THE EFFECTIVENESS OF GUIDED COMPOSITION TECHNIQUE TO

TEACH STUDENTS' NARRATIVE TEXT WRITING

Kirana Mega Rahmawati, Abdurrachman Faridi, Sri Wahyuni

English Department State University of Semarang
Email: megark@students.unnes.ac.id; pakdur@mail.unnes.ac.id;
sriwahyunifbs@mail.unnes.ac.id

ABSTRACT

This paper summarizes a quasi-experimental study conducted to find out the

effectiveness of guided composition technique to teach narrative writing. Sixty
eighth grade students from two classes of a junior high school in Semarang
participated in this research. They were categorized into experimental group
taught using guided composition technique and control group taught using
teachers regular technique. The data were obtained from pretest, post-test and
interview. The results showed that the experimental groups mean score increased
from 55.47 to 64.4. However, t-test showed that t(table) was 2.006, higher than
t(value) (1.925). Therefore, the null hypothesis stating there was no significant
difference between the achievement of students who use guided composition
technique and those who use regular technique was accepted. It was supported by
the interview result that not all the students felt positive impact of guided
composition technique. Furthermore, Guided Composition Technique was less
effective to teach students' narrative writing.

Key Words: Guided Composition; Narrative; Writing

1
 SARI

Artikel ini merupakan ringkasan penelitian kuasi eksperimen yang dilaksanakan

untuk mengetahui efektivitas teknik menulis terbimbing (guided composition
technique) untuk mengajar siswa dalam menulis teks naratif. Enam puluh orang
siswa dari dua kelas salah satu Sekolah Menengah Pertama (SMP) di Semarang
terlibat dalam penelitian ini. Kedua kelas tersebut dibedakan menjadi kelompok
eksperimen yang diajar menggunakan guided composition technique dan
kelompok kontrol yang diajar menggunakan teknik yang biasa digunakan oleh
guru. Data yang diperoleh berasal dari pretes, pos-tes dan wawancara. Hasil
penelitian menunjukkan bahwa nilai rata-rata kelompok eksperimen meningkat
dari 55.47 menjadi 64.4. Namun uji t menunjukkan bahwa t(tabel) 2.006, lebih dari
t(hitung) (1.925), sehingga, hipotesis awal yang menyatakan bahwa tidak ada
perbedaan signifikan antara pencapaian siswa yang menggunakan guided
composition technique dan yang tidak menggunakannya diterima. Hal tersebut
juga didukung oleh hasil wawancara bahwa tidak semua siswa merasakan dampak
positif guided composition technique, sehingga Guided Composition Technique
kurang efektif untuk mengajar siswa dalam menulis teks naratif.

