an analysis of students’ ability in writing descriptive text...

1

An Analysis of Students’ Ability in Writing Descriptive Text at

Tenth Grade of SMAN 2 Tanjungpinang

1Dini Trisni Anggraini, 2Muhammad Candra, 3Gatot Subroto

[email protected]

English Education Study Program, Teacher Training and Education Faculty,

Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji

ABSTRACT

The aims of this study are to find out the students’ ability in writing

descriptive text particulary in its organization aspect and their formatting mistakes.

Descriptive text is a text that describe particular person, animal, place, or thing in

order to give information to the reader in written form. This study uses quantitative

method. The sample of this study are the 52 students of science major at tenth grade

of SMAN 2 Tanjungpinang. The researcher uses the simple random technique to

select the sample. The instrument which used in this study is test. The researcher

adapts Brown’s writing rubric for descriptive text in organization aspect to analyse

the students’ descriptive text and calculates the result using mean formula. To

analyse the students’ formatting mistakes, the researcher adapts Oshima and

Hogue’s scoring rubric and uses the percentage formula to calculate the result. The

result of this research are most of the science students has fair ability in writing

descriptive text in organization aspect, and the formatting mistakes that mostly they

commit is “the writing is not tidy” (34,6%).

Key Words: Studentss’ Ability, Writing Descriptive Text, Organization Aspect

INTRODUCTION

In learning English, there are four skills which students have to learn. The

skills are listening, speaking, reading, and writing. Based on the 2013 Curriculum,

students have to master all skills including writing. Writing is the most difficult

skill that students have to master because it has several aspects, which the students

mailto:[email protected]

2

have to consider in order to make a good writing. The aspects are contents,

vocabulary, punctuation, language use, and organization aspect (Brown, 2004).

Because of those aspects, writing becomes complex for them and it makes them

lose motivation to learn more about writing.

Based on the syllabus, the students at tenth grade in senior high school learn

about descriptive text in the first semester. They have to learn how to write a simple

descriptive text particularly about tourist attraction and historical building.

According to Nordquist (2017), to make the best descriptive writing both in fiction

and nonfiction, we have to include five senses. They are smell, taste, touch, sight,

and hearing. Furthermore, to write a good descriptive text, he also states that after

identifying that subject in a clear topic sentence, they proceed to describe it in detail

while explaining its personal significance

Based on the researcher’s observation in SMAN 2 Tanjungpinang, she

found several problems connected to the students’ problem in writing descriptive

text. The problems are the students had difficulty to write the content, they confused

to write the identification and description, they cannot distinguish it, they often

make grammar mistakes, they lacked of vocabulary, and the often make mistakes

in spelling, punctuation and capitalization.

Based on the problems above, the researcher focused on students’ difficulty

in writing descriptive text in organization aspect and what kind of formatting

mistakes which they make in their descriptive text.

3

METHODOLOGY

This study used quantitative research as the methodology. Quantitative

research method uses statistical or numeric approach to quantify the data (Williams,

2007). The population of this study was the science students at tenth grade of

SMAN 2 Tanjungpinang in the academic year of 2017-2018. The researcher took

54 from 268 students as the sample of this study using a theory from Arikunto, ,

“...if the subject is large, the researcher can take 10-15% or 20-25% or more.”

Arikunto (2006, in Zakky, 2014:46). The researcher used simple random sampling

to take the sample. Frerichs (2008) stated that using simple random sampling

technique means each person in the population has the same possibility to be

selected as the sample. She also used the lottery method to select the students from

each classes.

To analyse the students’ ability in writing descriptive text in organization

aspect, the researcher adapted the writing rubric for descriptive text from Brown

(Brown, 2007).

Table 1.1

Writing Rubric for Descriptive Text in Organization Aspect: Identification

No Aspect Score Criteria

1

Organization:

Identification

4 Student writes the name of place and location

completely.

2 3 Student writes the name of place and location,

and it is almost complete.

3 2 Student writes the name of place and location

and it is not complete.

4 1 Student only writes one of the name of place or

location.

5 0 Student does not write the identification.

4

Table 1.2

Writing Rubric for Descriptive Text in Organization Aspect: Description

No Aspect Score Criteria

1

Organization:

Description

4 Student writes the part, qualities, and

characteristics of the object completely.

2 3 Student writes the part, qualities, and

characteristics of the object and it is almost

complete.

3 2 Student writes the part, qualities, and

characteristics of the object and it is not

complete.

