Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
USING JIGSAW TECHNIQUE TO IMPROVE
STUDENTS’ NARRATIVE WRITING
(A Classroom Action Research in the Second Year of English 2 Class of MTsN
Tangerang II Pamulang)
A “Skripsi”
Presented to the Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teacher’s Training in a Partial
Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Strata 1 (Bachelor of Art) in
English Language Education
By:
Ina Mayrina
106014000061
DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH EDUCATION
FACULTY OF TARBIYAH AND TEACHERS’ TRAINING
SYARIF HIDAYATULLAH STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY
JAKARTA
2011
ii
ABSTRACT
Mayrina, Ina 2011. Using Jigsaw Technique to Improve Students’ Narrative
Writing, Skripsi, Department of English Education, the Faculty of
Tarbiyah and Teachers’ Training, Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic
University Jakarta.
Advisor: Drs. Sunardi Kartowisastro, Dipl Ed.
Key words: Jigsaw Technique, Narrative Text, MTsN Tangerang II Pamulang
This study was designed to improve the students’ narrative writing ability
by using Jigsaw technique. The objective of the study was to find out how Jigsaw
technique can be used to improve the narrative writing ability of the second year
students’ of MTsN Tangerang II Pamulang.
The study was collaborative classroom action research in which the writer
and the collaborative teacher worked together in conducting this study. The
researcher acted as the teacher while the English teacher became the writer’s
collaborator to observe the implementation of Jigsaw technique. This study was
conducted in two cycles by following the procedures of the action research i.e.
planning, implementing, observing, and reflecting. Each cycle consisted of three
meetings. The data of the study were gathered through the following instruments–
interview, observation checklist, questionnaire and test. The subjects of this study
were 35 second year students of MTsN Tangerang II Pamulang of the 2010/2011
academic year. All students were taken as the subjects of the research.
The finding of the study indicated that Jigsaw technique was effective in
enhancing the students’ motivation and participation. From the result of
questionnaire, it showed that 75.1% students were motivated during the
implemented Jigsaw technique in writing narrative text. In addition, it was found
that there were 79.3% students participated actively in the first cycle and 89.3%
students who participated in the second cycle. This implied that the first criteria of
success had been fulfilled.
Furthermore, the finding of the study indicated that Jigsaw technique was
successful in improving students’ writing narrative text. The improvement could
be seen from the increase of students’ mean writing score from 56.3 in the
preliminary study, and 65.2 in the first cycle, to 77.2 in the second cycle. If it
calculated into class percentage, there were 5 students (14.3 %) who passed
Minimum Mastery Criterion- Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal (KKM) in the pre test.
Meanwhile, in the cycle 1, there were 10 students (28.6%) who passed KKM and
it gained which was in the posttest cycle 2 there were 28 students (80%) who
passed KKM. So, it indicated that the second criteria of success has been
achieved.
iii
ABSTRACT
Mayrina, Ina 2011. Using Jigsaw Technique to Improve Students’ Narrative
Writing, Skripsi, Department of English Education, the Faculty of
Tarbiyah and Teachers’ Training, Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic
University Jakarta.
Advisor: Drs. Sunardi Kartowisastro, Dipl Ed.
Key words: Jigsaw Technique, Narrative Text, MTsN Tangerang II Pamulang
Penelitian ini dirancang untuk meningkatkan ketrampilan menulis teks
narasi siswa dengan menggunakan teknik Jigsaw. Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah
untuk mengetahui bagaimana teknik Jigsaw dapat digunakan untuk meningkatkan
kemampuan menulis teks narasi siswa di MTsN Tangerang II Pamulang.
Penelitian ini menggunakan rancangan penelitian tindakan kelas yang
bersifat kolaboratif dimana penulis dan guru bekerja sama dalam melaksanakan
penelitian ini. Penulis berperan sebagai pengajar sedangkan guru bahasa Inggris
menjadi kolaborator penulis untuk mengobservasi pelaksanaan teknik Jigsaw.
Penelitian ini dilaksanakan dalam dua siklus yang mengacu pada prosedur
penelitian tindakan yaitu, planning, implementing, observing, dan reflecting. Tiap
siklus dalam penelitian ini terdiri dari tiga pertemuan untuk pelaksanaan teknik.
Data penelitian dikumpulkan melalui beberapa instrumen yaitu wawancara,
lembar observasi, kuisioner, dan hasil tes yang diberikan pada siswa. Subyek
penelitian ini adalah 36 siswa kelas dua MTsN Tangerang II Pamulang pada tahun
ajaran 2010/2011. Semua siswa menjadi subyek penelitian ini.
Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa teknik Jigsaw sangat efektif dalam
meningkatkan motivasi dan partisipasi siswa. Dari data hasil kuisioner diketahui
bahwa 75.1% siswa termotivasi selama penerapan teknik jigsaw dalam menulis
teks narasi. Selain itu, hasil penelitian juga menunjukkan bahwa 79.3% siswa
berpartisipasi secara aktif di siklus pertama dan 89.3% siswa berpartisipasi di
siklus kedua. Hasil tersebut menunjukan bahwa kriteria sukses yang pertama telah
terpenuhi.
Hasil penelitian lebih lanjut menunjukkan bahwa Jigsaw efektif dalam
meningkatkan kemampuan siswa dalam menulis teks narasi. Peningkatan dapat
dilihat dari kenaikan nilai rata-rata menulis teks narasi siswa dari nilai studi awal
56.3; 65.2 di siklus pertama, dan 77.2 di siklus kedua. Jika dihitung dalam
prosentase kelas, hasil studi awal menunjukkan hanya ada 5 siswa atau 14.3 %
yang mencapai nilai Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal (KKM), sedangkan dalam
postes siklus 1 ada 10 atau 28.6% siswa mencapai nilai KKM dan 28 siswa atau
80.0% telah mencapai nilai KKM. Jadi, hasil tersebut menunjukan bahwa kriteria
sukses yang kedua telah tercapai.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
All praises be to Allah, Lord of the world, who has bestowed upon the
writer in completing this “skripsi”. Peace and salutation be upon to the prophet
Muhammad SAW, his family, his companion, and his adherence.
The writer would like to express her greatest thanks and deepest gratitude
to the as follows:
1. Prof. Dr. Dede Rosyada, M.A. as the Dean of the Faculty of Tarbiyah and
Teachers‟ Training Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University Jakarta.
2. Drs. Syauki, M.Pd. as the head of English Department, and Neneng
Sunengsih S.Pd. as the Secretary of English Department. Her gratitude also
goes to all the lecturers of English Department who have transferred their
knowledge and also for their valuable guidance and encouragement to the
writer.
3. to her advisor, Drs. Sunardi Kartowisastro, Dipl Ed. for his valuable help,
guidance, motivation, comments, and suggestion for the completion of this
“skripsi”. May Allah always bless and keep his health.
4. to her beloved parents, H. Mahmuddin and Hj. Asiah for their love and
kindness, who have been getting involved in the writer‟s life especially in
education, and also her sisters, Susi Susanti, Nia Kurniawati and Ani Mayrani
who always give their love, motivation, and support to the writer to finish her
study.
5. The writer would express his gratitude to Drs. Suhardi, M.Ag. as the
headmaster of MTsN Tangerang II Pamulang, Dra. Hj. Neneng Susilawati, M
Pd. as the English Teacher of MTsN Tangerang II Pamulang and all teachers
of that school who helped her in conducting the study.
v
6. For all my friends in the English Department academic year 2006 of C class
especially Nia, Teh Eni, Ulfa, Lala, Dila, Yuning, Abi, Mumut, Ibah and for
the best friends, Irna Purnamasari, and Fuzy Aulia Haryani for giving more
spirit to finish the „Skripsi‟.
The writer does realize that this skripsi cannot be considered perfect
without critiques and suggestions. Therefore, it is such a pleasure for her to get
critiques and suggestions to make this skripsi better. Hopefully, this “skripsi” can
give usefulness for the development of English teaching-learning.
Jakarta, February 2011
The Writer
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ENDORSEMENT SHEET .............................................................................. i
ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................... ii
ABSTRAK ........................................................................................................ iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................... iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................. vi
LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................... ix
LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................... x
LIST OF APPENDICES ................................................................................ xi
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
A. Background of the Study .................................................. 1
B. Problem of the Study ......................................................... 5
C. Objective of the Study ........................................................ 5
D. Significance of the Study ................................................... 5
E. Limitation of the Study ..................................................... 6
F. Definition of Key Terms ................................................... 6
CHAPTER II THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
A. Writing .............................................................................. 7
1. Nature of Writing ........................................................ 7
2. Process of Writing ...................................................... 9
3. Purposes of Writing .................................................. 11
4. Problems of Writing ................................................. 13
B. Narrative Text ................................................................. 15
1. Definition of Narrative Text ..................................... 15
2. Purpose of Narrative Text.......................................... 15
3. Schematic Structures of Narrative Text .................... 16
vii
4. Linguistic Features of Narrative Text ....................... 16
C. Jigsaw Technique ............................................................. 17
1. Definition of Jigsaw Technique ................................. 17
2. Procedure in Jigsaw Technique ................................. 19
3. Advantages of Jigsaw Technique ............................. 20
4. Disadvantages of Jigsaw Technique ......................... 21
D. Teaching Narrative Text by Using Jigsaw Technique .... 23
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
A. The Research Design ....................................................... 26
B. Subject and Setting of the Research ................................. 29
C. The Classroom Action Research (CAR) Procedure ......... 29
1. Planning Phase ........................................................... 31
2. Acting Phase .............................................................. 31
3. Observing Phase ........................................................ 32
4. Reflecting Phase ........................................................ 32
D. The Technique of Collecting Data .................................. 33
E. The Technique of Data analysis ...................................... 34
F. The Criteria of the Action Success ................................. 37
CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDINGS
A. The Description of the Data ............................................ 38
1. Findings of the Preliminary Study ............................ 38
a. The Result of Pre Interview ................................ 38
b. The Result of Pre Questionnaire .......................... 40
c. The Result of Pre Test ......................................... 41
2. Findings of the First Cycle ........................................ 43
a. Planning ............................................................... 43
b. Acting ................................................................. 43
c. Observing ............................................................ 44
viii
d. Reflecting ............................................................ 46
e. Revision of the First Cycle ................................. 47
3. Findings of the second Cycle .................................... 48
a. Planning ............................................................... 48
b. Acting ................................................................. 48
c. Observing ............................................................ 49
d. Reflecting ............................................................ 53
4. Findings after Implementing CAR ............................ 53
a. The Result of Post Interview ............................... 53
b. The Result of Post Questionnaire ........................ 54
B. The Interpretation of the Data .......................................... 56
1. Data of Observation ................................................... 56
2. Data of Questionnaire ................................................ 57
3. Data of Interview ....................................................... 57
4. Data of Test ............................................................... 58
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
A. Conclusion ...................................................................... 60
B. Suggestion ........................................................................ 61
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................ 62
APPENDICES .................................................................................................. 65
\
ix
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 3.1 The Schedule of the Classroom Action Research ........................... 32
Table 3.2 Analytic Scoring Rubric of Narrative Writing .............................. 36
Table 4.1 The Result of Pre Questionnaire ................................................... 40
Table 4.2 Students’ Participation Result on the Teaching and
Learning in the 1st Cycle ............................................................... 44
Table 4.3 Students’ Participation Result on the Teaching and
Learning in the 2nd
Cycle ............................................................... 49
Table 4.4 Students’ Writing Score of Pretest, Posttest 1, and Posttest 2 ..... 52
Table 4.5 The Result of Post Questionnaire .................................................. 54
x
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 2.1 Trible’s Model of Writing ........................................................... 9
Figure 2.2 The example of Narrative Text ................................................... 17
Figure 2.3 Grouping in Jigsaw technique ................................................... 19
Figure 2.4 Division of students in Home group .......................................... 24
Figure 2.5 Division of students in Expert group ......................................... 24
Figure 3.1 Classroom Action Research Design of Kemmis &
Mc Taggart ................................................................................. 28
Figure 3.2 The Classroom Action Research Procedure ................................ 30
Figure 4.1 The Students’ Improvement in Writing Product
in the First Cycle ....................................................................... 46
Figure 4.2 The Students’ Improvement in Writing Product
in the Second Cycle ................................................................... 51
Figure 4.3 The Students’ Participation during Teaching and
Learning Process ........................................................................ 56
Figure 4.4 The Students’ Achievement in Writing Product ......................... 58
xi
LIST OF APPENDICES
Page
Appendix 1a Interview for the English Teacher in the Preliminary Study ....... 65
Appendix 1b The Result of Interview in the Preliminary Study ....................... 66
Appendix 2a Interview for the English in the last Classroom
Action Research .......................................................................... 68
Appendix 2b The result of Interview after Classroom Action Research ......... 69
Appendix 3a Questionnaire for Students in the Preliminary Study .................. 71
Appendix 3b The Result of Questionnaire in the Preliminary Study ............... 72
Appendix 4a Questionnaire for Students in the Last Classroom
Action Research .......................................................................... 73
Appendix 4b The Result of Questionnaire in the Last Classroom
Action Research ......................................................................... 74
Appendix 5a Pretest ......................................................................................... 75
Appendix 5b Students’ Writing Narative Text Scores
in the Preliminary Study .............................................................. 76
Appendix 5c The Sample of Students’ Writing Narative Text
in the Preliminary Study ............................................................. 77
Appendix 6a Students’ Writing Narative Text Score in the Cycle 1 ............... 78
Appendix 6b The Sample of Students’ Writing Narrative Text
in the Cycle 1 ............................................................................. 79
Appendix 7a Students’ Writing Narrative Text Score in the Cycle 2 ............. 80
Appendix 7b The Sample of Students’ Writing Narrative Text
in the Cycle 2 ............................................................................. 79
Appendix 8a Observation Checklist for Students’ Participation
in the Cycle 1 ............................................................................. 82
Appendix 8b Observation Checklist for Students’ Participation
in the Cycle 2 ............................................................................. 88
Appendix 9 Photographs of the Students’ Participation in
Writing Activities ....................................................................... 94
xii
Appendix 10a Lesson Plan of the First Cycle ................................................... 96
Appendix 10b Lesson Plan in the Second Cycle ............................................... 110
Appendix 11a Sets of Pictures for Writing Narrative Text
in the Cycle 1 ........................................................................... 123
Appendix 11b Sets of Pictures for Writing Narrative Text
in the Cycle 2 ........................................................................... 124
1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
This chapter discusses the background of the study, the problems of the
study, the objectives of the study, the significance of the study, the limitation of
the study, and the definition of key terms are formulated.