Kata Kunci: Menulis Terbimbing, Naratif, Menulis

INTRODUCTION
Writing is one of four language skills alongside listening, speaking and reading.
Gnes, as cited in Calp (2015), said that the skill meant writing down the
information structured in the brain. It is such a skill keeping us active since the
writers act and transmit ideas, thoughts, even feeling to another. According to
Sokolik (2003) as cited in Linse and Nunan (2006: 98), writing is combination of
process and product.
The process of writing refers to the act of gathering ideas and working with
them until they are presented in a manner that is polished and comprehensible to
readers. Writing process has four main elements: planning, drafting, editing
(reflecting and revising), and final version (Harmer, 2004:4). The writing process
is not linear, but rather recursive, which means to make a final draft, the writer is
able to re-plan, re-draft, and re-edit. The final presentation of writing process is
then called the product of writing.
In Indonesia, writing as a skill is taught and tested in English subject. We
should remember that most exams whether they are testing foreign language
abilities or other skills, often rely on students writing proficiency to measure their
knowledge (Harmer, 2004: 3). Therefore, writing is also one of indicators or
output that students have accomplished English lesson for several aspects in
teaching and learning English are conducted written.
Students of junior high school in Indonesia have problems dealing with
writing. They find that putting down an idea into text and arrange it in a manner
is difficult. Most of them find difficulties in terms of grammar, vocabulary,
2
coherence, and spelling. Yuliani (2009) says that writing itself is not an easy thing
to do. It needs much practice to make a good writing.
According to Anggara (2013: 1), teaching writing skill still needs greater
attention. Some current researches show that the process of teaching writing in
some schools in Indonesia is not satisfying which means they do not give
sufficient chances for students to develop their abilities. It is shown by many
students who are still not able to create good and meaningful texts.
Those facts happened because students still had some problems in writing.
First, the students actually had many creative ideas to be explored. However, they
did not know how to express their idea into written text in English. The students
were still confused about how to write correct sentences, correct spelling, proper
vocabulary and coherent text. Second, teacher's teaching method affected students'
writing development. In teaching writing, the teachers actually have implemented
guided question technique to students before asking them to make product of
writing. However, the process stopped on listing the question and answer. The
teacher then gave the instruction to students to directly make a product of writing
and usually focused on drilled assignments from copied handouts or students'
worksheet. In this case, teacher should have involved the students in teaching and
learning process. As what is said in Faridi (2012: 46), the teaching learning
process will be creative if the teacher gives student opportunities to participate.
When the students English achievement is low, this is assumed because they do
not paticpate in the teaching learning process.
Writing is different from speaking, reading and listening. Writing needs
mastery, not only of grammatical or rhetorical devices, but also conceptual and
judgemental elements to arrange words in order produce something in the final
written form (Heaton, 1990:135). Writing is more than recording idea on a paper
or computer file. It is also organizing ideas, preparing interview questions, jotting
down notes during an observation and writing for permission to use someone
else's questions or articles (Harmer, 2004: 25). Someone cant write when there is
nothing he or she wants to deliver. Seen as a skill, writing was essentially learned,
not taught, and the teacher's role was to be non-directive, therefore a teacher
facilitates writing through an encouraging and cooperative environment with
minimal interference when teaching writing It means the teacher provides students
with freedom into write may encourage fluency, but it doesn't liberate them from
the constraints of grammar and forming public contexts of writing.
Some schools in Indonesia still use School Based Curriculum (SBC) or
Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan (KTSP). In one of the junior high schools
in Semarang, SBC is implemented to the eight and nine grade use SBC, while
national 2013 curriculum is implemented to the seventh grade. At eight grade,
writing narrative text is taught in second semester. Based on the syllabus, writing
in junior school is one of the skills the students should acquire which contains
several competences. One of the competences requires them to be able to make a
composition in the form of narrative text. It is in line with content standard for
elementary and secondary education units in SBC that writing is one of the skills
which is taught where students are demanded to create simple essays, in the form
of procedure, descriptive, recount, narrative and report text, to interact with
3
surrounding environment. It is clearly stated in the Standard Competence of 12
that students are demanded to reveal the meaning contained in functional text and
short simple essay in the form of recount and narrative to interact with
surrounding environment and more specifically explained in the Basic
Competence of 12.2 that the students are demanded to reveal the meaning
contained in a simple short essay and discover its rhetorical steps by using a
variety of written language accurately, fluently and acceptable to interact with the
surrounding environment in the form of recount and narrative texts.
Narrative text and another kinds of texts belong to genre. The term of genre
refers to the types of text, either written or spoken. L Gerot & P. Wignell (1994:
17) say that genre can be defined as a culturally specific text-type which results
from using language (written or spoken) to (help) accomplish something. In short,
texts have their own purpose to be delivered and genre helps us classifying them.
Narrative text is a text which has social function to amuse, entertain, and to deal
with actual or vicarious experience in different ways. It deals with problematic
events which lead to a crisis or turning point of some kind, which in turn finds a
resolution. Narrative text type tells a story. Its purpose is to present a view of the
world that entertains or informs the reader or listener. It is related to the recount
text type (Anderson & Anderson, 2003).
One of the variant methods to present narrative is by using audio recording
or known recently by audiobook. According to Christensen et al (2013: 3), the use
of audio recording as an instructinal intervention is actually a part of a strategy
known as assisted reading. The process of assisted reading itself begins with
having students listen to an audio recording of a selected text, following along
with the teacher as the teacher read the text (Gilbert et al as cited in Christensen et
al, 2013). This strategy developed, in line with technology development.
Audiobooks were used in 1930s with the name of talking book in a government
program designed for blind readers. As technology developed, audiobooks have
not only been used for blind readers, but also for normal readers.
The use of Audiobook as teaching media makes it able to be combined with
other teaching technique, such as Guided Composition Technique. Guided
Composition Technique or usually known as Guided Writing Technique is a
technique where learners are given short texts and asked to fill in gaps, complete
sentences, transform tenses or personal pronouns, and complete other exercises
that focus student on achieving accuracy and avoiding errors (Hyland, 2003:4). In
guided composition technique, students are encouraged to think aloud and express
their idea under teachers guidance.
There are many different variations of guided composition technique,
depending on the teacher and the need of a class. Therefore, in its implementation,
we will find guided composition being combined with cooperative learning and
learning media, such as music, sequenced picture, etc. In this paper, audio book is
combined as a learning media to help students comprehend the text by listening to
the story while they are reading the text, and motivate them before starting
writing.
As what have been stated by Reid (1993), as cited in Dyan (2010: 30),
guided composition in widely used textbooks includes the following steps:
4
a. Model Paragraph
At the beginning, teacher provides a short text as a model paragraph and
briefly explains how the text can be used for model writing. Students may
concentrate on reading comprehension and study particular features of the text
given.
b. Comprehension Questions
Teacher may ask a series of questions about the basic information of the text
given.
c. Language Based Exercises
Teacher may give a series of exercises focusing on vocabulary building and
sentence structure. The activites may involve pattern drilling such as
transformation, substitution or completing pattern drills.
d. Oral Composition
The meaning of oral composition is the oral activity done orally. The oral
preparation can be conducted beforehand with the whole class in the form of
discussion. By discussion, students make suggestion about what to write and
teacher makes an outline or a list of key expression on the board as a basis for
student.
e. Written Composition
Students may follow the model given by the teacher, but they should involve
some changes.

