Writing Research

64
i TEACHING WRITING BY USING CUBING TECHNIQUE TO THE EIGHTH GRADE STUDENTS OF SMP NEGERI 9 LUBUKLINGGAU By Darmadi Student Number: 2106170 ENGLISH EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION DEPARTMENT INSTITUTE OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION TEACHERS ASSOCIATION OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA (STKIP-PGRI) LUBUKLINGGAU 2013

description

Cubing Technique

Transcript of Writing Research

Page 1: Writing Research

i

TEACHING WRITING BY USING CUBING TECHNIQUE TO THE EIGHTH

GRADE STUDENTS OF SMP NEGERI 9 LUBUKLINGGAU

By

Darmadi Student Number: 2106170

ENGLISH EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM

LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

INSTITUTE OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION

TEACHERS ASSOCIATION OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA

(STKIP-PGRI) LUBUKLINGGAU

2013

Page 2: Writing Research

ii

TEACHING WRITING BY USING CUBING TECHNIQUE TO THE EIGHTH

GRADE STUDENTS OF SMP NEGERI 9 LUBUKLINGGAU

A Thesis

Submitted to English Education Study Program

In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements

For Undergraduate Degree in English Education

By

Darmadi Student Number: 2106170

ENGLISH EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM

LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

INSTITUTE OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION

TEACHERS ASSOCIATION OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA

(STKIP-PGRI) LUBUKLINGGAU

2013

Page 3: Writing Research

iii

APPROVAL

TEACHING WRITING BY USING CUBING TECHNIQUE TO THE EIGHTH

GRADE STUDENTS OF SMP NEGERI 9 LUBUKLINGGAU

The thesis by Darmadi , Student Number 2106170 has been approved by the

advisors to be submitted by the team of examiners

Advisor, Assistant Advisor,

Suhar Jendro, M.Pd Mardi Juansyah, M.Pd

Certified by

Head of Language and Arts Education Department

For the Head of Institute of Teacher Training and Education

Teacher Association of Republic of Indonesia Lubuklinggau

Dra. Hj. Nyayu Masnon Arif, M.Pd

Page 4: Writing Research

iv

VALIDATION

The Thesis by Darmadi, Student Number 2106170 has been passed in the

examination by the team of examiners on July 06, 2013

TEAM OF EXAMINERS

Chairman : Suhar Jendro, M.Pd ............................................

Secretary : Mardi Juansyah, M.Pd ............................................

Members : 1. Dra. Irma Suryani, M.Pd ..............................................

2. Endrik Parasetyo, M.Pd ..............................................

Certified by

Head of Institute of Teacher Training and Education

Teacher Association of Republic of Indonesia Lubuklinggau

Drs. H. Aidil Fitri Syah, M.M

Page 5: Writing Research

v

MOTTO AND DEDICATION

Motto:

“Catch what you Love, Love what you catch”

“Ora ghelem rekoso mbudidoyo at least make little change in the world”

This thesis is dedicated to:

My Parents, Abdul Hasan and Sri Welas who support me Alive till now,

I can’t imagine your struggle. Thank you

My brothers and sister who support me: Ondok, Otok, Apai, Paman,

Sipit, Jonit, Embot and Lia, thank you.

My two advisors : Mr. Suhar Jendro and Mr. Mardi Juansyah, thank you

so much for guidance.

All my lecturers, especially: Mrs. Hindun, Mrs. Sastika Seli,

Mr. Endrik Prasetyo, thank you very much for your endeavour.

My friends: Oby Putrasyah, Efri Cahyono, Riki Purnomo, Abdi Wibowo,

Suharmanto, Maroten, Debby and Niken.

My Almamater, you will be remembered.

Page 6: Writing Research

vi

PERNYATAAN

Saya yang bertanda tangan dibawah ini:

Nama : Darmadi

NPM : 2106170

Program Studi : Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris

Jurusan : Bahasa dan Seni

Judul Karya Ilmiah/Skripsi : TEACHING WRITING BY USING CUBING

TECHNIQUE TO THE EIGHTH GRADE STUDENTS

OF SMP NEGERI 9 LUBUKLINGGAU

Dengan ini menyatakan bahawa karya ilmiah dengan judul tersebut diatas adalah benar-

benar karya saya sendiri dan saya tidak melakukan penjiplakan atau pengutipan dengan

cara-cara yang tidak sesuai dengan kaidah dan etika keilmuan yang berlaku dalam

masyarakat ilmiah. Atas pernyataan ini, saya siap menanggung resiko ataupun sanksi

yang dijatuhkan kepada saya apabila dikemudian hari ditemukan adanya pelanggaran

etika keilmuan atau plagiat dalam karya ilmiah ini. Hal ini juga berlaku apabila ada

klaim pihak lain terhadap keaslian karya saya ini

Lubuklinggau, Juli 2013

Yang membuat pernyataan

Darmadi

NIM 2106170

Page 7: Writing Research

vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This thesis has written to fulfil one of the requirements for Sarjana Degree in

English Study Program, Institute of Teacher Training and Education, Teacher

Association of The Republic of Indonesia (STKIP-PGRI) Lubuklinggau.

Alhamdulillah, praise be to Alloh Subhana hu Wata’Ala for blessing and

everything, so the writer could finish writing this thesis. The writer would like to thank

both of the advisers Mr. Suhar Jendro, M.Pd and Mr. Mardi Juansyah, M.Pd, who have

given the writer much guidance, suggestion and advice in writing this thesis. And the

writer’s gratitude was expressed to all the teachers, staff, and the students of SMP

Negeri 9 Lubuklinggau, especially to the Headmaster of SMP Negeri 9 Lubuklinggau,

Mr. Edi Yanuar, M.Pd who has given the writer permission and assistance in

conducting the research and collecting the data. In addition, the writer would like to

thank to the Head of STKIP-PGRI Lubuklinggau Mr. Aidil Fitri Syah, M.M and to all

of the lecturers.

The writer expressed thank you to the writer’s parents, brothers and sister,

friends for supports, prayer and assistance.

Finally, suggestions and criticism are very much welcome for the improvement

of this thesis. [email protected]

Lubuklinggau, May 2013

The writer

Page 8: Writing Research

viii

ABSTRACT

TEACHING WRITING BY USING CUBING TECHNIQUE TO THE EIGHTH

GRADE STUDENTS OF SMP NEGERI 9 LUBUKLINGGAU

By

Darmadi

Student Registration Number 2106170

The main problem of this study was “Is it effective teaching writing by using cubing

technique to the eighth grade students of SMP Negeri 9 Lubuklinggau in the academic

year of 2012/2013?” The objective of this study was to find out whether or not it was

effective teaching writing by using cubing technique to the eighth grade students of

SMP Negeri 9 Lubuklinggau in the academic year of 2012/2013. There were two

hypotheses in this study. They were Null Hypothesis (H0) and Alternative Hypothesis

(Ha). The population of this study was all of the eighth grade students of SMP Negeri 9

Lubuklinggau in the academic year of 2012/2013. The sample consisted of 28 students

that was taken by using cluster random sampling. The writer applied quasi-experimental

method and the data were collected through written test. To analyse the data the writer

applied three techniques. They were: Individual score, Conversion of individual score

and Matched t-test. The result of matched t-test calculation was t-obt = 6.89. It was

higher than the critical value of t-table 1.701 for significant level 0.05. So, the Null

Hypothesis (H0) was rejected and the Alternative Hypothesis (Ha) was accepted. It

means that teaching writing by using cubing technique to the eighth grade students of

SMP Negeri 9 Lubuklinggau in the academic year of 2012/2013 was effective.

Key Words: teaching, writing, cubing technique.

