were some students who got low scores in grammar but they got high

scores in writing, conversely, there were some students who got high scores in

grammar but they got low scores in writing. It could be inferred that the students‟

mastery of grammar did not have a significant role in writing. Grammar might be

a source to communicate effectively but it did not mean all kinds of grammar

were useful for students. Nevertheless, there were possibilities resulting in a

35

worse performance in the grammar test but a better performance in writing. For

the worst performance on the grammar test, it might be because the limited time

in doing a test and low comprehension on the grammatical areas. Students might

be confused to put the right words to make the correct sentences. While for the

writing, the ability to think creatively and develop the ideas, the ability to select

vocabulary, the ability to write in a good spelling and punctuation, etc would be

some factors that influenced students to make better writing. In other words,

students who did not have good grammar in their writing might be good in other

aspects that are usually used in rating scale or writing scoring rubric.

Hence, the researcher summarized that grammar gave less contribution

and had very low correlation to writing. Students who were good in grammar did

not mean good also in writing. It was affected by some factors such as students‟

motivation in learning grammar and writing, their frequency of practice, and the

writing assessment did not only focus on the grammatical area but also some

factors namely vocabulary, content, organization, and mechanics.

36

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

This chapter presents the conclusions of the findings and the suggestions

based on the result of this study.

5.1 Conclusion

Concerning on the result of the study, ro was lower than rtable (ro < rtable

= -0.024 < 0.312 and to was lower than ttable to < ttable = -0.149 < 1.686. The

researcher concludes there was no significant correlation between grammar and

writing achievement of ELEP students at the 2nd

semester in academic year

2016/2017. Then the correlation between grammar and writing achievement of

ELEP students was negative and very low.

5.2 Suggestions

1. For Teachers or lecturers

Knowing the result, the English teacher or lecturer as a motivator and

stimulator can explain about grammar rules and increase the students’

comprehension by using the good method. Furthermore, there are some

criteria to assess writing such as the organization of the text, content,

vocabulary, spelling, and also punctuation that should be known by the

37

students from teacher or lecturer. Thus, the teacher should teach all of them

to make students be a good writer.

2. For Students

For students, the students should pay attention to the grammar although

grammar has less contribution to writing. Effective communication either

spoken or written can be created by knowing grammar rules.

1. For the Further Researcher

For the further researcher, based on the result of this study, it is suggested

to take more sample to get a more accurate result and make a deeper

investigation and also to consider the implementation of the test if wants to

use a test as an instrument. This study also can be a contribution to the

research in education which is intended to find out the correlation between

grammar and writing. Hopefully, for another researcher, this study may be a

previous study for conducting a further research relating to the correlation

between language skills and language components.

38

REFERENCES

Arikunto, S. (2013). Prosedur penelitian suatu pendekatan praktik. Jakarta:

Rineka Cipta.

Azizi, M., & Majdeddin, K. (2014). On the validity of IELTS writing component;

do raters assess what they are supposed to?. Modern Journal of Language

Teaching Methods (MJLTM). Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/file.PostFileLoader.html?id=545b3320d039b

167148b45ed&assetKey=AS%3A273631672766466%401442250282751

Bailey, Kathleen M. (2005). Practical English language teaching: Speaking.

New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies.

Brown, H.D. (2000). Teaching by principles an interactive approach to language

pedagogy, Second Edition. New York: Longman.

Brown, H. D. (2003). Language assessment principles and classroom practices.

San Francisco, California: Pearson Education.

Celce-Murcia, M., et al. ( 1999). The grammar book, An ESL / EFL teacher’s

course, Second Edition. United States of America: Heinle & Heinle

Publishers.

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research planning, conducting and

evaluating quantitative and qualitative research, Fourt Edition. Boston:

Pearson.

Dornyei, Z. (2011). Research methods in applied linguistics quantitative,

qualitative, and mix methodologies, Fifth Edition. New York: Oxford

University Press.

Hajana, O. H. O. (2006). The relationship between grammatical competence and

writing quality. (Unpublished thesis). University Of Khartoum, Sudan.

Harmer, J. (1998). How to teach English. Cambridge: Pearson Education.

Harmer, J. (2004). How to teach writing. London: Longman.

Hyland, Ken. (2003). Second language writing. United States of America:

Cambridge University Press.

Leggette, H. R., McKim, B., Homeyer, M., & Rutherford, T. (2015). Perspectives

of writing related to critical thinking and knowledge creation. NACTA

Journal. Retrieved from

39

http://search.proquest.com/docview/1763786684/fulltextPDF/27D76B952

CC24318PQ/1?accountid=46437

Linse, C. T. (2005). Practical English language teaching: Young learners. D.

Nunan (Ed.). 1221 Avenue of the America, New York: McGraw-Hill.

Mart, Ç. T. (2013). Teaching grammar in context: why and how?. Theory Practice

in Language Studies,3(1), 124-129.

http://www.academypublication.com/issues/past/tpls/vol03/01/18.pdf

Maulana, A. R. (2016). The correlation between grammar competence and

writing skills of first year students at SMK Negeri 6 Malang (Unpublished

undergraduate thesis). Universitas Brawijaya, Malang.

Nunan, D. (2003). Grammar. Practical English language teaching. D. Nunan

(Ed.). Singapore: McGraw-Hill.

Purpura, J. E. (2004). Assessing grammar. J. Charles Alderson and Lyle F.

Bachman (Eds.). UK: Cambridge University Press.

Rogers, B. (2005). Peterson’s Toefl Success, Fifth Edition. Joe Ziegler(Ed.).

United States of America: Peterson.com.

Septiani, R. (2014). The correlation between grammar mastery and writing

ability. (Unpublished skripsi). Universitas Islam Negeri (UIN) Syarif

Hidayatullah, Jakarta.

Sokolik, M. (2003). Writing. Practical English language teaching. D. Nunan

(Ed.). Singapore: McGraw-Hill.

Suthiwartnarueput, T., & Wasanasomsithi, P. (2012). Effects of using facebook as

a medium for discussion of English grammar and writing of low-

intermediate EFL students. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language

Teaching, 9(2), 194-214. Retrieved from http://e-

flt.nus.edu.sg/v9n22012/suthiwartnarueput.pdf

Syarifudin, B. (2010). Panduan TA keperawatan dan kebidanan dengan SPSS.

Yogyakarta: GrafindoLitera Media.

Syopiana. (2011). The correlation between students’ grammar mastery and their

ability in writing narrative paragraph at the second year of SMAN 1

Kuantan Hilir Kuantan Hilir Regency. (Unpublished undergraduate

thesis). Universitas Islam Negeri (UIN) Sultan Syarif Kasim Riau,

Pekanbaru.

40

Weaver, C. (n.d.). Teaching grammar in context. Chicago, Illinois: National

Council of Teachers of English.

Weigle, S. C. (2002). Assessing writing. UK: Cambridge University Press.