METHODOLOGY
This research was conducted by using quasi-experimental design. The subjects of
this study were the eight grade students of the collaborative school in Semarang,
which consisted of eigth classes. Two classes of those were taken as sample of
this research by using purposive sampling or non-probability sampling. This
sampling technique was applied because in the nonequivalent-groups design, the
individuals can not be assigned randomly that and gathered in a particular group.
Therefore, it means that only the existing groups which can be chosen as the
participants without changing their student composition. A discussion with the
English teacher of the collaborative school was conducted in order to determine
the sample. The groups which would be involved in research were determined by
the consideration of class similarity that the classes were taught the same
materials by the same teacher, the number of the students were indentical, and the
mean of the students scores were approximately the same. Two classes were
selected and then categorized into experimental group and control group. Each
Group consisted of thirty students. Both group were examined in pretest and post-
test. However, the experimental group was taught by using guided composition
technique and some of its participants would be interviewed, while the control
group was taught by using teachers regular technique. The data of this research
were categorized into two type, quantitative data which were taken from test
results as the primary data, and qualitative data which were taken from the
interview results as supporting data.
The independent variable of this research was the implementation of guided
composition to teach writing narrative text, while the dependent variable of this
5
study is the students' ability in writing narrative text. There are two hypotheses in
this research, alternative hypothesis and null hypothesis. The alternative
hypothesis (Ha) is there is a significant difference between the achievement of the
students' who use guided composition technique and those who use regular
technique, while the null hypothesis (Ho) is there is no significant difference
between the achievement of the students' who use guided composition technique
and those who use regular technique.
The instruments of data collection were tests consisting of pretest and post-
test to collect primary data and interview to collect the supporting data. To collect
the primary data, pretest and post-test were conducted to both of the groups. In
pretest, students of both groups were asked to make a narrative text with the
provided theme.
After conducting pretest, the students were given treatment. The treatment
was conducted twice which each was conducted in two meetings. During the
treatment, the students were given the same topic. However, in the experimental
group, the students were taught by using guided composition technique while the
in the control group, students were taught by using regular technique conducted
by teacher.
After the treatment, post-test was conducted. The students were asked to
write a narrative text with the same instruction and procedure as the pretests, but
with different theme. It attempted to find out the progress of the students wrting
ability after the treatment was conducted.
In order to support the primary data, interview was conducted after post-test
to six students from the experimental group. Those students represented three
category of score, high, moderate and low. The interview was conducted to find
out the students respond after being treated with guided composition technique.
Then all data obtained were analyzed. Homogeneity and normality test were
conducted to make sure that all of the data were homogeneous and normal before
processed in t-test. The result of pretest and post-test were analyzed by using t-test
in order to find the significant difference between the group taught by guided
composition technique and the group taught by regular technique conducted by
teacher, as well as to prove whether the technique was effective or not.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

