IMPROVING STUDENT’S WRITING PROCEDURE TEXT

THROUGH PICTURE SERIES

(Quasi Experimental at Class 2 Student of SMPN 10 Cimahi)

13220252

Siti Nurjanah

English Education Study Program

Nurjanahs310@yahoo.com

STKIP Siliwangi Bandung

ABSTRACT

This research paper entitled “Improving Students' Writing Procedure Text Throught Picture Series” was
intended to test the effectiveness of using pictures series to improve students’ writing skill especially writing procedural
text. The Participants in this study were seventh grade students at one Junior High School in Cimahi. There were two
classes used in collecting the data: the experimental group and the control group. This study implemented a quasi
experimental as the research method. Furthermore, written test was conducted to obtain the data and students' writing
products which were then analyzed using writing assessment criteria taken from Rose (2007, as cited by Emilia, 2011,
p.151) . The findings showed that there was a significant difference between the mean of the experimental and that of
the control group. The mean of the experimental group (M = 34,78) was higher than the control group (M = 30,24) with
the large effect size (r = 0.92). It also showed that t (65) = 3.21 and sig = 0.002, p < 0.05 which means the use of pictures
series was effective to improve students’ writing skills. It was proved by the students’ experimental group significant
improvement in genre, register and discourse aspects in the posttest result. This research is expected to contribute to
the teaching of English. In addition, it is suggested to investigate the effectiveness of using pictures series in improving
other skills.

Keywords : Picture Series, Procedural Text, Writing Skill

Introduction

Writing is complex process of communication in main reason which causes that problem is teachers
which the writer needs to have both knowledge of still do not know how to create attractive and
language and knowledge of formulating ideas. effective and effective ways in teaching writing.
According to Alwasilah and Alwasilah (2007) Cited Consequently, students do not have any clue when
in Jaka Setiawan (2014) writing is the most difficult they are asked to compose a text. As Dewey (cited in
skill in learning EFL. In writing, the students have to Mooney, 2000) states, enjoyable teaching-learning
consider some rules to create a better text. Lagan process will occur when students are interested in the
(2008:10) argues that “writing is a skill, not a natural materials. So, teachers should do their role as
gift. It is a skill like, typing, or cooking; and, like any facilitator in which they need to prepare the fun and
skills, it can be learned and practiced”. It means that easy way in delivering the materials (Brown, 2001).
writing skill is not a natural talent possessed by The use of media such as a picture is one of ways in
everyone; therefore, it is needed much work hard and creating the fun and enjoyable learning.
practice continuously in learning this skill. Pictures can be tools or media to stimulate
Considering the complicated process faced by students in describing an object or a person in the
students, writing is considered as the most boring pictures. Students can acquire the meaning by seeing
language activity to do in the class. Harmer (2004) things in the pictures without teacher’s explanation.
states that writing is a weird activity for students Pictures also help the sudents to communicate or
because they seldom write even in their own explain the events in the pictures. According to
language. It is hard form them to start writing. The Raimes (1983), pictures can be valuable resources for