Page 9: Writing Research

ix

CONTENT

Page

COVER ............................................................................................................. i

TITLE ............................................................................................................... ii

APPROVAL ...................................................................................................... iii

VALIDATION .................................................................................................. iv

MOTTO AND DEDICATION ........................................................................ v

PERNYATAAN ................................................................................................ vi

ACKNOWLEDMENTS ................................................................................... vii

ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................... viii

CONTENTS ...................................................................................................... ix

LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................ xii

LIST OF CHARTS AND FIGURE ................................................................. xiii

LIST OF APPENDICES .................................................................................. xiv

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION .................................................................... 1

A. Background .................................................................................................... 1

B. The Formulation of the Problems .................................................................. 3

C. The Objective of the Research ....................................................................... 3

C. The Scope of the Research .............................................................................. 3

D. Significances of the Research ......................................................................... 4

E. Operational Definition .................................................................................... 4

CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................... 6

A. Theoretical Descriptions ................................................................................. 6

1. The Concept of Teaching ......................................................................... 6

2. The Concept of Writing ............................................................................ 6

3. The Concept of Descriptive Paragraph ..................................................... 9

4. The Concept of Achievement ................................................................... 10

5. The Concept of Cubing Technique ........................................................... 11

Page 10: Writing Research

x

6. The Procedure Teaching Writing by Using Cubing Technique ............... 14

B. Related Previous Study …. ............................................................................. 14

C. Theoretical Framework …. ............................................................................. 15

D. The Hypothesis .............................................................................................. 18

CHAPTER III: METHOD OF THE RESEARCH ...................................... 19

A. Research Design ............................................................................................. 19

B. Population and Sample ................................................................................... 20

1. Population ................................................................................................. 20

2. Sample ...................................................................................................... 20

C. Technique for Collecting the Data ................................................................. 21

D. Technique for Analysing the Data ............................................................... 22

1. Individual Score ....................................................................................... 22

2. The Students’ Categories Score ............................................................... 24

3. Matched t-test ........................................................................................... 25

E. Accountability of the Research ..................................................................... 26

1. Validity ..................................................................................................... 26

2. Reliability .................................................................................................. 27

CAHPTER IV: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ........................................... 31

A. Findings ......................................................................................................... 31

1. The Students’ Scores in the Pre-test ........................................................ 32

2. The Students’ Scores in the Post-test ...................................................... 33

3. Normality and Homogeneity .................................................................. 34

4. The Calculation of Matched t-test ............................................................. 41

B. Discussion ..................................................................................................... 42

C. Limitation of the Study ................................................................................. 45

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTION ................................ 46

A. Conclusions ................................................................................................... 46

B. Suggestion ..................................................................................................... 46

Page 11: Writing Research

xi

1. For the Teacher of English ....................................................................... 46

2. For the Students ...................................................................................... 47

3. To the other Researcher ........................................................................... 47

REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 48

APPENDICES ................................................................................................... 51

Page 12: Writing Research

xii

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 3.1 : Population of the Study .................................................................. 20

Table 3.2 : Scale Range and Category ............................................................. 22

Table 3.3 : Scoring Criterion ............................................................................ 23

Table 3.4 : Conversion of Individual Score ..................................................... 25

Table 3.5 : The Test Specification .................................................................. 27

Table 4.1 : The Score Distribution of Pre-test and Post-test ............................ 34

Table 4.2 : The List Frequency of Observation and Expectation

of the Students’ Scores in the Pre-test ............................................. 36

Table 4.3 : The List Frequency of Observation and Expectation

of the Students’ Scores in the Post-test ........................................... 39

Page 13: Writing Research

xiii

LIST OF FIGURE AND CHARTS

Page

Image 2.1 : Cubing Technique ....................................................................... 12

Chart 2.1 : Theoretical Framework ............................................................... 17

Chart 4.1 : The Result of the Students’ test .................................................. 31

Chart 4.2 : The Percentage Students’ Categories Score in Pre-test .............. 32

Chart 4.3 : The Percentage Students’ Categories Score in Post-test ............. 33

Chart 4.4 : The Normality Curve of Pre-test ................................................ 38

Page 14: Writing Research

xiv

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A : The Advisors’ SK

Appendix B : Surat Izin Penelitian

Appendix C : Instrument of the Test

Appendix D : Data of Pre-test and Post-test

Appendix E : Normality and Homogeneity

Appendix F : Analysing Statistic and Hypothesis

Appendix H : Surat Keterangan Memperbanyak Skripsi

Page 15: Writing Research

1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

A. Background

English is an important language since it is one of the languages used in

international communication. For this reason, English becomes a compulsory

subject in junior and senior high schools in Indonesia. Moreover, in some primary

schools, English has been taught from the fourth grade as a local-content subject.

The purpose of teaching English at school is that the students can use English as a

means to develop their knowledge and skills in science, technology, culture, and

arts. Indonesian students can hopefully become citizens who are intelligent,

skilful, and ready to take part in the national development and the challenge in the

international scope.

Learning a language includes learning the four skills, namely listening,

speaking, reading and writing. Besides, students should learn the language

aspects, such as grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, and spelling, to support the

development of the language skills. Among the four skills, writing is considered

one of the most difficult skills for many students (Richards, 1990:100). They do

not know what to write and how to develop the topic. Besides, “writing should be

conventional: it should employ readily, identifiable symbols so that other people

can pick up a piece of writing and know what it says” (Nathan, et al., 1993:13).

Byrne (1993:4-5) identifies three problems in writing-psychological,

linguistic, and cognitive. From the psychological aspect, the act of writing

becomes difficult because writing is a solitary activity and the fact that people are

1

Page 16: Writing Research

2

required to write on their own, without the possibility of interaction or the benefit

of feedback. From the linguistic aspect, writers should be sure with the choice of

sentences structure and the way sentences are linked together and sequenced so

that the writing can be interpreted on its own, from the cognitive aspect, writers

have to master the written form of the language and to learn certain structures

which are less used in understood by the readers who are not known by the

writers.

The students’ achievement in writing was considered low. It could be seen

from the percentage of the students who passed the writing mastery minimum

criteria or it is called writing KKM. The writing KKM of the school is 72. Based

on the writer’s observation in writing, there were 28 students in the class. It was

found that there were 16 students or 57.14% who did not pass the writing KKM,

while there were 12 students or 42.85% who could pass the writing KKM (see

Appendix C). Therefore, the writer considers it needs an improvement for the

writing.

There are many ways to help the students to write. Some researchers

suggest using prewriting activities to handle writing problem. Mann and Mann

(1990:4) state that prewriting consists of written activities to get the point of

writing a draft. Prewriting activities help students to develop a focus and to

generate ideas for writing. One kind of prewriting activities proposed by the

researchers is cubing technique. Cubing has been successfully used in ESL classes

as a quick means of helping students to identify a writing focus (Scarcella and

Oxford, 1992:125). Cwikilnski (2003:1), cubing gives students the opportunity to

Page 17: Writing Research

3

construct meaning about a given topic through six different ways and it can be

used in all disciplines. Cubing can also help readers to look at a subject from a

variety of perspective.

Based on the description above, the writer was interested to conduct a

research entitled “Teaching Writing by Using Cubing Technique to the Eighth

Grade Students of SMP Negeri 9 Lubuklinggau.”

B. The Formulation of the Problems

The problem of the study is formulated into the following question “Is it

significantly effective to teach writing by using cubing technique to the eighth

grade students of SMP Negeri 9 Lubuklinggau in the academic year of

2012/2013?”

C. The Objective of the Research

The objective of the study is to find out whether or not it was significantly

effective to teach writing by using cubing technique to the eighth grade students

of SMP Negeri 9 Lubuklinggau in the academic year of 2012/2013.

D. The Scope of the Research

It is important for the writer to limit the area of this research to avoid

wider description of the investigation. The problem is limited to the following

points:

1. The material of writing was focused on the descriptive paragraph.

2. The technique used was Cubing Technique.

3. The subject of this study referred to the eighth grade students of SMP Negeri 9

Lubuklinggau in academic year 2012/2013.

Page 18: Writing Research

4

E. Significances of the Research

Hopefully, the result of this investigation would be valuable in teaching

and learning process of English. The significance of the study would be useful for

the teachers of SMP Negeri 9 Lubuklinggau, the researcher himself and students.

This study hopefully to be advantageous to the following people:

1. Teacher

It is really expected that this study gives the teacher information about

creative and interactive technique in teaching English especially in teaching

writing. It also can help the teachers face the problems that occur during the

process of teaching and learning in the class.