During the study, the data was collected through pretest, post-test and interview
during the research. The research started by administering the pretest. The pretest
was administered to both control group (8B) and experimental group (8C). There
were 30 students in each class who were involved. The test was conducted in
order to measure the students initial knowledge of narrative text writing. In doing
the pretest, students had to write a narrative text in 40 minutes with the specified
theme.
The result of pretest showed that the mean score experimental group was
55.47, while the control groups was 58.40. Before conducting t-test, it was
important to check whether the data was homogeneous and normal. To make sure
that the students are in the same level, homogeneity test was conducted. The result
showed that For = 5% with df = 6-1 and X2 table = 11.07.
6
 The result showed that Fvalue (1.483) Ftable (2.045). Data were
homogeneous If F value F table. Therefore, it could be concluded that the
experimental and control group were homogeneous which meant the study could
be continued.
To make sure that data were normal, normality test was conducted. For the
experimental group, for = 5% with df = 6 1 and X2 table = 11.070. The pretest
data in the experimental group showed that the X2value was -128.187 and X2table was
11.070. A test was categorized normally distributed if x2 value < x2 table at a
certain level of significance. Since X2value was lesser than X2 table (-128.187 <
11.070), it could be concluded that the pretest data of the experimental group was
said normality distributed.
Meanwhile, in the control groups result, showed for = 5% with df = 6 1
and X2 table = 11.070. The pretest data in the control group showed that the X2value
was -91.617 and X2table was 11.070. Since X2value was lesser than X2 table (-91.617 <
11.070), it meant the pretest data of the control group was normally distributed
and furthermore, they could be calculated in t-test.
The calculation of t-test resulted with degree of freedom (df) = 30+30-2 =
58 and at level of significance () = 5%, ttable = 2.006, while tvalue is -1.278.
Therefore, both groups' initial condition was the same and H0 stating that there
was no significant difference in the mean of pretest was accepted.
After the treatment, the post-test was carried on to measure the students
narrative writing ability after getting the treatment. And the result indicated the
improvement of both groups scores, showed by the mean score of the
experimental group which was 64.4, higher than the control group's which was 60.
It indicated that guided composition technique had given different impact in
students' writing ability to the experimental group compared to the regular
technique conducted by the teacher to the control group. In short, we can see that
guided composition technique was more effective than the regular technique
conducted by the teacher. However, additional data and a t-test was still necessary
to prove and strengthen that the technique is really effective. Before conducting t-
test, the first thing to do was observing whether the data were homogeneous and
normally distributed or not.
The homogeneity of the post-test calculation showed for = 5% with df= 6-
1 and X2 table = 11.07, Fvalue (1.296) Ftable (2.045). Therefore, it could be
concluded that the experimental and control group were homogeneous and t-test
could be conducted.
Meanwhile, the normality tests result was showed in the experimental
group that For = 5% with df = 6 1 and X2 table = 11.070, the calculation
showed that the X2value was -114.992 and X2table was 11.070. Since X2value was
lesser than X2 table (-114.992 < 11.070), the post test data of the experimental group
could be categorized as normally distributed.
Nevertheless, in the control groups result, showed that for = 5% with df =
6 1 and X2table = 11.070. The results of post-test data in the control group
showed that the X2value was lower than X2 table (-90.778 < 11.070). So, we could
conclude that the post-test data of the control group was distributed normally.

7
Therefore, the data from both the experimental and control group could be
processed further in t-test.
Before going to t-test, served the figure of Mean score differences between
Experimental and Control Group.

