1

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background
Teaching writing is important for students of university at English
departments. Writing skill is assumed to be the most essential skill in order to be
successful. The university students are expected to be able to express their ideas both
in non-academic and academic writing such as writing essay, an article and a Skripsi
as their final project.
Helping students to be able to have a good writing skill is not easy and it
needs some effective efforts. It is due to the fact that writing is a complex subject.
Heaton (1990:135) states that writing is complex and difficult to teach and also learn,
requiring mastery not only of grammatical and rethorical devices but also of
conceptual and judgmental elements. From this point of view, writing skill covers the
mastery of language, mechanical skills, treatment of content stylistic skills and
evaluative skills.
Concerning with the importance of writing, Madako University in Tolitoli
provides a writing course which basically aims at improving the students skill
writing sentences, paragraphs and essays. Its reflected by the objective of the writing
course provided in the first and the second year. In the first year writing course is
called writing I where the main objective of the course is the students are expected to
be able to have knowledge about writing cover types of sentences, sentence

connectors and punctuation. In the second year writing course is called writing II.
The main objective of this course is the students are expected to be able to write good
paragraphs and various type of essay such as description, exposition and
argumentation.
The students are considered successful in writing course if they get or equal to
the minimum score established. The minimum score of the writing course is 65. The
scores are indicated by numbers then converted into letter. 85-100= A, 75-84= B, 6574= C, 55-64= D and less than 55= E.
Skripsi supevisors of Madako University reported that it is hard to check the
students Skripsi. They also found that the students skills in writing are not adequate
to write a skripsi in terms of, organization of ideas, sentence formation, and the
language use. In addition, the problems are identified by interviewing students
directly and analyzing their writing assigments. It can be concluded that the students
problems are (1) organizing and elaborating ideas, (2) limitation of time to revise
their paper, (3) lack of grammar knowledge and vocabulary, and (4) low motivation
to write.
Concerning to the first problem, it is hard for the students to develop their
ideas into a systematic writing and to find sufficient additional information to support
their topic. The cause of these problems is the instructor does not lead and show the
students how to develop and support their ideas by using relevant information so that
their argumentative essay can be scientifically accepted. The students are not given
enough time to explore the available sources. It means that there is no reading time
for collecting relevant information.

The second problem is the students dont have enough chance to make the
draft at home and conduct some revision on their paper. This situation caused by the
limited time and the instructor does not give a special time to share with the students.
It means that the students just write on paper for each topic for the whole semester
without any chances to make it better.
The third problem is the lack of grammar knowledge and vocabulary. Actually
these problem are caused by a long process started from the grammar and vocabulary
courses. It became worse when they wrote their paper without enough guidance from
both teacher and their peers.
The last but not least, those three mentioned problems influence the students
motivation to write. They were frustrated because of the teachers way of teaching
which did not help them to be an intelligible academic paper and the classroom
atmosphere did not encourage them to be a good writer.
Based on the common problems in writing found above, the second year
students of English Education Study Program of Madako University academic year
2014-2015 particularly class C tends to the first problem. They find it difficult to
organize and elaborate their ideas into a good writing. In addition based on the result
of their writing products in first half of the second year 64% of them get lower score
than the minimum score have been established.
As the instructor of the class, the writer needs to apply a new learning strategy
to overcome the problems faced by the students. One of the strategies can be applied
is autonomous learning. Autonomous learning provides some advantages for both the
teacher and the students. As in the autonomous learning the teacher will not be the

most authoritative person anymore and it reduces the students dependency on the
teacher. In addition, autonomous learning leads the students actively involved to
decide their learning including what is learned, when, where, and how it is learned. It
means that the students are encouraged to be an active learner than passive one.
In line with the advantages of autonomous learning above, the researcher
conducted a classroom action research by applying autonomous learning to improve
students writing skill especially in organizing ideas.

1.2 Problem Statement

In line with the background of the research, the problem statement of this
research is below:
How can the application of autonomous learning in improving students writing
skill?
1.3 Objective of the Research
In accordance with the problem statement above, the research objective was to
improve writing skill of the second year students of English education study program
of Madako University 2014/2015 academic year by applying autonomous learning.
1.4 Significance of the Research
The findings of the research were expected to be useful way to improve
students skill in writing essay. Practically, this research can be a guidance for other
teacher/instructor to use autonomous learning in teaching writing.

1.5 Scope and Limitation

This research was focused at improving students argumentative essay
especially in organizing ideas through autonomous learning.

1.6 Definition of Key Terms

Autonomous Learning in this research refers to the procedure which requires
the students to be an autonomous writer. It involves analyzing the model text from the
introduction, developmental paragraphs and concluding paragraphs. After analyzing
the model text autonomously the students are expected to be able to apply all aspects
found in the text for their own argumentative essays.
Argumentative essay is an essay which is used to persuade or convince the
readers. The argumentative essay shows the writers way of taking position on a
debatable topic, supporting the topic with relevant evidences and keeping the readers
on their side.
Organizing ideas refers to the art of communicating the information. It
involves the writers way in presenting the argument and supporting the argument
with some convincing both subjective and objective evidence.

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1 Review of Previous Study

In relation to this research, some studies have already been done dealt with
autonomous learning. Sudarsono (2004) conducted a research by focusing his study
on Applying Semi-Autonomous Learning Activity in The Listening Class for Students
of English Language Education Department at Jember University. The result of his
study was the students listening skill became improved, either individually or in
group. It was showed by the students score. Another result of his study was some
students who previously had a negative attitude toward the listening subject finally
had a positive one, it was indicated by the high enthusiasm and motivation they
showed or stated during the process of learning.
Another researcher who has done a study on autonomous learning was
Manurung (2005), who focused his study on Instructing Language Learning
Strategies to Promote Autonomous Learning at English Department of Tadulako
University. The result of his study showed that the students in the experimental group
improved more in their EFL performance than their counterparts in the control group.
The next study related to autonomous learning was done by Kweldju (2000).
The study focused on Developing a Model of Writing Instruction for Improving
English Department Students Stylistic English. The study produced an effective

model of writing instruction with autonomous learning. From the model developed
and employed, the researcher found that it succesfully improved the students writing
style and enrich their idea to write in their essays. Futhermore, the model developed
driven instructional model which students autonomously collect and learn the stylistic
items they would learn. It also improved many other relevant skills and attitudes for
essay writing. In reference to the previous studies, the current study will be conducted
at the second year students of Madako University academic year 2014-2015. What
make this study different from the previous study that the current study will be
focused on writing argumentative text particularly in organizing ideas.
2.2 Autonomous Learning
The term of autonomy in learning was originally defined by Holec (1981) as
the ability to take charge of ones learning. Since then autonomous in learning has
been defined in many ways using such words as capacity, willingness and attitude.
The following are definitions of autonomous learning commonly found in much of
the literature:
a. a capacity for detachment, critical reflection, decision making and
independent action (Little, 2007)
b. a capacity and willingness to act independently and in cooperation with
others, as, social, responsible person. (Dam, 2010:102)
c. an attitude towards learning in which the learner is prepared to take, or
does take, responsibility for his own learning. (Dickinson, 1995:167)
Defining autonomous learning is not a simple task as there is little consensus
on its meaning. However, there is a general agreement in all the literature that
autonomous learners are those who understand the purpose of their learning, share in

the setting of their learning objectives, plan practice opportunity implement

appropriate learning strategies, and regularly review and evaluate their progress
(Cotterall 2009; Dickinson 1995; Little 2007)
What these definitions do well gives us a more holistic view of the learner
where the learner is perceived as a decision maker and one who is connected to the
process of learning. They address the political aspect of autonomous learning where
the learners have the individual freedom to take control and make decision choices
about their learning (Reinders & Balcikanli 2011).
On the other hand, Benson (2010) argues that the autonomous learning from
the teachers perspective is primarily concerned with institutional and classroom
learning arrangements which established in the curriculum. The degree to which the
learners can become autonomous and take responsibility for their learning depends on
their relationship with the teacher. Autonomous learning is an interdependent
relationship where the subject of learning, in this case a foreign language, is placed
between teacher and learner (Barillaro 2011).
From the above points of view, it can be concluded that autonomous learning
is learners willingness and ability to take responsibility to plan, implement, monitor
and evaluate his or her learning with control and support from the teacher.
2.3 Autonomous Learning in Higher Education
Those points of view motivated the researcher to implement autonomous
learning in teaching writing. The implementation is relevant to the idea of

autonomous learning in the higher education which was proposed by Tam (2004: 32)
that the autonomous learning in higher education are:
1. The learners are actively involved in decisions about their learning, including
what is learned, when, where and how it is learned, how it is assessed and by
whom;
2. Active rather than passive;
3. The teacher provides or fasilitates rather than didactic teaching interventions;
4. The teacher provides or facilitates the necessary resources for the achievement
of learning outcome;
In addition, autonomous learning can lead the students to be an active learner
from the passive learner, brings a fresh air in language learning as well (Rendon
1995). From those points of view, it is clear that the autonomous learning is beneficial
for university students as adult learner where adult learners are expected to be an
independent learner who can take responsibility about their learning involve what to
be learned, how is learned and how to evaluate it.
2.4 Consideration in Applying Autonomou s Learning
The consideration in applying autonomous learning is that it provides an
opportunity to make either teachers or students role change in a positive way. The
following explanation shows how the teachers and the students role change.

