




































1 

 

 ELT FORUM 2 (1) (2013) 

 

English Language Teaching Forum 
 

http://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/elt 

 

 

THE USE OF BLOG AS A MEDIUM TO IMPROVE STUDENTS` SKILL IN 

WRITING HORTATORY EXPOSITION  

A Classroom Action Research at the Eleventh Grade Students of SMAN 12 

Semarang 

 

Maulina Nur Chikmahwati 

 

Department of English, Faculty Language and Arts, Semarang State University, Indonesia 

Info Artikel 

________________ 
SejarahArtikel: 

DiterimaJanuari 2013 

DisetujuiFebruari 2013 

DipublikasikanJuni 2013 

________________ 
Keywords: 

blog, hortatory exposition, 

writing skill 

____________________ 

Abstract 
___________________________________________________________________ 

The purposes of this study are to investigate students’ problems in writing hortatory exposition, to 

explain why students have problems in writing hortatory exposition, and to find out how well does 

blog contribute in improving students’ mastery of writing hortatory exposition In constructing this 

study, the writer collected data using a classroom action research, which was carried out through 

four activities. The activities consisted of planning, acting, observing and reflecting. The subjects of 

this study were 37 students of year eleven of SMA NEGERI 12 SEMARANG in the academic 

year of 2011/2012. The action was done through teaching learning process. All of the teaching 

learning processes were presented by the help of blog.The data was analyzed qualitatively, to find 

the answers. Based on the data analysis from each activity, it can be seen that the students’ 

problems in writing hortatory exposition text were the difficulty in drawing contents, organizing 

text, using the language and vocabulary, and mastering the mechanics. They were caused by the 

lack of students’ attention, enthusiasm, activeness in asking answering questions and activeness in 

doing the task given by the teacher. It was found that there was a significant difference of the 

students’ skill in writing hortatory exposition from the pre-test, first cycle and second cycle. After 

the treatments, the students’ achievement in writing hortatory exposition text was improved. 

Therefore, using blog as a medium was effective to improve the students’ writing skill in hortatory 

exposition text and very beneficial for the students in order to facilitate them in learning 

English.To explore the advantages of using blog in teaching learning process, in the future study, 

not only the teachers, but also the students are also recommended to possess blog accounts. By 

possessing their own blog accounts, students are supposed to compose the blog posts and explore the 

references of their writings by themselves. It also abridges the students to share their writings and 

testimonials to the others’ blogs. In this way, the frequency of the communication practice and 

word building gradually increases that is expected to be able to improve students’ writing skill, 

especially in hortatory exposition text, and generally in all other text types. 

© 2013UniversitasNegeri Semarang 

 
Alamatkorespondensi:  

GedungB3Lantai3 FBSUnnes 

KampusSekaran, Gunungpati, Semarang, 50229 

   E-mail: maulina101@gmail.com 

 

 

 

ISSN 2252-6706 

 

 

 

 

 



 

Maulina Nur Chikmahwati / Journal of English Language Teaching 2 (1) (2013) 

2 

 

INTRODUCTION 

 

Since English has been determined as the 

international language of communication by 

The United Nations in 1948, every nations 

including Indonesia, took the language into the 

school curriculum. In Indonesia, English has 

begun to be taught in junior high school, even in 

some elementary school English has been taught 

as a local subject. The condition shows that 

Indonesia takes English seriously to be learnt. 

From time to time, English is taught in 

classical method using classical media as books, 

while in fact there exists other innovative 

possible effective media that the technology 

offers. According to Maddux and Johnson 

(2005:121), using technology to foster innovative 

teaching and learning, or type II technology 

applications, should be a priority for all 

educators. Nowadays, children have started to 

be acquainted with technology, in this matter is 

internet, since their childhood. As the 

Indonesian students’ internet access has 

improved significantly, it is the time for the 

teachers to keep in balance themselves with the 

students’ interest and ability in accessing the 

internet.  

One of the most famous internet’s features 

is blog. Blog has been well received in education 

owing to its multimedia features, interactivity, 

and ability to support  cooperative  and  

autonomous   learning.  The strong 

interconnectedness between bloggers and readers 

makes blog a powerful tool for global 

conversation. Bloggers can read other blogs, link 

to them, and reference them in their own blogs. 

The worldwide blog audience enables students 

to interact with and have their work viewed by 

others outside the classroom. Blog can benefit 

students to improve their mastery in learning 

English. In addition, it will also be a good 

initiative for the teachers to enrich their teaching 

variations. 

In teaching-learning of English, the skills 

that have to be mastered are listening, speaking, 

reading and writing. The fact proves that writing 

is one of the language skills that is a little bit 

harder to be mastered than the other skills. It 

needs the combination of ideas that is gotten 

from listening, reading, thinking and imagining. 

In this study, writing is more emphasized than 

the others. The result of the writing can be 

classified into book, novel, journal, short story, 

poem, short text, etc. Short text is a kind of text 

type that is used in Indonesia curriculum, text-

based curriculum. 