Figure 1 Mean Scores of the Experimental and Control Group

Mean Scores of The Experimental and Control Group

70

65

60

55

50
Pretest Post- test

Experimental Group Control Group

Figure 1 above showed the mean score of the experimental group was 55.47
when pretest and increased into 64.4 when post-test and the mean score of the
control group increased from 58.40 when pretest into 60.00. Therefore, the
percentage of the experimental group improvement, between pretest and post-test
was 16.09%, while the control group's was 2.74%.
The preceeding step to find out that the technique was effective in t-test, the
data were calculated to find the standard deviation. After finding the calculation,
the standard deviation, mean of the groups and the amount of both of groups'
students were processed using the t-test.
The calculation of t-test found that tvalue was 1.925. Then, degree of freedom
(df) was determined in order to consult the tvalue with ttable. The number of
participants in each group were 30, so df = 30+30-2 = 58, with level significance
() = 5%. Thus, the ttable 2.006. The result showed that tvalue was lesser than ttable
(tvalue < ttable). The alternative hypothesis was accepted if tvalue > ttable, which meant
there was a significant difference in writing ability achievement between the
experimental and control group. On the contrary, if (tvalue < ttable), the significant
difference does not exist. For = 5% and df = 30+30-2 = 58, t(0.95) (58) = 2.006,
while tvalue was 1.925. So, it could be concluded that both groups' achievement
after the treatment had no significance difference.
8
 The analysis of quantitative data showed the statistical students'
achievement in writing skill before and after the treatment. In pretest, the
experimental group's average score was 55.47, while the control group's was 58.4.
The score difference was not really significant. To make sure both of the
groups' initial condition, the scores were also processed by using t-test. The result
showed that (tvalue < ttable) ttable = 2.006, while tvalue = -1.278. Therefore we could
say before the treatment, the students from both of the groups were in the same
level of writing skill.
After the students received the treatment, the students' average score from
both of the group were improved. In post-test, the experimental group got 64.4,
while control group got 60.0. In percentage, the experimental group's score
increased 16.09% while the control group increased 2.74%. Those increase of the
score indicated that students who were taught by using Guided Composition
Technique got better result than the control group.
To make sure the effectiveness of the technique, the scores of the groups
were examined by using t-test. The result showed that in post-test, (tvalue < ttable),
where t(able = 2.006 while tvalue =1.925. It indicated that statistically, there was no
significant different between both of the scores which meant that both of the
group were still in the same level of writing skill ability after getting the
treatment.
Additional data were necessary to collect in order to support the result
obtained from statistical calculation. Therefore, an interview was performed in
order to obtain supporting data for the primary data of the study. The type of
interview chosen was personal interview, where the interviewer and interviewee
could contact face to face, so the students could tell their opinion comfortably.
The interview was conducted in Indonesian language, so that the students could
understand and answer the questions properly. The interview was held in the
break time on Saturday and Monday, March 25th and 27th 2017 to six students
from experimental group. The students involved in the interview represented
threes level of scores: high, middle, and low.
The research findings asserted that the results of the post-test supported the
null hypothesis (Ho) which stated There is no significant difference between the
achievement of the students' who use guided composition technique and those
who use regular technique.". As the result, the working hypothesis (Ha) which
stated "There is a significant difference between the achievement of the students'
who use guided composition technique and those who use regular technique." was
not accepted.
There were some factors influencing the result of the score. First, according
to data taken from the interview to the experimental group, found that narrative
text was not the most the students' favorite type of text. Of the six students
interviewed, only two students who liked narrative text, while the other somewhat
liked narrative text (three students), and disliked (one student).
Another factor was the way the teacher taught them which relied on
translating and did not guide the students much to write and the writing problems
which the students faced.