1
teaching writing. Picture provides a shared writer’s problem is not just being explicit; the
experience for students in the class, a common base writer’s problem knowing what to be explicit about.
that leads to a variety of language activities. 2. The Example of Procedure Text Djuharie
One of media on picture that can be used to (2008:38)
learning writing is picture. The use of pictures for
teaching writing procedure text can make students Goal : How to Make a Cheese Omelet
interested in the teaching and learning process. Ingredients : 1 egg, 50 g cheese, cup milk, 3
Picture is flexible media to teach English because; it tablespoons cooking oil, a pinch of salt and pepper.
can’t be separated from other media. By using Utensils : Frying pan, fork, spatula, cheese
picture, students can see object, and they will be able grater, bowl and plate.
to describe more accurate and they can express Steps:
imagination, feeling and mind in written form. a) First, crack an egg into a bowl
The study will be focused on writing a procedure b) Second, whisk the egg with a fork until it is
text which one of the materials in English lesson for smooth
SMP/MTs especially on the First year students. c) Third, add milk and whisk well
Procedure is one of text that is to help the readers d) Fourth, grate the cheese into the bowl and stir
how to do, use, or make something completely. e) Fifth, heat the oil in a frying pan
Sometimes, the students create the procedure text f) Sixth, pour the mixture in a frying pan
without care about the generic structure specifically. g) Seventh, turn the omelet with a spatula when
They also get problem in using imperative verb and it browns
temporal conjunction. So, the result of learning h) Next, cook both sides
procedure text is not optimal. i) Then place on a plate; season with salt and
Finally, based on the writer experiment and pepper.
observation, the writer chooses SMPN 10 Cimahi to j) Finally, Eat while warm
conduct the research. I would like to take this school Thus from an example above, everybody know
because most of learners at SMPN 10 Cimahi The are how to write procedure text. First, they must write a
focus on the learn English especially writing. To goal. Second, they write a list of materials that will
solve the problem, the writer chooses the title to help be needed for completing the procedure, such as kind
the learners “IMPROVING STUDENTS’ WRITING of ingredients and utensils. And the last, they need
TEXT PROCEDURE THROUGH PICTURE steps to achieve the goal with the purpose: to tell the
SERIES” (Quasi-Experiment at class 1 Students of making process of a cheese omelet to the reader.
SMPN 10 Cimahi)
A. Definition of Picture Series
Literature Review According to Harmer (2004:69) states that
a. Writing picture can stimulate student’s creativity, especially
According to Harmer (2004:3) Cited that, in the in writing. Picture works in provoking the
context of education, it is also worth remembering imagination and creativity so that they can produce
that most exams, whether they are testing foreign good piece of writing. He also explains that some
language abilities or other skills, often rely on the situations, grammar, and vocabulary works can be
students “writing proficiency in order to measure presented by picture. Furthermore, when they look at
their knowledge. the picture, each student will have their own
Lagan (2008:10) argues that, “writing is a skill, imagination inside the picture. Starting from that,
not a natural gift. It is a skill like, typing, or cooking; they will have something (an idea) to write.
and, like any skills, it can be learned and practiced”. Similarly, Brown (2003:226) argues that picture
It means that writing skill is not a natural talent offers a non-verbal means to stimulate writer
possessed by everyone; therefore, it is needed much response. It means that by giving students picture, it
work hard and practice continuously in learning this is easier for them to get ideas.
skill.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Procedure Text
1. Definition of Procedure text Table 3.1
According to NY strand and Himley (1986: 81) a text Experimental Design
is explicit not because it says everything all by itself
but rather because it strikes a careful balance between Group Pretest Treatment Posttest
what needs to be said and what may be assumed. The Experimental TIE X T2E
Control TIC - T2C
2
 14 S-14 29 29 0
Where 15 S-15 14 35 21
TIE : Students’ writing scores of the experimental 16 S-16 14 40 26
group on pretest
TIC : Students’ writing scores of the control 17 S-17 27 26 1
group on the pretest 18 S-18 27 40 13
X : The treatments using picture series 19 S-19 36 42 6
T2E : Students’ writing scores of the
20 S-20 14 35 21
experimental group on posttest
T2C : Students’ writing scores of the 21 S-21 24 40 16
control group on the posttest 22 S-22 22 24 2
23 S-23 17 40 23
Data Collection
24 S-24 27 37 10
As initial steps, the data collection of the study 25 S-25 13 40 27
starts by having the seventh graders of 33 junior 26 S-26 21 35 14
high school Cimahi an achievement test in form of a
27 S-27 26 35 9
pretest. The treatment endure by having English
writing procedure lessons with a series picture which 28 S-28 14 40 26
given in eight sequences of eight meetings. At the 29 S-29 23 26 3
end the learning period, a post-test is given to find 30 S-30 25 40 15
out the difference of achievement scores between the
pre-test and post-test result. 31 S-31 14 42 28
32 S-32 14 28 14
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS 33 S-33 30 16
Finding Total 687 1,143 476
The data were collected from students pre-test
and post-test of both classes. The data which is
obtained is described into two tables. The table 4.1
showed the students’ score and achievement in Based on the result of the data above, it can be
experiment class and the table 4.2 showed the concluded that the total score of pretest is 687.
students’ score and achievement in control class. Meanwhile the result of the total score of posttest is
1143 and the result of gain scores is 476. It means
1. Data Table that the student’s score have increasing after they got
a. Experimental Group the treatment by using jigsaw technique.
Table 4.1 b. Control Group
Pretest, Posttest, and Gain Table 4.2
No Name Pretest Posttest Gain
Pretest, Posttest and gain
1 S-1 14 30 16
2 S-2 29 40 11 No Name Pretest Posttest Gain
3 S-3 38 38 0 1 S-1 27 29 2
4 S-4 15 26 11 2 S-2 21 33 12
5 S-5 14 29 15 3 S-3 17 42 25
6 S-6 14 42 28 4 S-4 26 40 14
7 S-7 25 28 3 5 S-5 27 31 4
8 S-8 14 35 21 6 S-6 16 28 12
9 S-9 25 28 3 7 S-7 25 33 8
10 S-10 14 40 26 8 S-8 25 27 2
11 S-11 27 25 2 9 S-9 25 23 2
12 S-12 14 42 28 10 S-10 27 36 9
13 S-13 15 36 21 11 S-11 26 29 3

