Presentation on theme: "IMA NATRIA, 2201402040 STUDENTS ERRORS IN USING SIMPLE PRESENT TENSE TO WRITE DESCRIPTIVE TEXTS (THE CASE OF THE EIGHTH YEAR STUDENTS OF SMP N 2 BREBES."— Presentation transcript:
IMA NATRIA, 2201402040 STUDENTS ERRORS IN USING SIMPLE PRESENT TENSE TO WRITE DESCRIPTIVE TEXTS (THE CASE OF THE EIGHTH YEAR STUDENTS OF SMP N 2 BREBES IN THE ACADEMIC YEAR OF 2006/2007)
Identitas Mahasiswa - NAMA : IMA NATRIA - NIM : 2201402040 - PRODI : Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris - JURUSAN : BAHASA & SASTRA INGGRIS - FAKULTAS : Bahasa dan Seni - EMAIL : - PEMBIMBING 1 : PROF. A. MARYANTO, PhD - PEMBIMBING 2 : HENDRIKUS JOKO YULIANTO, SS, SPd - TGL UJIAN : 2007-01-23
Judul STUDENTS ERRORS IN USING SIMPLE PRESENT TENSE TO WRITE DESCRIPTIVE TEXTS (THE CASE OF THE EIGHTH YEAR STUDENTS OF SMP N 2 BREBES IN THE ACADEMIC YEAR OF 2006/2007)
Abstrak This final project is a study about students’ errors in using simple present tense in descriptive text made by the eighth year students of SMP N 2 Brebes. Almost students consider writing is the most difficult skill than others. Therefore, the students often make errors, and also when they use simple present tense in descriptive text. This study was conducted under the consideration that simple present tense plays an important role in writing a descriptive text. The problems of this study are what dominant errors in descriptive texts are made by the eighth year students of SMP N 2 Brebes and what possible causes of those errors are. The purposes of this study are to find out the dominant errors on simple present tense in descriptive texts made by the eighth year students of SMP N 2 Brebes and to find out the possible causes of those errors. The population of this study was the eighth year students of SMP N 2 Brebes in the academic year of 2006/2007 which consisted of 7 classes; they were 8A, 8B, 8C, 8D, 8E, 8F, and 8G. The total number of the population was 294 students; out of which 42 students were chosen as the samples. Cluster proportional random sampling was used to collect the data proportionally to represent each of the group, so that they were all well represented. The samples were taken 15% from every class to collect the data. The instrument that was used is a written test consisting of an outline in writing a descriptive text. In analyzing the data, error analysis is used in which there are five steps; they are identifying the errors, classifying the errors, calculating the errors, putting the result in tables and the last step is drawing conclusion. Finally, the result of the analysis shows that there were 10 types of errors. They are omission of be, wrong form of be, double be, wrong use of singular and plural form, addition of be (before and after verb), omission of suffix -s/-es, wrong use of verb, wrong form of modal auxiliary, omission of verb, and wrong form of negative sentence. It is concluded that the dominant errors lies on the omission of suffix –s/-es from the verb of third person singular subjects in the students’ descriptive texts whose proportion of the errors is 24.65%. Based on the result of the research, it is suggested that the eighth year students of SMP N 2 Brebes should be given intensive exercises on the correct structure of simple present tense in their writing. It is quite necessary for the eighth year students and the teacher of SMP N 2 Brebes to be informed about the result of this study so that they can improve their teaching and learning process.
Referensi Abilene. 2004. www.usd435.k12.ks.us Arikunto, S. 1996. Prosedur penelitian: Suatu Pendekatan Praktek. Jakarta: PT. Rineka Cipta Arikunto, S. 2002. Dasar-Dasar Evaluasi Pengajaran: Edisi Revisi. Jakarta: Bumi Akasara. Azar, B. S. 1989. Understanding and Using English Grammar. New Jersey: Prentice –Hall Inc. Brown, D. H. 1987. Principle of Language Learning and Teaching. Regenes Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall Callaghan, M. 1988. “Descriptive Writing”, in Macmillan English: Thinking and Writing Process. Lake Forest: Glencoe. Macmillan. McGraw-Hill. Cook and Suter. 1983. The Scope of Grammar. Oxford: University Press. Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan. 2003. Kurikulum Berbasis Kompetensi: Garis-Garis Besar Program Pengajaran Bahasa Inggris. Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan, Direktorat Jendral Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah. Ellis, R. 1997. Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Frank, M. 1972. Modern English. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc. Gay, L. R. 1987. Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and Application. British: Merrill Publishing Company. Guth, H. P. 1961. Words and Ideas. Belmont, California: Wordsworth Publishing Company, Inc. Guthrie, E. R. 1982. Learning Theories. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company. Holman, C. H. 1997. Figure of Speech in Encyclopedia Americana (International Edition) Vol 11. Danbury: A Grolier Incorporated. Johansson, D. and Roger T. 1975. Learning Together Alone, Coorperation, Competition, and Individualization. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Inc Kellerman, E. and M. S. Smith. 1986. Crosslinguistic Influence in Second Language Acquisition. Pergamon: Pergamon Institute of English. Raja, T. Nasr. 1988. Grammar Practice Activities. London: Cambridge University. Ramelan, 1992. Introduction to Linguistic Analysis. Semarang: IKIP Semarang Press. Richards, J. C. 1974. Error Analysis. London: Longman Group. Saleh, M. 2001. Pengantar Praktik; Penelitian Pengajaran Bahasa. Semarang: IKIP Semarang Press. Scholes, R. and C. H. Clause. 1972. Elements of Writing. New York: Oxford University Press. Schratz and Puchta. 1993. Adolescents. New York. Pearson Education Limited. Soemarto, and Suharjito. 1994. English in Context I. Jakarta: Depdikbud. Direktorat Jenderal Pendidikan Tinggi. Valette, R. M. 1997. Modern Language Testing. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Wishon, G.E. and J. M. Burks. 1980. Let’s Write English. New York: American Book Company.