2.4.1

The Teachers Role

In the autonomous learning the role of teacher is quite different from the

teachers role in the conventional way of teaching where the teacher is the only one

10

resource of knowledge in the classroom. However, in the autonomous learning

teacher is a facilitator, an organizer, a resource person providing learners with
feedback and encouragement, and a creator of learning atmosphere and space. In
other words, a teacher work as a guide, a co-operator and an initiator rather than an
authority (Joshi 2011).
In addition, Cammileri (1999: 112) adds that a teacher of in the autonomous
learning class become more of a manager, a resource person and counselor. As a
manager means teacher will need to balance their role of supplier of knowledge and
that of manager of learning opportunity. Teacher need to be skillful in managing a
class where learners actively participate in decision making. As a resource person
means the teacher involve helping learners to develop an awareness of their learning
styles and the various learning strategies available to them in order to appropriate
learning materials inside and outside the classroom. As a counselor means the teacher
involves monitoring students learning and offering advice to help them manage
learning difficulties. In short, the teachers are no longer the only experts in importing
knowledge, but just organize the classroom teaching activities.
Based on the statements above it can be concluded that the teachers role in
the autonomous learning is to act as supervisor and guide the students to achieve the
learning objective rather than to import knowledge merely.
2.4.2

Students Role
As a result of the change of teachers role, the students role in the classroom

has also changed. In autonomous learning, the students should be active learners

11

rather than passive receivers. They must know what to do and where to go under the
guidance of the teacher. They must be able to find some references either from the
book or from the internet to enlarge their knowledge. Moreover, Rendon (1995)
suggest that the students should be an active participant or performer in the class. It
means that they are required to show themselves and to give a full attention to their
abilities. By the condition, it will encourage students to improve their skill and it also
motivates them to perform better.
Additionally, Smith (2008) suggest that in order to become excellent students
in the autonomous learning, one should have these following characteristics: a) learn
how to learn under the guidance of the teacher, b) be able to use different source to
get as much information as possible, c) be active in the process of classroom learning,
d) be ready to take certain charge of his or her own learning, e) learn to monitor his or
her own learning.
2.5 The Nature of Writing
The nature of writing can be widely defined from several perspectives. They
are in comparison with speaking as a physical and mental activity, as cognitive
activity and a means of communication. These four perspectives will be explained
more in the following discussions.
In the process of language learning, there are four language skills that must be
learnt by the learners namely listening, speaking, reading and writing. From the four
language skills, writing is categorized as one of the productive skills along with
speaking since they involve producing language rather than receiving it (Spratt,

12

2005). Although both writing and speaking are productive skills, those two skills are
basically different in a various way. The differences lie on a number of dimension
including textual, features, socio-cultural norm, pattern of use and cognitive process
(Weigle: 2002).
As stated by Bachani (2003), writing is slightly different from speaking in
term of communication context. Speaking is always intended for face to face
communication the audience present. While writing is always used by the writer to
express and communicate their ideas to the readers who separated by both time and
space distances. Therefore, it requires clearer and more comprehensive message. In
other words, when people communicate orally, they can use various types of prosodic
features such as pitch, rhythm, pauses that enable them to get feedbacks from the
listeners. In contrast, those features of speaking do not exist in writing because the
communication context is created by the words alone without having interaction
between the writer and the reader.
The nature of writing can also be defined as both physical and mental activity
that is aimed to express and impress (Nunan: 2003). It is categorized as the physical
activity because a writer is required to be able to do the act of committing the words
or ideas. As a mental work, the activities of writing focus more on the act of inventing
ideas, thinking about how to express and organize them into clear statements and
paragraphs that enable a reader in understanding the ideas of the written work.
To support the definition of writing proposed by Nunan, Brown (2001) also
stated that writing is the written product of thinking, drafting, and revising that
require specialized skills on how to generate ideas, how to generate them coherently,

13

how to use discourse markers and rhetorical convention coherently into a written text.
In short, some stages of the text composition proposed by Brown involve the act of
physical and mental, for example how to generate ideas, how to organize them
coherently etc.
Writing is also seen as a cognitive activity. Hayes (2009) stated that the
process of writing involves three main cognitive activities, involving text
interpretation, reflection and text production. The three cognitive processes are not
only applied in the drafting process but also in the revising process. First cognitive
activity of writing is text interpretation. It is the process of creating internal
representations derived from linguistics and graphics input, while reflection is the
process of creating new representation ideas from the existing representation in the
process of text interpretation. Text production is the last process in which new written
linguistics form are produced.
2.6 Aspects of Writing
There are some aspects of writing should be taken into account in producing a
good composition. They are organization, sentence formation, language use and
mechanics (Heaton, 1989).
a. Organization
Organization is the way of students organize the introduction, body, and
conclusion of the paragraph in logical and sequential order, so it will produce
cohesion and coherent paragraph. It also refers to the ability to organize paragraphs
according to the generic structure of the text.

14

b. Sentence formation
Sentence formation refers to the ability to write in appropriate manner for a
particular purpose with a particular audience in mind, together with an ability to
select, organize and order relevant information (Heaton, 1989: 135). Students,
however, sometimes have problem in word order when they are in writing practice.
They do not know how to construct sentence. Therefore, the students should be armed
with a sufficient knowledge about sentence formation in order to produce an effective
writing.
c. Language use
Language use or grammar is the knowledge of various language rules in practice for
effective communication. The rules involves inflection (plural, possessives, -ed, -ing
with verbs, and ly with adverbs) and subject with verb agreement. Heaton (1989)
defines that language use refers to the ability to write correct and appropriate
sentences. Correct and appropriate sentences can be achieved by knowing the
grammar rules. The common error of language use made by the students is misuse
tenses. To avoid this error the students need to know and identify about the verb form
in English. In writing argumentative essay the students will deal some tenses such as
present tense, past tense and future tense.
d. Mechanics
Sometimes in writing a piece of paper or essay the students just focus on how
to produce a good composition. In fact, there is one thing that should be kept in mind

15

called mechanics. Mechanics refers to the letter cognition, basic rules of spelling,
punctuation, and capitalization. It is a basic skill in producing written language.
Therefore, the students need to be taught about mechanics at the basic level of
education because it plays important rule in written language.
In conclusion, writing is a productive skill that must be learnt and mastered by
the English learners that involve the process of thinking, drafting and revising.
Writing is a mean of communication that enables the students to synthesize the
knowledge they have into an acceptable text that is appropriate with the English
writing conventions, such as, organization, sentence formation, language use and
mechanics.
2.7 Paragraph Development
An essay must be consisted of several paragraphs that support the ideas
behind the writing. In other word, the paragraphs in essay are not only consisting of
some sentences which discuss the topic sentence, but also all the sentences are
connected each other, and complete information to the reader. There are three
sentences must be involved in a paragraph as stated by Behrman (2003), they are
topic sentence, supporting sentences, and concluding sentences.
In developing paragraph, a writer should focus on a single idea. The idea is
usually stated in one general sentence called topic sentence. The topic sentence states
the main idea of paragraph. Besides, it also limits the topic that will be discussed
completely in the paragraph. The next is supporting sentences. They give detail
explanation about the topic sentence such as reason, examples, facts, statistics, and

16

quotations. They also help the reader to understand about readers mean and show
that the topic sentence is valid. The last but not least is concluding sentence. It signs
the end of the paragraph and leaves the reader with important point to remember. In
other words, concluding sentences remind the reader what have been discussed in the
paragraph.
2.8 Writing Scoring System
To measure the students argumentative writing product, it is important to
establish the writing scoring system. In this research the writer adapts the writing
scoring system for argumentative essay proposed by OMalley (1996).

17

Aspect

Introduction

Body of
paragraph

Score
4

Introductory
paragraph
contains detailed
background
information, a
clear explanation
or definition of
the problem,
devices to create
interest, and a
well-formed,
properly placed
thesis statement.

Introductory
paragraph contains
some background
information, a
technique for
creating interest,
and states the
problem, but does
not explain using
details. States the
thesis of the essay.

Introduction states
the thesis but does
not adequately
explain the
background of the
problem nor does
the writer attempt
to create interest.
The problem is
stated, but lacks
detail.

Thesis and/or
problem is
vague or
unclear. Writer
does not
attempt to
create interest.
Background
details are a
seemingly
random
collection of
information,
unclear, or not
related to the
topic.

Three or more
main points are
well developed
with supporting

Three or more main

points are present
but may lack detail
and development in

Three or more
main points, but all
lack development.
Refutation

Fewer than
three main
points, with
poor

Points

18

Conclusion

details.
Refutation
paragraph
acknowledges
the opposing
view and argues
it logically. It is
obvious that a
plan was
developed to
create sound,
logical
development.

one or two.
Refutation
paragraph
acknowledges the
opposing view, but
does not present
sound counterpoint.
Overall, the paper is
logically developed.

paragraph missing
and/or vague.
There are one or
two examples that
are not sound,
logical argument.
Paper itself is
repetitious,
contradictory, or
shows lack of
organizational

development of
ideas.
Refutation
missing or
vague. Obvious
lack of sound,
logical
argument
throughout.
There are many
examples of
poor
organizational
planning.

Conclusion
summarizes the
main topics
without
repeating
previous
sentences;
writer's
commentary and
suggestions for
change are

Conclusion
summarizes main
topics. Some
suggestions for
change are evident.

Conclusion
summarizes main
topics, but is
repetitive. No
suggestions for
change and/or
commentary are
included.

Conclusion
does not
adequately
summarize the
main points.
No
commentary or
suggestions for
change are
included.

19

logical and well

thought out.
Mechanics

Sentence
structure is
correct and
sentences are
varied
(beginnings,
lengths,
structures).
Diction is at a
college level or
the appropriate
level for the
audience.
Punctuation,
spelling and
capitalization are
correct. No other
mechanical
errors.