A. Background of the Study
English is the language used by most countries among languages in
the world. As Richards and Rodgers said, “Latin was most widely studied as
foreign language five hundred years ago. English has become the most
widely studied foreign language today”.1 However, it can’t be denied that
English language has become increasingly important as a medium language
which people from a range of culture can share their knowledge.
The improvement of using English can’t be separated from the
mastering of English because it has many roles in our life, such as in
technology, economy, education, science, information, and many others.
1 Jack C. Richards and Thedore S. Rodgers, Approaches and Methods in Language
Teaching, (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1986), p. 1
2
S.K. Gill in Galuh Nur Rohmah’s book Facing the Complexities of Writing
said, “There are now over 100,000 scientific journals in the world which are
published in English”.2 So, mastering English is necessary for people. It is
also needed by people to access many resources, knowledge and
information from internet, newspaper, television, books, and other English
literature.
From some reasons above, Indonesia’s National Education
Department has decided that English, as foreign language, has to be taught
at every level of school, from elementary school to university.3 But the
writer will focus on teaching English at junior high school level.
One of text types that Junior High School students learn and should
be mastered is narrative text. It has been obviously stated in the current
curriculum KTSP 2006. Narrative text is a kind of text which tells a story
based on a real or imagined event. It consists of orientation, complication,
and resolution.
English is taught as a foreign language in Indonesia and its aim is to
enable students to master the four English skills, i.e. listening, speaking,
reading, and writing. All of the skills should be mastered by students to
communicate with other people, understand them, talk to them, read what
they have written and write to them. By communication, the students can
express their ideas, thought, or feelings to others in an oral or written form.
Writing, unlike speaking is not a natural skill. Hess argues that
reading and writing are social inventions that have to be taught and learned,
practiced and mastered.4 It means writing as one of the four language skills,
is not an ability the learners acquire naturally. The students need to get
formal instruction in order to be able to write and have to learn consciously.
Among the skills, writing is considered the most difficult and complicated
2 Galuh Nur Rohmah. Facing the Complexities of Writing, (Malang: UIN Malang Press,
2008), p. 10 3Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan Nasional Republik Indonesia No. 372 tentang Pengajaran
Bahasa Inggris di Indonesia. 4Natalie Hess, Teaching Large Multiple Classes, (UK: Cambridge University Press,
2001), p. 77
3
language skill to be learned compared to other language skills. It can be seen
that the students make some serious problems when they try to translate a
native language sentence word by word into a good written foreign
language.
As it is known, writing is not easy. The difficulty lies not only in
organizing and generating ideas, but also in translating these ideas into
readable texts. The students have to pay attention on planning and
organizing as well as spelling, punctuation, word choice, and so on.
However, learning how to write is important. People who lives in
today’s growth world need to learn how to write for every reasons.
Newcomers to a country soon have to start communicating through writing.
They have to take down telephone messages. They have to fill out job
applications and applications for health insurance. Students in school at all
stages need to express themselves in writing to do well in school. Therefore,
it should be obvious that writing helps fulfill our need to communicate.
Considering the importance of writing in people’s life especially in
educational field, Indonesian government has included writing in the
English syllabus stated in Competence Standard and Basic Competence.
Ideally, according to Competence Standard–Standar Kompetensi (SK) and
Basic Competence–Kompetensi Dasar (KD) of writing skill in the current
School-Based Curriculum–Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan (KTSP),
the competence standard of writing of Junior High School level is to express
meaning in functional written texts and simple short essays in the form of
descriptive, procedure, narrative, recount, and report to interact with both
the closer environment and the context of daily life.5
It becomes the reason why the students have to master writing as
their need. But, there were still some difficulties faced by the students in
learning writing. Based on the informal interview and writer’s observation
during Praktek Profesi Keguruan Terapadu (PPKT) activities at MTsN
5 Departemen Pendidikan Nasional, 2006, Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan (School
Based Curriculum) 2006: Standar Isi SD, SMP dan SMA. Jakarta.
4
Tangerang II Pamulang, there were some difficulties faced by students
especially in learning writing. First, they had problems to get started in
writing. They took too much time to generate ideas and organize thoughts
onto paper. Second, they were confused in using the right sentence
structure, the use of appropriate grammar, vocabulary, punctuation, spelling,
and so on. The last, they feel bored in writing class because the learning
activities in writing are monotonous.
Considering the complexity of writing, especially in narrative
writing, an English teacher should be an effective teacher, who can use
variety of teaching methods and strategies to improve the students’ writing
ability. The writing class should be facilitated with activities which motivate
students to learn, for example the jigsaw technique where the students are
working together and sharing the ideas within the groups.
There are a lot of methods and techniques to get the English
teaching effectively. To make the teaching learning process effectively, the
writer would like to propose an alternative technique which promotes
cooperative and interesting activities, namely “Jigsaw Technique”. Jigsaw is
one of the cooperative learning strategies as one alternative strategy which
engages students in learning to write. In Jigsaw technique, the students work
in the same group of four to six members and each member in a team
becomes an expert on a topic.6 This technique not only helped the students
in generating ideas but they also feel enjoyed during the teaching and
learning writing process.
Related to the benefits of Jigsaw technique, the writer involves the
students in Jigsaw technique. The writer takes a title of this “skripsi” “Using
Jigsaw Technique to Improve Students’ Narrative Writing in the
Second Year Students of MTs Negeri Tangerang II Pamulang”.
6 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jigsaw_(teaching_technique)
5
B. Problems of theStudy
Referring to the background of the study, the research question is
formulated as follows: Can jigsaw technique improve the students’ writing
ability of narrative text? How does jigsaw technique improve the students’
writing ability of narrative text?
C. Objective of the Study
In line with the research problem, the objectives of this study are to
know how jigsaw technique improves writing ability of narrative text for
second year students of MTsN Tangerang II Pamulang.
D. Significance of the Study
The findings of this study can be useful for the English teachers,
impartial as students, and other researcher teachers.
1. The findings of this study are useful for the English teachers at junior
high school level to get an alternative way or technique in teaching
students to write narrative texts.
2. For the school principal as a decision maker of junior high school
level, he or she observe to the teaching learning strategies which are
used in the teaching learning activities directly. Also, they can send
the English teachers to join up grading with the aim to improve the
teachers’ competencies.
3. The findings of this study are also useful for the students. They will
learn a strategy expected to increase their motivation and improve
their writing ability in narrative texts by working together and sharing
the ideas within the groups.
4. For other researchers especially for those who have the same problem
and are interested in carrying out a research in a similar field, this
study can be implemented.
6
E. Limitation of the Study
The research is focused on the teaching and learning process by
involving the second year students of MTs Negeri Tangerang II Pamulang
in Jigsaw technique to improve their writing ability in narrative texts. The
improvement is focused on four components of writing namely content,
organization, vocabulary, and grammar. To make a description of this
“Skripsi” deeper, the problems will be limited in:
1. The implementation of using jigsaw technique in teaching narrative
text, and
2. The students’ improvement in learning narrative text by using jigsaw
technique.
F. Definition of Key Terms
In order to avoid possible misunderstanding, the writer defines
several important terms which are used in the present study as follows:
(1) Jigsaw Technique means the teacher’s strategy which is intended to
improve students’ narrative writing in teaching learning process. In
this study, Jigsaw refers to the one in writing conducted in a group in
which each student is given a different specific picture sequencing to
describe the events and share that description with his/her other
members of group to make a whole story.
(2) Narrative Text means part of the story genre which tells a story and,
in doing so, entertains or informs the reader or listener.7
(3) MTs Negeri Tangerang II Pamulang refers to Islamic Junior High
School which is under the supervision of the National Education
Department of Indonesia and where the writer was conducting the
study.
7 Mark Anderson and Kathy Anderson, Text Types in English 2, (South Yarra: Mcmillan,
1997), p. 8
7
CHAPTER II
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
A. Writing
1. Nature of Writing
Writing, like speaking, is a way of communication, but writing
makes its own special demands on the communicator. Hedge put it this way:
Compared with speech, writing requires a number of
things: a high degree of organization in the development of
ideas and information; a high degree of accuracy so that
there is no ambiguity of meaning; the use of complex
grammatical devices for focus and emphasis; and a careful
choice of vocabulary, grammatical patterns, and sentence
structures to create a style which is appropriate to the subject
matter and the eventual readers.1
According to Hedge, it can be said that writing is a complex
process that moves through a number of stages. On the other hand, speech is
a spontaneous action which requires very little preparation. We open our
mouths and out flow the words.
1 Tricia Hedge, Writing, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990), p. 5
8
Another idea about writing is expressed by Raimes. Learning to
write is not ―natural‖ extension of learning to speak a language.2 It means
that we do not need systematic instruction when we learn to speak our first
language at home, while most of us had to be taught in school how to write
that same language by using systematic instruction.
Moreover Harmer states that speaking is acquired naturally as a
result of being exposed; the students do not need to get formal instruction,
whereas in order to able to write, students have to have special instruction
and have to learn consciously.3
After the explanation of definition of writing above, it can be
stated that writing as a medium of communication is not a natural activity.
All physically and mentally normal people start to speak from the very
beginning of their life in natural way. On the other hand, all people have to
be taught how to write in formal setting.
Writing also is a way of remembering and a way of thinking as
well. Ryan states that thinking occurs at every stage in writing process.4 In
addition, Brown argues that written product are often the result of thinking,
drafting, and revising.5 When we write, we think from the topic to the final
draft of the writing.