2. The Students

Hopefully it can help the students to improve their writing skill, in this

case the skill in descriptive paragraph and get a better score in their English lesson

at school. Moreover it can increase their writing and achievement in learning

English.

3. The Writer

This research can enlarges the writer’s understanding about descriptive

paragraph, also giving the writer’s experience in teaching and this research can be

one of the references for the next research.

F. Operational Definitions

For the purpose of the study, the following terms are defined in order to

avoid misunderstanding. They are Teaching, Writing, Cubing Technique,

Descriptive Paragraph and Achievement.

Page 19: Writing Research

5

1. Teaching

Teaching is a process transformation of knowledge from the teacher to the

students that used methodologies to make the students understand about material

that the teacher given. In this study, teaching referred to guiding the students how

to learn writing through cubing technique.

2. Writing

Writing is the combination of letters which are arranged to form sentences

or paragraphs or way of communicating information, ideas, and feelings to other

people by producing the thoughts, ideas and feelings in written symbols.

3. Cubing Technique

Cubing is an effective technique for writing because it offers a more

systematic method of asking questions and generating ideas or a writing exercise

used as a prewriting technique.

4. Descriptive Paragraph

Paragraph is a group of related statement that the writer develops about the

topic. Descriptive paragraph is a paragraph describe about people, place, things

and others. In this study, descriptive paragraph means how the students’ writing of

descriptive paragraph by using cubing technique.

5. Achievement

Achievement is successfully in finishing something, especially to mastery

knowledge or science. In this study achievement referred to the student’s score in

writing test.

Page 20: Writing Research

6

CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW

A. Theoretical Descriptions

1. Concept of Teaching

According to Faturrahman and Sutikno (2007:45), teaching is a process of

transfer knowledge and skill for the students. This activity must organise and

arrange the environment in order to make the situation enjoy in teaching process.

Teaching is one aspect of education, the style of teaching, approach the method of

teaching and how to manage the classroom. The activity of teaching must be

occurring in the process of students learning and process of teacher in

demonstrating a lesson material. The teacher does three principle activities in

carrying out the job, they are: planning; implementation, and evaluation.

According to Whimley (2001:8), teaching is assumed that teachers can

improve their knowledge and skills, not necessarily by following a particular

method or the findings provided by “official” research, but with and enquiring

attitude which allows him/her to find out the most adequate technique in each

situation, because each teaching situation is different. And it needs to take of the

teacher, the classroom context and the community with its local educational and

intellectual traditions and every language lesson on necessarily different and

unique as the teacher and the learners jointly construct it.

2. The Concept of Writing

Byrne (1993:1) states that writing is the combination of letter which are

arranged to form sentences or paragraphs. Writing is a way of communicating

6

Page 21: Writing Research

7

information, ideas, and feelings to other people by producing the thoughts, ideas

and feelings in written symbols (Chin, 1990:11). Writing is primarily a mental

activity, but it relies on physical tools and resources from pens and paper to word

processor (Sharples, 1999:6). Bello (1997:1) states that writing is continuing

process of discovering how to find the most effective language for communicating

one’s thought and feelings.

According to Chin (1990:10), writing is a way of giving information,

ideas, and feelings, to other people in written. It means that when one writes, one

also composer or create meaning with words, and then meanings are received by

the reader of the words. Block (1993:211) states that writing is expressing

thoughts, ideas, and feelings in written language. Writing involves many aspects

of language, such as grammar, spelling, vocabulary, organisation, and mechanics.

Moreover, Block (1993:215) states that communication through written language

is the act of transmitting thoughts, feelings, and ideas from “up here” in the hand

to “down here” on paper. Zemach and Rumisek (2005:3) state that to produce

piece of writing, good writer should go through several steps:

a. Prewriting

Step one: choose a topic. The writers determine some ideas or a topic of

what to write about. Step two: Gather ideas. When the writers have a topic, the

writers have to think about what they will write about the topic. Step three:

Organise. Decide which of the ideas the writers want to use and where the writers

want to use them. Choose which idea to talk about first, which to talk about next

and which to talk about last.

Page 22: Writing Research

8

b. Drafting

Step four: write. The writers write paragraph or essay from start to finish.

The writers use their notes about their ideas and organisation.

c. Reviewing and revising

Step five: Review structure and content. The writers check what they have

written. Read the writing silently to themselves or aloud, perhaps to their friend.

Look for places where the writers can add more information, and check to see if

they have any unnecessary information by asking to exchange texts with their

classmates by reading their writing each other. Getting a reader’s opinion is a

good way to know if a writing work is clear and effective. Learning to give

opinions about other people’s writing helps them to improve skill. The writer may

want to go on to step six and revise the structure and content of their texts before

they proofread it.

d. Rewriting

Step six: Revise structure and content. Use the ideas from step five to write

the text, making improvement to the structure and content. The writer might need

to explain something more clearly, or add more details. The writers may even

need to change their organisation so that the text is more logical. Together, steps

five and six can be called editing. Proofread. Read the text again checking the

spelling and grammar and think about the words have been chosen to be used.

Make final correction. The writers checking the errors have been corrected which

is discovered in step five and six and make any other changes.

Page 23: Writing Research

9

3. The Concept of Descriptive Paragraph

According to Zemach and Rumisek (2005:11), paragraph is a group of

sentences about a single topic. Together, the sentences of the paragraph explain

the writer’s main idea (most important idea) about the topic. A paragraph is often

between five and ten sentences long but it can be longer or shorter, depending on

the topic. The first sentence of a paragraph is usually indented (moved in) a few

spaces.

A paragraph has three basic parts: a topic sentence, the supporting

sentences, and a concluding sentence.

a. Topic Sentence

Topic sentence is the main idea of the paragraph. It is usually the first

sentence of the paragraph, it is the most general sentence of the paragraph.

b. The Supporting Sentences

The supporting sentences are sentences that talk about or explain the topic

sentence. They are more detailed ideas that follow the topic sentence.

c. The Concluding Sentence

The concluding sentence may be found as the last sentence of a paragraph.

It can finish a paragraph by repeating the main idea or just giving a final comment

about the topic.

Descriptive paragraph is a paragraph describe things, it can be describing

people, places and processes. A descriptive paragraph explains how someone or

something looks or feels. A process paragraph explains how something is done.

For example:

Page 24: Writing Research

10

Niagara Falls

Niagara Falls, a popular destination for thousands of visitors each year, is a

beautiful place. When you stand at the edge and look down at the 188 feet of

white waterfalls, you feel amazed at the power of nature. The tree-lined river that

leads into the falls is fast.-moving, pouring over the edge of the falls and crashing

to the bottom in aloud roar. If you want to experience the falls close up, go for a

boat ride. You’ll come near enough to look up at the roaring streams of water

flowing over the edge and feel the cool mist that rises as the water hits the rocks

below. Seeing Niagara Falls is an unforgettable experience! (Adopted from:

Academic Writing from Paragraph to Essay p: 26)

4. The Concept of Achievement

According to Richards, et al. (2002:7), achievement is how much of a

language learners have successfully learned with specific reference to a particular

course, textbook, or programme of instruction.

Hornby (2010:11) states that achievement is something done successfully

with effort and skill. It means that the teacher’s evaluation would be some that

simplified. Effective teaching is usually determined by the teacher’s ability to

produce desirable change in students’ learning behaviour in students’

achievement. The students’ achievement, based on the desirable outcome, could

then be determined. Teacher has a profound affect on students learn.

In addition, achievement is something important that somebody succeed in

doing by his/her own efforts (Pearson, 2012:13). Achievement of the students can

be defined as the score or the ability achieved by the student after had some test.

Page 25: Writing Research

11

Failure can be regarded as negative achievement meanwhile success as positive

achievement. In this study the students’ achievement is their ability in writing a

paragraph.

5. The Concept of Cubing Technique

Gould, et al. (1989:120) state that cubing is a writing exercise used as a

prewriting technique. Cubing is an effective technique for writing because it

offers a more systematic method of asking questions and generating ideas. Scott

(2003:79) states that cubing can be and is a powerful tool for generating ideas

prior to the actual writing. A writer can explore his idea and develop through the

cubing guidelines. A writer often cannot go on writing about a subject because

they are locked in on a single way of looking at the topic, and that’s where cubing

works well.