Sentence structure is
generally correct.
Some awkward
sentences do appear.
Sentences show
some variety, with
an occasional (1 or
2) repetition of
sentence beginnings
or a number of
consecutive
sentences of the
same length or
type. Diction is
mostly at the
college level, with
some examples of
unsophisticated or
poor/incorrect word
choices. There are
one or two errors in
punctuation,
spelling, capitalizati

Work contains
some sentence
errors (2 or 3) and
grammatical errors.
There are three or
four errors in
punctuation,
spelling,
capitalization,
and/or other
mechanics. Many
consecutive
sentences begin
with the same
words, are of the
same length or the
same sentence
construction.
Diction is very
elementary and
lacks flair.

Work contains
multiple
incorrect
sentence
structures
(more than 3).
There are more
than 4 errors in
punctuation,
spelling,
capitalization,
and/or other
mechanics.
Diction is
elementary and
often writing is
awkward due to
many examples
of
poor/incorrect
word choice.

20

on and/or other
mechanics.

21

2.9 Teaching Writing

In this subchapter, it discussed about the related theories to the teaching
writing. It involved theory of writing process and approaches in teaching writing.
2.9.1

Process of Writing
In the writing process there are some stages should be considered by the

teachers to help their students in the teaching and learning process. Richard and
Renandya (2002:316) stated that the process of teaching writing consist of four basic
stages. They are planning, drafting, revising, and editing. For each stage, various
learning activities that can support the learning of specific writing skills are
suggested.
The planned writing experiences for the students can be described as follows:
1. Planning
Planning or pre-writing is an activity of writing that aimed to encourage and
stimulate the students to write. Since its function is to stimulate students ideas to
write, the writing activities must be prepared to provide them a learning experience
of writing, such as brains storming etc.
2. Drafting
At this stage, the students will focus on the fluency of writing and write
without having much attention to the accuracy of their works. During the process of
writing, the students must also focus on the content and the meaning of the writing.

22

Besides, the students may be encouraged to deliver their messages to different

audience, such peer, other classmate and etc.
3. Revising
The students review and examine the text to see how effective they have
communicated their ideas to the reader. Revising is not a simple activity of checking
language errors but it is done to improve global content and organization of the ideas
so the writers intention is clearer for the reader.
4. Editing
In this stage, the students are focused on tidying up their works as they
prepare the final draft to be evaluated by the teacher. The main activity done by the
students at this stage is editing their mistakes on grammar, spelling, punctuation,
sentences, diction and etc.
To sum up, the arrangement of the steps cannot be separated because it works
like a wheel. Each stage in the process of writing will work in line to help the
students in composing the text.
2.9.2

Approaches in Teaching Writing

In this subchapter, it will be discussed two approaches that commonly used in

teaching writing. They are product-oriented approach and process-oriented approach.

To be clearer those approaches will be discussed separately as below:
2.9.2.1 Product oriented-approach

23

Product oriented approach has been applied by the English teacher many years
ago in the process of teaching writing. The concern of this approach is on the
correctness of writing. Badger and White explained that the product-oriented
approach in the teaching of writing focuses more on the linguistic knowledge, such as
the appropriateness of vocabulary, grammar and linguistic devices.
In addition, Brown (2007) stated that in composing their works, students must
obey three main requirements. Every composition must 1) meet certain standards of
English rhetorical style, 2) use accurate grammar and 3) be organized based on the
convention to make the audience find it easily to understand the text .
In this approach the students writing products will be measured based on
some criteria. The scoring criteria commonly involve content, organization, grammar,
vocabulary and the mechanics of writing. For instance, spelling and punctuation.
Talking about the writing activities, Bedgar and White (2000) argued that
there are four stages commonly done by the students in this approach. They are
familiarization, controlled writing, guided writing, and free writing. The
familiarization is aimed at making the students aware of certain features of particular
text. In controlled and guided writing stages, the students practice the skills until they
are ready for the free production activity.
In conclusion, the product-oriented approach is emphasized mostly on the
students final writing products. Since the final products are the concern of this
approach, the activities of writing are also controlled by the teachers. They need to do

24

particular efforts to avoid errors in the text composition, for example by focusing on
the correctness of the grammar.

2.9.2.2 Process-oriented approach

Unlike the product-oriented approach which focuses on the final product, this
approach concerns more on the process of how the students develop ideas and
formulate them into effective writing works. Students are seen as the language
creators in which they are given chances to experience the process of writing, try to
analyze and express their ideas clearly.
The activities are intentionally designed to facilitate the students become the
language creators. Here are the list of typical writing activities done in the process
approach stated by Brown (2007: 335).
a) Focus on the process of writing that leads to the final written products.
b) Help students to understand their own composing process.
c) Help the students to build repertoires of strategy for pre-writing, drafting,
and re-writing.
d) Give students time to write and re-write.
e) Let the students discover what they want to say as they write.
f) Give the students feedback throughout the composing process (not just on
the final product) as they attempt to bring their expression closer and
closer to intention.
g) Include individual conferences between teacher and student during the
process of composition.

25

To sum up, the process-oriented approach more concern on the process of how
ideas are developed and formulated in writing. In other words, this approach focuses
on how clearly and efficiently a student can express and organize his or her ideas, not
on correctness of form.

2.10 Autonomous Learning in Writing Course

As have been explained above that there are two approaches that can be used
in teaching writing. They are product-oriented approach and process-oriented
approach. However, the teaching writing must involve both approaches. The
Autonomous learning that will be applied in this research covered those approaches
to teaching writing. In the autonomous learning the students not only focused on the
writing products but also on how they organize their idea into a good writing.
There are three main activities of autonomous learning will be applied in this
research. They are conducting library research, writing the first draft and doing selfevaluation (Kweldju, 2000). The following explanation will make them clearer.
2.10.1 The Library Research
In this activity, the students are required to follow the procedures. The library
research should be done before the students write their argumentative essay. The first
procedure is analyzing the model of argumentative essay prepared by the teacher.
Here, the students are given an argumentative essay and they are assigned to analyze
it. The analysis focused on the way of writer organize and develop the ideas. The first

26

part of argumentative essay that should be observed is introduction. The students will
be trained to see the method used by the writer in organizing his or her essay. Then,
the students have to find the thesis statement of the essay. The purpose of analyzing
the introduction is to make the students be able to implement the right strategy to
attract the readers attention. Another aim is to help the students be able to find the
most appropriate method to introduce the essay.
After observing the introduction, the students come to the following essential
part of the essay, the developmental paragraphs. In analyzing this part need an
analytical thinking. Here, the students must be able to identify the writers way in
supporting his or her topic. The analysis involve what kind of subjective evidences
are presented by the writer. It can be the writers personal experience or even personal
observation of someone else. Another way of supporting ideas is by presenting the
objective evidence. The students should be able to find the objective evidences used
by the writer in supporting his or her essay. The purpose of analyzing the
developmental paragraph is to make the students aware that their arguments need to
be supported by both subjective evidences and objective evidences.
Next, the students observe the conclusion. They are suggested to find what
methods of conclusion used by the writer. This observation is important because of its
position. The students have to understand the most effective way to close their own
essay. Sometime they present a new idea when they write a conclusion.
From the model given by the teacher, the students are able to learn more about
the way of organizing and developing their ideas. The characteristic of autonomous

27

learning in procedure is doing analytical observation on a model of essay given by the

teacher. Hopefully, the students can follow the right strategy of argumentative essay
writing.
The second procedure, the students are asked to conduct the library research
for finding the relevant information. They are assigned to read the articles or books
that will be used to support their topic. The article or books should be found by
themselves. After deciding what topic they will develop, the students should find any
relevant article or books from those materials they have to list any relevant objective
evidences to strengthen their argument.
2.10.2 Writing the First Draft
In this activity the students are given homework before they write the essay in
the classroom. The homework is writing the first draft on the students argumentative
essay. After deciding the topic to write and finding the relevant articles or books to
support their topic, the students should write a row draft of the essay. Writing a row
draft will help them to produce a good argumentative essay. In line with this, Hyland
(2010) inform that the draft is a further means of discovering ideas and exposing what
one wanted to say. It means that writing the first draft such writing a general plan of
the essay.
2.10.3 Doing Self-Evaluation
It was important to give an opportunity to score their own essay. Usually the
most authoritative person to score the students writing product is the teacher. This

28

activity is called the self-evaluation. It is a process which require collective judgment

about academic work (Sorcinelly, 2005:1). In the self-evaluation, the students are
asked to evaluate their revised essay draft. The aspects which can be evaluated are:
(1) organization of the argumentative essay, (2) sentence formation (3) language use
(4) mechanics
Concerning with the context of self-evaluation in writing course, the students
autonomous behavior is emphasized. The students need to evaluate their own
argumentative essay. Handley & Williams (2011) explain that the self-evaluation can
be considerable in demonstrating the achievements, in solving the problem and in
stimulating the change. The students can see their achievement during the lesson. It is
also as guidance to see strengths and weaknesses. By finding their own strengths and
weaknesses, they will be encouraged to find the way to solve it. Finally, the students
are motivated to make some improvement for writing a better argumentative essay.

29

CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHOD

3.1 Research Design

30

This research belongs to classroom action research which focused on

particular group of students. As defined by Mc Taggart and Kemmis (1988) action
research is a form of self-reflective inquiry undertaken by the participation (the
teacher, the students, and the principals in the social (including educational) situation
in order to improve the rationality and justice of (a) their own social or educational
practices, (b) their understanding of these practices, and (c) the situations in which the
practices are carried out.
Thus, the classroom action research in the study implemented for the purpose
of improving the rationality and justice of teaching argumentative essay writing
course through autonomous learning. The implementation was expected to improve
the students argumentative essay writing skill especially their skill in elaborating and
organizing their ideas. The implementation was also expected to improve the
understanding of the practices and the situation of the classroom where the practices
is conducted.