Beside these definition, Nunan states that two different views on
nature of writing which have merged namely product approach and process
approach.6 It means that, in recent years, the teacher sometimes applies the
product and process approach on nature of writing. A product approach
focuses on the end result of the learning process, while process approach
2 Ann Raimes, Technique in Teaching Writing, (New York: Oxford University Press,
1983), p. 4 3 Jeremy Harmer, How to Teach Writing, (Essex: Pearson Education, 2004), p. 3
4 Vincent Ryan, The Art of Writing, (Unites States of America: Alfres Publishing, 1981),
p. 3 5 H. Douglas Brown, Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language
Pedagogy, (New York: Addison Wesley Longman, 2001), p. 335 6 David Nunan, Designing Tasks for the Communicative Classroom, (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press,1989), p. 35
9
focuses on the various classroom activities which are believed to promote
the development of language skills.7
2. Process of Writing
In some ways writing a paper is like building a house. There are
some steps to follow in building a house. At the beginning, it starts by
planning the kind of house until the last step is add finishing touches that
make the house a pleasure to live in.8 So, writing a paper, like building a
house is a process. Both of them are done in some stages. As Richards and
Renandya mention the four stages of the process of writing: prewriting,
drafting, revising, and editing.9
Tribble argues that the process of writing is not as a fixed
sequence but as a dynamic and unpredictable process.10
Tribble‘s model of
writing is shown in Figure 1.
PREWRITING
COMPOSING/
DRAFTING
REVISING
EDITING
Figure 2.1
Tribble’s Model of Writing
7 David Nunan, Language Teaching Methodology: A Textbook for Teacher, (Englewood
Cliffs: Prentice Hall, 1991), p. 86 8 George Brainey and Claire May, Writing from Sources: A Guide for ESL Students,
(Mountain View, California: Mayfield Publishing, 1996), p. 17 9 Jack C. Richards and Willy A. Renandya, Methodology in Language Teaching: An
Anthology of Current Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), p. 315 10
Christopher Tribble, Writing Language Teaching: A Scheme for Teacher Education.
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996), p. 39
PUBLISHING
10
From the figure above, it shows that the writing process is
recursive. Recursive means that writing has several stages and these can be
performed from the initial to the final stages, and can proceed through again,
until the final product is presented. The writer at any point in the preparation
of a text, they can return to see which is need to replan or revise stages they
had completed.
a. Planning (Prewriting)
The first step in the writing process is to plan what kind of theme
or topic of the paper. First, the writer needs to select a subject and then
narrow the subject to a topic. At the same time, the writer thinks about
the purpose of the theme of the paper, who it‘s reader will be, and the
research that the writer do to gather information.11
It can be stated that a careful planning is very important step in the
writing process. It‘s a very crucial step which can determine whether the
writing is good or not. In a good writing, the writer should analyze the
purpose of the paper as well as the readers‘ knowledge and their interest
about the paper.
Prewriting in Richard‘s opinion is any activity in the classroom
that encourages students to write. Group brainstorming, clustering, rapid
free writing, and wh-questions are several variety activities provide the
learning experiences for students.12
It is not only stimulates thoughts for
getting started, but also motivates the students to write for gathering
information during prewriting.
b. Drafting
Drafting is the stage where the writer focused on the fluency of
writing and not worries yet about grammar, punctuation, or spelling. The
writer‘s goal is just to state the main idea clearly and develop the content
of the paper with plenty of specific details.13
At this stage, the writer just
writes down the information on the paper. Moreover, Hedge said that the
11
George Brainey and Claire May, Writing ….p.17 12
Jack C. Richards and Willy A. Renandya, Methodology… p. 316 13
John Langan, English Skill, (New York: Mc Graw Hill, 2006), p. 28
11
drafting process focuses primarily on what the writer wants to say.14
It
means that the content that‘s important for a draft to produce the final
writing.
c. Revising
After drafting the paper, the next step in the writing process is
revising. Revising means rewrite the paper, building upon what has
already been done, in order to make it stronger.15
Stronger means the
paper needs to be successful not only in the grammatical structure, but
also in the content of the writing, so the writer‘s purpose fulfills the
reader‘s expectation. So, it can be stated that revising a paper to correct
any weaknesses is an important part of the writing process.
d. Editing
The last major stage in the writing process is editing. At this
stage, the writer checking a paper for mistakes in grammar, punctuation,
usage, and spelling.16
Richards also states that in the editing stage, the
students engaged in tidying up their texts as they prepare the final draft
for evaluations by the teacher. They edit their own or their peer‘s work
for grammar, spelling, punctuation, diction, and sentence structure.17
Based on the definition above, editing within process writing is
meaningful because the students can see their ideas on the paper during
the writing process has been written as clear as possible to the reader.
3. Purpose of Writing
When the writers do their writing, they certainly have some
purpose. They have to consider the purpose of their writing since this will
influence, not only to the type of text they wish to produce, but including the
language they use, and the information that they choose.
14
Tricia Hedge, Writing…p. 23 15
John Langan, English Skill…p.29 16
John Langan, English Skill…p.33 17
Jack C. Richards and Willy A. Renandya, Methodology…p. 318
12
In general, the purpose of writing includes: (a) to clarify a thought,
a feeling, an impression, or an experience for a reader or yourself; (b) to
provide a reader with information; (c) to persuade a reader to accept an idea;
(d) to create a piece of imaginative literature that a reader might enjoy.18
Furthermore, Jakobson provide a model of the written
communication in six types of purpose, they are:19
a. Expressive purposes. One may write simply to express one's feelings,
attitudes, ideas, and so on. This type of writing doesn't take the reader
into consideration; instead, it focuses on the writer's feelings,
experience, and needs. Expressive writing may take the form of poetry,
journals, letters, and, especially, free writing.
b. Persuasive purposes. Persuasive writing seeks to persuade the reader or
affect the reader emotionally.
c. Informative purposes. Informative writing refers to something external
to the writing itself, with the purpose of informing the reader.
d. Poetic purposes. Poetic (literary) purposes focus on the message itself—
on its language, on the way the elements of language are used, on
structure and pattern both on the level of phrase and of the overall
composition.
e. Phatic purposes. Phatic language (nonverbal communication)
establishes and maintains contacts between writer and reader. Phatic
purposes are intended to establish and maintain friendly contact.
f. Metalinguistic purposes. Comments on a piece of writing are
metalinguistic. An author's preface to a book is an example of
metalinguistic purpose in writing.
18
Rise B. Axelord and Charles R. Cooper, The St. Martin’s Guide to Write, (New York:
St. Martin‘s Press, 1985), p.13 19
http://web.mst.edu/~gdoty/classes/concepts-practices/purposes.html
13
4. Problems of Writing
There are many problems of teaching learning writing skill. The
problems appear not only from the students, but also from the teacher. The
problems come from the students‘ side because writing is a complex process
which requires number of things, such as in using grammar correctly. This
problem usually can cause some difficulties for the students in learning
writing. According to Rozakis, the most common writing errors are:20
a) Grammar and Usage (such as wrong verb tense, and subject-verb
agreement)
b) Sentences (fragments and run-ons),
c) Spelling,
d) Punctuation,
e) Capitalization, and
f) Proofreading (missing words).
The six common errors of writing above usually make some
problems for the students. The first problem area is the students‘ difficulties
in using subject-verb agreement. Warriner states that some of the most
common mistakes in speaking and writing are made when verb and subject
do not agree.21
One of the mistakes in subject-verb agreement is sometimes
made in the situations when a singular subject takes a plural verb or a plural
subject takes a singular verb. For example, ―There is wild dogs in our
neighborhood,‖ a verb in this sentence doesn‘t agree with its subject in
number. So, the right sentence is, ―There are wild dogs in our
neighborhood.‖
Next, the second errors in student writing are the sentence
fragment and the run-on sentence. A sentence fragment is a group of words
that do not express a complete thought. Most times, a fragment is missing a
subject, a verb, or both.22
One types of fragments is a sentence that begin
with a dependent-word. For example, ―I won‘t leave the house. Until I hear
20
Laurie Rozakis, English Grammar for the Utterly Confused, (New York: McGraw
Hill, 2003), p. 78-79 21
John E. Warriner, English Grammar and Composition, (New York: Harcourt Brace
Jovanovich Publisher, 1982), p. 117 22
Laurie Rozakis, English Grammar…p. 122
14
from you,‖ the italic sentence is a fragment. It doesn‘t make sense standing
by itself. Another common writing fault is run-on sentence. A run-on
sentence is two complete thoughts that are run together with no punctuation
at all to mark the break between the thoughts.23
For example, ―Mario told
everyone in the room to be quiet his favorite show was on.‖
The third problem in writing is spelling. Students often misspell
words because they mispronounce them. One of the common mistakes is
dropping a letter or syllable when we say a word. For example, a word
―asked‖ gets mangled as ―ast‖ or even ―axed.‖24
Most common punctuation errors are missing commas or extra
commas, missing or misused apostrophes, misused exclamation marks, and
misused semicolons. For example, ―You will need a pencil, and plenty of
paper,‖ this sentence is incorrect. When the items in the series are separated
by conjunctions, there is no need for commas.25
Two types of capitalization errors are proper nouns not capitalized,
and errors in titles. For example, incorrect capitalization of ―louisa adams,‖
it should be written ―Louisa Adams.‖26
The last problem regarding ability in writing is the missing words
(proofreading errors). This is a simple rule, but many students run out of
time before they can proofread their writing.
Based on the explanation above, it can be said that writing is the
most difficult and complicated language skill to be learned compared to
other language skills.
The other problems appear from the teacher. The problems of the
writing teacher are related to the problems faced by the students above. The
teacher should find appropriate approach, and learning strategy of teaching
learning practice in the classroom in order to overcome the problems.
23
John Langan, College Writing Skills with Readings 5th
ed, (New York: McGraw Hill,
2001), p. 432 24
Laurie Rozakis, English Grammar…p. 83-84 25
John E. Warriner, English Grammar…p. 200 26
Laurie Rozakis, English Grammar…p. 93
15
The students should be challenged and stimulated by interesting
and fun activities during the teaching and learning process. Teaching writing
is not just opening the book, giving assignments, and grading paper. The
students are not just writing based on the topic given and collecting the
product at the end of a lesson. According to Brown, one of the challenges of
becoming an effective writing teacher is by facilitating the students in
learning writing. As the facilitator, the teacher must offer guidance in
helping students to engage in the process of writing.27
B. Narrative Text
1. Definition of Narrative Text
A narrative is a piece of text which tells a story and, in doing so,
entertains or informs the reader or listener.28
While Woodson states
narrating is when you tell a story, when you describe actual or fictional
events.29
Also, narrative whose purpose is mainly to inform often contain
large passages arranging the events in a story strictly in chronological order.
Narrative can be imaginary or factual (fairy tales, mysteries, fables,
romances and adventures stories, myths and legends). Anderson and
Anderson describe many different types of narrative namely humor,
romance, crime, real–life fiction, historical fiction, mystery, fantasy, science
fiction, diary-novel, and adventure.30
2. Purpose of Narrative Text
People write narrative text might be basically for pleasure, to gain
and hold the reader‘s interest in a story. It means that they like to write any
kinds of stories to entertain or even to teach the readers about the writer‘s
reflections on experience. This is equal to Anderson‘s explanation that
27
H. Douglas Brown, Teaching by Principles…p. 340 28
Mark Anderson and Kathy Anderson, Text Types in English 2, (South Yarra:
Mcmillan, 1997), p. 8 29
Linda Woodson, From Cases to Composition, (Glenview, Illinois: Scott, Foresman and
Company, 1982), p. 145 30
Mark Anderson and Kathy Anderson, Text Types…p. 18
16
narrative is used to present a view of the world that entertains or informs the
reader or listener.31
3. Schematic Structures of Narrative Text
The generic structures of narrative texts are orientation,
complication, resolution, and re-orientation. A more detailed generic
structure of a narrative text has been proposed by Anderson and Anderson
who argue that a narrative text includes (a) orientation that sets the scene
(when & where) and introduces participants/character (who), (b)
complication where a crisis arises and something happened unexpectedly,
(c) resolution when the crisis is resolved in which the characters finally sort
out the complication, and (d) a coda which is closing to the narrative (an
optional step).32
4. Linguistic Features of Narrative Text
The language features usually found in a narrative are (a) specific
characters, (b) time words that connect events to tell when they occur, (c)
verb to show the action that occurs in the story, and (d) descriptive words to
portray the characters and setting.
