an analysis of students’ skill in writing analytical exposition text...

1

An Analysis of Students’ Skill in Writing Analytical Exposition Text at

Eleventh Grade of SMA Negeri 4 Tanjungpinang

1Arda Fitria Ulfa

2Dewi Nopita

3Satria Agust

English Education Study Program

Faculty of Teacher Training and Education

Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji

Email: [email protected] Mobile phone: +6281535285275

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this research is to to know the eleventh grade students’

skill in writing analytical exposition of SMAN 4 Tanjungpinang as investigated

by the researcher. This research belongs to descriptive qualitative research. There

are no populations and samples. Therefore, this study has participants as research

subjects. The participants were eleventh grade students of SMA Negeri 4

Tanjungpinang selected using purposive sampling technique. Participants were

asked to write an analytical exposition text on the topic and they selected based on

several options provided by the researcher. To analyze the data, the data were

used scoring rubric for writing of an analytical exposition text adapted from

Brown (2004), Homp-Lyons (1994), Garrot and Wignel (1994), which consists of

five aspects. There are Organization, content, grammar, mechanics (punctuation

and spelling), and quality of expressions (style and vocabulary). Then, after got

the result, the researcher described the analytical exposition text by students form

by using Leo’s theory. The result of this research showed that the students made

mistakes organization, content, grammar, mechanics, and vocabulary. Most

dominants aspects from students’ very good achievement category until enough

achievement category dealing with writing analytical exposition text is

vocabulary, the percentage of 86%-100% means that the category is very good.

Therefore, it can be concluded that the analytical exposition text at eleventh grade

of SMA Negeri 4 Tanjungpinang in academic year of 2018/2019 the percentage of

86%-100% means that has a good analytical exposition text.

Key words: Analysis, Writing, Writing skill, Analytical Exposition Text

INTRODUCTION

Writing as known in general is the process that describe about something

or one topic then explained clearly by person through their knowledge and ability

mailto:[email protected]

2

also opinion what they know towards topic that discuss on written form.

Afterwards, it is important to share what their perspective to complete to reach

namely a good writing process. It should be maximal results of product in writing

and make it clearly. Moreover, it necessary to write in language that can be easily

to understanding (word-selection), so the reader do not difficult to understand the

meaning what the writer write.

In five skills of English, writing become the most difficulties one of part

skill to learn especially students. Richards and Renandya (2002) state that

“writing is the most difficult skill for second language learners to master.” it

means that writing is one of skill that needed extra times to be able for mastering

it deeply.

Furthermore, it was happened when the researcher taught in SMAN 4

Tanjungpinang as her internship in school (PPL), They got much difficulty,

lacked of vocabulary, and often making some error even mistakes in develop and

organize their idea in writing activity. It is not an easy activity for EFL students

who learn English, so the teacher needs some strategies of teaches as the

instructor who taught them to make them interesting in writing. As the effect, they

cannot writing in good paragraphs or carelessly and unwilling to write of use their

energy in writing activity. Byrd (2011) suggested that it happens because "learners

are expected to develop ideas - which may or may not be themselves - into fully

articulated products while taking into account the linguistic features of the target

language that they may not yet have". In this case they are expected to write

beyond their capability as the students or not yet the time for them to master it

well. They have to master in writing moreover they are young learners, and

3

frequently expected to make handwriting individually, even sometimes without

guidance directly by their teacher or instructor.

Based on the syllabus, the researcher knew that at eleventh grade in senior

high school, the students learn about analytical exposition. In this case, the

students have to know how to write and arrangement based on the generic

structure of simple analytical exposition text especially for Natural Disasters. The

materials can be found on chapter 4 in the first semester.

Based on the researcher’s observation when she did teaching practice

(PPL) in SMA Negeri 4 Tanjungpinang, developing ideas for making a

composition was the most students’ problem in writing class. When they were

obliged to write, the students had not enough ideas to write down. Or even worse,

they lost their ideas and did not know what to say. Thus, it needs some way or

technique to find, improve and develop ideas well.

