Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorAriani, Musli
dc.contributor.advisorSantihastuti, Asih
dc.contributor.authorNuryanto, Ivan
dc.date.accessioned2015-12-08T04:53:02Z
dc.date.available2015-12-08T04:53:02Z
dc.date.issued2015-12-08
dc.identifier.nim080210491055
dc.identifier.urihttp://repository.unej.ac.id/handle/123456789/67134
dc.description.abstractBased on the preliminary study and observation that was done on January, 5th 2015, most of the X MIA 1 students of MAN 1 Jember produced some errors dealing with the writing of recount text especially in grammar, vocabulary, mechanics, content, and organization. The English teacher said that the students often make errors in their writing. It was because most of the students write by translating Indonesian sentences into English not by transferring the meaning from Indonesian into English. This final project primarily deals with descriptive study. It was describe the X MIA 1 students’ ability in writing recount text at MAN 1 Jember in the 2014/2015 academic year. This research used a descriptive approach to describe the students’ writing ability of the X MIA 1 students of MAN 1 Jember in the 2014/2015 academic year in their recount text writing. It was chosen to answer the research problem and the research objective of this research. They were” How was the X MIA 1 students’ ability in writing recount text at MAN 1 Jember in the 2014/2015 academic year?” and “To describe the X MIA 1 students’ ability in writing recount text at MAN 1 Jember in the 2014/2015 academic year.” The students’ writing was analyzed. The writing ability was classified into five aspects. They were content, organization, grammar, vocabulary and mechanic. The students’ writing recount text was assessed by using an analytical scoring rubric which required the scorers to give score for each writing aspect. By assessing the students’ writing, it was obtained the data in the form of scores. All those scores were analyzed by using the percentage formula to get the students’ percentage in writing a recount text. By finding out the students’ percentage in writing recount text, the researcher was able to classify or interpret the students’ ability in writing recount text into some classifications based on the score levels interpretation. The purpose of the classifying or interpreting the students’ mean score in writing a recount text was to know the students’ ability in writing recount text whether it was excellent, good, fair, poor, or failed. The result showed that the X MIA 1 students’ writing recount that 3 students or (10%) were categorized as excellent, 15 students or (52%) were categorized as good, 11 students or (38%) were categorized as fair, and there was no student or (0%) that got the classification in poor even in failed category. In the aspect of content, it could be reported that 3 students or (2%) were categorized as excellent, 15 students or (10%) were categorized as good, 11 students or (8%) were categorized as fair, and there was no student or (0%) that got score in poor even failed category. Furthermore, in the aspect of organization, it could be reported that 21 students or (14%) were categorized as good, 7 students or (5%) were categorized as fair, 1 student or (1%) was categorized as poor, and there was no student or (0%) that got score in excellent even failed category. Then, in the aspect of grammar, it could be reported that 3 students or (2%) were categorized as excellent, 9 students or (6%) were categorized as good, 11 students or (8%) were categorized as fair, 6 students or (4%) were categorized as poor, and there was no student or (0%) that got score in failed category. Next, in the aspect of vocabulary, it could be reported that 4 students or (3%) were categorized as excellent, 16 students or (11%) were categorized as good, 6 students or (4%) were categorized as fair, 3 students or (2%) were categorized as poor, and there was no student or (0%) that got score in failed category. The last, in the aspect of mechanic, it could be reported that 10 students or (7%) were categorized as excellent, 12 students or (8%) were categorized as good, 5 students or (3%) were categorized as fair, and there was 1 student or (1%) was categorized as poor and also there was 1 student or (1%) that got score in failed category. Therefore, it can be said that teaching learning process in writing recount text was satisfying.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.subjectRecount Texten_US
dc.subjectA Descriptive Studyen_US
dc.titleA DESCRIPTIVE STUDY ON THE X MIA 1 STUDENTS’ ABILITY IN WRITING RECOUNT TEXT AT MAN 1 JEMBER IN THE 2014/2015 ACADEMIC YEARen_US
dc.typeUndergraduat Thesisen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record