In the following is the example of schematic structure and
language features of narrative text.33
31
Mark Anderson and Kathy Anderson, Text Types…p. 6 32
Mark Anderson and Kathy Anderson, Text Types…p. 8 33
Departemen Pendidikan Nasional Standar Kompetensi Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Inggris
SMP & MTs, Jakarta: Pusat Kurikulum, Balitbang Depdiknas: 2003
17
SNOW WHITE Schematic
Structures
Language
Features
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.
She was very tired and hungry.
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 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 Snow White and
the 7 dwarfs lived happily ever after.
Orientation
Major
Complication
Resolution
Complication
Resolution
Complication
Major Resolution
Specific
participants
Past
tense action
Samples
of temporal
sequence
Figure 2.2
The Example of Narrative Text
C. Jigsaw Technique
There are many developed learning techniques that can be applied
to help the students learn effectively and more quickly in language teaching
and learning. One of those techniques is jigsaw.
1. Definition of Jigsaw Technique
Jigsaw is one of the alternative strategies which engage students in
learning to write. The strategy is an efficient teaching method that also
encourages listening, engagement, interaction, teaching, and cooperation by
18
giving each member of the group an essential part to play in the classroom
activity.
The purposes of Jigsaw are to develop teamwork and cooperative
learning skills within all students, to help the students develop a depth of
knowledge which is not possible if students were to try and learn all of the
material on their own, and to expose students‘ own understanding of a
concept as well as reveal any misunderstandings because students are
required to present their findings to the group in Jigsaw learning.
There are many ways of grouping that can be used by the teacher.
The teacher can choose students randomly from attendance list, account off,
and can group the students according to the result of starting scores.
In jigsaw technique, grouping is very essential. It means that the
application of student groups is one of the keys to successful cooperative
learning. Successful Jigsaw technique also needs effective implementation
of student groups.
The organization in the jigsaw activities, first of all, the students
should work in the expert groups. In this group, students work in the same
group of four to six members and each member in a team becomes an expert
on a topic. After mastering the material and sharing the information, the
students present and teach their material to the new group. Then, each
student tells the other members of the group about the topic. After
information sharing and discussion, the groups have an opportunity to
review the material before taking a quiz.34
The figure below shows the illustration of the group in the jigsaw
technique.
34
Carolyn Kessler, Cooperative Language Learning, (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey:
Prentice Hall Regents, 1992),p. 143
19
Figure 2.3
Grouping in Jigsaw Technique
This technique is not only aimed at motivating and helping the
students in generating ideas but it is also to make students feel enjoy during
the teaching and learning writing process.
2. Procedure in Jigsaw Technique
The general procedure to follow when using the jigsaw technique
in the teaching of writing includes the following steps: (1) Divide students
into 5 or 6 person Jigsaw groups. The groups should be diverse in terms of
gender, ethnicity, race, and ability. (2) Appoint one student from each group
as the leader. Initially, this person should be the most mature student in the
group. (3) Divide the day‘s lesson into 5-6 segments. (4) Assign each
student to learn one segment, making sure students have direct access only
to their own segment. (5) Give students time to read over their segment at
least twice and become familiar with it. There is no need for them to
memorize it. (6) Form temporary ―expert group‖ by having one student from
each Jigsaw group join other students assigned to the same segment. Give
students in these expert groups time to discuss the main points of their
segment and to rehearse the presentations they will make to their Jigsaw
group. (7) Bring the students back into their Jigsaw groups. (8) Ask each
20
student to present her or his segment to the group. Encourage others in the
group to ask questions for clarification. (9) Float from group to group
observing the process. (10) At the end of the session, give a quiz on the
material so that students quickly come to realize that these sessions are not
just fun and games but really count.35
Procedure in implementing the Jigsaw technique according to
Parker is: (1) Students are divided up into groups. The number in each group
depends on the number of subtopics. (2) Each member of the group is
assigned a section or portion of the material. (3) Each student meets with the
members of the other groups who have the same assigned section forming
an expert group. (4) The expert group learns the material together and
decides on how to teach the material to the original groups. (5) Students
later return to their original groups, whose members are each now an expert
in one of the different areas of the topics being studied, and teach their area
of expertise to the other group members. (6) A quiz is given in the end. At
that time no team members may help each other.36
3. Advantages of Jigsaw Technique
There are several benefits of applying Jigsaw technique in
language teaching and learning activities. First, the Jigsaw strategy supports
the communicative approach in language teaching because it offers a highly
interactive learning experience.37
But even more important, the jigsaw
process encourages students work cooperatively by giving each member of
the group an essential part to play in the activity. Group members must work
together as a team to accomplish a common goal; each person depends on
all the others. No student can succeed completely unless everyone works
well together as a team. Also it is a remarkably efficient way to learn the
material.
35 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jigsaw_(teaching_technique) 36
Carolyn Kessler, Cooperative Language…p. 137
21
Second, it improves students‘ motivation. Related to the technique,
the students achieve success as a consequence of paying attention to their
peers, asking questions, helping each other, teaching each other, and helping
each other to teach in a small-group work. The affective benefit of small-
group work is an increase in students‘ motivation. For instance, if group and
individual performances are components of the final assessment, individuals
are motivated not only to learn the material but also to encourage all group
members to understand the basic of the knowledge. No student can succeed
completely unless everyone works well together as a team. Being motivated,
students will participate actively during the lesson.
Third, it increases enjoyment of the learning experience. There is
less boredom in Jigsaw classroom than in traditional classroom. Students in
Jigsaw classes report better while being in the position of the teacher and it
can be an exciting change of place for all students. If smart students are
encouraged to develop ―the intellect teacher‖, the learning experience can be
transformed from boring task into an exciting challenge.
In the Jigsaw classroom, an additional benefit to teacher and
students is availability of study materials at different levels of difficulty.
This technique allows the teacher to use several texts or information sources
at different levels of linguistic or conceptual difficulty in one class.38
4. Disadvantages of Jigsaw Technique
Many researchers demonstrate numerous advantages of Jigsaw
technique; this does not mean that implementing Jigsaw is problem free.
The problems are considered as the disadvantages for carrying out the
technique. According to Aronson, there are several disadvantages of using
Jigsaw technique; 39
a. The problem of the slow student. The slow student need more time than
others to understand and absorb the information. The problem for the
38
Carolyn Kessler, Cooperative Language…p. 138 39
http://www.jigsaw.org/steps.htm
22
poor students are that they need to catch up which may cause tension
because others are pulled back or delayed.
b. The problem may be dominated by smart students. Not everyone has an
equal voice in a group. One person may dominate the group while others
feel left out. Some students do not trust the abilities of others in the
group which results tension and refusal to cooperate.
c. The problem of bright students becoming bored. It usually happens to
the bright students in jigsaw situation. They become impatient, bored, or
resentful of the slower students. Moreover, because their minds are so
quick, the bright students tend to be among the most easily bored if the
activities are moving too slowly for them.
d. The last problem of the jigsaw classroom is noisy. The students are
scattered around the room. Everybody is talking at the same time. A
non-jigsaw teacher might be thought that the jigsaw teacher must be an
undisciplined person, unskilled, and ineffective for overcoming such as
how students learn in such noisy atmosphere.
All the problems above do occur in implementing the Jigsaw
technique if the jigsaw teacher who is not creative enough to tackle and
handle the problems. There are several tactics a teacher can do to solve the
problems. For example, the teacher involves the students in the expert
group. This is one of the strategies for helping the poor readers and the
bright students. In this way, poorer students are helped by their peers who
have the same topic. Meanwhile the bright students eliminate their boredom
by teaching others. By developing the mindset of a teacher, the bright
students can turn into exciting challenge otherwise slower students are faced
experience by this activity for solving problem. In addition, to reduce the
noisy class, the jigsaw teacher should maximally acts as a facilitator, moves
around the class, from Jigsaw group to Jigsaw group, listening, observing,
and keeping alert for many problems arise.
23
D. Teaching Narrative Text by Using Jigsaw Technique
Before involving students in jigsaw technique, first of all the
teachers introduce the concept of jigsaw technique together with the benefits
students get. Then, the teachers explain to the students that jigsaw technique
would be helpful to develop their writing ability of a story. Then explain the
basic rules in applying jigsaw technique in writing narrative text. Next,
explain that narrative texts, as one of the text types learned through four
stages, starts from the building knowledge of the field on the characteristics
of narrative text followed by the model of narrative texts with its features.
The following is steps in teaching narrative text using jigsaw
technique:
1. Distribute the story to the students as reading text to build the
students‘ knowledge of the story and language input in vocabulary,
grammatical usage, and the generic structure of narrative text.
2. Ask everyone to read the story and pay attention to vocabulary and
sentence structure or language feature of narrative text in the story.
3. Ask students some questions to ensure that the students have
understood about the story and generic structure of narrative text.
4. Prepare different several copies (as many copies as there are groups)
of the picture sequence to stimulate and help students describe the
events. The picture sequence should be cut into a specific picture of
sequence for distribution to individual students.
5. Put students into groups of six to seven. The diagram below shows the
arrangement of the group.
24
Figure 2.4
Division of Students in “Home group”
6. Give each member of group one of specific picture, so everyone in the
group has the different picture.
7. Reorganize the class into Expert group. The rearrangement can be
shown diagrammatically in Figure 2.5
Figure 2.5
Division of Students in “Expert group”
Group 1 Group 2 Group 3
Group 4 Group 5 Group 6
: Picture A
: Picture B
: Picture C
S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
S6
S1
S2
S4
S3
S6
S5
S2
S1
S4
S3
S6
S5
S5
S6
S1
S2
S3
S4 S6
S5
S1
S2 S4
S3
S6
S5
S1
S2
S4
S3
Group A Group B Group C
Group A Group B Group C
: Picture A
: Picture B
: Picture C
S1
S2
S1
S2
S2
S1 S3
S4
S4
S3
S4
S3 S5
S6
S6
S5
S6
S5
S1
S2
S1
S2
S1
S2
S3
S4
S4
S3
S4
S3
S5
S6
S6
S5
S6
S5
25
8. Assign students to discuss and describe the events in the picture
become an "expert" in their part of the story.
9. Collect the pictures.
10. Reorganize the class into Home groups after each student has a
summary of a part of the story or a description of one picture. The
rearrangement can be shown in Figure 2.4
11. Ask each student to present and share her or his part of the story to the
group, in order to get the whole story.
12. Ask students to write the complete story individually so that students
quickly come to realize that these sessions are not just fun and games
but really count.
13. Ask students to revise their draft on content and organization using the
revising guide.
14. Give students a chance to edit their writing in terms of grammar,
spelling, capitalization, and punctuation using editing guide.
15. Submit the students‘ final draft and completed versions by reading
aloud at the end of the session.
26
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter discusses research design, subject of research and setting,
and the Classroom Action Research (CAR) procedures which includes
preliminary study, planning the action, implementing the action, observing the
action, and reflecting on the results of the action, technique of collecting data,
technique of data analysis, and the criteria of the action success.
