Putri Anggraeni, et al / Journal of English Language Teaching 6 (1) (2017) 176 ELT FORUM 6 (2) (2017) Journal of English Language Teaching http://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/elt GROUP GRID AND ROUNDTABLE FOR TEACHING WRITING OF DESCRIPTIVE TEXT Silvia Urunami, Dwi Anggani Linggar Bharati, Abdurrachman Faridi  English Department, Faculty of Languages and Arts, Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia Article Info ________________ Article History: Received in October 2017 Approved in November 2017 Published in December 2017 ________________ Keywords: writing, quasi- experimental research, group grid and round table. ____________________ Abstract ___________________________________________________________________ This paper is based on a research aiming to describe the effectiveness of Group Grid and Round Table technique in teaching writing descriptive text. By using a quasi-experimental design, the research involves the tenth grade students of SMA Taruna Nusantara Magelang in the academic year of 2016/2017. In this case, the experimental group is X IA 12 and the control group is X IA 10. The result shows that the mean score of the experimental group increases from 69.15 to 79.34 after several treatments applying the strategy. The t-test computation reveals that there is a significant difference between the two groups. It is proven by the tvalue (2.844) which is higher than the ttable (1.998). In addition, a questionnaire is administered to know the effect of implementing the technique to the students. The analysis shows that 59.37% of the students agree that the implementation of the strategy assists their comprehension and 31.25% of them even strongly agree towards the statement. Therefore, Group Grid and Round Table technique is proven an effective strategy in teaching writing descriptive text. © 2017 Universitas Negeri Semarang  Correspondent Address: ISSN 2252-6706 B3 Building FBS Unnes Sekaran, Gunungpati, Semarang, 50229 E-mail: unnes_english@yahoo.com S. Urunami & D. Anggani Linggar Bharati & A. Faridi/ Journal of English Language Teaching 6 (2) (2017) 177 INTRODUCTION Writing is one of the ways of people to communicate to each other for expressing their thinking and feeling. Writing is unnatural act like speaking. Writing needs more efforts than speaking does. Writing needs hard effort to dig and manage the ideas which are from the writer’s mind and pour it into written form effectively so it will be readable. So, writing is one of the four skills which is considered difficult to be mastered. According to Paul (2003:96), “writing is generally as the most difficult of the four skills”. Besides, Richard and Renandya (2010: 303) stated, writing can be said as the most difficult skill among the four skills; listening, speaking, reading, and writing. Seow (in Richards and Renandya 2010:304) states that “Writing consists of four basic stages; planning, drafting, revising, and editing. Three other stages could be inserted after the drafting stage; these are responding, evaluating and post-writing.” It means that writing is not an instant activity, it cannot be acquired easily. Hence, it needs hard effort to master it. To improve this skill students need to do a lot of practices by using some steps/ stages. Furthermore, teacher needs hard effort to teach writing because it requires many aspects in order to make students master the writing skill. Therefore, teaching writing is not an easy job to do. In Indonesia, English is used as a foreign language. English is taught as a compulsory subject in junior and senior high schools which becomes one of the requirement subjects that stated in the national examination. The objective of teaching English is to enable students to communicate both orally and in written form. Meanwhile teaching and learning English as a foreign language is not an easy thing to do. As a matter of fact, the process of teaching and learning are commonly still using traditional method such as lecturing so that the achievement of the students are still low. Moreover, by applying the new curriculum of 2013 students have to think deeply to succeed in doing scientific approach. Of course, in doing so they face a lot of problems. Among the four skills, one of the problems is in writing problem. Students are not able to produce the correct written product in every genre of text because they have to consider many aspects. The aspects are grammar, generic structure, and lexicogrammatical order. Sometimes students also find difficulties with the sentence structure and how the sentences are linked together and sequences. Based on my observation at SMA Taruna Nusantara Mangelang, I found out that the students are still confused to write many kinds of genre which they have to master. As we know each genre has different grammar, generic structure, and lexicogrammatical order. The students have to write according the type of genre, so it goes without saying that they have to memorize all of them. Especially, in writing descriptive text, some students said it was one of the easiest texts, however