3
 12 S-12 28 23 5 nilai experiment ,250 32 ,000
13 S-13 14 35 21 control ,191 33 ,004
14 S-14 25 30 5 a. Lilliefors Significance Correction
Based on Table 4.3 it can be seen that the
15 S-15 13 25 12
significant value of the control class is 0,04 less than
16 S-16 27 35 8 0.05, which means that Ho is rejected and the class is
17 S-17 15 35 20 not normal. And the significant value of the
18 S-18 26 30 4 experimental class was 0:00 less than 0.05 means that
Ho is accepted and grade distribution is not normal.
19 S-19 14 24 10
So that the pretest results data control class and
20 S-20 23 23 0 experimental class is not normal, then the next will
21 S-21 14 40 26 be done using the nonparametric statistical test
22 S-22 17 26 9
Mann-Whitney test for homogeneity test requirements
of both classes must be normally distributed.
23 S-23 17 33 16
24 S-24 21 35 14 b. The average similarity Test
25 S-25 27 30 3
Because the control class is not normal then
continued with the nonparametric Mann-Whithey test.
26 S-26 23 30 7
The hypothesis was stated as follows:
27 S-27 15 28 13 Ho= the scores of the experimental and the
28 S-28 14 23 9 control groups are normally distributed.
Ha= the scores of the experimental and the
29 S-29 24 25 1
control group are normally distribted.
30 S-30 14 30 16
31 S-31 14 26 12 Table 4.4
32 S-32 15 36 21 Test Statistics NonParametrik Mann- Whitney U
Nilai
33 S-33 25 10
Mann-Whitney 465.000
Total 677 998 335 Asymp.sig (2 tailed) ,403