A. The Research Design
The research design in this study was the classroom action research
which focused on a particular group of students in a certain classroom. Mills
defines action research as any systematic inquiry conducted by teacher
researchers, principals, and school counselors in the teaching and learning
environment to gather information about (a) how their particular school
operates, (b) how teachers teach, and (c) how well their students learn.1
1 Geoffrey E. Mills, Action Research: A Guide for the Teacher Researcher, (Ohio:
Merrill Prentice Hall, 2003), p.5
27
In line with Kember who stated that action research has several
major characteristics; (1) action research is concerned with social practice
which it involves direct interaction of teacher and group of students (2)
action research is aimed towards improvement (3) action research is a
cyclical process which involves some phases of planning, acting, observing,
and reflecting (4) action research is pursued by systematic inquiry (5) action
research is participative.2
According to Ebbutt, action research is about the systematic study
of attempts to improve educational practice by group of participants by
means of their own practical action and by means of their owns reflection
upon the effects of those actions.3
Moreover, Carr and Kemmis define classroom action research as a
form of self reflective inquiry undertaken by participants in social situation
in order to improve the rationality and justice on their own practices, their
understanding of these practices, and the situations in which these practices
are carried out.4
Considering the definitions above, it can be concluded that
classroom action research carried out as a device to overcome problems in
learning activity in the class in order to improve the quality of teaching and
learning process.
The writer applied classroom action research model, as a cyclic
process, proposed by Kemmis and Mc Taggart, which consists of four steps,
namely, planning, implementation, observation, and reflection. Planning
stage focuses on how to set up a teaching and learning strategy to be used to
overcome problems which occurs in the class. During the acting stage, the
practitioner tries out the strategy. The observation stage includes collecting
data on the results of the strategy. Finally, during the reflection stage,
2 David Kember, Action Learning and Action Research, (London: Kogan Page Ltd,
2000), p.24-28 3 Nurul Zuriah, Metodologi Penelitian Sosial dan Pendidikan Teori-Aplikasi, (Jakarta:
Bumi Aksara, 2007), p.70 4 David Nunan, Understanding Language Classrooms, (United Kingdom: Prentice Hall,
1989), p. 12
28
conclusions are drawn and the original plan revised based upon the
conclusions so that a new cycle can begin (see Figure 3.1).
Figure 3.1
Classroom Action Research Design of Kemmis & Mc Taggart Model
The action research in this study was a collaborative classroom
action research, means that the writer was assisted by one of the English
teachers as her collaborator in conducting this study. Together with her, the
writer did at all of the research activities starting from the planning of the
action, the implementation of the action, the observation of the
implementation and the reflection of the implemented action. The writer
acted as a teacher who taught writing using Jigsaw technique, while the
collaborator acted as the observer who observed the implementation of
action and the whole process of teaching and learning.
According to Brown, this kind of the action research design is
called a systematic process of collaboration that in which one teacher
observes and gives feedback with some form of reciprocity to another
29
teacher.5 The use of this design was targeted to develop the teaching
strategy in order to solve the classroom’s problem in the teaching of writing.
The writer employed the activities in Jigsaw technique as one of cooperative
learning technique in this study.
B. Subject and Setting of the Research
The subject of this study is students at grade VIII English 2 class of
State Islamic Junior High School Tangerang II Pamulang, academic year
2010/2011. The number of students consists of 35 (thirty five). This class is
chosen based on observation and interview with the English teacher, it had
the lowest achievement on writing test compared with other second grade
classes. Therefore, their writing ability needs to be developed by using
effective strategy.
The setting of this study is jigsaw technique to improve students’
writing ability in terms of narrative text.
C. The Classroom Action Research (CAR) Procedures
In conducting the research, the researcher followed a number of
steps. The steps included preliminary study to analyze and identify the
problems as the preparation, followed by planning the action, implementing
the action, observing, analyzing, and reflecting.
5 H. Douglas Brown, Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language
Pedagogy, (New York: Addison Wesley Longman, 2001), p. 441
30
Figure 3.2
The Classroom Action Research Procedure
A preliminary study was conducted to get data about the factual
conditions of the problems faced by the teacher and students in the teaching
and learning process of writing. The result of the preliminary study was
used to set up a plan of action at the first cycle. An action plan was
established in order to solve the problems. Then, it was followed by
Implementing
Carrying out the planned
activities of Jigsaw
technique
Preliminary Study
Interviewing the English teacher, giving questionnaire to the
students, and the students’ writing narrative text at the VIII
year classes of MTs Negeri Tangerang II Pamulang
Analysis and findings
Analysis : Analyzing the result of preliminary study
Finding : Result of students’ writing narrative text is not satisfactory.
Causes :
1. The students have difficulty to start their writing and to organize and
translate the ideas into readable texts.
2. The teaching–learning writing strategy is ineffective.
3. The students have low motivation to write.
Planning
1. Designing lesson plan.
2. Preparing the model of Jigsaw technique
3. Preparing the materials and media.
4. Setting the criteria of success.
Observing
Observing and ensuring the
achievement of the targeted
success criteria
Reflecting
1. analyzing the collected data
2. determining whether or not
the action is successful
Succeed Fail
Conclusion
and report
Revise the plan and
continue the next cycle
31
implementing the action, observing and reflecting what has been done
during the action.
1. Planning Phase
In this phase, the writer and the collaborator made a plan based on
the findings. The step of planning was done on the basis of the Jigsaw
technique, the 2006 Standard of Content, and the students’ problems. The
planning were focused on designing lesson plan, preparing the activities of
Jigsaw technique, preparing materials and media, and determining criteria of
success.
2. Acting Phase
The implementation of the action was focused on what has been
proposed in the lesson plan. The researcher acted as a practitioner who
carried out the Jigsaw technique in teaching of writing, while the
collaborator acted as an observer who observed the students’ activities and
participation during the teaching and learning process of writing using
Jigsaw technique.
The implementation of the action recovered three meetings in each
cycle. The steps of the implementation of this strategy in every cycle were
described as follows.
Pre-activity; the teacher explained the activities that the students
were supposed to do in the classroom. The students were asked to read and
discuss the story in order to build and enrich their knowledge and language
input such as vocabulary and sentence structure or the language feature of
narrative texts. The students were arranged in groups of four for “home
group”. Then, they were reorganized into “expert group”.
Whilst-Activity; the main activities of this stage were (1) discussing
and describing the events on the picture in the “expert group”, the students
were asked to use words showing actions or activities in the past (2) the
students shared their part of story which they had learned to others in the
“home group” in order to get the complete story, and (3) writing the story
individually; a) composing a rough draft, b) identifying topic sentence,
32
adding or deleting, and ordering details using a revising guide, c) editing for
correctness in spelling, capitalization, and punctuation using a editing guide,
and d) publishing the final product by reading the story in front of the class
and displaying it on wall magazine.
Post-Activity; in the closing activity, the teacher reflected the
activities that had done in the class and asked students to complete a
questionnaire after they had finished their writing a narrative text
recursively in the last meeting. The time table of the implementation of the
action can be seen in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1
The Schedule of the Classroom Action Research
Meeting Date Theme/Sub Theme
Preliminary
study
January 24th
, 2011 Teenage/The Hare and the Tortoise
Cycle I
1 January 26th
, 2011 Teenage/The Wind and the Sun and
The Man, the Boy and the Donkey 2 January 28th
, 2011
3 January 31st, 2011
Cycle II
1 February 4th
, 2011
Teenage/Little Red Riding Hood 2 February 7th
, 2011
3 February 9th
, 2011
3. Observing Phase
Observing was the process of recording and gathering all relevant
data about any aspect occurred during the implementation of the action. The
researcher involved herself in the teaching and learning process in the class,
while the collaborator observed the students’ activities and participation
during the teaching and learning process of writing using Jigsaw technique.
4. Reflecting Phase
Reflecting was proposed to see the success or the failure of what
has been done in previous action or during the action. In reflecting, the
researcher and the collaborative teacher discussed together the
implementation and observation during the teaching and learning process in
the classroom. If the collected data in the first cycle revealed that the criteria
33
of success have been fulfilled, there would be no more cycle to conduct. On
the contrary, if the conclusions proved the criteria of success have not been
fulfilled, it needs to move to the next cycle concerning re-planning, re-
acting, and re-observing.
D. The Technique of Collecting Data
Before conducting the research, the researcher prepared some
instruments. The instruments in this study were observation checklist,
interview, questionnaire sheet, and test (pre-test and post-test).
1. Observation Checklist
Observation checklist was a sort of guidelines used to obtain
information concerning the activities done by the students during the
teaching and learning process in the class. Observation checklist was used to
check whether the students did the scenario they were supposed to do in the
jigsaw technique planned and whether they were enthusiastic, a sign of
being highly motivated, in doing activities. The observation checklist was
given to the collaborator who observed and ticked the students’ involvement
during the teaching and learning process.
2. Interview
Before implementing CAR the writer asks the teacher to know
students’ difficulties in writing skill, students’ condition involving in
writing activity, and the method or kinds of strategies usually adopted by the
teacher in teaching writing. The interview also will be carried out after
accomplishing CAR to know the teacher’s response toward the idea of
jigsaw technique.
3. Questionnaire
Questionnaire was a written of questions to be answered by the
students. This instrument took all students as the respondents. It was applied
both at the preliminary study and at the end of second cycle.
34
4. Test
The test used in this study is pre-test and post-test. The pre-test is
done before implementing jigsaw technique. It is to measure students’
ability in writing narrative text at first. Meanwhile, the post-test is
implemented after using jigsaw technique. The test is held on every second
action of each cycle.
E. The Technique of Data Analysis
The techniques of data analysis consists of data from observation,
data from interview, data from distributing questionnaire, and data from the
test (pre-test and post-test). The analysis qualitative data is used to measure
data from observation and interview, while the analysis quantitative data is
used to measure data from questionnaire and tests.
In analyzing numerical data, the writer finds out the average of
students’ writing score per action within one cycle. It uses the formula:6
X : mean
Xi : individual score
n : number of students
Next, to know the class percentage which pass the Minimum
Mastery Criterion- Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal (KKM) 70, the writer uses
the formula:7
6 Sudjana, Metoda Statistika, (Bandung: PT. Tarsito, 2002), p. 67
7 Anas Sudijono, Pengantar Statistika Pendidikan, (Jakarta: PT. Raja Grafindo Persada,
2008), p.43
n
xiX
P = %100N
F
35
P : the class percentage
F : total percentage score
N : number of students
The last, after mean of students’ scores per action is gained, the
writer analyzes whether there is or there is no improvement scores on
writing from pre-test up to post-test score in cycle 1 and cycle 2. She uses
the formula:8
P : percentage of students’ improvement
y : pre-test result
y1 : post-test 1
P : percentage of students’ improvement
y : pre-test result
y2 : post-test 2
The formula used to analyze data from the percentage of
questionnaire result:
n = number of students who answered the option
N = number of all students in the class
For assessing students’ writing, the researcher used analytical
scoring to get students’ score in writing. According to Weigle, there are four
aspects that will be specific purpose in scoring. It was used a scale to reflect
the instructional focus.9
8 David E. Meltzer, The Relattionship between Mathematics Preparation and Conceptual
Learning Gains in Physics: A Possible Hidden Variable in Diagnostic Pretest Scores,(Iowa:
Departmentof Physic and Astronomy, 2008), p.3 9 Sara Cushing Weigle, Assessing Writing, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
2002), p. 116
P = %1001
y
yy
P = %1002
y
yy
100% N
n
36
Table 3.2
Analytic Scoring Rubric of Narrative Writing
Components
of Writing Scores Indicators
Content
4 relevant to the topic and easy to understand
3 rather relevant to the topic and easy to understand
2 relevant to the topic but is not quite easy to understand
1 quite relevant to the topic but is not quite easy to understand
Organization
4 most of the sentences are related to the main idea
3 some sentences are related to the main idea
2 few sentences related to the main idea
1 the sentences are unrelated to each other
Vocabulary
3 some errors in words choice
4 few errors in words choice
2 occasional errors in words choice
1 frequent errors in words choice
Grammar
and
Mechanics
4 few errors in past tense.
few errors of spelling, punctuation, and capitalization.
3 some errors in past tense.
occasional errors of spelling, punctuation, and capitalization.
2 numerous errors in past tense.
frequent errors of spelling, punctuation, and capitalization.
1 frequent errors in past tense.
no mastery of conventions, dominated by errors of spelling,
punctuation, and capitalization.
The score is the student’s score which is calculated from the score
obtained by the student, divided with maximum score and multiplied by
100%. The obtained score is the score which is gained by every student in
the aspects of content, organization, grammar, and vocabulary. And the
maximum score is the highest score when the student writes correctly based
on the four aspects determined.