Dawson (2001:1), points out that cubing allows a writer to explore various

aspects of a topic, forcing the writer to think and re-think the topic. A writer can

apply cubing to the main person, thing, or concept that the writing will be about.

Cubing can also be applied for an abstract concept and it can be used in all

disciplines (Cwiklinski, 2003:1).

According to Center (2003:2), cubing is a technique that encourages the

writer to explore different aspects of a topic. Essentially, the writer answers six

commands or prompts. Therefore, this technique is called cubing because the six

different approaches to subject represent the six different sides of a cube. The six

sides of the cube are described in the proper sequence as follows (Mann and

Mann, 1990:10):

Page 26: Writing Research

12

Image 2.1

Cubing Technique (Source: http://novelinks.org)

a. Describe it: Describe or define the topic.

b. Compare it: What does it resemble? The comparison can include likenesses

and differences.

c. Associate it: Does it make you think of certain time, people, place, or events?

d. Analyse it: Tell how it is made, constructed, or formed, and if possible, identify

what it is made of.

e. Apply it: How can the topic are used? What can you do with it?

f. Argue for it against it: Be sure to choose only one position. Give reasons why

you argue or against it.

Cubing technique is one of the effective ways in generating ideas so the

students can creatively writing a paragraph. The following is an example of how

to apply the cubing technique in writing a paragraph entitled “Volunteer”

(Wyrick, 2011:13).

Page 27: Writing Research

13

a. Describe it: I and five other members of my campus organisation volunteered

three Saturdays to work at the shelter here in town. We mainly helped in the

kitchen, preparing, serving, and cleaning up after meals. At the dinners we

served about 70 homeless people, mostly men but also some families with

small children and babies.

b. Compare it: I had never done anything like this before so it is hard to compare

or contrast it to anything. It was different though from what I expected. I hadn’t

really thought much about the people who would be there or to be honest I

think I thought they would be pretty weird or sad and I was kind of dreading

going there after I volunteered. But the people were just regular normal people.

And they were very, very polite to us.

c. Associate it: some of the people there reminded me of some of my relatives!

John, the kitchen manager, said most of the people were just temporarily

“down on their luck” and that reminded me of my aunt and uncle who came to

stay with us for a while when I was in high school after my uncle lost his job.

d. Analyse it: I feel like I got a lot out my experience. I think I had some wrong

ideas about “the homeless” and working there made me think more about them

as real people, not just a faceless group.

e. Apply it: I feel like I am more knowledgeable when I hear people talk about

the poor or the homeless in this town, especially those people who criticize

those who use the shelter.

f. Argue for or against it: I would encourage others to volunteer there. The work

isn’t hard and it isn’t scary. It makes you appreciate what you’ve got and also

Page 28: Writing Research

14

makes you think about what you or your family might do if things went wrong

for a while. It also makes you feel good to do something for people you don’t

even know.

6. The Procedure Teaching Writing by Using Cubing Technique

Teaching writing by using Cubing Technique can be implemented through

the following steps:

a. Teacher explains the concept of descriptive paragraph.

b. Teacher explains the students how to make a paragraph by using cubing

technique and gives them example.

c. The students and teacher discuss the six questions in the cubing technique in

relation to the topic given.

d. The students answer the six questions individually in twenty minutes

e. Teacher asks some students to write their answers on the blackboard

f. The students and the writer discuss some alternative answers for the questions

g. The students combine the answers they have made into paragraph.

h. Teacher checks the students’ work mistakes and corrects them.

B. Related Previous Study

In this study, the writer found a thesis which is relevant to the writer’s

thesis. It is “Improving the Second Year Students’ Ability to Write Descriptive

paragraph through the Cubing Technique at SMA Negeri 4 Palembang”. The

thesis was written by Irlina in 2005.

There are several similarities between this studies and Irlina’s thesis. The

similarity is both studies talk about teaching writing by using Cubing Technique.

Page 29: Writing Research

15

The differences are (a) the research problem, Irlina’s thesis used true-experimental

method while the writer used quasi-experimental method, (b) location of

investigation, her thesis was done SMA Negeri 4 Palembang but the writer study

was at SMP Negeri 9 Lubuklinggau, (c) the number of sample used, Irlina’s thesis

used 87 students and the writer’s study use 28 students as sample.

The result of Irlina’s thesis showed that the results of match t-test

calculation were 3.497, while the critical value was 1.9876. It means that the Ha

was accepted and the Ho was rejected. So it was significantly to improve the

Second Year Students’ Ability to Write Descriptive paragraph through the Cubing

Technique at SMA Negeri 4 Palembang in the academic year 2004/2005.

C. Theoretical Framework

Theoretical Framework of this research is clearly described as follow:

First, the writer observed to the school by asked some questions related to the

problems of the study to the English Teacher of eighth grade students of SMP

Negeri 9 Lubuklinggau. Second, the writer searched the literature as well the

related previous study that was suitable for writing problems. The writer found

Irlina’s thesis which is relevant to the writer’s thesis. Third, the writer formulating

the problem of the study, the problem of the study was formulated into the

following question “Is it significantly effective to teach writing by using cubing

technique to the Eighth grade students of SMP Negeri 9 Lubuklinggau in the

academic year of 2012/2013?” Fourth, the writer defined the tentative notion.

Tentative notion is temporarily expectation of factors that affect the research

result. Then, the writer formulated the hypothesis. There are two hypotheses the

Page 30: Writing Research

16

writer used, they are the alternative hypothesis (Ha) which is stated “It is

significantly effective teaching writing by using cubing technique to the eighth

grade students of SMP Negeri 9 Lubuklinggau in the academic year of

2012/2013.” and H0 which is stated “It is not significantly effective teaching

writing by using cubing technique to the eighth grade students of SMP Negeri 9

Lubuklinggau in the academic year of 2012/2013.” Fifth, the writer determined

research method. The writer used quasi-experimental method with Pre-test and

Post-test design. The data source is taken from eighth grade students of SMP

Negeri 9 Lubuklinggau. In selecting the data source, the sample was chosen by

using cluster random sampling. Cluster random sampling means that the selection

of the groups of individual rather than single individual. The sample was taken by

arbitrary choosing one of the seven classes of eighth grade students of SMP

Negeri 9 Lubuklinggau in academic year 2012/2013. Then, the writer defined

research variable that would be analysed in writing elements. They are: content,

organisation, vocabulary, language use and mechanic. Seventh, the writer used

writing test as the research instrument. To find out the test instrument is valid and

reliable, the writer gave try out to the students. Eighth, the writer collected the

data by giving test. The students are given the same writing test twice namely Pre-

test, pre-test is the test in which the sample given the test before the treatment and

Post-test, post-test is the test which is given after treatment. Ninth, after collecting

the data the writer analysed the data by calculating it to individual score, student’s

categories score and matched t-test. The writer also asked the English teacher to

give the score of the test. Tenth, after analysing the data got from the test, the

Page 31: Writing Research

17

writer concluded the research result. And the last, the writer wrote whole the

report into the thesis. The theoretical framework illustrated into the following

chart:

Chart2.1

Theoretical Framework (Arikunto, 1999:18)

1. Choosing the problem

2. Related Previous Study

6a. Determine the

variables

4. Tentative notion

3. Formulating the Problem

6b. Determine data

source

4a. Hypothesis

5. Choosing the Method

10. Concluding the research

9. Analysing the Data

8. Collecting the Data

7. Designing Instrument

11. Writing the thesis

Page 32: Writing Research

18

D. Hypotheses

According to Hornby (2010:740), hypothesis is an idea or explanation of

something that is based on a few known facts but that has not yet been proved to

be true or correct. McMillan (1992:35), hypotheses are educated “guesses” or

tentative explanations about a correct solution to a problem, description, possible,

relationship, or differences.