There are many genres of short texts, 

among others are narrative, recount, news item, 

anecdote, spoof, hortatory exposition, and 

analytical exposition. Hortatory exposition is 

one of text type which is taught in senior high 

school. The writer chooses hortatory exposition 

as the writing material because as stated in 

school curriculum, it is one of the genres that 

must be learnt by students in senior high school. 

In addition, hortatory exposition is considered 

as a hard subject since it is the newest in English 

text genres. Not to mention, the various fitures 

of blog support the character of the medium that 

can be used to teach writing hortatory exposition 

text. 

Nowadays ICT (Information and 

Communication Technology) has significantly 

improved, as technology has a crucial role in 

people’s life. Therefore, making use of the 

technology, in this case is blog, to improve 

students’ writing skill in hortatory exposition is 

very suggestable. Thus, blogs with all their 

comprehensiveness are easy to be accessed by 

people, especially high school students who have 

advanced skill in IT (Information and 

Technology). The comprehensiveness of blog 

facilities can be a good point for the teacher to 

make the lesson as creative as possible. 

Specifically the research questions posed 

in this study are What are the students’ problems in 

writing hortatory exposition?, Why do the students 

have problems in writing hortatory exposition?, How 

well does blog contribute in improving students’ skill 

in writing hortatory exposition? Therefore, the main 

purposes of this research are to investigate 

students’ problems in writing hortatory 

exposition, to explain why students have 

problems in writing hortatory exposition, to find 

out how well does blog contribute in improving 

students’ skill in writing hortatory exposition. 



 

Maulina Nur Chikmahwati / Journal of English Language Teaching 2 (1) (2013) 

3 

 

By conducting this research, the writer 

expects that the result of this study will 

theoretically provide the reader, especially 

English department students, with a new 

understanding about using blog in improving the 

students’ skill in writing hortatory exposition 

and practically give the English teacher some 

kinds of understanding or reflection that can be 

used as the basic idea in designing the teaching 

and learning process. 

 

METHOD 

 

In this study, the writer chose the eleventh 

grade students of SMA Negeri 12 Semarang in 

the academic year of 2011/2012 as the subject of 

the study. The writer chose the eleventh grade 

because based on the curriculum, hortatory 

exposition is taught to this grade. In SMA 

Negeri 12 Semarang, there were seven classes of 

the eleventh grade, three science classes, three 

social classes and one language class. Firstly, the 

writer wrote the entire eleventh grade classes in 

some pieces of paper. Then, randomly, the 

writer took a piece of paper that determined as 

the sample. The students of XI Social 3 were 

chosen. 

This action research was conducted in 

collaboration between the teacher and the 

researcher. The researcher created the lesson 

plan and pre-test items to give to the students in 

the pre-test. Then the researcher assessed the 

students’ pre-test works then analyzed them.  

Afterwards, the researcher created the 

lesson plans, the blog medium, test items, and 

observation note, for the first cycle. After 

analyzing the first cycle results, the researcher 

created the next lesson plan,  blog  medium,  

test-items,  observation  note,  and  

questionnaire  to conduct the second cycle. In 

doing the research, the researcher gave the 

treatments by herself with the help of the 

classroom English teacher and her colleague. 

In this study, to collect the data, the 

researcher used three instruments. The 

instruments were tests, questionnaires, and 

observation notes. 

 

RESULT AND DISCUSSION 

Pre-test 

The pre-test was conducted by the 

researcher at the beginning of the study. The 

purpose of giving the pre-test was to check the 

students’ skill in writing hortatory exposition 

based on five categories given. Those were: 

content, organization, vocabulary, language use 

and mechanics. 

On April 25th 2012, the pre-test was taken 

by 37 students of XI Social 3 class. In this 

activity the researcher at first asked the students 

whether they have ever made a speech text and/ 

or given a speech or not. The students replied, 

“No,  

we haven’t/ we only ever listened to speeches!” 

The researcher then showed the students a 

hortatory exposition text entitled “Watch Your 

Students While Watching Television” and asked 

whether they were familiar with the text or not 

and then the students replied, “Yes.”  

Therefore, the researcher gave a brief 

review about hortatory exposition to the 

students using the earlier text as the example.  

Afterwards, the researcher showed four 

topics entitled:  

1) “Sex education course should be taught in 

high school”,  

2) “Dying hair should/should not be banned in 

high school”,  

3) “Stop eating junk food”, and  

4) “Study tour is/is not important for high 

school students”.  

After they finished writing the hortatory 

exposition text, the students submitted their 

works.  The result of the students’ works can be 

seen in table 4.1 below. 

From the pre-test result, it was found that 

the students problems were all the five 

competences, those were: content, organization, 

vocabulary, language use, and mechanics.  

