THE EFFECTIVE TECHNIQUE IN TEACHING LISTENING 1 USING SCAFFOLDING TECHNIQUE TO IMPROVE THE WRITING ABILITY OF THE 11TH GRADERS OF SMAN 5 MATARAM Yulia Isnaini Ali Saukah Johannes A. Prayogo State University of Malang ABSTRACT This study was intended to apply scaffolding technique as a teaching technique to solve the problems in the teaching and learning of writing report text. The research design used in this study was a Collaborative Classroom Action Research which had been conducted in two cycles. The subjects of this study were 32 eleventh graders of XI IPA 6 at SMAN 5 Mataram in academic year 2012/2013. The research instruments used to get the data were interview, questionnaire, observation checklists, field notes, and writing task.This article highlights the potential of the scaffolding technique integrated through the process approach-with which students go through a write-rewrite process; prewriting, drafting, revising, editing, publishing in giving students chance to work in real, live process of how real writer engages in the process of writing. However, the most important finding is the technique could improve the ability of students’ writing ability in writing report text. Keywords: writing ability, scaffolding, process writing approach, classroom action research. As many teachers of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) around the world have agreed that the process of teaching and learning writing skill seems to be more difficult and demanding than learning the other three skills. Teaching and acquiring the skills needed in writing is a great challenge for both of teacher and student, especially for the students, it is mostly dealing with students’ limitation in using the language that they just learned and the rhetorical conventions of English itself. These facts is strengthened by the findings in the preliminary study conducted at SMAN 5 Mataram in the eleventh graders from September 11thto 24th2011 by using some instruments, namely direct observation, questionnaire, interview, and writing task. Related to direct observation, the researcher found that the students lacked practice in writing. Most of students’ activities in English subject were taken into working on the workbook exercises and translations. Students tended to translate their first language model of writing directly into English. In order to identify more about students’ problem in writing report text, a writing task was conducted. In this activity, the students were assigned to write one report text based on the pictures given. Their writing score on average indicated that it was below the minimum passing level (kriteriaketuntasan minimal) that is 75. The number of students who passed this level was 1 out of 32 students (3.1%), while the rest of them (96.9%) got below the minimum passing level. 2 After having students’ writing product, the researcher the researcher therefore distributed a questionnaire to students. It was used to investigate the students’ attitude towards English writing and their writing habit. The result of the questionnaire showed that basically, most of students (62.5%) like English lesson. However, half the class (50%) like writing in English. Meanwhile, 8 students (25%) believe that writing is a difficult skill to learn. To think that writing in English is easy, 5 (15.6 %) out of 32 students agreed with it. Moreover, it was surprising to know the students’ response to the statement that grammar is more important than content 29 (90.6%) students were in the same opinion. 20 (60.5%) of them said that finding the appropriate words for their writing was the most difficult thing to do in writing, 11 (34.3%) agreed that organizing their writing with right mechanics was difficult and 14 students (43.75%) believed that finding and developing the idea of what to write was the most challenging part of their writing. Referring the above information, it showed that students of XI IPA 6 had a low ability in writing skill especially in terms content and organization. Therefore, it gives an overview for the researcher to do action research in this class. This is meant to bring about the changes for the improvement in English teaching and learning process. For that reason, the need to implement another teaching technique which will bring about the improvement is very crucial. Therefore, the researcher proposed to utilize scaffolding technique as the teaching technique to solve the students’ writing problems. The term scaffolding originates from Vygotsky's concept of the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). ZPD is the distance between students’ actual developmental level and the level of potential development through problem solving under competent guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers (Knapp & Watkins: 2005). The form of assistance Vygostky refers to is not simply provided by peers, but also by the teachers who explicitly directing student’s learning. Scaffolding in an educational context is a process by which teachers provides students with a temporary framework for learning. In this sense, the teacher is not only a teacher, who teaches, explains and asks the students to do some activities but the teachers are team workers. The teachers and the students collaborated in discussing about something to write. The teacher simultaneously provides students with sufficient supports whenever students need assistance to attain one particular level of understanding.The students would not feel alone and inferior in the class and the success is possible to be reached. Thus, it is helpful to foster students’ cognitive development in terms of their self-efficacy and self-esteem (Rosenshine and Meister, 1992). In addition, or this strategy to be successful, the teacher must provide students with the optimal amount of support necessary to complete the task, and then step by step decrease the level of assistance until the student becomes capable to the activity independently (Vernon: 2001). Because of the effectiveness and flexibilities of scaffolding technique, some studies were conducted to investigate its effectiveness to support and enhance student academic performance (Miller, 2012; Ningrum, 2012; Verenikina, 2004; Isnawati, 2009; Vernon. 