4 1 Student only writes one of the part or qualities

or characteristics of the object.

5 0 Student does not write the description.

The researcher adapted the criteria of students’ ability from Purwanto

(1990, in Prasetyanti, 2014), to categorize their ability in writing descriptive text in

organization aspect.

Table 1.3

Criteria of Students’ Ability in Writing Descriptive Text in Organization Aspect

Letter Score Value Criterion

A 4 Excellent

B 3 Good

C 2 Fair

D 1 Less

E 0 Poor

The researcher used the mean formula (Best & Kahn, 1998) to calculate the

total score of students’ organization.

�̅� = ∑ 𝑥

𝑛

5

Where:

�̅� = mean

∑𝑥 = sum of scores from identification and description

𝑛 = total number of organization aspects

To analyse the students’ formatting mistakes, the researcher used the

scoring rubric adapted from Oshima and Hogue (2007), as follows:

Table 1.4

Scoring Rubric to Measure the Students’ Formatting Mistakes in Writing

Descriptive Text

No Criteria Maximum Score

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Format – 5 Points

There is a title

The title is centered

The first line is intended

The writing is tidy

The writing is clean

1

1

1

1

1

Afterward, to categorize the students’ formatting mistakes, the researcher

adapted Vagias and Wade’s (2006) level of quality.

1 – Poor, 2 – Fair 3 – Good 4 – Very Good 5 – Excellent

Last, to calculate the students’ formatting mistakes, the researcher used the

percentage formula from Lota (2015), as follows:

𝑃 = 𝑓

𝑛𝑥100%

6

Where:

𝑃 = percentage

𝑓 = frequency of student who commit the formatting mistake in each category

𝑛 = total number of students

In this study, the researcher used test as the instrument. The students had to

write a simple descriptive text about tourist attraction or historical building. After

that, the researcher collected the data and analysed it using Brown’s (Brown, 2007)

scoring rubric of writing descriptive text in organization aspect. The researcher also

analysed the formatting mistakes (Oshima and Hogue, 2007) in students’

descriptive text.

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS

After the researcher collected the data, there were only 52 from 54 students

who attended the class and did the written test. The researcher analysed the

students’ organization aspect and the result was presented in the following table:

Table 1.5

Students’ Organization Aspect Score

Student

Aspect: Organization

Identification

Description

Total

Score

Mean

�̅� = ∑ 𝑥

𝑛

Letter

Score

Value

Criterion

Student 1 3 1 4 2 C 2 Fair

Student 2 4 4 8 4 A 4 Excellent



7







Student 11 3 3 6 3 B 3 Good


Student 13 2 0 2 1 D 1 Less































8

Based on the table above, there were 15 students categorized as excellent, 8

students categorized as good, 26 students categorized as fair, 3 students categorized

as less and none of them got poor. Half of them got fair, it can be concluded that

most of them still did not know how to write a good descriptive text particularly in

organization aspect.

Graphic 1.1

Students’ Ability in Writing Descriptive Text in Organization Aspect

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Excellent Good Fair Less Poor

Graphic of Students' Ability in Writing Descriptive Text










Total

Excellent 15 Students

Good 8 Students

Fair 26 Students

Less 3 Students

Poor 0 Student

9

Based on the graphic above, it was found that most students got fair in

writing descriptive text in organization aspect.

The researcher analysed students’ formatting mistakes in writing descriptive

text. The result was presented in the following table:

Table 1.6

Students’ Formatting Mistake at Five Criteria

Student

Criteria

Score

Quality There

is a title

The title

is

centered

The first line

is intended

The

writing

is tidy

The

writing

is clean

Student 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 Very Good

Student 2 1 1 - - - 2 Fair

Student 3 1 1 1 1 1 5 Excellent




Student 7 1 1 1 - 1 4 Very Good

Student 8 - - 1 1 1 3 Good


Student 10 - - - 1 1 2 Fair


Student 12 - - 1 - 1 2 Fair





Student 17 1 1 1 1 - 4 Very Good



Student 20 1 1 - 1 1 4 Very Good



Student 23 1 1 1 - - 3 Good


Student 25 1 1 - - 1 3 Good


10


Student 28 1 - - - 1 2 Fair








Student 36 1 1 - 1 1 4 Very Good









Student 45 - - 1 - - 1 Poor







Student 52 1 1 1 1 - 4 Very Good

Total

Poor 1 Student

Fair 4 Students

Good 12 Students

Very Good 10 Students

Excellent 25 Students

After the researcher analysed the students’ formatting mistakes, she found

that 52 from 25 students got excellent, 10 students got very good, 12 student got

good, 4 students got fair, and 1student got poor. It means that there were 46 students

who wrote the title, 45 students who centered the title, 46 students who intended

11

the first line. 34 students who wrote the descriptive text tidily, and 39 students who

wrote the descriptive text cleanly.