The hypotheses which were used in this study were Null Hypothesis (Ho)

and Alternative Hypothesis (Ha) which:

1. The Null Hypothesis (Ho) was stated that it was not significantly effective to

teach writing by using cubing technique to the eighth grade students of SMP

Negeri 9 Lubuklinggau in the academic year of 2012/2013.

2. The Alternative Hypothesis (Ha) was stated that it was significantly effective

to teach writing by using cubing technique to the eighth grade students of SMP

Negeri 9 Lubuklinggau in the academic year of 2012/2013.

The hypotheses were tested by critical value of the t distribution table.

Since the total number of the sample of this research were 27 (28-1) students and

the significance level was 95 % or 0,05 for one tailed test, the critical value of t-

table is 1.701, when the result of the t-obtained is less than 1.701, the null

hypothesis will be accepted. On the other hand, if the result of the matched t-test

was equal to or exceeded 1.701, the alternative hypothesis was accepted and

consequently the null hypothesis was rejected (Hatch and Farhady, 1982:272).

Page 33: Writing Research

19

CHAPTER III

METHOD OF THE RESEARCH

A. Research Design

In doing this study, the writer used quasi-experimental method. Quasi-

experimental method refers to an experimental method that does not meet all the

requirements necessary for controlling the influence of extraneous variables

(Christensen, 1991:303). Moreover, Dane (1990:104) cites in Irlina (2005:16)

state that quasi-experimental method is a research method that approximates but it

is not truly-experimental method. Quasi-experimental research is simply not

possible to randomly assign participants to the difference levels of many

independent variables, in the quasi-experimental there are still exists a treatment,

in the sense that the researcher introduces a treatment or experimental design, pre-

test post-test design. The one-group pre-test post-test design is a single group is

measured or observed not only after being exposed to a treatment of some sort,

but also before (Fraenkel, et al., 2012:269). The formula of this design is as

follow:

01 X 02

Where: 01 : The pre-test

02 : The post-test

X : Treatment

19

Page 34: Writing Research

20

B. Population and Sample

1. Population

Richards, et al. (2002:408) state that population is any set of items,

individuals, etc, which share some common observable characteristics and from

which sample can be taken. In addition, Arikunto (1997:115) also states that

population is a set (or correlation) of all elements possessing one or more

attributes of interest.

The population in this study was taken from the eighth grade students of

SMP Negeri 9 Lubuklinggau. The population was 188 students. The population of

this study is presented in the table below:

Table 3.1

Population of the Study

No Classes Number of Students

1 VIII.A 28

2 VIII.B 27

3 VIII.C 26

4 VIII.D 28

5 VIII.E 27

6 VIII.F 26

7 VIII.G 26

Total 188

(Source: SMP Negeri 9 Lubuklinggauin the academic year of 2012/2013)

2. Sample

Sample is a group of subject on which information is obtained. It is

selected in such way that it represented larger group (population) from which it is

Page 35: Writing Research

21

obtained (Fraenkel, et al., 2012:91). In addition, McMillan (1992:60) states that

sample is the group of elements, or a single element from which data are obtained.

It is smaller number of elements that have been selected for the study from the

total number of element contained in population.

In selecting the sample, the writer used cluster random sampling

technique. According to McMillan (1992:78), the advantages of cluster random

sampling are that it low cost, requires list of elements and efficient with large

population. In addition, Fraenkel et al. (2012:95) cluster random sampling means

that the selection of groups of individual rather than single individuals. The steps

of cluster random sampling: (1) writing the seven classes in small of pieces of

paper, (2) rolling them up, (3) putting them in a glass, and, (4) taking one of them

to be chosen as the sample. The result was VIII.A as the sample group with the

total number of 28 students.

C. Technique for Collecting Data

In collecting the data, the writer applied a written test. There was one test

and was administered twice to the students. In this study, they were pre-test and

post-test. The pre-test was given before doing the teaching experiment to the

sample students and the post-test was given at the end of teaching experiment.

The post-test was given since it was important to know the students’ progress in

studying writing through writing cubing technique.

The data were collected through written test in the form of descriptive

paragraph that consists of 80-100 words. The time allocated for the students to do

the test was 60 minutes.

Page 36: Writing Research

22

D. Technique for Analysing the Data

In analysing the data obtained from the test. First, the data concern with

the pre-test scores. Second, the data concern with the scores of the students in the

post-test. The writer applied three techniques. They were: individual score, the

students’ categories score, and matched t-test.

1. Individual Score

The students’ paragraph was scored in terms of five elements: content,

organisation, vocabulary, language use, and mechanics. Content refers to the idea

of paragraph; organisation is concerned with ideas and their logical and coherent

language and development; vocabulary covers the correct or appropriate choice of

words and idioms; structure refers to the grammar and word order; and mechanics

involve the punctuation and spelling.

The following table 3.2 and table 3.3 show the complete scale and ranges

scoring in writing proposed by Heaton (1988:146).

Table 3.2

Scale Range and Category

Elements

Scale Range and Category

Very Poor Poor to Fair Average

to Good

Very Good to

Excellent

Content 13-16 17-21 22-26 27-30

Organisation 7-9 10-13 14-17 18-20

Vocabulary 7-9 10-13 14-17 18-20

Structure 5-10 11-17 19-21 22-25

Mechanics 2 3 4 5

(See Heaton, 1988:146)

Page 37: Writing Research

23

Table 3.3

Scoring Criterion

a. Content

30-27 knowledgeable-substantive

26-22 some knowledge of subject-adequate range

21-17 Limited knowledge of subject – little substance

16-13 Does not show knowledge of subject-non substantive

b. Organisation

20-18 Fluent expression – ideas clearly stated

17-14 Somewhat choppy-loosely organised but main ideas stand out

13-10 Not fluent – ideas confused or disconnected

9-7 Does not communicate-no organisation

c. Vocabulary

20-18 Fluent expression – ideas clearly stated

17-14 Adequate range – occasional errors of word /idiom form, choice,

usage but meaning not obscured usage

13-10 Limited range – frequent errors of word/ idiom word, choice,

9-7 Essentially translation – little knowledge of English vocabulary

d. Structure / Language Use

25-22 Effective complex construction

21-18 Effective but simple construction.

17-11 Major problem in simple/complex construction

10-5 Virtually no mastery of sentences construction rules

Page 38: Writing Research

24

e. Mechanics

5 Demonstrates mastery of conventions.

4 Occasional errors of spelling, punctuation.

3 Frequent errors of spelling, punctuation, and capitalization.

2 No mastery conventions – dominated by errors of spelling,

punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing.

Then, the writer changed those scores into the students’ individual score.

To find out the individual score, the writer used the following formula:

Where:

: Individual Score

: Students’ Score

: Total Score

2. The Students’ Categories Score

In order to know the student’s categories score, the scores were converted

into the range of the score. The writer used conversion of individual score as seen

in the following table 3.4.

Page 39: Writing Research

25

Table 3.4

Conversion of Individual Score

Mark Range Qualification

91-100 Excellent

81-90 Very good

71-80 Good

61-70 Nearly good

51-60 Sufficient

41-50 Nearly Sufficient

34-40 Poor

≤ 33 Very poor

(Source: Heaton, 1988:145)

3. Matched t-test

The writer used matched t-test in comparing the result of the post-test and

pre-test. The formula is presented below:

SD

xxtobt

21

Where:

tobt : The t-obtained

1X : The Students’ Mean Score of Post-Test

2X : The Students’ Mean Score of Pre-Test

SD : The Standard Errors of Differences

SD was obtained by using the following formula:

n

SDSD

Page 40: Writing Research

26

SD was calculated by using the following formula:

1

/122

n

DnDSD

Where:

SD : Standard Deviation

n : Number of Students

D : Difference of Students’ Scores

(Hatch and Farhady, 1982:116)

E. Accountability of the Research

In order to have a good test, before the test was being given to the

students, the writer measured the validity and reliability of the test. The aim is to

examine whether or not the test items can be used as a test instrument for

collecting the data.

1. Validity

Validity refers to the appropriateness, meaningfulness, and usefulness of

inferences researcher makes (Fraenkel et al., 2012:147). In this study, the writer

used content validity. According to Richards, et al. (2002:115), content validity is

a form of validity, which based on the degree to which a test adequately and

sufficiently measures the particular skills or behaviour it set out to measure.