While the data on students’ response to the implementation of
Jigsaw technique in writing a narrative text obtained through questionnaire
is analyzed in the form of percentage.
37
F. The Criteria of the Action Success
Criteria of success were set up to determine whether the action in
the research was successfully completed or not. In line with this study, the
criteria of success were decided as follows.
1. The students are highly motivated during the teaching and learning
process. The students are considered motivated if there were 75% of
students are enthusiastic in writing narrative text during the
implementation of Jigsaw technique in the classroom. It is analyzed on
the basis of the obtained data from the observation, questionnaire and
interview.
2. The students’ writing score could achieve the target of the Minimum
Mastery Criterion- Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal (KKM) of English
(70.0) or above. And it is considered successful if 75% of the students
with individual score in writing narrative text achieve at least the same
as or above 70.0. It is established on the basis of the scores of the
students’ writing analyzed by analytic scoring rubric as illustrated in
Table 3.2.
38
CHAPTER IV
RESEARCH FINDINGS
A. The Description of the Data
1. Findings of the Preliminary Study
A preliminary study was conducted to get data about the factual
conditions of the problems faced by the teacher and students in the teaching
and learning process of writing. The preliminary study was conducted on
January 24th
, 2011 which was done by (a) interviewing the English teachers
in terms of the techniques and activities employed in teaching writing, (b)
giving questionnaire to the students in terms of learning English, and (c)
assigning the students to write narrative text in order to identify the
students’ real competence and problems in writing narrative texts.
a. The Result of Pre Interview
Pre interview carried out in this study was the unstructured
interview. It was held on Monday, 24th
2011 started at 10.00 A.M and
finished at 10.30 A.M. The writer asked to the teacher some questions
which divided into three categories, involving: the general condition in
English class especially in writing class, the difficulty faced by students and
39
their participation, and the strategy used by the teacher in writing class and
asking about Jigsaw technique.
First category discussed about the general condition in English class
especially in writing class. The teaching learning process conducted as
usual, there were pre activities, while activities and post activities. In writing
class, the teacher used some activities like grouping, fill in the blank,
arrange the words into a good sentence, and arrange the sentence into a good
paragraph and write a short story about their daily activities, and so on. The
media used was pictures and text which relevant to the topic. (see item
numbers 1, 2 and 3 of interview)
Second category talked about the difficulty faced by the students
focus on English skill. The teacher said that writing were the difficult skills
to be learned whereas the students must achieve the Minimum Mastery
Criterion- Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal (KKM). The students’ difficulties in
writing lied on generating ideas and organizing into paragraph, choosing the
words and using appropriate grammar. Consequently, the students got
boredom in writing class and students’ participation in writing class was not
too active. (see item numbers 4,5, 6, 7 and 8 of interview)
The last category is about the strategy used by the teacher in writing
class and asking about Jigsaw technique. The teacher said that she has never
used Jigsaw technique in writing class but she has known about Jigsaw
technique. She assumed that Jigsaw could be an effective technique in
teaching writing because it could facilitate the learning. It was good to help
generate the ideas. So, it might be able to improve students’ ability in
writing. (See item numbers 9, 10, 11 and 12 of interview).
The conclusion of the interview in term of the students’ difficulties
in writing was the students’ of English 2 class still have difficulties in
writing in term of generating ideas, organizing ideas into paragraph and
choosing the words. (The detail result of pre interview can be seen in
appendix 1b).
40
b. The Result of Pre Questionnaire
The pre questionnaire was conducted to obtain the data indicating
students’ motivation in writing activities. The questionnaire was given to the
students in the second year of English 2 class on Monday, January 24th
2010. The questionnaire had ten questions which revealed in five issues: the
students’ motivation toward the English lesson especially in writing skill
(number 1 and 3), the most difficult skill in English lesson (number 2 & 4),
the students’ feeling toward the teacher’s style in teaching writing (number
5, 6 & 7), the teacher’s implementation of the suitable technique in teaching
writing (number 8 & 9), and the students’ feeling toward their result in
English lesson (number 10). The table below showed the result of pre
questionnaire.
Table 4.1
The Result of Pre Questionnaire
No Perception
Percentage (%)
Strongly
Agree Agree So-so Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
1 The students’ motivation toward the
English lesson (item numbers 1 & 3) 10.0 37.1 41.4 8.6 0
2 The most difficult skill in English lesson
(item numbers 2 & 4) 24.3 15.7 27.1 32.8 0
3
The students’ feeling toward the
teacher’s style in teaching writing (item
numbers 5, 6, & 7)
7.1 24.8 49.5 13.3 0
4
The teacher’s implementation of the
suitable technique in teaching writing
(item numbers 8 & 9)
11.4 20.0 47.2 11.4 0
5 The students’ feeling toward their result
in English lesson (item number 10) 22.9 45.7 11.4 20.0 0
The first issue in Table 4.1 was on the students’ liking for English
lesson. It indicated that 10.0% of students strongly agreed that they like
English lesson very much and 37.1% of students like English lesson, 41.4%
students felt fair to the English lesson and 8.6% of students did not like
English lesson. It can be concluded that most (47.1%) of the students of
English 2 class like English lesson.
41
Although there was only 24.3% of students strongly agreed that
writing was the most difficult skill to learn and 15.7% students agreed. But,
it still appeared some of students (40.0%) assumed that writing was the most
difficult skill to learn.
The third issue was on the students’ feeling toward the teacher’s
style in teaching writing. It was showed that 49.5% of students neither agree
nor disagree. Then, there were only 7.1% students strongly agreed and
24.8% students agreed that they felt interest in the way of the teacher teach.
It indicated that the students didn’t too interest with their teacher style in
teaching writing. So, it needed innovation to develop their motivation in
learning writing.
The next issue was on the teacher’s implementation of the suitable
technique in teaching writing. The table 4.1 indicated that 47.2% students
felt fair that the teacher’s technique could help them in generating ideas
easily. Those were only 11.4% students strongly agreed and 20.0% students
agreed that the teacher’s technique could solve their difficulties in writing. It
showed that most of the students of English 2 class still got diffulties in
writing skill.
The last issue was on the students’ feeling toward their result in
English lesson. It can be seen that 22.9% students strongly agreed and
45.7% students agreed that they were satisfied with their writing score.
Although many students were satisfied, but it could not be said that their
scores were good because they might were satisfied with the scores they got
though it was not really good.
The conclusion in term of writing problem was this class still got
difficulty in writing skill and need improvement to reach the Minimum
Mastery Criterion- Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal (KKM). (The detail result
of pre-questionnaire are presented in appendix 3b)
42
c. The Result of Pre Test
The Pretest was conducted as the preliminary study to identify the
students’ real competence and problems in writing narrative texts. In pretest,
the students assigned to write narrative text in line with pictures provided.
To get the result of the pretest, firstly, the writer calculated the mean
score such following:
n
xiX
35
7.1969X
3.56X
Next, to know the class percentage that’s passed the Minimum
Mastery Criterion- Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal (KKM) using the following
formula:
%100xN
F
35
%1005x
%3.14
Based on the result of the students’ writing product in pretest was
56.3. There were only five students or 14.3% of the students who got the
score above the Minimum Mastery Criterion- Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal
(KKM) meanwhile the other 30 students were below that criterion. From that
analyzing, it could be seen that almost of the English 2 students’ writing
narrative text was unsatisfactory (see Appendix 6a). They made some
mistakes in (1) content, the story has unclear information, (2) organization,
the ideas were unevenly organized and weakly connected, (3) verb
agreement (linguistics structure), the subject or verb in the sentence used
incorrectly, and (4) verb forms, spelling, capitalization, and punctuation. It
indicated that students’ writing narrative text was low. The samples of the
students’ writing product in the pretest can be seen in Appendix 6b.
43
Based on the result of this preliminary study, it needs to set up a
plan of action to solve the problems. The action was intended to improve the
students’ writing ability, as well as increased students’ motivation during
writing activities. So, the writer introduced Jigsaw technique in teaching
writing as an innovation in teaching learning process. The action research
conducted in two cycles. Every cycle followed the procedures of action
research involving planning, acting, observing, and reflecting. Every cycle
was conducted in three meetings. The following was the explanation of the
action research results.
2. Findings of the First Cycle
a. Planning
The writer collaborated with her collaborator planned the action
dealing with preparing Jigsaw technique, lesson plan, instructional materials
and media, and determining the criteria of success. First, the lesson plan for
the first cycle designed into three lesson plans (see Appendix 11a). Second,
the researcher employed Jigsaw technique as the technique of teaching of
writing with the aim at facilitating the students to improve their writing
ability.
Third, the writer prepared materials and media. The researcher took
some narrative texts from a number of writing materials based on the
appropriateness of the materials and media with the instructional objectives
and the students’ interest and level. They were taken from the English text
book, and downloaded from internet. While for media, the researcher used
laptop, paper, and the picture sequence that could be used in Jigsaw
technique (see Appendix 12a).
Next, the writer and collaborator determined the criteria of success.
The criteria of success were 75% of the students’ writing score achieved the
Minimum Mastery Criterion- Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal (KKM) of
English (70.0) or above and 75% of students participated in writing class.
44
Besides, the researcher prepared the instruments for the research such as:
posttest 1, observation checklist, and camera to take a picture of the action.
b. Acting
The action of the first cycle was done on January 26th
, 28th
and 31st
2011. The writer implemented the teaching learning process based on the
lesson plan had been made. In the first meeting, before involving students in
Jigsaw technique, the researcher asked students to read the story given to
build the students’ knowledge about narrative texts. Having known about
the characteristic of narrative texts the students were involved in Jigsaw
technique. They discussed, described the events, and shared the ideas based
on the picture given. In the second meeting, the students were asked to make
their first draft of narrative text and asked them to revise their first draft by
peer correction. In the third meeting, the students were asked to edit their
draft, read their final draft, and collect the final draft. The final draft was the
data for the posttest 1.
c. Observing
In this phase, the observer observed the students’ participation in the
process of writing in pre, whilst and post writing activities through
observation checklist (see Table 4.2).
In the first meeting, there were 75.3% students who participated
actively in discussing the events in the picture sequence. There were 80.0%
students involved enthusiastically in writing and revising their first draft,
while in the third meeting, there were 82.5% students who participated
actively in editing and completing their final draft. So, the result of
observation checklist in the first cycle was 79.3% of the students were
involved in writing class activity. This was assessed by adding the
percentage of the students’ participation in the three meetings divided by 3
(See Appendix 9a). From the students’ participation, it showed that the
45
students were motivated in the teaching and learning of writing. It indicated
that the first criteria of success had been achieved.
Table 4.2
Students’ Participation Result on the Teaching and Learning in the 1st Cycle
No Categories First meeting Second meeting Third meeting
Student % Student % Student %
1 Very Good 16 45.7 18 51.4 19 54.3
2 Good 11 31.4 14 40.0 16 45.7
3 Fair 8 22.9 3 8.6 - -
4 Poor - - - - - -
Total 35 100 35 100 35 100
Also, after accomplished the first cycle, the writer collected the data
for posttest 1.
To know the result of students’ writing, the writer needs to calculate
the mean score firstly. The mean score derived from the following formula:
n
xX
35
8.2281X
2.65X
Then, the writer calculated the class percentage that’s passed the
Minimum Mastery Criterion- Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal (KKM) using the
following formula:
%100xN
F
%10035
10x
%6.28
The data showed that the mean score of posttest 1 was 65.2. There
were only 10 students or 28.6% of the students who got the score above the
Minimum Mastery Criterion- Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal (KKM)
meanwhile the other 25 students were below that criterion. It implied that
the first criterion has not fulfilled.
46
50
55
60
65
70
Writing 56,3 65,2
Preliminary 1st Cycle
Based on the result of the students’ writing product, there was little
improvement of students’ average score from the students’ writing on the
preliminary study to the students’ writing on the first cycle. The students’
improvement in writing a narrative text from the preliminary study to the
first cycle recapped in Figure 4.1.