After that, the researcher used percentage formula to present the percentage

of the formatting mistakes for each criteria. The result was presented as follows:

1. There is a tittle:

𝑃 = 6

52𝑥100% = 11,5%

2. The tittle is centered:

𝑃 = 7

52𝑥100% = 13,5%

3. The first line is intended:

𝑃 = 6

52𝑥100% = 11,5%.

4. The writing is tidy:

𝑃 = 18

52𝑥100% = 34,6%.

5. The writing is clean:

𝑃 = 13

52𝑥100% = 25%.

From the result above, the researcher found that there were 6 students who

did not write the title (11,5%), 7 students who did not centered the title (13,5%), 6

students who did not intended the first line (11,5%), 18 students who did not write

the descriptive text tidily (34,6%), and 13 students who did not write the descriptive

text cleanly (25%).

12

Graphic 1.2

Students' Level of Quality in Formatting Mistakes

Based on the graphic above, the result was most of the science students at

tenth grade of SMAN 2 Tanjungpinang got excellent in using the format in their

descriptive text, and based on the findings, it showed that mistake that committed

by most students was their writing is not tidy. The percentage of the mistake was

34,6%.

CONCLUSION

Based on the data, it can be concluded that most of the science students at

tenth grade of SMAN 2 Tanjungpinang had fair ability in writing descriptive text

in terms of organization aspect. Whereas 26 students from 52 students who got C

in value and the score was 2, it means half of them still did not know how to write

a good descriptive text in organization aspect.

Based om the data, it can be concluded that the formatting mistakes that

mostly science student at tenth grade of SMAN 2 Tanjungpinang made in this

research the writing was not tidy. The percentage of the mistake was 34,6%.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Poor Fair Good Very Good Excellent

Graphic of Students' Level of Quality in Formatting Mistakes

13

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The publication of this research was approved by English Education Study

Program, Teacher Training and Education Faculty, Universitas Maritim Raja Ali

Haji.

REFERENCES

Best, John W., James V Kahn. (1998). Research Education. USA: Allyn & Bacon.

Brown, H. D. (2004). Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom Practices.

New York: Pearson Longman.

_(2007). Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy.

San Francisco: Pearson Longman

Crossman, Ashley. (2017). What is A Simple Random Sample?. Retrieved from

https://www.thoughtco.com/random-sampling-3026729 accessed on

Sunday November 19, 2017 at 11:13 A.M.

Dian Candra Prasetyanti. (2014). A Study on the Ability in Writing A Recount Text

by Using Pictures of the Eighth Grade Students of SMPN 2 Tambakromo Pati

Academic Year 2012/2013. Muhammadiyah University of Semarang.

Frerichs, RR. (2008). Simple Random Sampling, Chapter Three, in Rapid

Surveys (unpublished).

Lota, Violeta A. (2015). The Effectiveness of The Academic Processes of The BI-

Semestral System of Asian Institute of Maritim Studeis. DSLU Research

Congress, 3.

14

Nordquist, Richard. (2017). Model Descriptive Paragraphs.

https://www.thoughtco.com/model-descriptive-paragraphs-1690573

accessed on Sunday November 5, 2017 at 07:53 A.M.

Oshima, Alice and Hogue, Ann. (2007). Introduction to Academic Writing. NY:

Pearson Education.

Vagias, Wade M. (2006). Likert-Type Scale Response Anchors. Clemson

International Institute for Tourism & Research Development, Department

of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management. Clemson University.

Williams, Carrie. (2007). Research Methods. Journal of Business of Economic

Research, 5.

Zakky Bunyamun Marsus. (2014). Hubungan Antara Pemanfaatan Internet

Sekolah dengan Motivasi Siswa untuk Menelusuri Bahan Ajar: Studi

Deskriptif Korelasional terhadap SMP Siswa Kelas VIII SMP Negeri 1

Lembang. Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.

an analysis of students’ ability in writing descriptive text...

Documents