Validity is the degree to which the test actually measures what it is intended to

measure (Heaton, 1988:160). In making the test to be valid, the writer had

Page 41: Writing Research

27

consulted it with his two advisors in constructing it. So, the test materials really

measured about the students’ descriptive paragraph writing. In order to make the

test has high degree of content validity, the writer devised the test items in

accordance with the table of the test specifications. The table of test specification

is also based on the curriculum or syllabus which is taught by their teachers. The

test specification is valuable information in producing an appropriate test, level of

difficulty, content, topic, task and others. The test specification is presented on the

following table:

Table 3.5

The Test Specification

Objective Material Indicator Total

item

Test

Type

To write

descriptive

paragraph

correctly.

Writing skill of

descriptive

paragraph entitled

“meatball”

Write one descriptive

paragraph Consisting of

80-100 words. the

elements that will be

scored are:

(1) Content

(2) Organisation

(3) Vocabulary

(4) Structure

(5) Mechanics

1

Written

Test

Total 1

2. Reliability

Fraenkel, et al. (2012:154) state that reliability refers to the consistency of

the scores obtained-how consistent they are for each individual from one

administration of an instrument to another and from one set of items to another.

Moreover, Richard et al. (2002:454) state that reliability is a measure of the

Page 42: Writing Research

28

degree to which a test gives consistent result, a test is said to be reliable if it gives

the same results when it is given on different occasions or when it is used by

different people. In measuring the reliability of the test, the writer used split-half

procedure by using internal-consistency methods. In administering this method,

the writer asked the teacher of English of SMP Negeri 9 Lubuklinggau to help the

test scoring. So, there were two scorers and the reliability coefficient of the

writing test was 0.444. It means that if the result of the calculation is higher than

or equals to 0.444, the test is reliable. On the other hand, the test is not reliable if

the result of the calculation is lower than 0.444. The score was obtained by using

the following formula:

∑ (∑ ) (∑ )

√{ ∑ (∑ ) }{ ∑

(∑ ) }

Where:

: Correlation for the whole test

: The students’ score from the first scorer (the writer)

: The students’ score form the second scorer (the English teacher)

: The number of the students

To find out the reliability for whole test the writer calculated by using

Spearman Brown formula. The formula is as follows:

Page 43: Writing Research

29

Where:

: Reliability of scores on total test

: Correlation coefficient

From The result of the calculation of try-out test is presented on the table 1

(Appendix C), the writer calculated the reliability coefficient by using Pearson

Product Moment Formula. The process of the calculation can be seen as follows:

∑ (∑ ) (∑ )

√{ ∑ (∑ ) }{ ∑

(∑ ) }

( ) ( )( )

√*( ) ( ) +*( ) ( ) +

√( )( )

1

After getting the value of correlation coefficient, the writer calculated

reliability for whole test through Spearman Brown formula as follows:

( )

Page 44: Writing Research

30

Base on the result of the calculation above, the writer found that the

reliability coefficient of the writing test was 0.751. Since the reliability coefficient

(0.751) was higher than 0.444, the test instrument was “reliable”.

Page 45: Writing Research

31

CHAPTER IV

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

A. Findings

The research result is shown in the following chart:

Chart 4.1

The Result of the Students’ test

It was found that the students’ average score in the pre-test was 62.29 and

in the post-test 71.11. It means that the average score in the post-test was higher

than the students’ average score in the pre-test. Then the writer also found that the

result of the matched t-test calculation 6.89 was higher than the critical value,

meanwhile the critical value was 1.701. It means that the Ho (null hypothesis) was

rejected and automatically the Ha (alternative hypothesis) was accepted. It was

effective teaching writing by using cubing technique to the eighth grade students

of SMP Negeri 9 Lubuklinggau.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

SCORE

STUDENTS

Pre-test Post-test

31

Page 46: Writing Research

32

1. The students’ score in the pre-test

The elements of the writing that the writer checked were content (C),

organisation (O), vocabulary (V), structure (S), and mechanism (M). Previously,

more detail explanation of the scoring criterion was described in chapter III. The

students’ score of the pre-test is presented in the table 2. (Appendix D).

From the table 2 (on Appendix D) showed that there was 1 student or

3.57% who was in “very good” category, 5 students or 17.86% who were in the

“good” category, 9 students or 32.14% in the “nearly good” category, 11 students

or 39.29% in the “sufficient” category, and 2 students or 7.14% in the “nearly

sufficient” category. The average score was 71.11, the highest score was 89 and

the lowest score was 54. The Chart 4.2 shows the result of students’ score in the

pre-test.

Chart 4.2

The Percentage Students’ Categories Score in the Pre-test

Excellent. 0.

0% Very good.

3.57%

Good. 17.86%

Nearly good.

32.14%

Sufficient.

39.29%

Nearly

Sufficient.

7.14%

Poor. 0. 0% Very poor.

0. 0%

Excellent Very good Good

Nearly good Sufficient Nearly Sufficient

Poor Very poor

Page 47: Writing Research

33

2. The Students’ Score in the Post-test

The elements of writing that the writer checked in the post-test are same as

those in the pre-test. They were content (C), organisation (O), vocabulary (V),

structure (S), and mechanism (M). The result of the students’ score in the post-test

was shown on the table score 3 (Appendix D).

From that table score 3.2 (Appendix D), it was known that there were2

students or 7.14%, who were in “Sufficient” category, 14 students or 50.00% who

were in “Nearly Good” category, 6 students or 21.43% who were in “Good”

category, and6students or 21.43% who were in “Very good” category. Herein the

chart of the percentage of students’ categories scores:

Chart 4.3

The Percentage Students’ Categories Score in the Post-test

Excellent. 0%

Very good.

21.43%

Good. 21.43%

Nearly good.

50.00%

Sufficient.

7.14%

Nearly

Sufficient. 0.

0%

Poor. 0. 0% Very poor.

0. 0%

Excellent Very good GoodNearly good Sufficient Nearly SufficientPoor Very poor

Page 48: Writing Research

34

Table 4.1

The Score Distribution of Pre-test and Post-test

N = 28 Pre-test Post-test

Highest score 87 89

Lowest score 47 54

Average score 62.29 71.11

Students

Categories Score

Pre-test Post-test

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Excellent 0 0% 0 0%

Very good 1 3.57% 6 21.43%

Good 5 17.86% 6 21.43%

Nearly good 9 32.14% 14 50.00%

Sufficient 11 39.29% 2 7.14%

Nearly sufficient 2 7.14% 0 0%

Poor 0 0% 0 0%

Very poor 0 0% 0 0%

3. Normality and Homogeneity

a. Normality Test

Before the writer calculated matched t-test of this study. The writer

calculated normality and homogeneity of the test firstly. They are as follows.

∑( )

the Observation Frequency

the Expectation Frequency

Before the writer calculated normality test, it is important to know the

some steps to calculate the normality test. The data were got from the table 4 and

table 5of the square of the students’ score of the pre-test and post-test in the

Appendix E. They were as follow.

Page 49: Writing Research

35

1) Calculated Mean Score

In the pre-test, it was known that mean score of the pre-test was 62.29 It

was got by total of the students’ score (1744) divided by the number of students

(28). In the post-test, it was also known that mean score of the post-test was

71.11. It was got by the total of the students’ score (1991) divided by the number

of students.

2) Calculated Standard Deviation

a) In the pre-test, data was taken from table 4 in the Appendix E. From the

calculation in the Appendix E, the writer found that the standard deviation in

the pre-test was 9.94

b) In the post-test, the data was taken from the table 6 in the Appendix E. From

the calculation in the Appendix E, the writer found that the standard deviation

in the post test was 9.64.

3) Make List of the Observation Frequency and Expectation Frequency

a) In the pre-test

(1) Dividing the interval class

( )

the number of the students

( )

So, K was 5 or can be taken 6

(2) Distance

Distance Highest score Lowest score

Page 50: Writing Research

36

87 47

40

(3) Long interval class

So, can be taken 6 or 7

After that, the writer made the table of normality as follow.