3.2 Setting and the Research Subject

This research was conducted at Madako University. The university is located
in Tolitoli regency, at Jln. Swadaya No. 1. The second year students of English
Education Study Program 2014/2015 academic year particularly class C was the
subject of this research. The number of students in this research is twenty three

31

students. The students have taken writing I and Writing II. These particular students
still find difficulties in writing argumentative essay.
3.3 Procedure of the Research
This action research was done in two cycles consist of seven meetings, five
meetings in the first cycle and two meetings in the second cycle. The writer adopted
the action research step proposed by Kemmis and McTaggart. It involved planning,
acting, observing, reflecting, and revise planning as seen in the figure 3.1 below:
Figure 3.3 The classroom Action Research Spiral

(adopted from Kemmis and McTaggart, 1988:11)

3.3.1 Planning
The action was conducted in two cycles consisting of five meetings in the first
cycle and two meetings in the second cycle. The preparation include designing a
syllabus, establishing the learning strategy to achieve the target competence. In this
case the writer applied the autonomous learning strategy. The autonomous learning

32

strategy in this research consist of some activities they were: finding topic,
conducting library research, writing argumentative essay and doing self-evaluation.
Moreover, in the planning stage both researcher and collaborator prepare the
instruments to collect data, and set up the criteria of success of the research.
The syllabus was developed by the writer based on the standard competence
and basic competence of the writing course in the second year students of English
Study Program of Madako University. In accordance with the instruments, the writer
and the collaborative teacher develop observation checklist, field notes, questionnaire
and writing assessment rubric. Observation checklist was used to observe the
teachers activities in the classroom, field notes was used to record the class portrait
during the process of applying autonomous learning, questionnaire was used to find
out the students own responses on the procedure of applying autonomous learning,
writing assessment rubric was used to assess students writing product.
3.1.2 Acting
The implementation of the action was done based on the syllabus prepared in
advance. In the first meeting, before the researcher explained the general description
of argumentative writing and the procedure of autonomous learning strategy had to be
followed the researcher assigned the students to evaluate their current writing skill.
In the second meeting the students were asked to analyze a model of
argumentative essay which involved the introduction, supporting details and
conclusion. Likewise, the students were asked to write their first argumentative essay

33

based on the topic provided. Their first argumentative essay was written outside of
the classroom. It was done as the training session and provided them more time to
explore relevant information through library research activities.
In the third meeting the students were asked to report the result of their library
research related to their first essay. It was done to check whether all students done the
procedure of learning strategy applied. After reporting their library research the
students were asked to revise their essay based on the comments and corrections
given.
In the fourth meeting the students still do the same things as the third meeting
namely report the library research for the improvement of their first essay. In this
meeting also the students were asked to do self-evaluation by scoring their
argumentative essay. It was done to find out their own improvement in writing.
Moreover, it also made them more understand about their weaknesses in writing. By
understanding their own weaknesses they were expected to find solution to cope with
the weaknesses independently.
The fifth meeting was for assigning them to write argumentative essay
directly in the classroom. It became a test to evaluate their writing progress after
doing a series activity of autonomous learning strategy such as finding topic,
conducting library research, writing argumentative essay and doing self-evaluation.
After the first up to the fifth meeting had been done the writer and the collaborator
reflect whether the success criteria had been achieved or not. If the success criteria of
the first cycle is not achieved yet then the writer must continue to the next cycle.

34

3.3.3 Observing
In the observation phase the role of collaborative teacher really important. The
collaborative teacher have to record both teacher and students activities during the in
class were going on. The observation sheet and field notes were used to record
everything happen during the classroom activities are carrying out.
3.3.4 Reflecting
The result of data collection through observation, field notes, and
questionnaire and writing products were reflected either by teacher and the
collaborative teacher. The result of the reflection was used as a feedback to revise
planning of instruction in the next cycle. Besides, in this phase the researcher would
know whether the students achievement in writing argumentative essay had met the
success criteria had been established in advance.

3.4 Procedure of Data Collection

The process of observing the class was followed by the natural teaching
procedure. This was aimed to avoid bias data collected. The data were collected in
two cycle. Five meetings in the first cycle and two meetings in the second cycle. To
find out the data during the research process the result of observation, field note and
writing products were opened.
The observation checklist was used to observe the teachers performance in
the teaching and learning process. Field notes was used to record the students

35

activities during the in-class activity of autonomous learning. The students writing
products were used to obtain the data about the students improvement in writing
argumentative essay especially in elaborating and organizing idea.
3.5 Technique of Data Analysis
The writer used both quantitative and qualitative method in analyzing the
data. The data obtained through students writing products and questionnaire were
analyzed quantitatively in the form of statistics. The data collected through
observation and field notes were analyzed qualitatively in form of elaboration.
3.6 Criteria of Success
The students achievement in writing determine whether the research is
continued to the next cycle or not. In determining whether the research continued or
not the writer and the collaborative teacher established the success criteria as follows:
1. The improvement of the students skill in writing argumentative essay
individually.
2. The students active involvement in the writing course.
The first criterion was measured by data collected through writing test to
measure the students achievement in writing argumentative essay. The research
would be success if 80% of the total students reach 65 as individual score. The
score was based on the minimum achievement criteria of the writing course in the
second year students of English Study Program academic year 2014-2015.

36

Below is the table of students writing product individually. The total score
state whether the students pass or fail.
Table 3.6 The Score of Students Writing Product

No

Initial
name

Scores
Component of Argumentative Essay
Body
Intro.
Concl.
Mechanics
of Phar.

Achieve
ment
score

Qualitati
ve score

Category

1
2
3
4
5
Total Score
Classical
score

In order to get students score, the writer computes the students score by using
formula proposed by Sugiono (2013: 123) as follows:

Achievement Score =

Total Gained Score

x 100
Maximum Score

The students should get minimum 65 as individual score and should be

achieved by 80% of total number of students as classical percentage. The writer used
the following formula adapted from Harahap (1992: 187):

successful percentage=

Total succesful students

x 100
The total Number of Students

The second criterion was measured by analyzing data gathered through

observation in the class activities of autonomous learning. The criterion of success in
the students active involvement should reach 80% of the total number of students.

37

It means that the students active involvement should in a good level. The following
was the description of the percentage of the students active involvement:
85% - 100%

= Excellent

75% - 84%

= Good

65% - 74%

= Fair

0% - 64%

= Poor

(Adopted from Tanampo, 2013: 46)

The students should be involved in the process of learning actively such as
conducting library research, reporting the library research, revising the essay and
doing self-evaluation. This indicator reflect the students active involvement in the
autonomous learning.

CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS

4.1 Findings in the First Cycle

38

4.1.1

First Meeting
The first meeting was conducted on 5 th February 2015. It was focused on the

self-evaluation of the students current skill in writing, explaining the general

description of argumentative essay, and the procedure of the learning strategy had to
be followed.
In starting the class, the researcher employed some preliminary questions to
the students related to the topic discussed in the current semester. For example: Did
you ever employ your opinion about something? What was that? Did you ever try to
convince your friends about something? How did you convince them?
The various answer came from the students for instance: NHY answered that
yes, I ever employed my opinion about the Free Trade Asian when I joined English
debate program in English Club. Refers to the second question was answered by
KPO she said that I ever tried to convince my friends to join with me in the Tiens
multilevel group. The researcher asked her again how she convinced her friends. She
said I convinced them with some advantages and testimony about the group.
Based on the students answered the researcher told the students that when we
employed our opinion or try to convince someone with a logical reason it was called
argument. The researcher also told them the learning objective of the writing course.
The learning objective of writing course in the current semester was students were
expected to be able to write argumentative essay well. However, before explaining
more about argumentative essay the researcher asked them to evaluate their current
skill in writing. In line with the students evaluation about their current skill in writing,

39

the researcher excerpted five result of students self-evaluation in which considered

represent others. Those excerpts were presented as follows:
Excerpt 1: SRW

I feel my writing skill is not good. My grammar

is bad. I am not able to choose appropriate
words to be used. I have problem to find a
topic or ideas.
Excerpt 2: NHY

I feel my writing is better than before but I

have difficulty to arrange a good paragraph
consist of many sentences.
Excerpt 3: MFA

I think my writing skill still low. I have many

problems in writing such as I difficult to find
topic or ideas to write. Even though I get a
topic I feel difficult to develop the topic but the
crucial problem of mine is my grammar.

Excerpt 4: FTR

My writing is complicated, I have difficulties in

writing good English sentences, find and
develop a topic.