In term of content, the students’ average 

pre-test was “fair to poor”. It was shown by the 

fact that most of the students’ work contents 

were still too general and/or incoherent. The 

students’ work showed that they had limited 

subject knowledge and had not enough 

development of the topic. 



 

Maulina Nur Chikmahwati / Journal of English Language Teaching 2 (1) (2013) 

4 

 

In term of organization, the students’ 

average pre-test was “fair to poor” too.  It was 

shown by the fact that the students’ ideas were 

not clear and/or disconnected though they had 

followed the generic structure and logical order 

of hortatory exposition text.  

In term of vocabulary, the students’ 

average pre-test was considered as “fair to poor” 

too. It was shown by the fact that the students 

made frequent errors in words choice and/or 

usage. Some of the words’ meanings were 

confused though they had enough range of 

words and used varied adjectives. 

In term of language use, it was also 

considered as “fair to poor”. the students’ made 

frequent errors and the meanings were often 

confusing. Though their language was effective 

but the construction was still simple. 

In term of mechanics, the average pre-test 

score was considered as “fair to poor” since the 

students made numerous mistakes that make 

sentences choppy. 

For this reason, the writer analyzed the 

observation note of the pre-test first to find the 

causes of the students’ problems before 

conducting the action to improve students’ skill 

in writing hortatory exposition using blog as the 

medium. 

Pre-test Observation Note 

The observation notes were analyzed to 

explain why students have problems in writing 

hortatory exposition.  

The notes were made in the pre-test, first 

cycle and second cycle to explain why the 

students had the problem in writing hortatory 

exposition.  

During the pre-test the writer and 

colleague did the observation. The result of 

observation in the pre-test can be seen in table 

4.2 below. 

Based on the result, it was found that the 

causes of the students having problem in writing 

hortatory exposition were the students’ lack of: 

1) Attention 

Based on the item number 1, more 

students didn’t pay attention to the learning 

process than those who paid attention. They 

were not concentrating in the class, for example: 

they often looked outside of class, got sleepy and 

talked to his/her friends.  

2) Enthusiasm 

Item number 2 also showed that most 

students were not enthusiastic during the 

research conducted, almost half of the students 

were not enough enthusiastic and busy with 

themselves.  

3) Activeness in asking and answering 

questions 

Item number 3 and 4 showed that most of 

the students weren’t active in asking and 

answering questions. They were still shy to ask 

or answer questions.  

4) Activeness in doing the tasks given by 

the teacher  

Item number 5 showed that the students’ 

activeness in doing the tasks given by teacher 

was not good enough. Not enough questions 

they asked to the teacher that made their tasks 

done not satisfying. 

 Using the findings of the pre-test and 

observation note, the researcher then prepared 

the first cycle. 

First Cycle 

The first cycle was conducted in two 

meetings, which were identified as the first and 

second activity. The first activity was conducted 

on April 26th 2012 by 37 students. Since Weblog 

or Blog is an online learning method, the activity 

was conducted in a computer laboratory with 

internet connection. The writer used a computer 

that linked to an LCD screen so the students 

could see each step that the writer explained. 

Moreover, each student sat at his/her own 

computer. All of the computers had direct access 

to the internet. 

The writer introduced the Blog method to 

the students as a start. The writer asked whether 

they had heard of blog or familiar with Blog 

before. Most of the students only knew the basic 

idea of what blog is. They read blogs yet they 

hadn’t ever found one that is used to learn 

English. The writer then introduced the Blog to 

the students. At first, the writer asked the 

students to connect to the internet and open a 

blank web page in the internet. Each step was 

shown clearly from the LCD screen. After the 



 

Maulina Nur Chikmahwati / Journal of English Language Teaching 2 (1) (2013) 

5 

 

students were on the blank page, the writer 

asked them to type a web address namely 

“OscToEnglish.blogspot.com”. Students were 

then on the Blog’s front page. Afterwards, the 

writer told the students to explore the Blog for 

about ten minutes in order to help them become 

familiar with this new medium of 

learning/teaching. Then the writer asked the 

students to click on a blog thread entitled 

“Learning Hortatory Exposition: Cycle 1”. 

Following the introduction, the writer 

then asked them to scroll down the page, which 

led them to the link of the Pre-Activity. In the 

Pre-Activity, the students were recalled to the 

basic definition of hortatory exposition, still 

using the one-on-one communication-like 

method so the students would feel closed to the 

blogger. The writer gave the students about 25 

minutes to read and understand the explanation 

of Hortatory Exposition that could be found in 

Pre-Activity. The writer then walked around the 

class and observed what the students were 

doing. While observing the class, the writer 

noticed that some students were reading the 

explanation very carefully but some others were 

trying to open Twitter, Facebook and games 

online. Then the writer reminded every student 

not to play on Facebook or any other site during 

the class.  