2000). Result of the studies showed the use of scaffolding technique was effective as a learning strategy; however for the technique be maximally effective, the teachers need to consider the best form of scaffolding and theappropriate amount of scaffolding need 3 to be given to their students. Another study was conducted by Laksmi (2006). She found that it could foster student motivation in writing EFL class at university level. All the results of the studies indicate that using scaffolding can improve the quality of students’ ability in learning. In addition, to assess students’ writing, the researcher used two kinds of assessments; these assessments were product and process assessment. Product assessment was done by scoring students’ final product based on the analytical scoring scales through each of the writing components such as content, organization, grammar, vocabulary and mechanics (O’Malley and Pierce, 1996). Process assessment was used during the process of teaching and learning and aimed at giving information about the students’ performance on how the students write, the strategies they employed, and the decision they made as they write. Moreover, a peer assessment was also done to facilitate the students to get feedback from their peers as their readers. Furthermore, feedback might be given by the teacher through discussion in students-teacher conference and, the last, self-assessment was done to encourage students to improve their writing based on the feedback they get. Moreover, the revision checklist facilitated students to monitor their own draft whether they have been completely composed their draft based on the scaffolding they had. As a conclusion, by considering the possibility and suitability the researcher intended to solve the students’ problems in writing by scaffolding technique which was implemented together with process writing based approach. This technique would give potential improvement of students’ ability in writing English report texts through the process approach-with which students go through a write-rewrite process-in giving students a scaffold to work in real, live process of how real writer engages in the process of writing. RESEARCH METHOD The use of scaffolding as a teaching technique was applied through process writing. This study applied the collaborative classroom action research at the eleventh-graders of XI IPA 6 SMAN 5 Mataram. The collaborator was the English teacher of the school. This collaboration will give contribution ‘in a more critical and substantial way’ in process of the study (Burns, 2010: 13). The researcher and the collaborator worked together in planning, implementing, observing, and reflecting on the action. In the planning, the researcher and collaborator carefully designed the teaching strategy, lesson plan, set the criteria of success, and provide research instruments. In the implementation stage, the researcher conducted the teaching activity as a teacher while the collaborator acted as an observer who conducted the classroom observation. The collaborator observed the effect of the action by using observation checklist and field notes when the researcher was implementing the teaching technique. At the end of the cycle, the researcher distributed the questionnaire. In the last stage, together they evaluated and analyzed the implication of the action for classroom learning, whether the result had achieved the criteria of success or not.If the result could not achieve the criteria, the action must be continued to the next cycle. 4 The implementation of the action was focused on the lesson plan that had been designed by the researcher and collaborator. To highlight the effective use of Scaffolding technique, the researcher used the modified scaffolding diagram by Anderson and Anderson (1997) as the main teaching. The teaching of writing activities were implemented with the process writing based approach, which the researcher believed potential to help students to understand the importance of skills involved in writing which would contribute to the development of their writing ability. Figure 1.1 Information Report Scaffold Diagram (Adapted from Anderson & Anderson: 1997). REPORT TEXT – ANIMALS BY: ________________________ 1. Classification What is it? 2. Description What does it look like? The color, size& weight. 3. Lifespan How long it can live? 4. Range Where does it can be Found? 5. Habitat Where does it live? 6. Diet What does it eat? 7. Offspring How does it have babies? 8. Behavior How does it live/defense system/territorial/solitary /social 9. Threats Is it endangered animal? and how you preserve/ save it from extinction 5 The implementation of the scaffolding technique was carried through the five stages of process writing based approach. The technique began with the prewriting stage where the students are exposed to series of pictures and videos related to particular topic, the researcher lead the discussion in the form of questions and answers that related to the picture. Therefore, students were given a model of report text of a particular subject that represents information about the subject. Moreover, by using the modified information report scaffolding diagram researcher helped students to scatter the topics into a detailed in a systematic order. Through this step, students also learnt the linguistics feature, generic structure, and language use related to the topic. The next step was drafting, where students further organize the thoughts revealed in the prewriting step. Again by using the modified information report scaffolding diagram, researcher helped students to generate ideas which later became the outline that helped students to develop their draft that visually identifies the characteristics of subject of report text. In this stage, some of the writing aspects such as spelling, punctuation, and mechanical mistakes were little of concern. Moreover, to help them negated with this idea and emphasize the notion that writing is not to write an instant thought, they are assigned to label their papers “rough draft”. Therefore, the next step on this approach was revising. It included the self-revision and peer revision. Students made changes and rewrite their initial rough draft; the changes that the students made during the revision were classified into adding, substituting, deleting, or moving. These changes may take in the form of word, phrase, clause, sentence, or paragraph. After completing this phase, they shared the drafts with their friends in the peer revision activity. During this activity, students were actively gave their comments and compliments on each other’s work. Next step was the editing stage. This was the stage where students attempted to make their writing optimally readable. Students used the evaluation feedback and suggestion from the teacher and their friends to make correction as necessary. Students then proceeded to the final draft, and so, the researcher assisted students to get through this process by providing them with a list of correction symbol guide for proofreading which included conventions of written Standard English: capitalization, punctuation, spelling, grammar, etc. In the final stage, students published their