32 ELT FORUM 3 (1) (2014) Journal of English Language Teaching http://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/elt TEACHING WRITTEN ANNOUNCEMENT THROUGH GALLERY WALK TECHNIQUE (An Experimental Study of Eighth Grade Students at SMP Muhammadiyah 1 Weleri, Kabupaten Kendal, in the Academic Year of 2013/2014) A’in Ratna Mulyani English Department, Faculty of Languages and Arts, State University of Semarang, Indonesia Article Info ________________ Article History: Received in April 2014 Approved in Mei 2014 Published in Juni 2014 ________________ Keywords: Writing Skill, Announcement Text, Gallery Walk Technique ____________________ Abstract ___________________________________________________________________ The objective of this study was to find out whether there was significant difference in the achievement of writing announcement text between the eighth grade students of SMP Muhammadiyah 1 Weleri in the academic year of 2013/2014 who were taught by using Gallery Walk technique and those who were taught by using conventional method. To meet this objective, an experimental research design called pretest-posttest control group design was applied. The research was carried out at SMP Muhammadiyah 1 Weleri. The subjects of the research were two classes. The experimental group was the students of VIII-A which consisted of 28 students and was taught by using Gallery Walk technique. The control group was the students of VIII-B which consisted of 28 students and was taught by using conventional method. The data of the research were obtained from the writing test on pre-test and post-test. Based on the pre-test analysis, the value of tvalue was 0.38, while the value of ttable was 1.67. Since the value of tvalue was lower than the ttable, it meant that there was no significant difference in the students’ achievement of writing announcement text between experimental and control groups on pre-test. Meanwhile, based on the post-test analysis, the value of tvalue was 1.76. Compared with the value of ttable, 1.67, the tvalue was higher than the ttable. It meant that there was significant difference in the students’ achievement of writing announcement text after the treatment was given where the students’ achievement in experimental group was higher or better than the control group. The result above indicates that the use of Gallery Walk technique in teaching writing announcement text brought about significant improvement. © 2014 Universitas Negeri Semarang  Correspondent Address: B3 Building FBS Unnes Sekaran, Gunungpati, Semarang, 50229 E-mail: ainratnam123@yahoo.co.id ISSN 2252-6706 A’in Ratna Mulyani / Journal of English Language Teaching 3 (1) (2014) 33 INTRODUCTION In educational system in Indonesia, English is included in curriculum for both junior and senior high school levels. In the Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan (KTSP) for SMP/MTs which is also called 2006 Competence-Based Curriculum, the teaching learning of English has the purpose to develop four language skills: listening, speaking, reading and writing. Writing is a skill that is required in written communication. It requires complex thinking. A good writing is not always easy and may be a challenge even for the best students. Palmer, Hafner, and Sharp (1994:7) state that “if the goal of writing is to communicate meaning to ourselves and others, thinking will occur as the writer (1) generates ideas, thoughts, and images; (2) creates an order to those thoughts; and (3) communicates this meaning to others through interesting text that, ideally, is well written.” If we take a look at the teaching learning process at schools, writing is difficult to be learned by students. Like the researcher have ever experienced when she became a teacher trainee at a junior high school, many students got difficulty in writing English. At that time, the researcher explained about a short functional text especially announcements then the students were demanded to make them by their own, the researcher found that they faced some difficulties. Usually, they got difficulties in choosing appropriate words, combining sentences, and communicating their ideas or thought into good sentences or text. Beside that, several of them still got confused in using the grammar. In this case, the researcher realized that the students’ achievement is not only affected by their ability and skills in writing but also influenced by the method which is used. Slameto (2010:65) says that “teacher usually teaches using classical way and the students feel bored, sleepy, passive, and only write down on their note. It is mentioned that a progressive teacher will try a new method which can be used to improve the teaching learning process and to motivate students to learn.” In this study, the researcher would like to use Gallery Walk technique to teach writing announcement text. Based on the competence standard of the eighth grade of Junior High School, in the sixth competence standard, it is stated