It was continued to Part Two or The 

Whilst Activity which consists of two parts. The 

first one was Whilst Activity Part 1. In this part, 

students were asked to understand a Hortatory 

Exposition text although to answer the questions 

following the text, the writer needed to guide 

them to the expected answers. Students also 

found it hard to understand the meaning of 

some words or phrases so the teacher suggested 

them to open “www.Translate.Google.com” to 

help them figure out the meaning of the words 

or phrases. After given the example of Hortatory 

Exposition text, in the Whilst Activity Part 1, 

the students were asked to read a short dialogue 

as an implementation of Simple Present Tense 

and Present Perfect Tense. Then, they were 

asked to understand the explanation about 

Simple Present Tense and Present Perfect Tense 

following the dialogue independently. 

Afterwards, the students were asked to analyze 

the dialogue about which of sentences use 

Simple Present Tense and Present Perfect Tense.  

The activity then continued to the second 

activity. In this activity, the writer continued 

giving the treatment. The writer asked the 

students to open the Blog the same way that 

they did in the previous meeting. Afterwards, 

the writer asked them to continue to the last 

activity that they did in the previous meeting. 

The students gave positive responses and 

showed that they have understood well what 

they should do. 

It was the Whilst Activity 2 of the 

treatment. In this activity, the students were 

showed a persuasive text and the analysis of it. 

To emphasize the understanding, students were 

given another example of persuasive text that is 

created based on an article in some newspaper. 

The last activity was the Post-Activity in 

which the students were asked to make a group 

of 6 to 7 so there would be 6 groups in the class. 

Then each group was given a case based on a 

newspaper’s article. After reading the article, the 

members of group discussed about it and shared 

their arguments about the topic/case.  

Since there were 6 groups, there would be 

6 different topics/cases to for each group. For 

the group number one, the case is an article 

entitled “IPads replacing textbooks and 

notebooks in local school”. The members should 

share their opinions whether they support the 

idea of replacing textbooks and notebooks to 

Ipads in local school or not. Group two got an 

article from chicagotribune.com entitled “City 

plans free Wi-Fi in all parks, public spaces”. The 

members should discuss their arguments 

whether they agree or disagree with the plan of 

providing free wifi in public parks. Close to the 

students’ life, the group number three got a case 

entitled “Philadelphia's juvenile curfew is 

extended through Labor Day”. Thus they could 

share their opinion about teenager curfew 

policy. An article entitled “Britain's fattest 

woman dies of heart attack after junk food binge 

in hospital bed” was given to group number 

four. Therefore they could think whether they 

would make persuasive speeches supporting or 



 

Maulina Nur Chikmahwati / Journal of English Language Teaching 2 (1) (2013) 

6 

 

opposing the consuming of junk food. The group 

number five got an article entitled “A child 

expelled from school because parents are gay”. 

By understanding this article, students should 

make persuasive speeches about the gay and 

lesbian discrimination among public, whether 

they against the discrimination or else they agree 

with the discrimination. The last but not the 

least, group number six got an article from 

abcnews.go.com entitled “New Jersey Woman 

Sues, Can't Fully Blink After Eyelid Surgery”. 

The students needed to give their opinion and 

arguments about plastic surgery that is being 

more popular in society lately. 

In this activity, the students were allowed 

to open other supporting websites such as 

Google Translate, Wikipedia and any other 

sites. Students were trying hard to make their 

best work since they said it was their first time 

working on the internet.  

Those who finished writing their 

persuasive speech were asked to do the peer 

editing. They were asked to do peer editing their 

friend’s first cycle test. 

In peer editing, the students needed to 

answer these questions. 

1) Is there any thesis paragraph? 

2) What information does your friend 

need to add in his/her thesis? 

3) Is there any argument paragraph? 

4) What information does your friend 

need to add in his/her argument 

paragraph? 

5) Pay attention to the vocabulary. Does 

the vocabulary vary enough? 

6) Give some suggestions to make it better. 

7) Is there any sentence that confuses you? 

8) Write down the confusing sentence. 

9) Is the content clear enough for you? 

Any suggestions? 

10) Is there any grammatical error? 

Mention! 

11) What is your general impression of 

his/her persuasive speech? 

12) a. Strength (what do you like most 

about the speech?) 

13) b. Weaknesses (Give some suggestion 

for your friend’s improvement!) 

The students had to submit their peer 

editing worksheet in the comment box below the 

instruction post.  

Following the peer editing worksheet, the 

writer graded the students’ hortatory exposition 

text and analyzed their errors. Afterwards, the 

writer cumulated the students’ errors and 

analyzes their errors.  

The result of the students’ achievement 

during the first cycle-test can be seen in table 4.3. 

From the first cycle result, it was found 

that the students’ problems were getting better.  

In term of content, the students’ average 

score was “good to average”. It was shown by 

the fact that most of the students’ works showed 

some knowledge of the subject although they 

still had limited development of the topic and 

lacks depth of detail contents. 

In term of organization, the students’ work 

was “good to average”. The finding showed that 

they students had followed the generic structure 

of hortatory exposition text; though their works 

were still loosely organized but the main ideas 

were clear.  The students had followed the 

logical order but it was not completed. 