writing by reading aloud in front of the classroom and the other students were given opportunity to give comments and suggestion about their friends’ work and performance.The summary of the steps of scaffolding strategy in the teaching activities can be seen in the Table 1.1 Table 1.1 Summary of the Steps of Scaffolding Technique in the Teaching Activities No Writing Stage The Teaching and Learning Activities 1 Prewriting a. The teacher showed students some pictures. b. The teacher providedquestion and answer session in the form of brainstorming/word webbing related to the picture. c. The teacher gavethe model of report text and explainedits generic structure and language 6 features. d. The teacher shows more pictures to help grasp students’ knowledge. e. The teacher explained the use of the modified information report scaffolding diagram and assisted students to create an outline by using it. 2 Drafting a. The teacher providedstudents with vocabularies needed to create a text. b. The teacher assisted the students to make a draft based on the information report scaffolding diagram. 3 Revising a. The teacher gave and explained the revising guideline. b. The teacher assisted the students to revise their draft and rewrite the revision. 4 Editing and Publishing a. The teacher gave and explained the editing guideline. b. The teacher assisted the students to edit their draft and rewrite final draft. c. The teacher asks the students to publish their writing by reading aloud in front of the classroom and other students are asked to give comments and questions on their friends’ work. To obtain the data, four research instruments were utilized during and after the implementation. The observer collected data while the teaching process is conducted. After the implementation, the teacher distributed questionnaireand administered a writing task for the students.All of the data then were reflected on the criteria of success. Criteria of success, data sources, and research instruments are presented at Table 1.2. Table 1.2 Criteria of Success, Data Sources, and Research Instruments Components Criteria of Success Data Source Research Instruments Product All students are expected to be successful by achieving > 75 as the passing grade, and gained higher points over their scores in the task before the action with the different levels of preferences; High achievers: 10%, Middle achievers: 20% Low achievers: 30% Students’ scores in writing English report text Analytical scoring rubric for writing Process Most of students are engaged actively during the teaching and learning Students’ participation among peers Observation checklist and field notes 7 process and teacher in the activities Most of the students respond positively to the implementation of the technique Students’ responses about the implementation of scaffolding technique in the teaching and learning process Questionnaire The process of evaluating the data comprised some steps for assembling the data, coding the data, comparing the data, building meaning, and reporting the outcomes. Inthe process of assembling, all the data were collected and reviewed from the questions of the research, then started going through the data and looked for broad pattern or ideas which seemed to answer the questions. In coding the data, the researcher and the collaborator specified the data pattern or categories based on the broad picture, and identify the data sources. In the next steps, they compared the result of the coding to find out the similarity or difference pattern in different sets of data, and they visualized the data in a diagram or tables. For example, between the students’ scores before and after the action were compared. The following step, theyinterpret what the data mean, why and how the data emerges. The data would be reflected on the criteria of success to see whether the criteria had been achieved or not. RESEARCH FINDINGS The findings cover the students’writing scores, participation, and responseduring two cycles. In addition, revision for the second cycle was also presented. Findings in Cycle 1 The implementation scaffolding as a teaching technique in writing report text was combined with the process writing based approach. The study in Cycle 1 consisted of four meetings which covered the five steps of writing process. The first meeting as prewriting stage was conducted on April 30th 2013. The second meeting was drafting stage which washeld on April 2nd 2013. However, the third meeting was revising stage that was held on April 7th 2013. As for the last meeting of Cycle 1, the editing and publishing stage, these stages were undertaken on May 14th 2013. The result of the data analysis in the Cycle 1 showed that the action conducted did not yet meet the criteria of success. Although the result of data from the observation checklist and field notes showed that students’ participation in the process of teaching and learning was mostly increased and they also showed a positive response in the questionnaire, however, after the sets of data were analyzed and evaluated, it showed that there were still 4 students out of 32 students got below the average score below the criteria of success. Therefore, the first cycle was not considered successful, and the researcher and collaborator decided to continue the action to the Cycle 2. The detailed research findings and the process of the research were presented as the following. 8 The Students’ Writing Scores On the process of writing in the drafting stage, students were assigned to write and develop their report text based on their completed information report scaffolding diagram. The result of students writing was collected and analyzed by the researcher. It was assessed on the term of content, organization, vocabulary, grammar, and mechanics. Based on the result of students’ writing product, there was quite good improvement of the students’ average score from the students’ writing products on the preliminary study. The average score on the preliminary study was 57.6 and the average score of students’ writing on Cycle 1 was 85.4. It means that there was a 27.8 points of average score improvement. In the preliminary study there was only 1 students or 3.12% students who achieved the score 76 which was higher than 75 as the minimum learning mastery (kriteriaketuntasan minimal). Meanwhile, in Cycle 1, there were 28 students or 87.5% of them who got score equal or higher than 75 as the minimum learning mastery. For detailed information about the improvement of the students’ score in the Cycle 1 compared to the gain in the preliminary study can be seen in Table 1.3 Table 1.3 The Comparison of Students’ Writing Scores in the Terms of Aspect of Writing on Preliminary Study and