40

Excerpt 5: MSM

Im confuse with my writing skill. I dont know

how to start my writing and how to develop
the topic that I choose. Moreover, I still used to
write sentences with Indonesian style but Ill
try to be better in writing.
Based on the self-evaluation the students seemed to have less problem in
organizing ideas. The excerpts above reflected that their problem in writing only deal
with grammar, vocabulary, and finding a topic. They didnt pay attention to the
organizing ideas, how to develop a topic and find some relevant supporting of their
writing. In fact, those things influenced the argumentative essay writing. After
conducting the self-evaluation the researcher then explained about the argumentative
essay, and how it should be developed start from the introduction, body of paragraph
and the conclusion. The last activity was done in first meeting, explained the
procedure of the learning strategy have to be followed as suggested in the procedure
of autonomous learning. They were to find a topic, conduct library research and
compose the argumentative essay.
4.1.2

Second Meeting
This meeting was conducted on 12nd February 2015. The objective of this

meeting was the students were expected to be able to analyze and identify the
organization of an essay. However, before doing the activities as planned for this

41

meeting the researcher told them about the result of their self-evaluation for their
current skill in writing. The researcher told them that most of them had the same
problem in writing which covered the difficulties in finding topic, developing the
topic and writing grammatically. The result of the students evaluation about their
current skill in writing argumentative essay also revealed that they were not aware
that there was one more thing which important in writing argumentative essay. It was
the organization of the argumentative writing. The organization refers to the way of
the writer in presenting and supporting the argument with either subjective and
objective reason or evidence. This thing also called as the skill in organizing ideas.
To rise the students awareness about the importance of knowledge in
organizing ideas for an argumentative essay. The students were required to read a
model of essay provided by the researcher. Then the students were asked to analyze
the model of essay. The aspect analyzed in the essay were the way of the writer
started, developed and ended his or her essay. It meant that the students should
analyze the introductory paragraph, the developmental paragraph, and the conclusion
of the paragraph. However, based on the collaborators notes some students were not
serious to do the task during the process of analyzing the aspect of the essay. They are
HRN, IKR, RHD, MFR, and KSL. It was happened because the researcher didnt lead
them in analyzing the aspects of the essay. After the analyzing process finished the
researcher checked the students understanding about the way to analyze the essay. It
was done to ensure them whether the objective of this meeting had been achieved or

42

not. Besides, the students were expected to be able to organize their ideas in their own
argumentative essay.
At the end of the meeting the researcher provided them a topic. The topic
provided should be developed into argumentative writing. The topic was about the
controversial issue of Euthanasia. Euthanasia is a death practice conducted by the
doctors to relieve pain of patience that has not chance to recover. It also known as
mercy killing. The topic raised two arguments pro and contra. Therefore, the students
were required to employ their argument in the written form about the topic given. The
argumentative essay should consist of five paragraphs. One introductory paragraph,
three developmental paragraphs and one concluding paragraph. However, the writing
process of argumentative essay was done outside of the class. It was done by
considering that the students didnt have enough idea about the topic because it was a
new topic for them. Besides, if the topic was developed outside the classroom the
students had more time to explore many references to help them in developing their
ideas in which the process of exploring any references to develop the ideas to write
called as library research. Moreover, the library research was one of the activities of
autonomous learning strategy which aimed to make the students familiar with the
organization of argumentative essay.
The last activities done by the researcher in this meeting, the researcher told
the students that their argumentative writing should be submitted before the next
meeting was done. It was aimed to provide the researcher time to give corrections and
comments to their essay. Likewise, the researcher told the students that in the next

43

meeting the students had to report the result of their library research based on the
library research form provided.
4.1.3

Third Meeting
The third meeting was conducted on 26th February 2015. As planned, before

the students were asked to revise their essay the researcher asked them to show the
result of the students library research. The researcher checked their library research
by calling their names one by one and marking the students name who were able to
show their library research. Checking students library research was important to
make sure whether all students followed the steps of learning strategy applied or not.
Two students were not present in this meeting they were MFR and KSL. However,
four of the present students didnt show the result of their library research they were
RHD, IKR, WRD, and HRN. When the researcher asked them why they didnt have
library research various reasons come from them. RHD said that his library research
was left behind at home. IKR said that her library research was not complete yet
whereas WRD and HRN said that they didnt understand how to conduct the library
research.
After checking the students library research. The researcher returned the
students essays submitted before the current meeting was going on. When all
students got their own essay, the researcher asked them to revise their essay based on
the researchers correction and comments. However, during the process of revising
essay some students got confuse about the researcher corrections and comments

44

employed to their essay. They were confused because of the researchers writing were
not clear for them. In line to this, the researcher made clear his correction and
comments to them. Generally, the researchers correction to their essay involved the
spelling, grammar and the organization of the essay which covered the introduction,
developmental paragraph and conclusion. The improvement dealing with spelling and
grammar was done in the classroom. However, the improvement dealing with the
organization especially about the body of paragraph had to be done outside of the
class. It was because most of their essay still lack of supporting details. It meant that
the students still need to explore some additional information to complete the body of
their essay by conducting library research again. It meant that the revision process
still continued outside of the classroom. The essay revision should be finished before
the following activities was going on.
At the end of the meeting the researcher told them that they had to report the
result of their library research again in the next meeting. In addition, the researcher
also told them that in the next meeting they would be asked to score their own essay
had been revised.

4.1.4

Fourth Meeting

45

The fourth meeting was conducted on 5th March 2015. The activities planned
to do in this meeting was scoring the essay or doing self-evaluation. Self-evaluation
was one of the stages of autonomous learning strategy that had to be done by the
students. The students self-evaluate their essay by giving score based on the rubric
provided by the researcher. However, before doing this, the researcher asked them to
show the result of their library research in line with the improvement of their essay
revised previously. In this meeting all students were present and did the assignment
given namely conducting library research included the students were not present in
the third meeting.
After checking the students library research, the researcher distributed the
scoring rubric of an argumentative writing to students. The soring rubric covered four
aspects of argumentative writing. First, it dealt with the introduction, second deal with
body paragraph, third dealt with conclusion and fourth dealt with the mechanics.
Then the researcher explained how the rubric was used to score an argumentative.
After explaining the usage of the scoring rubric, the researcher asked the students to
take their essay and score it by themselves. Likewise, the researcher told them that
they had to score their own essay objectively. During the process of self-evaluation
some students were not confident to score their own essay. They were HRN, KSL and
MFR. They thought that their essay was same as the essay had been corrected in
previous meeting and the right one to do this activity was the teacher or instructor.
Then the researcher convinced them that they were able to score the essay. They just
need follow the rubric of writing to give appropriate score on each aspect of the essay.

46

Having listened to the explanation, those students started to score their essay. When
the students finished scoring their essay, the researcher asked them to mention how
much score they got. After a while they were asked to submit their essay to the
researcher.
At the end of the meeting the researcher and the students conducted a short
evaluation dealt with the activities had been done started from the first up to the
current meeting was going on. The researcher asked their comments about the
sequences of activities done in writing argumentative essay started from finding topic,
conducting library research, writing argumentative essay and doing self-evaluation.
Most of them said that those activities helped them to cope with their problems in
writing such as their difficulties in developing the topic and organizing their ideas.
However, there still some of them said that this activities only gave a bit contribution
to improve their skill in writing. They said that they still got confused how to do as
well their friends done. In short, they still need more explanation about the learning
strategy applied. To respond their comment the researcher asked them to discuss with
their friends who had understood about the learning strategy applied.
After the short evaluation had been done, the researcher told the students that
in the next meeting there would be a writing test. They had to write an argumentative
essay directly in the classroom and they may choose any topic they were interested in.
Therefore, they had to prepare a draft at home that would be composed into
argumentative essay in the classroom. Besides, the researcher also told them that

47

before they write an argumentative essay in the next meeting, the researcher would
check their draft to make sure that they were ready to write.
4.1.5 Fifth Meeting
The fifth meeting was conducted on 12 nd March 2015. The objective of this
meeting was to measure to what extent the students could applied autonomous
learning strategy to improve their skill in writing argumentative essay. The stage of
autonomous learning strategy was done by the students described as follows:
First, the students were asked to find a debatable topic they were interested in.
Here were some of students and the topic they chose RNI chose Transgender as her
topic, WRD chose Abortion as her topic, KPO chose Divorce as her topic, and HRN
chose Death Penalty as his topic. The second, the students were asked to conduct
library research to explore relevant information with their topic. Besides, the library
research activity would help them to be more familiar with the organization of the
argumentative essay. The third, the students made draft for their argumentative essay.
The first up to the third stage had been done outside of the classroom before the
current meeting was done. The fourth, writing argumentative essay in the classroom
based on the draft prepared in advance at home.
Before the writing process was done the researcher checked the students
draft. It was found that all students had draft but there were some students had a poor
draft. They were KSL, WRD, PTW, IKR, HRN, MFR, and RHD. Their draft was
poor because they didnt put an expert or someones opinion to support their
arguments toward the topic they chose. It indicated that they didnt conduct library

48

research. Nevertheless, the writing process should be continued. Having checked their
draft the researcher asked them to complete their argumentative essay. The findings of
their essay can be seen in the following table:
Table 4.1.5 The result of the students essay test in the first cycle
Scores
Component of Argumentative Essay
Initial
No
Body
name
Intro. of
Concl.
Mechanics
Phar.
Max. score
4
4
4
4
1
SRW
3
3
3
2
2
NHY
4
3
3
1
3
NRH
3
3
3
2
4
KPO
4
3
4
3
5
FTR
3
3
3
2
6
MFA
3
4
2
2
7
STY
3
4
3
2
8
HRN
3
2
3
2
9
RNI
3
3
3
2
10 IKR
4
2
2
2
11 YLT
3
3
3
2
12 DFN
4
3
3
2
13 WRD
2
2
3
2
14 STI
3
3
3
2
15 RHD
3
2
2
2
16 RFI
3
3
3
2
17 KSL
3
2
2
2
18 SSD
4
3
2
2
19 MSM
3
3
3
2
20 KSM
4
3
3
2
21 PTW
3
2
3
2
22 MFR
3
2
3
2
23 SAY
3
3
3
2
Successful Percentage

Achiev
ement
Score

Qualit
ative
Score

68
68
68
87
68
68
68
62
68
62
68
68
56
68
56
68
56
68
68
75
62
62
68
69%

C
C
C
A
C
C
C
D
C
D
C
C
D
C
D
C
D
C
C
B
D
D
C

Category

Success
Success
Success
Success
Success
Success
Success
Unsuccess
Success
Unsuccess
Success
Success
Unsuccess
Success
Unsuccess
Success
Unsuccess
Success
Success
Success
Unsuccess
Unsuccess
Success
Unsuccessful

Table 4.1.5 indicated that there were 16 out of 23 or (70%) students got 65 and 7 out
of 23 or (30%) students lower than the set criterion. It meant that the criterion of
success have not been achieved yet. Furthermore, table 4.1.5 also showed that

49

generally the weakness of students writing were on the body paragraph and
mechanics aspect. It was proved by the means score of body of paragraph and
mechanics just achieved 2.