In term of vocabulary, the students’ 

average score was considered as “good to 

average”. The students had had enough range of 

words, used some adjectives and verbs; made 

occasional errors in word usage; but the 

meaning is clear. 

In term of language use, it was also 

considered as “good to average”. It was shown 

that the students’ use of language had been 

effective although the construction was still 

simple. The errors in agreement and tense were 

seldom too. 

In term of mechanics, the average score 

was considered as “good to average” too. It was 

shown by the finding that the students made 

minor mistakes in mechanic. 

For the findings in pre-test result, the 

researcher the design a better plan for the second 

cycle. 

Second Cycle 

 In the second cycle, the writer 

considered the weaknesses that the writer did in 

the first cycle. Then, the writer did some 



 

Maulina Nur Chikmahwati / Journal of English Language Teaching 2 (1) (2013) 

7 

 

reflections and evaluations to improve the 

teaching learning performance; especially to 

manage the students’ behavior in order to make 

them pay more attention to the lesson’s 

instructions. 

The writer’s evaluations that had been 

practiced in the second cycle included: spoke 

more clearly and slowly in order to make the 

students understand the instructions. After that 

was the shut down access to the online social 

networks such as Facebook, Twitter and Yahoo 

Messenger. So, the second cycle was conducted 

based on those evaluations. Furthermore, the 

writer gave deeper explanation of some 

materials regarding students’ error and mistakes 

in writing the hortatory exposition texts. 

The second cycle also was conducted in 

two meetings, which was the third activity and 

fourth activity. The third activity was conducted 

on Thursday May 3rd 2012. The writer prepared 

some materials to be discussed. 

Following the peer editing worksheet, the 

writer graded the students’ hortatory exposition 

text and analyzed their errors. Moreover, the 

writer created materials related to the students’ 

common mistakes in order to minimalist their 

mistakes. The material was posted in the blog. 

The writer explained the students’ 

common mistakes and gave some advice in 

order to make their work better. The students 

were then given a chance to ask questions. After 

the question-answer session was finished, the 

writer asked the students to repair their 

persuasive text based on that day’s explanation 

and peer editing. The writer told the students to 

finish their work today. Unfortunately some of 

the students could not finish their work on the 

day. Then the teacher held the fourth activity to 

give the students additional time to finish their 

works. 

The fourth activity was an extended 

activity for the students who had not posted 

their persuasive speech. The result of students’ 

achievement in the second cycle can be seen in 

the table 4.5. 

From the second cycle result, it was found 

that the students’ problems got significant 

improvement.  

In term of content, the students’ average 

score was “good to average”. It was shown by 

the fact that most of the students’ works showed 

some knowledge of the subject although they 

still had limited development of the topic and 

lack depth of detail contents. 

In term of organization, the students’ work 

was “good to average”. The finding showed that 

they students had followed the generic structure 

of hortatory exposition text; though their works 

were still loosely organized but the main ideas 

were clear.  The students had followed the 

logical order and it was completed. 

In term of vocabulary, the students’ 

average score was considered as “good to 

average”. The students had had enough range of 

words, used a lot of adjectives and verbs, the 

meaning is clear but made occasional errors in 

word usage. 

In term of language use, it was also 

considered as “good to average”. It was shown 

that the students’ use of language had been 

effective and some of them used complex 

sentence construction. The errors in agreement 

and tense were seldom too. 

In term of mechanics, the average score 

was considered as “good to average” too. It was 

shown by the finding that only the students 

made minor mistakes in mechanic. 

 Considering the finding on cycle two, 

the researcher then decided to end the research. 

Questionnaire 

The questionnaire which consisted of 10 

questions was analyzed to find out how well 

blog had contributed to improve students writing 

skill in hortatory exposition. It had to be 

answered by choosing “yes” or “no” answer. 

The percentage result of the questionnaire can be 

seen in the table 4.7. 

The questionnaire number one showed 

that most of the students (29) had difficulty in 

learning hortatory exposition text before the 

treatment given. Based on the questionnaire 

number two, there were 28 students also had the 

difficulty in determining the elements of 

hortatory exposition text. The questionnaire 

number three showed that there were 32 

students thought that writing hortatory 



 

Maulina Nur Chikmahwati / Journal of English Language Teaching 2 (1) (2013) 

8 

 

exposition was hard. Questionnaire number four 

showed that before the treatments given, most of 

the students (22) hadn’t known blog. 

Questionnaire number five showed that 32 

students thought that there was a difference in 

mastering hortatory exposition text writing. 

Based on questionnaire number six, there were 

36 students liked to learn hortatory exposition 

through blog. Also in questionnaire number 

seven, 36 students thought that blog was more 

attractive than the conventional teaching. 