Cycle 1. Aspect of Writing Stage Preliminary Study Cycle 1 Mean Min Score Max Score Mean Min Score Max Score Content 16.89 10.2 23.85 25.79 20.4 27.3 Organization 14.55 10.2 20.4 21.48 17 27.3 Grammar 9.51 6.8 13.6 14.03 11.35 15.9 Vocabulary 11.13 9.1 13.6 15.9 11.35 18.2 Mechanics 5.55 3.4 7.95 8.16 6,8 9.1 Despite the unsuccessful result for the KKM aspect of students’ writing score, luckily, most of students showed improvement compared to gain in the preliminary study. Related to this gain, the scaffolding technique played an important role in achieving this score. The most significant improvement of the aspects of writing was in the content by 8.89 and organization by 6.93 per student after the score conversion. The Students’ Involvement in the Teaching and Learning Activities Result of the analysis in observation checklist showed that students’ participation was 81.04% out of 26 learning activities.It meant that their involvement in the classroom was considered excellent in the classroom, and achieved slightly above the criteria of success that is 80%. The summary of their involvement in the first cycle was presented in Table 1.4. Table 1.4Summary of the Students’ Involvement during the Writing Activities in C1 Meeting Numbers of Activities Stage of Writing Process Percentage (%) Interpretation 1 10 Prewriting 70 % Good 9 Meeting Numbers of Activities Stage of Writing Process Percentage (%) Interpretation 51-75% of the students involved in the activity 2 6 Drafting 79.16% Excellent 76-100% of the students involved in the activity 3 5 Revising 85% Excellent 76-100% of the students involved in the activity 4 5 Editing and Publishing 90% Excellent 76-100% of the students involved in the activity Total 81.04% Above the criteria of Success Which is 80% In addition to the use of observation checklist, the data also were supported by findings in field notes. During the process of teaching and learning process the collaborator noted some important points about the strengths and weaknesses of the use of scaffolding technique, and gave some suggestions for further improvements.However, in general the collaborator as the observer concluded the strength of using the scaffolding technique could foster the students’ motivation to learn. For the further improvement, he suggested that the classroom management, time allotment, and modification of the activities should be considered to encourage better students’ participation. The Students’ Response to the Implementation of Scaffolding Technique in Writing Report Texts. After thetreatment, the students weregiven a questionnaire related to the effectiveness of scaffolding as a teaching technique.Inclosed-ended questions, most of them agreed that scaffolding could help them develop ideas and vocabulary,and organize them easily. Moreover, related to the students’ attitude towards writing the intensive guidance given by the researcher in modeling and in completing the task in every stage help students to feel motivated and pleased to write report texts. Besides, the enjoyable atmosphere and support created by the researcher helped students to decrease their reluctance to write.To be more specific, the exact number and details of each item in the questionnaire was presented in the table Table 1.5The Students’ Response to the Questionnaire in Cycle 1 Easily Findin g Ideas (1) Easily Dev. Ideas (2) Easily Org. Ideas (3) Easily Dev. Vocab (4) Feeling Motivate d (5) Showing Confidenc e (6) Showing Pleasure (7) Strongly 9 6 13 3 3 3 1 10 Agree Agree 23 22 19 19 13 17 22 Not Really Agree 0 3 0 10 15 10 9 Disagree 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 Strongly Disagree 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reflection in Cycle 1 After different sets of data were compared to find its difference and similarity, the findings obtained by using observation checklist, field notes and questionnaire indicated similar results, and achieved the criteria of success. However, these results were in not line with students’ writing score. This contradiction implied that scaffolding technique had not been successful yet. Therefore, considering the findings and suggestions in the Cycle 1, the teacher and the collaborator decided to continue the action to the Cycle 2. The lesson plan of the study in the Cycle 2 needed to be revised and improved so that it could meet the criteria of success. Then revision in the Cycle 2 was focused on the lesson plan and the classroom management. In relation to the lesson plan, the instructional material and the learning activities were the main concern. In the Cycle 2 the topic of natural phenomenon was given to students. The researcher allotted more time in explaining the material time, this way, students were expected to have a better understanding so that they would be able to distinguish and express fact and opinion correctly in their writing. Moreover, the researcher also focused on the model of the development and organizing ideas of report texts by modifying the scaffolding diagram to match with the certain topics of natural phenomenon such as; Earthquake, Sandstorm, Tornado, Volcano. As for the classroom management, the researcher together with collaborator managed to make a time restriction for every activity. In addition, the researcher used videos as an additional entertaining material; this change was to make the students to be more act ive than before. In addition, the students were also asked to play a game as warm up exercise to prepare students for the actual material be given, this activity was done to refresh students’ memory of report text and created fun and enjoyable learning atmosphere. The revision related to the material was the leading question, by giving more portions to the questions aimed to ease and support the students to understand the report text. Moreover, the researcher also provided students with list of vocabularies to help them find the appropriate words or technical terms to express their idea. The researcher also revised some questions in the editing and guidelines as well as gave them the revising and editing exercise so that the students would easily recognize their mistake and revised it into a better writing. Generally, the procedures of instruction and procedures of assessment were similar to those in Cycle 1 since the action in the Cycle 2 was mainly to continue the teaching and learning process in order to achieve the criteria of success. 