As explained above, that was found the main problem that the researcher

found. Many students did not write complete organization of analytical exposition

text. Teacher had exposed the students with examples of analytical exposition text

and practiced them in identifying the generic structures of the text including

thesis, arguments, and reiteration. Unfortunately, even though they succeeded in

identifying the generic structures in the text samples, they failed writing complete

organization of analytical exposition text in their writing task.

Therefore, based on explanation above, the most important thing that

students notice, is the generic structure of analytical exposition text during they

write the analytical exposition text. Generic structure is the way in which

elements of a text are arranged to match its purpose. This structure can be

4

observed by readers, and writers will use this knowledge to structure their writing,

depending on their purpose. Research in writing is very important to be conducted

in order to help both teacher and students in learning and teaching process. Lock

(1996) states that analyzing students’ text is very important to help English

teacher to find out students’ difficulties in writing. By knowing the students’

difficulties, it can lead the teacher to help the students’ problems.

The students should bring their mind into one topic to be developed. It is

important to make them focus to the topic that will be developed and created the

arguments related to the topic itself. They should be able to arrange and organize

the ideas until they have a meaning in a paragraph or a text. The ideas should be

connected well from a word to word and a word to be one sentence. In other

words, in writing analytical exposition text the generic structure should be

arranged correctly in a text. In addition, the generic structure of the analytical

exposition text concerned with the way of how the writer arranges and organizes

their ideas in writing. As a writer, students should take care of the generic

structure in their writing because it will help them to communicate successfully.

Thus, in this research, the focus is on analyzing students’ skill in writing

analytical exposition text at eleventh grade students of SMA Negeri 4

Tanjungpinang.

METHOD

This research was conducted at SMAN 4 Tanjungpinang which is located

at Jalan Pemuda, km 4 Tanjungpinang, in 17 Juni 2019. The research design was

qualitative research method. It’s because the data of the research are non-

5

numerical. It is stated by Biklen (2007) that, “qualitative is descriptive that data

collected are in the form of words or pictures rather than numbers”.

This research used purposive sampling as the sampling technique to get

the research subject for the research. A research subject is a person who is the

objects of research being investigated (Ruslan, 2003). According to Arikunto

(2010), purposive sampling is the process of selecting a sample by taking a

subject that is not based on the level of the area, but it is taken based on the

specific purpose. In this study, the research subject of this research was class

eleventh IPA 1 (XI IPA.1) of SMA Negeri 4 Tanjungpinang, which consisted of

21 students.

A research instrument is what researcher used to collect information or

data to answer the research question (Eng, 2013). The instrument of this research

was a written test. The students need to write on a piece of paper, which has been

prepared by the researcher. The researcher gave the students a written test to make

an analytical exposition text. The researcher set the simple present tense as the

rule in making the analytical exposition text. There was thirteen different topics

are given by the researcher to the students. The test took approximately forty five

minutes. As the last, the researcher collected their writing in the paper that given.

The collected data were used by the researcher to analyze, got the percentage, and

described the results of the writing skill in analytical exposition text the 11th of

SMAN 4 Tanjungpinang.

6

RESEARCH FINDINGS

In these findings, the researcher presents the result of the research and the

analysis of the data that were collected through writing test. Written test was

conducted for two days. The researcher took one class that second grade in SMA

Negeri 4 Tanjungpinang. The total numbers of student were 21 students. Data of

the student’s writing skill were obtained by writing the analytical exposition text.

The researcher classified the writing skill into five aspects in the table;

organization, content, grammar, mechanics, and vocabulary. Based on student’s

score from five aspects in writing analytical exposition text, the researcher also

found the most dominant aspects students made in writing analytical exposition

text.