Questionnaire number eight showed that there 

were 30 students were more motivated learning 

hortatory exposition text using blog as the 

medium. Questionnaire number 9 showed that 

the teacher had never used any special 

techniques to teach hortatory exposition text. In 

addition, questionnaire number ten showed that 

34 students wanted this kind of activity to be 

continued. 

 

Table 4.1 The Students’ Pre-test Result 

No. 
Students'  

Code 

Component of Writing Score 
Score 

C O V LU M 

1 A – 01 22 10 11 17 1 61 

2 A – 02 22 14 12 18 2 68 

3 A – 03 22 10 11 17 1 61 

4 A – 04 22 13 11 12 1 59 

5 A – 05 22 14 11 17 1 65 

6 A - 06 15 14 11 12 1 53 

7 A - 07 22 15 12 19 2 70 

8 A - 08 15 14 11 18 2 60 

9 A - 09 16 10 17 18 1 62 

10 A - 10 22 15 12 18 2 69 

11 A - 11 22 15 11 17 2 67 

12 A - 12 16 10 11 17 1 55 

13 A - 13 22 13 17 16 2 70 

14 A - 14 17 11 9 16 1 54 

15 A - 15 22 15 15 19 2 73 

16 A - 16 21 14 12 20 1 68 

17 A - 17 22 15 12 18 2 69 

18 A - 18 22 15 11 17 2 67 

19 A - 19 22 16 16 18 2 74 

20 A - 20 22 14 12 15 2 65 

21 A - 21 16 9 11 17 1 54 

22 A - 22 22 15 11 17 2 67 

23 A - 23 22 15 12 18 2 69 

24 A - 24 21 14 12 15 2 64 

25 A - 25 22 15 11 17 2 67 

26 A - 26 22 14 17 17 2 72 

27 A - 27 22 14 12 21 2 71 

28 A - 28 22 10 11 21 2 66 

29 A – 29 16 9 11 17 1 54 

30 A – 30 16 13 7 12 1 49 

31 A – 31 22 14 12 18 2 68 

32 A – 32 22 15 12 18 2 69 

33 A – 33 16 14 7 15 1 53 

34 A – 34 22 15 11 17 2 67 

35 A – 35 22 15 11 17 2 67 

36 A – 36 22 15 11 17 2 67 

37 A – 37 17 14 11 18 2 62 

∑ 752 497 435 631 61 2376 

MEAN 20.32 13.43 11.76 17.05 1.65 64.22 



 

Maulina Nur Chikmahwati / Journal of English Language Teaching 2 (1) (2013) 

9 

 

 

Where : 

C  = Content 

O  = Organization 

V  = Vocabulary 

LU = Language Use 

M = Mechanics 

Table 4.2 The Pre-test Observation Note 

No

. 
Students’ Activities 

Scale 

(Number of Student) Total 

Good Fair Poor 

1. Students’ attention to the teacher 
10  

(27%) 

12 

(32%) 

15  

(40%) 

37 

(100%) 

2. Students’ enthusiasm 
10 

(27%) 

10  

(27%) 

17 

(46%) 

37 

(100%) 

3. 
Students’ activeness in asking 

questions 

2 

(1%) 

10 

(27%) 

25 

(68%) 

37 

(100%) 

4. 
Students’ activeness in answering 

teacher’s questions 

2 

 (1%) 
10 (27%) 

25 

(68%) 

37 

(100%) 

5. 
Students’ activeness in doing the 

tasks given by teacher 

 10 

(27%) 

10 

(27%) 

17 

(46%) 

37 

(100%) 

 

Table 4.3 The First Cycle Test Result 

No. 
Students' 

Code 

Component of Writing Score 
Score 

C O V LU M 

1 A – 01 22 14 12 22 4 74 

2 A – 02 22 18 18 22 4 84 

3 A – 03 26 18 18 23 4 89 

4 A – 04 17 14 12 18 3 64 

5 A – 05 22 14 14 22 2 74 

6 A – 06 22 20 17 22 4 85 

7 A – 07 26 18 18 23 4 89 

8 A – 08 22 17 15 18 3 75 

9 A – 09 22 17 12 20 1 72 

10 A – 10 26 18 17 23 4 88 

11 A – 11 22 17 12 20 4 75 

12 A – 12 20 13 21 14 3 71 

13 A – 13 21 17 15 21 3 77 

14 A – 14 22 16 17 18 1 74 

15 A – 15 26 18 18 23 3 88 

16 A – 16 22 15 18 18 2 75 

17 A – 17 25 13 11 17 1 67 

18 A – 18 19 16 17 18 2 72 

19 A – 19 26 18 18 23 3 88 

20 A – 20 24 17 15 17 3 76 

21 A – 21 22 17 17 21 1 78 



 

Maulina Nur Chikmahwati / Journal of English Language Teaching 2 (1) (2013) 

10 

 