11 Findings in Cycle 2 Slightly different to the previous cycle, the observation of teaching and learning process was obtained through observation checklist and field notes in 3 meetings; Thursday, May 16th 2013; Tuesday, May 21st 2013; Tuesday, May 28th 2013 with the time allotment 2×45 minutes for each meeting. In this cycle, The prewriting and drafting stage were covered in the fifth meeting which was comprised in 10 activities, while the revising stage was held in the sixth meeting which comprised in 4 activities, and 6 activities were covered in the editing and publishing stage were done as the last activities in the seventh meeting. The Students’ Writing Scores In line with the improvement of students’ writing product in the previous cycle, the number of students who passed the writing test in Cycle 2 had also increased. The result of their writing showed that 96.87% or 31 out of 32 students achieved the targeted scores namely > 75 and passed the writing task in Cycle 2. The teacher and collaborator analyzed the result of students’ final writing based on the scoring rubric set in this study. In the Cycle 2, the product of students’ writing report text by applying the scaffolding technique showed great improvement comparing to the gain in the previous cycles. From their writing it could be seen that even though they still made few trivial mistakes on the appropriate convention of writing, nonetheless, the students could finally organized their writing in terms of stating the subject correctly, describing the subject comprehensively, and using appropriate vocabulary/technical term Based on the students’ scores, it can be concluded that the scaffolding technique implemented in Cycle 2 almost met the criteria of success. The average score was 89.58. There was only 1 student (3.1%) who got score under <75 and the rest 31 students (96.8%) were able to achieve the criteria of success. In Cycle 2, the lowest score achieved by a student was 71.4 and the highest score was 95.5. The data above showed that the students’ achievement in their writing ability had finally achieved the criteria of success.Moreover, there was also an improvement in terms of aspect of writing. For the detailed information about the students, improvement in every aspect of writing can be seen in the Table 1.6 Table 1.6 The Students’ Improvement in Writing Aspect in Cycle 2 Aspect of Writing Stage Preliminary Study Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Mean Min Score Max Score Mean Min Score Max Score Mean Min Score Max Score Content 16.89 10.2 23.85 25.79 20.4 27.3 26.7 20.4 27.3 Organization 14.55 10.2 20.4 21.48 17 27.3 23.74 17 27.3 Grammar 9.51 4.5 13.6 14.03 11.35 18.2 13.67 11.35 15.9 Vocabulary 11.13 9.1 13.6 15.9 11.35 18.2 17.48 13.6 18.2 Mechanics 5.55 3.4 7.95 8.16 6,8 9.1 7.91 6.8 9.1 12 Despite the unsuccessfulness of students’ achievement in term of their grammar and mechanic aspects, the improvement of students’ ability in writing report text can also can be seen from their range scores of improvement for every writing aspect from Preliminary Study, Cycle 1 and Cycle 2. After the calculation of the data gained from all cycles, it showed that students’ achievement was significantly improved in three aspects of writing; content, organization, and vocabulary. The Students’ Involvement in the Teaching and Learning Activities Based on the result of the data analysis, the effectiveness of scaffolding technique in this cycle could meet the criteria of success. Most of the students were participating actively compared to the previous cycle. In this cycle, students showed major improvement especially in their involvement in the classroom discussion, group work and also responded positively to the teaching technique used, and able to write report texts better through development of subject, complete features of report texts and effective vocabulary. They also responded positively. The summary of students’ involvement in the Cycle 2 was presented as the following description. Table 1.7 Summary of the Students’ Involvement in the Writing Activities in Cycle 2 Meeting Numbers of Activities Stage of Writing Process Percentage % Interpretation 5 10 Prewriting & Drafting 85% Excellent 76-100% of the students involved in the activity 6 4 Revising 87,5% Excellent 76-100% of the students involved in the activity 7 6 Editing & Publishing 88,1% Excellent 76-100% of the students involved in the activity TOTAL 88,1% Above the criteria of success, 80% The total percentage of students’ involvement during the three meetings in the Cycle 2 was 88.1%. It increased 7.06% from Cycle 1 which was only achieved 81.04%. This significant improvement of percentage of the students’ participation was the sign that students’ had achieved the stipulated criteria of success stipulated in this study namely 80%. In accordance to the findings in the classroom, the additional activity in using video and game as the warming-up activities were really helpful. It helped students to release some tension and prepare them to do the task. In addition to this, the list of helpful vocabularies gave the impression positively. The students seemed more relax in completing their writing and they were also able to manage the time effectively. In short, students were no longer complained about the insufficient time given or asking additional time to finish their draft. 13 The Students’ Response to the Implementation of Scaffolding Technique in Teaching Writing Report texts. Concerning the student responses to the questionnaire about the teaching using the sscaffolding technique, in the second cycle,most of the students agreed that the technique helped them to improve their writing ability better and make them more interested in the learning. However, their responses to the action implemented was almost similar with their responses in the first cycle.These findings were presented more detailed inTable 1.8 Table 1.8 The Students’ Response to the Questionnaire in Cycle 2 Easily Findin g Ideas Easily Dev. Ideas Easily Org. Ideas Easily Dev. Vocab Feeling Motivat ed Showing Confiden ce Showing Pleasure Strongly Agree 6 5 12 3 3 4 6 Agree 24 23 18 24 15 17 17 Not Really Agree 2 4 2 5 13 10 9 Disagree 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 Strongly Disagree 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reflection of Cycle 2 Based on the previous descriptions of the teaching process and the evaluation of students’ final writing in Cycle 2. The researcher and the collaborator drew a conclusion that the implementation of teaching writing by using scaffolding technique had reached the criteria of success. Even though there were still weaknesses found in the students’ grammatical and mechanical achievement in Cycle 2. However, it was worth saying that they had successfully improved their scores comprehensively. Therefore, this is meant that there is no more cycle to be implemented. DISCUSSION Scaffolding is a practice based on Lev Vygotsky’s socio-cultural theory and its relation to the concept