they could not write it well and differentiate it from report text. They were confused to find a key word in each sentence. In addition, they were lack of vocabulary in a certain register. I can say that they felt difficult even to write descriptive text which they have got in Junior High School. As the mastery of descriptive text is one of the final exam’s requirements, the problem of understanding this text needs to get extra attention. Furthermore, it is clearly stated in the 2013 curriculum the students have to master writing skill of descrptive text. Considering the importance of mastering writing skill to produce descriptive text, the teacher should improve the teaching of writing especially in teaching descriptive text. One of the ways to improve it is that the teacher can use an interesting and succesful method. The method is called Cooperative Learning Method. Cooperative learning is a teaching method that offers “principles and techniques for helping students work together more effectively” (Jacobs, Power, & Loh, 2002, p. ix). In other words, cooperative learning is much more than just putting students together in groups and asking them to work together. Instead, cooperative learning principles help us understand what is involved in helping groups succeed, and cooperative learning techniques embody those principles in an attempt to provide structure for student interaction (Baloche, 1998, Johnson & Johnson, 1999). I S. Urunami & D. Anggani Linggar Bharati & A. Faridi/ Journal of English Language Teaching 6 (2) (2017) 178 also find many benefits based on the reasearch done by the experts, they promote student learning and academic achievement, increase student retention, enhance student satisfaction with their learning experience, help students develop skills in oral communication, develop student’s social skills, promote student self-esteem, and help to promote positive race relations. As Kagan states in his book, there are so many techniques that can be used by teachers in teaching and learning process, especially in writing. Two of them are group grid and round table techniques. In the study, I used the combination of those two techniques. First group grid, in applying this technique, students are divided into some groups. Each group consists of four-five students. The teacher gives each group an envelope which consists of many pictures. The students are asked to clasify each picture into some categories in a limited time. Then, both teacher and students discuss it together. The group that get many correct items will be given a reward from the teacher. Second, round table tecnique, the students are divided into some groups. Each group consists of four-five students. Each person writes one idea for an issue or task and then passes their paper to the person on the right. The paper circulates around the entire group at least once. Each time a person receives the paper, they should write a different task. Then, whole class discussion should follow. Therefore, all students will participate in teaching learning process. In teaching writing, based on Harmer (2004:41) teachers have a number of important tasks to do when helping students to become better writer. The tasks which teachers have to do before, during, and after student writing are the following: 1. Demonstrating Teachers have to be able to explain the text specifically. Teachers have to make the students know the layout of the text and language used in a certain text. 2. Motivating and provoking The teachers help students to get the ideas when the students get stuck in writing. It is better if the teachers prepare amusing and engaging ways in teaching and learning process so can get the students’ involvement in writing task. For example, students can be asked to do the reassemble jumbled texts on the board. Sometimes, teachers can give them the words to start writing. 3. Supporting Students need a lot of help and reassurance when they are writing, both with ideas and how to carry them out. Teachers need to support the students when they are writing in class, always available for them, and prepare to help students overcome difficulties. 4. Responding In order to respond students’ writing, the teachers may give comments or suggestion for its improvement. It is better to react to what they have said rather than filling their work full of correction symbols. 