22 A – 22 22 18 17 21 1 79 

23 A – 23 22 17 17 18 1 75 

24 A – 24 24 18 15 17 1 75 

25 A – 25 24 17 17 17 2 77 

26 A – 26 27 18 18 23 5 91 

27 A – 27 24 19 17 22 4 86 

28 A – 28 26 17 17 18 3 81 

29 A – 29 24 17 19 17 3 80 

30 A – 30 23 17 11 17 3 71 

31 A – 31 24 18 17 23 4 86 

32 A – 32 24 18 18 23 4 87 

33 A – 33 24 17 15 17 3 76 

34 A – 34 24 17 17 17 2 77 

35 A – 35 24 17 17 17 3 78 

36 A – 36 24 17 15 17 3 76 

37 A – 37 26 18 18 23 3 88 

∑ 862 625 597 730 104 2918 

MEAN 23.29 16.89 16.13 19.72 2.81 78.86 

 

Table 4.5 The Second Cycle Result 

No. 
Students'  

Code 

Component of Writing Score 
Score 

C O V LU M 

1 A – 01 24 18 12 22 4 80 

2 A – 02 26 18 18 23 4 89 

3 A - 03 27 18 18 23 5 91 

4 A - 04 22 17 15 18 3 75 

5 A - 05 21 17 15 21 3 77 

6 A - 06 26 18 18 23 4 89 

7 A - 07 27 18 19 22 5 91 

8 A - 08 21 17 15 21 3 77 

9 A - 09 22 17 15 18 3 75 

10 A - 10 27 18 18 23 4 90 

11 A - 11 21 17 15 22 4 79 

12 A - 12 24 17 15 17 3 76 

13 A - 13 24 18 12 22 4 80 

14 A - 14 24 18 12 22 4 80 

15 A - 15 27 18 18 23 4 90 

16 A - 16 21 17 15 22 4 79 

17 A - 17 22 15 18 18 2 75 

18 A - 18 24 17 15 17 3 76 

19 A - 19 27 18 18 23 5 91 

20 A - 20 24 18 12 22 4 80 

21 A - 21 22 20 17 22 4 85 

22 A - 22 24 20 17 22 4 87 

23 A - 23 22 17 15 22 4 80 

24 A - 24 24 17 15 22 4 82 



 

Maulina Nur Chikmahwati / Journal of English Language Teaching 2 (1) (2013) 

11 

 

25 A - 25 22 18 17 22 4 83 

26 A - 26 27 20 18 23 5 93 

27 A - 27 27 18 18 23 5 91 

28 A - 28 24 19 17 22 4 86 

29 A - 29 22 20 17 22 4 85 

30 A - 30 24 17 14 17 3 75 

31 A - 31 27 18 18 23 4 90 

32 A - 32 25 18 18 23 4 88 

33 A - 33 22 18 17 22 4 83 

34 A – 34 22 18 17 22 4 83 

35 A – 35 24 19 17 22 4 86 

36 A – 36 22 18 18 22 4 84 

37 A – 37 27 18 18 23 5 91 

∑ 888 662 601 796 145 3092 

MEAN 24 17.89 16.24 21.51 3.91 83.56 

 

Where : 

C  = Content 

O  = Organization 

V  = Vocabulary 

LU = Language Use 

M = Mechanics 

Table 4.7 The Questionnaire Result 

Pertanyaan Ya Tidak Total 

1. Apakah Anda mengalami kesulitan dalam mempelajari teks yang 

berbentuk hortatory exposition? 

29 

(78%) 

8 

(22%) 

37 

(100%) 

2. Apakah Anda mengalami kesulitan dalam menentukan elemen-

elemen dalam  teks hortatory exposition? 

28 

(76%) 

9 

(24%) 

37 

(100%) 

3. Apakah menulis teks hortatory exposition itu sulit? 32 

(86%) 

5 

(14%) 

37 

(100%) 

4. Apakah sebelum diadakan kegiatan ini Anda telah mengenal blog? 22 

(59%) 

15 

(41%) 

37 

(100%) 

5. Apakah ada perbedaan penguasaan penulisan teks hortatory 

exposition sebelum dan sesudah penggunaan medium blog? 

34 

(92%) 

3 

(8%) 

37 

(100%) 

6. Apakah Anda senang mempelajari hortatory exposition 

menggunakan blog? 

36 

(97%) 

1 

(3%) 

37 

(100%) 

7. Apakah penggunaan blog dalam mempelajari hortatory exposition 

lebih menarik dibanding pengajaran konvensional (menggunakan 

buku pelajaran)? 

36 

(97%) 

1 

(3%) 

37 

(100%) 

8. Apakah pengajaran dengan medium blog membantu Anda untuk 

lebih termotivasi mempelajari hortatory exposition? 

30 

(81%) 

7 

(19%) 

37 

(100%) 

9. Apakah guru Anda pernah menggunakan teknik khusus dalam 

pengajaran teks hortatory exposition? 

0 

(0%) 

37 

(100%) 

37 

(100%) 

10. Menurut pendapat Anda, apakah kegiatan semacam ini perlu 

dilanjutkan atau tidak? 