that “Mengungkapkan makna dalam teks tulis fungsional dan esei pendek sederhana berbentuk descriptive, dan recount untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan sekitar.” And in the point 6.1 of basic competence, it is stated that “Mengungkapkan makna dalam bentuk teks tulis fungsional pendek sederhana dengan menggunakan ragam bahasa tulis secara akurat, lancar, dan berterima untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan sekitar.” It could be seen that the students of junior high school should master short functional texts. One kind of short functional texts that students have to master is announcement text. Announcement is a statement in spoken or written form that makes something known publicly. It should be brief and could answer what, when, where, and who. Often it includes why and how. It seems that it is easy to make announcement, but most of students always feel difficult when they are asked to make their own. In order to help students in writing announcement text, the researcher will try to use Gallery Walk technique. “Gallery Walk is a discussion technique that gets students out of their chair and actively involved in synthesizing important science concept, writing, and public speaking” (Francek, 2006). The advantage of this technique is its flexibility. It can be organized for a simple 15- minutes ice breaker or a week-long project involving graded oral or written reports. It can be used with introductory or advanced material and with a variety of class sizes. Finally, a Gallery Walk gives chance to move around the classroom, directing students’ focus and interrupting the lethargy that sometimes results from being seated for long periods. Francek (2006) further explains the common procedures in conducting a Gallery Walk. They are as follows: 1) Create and post questions A’in Ratna Mulyani / Journal of English Language Teaching 3 (1) (2014) 34 2) Group students, assign roles, and stress team building 3) Assign stations and begin comments 4) Rotation 5) Begin oral presentation Meanwhile, Bowman (2005) suggests the general instructions for teaching using Gallery Walk as follows: 1) Tape a number of large sheets of paper to the wall of the training room. Space the chart pages so that learners can walk from one chart to another. 2) Label each chart with question, statement, or issue related to the topic. 3) Learners walk around the room writing their responses on the charts. 4) Assign a direction to move or they can move randomly. They can do the activity as individuals or in groups. 5) After the learners have written on all the charts and jotted down their observation on a work sheet, learners then spend a short period of time in small groups discussing their observation. 6) Finally they discuss the activity with the whole group. From this brief explanation, the researcher will modify a bit the steps in conducting the Gallery Walk technique in teaching writing announcement text. In this research, the researcher will divide the students into five groups. Each group will rotate and answer some questions based on the announcement given. Here, the group will practice as a small group discussion. After they have finished answering all questions, there will be a class discussion. By using Gallery Walk, each group also can leave a comment or feedback to other groups’ works. The aim of this study is to find out in whether there is significant difference in the achievement of writing announcement text between the eighth grade students of SMP Muhammadiyah 1 Weleri in the academic year of 2013/2014 who are taught using Gallery Walk technique and those who are taught using conventional method. Thus, to meet this objective, there are two hypotheses that are drawn. The first hypothesis is the working hypothesis (H1): there is significant difference in the achievement of writing announcement text between the eighth grade students of SMP Muhammadiyah 1 Weleri in the academic year of 2013/2014 who are taught using Gallery Walk technique and those who are taught using conventional method. The second hypothesis is the null hypothesis (Ho): there is no significant difference in the achievement of writing announcement text between the eighth grade students of SMP Muhammadiyah 1 Weleri in the academic year of 2013/2014 who are taught using Gallery Walk technique and those who are taught using conventional method. In this study, the researcher hopes that using Gallery Walk technique can improve the students’ skill in writing announcement text. METHODS OF INVESTIGATION This study used pre-test post-test control group design which is included in true experimental design. The design of this study is presented as the following: E O1 X O2 C O3 Y O4 (Tuckman in Saleh, 2011) Where: E : Experimental group C : Control group O1 : Pre-test for the experimental group O2 : Post-test for the experimental group O3: Pre-test for the control group O4: Post-test for the control group X :Treatment using Gallery Walk technique Y :Treatment