of assisted learning. This concept views the teacher as the cultural agent who guides instruction so that students will master and internalizes the skills that permits higher cognitive functioning (Slavin, 2003: 262). Therefore, it commonly used as a metaphor to describe the role of adults or more knowledgeable peers in guiding students’ learning development. In addition, With regard to the statement above and its relation to the teaching practice, the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) is the distance between the two levels of learner’s past independent capabilities or understanding and their potential development or capability with the support and guidance of other capable adults or peers (Galea and Nair: 2008). With regard to the Vigotsky’s theory, the teacher’s roles were very crucial in leading the 14 students into effective learning, especially when the teacher utilized a teaching technique In its practical term, scaffolding technique implemented in this study were taken into various form of teacher supports such as demonstration; modeling; ongoing dialogue; providing guidelines; keeping attention focused as well as providing examples/questioning; and dividing task into simpler steps through the information report scaffolding diagram. During the process, the researcher constantly judged what kind of scaffolds are appropriate and to which degree adults shifted the level of intervention to fit the students’ individual zone of proximal development. For example, when student is having difficulty, the teacher increases his or her help just enough to provide support and assistance but not so much as to take over the task. As it mentioned before, the researcher used the information report scaffolding diagram as the main teaching aid in assisting students to complete their writing task. The guided questions in the scaffolding diagram help students to generate ideas and give details to their writing. This is in line to Yangrifqi’s study (2012) proves that asking questions is one of best way of discovering ideas. It is useful in discovering what to say or what to write about the topic and it also help students to discover details of experience and provides some structures to the development of ideas. Related to the difficulties in organizing ideas, the information report scaffolding diagram was constructed by following the generic structures of the text. As what Anderson and Anderson (1997) state that the scaffolding which was constructed by following the generic structures of the text helped students to organize their writing into a reasonable right ordered piece of text. Responding to Anderson and Andersons’statement, students can understand the complex structure because they could recognize and identify relationship of the ideas presented in diagram. Regarding to the achievement of students’ writing products from viewed on Cycle 2, there was quite degradation in terms of their average scores on the grammatical and mechanical aspects of writing. Precisely, for the grammar the score reached down to 13.67 or decreased by 0.36 points on average scores below to gain in the previous cycles. As for the mechanical aspect, the average score decreased by 0.25 points. Concerning to the gain of grammar, there were some aspects of that needed to be discussed. First of all the teaching grammar was conducted in integration with writing skill, not isolated grammar teaching. The students, moreover, did not only learn how to construct sentence accurately, but also they analyzed grammatical errors in their writing. However, this strategy was somehow did not work out well since as students were busy in the process developing their ideas, they were running out of time to check the grammatical aspect of their writing. As a result, their ability in grammar did not improved enough; however, unlike the other aspects, grammar and mechanics were the lowest score gained in the second cycle. It was because the limited time to teach grammar during 2 cycle, while students had many grammatical problems to be solved. Moreover, this study more concerned students’ problems in developing and organizing ideas. 15 As the underpinning of scaffolding technique in teaching writing, it was implemented through the process writing based approach. The writing process used in this study incorporate five basic writing stages; prewriting, drafting, revising, editing, and publishing. As Richard and Renandya (2002) state, this approach which expose students with series of a planned learning experience which help them understand and experience the nature of writing at every point. In addition, as students managed their ideas from the scaffolding diagram until the final draft especially from prewriting to drafting stage. To give a better insights on how scaffolding worked on students’ writing process, some example of their works are presented. (Source – presented as original: ESB/Cycle 1) 1.2 Figure Sample of Student’s Scaffolding Diagram After having their ideas organized, the students therefore managed to create their first rough draft in the drafting stage, they therefore proceed to the revising stage, the students were assisted to revise their draft by adding, deleting, or substituting some materials of their draft. Furthermore, in the editing stage, the students attempt to make their writings optimally readable, and so, the focus is shifted to looking at mechanics of writing, which includes conventions of written Standard English: capitalization, punctuation, spelling, and grammar. Sample of student’s draft during the process of revising and editing is presented in Figure 1.3. 16 Figure 1,3The Samples of Students’ Self-Edited Writing Moreover, the students read word by wordto identify and locate mistakes. They initially find this activity burdensomeas they are used to leaving the judgment concerning mistakes to the teacher.However, encouragement and guidelines inediting have helped them easethe burden. They use marks, as illustrated in Figure 1.4 and editing checklist,as illustrated in Figure 1.5. Table 1.4 Students’ Self- Editing Guideline (Adapted from Richards &Renandya: 2004) No Questions Yes (√) No (√) 1 Have you used your text in simple present tense (v1)? 2 Have you used the correct preposition? 