Here are the following descriptions of generic structure (organization aspect)

and language feature (grammar) as the findings in this research;

Table 4.1

Generic structure of student in Writing Analytical Exposition Text

N

O

Participant

s

Score

Catego

ries

7

Org

an

izati

on

Con

ten

t

Gra

mm

ar

Mec

han

ics

Voca

bu

lary

TOT

AL

SCO

RE

1 Student 1 4 5 4 4 3 20 GOOD

2 Student 2 4 3 4 4 3 18 GOOD

3 Student 3 4 4 4 4 3 19 GOOD

4 Student 4 2 4 4 4 5 21 GOOD

5 Student 5 4 5 4 4

5 22 VERY

GOOD

6 Student 6 5 5 4 4 5 23 VERY

GOOD

7 Student 7 5 5 4 4 5 23 VERY

GOOD

8 Student 8 4 4 4 4 5 21 GOOD

9 Student 9 4 4 4 4 3 19 GOOD

10 Student 10 4 4 5 4 3 20 GOOD

11 Student 11 4 5 4 4 5 22 VERY

GOOD

12 Student 12 5 5 4 4 5 23 VERY

GOOD

13 Student 13 5 4 3 4 5 21 GOOD

14 Student 14 5 4 4 4 5 22 VERY

8

GOOD

15 Student 15 4 4 4 4 3 19 GOOD

16 Student 16 5 4 4 4 5 22 VERY

GOOD

17 Student 17 2 4 4 4 5 19 GOOD

18 Student 18 4 4 4 4 5 21 GOOD

19 Student 19 4 4 4 4 5 21 GOOD

20 Student 20 5 4 4 3 5 21 GOOD

21 Student 21 4 4 4 4 3 19 GOOD

NOTE:

= Highest Score

The result of this table showed writing skill that from 21 participants who

did the test, the researcher found that there were 12 students categorized as good

and 1 student categorized fair achievement in generic structure or organization

aspect of writing analytical exposition text. Based on the table, it also showed the

most dominant in generic structure or organization aspect from 21 participant or

all students in writing analytical exposition text. The most dominant in generic

structure or organization aspect that student could do in writing analytical

exposition text is there were 7 students got the highest score in generic structure

or organization aspect.

9

Table 4.2

Language feature of student in Writing Analytical Exposition Text

NO

Participan

ts

Score

Categories

Org

an

izati

on

Con

ten

t

Gra

mm

ar

Mec

han

ics

Voca

bu

lary

TOT

AL

SCO

RE

1 Student 1 4 5 4 4 3 20 GOOD

2 Student 2 4 3 4 4 3 18 GOOD

3 Student 3 4 4 4 4 3 19 GOOD

4 Student 4 2 4 4 4 5 21 GOOD

5 Student 5 4 5 4 4

5 22 VERY

GOOD

6 Student 6 5 5 4 4 5 23 VERY

GOOD

7 Student 7 5 5 4 4 5 23 VERY

GOOD

8 Student 8 4 4 4 4 5 21 GOOD

10

NOTE:

= Highest Score

The result of this table showed writing skill that from 21 participants who

did the test, the researcher found that there were 19 students categorized as good

and 1 student categorized fair achievement in language feature or grammar aspect

of writing analytical exposition text. Based on the table, it also showed the most

dominant in language feature or grammar aspect from 21 participant or all

9 Student 9 4 4 4 4 3 19 GOOD

10 Student 10 4 4 5 4 3 20 GOOD

11 Student 11 4 5 4 4 5 22 VERY

GOOD

12 Student 12 5 5 4 4 5 23 VERY

GOOD

13 Student 13 5 4 3 4 5 21 GOOD

14 Student 14 5 4 4 4 5 22 VERY

GOOD

15 Student 15 4 4 4 4 3 19 GOOD

16 Student 16 5 4 4 4 5 22 VERY

GOOD

17 Student 17 2 4 4 4 5 19 GOOD

18 Student 18 4 4 4 4 5 21 GOOD

19 Student 19 4 4 4 4 5 21 GOOD

20 Student 20 5 4 4 3 5 21 GOOD

21 Student 21 4 4 4 4 3 19 GOOD

11

students in writing analytical exposition text. The most dominant in generic

structure or organization aspect that student could do in writing analytical

exposition text is there was 1 student got the highest score in language feature or

grammar aspect.

In this research, the researcher used Brown (2004), Homp-Lyons (1994)

also Garrot and Wignel (1994) writing assessment to assessing students' skill in

writing analytical exposition text. The table below is a data display that shows the

students’ raw scores in organization aspect (Generic Structure) and Language

Feature (Grammar aspect).