without Gallery Walk technique This study consisted of pre-tests, treatments, and post-tests. Pre-tests were given to measure the students’ skill in writing announcement text before the treatments were given. Meanwhile, the post-tests were given after the treatments. Both, the pre-tests and the post- tests were in a form of writing test. The experimental group was taught by using Gallery A’in Ratna Mulyani / Journal of English Language Teaching 3 (1) (2014) 35 Walk technique, while the control group was taught by using conventional method. The population of this study was the eighth grade students of SMP Muhammadiyah 1 Weleri in the academic year of 2013/2014 which was divided into three classes: VIII-A, VIII-B, and VIII-C. Every class consisted of 28 students, so the total of those three classes were 84 students. The samples were class VIII-A as the experimental group and class VIII-B as the control group. Those two classes were chosen based on the English teacher’s recommendation because in SMP Muhammadiyah 1 Weleri there is no stratification in dividing the population. Furthermore, they were chosen in order to make it easy in labeling the group. The researcher took those two classes from the eighth grade students of SMP Muhammadiyah 1 Weleri because announcement text material which is included in short functional text, as it is insisted in curriculum, is given in the first semester and is included in writing competence of the eighth grade in junior high school. The instrument used was writing test because it is the most appropriate instrument to measure the students’ mastery in writing announcement text. In collecting data, the researcher took the students’ scores in writing announcement text through pre-tests and post- tests. There were five aspect of writing that were scored based on Brown’s rubric assessment: (a) organization, (b) content, (c) grammar, (d) punctuation, spelling, mechanics, and (e) style and quality of expression (Brown and Bailey cited in Brown 2004:244). After the data were obtained, then the data from pre-tests and post-tests were analyzed by using t-test formula. The t-test was used to find out whether there was significant difference in the achievement of writing announcement text between the eighth grade students of SMP Muhammadiyah 1 Weleri in the academic year of 2013/2014 who were taught using Gallery Walk technique and those who were taught using conventional method. RESULTS OF THE STUDY 3.1 Pre-test Analysis The aim of the pre-test was to know the basic or prior knowledge that the students had in writing announcement texts before they were given the treatments. The pre-test for experimental group was held on Friday, 23rd of August 2013; while the pre-test for control group was held on Saturday, 24th of August 2013. They were 28 students in each group. This pre-test was in a form of writing test. Both the experimental and the control groups had the same writing test. The students were asked to make announcement texts by choosing one of the given themes. The time allotment in doing pre-test was 60 minutes. From the result of the pre-test scores, the highest score for the experimental group was 79 and the lowest score was 20. Meanwhile, the highest score for the control group was 71 and the lowest score was 12. The next step was calculated the mean. The mean of the experimental group was 53.61, while the mean of the control group was 51.75. Below was the figure of comparison between the mean of the experimental and the control groups on the pre-test. Figure 3.1 The Mean of the Experimental and the Control Groups on Pre-test 0 100 53,61 51,75 Experimental group Control group A’in Ratna Mulyani / Journal of English Language Teaching 3 (1) (2014) 36 The figure above showed that the students’ achievement of both groups were relatively the same before they were given the treatment. In order to prove that there were similarities in pre- test data in the experimental and the control groups, t-test was needed. However, before the t- test was calculated, the normality and homogeneity of the pre-test scores were analyzed first. To test the normality of the pre-test scores, the Chi Square formula was used. The result of the calculation showed that the value of X2 data for the experimental group was 2.59, while the value of X2 data for the control group was 6.09. Meanwhile, the value of X2 table with degrees of freedom (dk) = k – 3 = 6 – 3 = 3 and α = 5% is 7.81. Since the value of X2 data for the experimental group (2.59) and the control group (6.09) were lower than the value of X2 table (7.81), it meant that the pre-test scores for both of groups were said to be normally distributed. To test the homogeneity of the pre-test scores, F test was used. From the calculation, the value of Fdata for the pre-test scores was 1.82. Meanwhile, the value of Ftable with dk numerator V1 = n1 – 1 = 28 – 1 = 27, dk denominator V2 = n2 – 1 = 28 – 1 = 27 and α = 5%, squared to V1 = 28 and V2 = 28 is 1.87. Since the value of Fdata was lower than the Ftable, it could be concluded that the variances of the pre-test scores in experimental and control groups fulfilled the condition of homogeneity. 