34 

(92%) 

3 

(8%) 

37 

(100%) 

 

 



 

Maulina Nur Chikmahwati / Journal of English Language Teaching 2 (1) (2013) 

12 

 

REFERENCES 

 

Arikunto, S., 1996, Prosedur Penelitian: Suatu 

Pendekatan Praktek, Jakarta: Rineka 

Cipta. 

Best, J. W. 1981. Research and Education. New 

Jersey: Prentice Hall. Inc. 

Brown, H. D. 2004. Language Assessment 

Principles and Classroom Practices. New 

York: Pearson Education Limited. 

Brown, W. J. 1977. Educational Media Yearbook. 

New York: rr Browker. 

Brooks, K., C. Nichols, and S. Priebe. 2004. 

Remediation, Genre, and Motivation: 

 Key Concepts for Teaching with Weblogs.  

Gurak, L. et al. (nd) Into the Blogosphere: 

Rhetoric, Community, and Culture of 

Weblogs. 

www.blog.lib.umn.edu/blogosphere 

[accessed 02/29/12] 

Cahyono, K. D. and E. Purnama. 2006. 

Communicative Competence 2B: A 

course in Acquiring English 

Communicative Competence, For Senior 

High School Level, Grade XI Semester 2. 

www.text-types.com/2011/01/hortatory-

exposition-text-campaign-of.html 

[accessed 01/10/12]  

Creswell, J. W. 2005. Educational Research: 

Planning, Conducting and Evaluating 

Quantitative and Qualitative Research. New 

York: University of Michigan. 

Drexler et al. 2007. Collaborative Blogging as a 

Means to Develop Elementary Expository 

Writing Skills. Electronic Journal for the 

Integration of  Technology in Education, Vol. 

6. 140 – 160. 

Finocchiaro, M. 1974. English as a Second 

Language. From Theory to Practice. New 

York: Regents Publishing Company, Inc. 

Gerlach, V. S., P. E. Donald and R. Melnick. 

1980. Teaching and Media: A sistematic 

Approach. University of Michigan: 

Prentice Hall. 

Gerot, L and P. Wignell.1994. Making Sense of 

Grammatical. Sydney: Gerd Stabler. 

Halliday, M.A.K. and R. Hasan. 1985. 

Language, Context, and Text: Aspects of 

Language in Social-Semiotic Perspective. 

London: Oxford University Press. 

Harmer, J. 2001. The Practice of English Language 

Teaching. Longman: Essex. 

Harris. P. D. 1969. Testing English as a Second 

Language. Mc. Graw-Hill Book Company: 

USA. 

Hartoyo. 2010. Academic Writing. Semarang. 

Harvey, C. 2010. ESL Composition Profile. 

Maryville: Unpublished article. 

Larsen-Freeman, D. 1996. Techniques and 

Principles in Language Teaching. New  

  York: Oxford University Press. 

Locatis, C. and F. D. Atkinson. 1984. Media and 

Technology for Education and Training. 

Columbus, Ohio: C.E. Merril Pub. Co. 

Lowe, C. 2004. Moving to the public: Weblogs in 

the writing classroom. Into the Blogosphere. 

http://Blog.lib.umn.edu//blogosphere/

moving_to_public_pf.html [accessed 

01/23/13] 

Maddux, C. D. and J. D. Lamont. 2006. Type II 

Uses Technology in Education: Project, Case 

Studies, and Software Application. 

Mills, G. E. 2010. Action Research: A Guide for the 

Teacher Researcher. Pennsylvania State 

University: Pearson. 

Murcia, Marianne C. 2001. Teaching English as A 

Second or Foreign Language. Heinle & 

Heinle. 

Mynard, J. 2007. Professional Teaching Articles: A 

blog as a Tool for Reflection for English 

Language Learners. Japan: Koryo 

International College. 

Pinkman, K. 2005. Using Blogs in the Foreign 

Classroom: Encouraging learner 

 independence. JALT CALL Journal, 1(1): 

12-24. 

Rozgiene, Inga, Olga Medvedeva, Zuzana 

Straková. 2008. Integrating ICT into 

Language Learning and Teaching. 

Altenberger :Johannes Kepler Universität 

Linz.  

Subyantoro. 2009. Penelitian Tindakan Kelas. 

Semarang: Badan Penerbit Undip and 

CV. Widya Karya. 



 

Maulina Nur Chikmahwati / Journal of English Language Teaching 2 (1) (2013) 

13 

 

Tuckman, B. W. 1999. Conducting Educational 

Research. University of Michigan: 

Harcourt Brace College Publishers. 

Vurdien, Ruby. 2011. Enhancing writing skills 

through blogs in an EFL class. Spain: White 

Rose Language School. 

White, R. and A. Maley. 1987. Writing: 

Advanced. New York: Oxford University 

Press.

 

 

 

 

 