Table 4.1 Students’ Writing Scores in organization aspect (Generic

Structure)

No. Name Organization

aspect Information

1. Student 1 4 Good

2. Student 2 4 Good

3. Student 3 4 Good

4. Student 4 2 Fair

5. Student 5 4 Good

6. Student 6 5 Very good


8. Student 8 4 Good

9. Student 9 4 Good

10. Student 10 4 Good







17. Student 17 2 Fair





12

Table 4.2 Students’ Writing Scores in grammar aspect (Language Feature)

No. Name Organization

aspect Information

1. Student 1 4 Good

2. Student 2 4 Good

3. Student 3 4 Good

4. Student 4 4 Good

5. Student 5 4 Good

6. Student 6 4 Good

7. Student 7 4 Good

8. Student 8 4 Good

9. Student 9 4 Good




13. Student 13 3 Fair









The researcher assessed the total of students’ writing scores, she calculated

them with existing formula by Asrul et al (2014) as the following table:

Table 4.2 Students’ Highest and Lowest Scores

Students’ Highest Score Students’ Lowest Score

Final Score = students′score

5× 100

Final Score = 5

5× 100 = 100

Final Score = students′score

5× 100

Final Score = 2

5× 100 = 40

According to the table 4.1 and 4.2, the researcher classified the students’

score with students’ achievement table by Asrul et al (2014) to know the position

13

of students who got high and low score in two aspects; Generic Structure

(organization) and Language Feature (grammar).

Table 4.3 Students’ Written Test Final Scores in Generic structure

(organization)

No. Name Score Grade

1. Student 1 80 A

A. Student 2 80 A

3. Student 3 80 A

4. Student 4 40 D

5. Student 5 80 A

6. Student 6 100 A

7. Student 7 100 A

8. Student 8 80 A

9. Student 9 80 A

10. Student 10 80 A

11. Student 11 80 A

12. Student 12 100 A



15. Student 15 80 A


17. Student 17 40 D

18. Student 18 80 A

19. Student 19 80 A


21. Student 21 80 A

Table 4.4 Students’ Written Test Final Scores in Language Feature

(Grammar)

No. Name Score Grade

1. Student 1 80 A

A. Student 2 80 A

3. Student 3 80 A

4. Student 4 80 A

5. Student 5 80 A

6. Student 6 80 A

7. Student 7 80 A

8. Student 8 80 A

9. Student 9 80 A


14

11. Student 11 80 A

12. Student 12 80 A

13. Student 13 60 C

14. Student 14 80 A

15. Student 15 80 A

16. Student 16 80 A

17. Student 17 80 A

18. Student 18 80 A

19. Student 19 80 A

20. Student 20 80 A

21. Student 21 80 A

After the researcher got total of the students’ scores and grades, then it

calculated with existed formula by Hatch & Farhady (1982) and changed it into

percentage. This percentage is useful to know how many percent students’ of

class eleventh IPA 1 (XI. IPA 1) got in organization (generic structure) and

grammar (language feature) of writing analytical exposition text. The percentage

table would appear below:

Table 4.5 Students’ Writing Percentage in organization or generic structure

No. Grade

Total

of

Student

Percentage

(%) Information

1. A 19 90.47% Nearly all of the students

2. B - - -

3. C - - -

4. D 2 9.52% A few students

Table 4.6 Students’ Writing Percentage in grammar or language feature

No. Grade

Total

of

Student

Percentage

(%) Information

1. A 20 95.23% Nearly all of the students

2. B - - -

3. C 1 4.76% A few students

4. D - - -

15

And then, the researcher also computes the averages of the students’ score

with Hadi (1988) formula, in order to find out whether the class eleventh IPA one

(XI.IPA 1) students have a low skill in writing or not. The data would appear

below:

�̅� =∑ 𝑥

𝑁

�̅� =1.740

21

�̅� = 82.85

The mean of the test score is 82.85, and then it would calculate by using

the formula as stated by Hatch & Farhady (1982) as follow:

Percentage of the students’ average = 𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒

𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 𝑜𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑋 100%

= 82.85

100 𝑋 100%

= 82.85%

Based on the table 3.4 in the chapter three, 82.85% is regarded as good

achievement. So it can be concluded that the average of the students’ skill on the

writing analytical exposition by using simple present tense is good.