4.2 Findings of Observation in the First Cycle

This part presents the findings of observation sheets, field notes. The findings
of those instruments were described in detail as follows:
4.2.1

The Observation Sheet

The observation sheet was filled by the collaborator of the researcher during

the in class activities done. The collaborator put a tick () on the option column for
each statement. The findings were as follows:
4.2.1.1 The Observation Sheet of the Researchers Activities on the first and the
second meeting
Activity

Meeting 1
Yes

a.

The researcher explain the general

description of argumentative essay

b.

The researcher explain the procedure of

autonomous learning strategy in detail.
The researcher asked the students to selfevaluate their current writing skill

The researcher provided and showed the

example of argumentative essay to the
students

c.

d.

Meeting 2

No
-

50

e.

The researcher asked the students to

analyze the essay model.

f.

The researcher lead them to analyze the

essay model

g.

The researcher assigned the students to

conduct library research and write an
argumentative essay based on the topic
provided.
The researcher explain the material
systematically

The researcher manage time well

h.

i.

Based on the observation sheet above it can be seen that in the first meeting the
researcher did the in class activities based on the planning. However, the researcher
did not explain the procedure of the autonomous learning strategy in detail. It was
because the researcher did not manage the time well and teach systematically. In the
second meeting, the researcher did the teaching step as planned but there was one
thing missed by the researcher. In the process of analyzing essay the teacher did not
lead the students to analyze the essay. As a consequence, there were five students did
not do the task given seriously.

51

4.2.1.2 The Observation Sheet of the Researchers Activities on the third, fourth
and the fifth meeting
Activity

Meeting 3

Meeting 4

Meeting 5

Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

No

a.

The researcher asked the

students to report the result of
their library research

b.

The researcher asked the

students to revise their essay

c.

The researcher assign the

students conduct library
research to improve their
essay.

d.

The researcher asked the

students to make a draft at
home

e.

The researcher asked the

students to score their essay

f.

The researcher checked the

students draft

g.

The researcher asked the

students to write
argumentative essay directly
in the classroom.

h.

The researcher managed the

time well did the teaching
and learning process
systematically

52

Based on the table above it can be seen in the third meeting the researcher did
all the teaching and learning process as planned. Likewise in the fourth and fifth
meeting.

4.2.2 The Result of Field Note

Based on the collaborators notes, during the action in the first meeting, the
students were active and enthusiastic to respond the researchers preliminary
questions. When the researcher asked to evaluate their current skill in writing some
students were confused. They were RHD, HRN, and IKR. They didnt understand
what their main problem in writing. Instead, they asked each other about their
problems. Furthermore, when the researcher explained about the general description
of argumentative essay the procedure of the autonomous learning strategy WRD,
RHD, and MFR didnt pay attention on the researcher explanation. They just
whispered each other until the researcher addressed them to pay attention.
In the second meeting, the researcher distributed an argumentative essay model
and asked them to analyze essay model. When the process of analyzing essay was
going on WRD, RHD, MFR, HRN, and IKR seemed confused how to analyze the
essay. They didnt understand what aspect of the essay had to be analyzed.
Furthermore, when the researcher asked them to conduct library research and write an
argumentative essay based on the topic provided most of them said assignment were

53

complicated. However, the researcher kept encourage them that if they apply the
learning strategy have been learnt, the task would not be a complicated task as they
thought.
The collaborators notes in the third meeting showed two students were not
present. They were MFR, and KSL. The present students did the assignment given in
the previous meeting except RHD, IKR, WRD, and HRN. RHD said that he had done
his assignment but it was left behind at home. IKR said that her assignment was not
complete yet whereas WRD and HRN said that they didnt understand about the
assignment. Another things noted by the collaborator in this meeting was the students
confused about the researchers comments on their essay. It was because the
researchers writing unclear for them. In line to this, the researcher clarified his
comments by telling the purpose of his unclear writing.
In the fourth meeting, all students were present and did the assignment given.
Furthermore, in the process of scoring essay HRN, KSL, and MFR lost confidence to
score their own essay. They thought that their essay was the same as the previous
essay. Besides, scoring their essay was not their duty but it belonged to the instructor.
Another notes by the collaborator in this meeting was about the students response
about the sequence activities have been done in the process of writing argumentative
essay through autonomous learning. Most of them said that those activities helped
them to improve their skill in writing argumentative essay. However, there WRD,
RHD, IKR, and HRN said that those activities only contributed a bit improvement on
their writing skill.

54

In the fifth meeting the collaborator noted that all students were present and did
the assignment given by the researcher in the previous meeting. However, seven
students did not do the assignment as expected by the researcher. They were KSL,
WRD, PTW, IKR, HRN, MFR, and RHD. Nevertheless, the researcher kept
continuing the activities as planned. It was about asking students to write
argumentative essay directly in the classroom.
4.3 Reflection
Based on the result of the writing test in the fifth meeting, it was found that
there were 16 out of 23 or (70%) students able to achieve the minimum score
established by the researcher and 7 out of 23 or (30%) students were not able to
achieve the minimum criteria established. Even though most of students were able to
achieve the minimum score but the classical score were not met yet in which the
classical score must be achieved was 80% of the total students. It indicated that the
success criteria for the first cycle have not met yet. To find the answer why it
happened, the teaching and learning process had to be reflected by opening the result
of observation and field notes. The reflection of the teaching and learning process
described as follows:
Based on the observation sheet and field notes in the first meeting the
researcher did all the activities as planned but he did not explain in detail the
procedure of the learning strategy applied. He more focused on the evaluation of the
students current skill in writing. In the second meeting the collaborator noted that five

55

students did not serious do the task given. It was because the researcher didnt lead the
students well how to do the task. Besides, the collaborator noted that the researcher
only focused on the active students. As matter of fact, in the third meeting those
students could not show the result of the library research that was assigned to them
because they didnt understand well about the assignment. In the fourth and the fifth
meeting all students did the assignment given. However, seven students did not do the
assignment as suggested. It was about preparing a draft that would be composed into
argumentative essay.
In line with the result of the reflection above, the researcher and the
collaborator concluded that the above things were the factors had affected the failure
of the first cycle. Thus, the researcher need to revise his planning to be implemented
in the next cycle.

4.4 Findings of the second cycle

In this subchapter it was presented the revised plan for cycle two, finding of the
first meeting of cycle two, findings of the second meeting of cycle two, findings of
the observation of cycle two, findings of field notes and refection of the second cycle.

4.4.1 Planning For Cycle Two (Revised Planning)

Revised planning is the follow up of the result of the reflection in the first
cycle. The researcher and collaborator revised the planning to be implemented in the

56

second cycle which consist of two meetings. Revised planning for both meetings
were described as follows:
In the first meeting of cycle two, the researcher explained the procedure of the
learning strategy applied in detail. After that the researcher led them how to conduct a
library research particularly in analyzing the aspects of argumentative essay the last
activity done in first meeting of the second cycle provided them with a draft form of
an argumentative essay. The draft form was expected to facilitate them in preparing
their draft. Besides, the researcher also asked them to find any topic they were
interested in and prepared the draft for their topic because in the next meeting they
had to compose an argumentative essay in the classroom.
In the second meeting of the second cycle, the researcher conducted a test to
evaluate the students progress in writing by applying the learning strategy suggested.
However, before they were asked to write argumentative essay the researcher checked
their draft. After checking their draft and ensure that they were ready to write, then
the researcher asked them to compose their draft into an argumentative essay.

4.4.2 Findings of the First meeting (cycle two)

The first meeting of cycle two was conducted on 19 th March 2015. The
objective of this meeting was to explain the procedure of learning strategy applied in
detail particularly to the students who did not understand yet about the procedure of
conducting library research (analyzing the aspect of essay) and provided them with

57

the draft form for argumentative essay (see appendix 3). The different stage of this
cycle form the previous cycle was in this cycle the researcher lead the students to
conduct library research (analyzing the aspect of argumentative essay) and showed
them how to make a draft for argumentative essay by using the draft form.
As planned, the researcher started the class by attracting the students attention
with some preliminary questions dealt with the activities done in the previous
meeting. For example: did you enjoy the learning strategy applied so far? Which part
of the learning strategy did you enjoy? Do you have a problem in applying the
learning strategy in writing argumentative essay? Various answer came from the
students for instance KPO said she enjoyed the learning strategy particularly
conducting library research it was challenging. KSM said that she also enjoyed the
learning strategy but there was challenging and impressive part for her in the
learnings strategy applied, it was scoring essay. Those were the answer from students
who got a satisfacory result but when the researcher asked students who got low score
such HRN, RHD, KSL, PTW, IKR, WRD and MFR they said that they didnt enjoy
the learning strategy because they did not understand well how to apply the strategy
especially in conducting library research and making draft for an argumentative essay.
Having listened to their comments firstly, the researcher explained the steps of the
strategy applied in detail started from finding topic, conducting library research,
making draft and writing an argumentative essay. Considering the weakness in the
previous cycle that one of the factors affected the students failed in cycle one because

58

they did not understand well how to conduct library research. Hence, in this meeting
the researcher led them to analyze the aspects of the essay one by one. The researcher
showed them an argumentative essay through LCD then analyzed the essay together
with the students started from the introduction, body of paragraph and the conclusion.
Besides, the researcher explained to them common methods of writers in starting his
or her introduction, the way of the writer in developing the body of the paragraph and
told them the common methods of writers to close their essay. By the end of the
meeting the researcher showed them a draft form (see appendix 3). The researcher
told them this draft form that made them easier to make a draft for their
argumentative essay later. After doing all activities as have been planned the
researcher made sure that all students have understood about the procedure of the
learning strategy.
At the end of the meeting the researcher told them that in the next meeting they
would be asked to write argumentative essay again in the classroom. Therefore, they
have to find a topic they were interested in, conducting library research to explore
relevant information dealt with their topic and made a draft for the topic that would
be composed into argumentative writing. The researcher also suggested them that to
use the draft form provided to make them easier in making draft.