3.2 T-test for Pre-test In order to find out that there were similarities in pre-test data in the experimental and the control groups, t-test was used. Here, the first step was to obtain the tvalue using the following formula (Sudjana 2005:243): Based on the formula above, the result of tvalue was: 𝑡 = 53.61 − 51.75 18.25 √ 1 28 − 1 28 𝑡 = 0.38 It could be seen from the calculation that the value of tvalue was 0.38. Meanwhile, the value of ttable with level of significance (α) = 5% and degrees of freedom (dk) = 54 was 1.67. Since the value of tvalue was lower than the ttable, thus we could conclude that the t-test was not significant, meaning that there were similarities in pre-test data in the experimental and the control groups. In other words, the null hypothesis (Ho) was accepted. 3.3 Treatment for Experimental Group The researcher was applying a Gallery Walk technique as a treatment to teach how to write announcement texts. The treatment was given to the experimental group, which consisted of 28 students, in four meetings. Each meeting was done in 2 x 40 minutes. The following were the learning activities during the treatment for the experimental group: Opening 1. The class was opened by praying together. 2. Teacher checked the students’ attendance. Main Activities (1) Meeting 1 (2x40’) It was divided into two activities, they were: pre-test and exploration.  Pre-test (60’) 1. Students were told that they would be given a pre-test on that day. The aim of the pre-test was to measure their ability in writing t : t-test 𝑋1 ̅̅ ̅ : the mean of the pre-test of the experimental group 𝑋2 ̅̅ ̅ : the mean of the pre-test of the control group 𝑛1 : the number of the experimental group 𝑛2 : the number of the control group 𝑆 : standard deviation 𝑆1 : standard deviation of the experimental group 𝑆2 : standard deviation of the control group 𝑡 = 𝑋1 ̅̅ ̅ − 𝑋2 ̅̅ ̅ 𝑆√ 1 𝑛1 + 1 𝑛2 A’in Ratna Mulyani / Journal of English Language Teaching 3 (1) (2014) 37 announcement texts before they were given the treatment. 2. Students were given a piece of paper containing the instruction, the themes of announcement text that should be chosen to write, scoring rubric, and a piece of worksheet. 3. Students submitted their work.  Exploration (20’) 4. Students were asked questions about announcement texts and the Gallery Walk technique that they would practice. 5. Students and teacher discussed about announcement text and how to use Gallery Walk technique in writing activity. (2) Meeting 2 (2x40’) – Elaboration 1. Students and teacher reviewed about the previous meeting, that was about announcement text and how to use the Gallery Walk technique in writing activity. 2. The class was divided into five groups. 3. In class there were five stations, each station was provided with example of announcement text and question. 4. Each group was rotated from station one to five to answer all questions based on the example of announcement on the answer sheet in a given time. 5. After all groups had finished rotating and answering all questions based on the example announcements, there was class discussion. 6. The students were told that in the next meeting they would practice to make announcement texts. (3) Meeting 3 (2x40’) – Elaboration 1. Students and teacher reviewed about the previous meeting. 2. The students were divided into five groups (the same groups with the previous meeting). 3. In groups, the students tried to make announcement texts. 4. After that, they attached their group work on the wall. 5. The students did Gallery Walk like the previous meeting, each group rotated visiting the other groups’ work. However, this time they did not answer the questions but they gave feedback or comment to the other groups’ work. 6. The students went back to their desks and did a class discussion. 7. The students were asked about difficulties they found. 8. The students were told that they would be given a post-test in the next meeting. (4) Meeting 4 (2x40’) – Confirmation It was divided into two activities, they were: review and post-test.  Review (20’) The students and teacher reviewed about the all activities they had done before in the previous meetings.  Post-test (60’) The students did the post-test (the instrument of the post-test were similar with those on the pre-test), then they submitted it to the teacher. Closing 1. Students told the teacher what they had learnt in class, the teacher gave some feedback. 2. Teacher closed the lesson. 3.4 Treatment for Control Group The control group, consisted of 28 students, was taught the same material as the experimental group. It was about announcement text. Here, the researcher was applying conventional method. This method was the method that their teacher usually used. The learning activities for the control group were also conducted in four meetings. Each meeting was done in 2 x 40 minutes. The following were the learning activities for the control group: Opening 1. The class was opened by praying together. 