Figure 4.1
The Students’ Improvement in Writing Product in the First Cycle
The mean score for the first one was 56.3 and the mean score of the
students’ writing on the first cycle was 65.2. That means that there was 8.9
points or 15.8% of mean score improvement. The improvement percentage
derived from the formula:
%1001
y
yy
%1003.56
3.562.65
%8.15
The detail of all students’ scores in the first cycle can be seen in
Appendix 7a.
47
d. Reflecting
In this phase, the writer and her collaborator talked about the result
of the action. Based on the analysis of the students’ writing product that the
students have not achieved the criteria of success that 75% of students must
achieve the Minimum Mastery Criterion- Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal
(KKM). It can be seen that only 28.6% of the students who got the score
above the Minimum Mastery Criterion- Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal
(KKM). So, the implementation of Jigsaw technique has not given
satisfactory result yet on the improvement of students’ writing ability.
From the analysis of the students’ writing product in the first cycle,
it was found that the contents of some students’ writing products were not
quite easy to understand. They did not presented some generic structure of a
narrative text, the ideas are almost clearly stated although it had some
transition words. It was not also easy for them to find words related to the
idea because of limited vocabulary. Moreover, there were some mistakes
made by the students in using past form. The samples of the students’ final
works in the first cycle can be seen in Appendix 7b.
Therefore, it needed to be revised before the implementation of the
next cycle so that it could achieve the criteria of success of this study. In the
other, the students’ participation in writing class has met the second criteria
of success that 79.3% of the students participated in writing class.
e. Revision of the First Cycle
Based on the analysis of the students’ motivation and the students’
writing product in the first cycle, the implementation of Jigsaw technique
did not yet give satisfactory result on the improvement of students’ writing
ability. Therefore, the writer and the collaborator concluded some revision
before the implementation of the next cycle in order to achieve the criteria
of success of this study.
First, the revision was focused on the teaching procedure. In the first
cycle, the students had to move from Jigsaw or Home group to Expert
48
group. Having discussed and mastered their part of a story, the students had
to move again to their home group. These activities were time-consuming
and made some students feel bored. Thus, modifying the teacher’s
procedure by organizing the students to expert group directly was a good
way to eliminate students’ boredom and timesaving so that the students
could discuss and present their part of a story within their group longer.
Details of the teachers’ procedure in the second cycle are presented in
Appendix 11b.
Second revision was wordless picture sequence. Previously in the
first meeting of the first cycle, each student was given a part of wordless
picture sequence. This aimed to involve the students in discussing and
describing the event in the picture freely, but the students were
unaccustomed to doing such an activity. The students were not able to
decide the events because of limited number of vocabulary. In the second
cycle, some key words were added on the picture sequence (see Appendix
12b). Therefore, the students could develop their ideas based on the key
words on the picture sequence.
The last, the students had to bring dictionary at least one dictionary
in one group in order to help them to find out the difficult word.
3. Findings of the Second Cycle
a. Planning
The planning phase of the second cycle was implemented into a
lesson plan. In this case, the writer modified the previous lesson plan based
on the result of reflecting phase in the first cycle. The lesson plan which was
used still related to Jigsaw technique in learning generic structure and
language feature of a narrative text which provided with the picture
sequence related to the text. But, in this cycle, some key words were added
on the picture sequence. Beside, the writer still also prepared the
observation checklist, camera, and the posttest 2 to collect the data
49
b. Acting
The action of the second cycle was done on February 2nd
, 4th,
and 7th
2011. The action was done based on the lesson plan. In the first meeting, the
writer gave the students a model of a narrative text and provided with the
picture sequence which added by some key words to stimulate and help
students to describe the event. The student asked to write a description of a
picture or part of the story in the Expert group and asked each student to
present and share her or his part of the story to the home group.
In the second meeting, the students were asked to make the first
draft (the complete story) individually and asked them to revise their draft
on content and organization using the revising guide by peer correction. In
the third meeting, the students were asked to edit their writing in terms of
grammar, spelling, capitalization, and punctuation using editing guide.
c. Observing
As in the first cycle, the observer observed the students’
participation in the process of writing in pre, whilst and post writing
activities through observation checklist (see Table 4.2).
In the first meeting, there were 86.0% students who participated
actively in discussing the events in the picture sequence. There were 89.0%
students involved enthusiastically in writing and revising their first draft,
while in the third meeting, there were 92.8% students who participated
actively in editing and completing their final draft. So, the result of
observation checklist in the first cycle was 89.3% of the students were
involved in writing class activity. This was assessed by adding the
percentage of the students’ participation in the three meetings divided by 3
(See Appendix 9b). From the students’ participation, it showed that the
students were motivated in the teaching and learning of writing. It indicated
that the second criteria of success had been achieved.
50
Table 4.3
Students’ Participation Result on the Teaching and Learning in the 2nd
Cycle
No Categories First meeting Second meeting Third meeting
Student % Student % Student %
1 Very Good 25 71.4 27 77.1 30 85.7
2 Good 10 28.6 8 22.9 5 14.3
3 Fair 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 Poor 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 35 100 35 100 35 100
The calculation of the mean of students’ score in writing posttest 2
gained 77.2. It was derived from:
n
xiX
35
6.2700X
2.77X
Then, the calculation of class percentage about the students who
passed the Minimum Mastery Criterion- Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal
(KKM):
%100xN
F
%10035
28x
%0.80
Finally, the calculation of the improvement percentage is gained
from the following formula:
P = %1002
y
yy
%1003.56
3.562.77
%1.37
Based on the result of the students’ writing product, there was better
improvement of students’ average score from the students’ writing in the
51
50
60
70
80
Writing 56,3 77,2
Preliminary 2nd Cycle
preliminary study to the students’ writing in the second cycle. The mean
score of the pretest in the preliminary study was 56.3% and the mean score
of the students’ writing on the second cycle was 77.2%. Means that there
was 20.9 points or 37.1% of average score improvement. The students’
improvement in writing a narrative text from the first cycle to the second
cycle recapped in Figure 4.2.
Figure 4.2
The Students’ Improvement in Writing Product in the Second Cycle
The students who passed the Minimum Mastery Criterion- Kriteria
Ketuntasan Minimal (KKM) (70.0) were 28 students or 80.0% if it
calculated into class percentage, while 7out of 35 students (20.0%) achieved
bellow 70.0 of 35. It indicated that the first criterion of success which
required 75% of the students who got at the same as or above the minimum
adequacy criteria has been achieved. The following was the table of
students’ writing score.
52
Table 4.4
The Students’ Writing Score of Pretest, Posttest 1, and Posttest 2
No Students’
Number Pre-Test Post-Test 1 Post-Test 2
1 S1 56.3 62.5 75.0*
2 S2 43.8 56.3 75.0*
3 S3 56.3 75.0* 81.3*
4 S4 50.0 50.0 68.8
5 S5 75.0* 75.0* 87.5*
6 S6 56.3 62.5 81.3*
7 S7 50.0 50.0 68.8
8 S8 43.8 75.0* 81.3*
9 S9 62.5 62.5 75.0*
10 S10 50.0 56.3 81.3*
11 S11 56.3 62.5 75.0*
12 S12 43.8 50.0 62.5
13 S13 75.0* 62.5 75.0*
14 S14 56.3 75.0* 87.5*
15 S15 50.0 62.5 75.0*
16 S16 43.8 50.0 62.5
17 S17 62.5 81.2* 87.5*
18 S18 68.8 87.5* 93.8*
19 S19 43.8 68.8 81.3*
20 S20 75.0* 62.5 75.0*
21 S21 43.8 50.0 62.5
22 S22 50.0 56.3 75.0*
23 S23 56.3 68.8 81.3*
24 S24 62.5 68.8 81.3*
25 S25 75.0* 75.0* 87.5*
26 S26 75.0* 81.2* 87.5*
27 S27 43.8 62.5 75.0*
28 S28 68.8 68.8 81.3*
29 S29 50.0 62.5 75.0*
30 S30 56.3 68.8 75.0*
31 S31 50.0 81.2* 87.5*
32 S32 62.5 75.0* 75.0*
33 S33 56.3 62.8 75.0*
34 S34 43.8 50.0 68.8
35 S35 56.3 62.5 62.5
MEAN 56.3 65.2 77.2
*: The student who passed the Minimum Mastery Criterion- Kriteria
Ketuntasan Minimal KKM (70).
53
d. Reflecting
After getting the result of observation checklist and posttest 2, the
writer and the collaborator carried out the reflection. They felt satisfaction
with the result of the action. The result of the posttest 2 showed that 80% of
the students got the score above the Minimum Mastery Criterion- Kriteria
Ketuntasan Minimal (KKM). So it has met the first criterion of success that
75% of the students must get the score above the Minimum Mastery
Criterion- Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal (KKM). Also, the students’
participation in the second cycle achieved 89.3%. It meant that the second
criterion of success has achieved. Because of the satisfied result, so the
writer and the collaborator decided to stop the action.
4. Findings after implementing CAR
a. The Result of Post Interview
Unstructured interview was conducted on Monday, February 7th
2011. It started at 10.00 A.M and finished at 10.30 A.M. In this case, the
writer divided into three criteria of questions. First criterion talked about the
general condition in writing class during implementing the action. It was
found that the students’ condition were better than before. In this sense, they
looked enthusiast and felt easier to write narrative text using Jigsaw
technique. The students’ participation was good because the activity in the
classroom involved the students.
Second criterion was about the barrier and its solution in
implementing Jigsaw technique during implementing the action. It was
observed that most of the students difficult in describing the event in the
picture because of limited number of vocabulary. So, it was added some key
words on the pictures to help the students in developing their ideas. Also it
was suggested for the students to bring dictionary to help them to find out
the difficult word.
The last criterion is about the opinion of Jigsaw technique. It was
said that Jigsaw was a good technique in teaching writing. It could be an
54
effective way to help the students’ writing. Beside it might be able to
improve the students’ writing; it could be an alternative strategy and could
motivate the English teacher to use it. (See appendix 2b for detail result of
interview)
From the explanation above, it could be drawn the general
conclusion from the post interview that the teacher gave a positive response
toward the implementation of Jigsaw technique. In addition, have a good
impact to improve the students’ ability in writing narrative text.
b. The Result of Post Questionnaire
The post-questionnaire was conducted to know about the students’
response after learning writing through Jigsaw technique. The questionnaire
had ten questions which revealed in five issues: The students’ liking for
Jigsaw technique (number 1 & 6), the usefulness of Jigsaw technique
(number 2 & 3), the students’ response about teaching writing through
Jigsaw (number 4 & 7), the extent of the role of peers’ responses in
improving writing quality (number 8 & 9), and the teacher’ style during
teaching writing through Jigsaw (number 5 & 10). The questionnaire was
given to the students in the second year of English 2 class on Monday,
February 7th
2010. The table below showed the result of post questionnaire.
Table 4.5
The Result of Post Questionnaire
No Perception
Percentage (%)
Strongly
Agree Agree So-so Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
1 The students’ liking for Jigsaw technique
(item numbers 1&6) 17.1 64.3 17.1 1.4 0
2 The usefulness of Jigsaw technique (item
numbers 2&3) 17.1 64.3 15.7 2.9 0
3 The students’ response about teaching
writing through Jigsaw (item numbers 4&7) 15.7 54.3 27.2 2.9 0
4 The extent of the role of peers’ responses in
improving writing quality (item numbers
8&9)
14.3 48.6 32.8 4.3 0
5 The teacher’s style during teaching writing
through Jigsaw (item numbers 5&10) 20 60 15.7 4.3 0
Total 84.2 291.5 108.5 15.8 0
Mean 16.8 58.3 21.7 3.2 0
55
The first issue in Table 4.5 was on the students’ perception of their
liking to write a narrative text using Jigsaw technique. It indicated that
17.1% students strongly agreed and 64.3% students agreed. Those neither
agree nor disagree comprised 17.1%. It was clearly indicated in the table
that most of the students were like to write using Jigsaw technique. The
second issue was on the students’ perception of the usefulness of Jigsaw
technique. The Table 4.1 revealed that 17.1% students strongly agreed and
64.3% students agreed. Those neither agree nor disagree amounted 15.7%. It
indicated that most of the students agreed that Jigsaw technique could
motivate them to participate actively in writing class.