4.4.2 Finding of the Second Meeting (Cycle two)

59

The second meeting of cycle two was conducted on 26th March 2015. The
objective of this meeting based on the planning was to evaluate their progress in
writing through autonomous learning strategy. In this meeting the students were
asked to write argumentative essay. However, before the students were asked to write
argumentative essay the writer made sure that all students have done the steps of
autonomous learning strategy as suggested such as finding topic, conducting library
research, making draft and writing argumentative essay. The first step of autonomous
learning such finding topic can be seen from the various topic have chosen by
students. For example HRN, chose Internet as his topic, KPO chose Free Trade Asian
as her topic, and PTW chose Married Under age as her topic. The second and third
step of autonomous learning strategy (conducting library research and making draft)
can be seen from the students draft. All students have made their draft based on the
draft form provided. After checking the students preparation before writing
argumentative essay and made sure that the student were ready to write the researcher
asked them to compose their draft into an argumentative writing. The result of their
writing can be seen in the following table:
Table 4.4.2 The Result of the Students Argumentative Writing

60

Scores
Component of Argumentative Essay
No
Body
Intro.
Concl.
Mechanics
of Phar.
Max. score
4
4
4
4
1
SRW
3
3
3
3
2
NHY
4
3
3
3
3
NRH
4
3
3
3
4
KPO
4
4
4
3
5
FTR
4
3
3
3
6
MFA
4
3
3
2
7
STY
4
3
3
3
8
HRN
3
3
3
3
9
RNI
4
3
3
3
10 IKR
4
3
3
2
11 YLT
4
3
3
3
12 DFN
4
3
3
3
13 WRD
3
2
3
2
14 STI
4
3
3
3
15 RHD
3
3
2
2
16 RFI
4
3
3
3
17 KSL
3
2
3
2
18 SSD
4
3
3
2
19 MSM
4
4
3
2
20 KSM
4
3
4
2
21 PTW
4
3
3
2
22 MFR
3
2
3
2
23 SAY
4
3
3
2
Classical Score
82%
Initial
name

Achieve
ment
Score

Quali
tative
Score

Category

75
81
81
93
81
75
81
75
81
75
75
75
62
75
62
68
62
75
81
75
75
62
75

B
B
B
A
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
D
B
D
C
D
B
B
B
B
D
B

Success
Success
Success
Success
Success
Success
Success
Success
Success
Success
Success
Success
Unsuccess
Success
Unsuccess
Success
Unsuccess
Success
Success
Success
Success
Uns uccess
Success
Success

From the above table can be seen that the students who got the lowest score or
under the 65 were four students (WRD, RHD, KSL, and MFR). The highest score 93
was gained by one student (KPO). The score 81 was attained by six students (NHY,
NRH, STY, FTR, RNI, MSM). It showed that the score 65 or more were obtained by
19 out of 23 students or 82%. It can be inferred that the success criteria classically
80% were already met. It indicated that the application of autonomous learning in this
CAR was successful in improving students skill in writing.

4.4.3

Findings of Observation in Cycle Two

61

The findings of observation refers to the researchers activities in classroom

to facilitate the students applying autonomous learning in improving their skill in
writing. The researcher activities can be seen through the table below:

Table 4.4.3 The Result of Observation on the First Meeting of Cycle Two
Activity

Meeting 1

Meeting 2

Yes

No

Yes

No

a.

The researcher explain the procedure of

the autonomous learning in detail

b.

The researcher explain the function of

library research in the process of writing
argumentative essay

c.

The researcher and showed the example

of argumentative essay and lead them to
analyze the essay.

d.

The researcher assigned the students to

conduct library research and make draft
about the topic they were interest in

e.

The researcher explain the material

systematically

f.

The researchers check the students

library research and draft.

g.

The researcher asked the students to write

their argumentative essay.

Table 4.4.3 showed that the researcher applied the strategy step by step as
what had already been planned and suggested by the collaborator. In the first meeting

62

of cycle two the researcher started to explain the procedure and the function of library
research in writing argumentative essay. Next, the researcher provided an essay
model and led the students to analyze the aspects of the essay started from the
introduction, thesis statement, developing paragraph and the conclusion of the essay.
In short, the researcher had done his best because he explained the material
systematically.
In the second meeting of the cycle two, before the researcher asked the
students to write argumentative essay the researcher checked the students preparation
by asking them to show their draft form. Having made sure that all students were
ready to write the researcher asked to start writing their argumentative essay.

4.4.4

Finding of Field Notes in Cycle Two

In the first meeting of cycle two the researcher noted the students responses

dealt with the researchers preliminary questions for example KPO said that she
enjoyed the application of autonomous learning strategy in writing argumentative
essay because it was challenging particularly the library research activity. KSM, FTR
NHD, MSM, STY, SAY and RNI gave the same response that they enjoyed the
application of the learning strategy but the impressive thing for them was the scoring
essay. They said that it was the first time for them to score their own essay. However,
HRN, RHD, KSL, PTW, IKR, WRD, and MFR said that they did not enjoy the
learning strategy applied because they still got confused about the procedure of
autonomous learning particularly the procedure of conducting library research and

63

made a draft that would be composed into argumentative essay. As the follow up of
their objections the researcher then explained the procedure autonomous learning
strategy in detail and provided them with a draft form that made them easier to make
a draft for their argumentative essay.
In the second meeting of cycle two the collaborator noted that before the
students were asked to write argumentative essay the researcher checked the students
preparation particularly their draft. The researcher more focused to the students who
employed their objections in the previous meeting. The researcher found that most of
them in well preparation except MFR, KSL, and WRD. Their draft still poor they
didnt enclose someones opinion to support their topic.

4.5 Reflection of Cycle two

Based on the result of test in the second meeting of cycle two it was found that
19 out of 23 students (82%) were able to achieve the minimum score established by
the researcher. On the other hand, there were four students still got score under 65 as
the minimum score should be achieved. They were WRD, RHD, KSL, and MFR.
Nevertheless, the researcher and the collaborator stopped cycle because the success
criteria have been achieved. To find the factors that had affected the success and the
failure of the students in writing argumentative essay, the researcher opened the
result of the observation and field noted during the second cycle.

64

Based on the result of the observation in the first meeting of cycle two it was
found that the researcher had done all the learning activities as had been planned.
Besides, the result of field notes also showed that none of the students asked about
the procedure of the autonomous learning strategy when the researcher invited them
to ask anything about the strategy applied. It indicated that all students had
understood the procedure of autonomous learning.
However, in the second meeting of cycle two the researcher noted that three
students were not in well preparation (MFR, KSL, and WRD). They didnt make
draft as suggested by the researcher. Their drafts were still poor of objective
evidence to support the topic they chose. It meant that they didnt conduct library
research to explore relevant information dealt with their topic.
Based on the explanation above it can be inferred that the factors affected the
students success in their writing was they followed the procedure autonomous
learning strategy as suggested such as finding topic, conducting library research,
making draft and composing an argumentative essay. Whereas the factors affected
the students failure were they didnt follow the procedure of autonomous learning as
suggested. However, the students attitude in the learning process need to be
considered as one of the factors affected the students failure.

4.6 Students Improvement in Writing Skill

The result of the students writing products in the cycle 1 showed that the lowest
score or under 65 was obtained by 7 students and the highest score was 87 obtained

65

by 1 student. The students achievement scores indicated that the score 65 were
obtained by 16 out of 23 or 70% students. This percentage could be classified good
but it did not indicate the criteria of success were met since the minimum standard of
success criteria did not reach classically (80%). For this reason the researcher conduct
the second cycle.
The lowest score or under 65 in cycle two was obtained by four students. The
highest score 93 was gained by one student, the score 81 was gained by six students,
the score 75 was gained by nine students and the score 68 was gained by one
students. It meant that the score 65 or above was gained by 19 students or (82%). It
indicated that the success criteria (80%) were already reached. It also indicated that
the application of autonomous learning is effective to improve students writing skill
especially the skill in organizing and elaborating the idea. In addition, it can also
promote the students to be autonomous learner who are able to solve their problem
with their own way.

66

4.6 The Students Response to the Questionnaire

Question
How much did you enjoy the lesson?
How much do you think you learn?
How much did you understand?
Did the instructor help you to learn?

Answer
All of it
A lot
Most of it
Yes, enough

Respond
82%
65%
60%
82%

Answer
Some of it
Some things
Some of it
No, not

Respond
18%
35%
40%
18%

Answer
None
Nothing
Nothings
-

Respond
-

How was the lesson?

What do you think about the

Interesting
Easy

87%
70%

enough
Boring
Hard

13%
30%

assignment?
Did you think your writing skill

Yes, a lot

65%

Yes, partly

35%

None

improve after following the course?