2. Teacher checked the students’ attendance. Main Activities (1) Meeting 1 (2x40’) It was divided into two activities, they were: pre-test and exploration. A’in Ratna Mulyani / Journal of English Language Teaching 3 (1) (2014) 38  Pre-test (60’) 1. Students were told that they would be given a pre-test on that day. The aim of the pre-test was to measure their ability in writing announcement texts before they were taught using conventional method. 2. Students were given a piece of paper containing the instruction, the themes of announcement text that should be chosen to write, scoring rubric, and a piece of worksheet. 3. Students submitted their work.  Exploration (20’) 4. Students were asked some questions about announcement texts as an introduction. (2) Meeting 2 (2x40’) – Elaboration 1. Teacher asked the students about announcement text as a building knowledge. 2. Teacher explained about what announcement text was, its social function and its parts. 3. Teacher gave some examples of announcement text then students tried to analyze it about its function and its parts. 4. Students learnt new vocabularies, spelling, and punctuation. 5. Students mentioned the content of announcement texts. 6. Teacher explained about the grammar (simple future tense and simple past tense). 7. Teacher gave some exercises. 8. Students were told that in the next meeting they would practice to make announcement texts. (3) Meeting 3 (2x40’) – Elaboration 1. Students and teacher reviewed about the previous meeting. 2. Teacher gave other examples of announcement text and students tried to mention the content of announcement. 3. Teacher gave some exercises in a form of fill in the blank. 4. Students filled in the blank of some announcement texts. 5. Students tried to make announcement texts with the given theme guided by the teacher. 6. Students were told that they would be given a post-test in the next meeting. (4) Meeting 4 (2x40’) It was divided into two activities, they were: review and post-test.  Review (20’) The students and teacher reviewed about the all activities they had done before in the previous meetings.  Post-test (60’) Students did the post-test (the instrument of the post-test were similar with those on the pre- test), then they submitted it to the teacher. Closing 1. Students told the teacher what they had learnt in class, the teacher gave some feedback. 2. Teacher closed the lesson. 3.5 Post-test Analysis The aim of the post-test was to measure the students’ skill in writing announcement texts after the treatment was given. The post-test for experimental group was held on Saturday, 31st of August 2013; while the post-test for control group was held on Monday, 2nd of September 2013. They were 28 students in each group. The form of the post-test was exactly the same as the pre- test. It was in a form of writing test. The students were asked to make announcement texts by choosing one of the given themes. The time allotment in doing post-test was 60 minutes. From the result of the post-test scores, the highest score for the experimental group was 96 and the lowest score was 34. Meanwhile, the highest score for the control group was 88 and the lowest score was 30. The next step was calculating the mean. The mean of the experimental group was 71.32, while the mean of the control group was 63.89. Below was the figure of comparison between the mean of the experimental and the control groups on the post-test. A’in Ratna Mulyani / Journal of English Language Teaching 3 (1) (2014) 39 Figure 3.5 The Mean of the Experimental and the Control Groups on Post-test The figure above showed that the students’ achievement in the experimental group was higher than the students’ achievement in the control group. However, the t-test was still needed. It was used to check whether the difference of the students’ data on post-test was significant or not. Before the t-test was calculated, the normality and homogeneity of the post-test scores were analyzed first. To test the normality of the post-test scores, the Chi Square formula was used. The result of the calculation showed that the value of X2 data for the experimental group was 1.18, while the value of X2 data for the control group was 1.15. Meanwhile, the value of X2 table with degrees of freedom (dk) = k – 3 = 6 – 3 = 3 and α = 5% is 7.81. Since the value of X2 data for the experimental group (1.18) and the control group (1.15) were lower than the value of X2 table (7.81), it meant that the post-test scores for both of groups were said to be normally distributed. To test the homogeneity of the post-test scores, F test was used. From the calculation, the value of Fdata for the post-test scores was 1.34. Meanwhile, the value of Ftable with dk numerator V1 = n1 – 1 = 28 – 1 = 27, dk denominator V2 = n2 – 1 = 28 – 1 = 27 and α = 5%, squared to V1 = 28 and V2 = 28 is 1.87. Since the value of Fdata was lower than the Ftable, it could be concluded that the variances of the post-test scores in experimental and control groups fulfilled the condition of homogeneity. 