5. Evaluating Teachers indicate where students work well and where they made mistakes, and of course give award for them who work well. Teachers should highlight the students’ error and try to put them right before handing back the marked scripts to the students. According to Anderson and Anderson (1997: 86), descriptive text is included in information reports, an information report usually contains facts about the subject, a description and information on its parts, behaviour, and qualities. “This kind of paragraph is used to describe a particular person, place, or thing.” (Gerot and Wignell, 1994: 208). They added the generic structure of descriptive text can be defined as identification and description. (a) Identification: Identifies phenomenon to be described. (b) Description: Describes parts, qualities, characteristics, etc. Group grid and Round table techniques used in this research were designed for teaching writing descriptive text. Therefore, it is expected that group grid and roundtable are effective and S. Urunami & D. Anggani Linggar Bharati & A. Faridi/ Journal of English Language Teaching 6 (2) (2017) 179 efficient to learn the material, yet it has not been proved by any preliminary study. Therefore, this research is aimed to describe the effectiveness of implementing the technique in teaching writing descriptive text through an experimental research entitled “The Effectiveness of Using Group Grid and Roundtable for Teaching Students’ Writing Skill of Descriptive Text”. METHODOLOGY OF THE RESEARCH Applying Creswell pre- and post-test design, below is the design of this research. Pre- and Post-test Design Time Select CG Pre-test No Treatment Post-test Select EG Pre-test Experimental Treatment Post-test This research was conducted at SMA Taruna Nusantara Magelang in academic year of 2016/2017. The population of this research was 392 tenth grade students of the school in the academic year. Because there were some reasons, the researcher took purposive random sampling of two group. The two groups were X IA 9 and X IPS 7. The experimental group was X IPS 9; while, the control group was X IPA 7. There were two kinds of instruments used in this research. Those are test and questionnaire. The test used was written test method. The researcher analyzed the data collected from both of the groups’ pre-test and post-test scores. Before the test, the researcher checked the validity and reliability condition of the test. Below was the procedure of analyzing the data; 1. Analyzing try-out test; 2. Analyzing pre-test and post test scores of both groups; 3. Analyzing questionnaire. By calculating the validity and the reliability of the test instrument, the researcher analyzed the condition of the test. After analyzing the try-out test, the pre-test and post-test scores were analyzed, independently. The following were the procedures of analyzing the test scores; 1. Scoring students’ works; 2. Analyzing the normality of the test scores; 3. Analyzing the homogeneity of the test scores; 4. Analyzing the t-test of the test scores; 5. Analyzing the paired-samples t-test of each group scores. Nonetheless, in order to analyze the pre-test and post-test scores, the researcher used the SPSS 18.0. Through the program, the normality, homogeneity, and t-test were analyzed. The significant difference between the two groups’ scores is accepted if the value of Sig.(2-tailed) on the t-test is less than 0.05. in addition, the effectiveness is proven if the t value is more than the t table. Thus, if the prerequisites are fulfilled, it is concluded that there is a significant difference between students who were taught by using Group grid and Round table and those who were taught by using group work brainstorming. In order to support the result of tests, students were given questionnaire in the end of the post- test. It was used to further describe the effect of Group grid and Round table for the experimental group. Through the questionnaire, the researcher intended to analyze the responses of students towards the implementation of Group grid and Round table. The format of the questionnaire was Likert-type items. They were ten question written in Indonesian, it was supposed to gain students’ S. Urunami & D. Anggani Linggar Bharati & A. Faridi/ Journal of English Language Teaching 6 (2) (2017) 180 better understanding in fulfilling the questionnaire. Thus, they could easily share their opinions. The Likert-type items were completed with four likert scales. The four scales were strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree and strongly agree. Each of the scales represented different scores; strongly disagree = 1, disagree = 2, agree = 3, and strongly agree = 4. Next, the questionnaire was administered to describe the effect of implementing the technique towards the students. It supports the result of the test. In this case, the questionnaire was analyzed by calculating the mean scores of each test-item. RESULT AND DISCUSSION Results of the Test Based on the try-out analysis, the test instrument was reliable and valid to be used. Since the test given was based on the syllabus and the result of the try out test showed 0,81, for α = 5% with N = 32. The r-table = 0.344. Since the result values (0,81) were higher than critical value (0.344), the instruments were reliable because it was supported with a clear rubric of scoring scale that used to guide assessors in marking the essay. Due to the try-out analysis, the researcher was confident to use the written test for pre-test and post-test. The achievement of pre-test in the control group was 69.71 and the experimental group was 69.15. The test was aimed to investigate students’ initial level of ability to write descriptive texts. The distribution of test in both group was normal, because the value of Asymp. Sig.