Based on table 4.4 can be seen that asymp.sig (

Based on the result of the data above, it can be 2-tailed ) test Mann-Whitney is o.403 .Value
concluded that the total score of pretest was 677. signifikansinya more than 0.05 so Ho accepted .This
Meanwhile the result of the total score of posttest was means there is no difference significance between
998 and the result of gain scores was 335. There was grade experimentation and class control .
an improvement in their writing scores it is still lower
if we compare with the experimental group. 3. Posttest Data Analysis
2. Data Statistic The posttest was compared after the students in
a. The Normalitas Distribution of Pretest both groups got some treatments to improve their
ability in writing skill. The procedure of posttest data
Normality test is done on the data pretest analysis was quite similar with the pretest data
control class and experimental class with the help of analysis. It was started by testing the normality, the
software SPSS 22.0 for Windows. Test for normality variance of homogeneity, and the independent of t-
using Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. Formulation of test. However, it was different from the pretest data
hypotheses to test for normality as follows: analysis; the data in posttest should have calculated
Ho: Score pretest Normal distribution the effect size. Furthermore group which was given
Hi: Score pretest not Normal distribution the treatments and the control group which was
A significance level of 5%, with the testing taught by conventional teaching method were
criteria are as follows: different. In addition, the questions of posttest ere
Table 4.3 similar with the questions of pretest. The following
Tests of Normality table shows the students’ posttest scores.