9
 However, after the students received the treatment using Guided
Composition Technique, five of six students said that they felt positive impact,
although one of the students form high score category only felt a bit positive
impact and one person from moderate score category said he did not get more
understanding in learning narrative writing. The six students said that their writing
ability was improved and felt accustomed to using past form, developing idea, and
understanding how to create narrative text. The students enjoyed writing narrative
text although they sometimes felt difficult to write. In addition, four of six
students said that the Guided Composition Technique used in the treatment was
interesting for it used audiobook as learning media. It made them felt involved in
the story, knew more how to pronounce English words, and became keener on
English. Nevertheless, one student from moderate score level said Guided
Composition Technique was fairly interesting and one student from high score
level said it was ordinary.
Although it had generally increased the experimental group's score, the
researcher could not claim that Guided Composition Technique successfully
helped the students to improve their skill in writing narrative text. First, it was
simply shown by the statistical result findings that there was no significant
difference between the experimental group's mean score result and the control
group's mean score in post-test. Second, from the interview, revealed that not all
the students feel comfortable and supported in learning process during the
treatment using Guided Composition Technique.
The students factor did affect the result of the treatment since they were the
participants of this research. One habit of the students which the researcher
considered not supporting the learning process was the students liked to ask the
teacher the meaning of the words they did not understand instead of looking up a
dictionary. The habit might have been solved by asking the students to bring their
dictionary.
The next factor came from the researcher. Since Guided Composition
Technique needed sustainable act of treatment and took longer process, a
researcher who was responsible to carry out this research should be aware in
conducting the treatment according to the lesson plan. However, the less field
control, for example was handling the noise class' atmosphere and the narrative
texts prepared to the students which were too difficult, made the treatment did not
really run as it was supposed to be.
The last was the external factor. What the researcher meant by the external
factor was the things were out of the researcher's control coming from the
regulation of the school and the school's activities. The research was being
conducted from Thursday, March 2nd 2017 to March 27th 2017 which took longer
time than the research timeline. It happened because there was a national exam
preparation and mid-semester test in the in the middle of the treatment process, so
the research was being postponed for approximately one week. This was
suspected to influence the students' condition.
CONCLUSIONS
Three conclusions can be drawn as followed:

10
 First, based on the quantitative data analysis, statistically, the use of
Guided Composition Technique was less effective to teach students' narrative
writing. It could be showed by the results that in post-test, ttable was 2.006, higher
than tvalue which was 1.925 so that the null hypothesis stating there was no
significant difference between the achievement of the students' who use guided
composition technique and those who use regular technique was accepted.
Second, the interview findings also noted that although Guided
Composition Technique was interesting enough to most of the students and able
to increase students' understanding and writing skill, it still needed more
improvisation.
Third, a successful teaching was indicated by a successful process and good
scores achieved by students. Regarding to teaching narrative writing, teachers
have to provide the most appropriate technique to support the students understand
how to write narrative text itself and get familiar with English.

REFERENCES
Anderson, K., & Anderson, M. (2003). Text types in English 2. South Yara:
Macmillan Education Australia.
Anggara, Y. D. (2013). The Effectivenessof Guided Writing in Improving the
Students' Writing Abilityof the Eighth Grade Students at SMP Negeri 2
Temon in the Academic Year of 2012/ 2013. Thesis of English Education
Department FBS UNY.
Calp, M. (2015). The Comparison of Fourth Grade Students' Essays Based on
Free and Guided Writing Technique in Terms of the Quality of Written
Expression. Academic Journal, 10, 444-452.
Christensen, R., Huffman, S., McAllister, T., & Whittingham, J. (2013). Use of
Audiobooks in a School Library and Positive Effects of Struggling
ReadersParticipation in a Library-Sponsored Audiobook Club. School
Library Research, 16, 1-18.
Dyan, V. L. (2010). Improving Writing Skill through Guided Writing. Thesis of
Teacher Training nd Education Fakulty UNS.
Faridi, A. (2012). Methods Used in Teaching English at Junior High Schools in
Central Java. Arab World English Journal, 44-55.
Gerot, L., & Wignell, P. (1994). Making Sense of Functional Grammar. Sydney:
Gerd Stabler.
Harmer, J. (2004). How to Teach Writing. London: Pearson Education Limited.
Harmer, J. (2004). The Practice of English Language Teaching. Cambridge:
Longman.
Heaton, J. ( 1990). Writing English Language Test (Longman Handbook for
Language Teacher). New York: Longman Group UK Limited.
Hyland, K. (2003). Second Language Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
11
Hyland, K. (2007). Genre and Second Language Writing. Michigan: The
University of Michigan Press.
Linse, C. T., & Nunan, D. (2006). Practical English Language Teaching: Young
Learners. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Yuliani. (2009). Improving Students' Writing Skill Using Guided Composition.
Final Project of School of Teacher Training and Education Faculty UMY.

12