(2-tailed) of experimental group was 0.999 and control group was 0.300. Those were higher than 0.05. Meanwhile, the Significance value was 0.295. The hypothesis was accepted if the Significance value was more than 0.05. The pre-test scores of both groups were homogeneous; since the Significance value was higher than 0.05. By using Independent Sample T-test in SPSS 18.0 program, the result showed that the students of both groups were initially in the same level of ability. It was proven by the value of Sig.(2-tailed) which was 0.681. Based on the results; hence, Ha was accepted. Therefore, the initial levels of both groups were equivalent. A satisfying result was achieved on post-test. The post-test was conducted to investigate students’ achievement after treatments were given. On one hand, the mean score of the experimental group was 79.34. On the other hand, the mean score of control groups was 77.40. Both of the mean scores showed that both of the groups were enhanced after the treatments. The distribution test of both group was also normal. It was proven by the value of Asymp. Sig.(2-tailed) of experimental group was 0.688and control group was 0.522. In addition, the significance value showed 0.082 so that the homogeneity for both group was homogeneous. The Independent Sample T-test on the table also showed that there was a significant different between the post-test scores of both groups. It was proven by the result of Sig.(2-tailed) which was 0.003 and 0.004. Those were below than 0.05. Thus, it could be concluded that there was a significant difference on both groups after the treatments. Hence, the implementation of Group Grid and Roundtable Technique in teaching writing descriptive text resulted satisfying result to students’ achievements. In addition, the analysis of Paired-Sample T Test showed that both of the groups were improved after the treatments. For control group improvements from pre-test up to post-test, the result showed that the mean scores difference was 7.68. In addition, the t-value was 5.873 and the Sig.(2-tailed) was 0.000. Ha was accepted since the value of Sig.(2-tailed) was lower than. 0.05. Thus, the scores of post-test was higher than the pre-test. For experimental group improvements from pre-test up to post-test, the result showed that the mean scores difference of the experimental group was 10.18. Moreover, the t-value was 8.042 and the Sig.(2-tailed) was 0.00. Ha was accepted since the value of Sig.(2-tailed) was lower than. 0.05. Thus, there was improvement on the post-test after the treatment. Finally, after completing the procedures of analyzing the result of test, it showed that there was a significant difference on tenth grade students of SMA Taruna Nusantara Magelang in the S. Urunami & D. Anggani Linggar Bharati & A. Faridi/ Journal of English Language Teaching 6 (2) (2017) 181 69.15 79.34 69.71 77.4 60 65 70 75 80 85 PRE-TESTPOST-TEST Experimental Group academic year 2016/2017 who were taught by using Group Grid and Roundtable Technique compared to those who were taught by using group work Brainstorming. Thus, the working hypothesis (Ha) was accepted. In order to make the analysis to be more comprehensible, the comparison result of pre-test and post-test scores would be presented on this chart below: According to the chart, Group Grid and Roundtable technique was proven to be an effective technique for teaching writing descriptive texts. By using the technique, tenth grade students of SMA Taruna Nusantara Magelang in the Academic Year 2016/2017 gained significant achievement in writing descriptive text. Results of the Questionnaire In order to investigate the effect of implementing the technique, several statements were provided in the questionnaire. The students had to give check mark () based on their degree of agreements. The test-items of the questionnaire were about: 1. interest in learning English; 2. interest in writing; 3. difficulty of writing descriptive text; 4. initial interest towards Group Grid and Roundtable technique; 5. feeling easier after applying Group Grid and Roundtable Technique for writing descriptive texts; 6. interest towards Group Grid and Roundtable Techniques for writing descriptive texts; 7. feeling bored after applying Group Grid and Roundtable techniques for writing descriptive texts; 8. effectiveness of applying Group Grid and Roundtable techniques for writing descriptive texts; 9. motivation to write descriptive text after applying Group Grid and Roundtable techniques; and 10. consideration of applying the technique for teaching writing other kinds of text in English. The following is the results of the questionnaire. T e st I te m st ro n g ly d is a g re e d is a g re e a g re e st ro n g ly a g re e M e a n S. Urunami & D. Anggani Linggar Bharati & A. Faridi/ Journal of English Language Teaching 6 (2) (2017) 182 1 0 2 16 14 3.37 2 0 5 23 4 2.96 3 7 14 6 5 2.21 4 0 2 20 10 3.25 5 1 2 19 10 3.37 6 0 2 18 12 3.18 7 10 21 1 8 1.71 8 0 1 27 4 3.09 9 0 7 21 4 2.90 10 0 4 18 10 3.18 The result of the questionnaire showed that more than a half number to the