a. Normality Distribution Test

Kolmogorov-Smirnova
kelas Statistic df Sig.
4
 The analysis of normality test in posttest score b. T-test Computation on Post-Test
was the same as the analysis of normality test in
pretest scores. It used kolmogorov-Smirnov test at The way in testing the independent t-test on
level of significance 0.05. the hypothesis was stated posttest was the same as the pretest. As the previous
as follows: tests, t-test was also started by setting the level of
significance 0.05 and starting the hypothesis as
Ho= the scores of the experimental and the follows:
control groups are normally distributed.
Ha= the scores of the experimental and the Ho= there are no significant differences between the
control group are normally distribted. pretest mean of the experimental and the
control groups.
Table 4.5 Hi= There are significant differences between the
Tests of Normality pretest mean of the experimental and
Tests of Normality the control groups
Kolmogorov-
Smirnova From the data above, the result of with
Kelas Statistic df Sig.
significant confidence 95% is 3,214. It means that
Sig (2 tailed test) 0.002 is smaller than 0.05, it can be
nilai experiment ,211 32 ,001
concluded that the difference between two groups of
control ,124 33 ,200*
the experimental group and control group is
Based on Table 4.2 it can be seen that the significant dofferent, in other words, the alternative
significant value of the control class is 0,200 less hypothesis (Ha) is accepted and Null Hypothesis
than 0.05, which means that Ho is rejected and the (Ho) is rejected.
class is normal. And the significant value of the
experimental class was 0:001 less than 0.05 means Discussion
that Ho is accepted and grade distribution is not 1. Discussion of the Pretest Score Analysis
normal. So that the pretest results data control class The pretest data analysis was aimed at finding
and experimental class is not normal, then the next out the initial students’ writing abilities and to
will be done using the nonparametric statistical test investigate the equivalent of both experimental and
Mann-Whitney test for homogeneity test requirements control group in their scores. Writing ability in this
of both classes must be normally distributed. study refers to write procedural text. Based on
statistical computation of pretest score for both
c. The average similarity Test experimental and control group using SPSS 22.0 for
Because the control class is not normal then windows, it can be seen that distributions of
continued with the nonparametric Mann-Whithey test. experimental and control groups scores on pretest
The hypothesis was stated as follows: were is not normal. besides, the variance of both
groups were then the next will be done using the
Ho= the scores of the experimental and the nonparametric statistical test Mann-Whitney test for
control groups are normally distributed. homogeneity test requirements of both classes must
Ha= the scores of the experimental and the be normally distributed.
control group are normally distribted.
From pretest result above, it was found than the
Table 4.6 scores and variances of both groups were normally
Test Statistics NonParametrik Mann- Whitney U distributed and Nonparametric Mann-Whitney
because those group have not received any
Nilai treatments. Besides, t-test computation showed that
Mann-Whitney 308,500 both groups have similar ability in writing procedure
Monte Carlo Sig. (1- ,045 text before the treatment. Therefore, it can be
tailed)
concluded that both groups have came ability
especially in procedure text.
Based on table 4.6 can be seen that Monte 2. Discussion Posttest analysis
Carlo Sig. ( 1-tailed ) test Mann-Whitney is 0,045
.Value signifikansinya more than 0.05 so Ho This section discussed findings of posttest
accepted .This means there is no difference analysis. This analysis was done after having
significance between grade experimentation and class conducted some treatments to the experimental
control . group. The posttest was administrated to both
5
experimental and control groups in order to From the result above, it can be concluded that
investigate the use of picture series in teaching picture series is an effective way to improve students
writing procedure test. The result of statistical writing ability as it provides students with knowledge
computation of posttest for both experimental and and five models aspects (genre, register, discourse,
control groups were normally distributed. In addition, grammar and aspects that improve significantly.
it also showed that the variances value of tobe is Besides, this media can be implemented as an
0,200 at p=0,05, with df-65. Based on the score alternative method in teaching writing, particularly
obtained. Ho was rejected, and it was concluded that procedure text for seventh grades of junior high
the mean of control group ( 32.07) was significantly school.
lower than experimental group than the mean of
experimental group ( 32.14), t(65), p<0.05. B. Recommendations
Therefore, the experimental and control group were
different in terms of their writing abilities after the The first is the use of picture series in teaching
treatment. Besides, t test computation showed that writing at junior high school seems to be statistically
both groups did not have similar ability in writing effective in some ways. The use of this media offers
procedural text after the treatment. Therefore, both improvements to students writing as well as their
group had different ability after the treatments. motivation to learning writing. Therefore, it can be
concluded that the use of this media offers
The objective of this research is to examine improvements to students writing as well as their
whether or not picture series can improve students’ motivation to learning writing. Therefore, it can be
writing ability in procedure text. Based on the table concluded that picture series can be used as an
above, the mean of the experimental group class 6,46 alternative media, in some ways, to development of
and control group class is 3,38 . It means that the students' writing ability.
mean of the experimental group class was bigger than
mean of the contol group class. In addition the Furthermore, it also suggested that the research
students’ look more active after being through picture should be ready for unexpected thing which would
series, during teaching and learning activity the come up during the research. It should be anticipated
students are enthusiastic, and the class can have fun. by preparing back-up plan in case something goes
The t-observed is bigger than the t-table and with wrong.
Sig(2 tailed test) is 0.002 is smaller than 0.005, the The second is for the further researcher, it is
differences between two group of the experimental important to enrich information about main
group and the control group is significant different, it instrument which use in the study. In this case picture
can be concluded that the hypothesis (Ha) is CTL series as teaching media. hence. the researcher
approach with picture series can improve students suggested to conduct the use of picture series in
writing procedure text was accepted. teaching other skills in different levels better with
longer periods of time to find out better and detailed
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMEDATIONS
A. Conclusions result.
In relation to research question number one, the Bibliography
findings of this study showed that the media was
proved to be effective in improving students writing Brown,H. D. 2003. Language Assessment:
procedural text. The statistical computation showed principles and classroom Practice.
that there were significant difference in the California. Pearson Education.
achievement between the experimental group that Coolidge, L. F. (2000). Statistic a gentle introduction.
was given picture series and the control group that Great Britain. The Cromwell Press Ltd.
was given a single picture. It can be seen in the value Trowbridge. Wiltshire
of t-test calculated which showed tobt is 3.214 it was Harmer, J. 2004. How to Teach Writing. Essex:
higher than the value of tcrit was 2.000 at p=0,05, Pearson Education Limited.
with df = 65. For than reason, the null hypothesis was Raimes, 1983. Media in Teaching Writing.
rejected. Based on the finding, it can be concluded Research Paper by Eni Yusnita
that picture series improved students writing of Levine, M.D.& David, S.S. (2005). Even You Can
procedural text significantly. Although it also showed Learn Statistic. A Guide for Everyone
taht single picture could also improve the students’ Who Has Ever Been Afraid of
writing of procedural text, the improvement was not Statistic. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson
significant. Prentice Hall

6
7