Table 4.2

The List Frequency of Observation and Expectation of the Students’ Scores

In the Pre-Test

Interval

Class

Boundary

Class Z-Score

The

Boundary of

Wide of Area

The

Wide

Of Area

Ei Oi (Oi-

Ei)2/Ei

87.5 2.54 4945

81-87 2.81 0.79 1 0.06

80.5 1.83 4664

74-80 9.56 2.68 2 0.65

73.5 1.13 3708

67-73 20.80 5.82 4 2.51

66.5 0.42 1628

60-66 27.31 7.65 8 0.24

59.5 -0.28 1103

53-59 22.62 6.33 7 0.02

52.5 -0.98 3365

46-52 11.80 3.30 6 2.20

45.5 -1.69 4545

5.68

Explanation of the calculation:

Column 1: Lowest score + Long class

Page 51: Writing Research

37

Column 2 : Boundary Class is the lower and upper limited of interval class.

Column 3 : Z Scores

Column 4 : Boundary Wide of Area use List of Z- table

Column 5 : The wide of Area

The value of Wide of Area should be in positive by ignoring minus sign

after being subtracted by upper BWA and lower BWA. The exception for interval

class 60-66, because the interval class was between plus and minus Z-Score of 0

ordinate points, so both of the values of Boundary Wide of Area between those

ordinate points were added.

For instance, the Wide of Area

27.31

Column 6 :Ei

Page 52: Writing Research

38

Column 7 : Observation Frequency

Column 8 : Score (Oi – Ei)2/Ei

From the table 4.2 above it was found that .Then,the writer

calculated degree of freedom (df) = number of interval class -1. So, df=6-1 = 5

with the significance level 0.05 on the table of Chi-square was 11.070. If

5.68<11.070 so the data distribution was normal.

Chart 4.4

The Normality Curve of Pre-test

b) In the Post-test

(1) Dividing the interval class

( )

the number of the students

( )

So, K was 5 or can be taken 6

-1.69

-0.98 -0.28

0.42

1.13

1.83

2.54

-2 -1 0 1 2 3

Page 53: Writing Research

39

(2) Distance

Distance Highest score Lowest score

89 54

35

(3) Long interval class

So, can be taken 5 or 6.

The result of normality calculation was shown in the table below:

Table 4.3

The List Frequency of Observation and Expectation of the Students’ Scores

in the Post-Test

Interval

Class

Boundary

Class Z-Score

The

Boundary of

Wide of Area

The

Wide

Of Area

Ei Oi (Oi-

Ei)2/Ei

89.5 1.90 4713

84-89 6.98 1.95 4 2.15

83.5 1.29 4015

78-83 15.61 4.37 6 0.60

77.5 0.66 2454

72-77 22.94 6.42 1 4.57

71.5 0.04 0160

66-71 23.50 6.58 8 0.30

65.5 -0.58 2190

60-65 16.29 4.56 7 1.30

59.5 -1.20 3819

54-59 8.37 2.34 2 0.04

53.5 -1.83 4656

8.96

Page 54: Writing Research

40

The steps of normality calculation of post-test were same like in the pre-

test and it was found that . After that, the writer calculated degree of

freedom (df) = number of interval class -1. So, df=5-1 = 4 with the significance

level 0.05 on Chi-square table was 9.488

So, 8.96<9.488 the data distribution was normal.

b. Homogeneity Test

Beside calculated the normality, the writer calculated the homogeneity test

as well. For calculating the homogeneity, the writer used the following formula.

According to table 6 of the variance of homogeneity of the students’ scores

in the pre-test and in the post-test in Appendix E, the writer found that the highest

variance was 84.5 and the lowest variance was 76.34. The calculation of the

homogeneity was shown as follow.

1.09

From that degrees of freedom it was known that (df) na-1 =28-1 = 27 and

n0-1= 28-1 =27. The value of degrees of freedom (df) na and n0=27, with the

significance level of 5%, on Ftable was 1.93

From the calculation above, it was known that Fobt = 1.09. and Ftable = 1.93.

It statistically could be said that the data distribution was homogeneity, because

Fobt<Ftable.

Page 55: Writing Research

41

4. The Calculation of Matched t-test

After analysing and calculating the students’ score in the post-test and pre-

test, the writer calculated the matched t-test. It was done to test the hypothesis

which one was accepted or rejected. The result of matched t-test calculation can

be seen in the table 7 (see Appendix F).

From the table 7, it was found that the number of students (N) was 28, the

students’ average scores in the pre-test ( )was 62.29 the students’ average score

on the post-test ( ) was 71.11, the sum of difference (∑ ) was 247 and the

squared sum of the difference (∑ 2) 3433. The process of the calculation of t-test

is presented as follows:

√∑ ( )(∑ )

√ ( ) ( )

√ ( ) ( )

Page 56: Writing Research

42

1.28

0

Based on the result of the calculation above, it was found that t-obtained

was 6.89 higher than the critical value of t-table 1.701 for significant level 0.05

for df=28. It was indicated that the alternative hypothesis (Ha) was accepted and

the null hypothesis (H0) was rejected. So, it is significantly effective teaching

writing by using cubing technique to the eighth grade students of SMP Negeri 9 in

the academic year 2012/2013.

B. Discussion

This study was conducted based on the phenomena that happened in the

real field concerning the student’s writing achievement. This happened because of

several factors one of them is the students have difficulty in developing the ideas

in writing. As a result, the students feel confuse and spend the time by imagine

what they should write on the paper. Then, the writer chose the cubing technique

to overcome the students’ writing problems. Byrne (1993:25) states that in view

of the many difficulties with which are the students faced in learning foreign

Page 57: Writing Research

43

language, the fundamental principal in guiding them in various ways towards a

mastery of writing skills, and sometimes controlling what they write, is not one

we can lightly dismiss, even if the principle has to some extent been misapplied

(for example, in trying eliminate mistakes). Rather, we should consider more

carefully what kind of guidance we should give them, particularly in relation to

the various problems they have when they writing.

Scott (2003:79) states that cubing can be and is a powerful tool for

generating ideas prior to the actual writing. A writer can explore his/her idea and

develop through the cubing guidelines. A writer often cannot go on writing about

a subject because they are locked in on a single way of looking at the topic, and

that is where cubing works well.

In doing the research the writer asked the English teacher’s help in giving

the score of the students’ test. The scoring criterion is based on table 3.3 (Heaton,

1988:146). In the Pre-test the writer gave the students writing test with the topics:

Model (food) and Supermarket. The students should choose only one of topics for

their descriptive paragraph. Then, the writer gave the students treatments by twice

teaching them, the first meeting the writer taught the students descriptive

paragraph through cubing technique in the topic of “meatball.” The second

meeting, the writer also taught the students the same steps in first meeting but

slightly different by using another topic. Then in the next meeting the writer gave

the students Post-test. The test given was the same as in the pre-test.

After got the data, the writer combined the score from the first judge (the

writer) and the second judge (the English teacher). In the pre-test, 7.14% of the

Page 58: Writing Research

44

students in nearly sufficient category, but in post-test decreased become 0%.

Then, 39.27% students who was in sufficient category in the pre-test decreased to

7.14% in the post-test. Meanwhile, the percentage of the students in nearly good

category was increased from 32.14% in the pre-test to 50.00% in the post-test. As

well, the students’ category in good category also increased from 17.86% in the

pre-test to 21.43% in the post-test. And the students who reached in very good

category also increased from 3.57% in the pre-test to 21.43% in the post-test.

More detailed, see table 3.1 on Appendix D.

Based on the results of the data obtained above, the writer interpreted that

the students’ achievement in writing has a better score. This result could be seen

from the difference between students’ mean score obtained in the pre-test and the

post-test. In the pre-test, the students’ mean score was 62.29. On the other hand,

in the post-test, their mean score increased to be 71.11. It means that after being

taught, their achievement on writing was improved.

The highest score in the pre-test was 87 and the lowest score was 47.

Meanwhile, the highest score in the post-test was 89 and the lowest score was 54.