The third issue was on the students’ response about teaching
writing through Jigsaw. It was indicated that 14.3% students strongly agreed
and 48.6% students agreed. Those neither agree nor disagree amounted
32.8% and those disagree comprised 4.3%. No one strongly disagreed. The
fourth issue was on the extent of the role of peers’ responses in improving
writing quality. The table 4.1 also indicated that 14.3% students strongly
agreed and 48.6% students agreed. Those were 32.8% students neither agree
nor disagree. It showed that 4.3% students disagreed and no one strongly
disagreed. The last issue was on the students’ response about the teacher’s
style during teaching writing through Jigsaw. It was indicated that 20.0%
students strongly agreed and 60.0% students agreed. Those neither agree nor
disagree amounted 15.7% and those disagree comprised 4.3%. No one
strongly disagreed.
To sump up, Table 4.5 indicated that 16.8% students strongly
agreed that Jigsaw technique motivated them to write narrative text. Those
agreed amounted to 58.3%. Those neither agree nor disagree comprised
21.7%. It was also clearly indicated in the table that 3.2% students disagreed
and no students strongly disagreed. It meant that 75.1% students were
motivated during the implemented Jigsaw technique in writing class. This
implied that the first criteria of success had been fulfilled. Details of the
students’ perception on their motivation are presented in Appendix 6.
56
0
50
100
Cycle I 75.3 80 82.5
Cycle II 86 89 92.8
1st Meeting 2nd Meeting 3rd Meeting
B. The Interpretation of the Data
In action research, we should not rely on any single data but we have
to look the various data sources to sustain the result of research. Data
sources used in this study was triangulation. It was used to know and to
check whether the result of each instrument was in line with the result of
other instrument. So it could produce the validity of the data and it could be
clearly seen the accordance of the research findings.
1. Data of Observation
Based on the result of the students’ participation during the teaching
and learning process of writing class through observation checklist, it was
indicated that the students’ participation gradually increase from the first
cycle into the second cycle. It was found that there were 79.3% students
participated actively in the first cycle, meanwhile 89.3% students
participated in the second cycle. It meant that the improvement percentage
was 10.0%. Hence, it has met the second criterion of success. Figure 4.3
recapped the improvement of students’ participation in both the first and
second cycles.
Figure 4.3
The Students’ Participation during Teaching and Learning Process
The improvement of students’ participation meant that the
implementation of Jigsaw technique gave a good impact of their
participation during the teaching and learning process of writing narrative
57
text. It was successfully improve the students motivation because the
activities of Jigsaw technique could make the students interest and forced
them to involve in doing the activities. (see appendices 8a and 8b)
2. Data of Questionnaire
The data from the pre questionnaire revealed that writing was one
of the English skills that difficult to master. The students had difficulty in
term of generating and organizing the idea into readable text, choosing the
words, and using past form. Those problems made the students did not
interest in writing class. However, after using Jigsaw technique in teaching
writing, the students gave positive responses toward that action. Jigsaw
technique could make the classroom atmosphere more interesting and make
students easier to write. It because they can share their ideas in writing a
narrative text in both the expert groups and home groups.
3. Data of Interview
The data gained from the pre interview with the English teacher
indicated that the students’ ability in writing was poor because the students
had some difficulty in writing, and the students’ participation in writing
class was not too active. Consequently, it needed to do the innovation in
teaching writing. The writer suggested implementing Jigsaw technique
strategy in teaching writing. After conducting the action, the English teacher
gave positive responses toward the action. The English teacher felt satisfied
with the improvement made by the students focus on writing ability and
their participation. The English teacher also motivated to use Jigsaw
technique because it could facilitate the students in writing. Hence, the
English teacher would use Jigsaw technique as an alternative strategy in
teaching writing. (see appendices 1b and 2b).
58
4. Data of Test
Based on the result of students’ writing product, it was found out
that the students’ writing in a narrative text was gradually improving. It
meant that the use of Jigsaw technique could increasingly help and motivate
them to learn for better writing a narrative text. Thus, most of them
gradually gained good scores at the end of each cycle. The students’ average
score in preliminary study was 56.3; in the first cycle the average score was
65.2; and the average score in the second cycle was 77.2. The students’
improvement in the writing narrative text from the preliminary study to the
second cycle was recapped in Figure 4.4.
Figure 4.4
The Students’ Achievement in Writing Product
The overall finding of the study after accomplishing the classroom
action research revealed the good results from implementing Jigsaw
technique in teaching narrative text.
The result of the study using Jigsaw technique indicated that there
was an increase in students’ motivation in writing a narrative text from
79.3% in the first cycle to 89.3% in the second cycle. The implementation of
Jigsaw technique gradually improved students’ motivation to write.
The result of this study also indicated that students’ writing
product increased significantly from 56.3 in the preliminary study, 65.2 in
the first cycle, to 77.2 in the second cycle.
50
60
70
80
Writing 56.3 65.2 77.2
Preliminary 1st Cycle 2nd Cycle
59
Furthermore, the interview implied that Jigsaw technique was a
good technique in improving students’ writing and it could be an alternative
technique in teaching writing.
Some points that can be concluded from the study are that Jigsaw
technique (1) stimulates the students to be active participants in English
classes through a series of its activities, (2) increases students’ achievement
and motivation, (3) produces a live, interesting, and fun English class, and
(4) activates the four language skills at the same time.
60
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
A. Conclusion
It can concluded that the implementation of Jigsaw technique in the
teaching of writing has successfully improved the second year students’
writing ability in narrative text at MTsN Tangerang II Pamulang. The
improvement could be seen from the increase of students’ mean writing
score from 56.3 in the preliminary study, and 65.2 in the first cycle, to 77.2
in the second cycle. Besides, the finding indicated that Jigsaw technique was
effective in motivating and encouraging the students to participate actively
in writing a narrative text. It was found that there were 79.3% students
participated actively in the first cycle and 89.3% students participated
enthusiastically in the second cycle.
It was also supported by the result of the questionnaire given to the
students in the end of the second cycle. After using Jigsaw technique in
teaching writing, the students gave positive responses toward that action.
Jigsaw technique could overcome their difficulty in term of generating and
organizing ideas. They can share their ideas in writing a narrative text in
both the expert groups and home groups. It can be concluded that Jigsaw
61
technique could make the classroom atmosphere more interesting and make
students easier to write.
Finally, the teacher’s response about the implementation of Jigsaw
technique was positive and it would be alternative strategy in teaching
writing. Therefore, Jigsaw technique could improve the students’ writing
ability in narrative text.
B. Suggestion
There are some suggestions to offer to the English teachers and the
other researchers based on the research findings, they are:
1. Based on the effectiveness of the implementation of the Jigsaw
technique in the teaching and learning of writing narrative texts and
improving student’s motivation, particularly in sharing ideas and
describing the events in the picture, it is suggested that the English
teachers implement the strategy as an alternative strategy in teaching
English language. Yet, in applying this technique, the teacher should be
active in monitoring the students’ activities in group discussion and the
teacher should be creative in making the teaching and learning process
alive so that students will never feel bored.
2. It is also recommended that the students use Jigsaw technique as one of
their learning strategies to practice and improve their writing ability in
narrative texts which can be done in their extracurricular activities.
3. To the future researcher teachers, particularly those who have the same
problem and are interested in conducting research, it is suggested that
they apply Jigsaw activity in the same field in their research or on the
teaching of three other language skills, for instance listening. In
listening, for example, students can hear the different parts of a text,
and then exchange information with others in order to complete a task.
The student can report the task orally or in a written form.
62
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Anderson, Mark and Kathy Anderson. 1997. Text Types in English 2. South
Yarra: Mcmillan.
Axelord, Rise B. and Charles R. Cooper. 1985. The St. Martin’s Guide to Write.
New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Braine, George and Claire May. 1996. Writing from Sources: A Guide for ESL
Students. Mountain View, California: Mayfield Publishing.
Brown, H. D. 2001. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to
Language Pedagogy (2nd
ed.). White Plains: Addison Wesley Longman.
Departemen Pendidikan Nasional. 2003. Kurikulum 2004: Standar Kompetensi
Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Inggris Sekolah Menengah Pertama dan
Madrasah Tsanawiyah. Jakarta: Pusat Kurikulum, Balitbang Depdiknas.
————————————. 2006. Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan
(School Based Curriculum) 2006: Standar Isi SD, SMP, dan SMA. Jakarta.
Djamarah, Syaiful Bahri. 2006. Strategi Belajar Mengajar. Jakarta: PT. Bineka
Cipta.
Harmer, Jeremy. 2007. The Practice of English Language Teaching. Essex:
Pearson Education.
Hartono, Rudi. 2005. Genres of Texts. Unpublished, Semarang State University:
English Department Faculty of Language and Art.
Hedge, Tricia. 1990. Writing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hess, Natalie. 2001. Teaching Large Multiple Classes. United Kingdom:
Cambridge University Press.
Kember, David. 2000. Action Learning and Action Research. London: Kogan
Page Ltd.
Kessler, Carolyn. 1992. Cooperative Language Learning. Englewood Cliffs, New
Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Langan, John. 2001. College Writing Skills with Readings 5th
ed. New York:
McGraw Hill.
––––––––––: 2006. English Skill. New York: Mc Graw Hill.
63
Meltzer, David E. 2008. The Relationship between Mathematics Preparation and
Conceptual Learning Gains in Physics: A Possible Hidden Variable in
Diagnostic Pretest Scores. Iowa: Departmentof Physic and Astronomy.
Mills, Geoffrey E. 2003. Action Research: A Guide for the Teacher Researcher.
Ohio: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Nunan, David. 1989. Designing Tasks for the Communicative Classroom.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
–––––––––——–: 1989. Understanding Language Classrooms. United Kingdom:
Prentice Hall.
––––––––––––: 1991. Language Teaching Methodology: A Textbook for
Teachers. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Rahmah, Galuh Nur. 2008. Facing the Complexities of Writing: As a Learner and
Teacher of EFL Writing. Malang: UIN Malang Press.
Raimes, A. 1983. Techniques in Teaching Writing. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Raymond, James C. 1980. Writing: Is an Unnatural Act. New York: Harper and
Row.
Richards, Jack C. & Thedore S. Rodgers. 1986. Approaches and Methods in
Language Teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press.
––––––––––––– & Renandya, W. A. (Eds.). 2002. Methodology in Language
Teaching: An Anthology of Current Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Rozakis, Laurie. 2003. English Grammar for the Utterly Confused. New York:
McGraw Hill.
Ryan, Vincent. 1981. The Art of Writing. Unites States of America: Alfres
Publishing.
Sudjana. 2002. Metoda Statistika. Bandung: PT. Tarsito.
Sudijono, Anas. 2008. Pengantar Statistika Pendidikan. Jakarta: PT. Raja
Grafindo Persada.
Tribble. C. 1996. Writing. In C. N. Candlin., & H. G. Widdowson. (Eds.),
Language Teaching: A Scheme for Teacher Education. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
64
Warriner, John E. 1982. English Grammar and Composition. New York: Harcourt
Brace Jovanovich Publisher.
Weigle, Sara Cushing. 2002. Assessing Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Woodson, Linda. 1982. From Cases to Composition. Glenview, Illinois: Scott,
Foresman and Company.
Zuriah, Nurul. 2007. Metodologi Penelitian Sosial dan Pendidikan Teori-Aplikasi.
Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.
Aronson, E. “Jigsaw classroom”, (Online), (http://www.jigsaw.org/steps.htm,
retrieved on October 23, 2010).
Jakobson, Roman. Purpose in Writing, (Online),
(http://web.mst.edu/~gdoty/classes/concepts-practices/purposes.html,
retrieved on October 23, 2010).
Parker, Jill. ―Jigsaw”, (Online), ([email protected], retrieved on
October 23, 2010).
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, (Online),
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jigsaw_teaching_technique, retrieved on
October 23, 2010).