The result of the data then would be discussed elaborately in this step.Related

to the research question in chapter I, the discussion would cover only focused of

two aspects of five aspects of written test of analytical exposition by the 21

16

students; Organization aspect (Generic structure) and Grammar aspect (Language

Feature).

DISCUSSIONS

The result of the data then would be discussed elaborately in this

step.Related to the research question in chapter I, the discussion would cover only

focused of two aspects of five aspects of written test of analytical exposition by

the 21 students; Organization aspect (Generic structure) and Grammar aspect

(Language Feature).

1. Organization aspect (Generic structure)

In this case, they did not add supporting knowledge like definition and

data in argument. For example student 1 did not add, “As we know garbage

as…., or research shows that garbage service has many complaints……” For

this text, the student did not write supporting knowledge to convince the reader

about the topic.

Student 4 did not mention the writer’s position about the topics such as

”Blog and social media networking is the form of social media that mostly used

by the community around the world. For this text, the student did not indicate

writer’s position or point of view. This thesis statement or incorrectly sentences

could write as “However, i think there are many negative than positive impact

to the children and teenagers of social media.”

Student 17 did mistake that the reiteration that did not have a conclusion

and restated the thesis or writer’s position but not related to the topic such as,”

Further, music can unite people and changes the world. A song with good lyric

and striking deep chord can stimulate certain universal feeling of all people.”

17

This conclusion could write as, “So what would the world be like without music?

It would be lonely.” It can happened because the students still cannot understand

how to signals the end of the essay which can be done by beginning the

conclusion with a transition signal. The student also couldn’t remind and reiterate

the student’s opportunity to convey a strong, effective message that the reader will

remember.

Jacobs et al. (1981) stated that organization is like the little ideas in a piece

fit in paragraphs under the bigger ideas. It means among topic sentence,

supporting sentence and concluding sentence is differentiated. In term of

organization, the supporting detail is used to tell reader more about the topic in

paragraph and the concluding sentences generally conclude the overall

paragraph briefly.

In this research, there were 7 students got the highest score, 12 students in

good score categories, and 2 students got fair in organization.

2. Grammar aspect (Language Feature)

In this case, they did not add mental verbs (e.g. think, feel, believe, guess,

etc.), internal conjunction (e.g. Firstly, secondly, next, finally), causal conjunction

(e.g. because, consequently, despite, due to, for that reason, in that case, even

though, yet, otherwise, etc.).

For example student 4 did not write internal conjunction such as

“Cigarette smoke has been linked to heart and respiratory disease.” This

sentence could write as “Firstly, Cigarette smoke has been linked to heart and

respiratory disease.” Student 4 also did not write or add mental verbs as “There

is no pleasant experience, and this is why smoking must be banned in public

18

places.” This sentence could write as “There is no pleasant experience, and I

strongly believe smoking must be banned in public places.”

As Jacobs et al. (1981) stated that “Grammar contains rules about how

words change their form and combine with other words to make good sentences.

Good writing must show correct pattern based on grammar.” It can be happened

because they still don’t know all element or parts in grammar that put in analytical

exposition. They just knew some parts or elements of them.

According to Garot and Wignel (1994), there are consists into five

characteristic of language feature such as, using simple present tense, emotive

words, relational process, internal conjunction, and causal conjunction.

In this research, there was 1 student got the highest score, 19 students in

good score categories, and 1 student got fair in grammar.

In line with the previous study in one of the researcher related findings by

Dimas Yudha Putra Garintama “Analysis on Analytical Exposition Text Written

by Eleventh Graders of SMA Hang Tuah 4 Surabaya”. Related to this research, it

discusses students’ skill in writing analytical exposition text. The previous

research has more concern on analytical exposition text compositions, while the

researcher has more concern into as assessing by rubric. In that research, just or

only focused or concerned on analytical exposition text compositions of organize

their analytical exposition writing text in terms of its generic structure. It is

different from the researcher who more concern to assessing students writing in

five aspects, which are organization, content, grammar, mechanic and vocabulary.