Therefore, it was obvious that in the post-test most of the students could make

better achievement than in the pre-test.

In addition, the result of matched t-test calculation shows that the value of

the t-obtained was much higher than t-table. The t-obtained was 6.89 while the

critical value for df=28 of the t-table was 1.701. It means that the null hypothesis

(Ho) was rejected and automatically the alternative hypothesis (Ha) which is

stated “It is significantly effective to teach writing by using Cubing Technique to

Page 59: Writing Research

45

the eighth grade students of SMP Negeri 9 Lubuklinggau in the academic year

2012/2013” was accepted.

In Irlina thesis (2005), it was found that the value of the mean difference

of the pre-test and post-test in the experimental group was 4.43 meanwhile the

value of the mean difference of the pre-test and post-test in control group was 1.67

and the mean difference of the post-test in the experimental group and the post-

test in the control group was 2.83. This means difference was statistically

significant for significance level of p<0.05 in two tailed testing by df=87. It means

that there was a significant difference in the students’ writing achievement

between the students who were taught by using cubing technique and those who

were not. Therefore, based on the writer’s and Irlina’s research result. It was

found that teaching writing by using cubing technique is significantly effective.

C. Limitation of the Study

The writer would describe the limitations of the research that were found

during conducting the research. The instrument used in this research only a test, it

should be added by questionnaire in order to see the satisfaction and comments of

the students toward the method applied. The time taken for conducting the

research was not really sufficient because when collecting the data a few days of

that month were the school holiday. Therefore, the more exposure for writing

activities could not be achieved maximally. After the post-test, there are still some

of the students’ writing achievements have not passed writing KKM of Eighth

grade Students of SMP Negeri 9 Lubuklinggau in the academic year 2012/2013.

(see table 9 Appendix F).

Page 60: Writing Research

46

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

A. Conclusion

Based on the result of the test the writer concludes that there was

significant difference between the students’ writing achievement before and after

treatment. The students’ ability was increased from “Nearly good” category in

pre-test to “good” category in post-test. The average of the students’ score in the

post-test (71.11) was much higher than those in the pre-test (62.29). The result of

matched t-test, t-obtained was 6.89 was higher than the coefficient critical value

of t-table (1.701) for significant level 0.05 for df = 28. The writer concludes that it

was significantly effective teaching writing by using cubing technique to the

eighth grade students of SMP Negeri 9 Lubuklinggau in the academic year of

2012/2013.

B. Suggestion

Based on the data analysis and implementation the writer has some

suggestions to the teacher of English, the students, and to the researcher. For the

sake educational development partially in the teaching and learning writing, the

writer offers some suggestions for the teachers, the students of English, and the

other researchers.

1. For the Teacher of English

The teacher of English should apply the cubing technique because the

cubing technique is a good technique in how to develop students’ idea in teaching

46

Page 61: Writing Research

47

writing. The writer suggests the teacher of English can use the six questions of

cubing technique in creating descriptive, narrative, and argumentative essay in

teaching writing. Since the result of this research showed that Cubing Technique

was effective to be used in teaching writing for the students.

2. For the Students

The students are suggested to pay close attention when the teacher

teaching them. The writer also suggests that the student must increase their

knowledge in field of grammar and structure, vocabulary and the others aspect of

writing. Ideally, the students are better to take the English course, study

themselves and discuss to the teacher of English and their friends to help them

master English better. And the last one and the most important, students should

take a plenty of practice in writing to achieve writing mastery.

3. To the other Researchers

To the other researchers, the writer suggests to do the same research with

Cubing technique in teaching on the other materials and field. To know deeply the

effectiveness of Cubing technique the future researcher should be careful in

designing the lesson plan because the accuracy in managing the time and the

teaching goals is really tight close. In choosing the technique that appropriate for

the research, make sure that the future researchers checking the materials to be

investigated are available in syllabus or curriculum at the school or university of

the research to be done.

Page 62: Writing Research

48

REFERENCES

Arikunto, S. 1999. Prosedur Penelitian. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.

Bello, T. 1997. Improving ESL Learners' Writing Skills (Online)

http://www.cal.org/caela/esl_resources/digests/Writing.html accessed on

August 19, 2012

Block, J. 1993. Choosing Your Course Book. London: Oxford University Press

Byrne, D. 1993. Teaching Writing Skills. London: Longman Group Ltd.

Center, A. 2003. Cubing. (Online)

http://www.uhv.edu/ac/research/prewrite/cubing.aspx accessed on August

21, 2012

Chin, B. 1990. On Your Own: Writing Process. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-

Hall, Inc.

Christensen, L. B. 1991. Experimental Methodology. (5th

ed). Needham Heights,

M.A: Allyn and Bacon.

Cwiklinski, A. 2003. Strategy: Cubing. (Online)

http://www.glencoe.com/sec/teachingtoday/weeklytips.phtml/17 accessed

on August 20, 2012.

Dane, F. 1992. Research Methods. Belmont, California, CA: Wadsworth.

Dawson, M. 2001. Prewriting: Cubing. (Online)

http://writing2.richmond.edu/writing/wweb/cubing.html accessed on

August 19, 2012.

Irlina. 2005. “Improving the Second Year Students’ Ability to Write Descriptive

paragraph through the Cubing Technique at SMA Negeri 4

Palembang.”Unpublished Undergraduate Thesis. Palembang: Faculty of

Teacher Training and Education, Sriwijaya University, Indralaya.

Faturrahman, P., and M. S. Sutikno. 2007. Strategi Belajar Mengajar. Bandung:

Rafika Aditama.

Fraenkel, J. R., N. E. Wallen, and H. H. Hyun. 2012. How to Design and Evaluate

Research in Education. (8th

ed). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, Inc.

Page 63: Writing Research

49

Gould, E., D. Yanni., and W. Smith. 1989. The Act of Writing. New York, NY:

Random House.

Hadi, S. 2002. Metodologi Research. Yogyakarta: ANDI

Hatch, E., and H. Farhady. 1982. Research Design and Statistics for Applied

Linguistics. London: Newbury House Publisher, Inc.

Hornby, A. S. 2010. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. (8th

ed). London:

Oxford University Press.

Heaton, J. B. 1989. Writing English Language Test. New York, NY: Longman

Group Ltd.

Pearson Education, 2012. Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English for

Advance Learners. Essex, UK: Pearson Education Limited

Mann, R. C., and P. Mann. 1990. Essay Writing Methods and Models. Belmont,

California, CA: Wadsworth.

McMillan, J. M. 1992. Educational Research Fundamentals for the Consumer.

New York, NY: Harper Collins Publishers, Inc.

Nathan, R., C.Temple, F. Temple,and N. A. Burris 1993.The Beginning of

Writing. (3rd

ed). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Nazir, P. 2005. Metode Penelitian. Bogor: Ghalia Indonesia.

Richards, J.C. 1990. The Language Teaching Matrix. New York, NY: Cambridge

University Press

Richards, J. C., R. Schmidt, H. Kendricks, and Y. Kim.2002. Longman Dictionary

of Applied Linguistics.London: Pearson Education Ltd.

Scarcella, R., and R. L. Oxford. 1992. The Tapestry of Language Learning: The

Individual in the Communicative Classroom. Boston, MA: Heinle and

Heinle.

Scott, J. H. 2003. The Cubing Technique. (Online)

http://csun.edu/~hcpas003/cubing.html accessed on August 18, 2012

Sharples, M. 1999. How We Write: We Write as Creative Design. London:

Routledge.

STKIP-PGRI Lubuklinggau. 2001. Pedoman Penulisan Makalah dan Skripsi

Mahasiswa STKIP-PGRI Lubuklinggau. Lubukinggau: STKIP-PGRI

Lubuliggau.

Page 64: Writing Research

50

Whimley, A. 2001. Teacher’s Guide to Classroom Activities. Alexandria, VA:

Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Wyrick, J. 2011. Steps to Writing Well: with Additional Reading. Boston, MA:

Wadsworth.

Zemach, E. D., and L. A. Rumisek. 2005. Academic Writing from Paragraph to

Essay. London: Macmillan Publishers Limited.