total respondents like English (mean: 3.375), there were thirty of the respondents who like learning English. Furthermore, twenty-three students of the total respondents also like to write in English. Even so, many of them twenty-two (68.75%) students found difficulty in writing especially writing descriptive text in this case. At the beginning of the treatment, students were interested towards Group Grid and Roundtable Techniques for Writing Descriptive text (mean: 3.25). They recognized that the implementation of the technique for writing descriptive texts made them so happy and interesting (agree: 56.25% and strongly agree: 37.5%). After the treatments, twenty-five students were motivated to apply the technique. They argued that the strategy assisted them to write descriptive texts (mean: ). Moreover, Twenty-seven or 84.37% students of the total respondents agreed that it was effective to write descriptive text after applying group grid and roundtable technique. The last item, eighteen students agreed to apply group grid and roundtable technique in writing other kinds of text in English material (56.25%) and ten students were strongly agree to apply it (31.25%). Finally, the result of questionnaire above further elaborated how Group Grid and Roundtable technique gave effects on tenth grade students of SMA Taruna Nusantara Magelang in the academic year 2016/2017 in teaching writing descriptive such as students get more happy and interested in following the material, they also feel easier in writing descriptive text, and they thought the techniques can be applied in other material, especially in writing a text. CONCLUSIONS The first objective of conducting the research was to describe the significant difference between tenth grade students of SMA Taruna Nusantara Magelang in the academic year 2016/2017 who were taught by using Group Grid and Roundtable Technique and those who were taught by using group work brainstorming. By determining the significant difference, the effectiveness of Group Grid and Roundtable Technique could be proven. The research findings from pre-test and post-test mean scores of experimental group showed that it statistically increased from 75.81 to 82.68. Meanwhile, the scores of control group only increased from 76.34 to 79.18. The data were analyzed by using Independent Sample T-Test. The mean scores comparison of both groups in post- test proved that the working hypothesis (Ha) was accepted. The analysis showed that the value of S. Urunami & D. Anggani Linggar Bharati & A. Faridi/ Journal of English Language Teaching 6 (2) (2017) 183 Sig.(2-tailed) (0.03) was less than the value of α = 5% = 0.05. In addition, the data were also investigated by using Paired-Sample T-Test. The analysis showed that both of the groups improved after the treatments. However, the mean scores differences indicated that the experimental group (6.87) improved better than the control group (2.84). Through the mean scores differences, the t- value of the experimental group was 4.785. Meanwhile, the t-value of the control group was 1.858. Based on the results, it can be concluded that there was a significant difference between the two groups, after being given several treatments. Thus, the analysis of significant difference revealed that Group Grid and Round table Technique was effective in teaching writing descriptive texts for the subjects of this research. The second objective, in order to describe further about how the strategy effects on the objects, the researcher gave a questionnaire. The questionnaire was used to recognize the responses of students towards the implementation of Group Grid and Round table Technique. The questionnaire with Likert-type items was delivered to fill in. The analysis showed that 59.37% of the students agreed that the implementation of the strategy assisted them to write descriptive texts. In addition, 31.25% of them even strongly agreed towards the statement. REFERENCES Anderson, M. and Anderson, K. 1997. Text Types in English. South Yarra: Macmillan Education Australia PTY LTD. Baloche, L. (1998). The cooperative classroom: Empowering learning. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Creswell, John W. 2012. Educational Research: Planning, Conducting and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Boston: Pearson. Harmer, J. 2004.How to Teach Writing. New York: Longman Group. Ltd. Jacobs, G. M., Power, M. A., & Loh, W. I. (2002). The teacher's Sourcebook for Cooperative learning: Practical techniques, basic principles, and frequently asked questions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1999). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive and individualistic learning (5Th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon Kagan, S. 1994. Cooperative Learning. San Clemente, CA: Kagan Publishing. Online. Available at www.KaganOnline.com. [Accessed on 12/03/2016] Paul, David. 2003. Teaching English to Children in Asia. Hong Kong: Longman Asia ELT. Richard, Jack C and Renandya, Willy A. 2010. Methodology in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.