3.6 T-test for Post-test In order to find out that there was significant difference in post-test data in the experimental and the control groups, t-test was used. Here, the first step was to obtain the tvalue using the following formula (Sudjana 2005:243): Based on the formula above, the result of tvalue was: 𝑡 = 71.32 − 63.89 15.86 √ 1 28 − 1 28 𝑡 = 1.76 0 20 40 60 80 100 71,32 63,89 Experimental group Control group t : t-test 𝑋1 ̅̅ ̅ : the mean of the pre-test of the experimental group 𝑋2 ̅̅ ̅ : the mean of the pre-test of the control group 𝑛1 : the number of the experimental group 𝑛2 : the number of the control group 𝑆 : standard deviation 𝑆1 : standard deviation of the experimental group 𝑆2 : standard deviation of the control group 𝑡 = 𝑋1 ̅̅ ̅ − 𝑋2 ̅̅ ̅ 𝑆√ 1 𝑛1 + 1 𝑛2 A’in Ratna Mulyani / Journal of English Language Teaching 3 (1) (2014) 40 It could be seen from the calculation that the value of tvalue was 1.76. Meanwhile, the value of ttable with level of significance (α) = 5% and degrees of freedom (dk) = 54 was 1.67. Since the value of tvalue was higher than the value of ttable, thus we could conclude that the t-test was significant, meaning that there were differences in post-test data in the experimental and the control groups. In other words, the null hypothesis (Ho) was rejected and the working hypothesis (H1) was accepted. 3.7 Discussion of the Research Findings Based on the analysis of the pre-test data, the t-test result was not significant. It meant that there was no significant difference in the students’ achievement of writing announcement text before the treatment was given. In other words, there was similarity in pre-test data in the experimental and the control groups. Thus, it was concluded that both of groups had the same initial condition. After that, the experimental group was given a treatment in a form of Gallery Walk technique to teach writing announcement texts. Based on Francek (2006), Gallery Walk technique was “a discussion technique that gets students out of their chairs and actively involved in synthesizing important science concept, writing, and public speaking.” After the treatments were given, the post- test data were analyzed. Based on the analysis of the post-test data, the t-test result was significant. It meant that there was significant difference in post-test data in the experimental and the control groups where the students’ achievement in experimental group was higher or better than that in the control group. In other words, the application of Gallery Walk technique to the experimental group improved the students’ achievement in writing announcement texts. In this matter, it meant that the working hypothesis which stated that “There is significant difference in the achievement of writing announcement text between the eighth grade students of SMP Muhammadiyah 1 Weleri in the academic year of 2013/2014 who are taught using Gallery Walk technique and those who are taught using conventional method” was accepted. CONCLUSION Based on the research findings and the analysis, the results of the research were: 1) There was significant difference in the achievement of writing announcement text between the eighth grade students of SMP Muhammadiyah 1 Weleri in the academic year of 2013/2014 who were taught using Gallery Walk technique and those who were taught using conventional method. 2) The students’ achievement of writing announcement text who were taught by using Gallery Walk technique was higher or better than those who were taught by using conventional method. Based on those results, it could be concluded that using Gallery Walk technique improved the students’ achievement in writing announcement texts for the eighth grade students of SMP Muhammadiyah 1 Weleri in the academic year of 2013/2014. REFERENCES Bowman, Sharon L. 2005. The Gallery Walk: An Opening, Closing, and Review Activity. Available at http://www.bowperson.com/BOWPERSON/Galler yWalk.pdf [accessed April 2013] Brown, H. Douglas. 2004. Language Assessment. New York: Longman. Francek, Mark. 2006. Promoting Discussion in the Science Classroom Using Gallery Walks. Journal of College Science Teaching, September. Page 27-31 Available at http://blog.stetson.edu/jrseminars/wp- content/uploads/Gallery-Walk.pdf [accessed May 2013] Palmer, C. Barbara, Mary L. Hafner, and Marylin F. Sharp. 1994. Developing Cultural Literacy through the Writing Process. Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon. Saleh, M. 2011. Linguistics and Educational Research. Handout and Assignment of Semarang State University. A’in Ratna Mulyani / Journal of English Language Teaching 3 (1) (2014) 41 Slameto. 2010. Belajar dan Faktor-faktor yang Mempengaruhinya. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta. Sudjana. 2005. Metoda Statistika. Bandung: Tarsito.