Are you interested in writing

Yes, of

65%

Yes, a little

35%

No, I

argumentative essay?

course

dont
think so

67

The table above indicated that students enjoyed the argumentative writing
course by using the autonomous learning. The table also indicated the students skill
in writing get improvement. It is proved by the students response on the first
question. There were 19 students out of 23 students said enjoy the lesson using
autonomous learning. In the second question, there were 15 out of 23 students
responded that they learnt a lot of the course. Then, in the third question, there were
14 out of 23 students responded that they understood most of the course. In the fourth
question 19 out of 23 students responded that the instructor helped them to learn.
Next, in the fifth question 20 out of 23 students responded that the learning procedure
applied is interesting. Then, in the sixth question 16 out of 23 students responded that
the assignment given (conducting library research) is easy. In the seventh question
there were 15 out of 23 students responded that their writing get a lot improvement
and 8 out of 23 students responded that their writing improved partly. In the eighth
question, there were 15 out of 23 students responded that they were interested in
writing argumentative essay using autonomous learning and there were 8 out of 23
students responded that they were little interested.

68

4.7 Discussion of the Research

Based on the findings of this research, it was evident that the appropriate model
of autonomous learning required the instructor to follow a particular procedure. First
of all, the instructor designed challenging task of appropriate materials. The
challenging task in this research were conducting research and making draft and
writing the argumentative essay in the classroom. The appropriate materials provided
by the instructor should be interesting and easy to follow. The appropriate materials
involved the steps of organizing the argumentative essay and the model of
argumentative essay.
Second, the instructor should clarify the instructions. The clear instructions given
by the instructor helped the students to do the task properly. The instruction were
related to the way of conducting library research, writing argumentative and doing
self- evaluation. Third, the instructor assigned the students to find certain debatable
topic to develop, and write the outline of the students argumentative essay, make the
draft at home, and write the argumentative essay in the classroom. Fifth, the teacher
gave the students chance to revise their essay and finally the teacher guided the
students to do self-evaluation in which the students evaluated their own argumentative
essay.
During the application of autonomous learning, the researcher found that it
was hard to handle difficult students. They need special treatments. In this case, the
researcher always try to motivate them to write better. At the first time, the slow

69

students were not able to write argumentative essay and conduct appropriate library
research. The researcher did not directly judge their writing skill. Here, the researcher
always reminded them that they had to work seriously and guide them to do their
best.
The researcher guided the students to see the ideas organization of model essay which
involves the organization of the introductory, the developmental and the concluding
paragraph. The researcher provided some questions that stimulated the students to
find the writers way in introducing the topic. Then, researcher guided the students
the writers way in supporting his or her ideas. The process of finding the supporting
details involved recognizing the subjective evidence. The subjective evidence were in
the form of the writers opinion, the writers personal experience and the writers
personal observation of someone else. Finally the last step of analyzing the model
essay was to find the writers way in concluding his/her essay.
After that, the researcher assigned the students to find a debatable topic. The
following activities were assigning the students to write the draft of their
argumentative essay at home and instructing them to find relevant articles and books.
The process of finding relevant articles called library research. The library research
activity had two function. First, by doing library research the students learned
autonomously the organization of relevant articles. The second, by doing library
research helped them to support and strengthen their argument. To assess whether all
students conducted library research, the researcher asked them to give a written report
in the classroom meeting. The library research was highly recommended because of

70

its benefit in improving the writing skill especially in organizing and elaborating the
ideas.

In the implementation of the autonomous learning, the researcher gave the

students chance for doing self-evaluation. The students were suggested to evaluate
and score their own argumentative essay. The students were expected to be able to see
their achievement and solve their writing problems they faced in writing
argumentative essay.
Even though the instructional strategy had been applied appropriately, the
students learning result did not automatically improve drastically. In fact, the
students writing skill in organizing their ideas was not well-shaped and was still
overwhelmed with some problems. The problem was due to the students lack of
experience and exposure in English Writing skills. On the other hand, doing library
research was something new in writing course. It made the students feel that the
library research was difficult to do. Therefore, in the library research the instructor
need to provide the library research form in more detail which covers all aspect
organizing ideas.

71

CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

5.1 Conclusions
After applying the autonomous learning through classroom action research, it
was concluded that the application of autonomous learning successfully improve
students writing skill in organizing their ideas. It can be seen from the percentage
achievement 69,56% in the cycle one and 82,60% in the cycle two. The
improvements are influenced by the activities carried out during the application of the
research. The activities were conducting library research and writing draft before
writing argumentative essay. Another improvement also occur on the students
attitudes in the writing course. It can be seen from the students responses on the
questionnaire given. The result of the questionnaires indicated that the students enjoy
the writing course by using autonomous learning.

5.2 Suggestions

72

In line with the findings of the research the researcher would like to provide
some suggestions.
The instructor of writing course particularly argumentative essay writing
needs to emphasize not only on the students skill in organizing but also the students
skill in quoting the relevant information. This is important because the students do
not have adequate strategies in quoting information. Sometimes they just rewrite the
information.
The instructor must be patient in guiding the students to conduct library
research. The library research is still something new and hard to conduct. The
instructor should be able to provide clear directions to help the students to conduct
the library research properly.
Even though the findings showed that autonomous learning successfully
improved the students skill in organizing idea but researcher also suggested to use
autonomous learning in teaching unity and coherence.

73

REFERENCES

Bachani, M. 2003. Teaching Writing. Retrived from http://www.waymadeedu.org/

Teaching Writing. pdf on October 24th 2014.
Badger, R., & White, W. 2000. A Process Genre Approach to Teaching Writing.
ELT Journal, Volume 54 No. 2
Barillaro. F. 2011. Teacher Perpective of Learner Autonomy in Language Learning.
Dissertation. Unpublished. UK: England
Benson, P. 2010. Measuring autonomy: Should we put our ability to the test? London,
England: Longman.
Brown, H. D. 2001. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language
Pedagogy. London: A Pearson Education Company
Brown, H.D. 2007. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. New York:
Pearson Education, Inc.
Brown, J.D. and Rodgers, T.S. 2003. Doing Second Language Research. New York.
Oxford University Press.
Cotterall, S. 2009. Learner Autonomy in a Mainstream Writing Course: Articulating
Learning Gains. ELT Journal Volume 46 No. 3
Camilleri, A. 1999. Introducing Learner Autonomy in Initial Teacher Training.
Strasbourg: Council Europe
Dam, L. 2010. Developing learner autonomy with adult immigrants. Oxford, UK:
Peter Lang.

74

Dickinson, L. (1995). Autonomy and motivation: A literature review. System,Volume

23 No. 2
Handley, K & Williams, L. (2011). From Copying to Learning: using exemplars to
engage students with assessment criteria and feedback. Assessment &
Evaluation in Higher Education Journal, Volume 36 No. 1
Harahap, N. 1992. Tehnik Penilain Hasil Belajar. Jakarta: Bulan Bintang.
Harmer, J. 2007. How to Teach English. Endinburgh Gate: Longman
Hayes, J. 2009. The SAGE Handbook of writing development. London: Sage
Publications.
Heaton, J.B. 1990. Classroom Testing. Harlow: Longman.
Holec, H. 1981. Autonomous in Foreign Language Learning. Oxford: Pergamon.
Hyland, K. 2010. Second Language Writing. (8th ed). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Joshi. K.R. 2011. Learner Perception and Teacher Beliefs about Learner Autonomy
in Language Learning. Journal of NELTA, Volume 16. No. 1
Kemmis,. S. & Mc. Taggart. 1988. The Action Research Planner. Victoria. Deakin
University.
Lewin, K. 1946. Action Research and Minority Problems. Journal of Social Issues,
volume 2
Kweldju, S. 2000. Developing a Model of Writing Instruction for Improving English
Departement Students Stylistic English. Jurnal Penelitian Kependidikan.
Volume 1 No. 11. State University of Malang.
Little, D. 2007. Language Learning Autonomy: Some fundamental considerations
revisited. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching Journal, Volume 1
No. 1
Manurung, K. 2005. Instructing Language Learning Strategies to Promote
Autonomous Learning. Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching.
Volume1. Number 2. Tadulako University.
Nunan, D. 2003. Practical English Language Teaching. Singapore: Mc Graw Hill.

75

Prosser and Trigwell. 1999. Relation between Teachers Approaches to Students

Approaches to Learning. Higher Education. Volume 37. No. 1
Reinders, H., & Balcikanli, C. 2011. Learning to foster autonomy: The role of
teacher education materials. Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal, Volume 2
No. 2
Rendon, M.J. 1995. Learner Autonomy and Cooperative Learning. English Teaching
Forum,Vol.33,No.4,Retrievedhttp://exchanges.state.gov/forum/vols/vol33/no4/p
41.htm
Richard and Renandya. 2002. Methodology in Language Teaching. USA: Cambridge
University Press.
Smith. R. C. 2008. Learner Autonomy: Key Consepts in ELT. ELT Journal. Volume
62. No. 4
Sorcinelly. M.D. 2005. The evaluation of teaching: The 40-year debate about
student, colleague, and selfevaluations. Journal of Higher Education Studies,
Volume 2 No.1
Spratt, P. A. & William, M. 2005. The Teaching Knowledge Test Course. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Sudarsono. 2004. Applying Semi-Autonomous Learning Activity in a Listening
Class for the Students of English Language Education Departement at
Jember University. Unpublished Thesis. Malang: Graduate Program State
University of Malang.
Sugiono. 2013. Metode Penelitian Pendidikan. Alfabeta, Bandung.
Tamanampo, H. 2013. Developing Students Skill in Writing Narrative Text at SMA
Negeri 1 Toure through Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition.
Unpublished

Mastes

Thesis.

Palu.

Postgraduate

Program.

Tadulako

University.
Tam, M. 2004. Measuring the Effect of Higher Education on University Students.
Quality Assurance Education. Volume 10. No 4
OMalley, J Michael and Pierce Lorraine Valdez. 1996. Authentic Assessment for
Language Learners. New York: Addisonwesly Publishing Company.

76