3 Does the text use the correct choice of word? 4 Have you used the appropriate Tornado Tornado is a strong dangerous wind. It looks like dark wind that √(on) the ground and its speed is about 300-00 mile per hour. It has very high air presure that spinning(T/spin) in the air. Tornado appear after the suppercells and strom cloud happen(WW/clash). It followed by the satellite tornado, a smaller tornado that moving(T/move) with the main tornado. There is a funnel of claud too, where the objects or victims of tornado are spinning(T/spin) inside it. Tornadoes mostly happen in America. But in Indonesia they - √known as putting beliung. They may kills (T/kill) many people and animals, destroy everything they touch, and damage every land that crossed by tornado. People can survive from tornado by using their basement in their house or public places. We also can detect the tornado before it comesnear our side. There is tool(WW/device)called Toto that √dropped(WW/is put) in the path of tornado to measure its strength, speed and direction. (Source – rewritten as original: LARSP/Cycle 2) 17 articles? 5 Is every word in the text written in correct spelling? 6 Are the capital letters written in correct position? Table 1.5 Students’ Peer-Editing Guideline (Adapted from Harmer: 2004) Symbol Meaning Example error Sp A spelling error The asnwer is obvius T Wrong verb tense It have slippery skin P Punctuation error Do you like London. C Capitalization error people love komodo Pl You need plural noun There 30 student_ in the classroom Sing You need singular noun I have one science books WW Wrong word He has rude skin Agr Verb Agreement problem I has one younger brother √ You need a word/preposition etc. I put the book on √ table ____ You don’t need this word CONCLUSIONS Referring to the discussion presented in the preceding chapters, the researcher draws some conclusions about how the scaffolding technique can improve the quality of the students’ ability in writing, particularly in writing report text. Results of the study indicate that scaffolding as a teaching technique can improve students’ writing ability and attitude. The major improvements in the aspects of writing score are content, organization, and vocabulary; so, these results are in line with the essence of the scaffolding technique that is to develop and organize ideas visibly. In relation to the use information report scaffolding diagram in prewriting, which every element on it was associated with the schematics structure of report text triggers students’ ability to dig deeper into ideas to be expressed. As a result, they are able to recognize the whole picture of the information to be developed and organized into coherent writing. The scaffolding technique is implemented through the five stages of writing process approach. By giving the students the experience of going through these processes of writing as a real writerhelp students to develop the skills needed in writing. At the same time, they also learn to work in collaboration with their friend, help each other to produce the best writing works, communicate ideas, and help them to develop the other language skills. 18 SUGGESTIONS The findings of this study offer suggestion for English teachers and future researchers. Due to the facts shown in the implementation of scaffolding technique can improve students’ ability in writing report text, it is recommended for English teachers and others who have similar problems to apply this teaching technique as an alternative solution to solve their teaching of writing problems. However, there some aspects need to be considered before implementing this technique. Firstly, to improve the quality of students’ writing ability, teachers should adopt the information report scaffolding diagram as one of the effective teaching strategies to help students to select, compose, and develop their ideas for writing. In order to help students to be accustomed in the process of writing, teachers should implement the scaffolding technique through the process writing approach. Besides, the consideration of selection of instructional materials is very important to support effectiveness of the teaching technique. Teachers may introduce and relate new knowledge and experience to the students, by focusing more on a particular main topic as the umbrella. For instance choosing topic about natural phenomenon like tornado, earthquake, sandstorm, in which students can learn and share different information on particular culture, people, tradition, climate, measurement, etc. In addition, with regard to the weakness of this study in which some aspects of writing; grammar and mechanics did not show satisfying result and one student did not pass the standard score of 75 as the minimum learning mastery, the English teachers of SMAN 5 Mataram have to take another action or continue the action to improve the students’ ability in writing. For the future researchers, they are recommended to use this study to carry out a study related to the use of scaffolding technique by employing the use of ICT and any other learning software as an attractive media to foster students’ effective learning. This scaffolding technique, however, is a dynamic and flexible; teacher can always modified what types of scaffolding that suit to particular classroom by considering their students’ level and proficiency. In sum, the use of scaffolding technique as a teaching strategy has two important implications to the teaching and learning process; Firstly, for the long time effect is this technique can be used by all the English teachers to overcome their classroom problems, especially in solving their students’ writing problem. Secondly, in its short term implication, the technique itself can be used as a learning strategy for student. As they get the real experience in completing their task, the students gradually become accustomed to every step of writing, and therefore it stimulates and affects their learning style, and therefore it will eventually become a more independent learner. REFERENCES Anderson, M & Anderson, K. (1997). Text Types in English 2. South Yarra: Macmilan Education Australia. Badger, R. & White, G. (2000).A Process Genre Approach to Teaching Writing.ELT Journa Volume 54/2l (Online), (http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/), accessed on November 21, 2012. http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ 19 Bass, J. (2010). The Teacher’s Big Book of Graphic Organizers. San Francisco: Wiley & Sons, Inc. Brown, H.D. (2007.) Teaching by Principle: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy (3rd Ed). White Plains, New York: Longman Pearson Education, Inc. Brown, H. D. 2004. Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom Practices. White Plains, New York: Longman Pearson Education Inc. Burns, A. (2010). Doing Action Research in English Language Teaching: A Guide for Practitioners. New York: Routledge. Byrne, D. (1984). Teaching Writing Skill. Essex: Longman. Carroll, J.A & Wilson, E.E. (1993). Acts of Teaching: How to Teach Writing. Colorado: Teacher Ideas Press. Chen, L. (2009). The Role of Revision and Teacher Feedback in Chinese College Context.CCSE English Language Teaching, (Online), 2 (4):162-166, (http://www.ccsenet.org/journal.html), accessed on November 24, 2012. Chien, C. L. (2007). Graphic Organisers as Scaffolding for Students’ Revision in the Pre-writing stage. In ICT: Providing choices for learners and learning. Proceedings ascilite Singapore 2007, (Online), (http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/singapore07/procs/lee-cc.pdf), accessed on December 3, 2012. Devlin, B. (2000) The Scaffolding Literacy Approach. NTIER Newsletter.Vol 5:1, (Online), (http://www.ntu.edu.au/education/ntier/newsletter/scaffolding. html), accessed on December 6th, 2012. Crandall, J. (2006). The Power of Writing: The Importance of Writing in EFL. (Online), (http://esl.about.com/library/weekly/aa081701a.html), accessed on Decemeber 3rd 2012. Galea, S. R & Nair, P. (2008).The Use of Scaffolding Strategies Among ESL Learners in the Comprehension of Literary Texts. Indonesian Journal of English Language TeachingVolume 4/Number 2. October 2008. Gardner, P. (2005). New Directions: Reading, Writing, and Critical Thinking (2nd). New York: Cambridge University Press. Harmer, J. (2000).How to Teach English: An Introduction to the Practice of English Language Teaching. Edinburg Gate: Addison Wesley Longman. Harmer, J. (20040.How to Teach Writing. Edinburg Gate: Addison Wesley Longman. Hinkel, E. (20040.Teaching Academic ESL Writing: Practical Techniques in Vocabulary and Grammar. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publisher. Hyland, K. (2003). Second Language Writing. In Jack. C. Richards (Ed). New York: Cambridge University Press. Housden, E. (2008).Senior Text Types; A writing Guide for Students. Queensland: Farr Books. Irwandi. (2012). Using Mind Mapping to Improve the Eleventh Graders’ Ability in Writing Report Text at SMAN 8 Malang. Unpublished Thesis: State University of Malang. http://www.ccsenet.org/journal.html http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/singapore07/procs/lee-cc.pdf http://www.ntu.edu.au/education/ntier/newsletter/scaffolding.hl http://esl.about.com/library/weekly/aa081701a.html 20 Isnawati, U. M. (2009). Improving the Writing Ability of the 11th Grade Students of MA HasyimAsyari Kembang Bahu Through the Implementation of Scaffolding Strategy. Unpublished Thesis. Malang: State University of Malang Kasmiani. (2010). The Implementation of Scaffolding in Improving Students’ Activeness in Writing. JurnalKependidikanTriadik, (Online), Volume 13, No.1, (http://www.docstoc.com/docs/56718144/Classroom-Action-Research), accessed on April 20, 2012. Knapp, P & Watkins, M. (2005).Genre, Text, Grammar, Technologies for Teaching and Assessing Writing. Sydney: University of New South Wales Press Ltd. Laksmi, E. D. (2006). Scaffolding Students’ Writing in EFL Class: Implementing Process Approach. TEFLIN Journal, Volume 17, Number 2. Latief, M.A. (2009). Classroom Action Research in Language Learning, (Online), (http://www.docstoc.com/docs/56718144/Classroom-Action-Research), accessed on April 20, 2012. Latief, M.A. (2010). Tanya JawabMetodePenelitianPembelajaranBahasa. Malang: State University of Malang. Lin, B. (2006).Vygotskian Principles in a Genre-Based Approach to Teaching Writing, (Online).(http://www.asian-efl-journal.com), accessed on November 24th 2012. Lawson, L. (2002).Scaffolding as a Teaching Strategy. City College.EDUC 0500. Longman Advanced American Dictionary. 2007. Harlow, Essesx: Longman. Muliasih, S. (2010). The Use of Scaffolding Technique to Improve the Students’ Competence in Writing Genre-Based Text.Parole, (Online), Vol.2, No.1, April 2010. McKenzie, J. (1999). From Now on the Education Technology Journal, Chapter 19- Scaffolding for Success in Beyond Technology: Questioning, Research and the Information Literate School Community, 9(4), December 1999, (Online), (http://fno.org/dec99/scaffold.html), accessed on December 3, 2012. Miller, K. W. (2012). Scaffolding Improvement in Writing Instruction: An Action Research Project. Thesis: Utah State University. Ningrum, A. S. B. (2012). Scaffolding Strategy in the Process of Writing to Improve the Students’ Writing Ability, Jakarta: Kementrian Agama Republik Indonesia. Nunan, D. (1999). Second Language Teaching and Learning. Boston: Heinle&Heinle. O’Malley, J. M & Pierce, L.V. 1996. Authentic Assessment for English Language Learners: Practical Approach for Teachers. Virginia: Addison-Wesley Publishing. Oshima, A. & Hogue, A. (2007). Introduction to Academic Writing (3rd Edition). New York: Addison-Wesley Longman. Oshima, A. & Hogue, A. (2006). Writing Academic English (4th Edition). New York: Longman. Raimes, A. (1983).Techniques in Teaching Writing. New York: Oxford University Press. Richards, J. C. &Renandya, (2002).W. A. Methodology of Language Teaching: An Anthology of Current Practice. New York:Cambridge University Press. Rosenshine, B &Meinster, C. (1992).The Use of Scaffolds for Teaching Higher- Level Cognitive Strategies. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/ http://fno.org/dec99/scaffold.html 21 Slavin. R. E. (2003). Educational Psychology Theory and Practice. 7/E. Boston: Pearson. Solikhah. (2012). Implementing Scaffolding Strategy to Improve the Writing Ability in Writing Exposition Texts of Grade XI Students of SMAN 1 Bangil.Unpublished Thesis: State University of Malang. Vernon, L. (2000). The Writing Process: A Scaffolding Approach. (http://www.Wm.edu/TTAC/packets/writing proocess.pdf), accessed on November 21, 2012. Verenikina, I. (2004). From Theory to Practice: What does the Metaphor of Scaffolding Mean to Educators Today?.Outlines.No. 2. 2004. (Online), accessed on November 21, 2012. Wakhid, A. (2011).Teaching Students to Write Report Text in English.In B.Y. Cahyono (Ed.), Teaching English by Using Various Text Types. Malang: Malang State University Press. Weigle, S.C. (2002). Assessing Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Weir, C. J. (1990).Communicative Language Testing. New York: Prentice Hall International. Widiati, U &Widayati. S. Out of a Writing Conference: Speaking-Writing Connection. TEFLIN Journal, Volume VIII Number 1, August 1997. Yangrifqi, N. (2012).The Effectiveness of Scaffold and Conferencing on the Senior High Scholl Students’ Ability in Writing Narrative and Descriptive Text.Unpublished Thesis: State University of Malang. Yan. G. (2005). A Process genre Approach Model for Teaching Writing.English Teaching Forum, (Online), 13 (3), (http://exchanges.state.gove/englishteaching/forom/archieves/docs/15-43-3- d.pdf), accessed on November 21, 2012. http://www.wm.edu/TTAC/packets/writing%20proocess.pdf http://exchanges.state.gove/englishteaching/forom/archieves/docs/15-43-3-d.pdf http://exchanges.state.gove/englishteaching/forom/archieves/docs/15-43-3-d.pdf 22