Also, both of these researches are having different resulted, that the students

having poor score in writing in that researcher. Different with him, the researcher

19

students got good score. But, both of them are having same purposed which has

two research questions, in terms of its generic structure and language feature.

CONCLUSIONS

From the data, there are 21 students as the participant of this research.

Related to the research question in chapter I, the researcher finds that they have

some problems to organize their paragraph. They do not add supporting

knowledge like definition and data in argument. They do not mention the writer’s

position about the topics, and they make mistake on reiteration which they do not

give a conclusion and restate the thesis. They make mistake that some unrelated or

irrelevant material is present and the essay address the issue but miss some points

in content. In grammar, they do not add mental verbs, internal conjunction causal

conjunction, and wrong in using tenses. They have problems with word choice. In

mechanics aspect, they make mistake or problems in some writing conventions or

punctuation occasional spelling errors. In vocabulary, they make mistake that

some vocabulary misused. Most dominants aspects from students’ very good

achievement category until enough achievement category dealing with writing

analytical exposition text is vocabulary, because almost of them show attempt

variety that is good vocabulary, not wordy and concise. Besides that, they

vocabulary shows that they are lacks accuracy of diction but meaning obscured

also may be too wordy.

The researcher concludes that the students’ writing skill in writing generic

structure and language feature of analytical exposition text at the eleventh grade

students in SMAN 4 Tanjungpinang ion academic year of 2018/2019 is

categorized as good.

20

REFERENCES

Linda Gerot, Peter Wignell. (1995). Making Sense of Functional Grammar: An

Introductory Workbook. Gerd Stabler: New south wales.

M.Anderson & K. Anderson. (2003b). Text Types in English 2. Melbourne:

MacMillan.

.G., D. (2002). Writing.

A.Hughes. (2003). Testing for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

A.Oshima and A. Hogue. (2007). Introduction to Academic Writing.3rd Ed. . New

York: Pearson Education, Inc.

Brown, H. D. (2004). Language assessment principles and classroom practices .

New York: Pearson Education.

Brown, H. D. (2004). Strategies for Success: A Practical Guide to Learning

English. New York: Longman.

Cunningsworth, A. (1987). Evaluation and Selecting EFL Teaching Materials.

London: Heinemann Education Book.

D.Brown, H. (2001). Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to

Language Pedagogy (2nd Ed.). New York: Addison Wesley Longman,

Inc.

D.Brown, H. (2007). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching (5th Ed.).

New York: Pearson Education, Inc.

D.Nunan. (2004). Task-based Language Teaching. UK: Cambridge University

Press.

Gay, L. R., Milss, G. E., & Airasian, P. (2012). Educational

Research:Competencies for Analysis and Application. USA: Pearson

Education Inc.

Harmer, J. (2003). The Practice of English Language Teaching. London :

Longman.

M.Celce-Murcia. (2001). Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language,

3rd edition. Heinle: Cengage Learning.

Martin,J.R and Rose, David. (2008). Working with Discourse: Meaning Beyond

the Clause. . Sydney: Halliday Centre.

Priyana,J., Riandi,& Mumpuni, A. P. (2008). Interlanguage: English for senior

high school students XI science and social study program. Jakarta,

Indonesia: Pusat Perbukuan, Departememen Pendidikan Nasional.

R Smalley and Ruetten. (1986). Refining Composition Skills: Rhetoric and

Grammar for ESL Students. New York: University of New Orleans.

R.Hammond, E. (1983). Teaching Writing. New York: Mc. Graw-Hill Book Mc.

Graw-Hill Book.

S.Arikunto. (2005). Manajemen Penelitian. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.

Sudijono. (1996). Evaluasi Pendidikan. Jakarta: PT Raja Grafindo Persada.

Taylor, G. (2009). A Student’s writing Guide. United Kingdom (UK): University

Press Cambridge.

Ur, P. (1996). A Course in Language Teaching:Practice and Theory. London:

Cambridge University Press.

an analysis of students’ skill in writing analytical exposition text...

Documents