The INFLUENCE OF MIND MAPPING AND LEARNING MOTIVATION TOWARD WRITING ACHIEVEMENT TO THE FIFTH SEMESTER

  • Nozylianty Lianty ABA Bina Insan Indonesia
  • Arief Rahman Hakim
Keywords: Mind-Mapping, Motivation, writing

Abstract

ABSTRACT

This article was aimed to find out the significance average score and motivation between Mind-Mapping and Conventional Technique. Due the interpretation of this  study, it found that: (1) there was a significant difference in writing achievement between the student who taught by using Mind-Mapping and those are taught using conventional technique since it was  found  that the result was 0.00, (2) there was significant difference in writing achievement between the students who have high motivation by using Mind-Mapping and conventional teaching since the result was 0.005, (3) there was significant difference in writing achievement between the students who have low motivation by using Mind-Mapping and conventional teaching technique since the result was 0.002, (4) there was significant difference in writing achievement between the students who have low and high motivation by using Mind-Mapping since the significant was lower 0.02, and (5) there was an interaction effect of technique used and student’s motivation in improving writing achievement since the result of interaction effect was lower 0.006. Based on the result, the writer concluded that the result of this research was lower than the level of significant level (0,05), and Mind-Mapping and motivation gave the significant influence for student’s narrative writing achievement.

 

ABSTRAK

                Artikel ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui signifikansi skor rata-rata dan motivasi antara Mind-Mapping dan Teknik Konvensional. Berdasarkan interpretasi penelitian ini, ditemukan bahwa: (1) terdapat perbedaan yang signifikan dalam prestasi menulis antara siswa yang diajar menggunakan Mind-Mapping dan mereka yang diajar menggunakan teknik konvensional karena ditemukan bahwa hasilnya adalah 0,00, ( 2) terdapat perbedaan yang signifikan dalam prestasi menulis antara siswa yang memiliki motivasi tinggi dengan menggunakan Mind-Mapping dan pengajaran konvensional karena hasilnya adalah 0,005, (3) terdapat perbedaan yang signifikan dalam prestasi menulis antara siswa yang memiliki motivasi rendah dengan menggunakan Mind -Pemetaan dan teknik pengajaran konvensional karena hasilnya adalah 0,002, (4) terdapat perbedaan yang signifikan dalam prestasi menulis antara siswa yang memiliki motivasi rendah dan tinggi dengan menggunakan Mind-Mapping karena signifikansinya lebih rendah 0,02, dan (5) terdapat peningkatan efek interaksi teknik yang digunakan dan motivasi siswa dalam meningkatkan prestasi menulis karena hasil efek interaksi lebih rendah 0,006. Berdasarkan hasil tersebut, penulis menyimpulkan bahwa hasil penelitian ini lebih rendah dari tingkat signifikansi (0,05), dan Mind-Mapping dan motivasi memberikan pengaruh yang signifikan terhadap prestasi menulis narasi siswa.

References

Arikunto, Suharsimi. 2002. Penelitiansuatupendekatanpraktek. Jakarta : PT
RinekaCipta
Biehler, Snowman. 1997. Psychology Applied to teaching, 8/e Houghton Miffin
Boekaerts, Monique. 2000. Motivastion to learn. Chicago: University of Ilinois.
Brown, H.D. 1980, 2000, 2004. Principles of Language Teaching Learning.
Englewood Clifts, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Bygate, M.P., Skehan and M. Swain, 2017.Researching pedagogical tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing. Essex: Longman.
Camarello.CandUriagereka, J. 2013. Teaching Resource Guide.USA: College
Park.Maryland.
Celce-Murcia. M. Teaching English as a Second of Foreign Language. Boston.,
MA: Heinle&Heinle Publisher
Clleand,DavidMc.1996.Interaksi&MotivasiBelajarMengajar.Jakarta: Raja
GrafindoPersada.
Deci. E.L., et.al.1999.A Meta-Analytic Review of Experiments Examining the
Effects of Extrinsic Rewards on Intrinsic Motivation.Psychological Bulletin, 125 (6), 627-668.
Dian, Fausta.2009.Bahan AjarKompetnesiProfesional.DiklatPeningkatan
Kompetensi Guru VokasiAngkatanIII.Jakarta: LPMP.

Djuharie, Otong Setiawan.2009.Essay Writing.TeknikdanPanduanMenulis
MelaluiEksplorasi Model danLatihan.Bandung: Cv. YramaWidya.
Douglas,S.R& Kim, M.2014.Task-Based Language Teaching and English for
Academic Purposes: An Investigation into Instructor Perceptions and Practice in the Canadian Context TESL CANADA JOURNAL/REVUE
TESLDU CANADA 1.VOLUmE 31, SpECiALiSSUE 8, 2014
Falk, Julia S. 1978, Lingustic and Language: A survey of Basic Concept and
Implication. New York, NY: Jhon Wiley & Sons.
Fegerson, et.al.1992.All in One.New jersey: MarieLouse Prentice Hall.
Fraenkel, Jack R and Norman E, Wallen.1990, 2012. How to Design and
Evaluate Research in Education. New York. NY: McGraw Hall, Inc.
Freeman, D. L.2000.Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching.Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Gardner, R. C. (2003).Social Psychology and Second Language Learning. London
Edward Arnold.
Guay, et.al.2010.Intrinsic Identified, and Controlled Types of Motivation for
School Subjects in Young Elementary School Children. British Journal of
EducationalPsychology, 93 (1)
Hairstone, Maxine. 1986. Contemporary Composition. Boston: Houghton Mifflin
Company.
Harmer, J. 2006.The Practice of English Language Teaching. England: Edinburg
Gate Harlow.
Hasani, A.2005.Ihwal Menulis.UNTIRTA PRESS.
Hatch, Evelyn and HosseinFarhady. 1982. Research Design and Statistics for
Applied Linguistic.Cambridge : Newbury House Publisher.
Heaton.1975.Writing English Language Tests.New York, NY:Longman Inc.
Hudson, G.2000.Essetial Introductory Linguistics.Blackwell Publisher.
Street.Malden.MA 02148-5020
Indiani D.K & Ericka, D. 2019. Integration of STAD with Mind mapping to Enhanced Student Cognitive Through Classroom Action Research. Biology Education Department Tidar University.
Maharimin, I.1999.Menulis SecaraPopuler.Jakarta: Pustaka Jaya.
Mackey, W. F. 1965. Language Teaching Analysis.London: LongmanGroup Ltd.
McMilan.J.H. 1992.Educational Research: Fundamentalsa for the Consumer,
New York, NY: Harper Collins Publishers Inc.
Moore, K. D.2005. Effective Instructional Strategies:From Theory to Practice.
USA: Sage Publications Inc.
Nasution,A.S.2017.The Effect of Task-Based Learning Method on Students’ Achievement in Writing .A graduate of English Language and Literature Department of UNIMED
Nunan, David.2003.Practical English Language Teaching.Singapore: Mc. Graw
Hill.
Oshima, Alice and Ann Hogue. 1997. Introduction to Academic Writing. New
York : Longman
Poblette, Judy H. 1999. Communicating Christian Values Through Teaching
English as a Second Language : The Use of Poetry.Michigan : Andrews
University.
Richard, et.al.2002.Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied
Linguistics.Malaysia: Longman.
Saleh, Yusrizal. 1997. Methodology of TEFL in the Indonesian Context Book 1.
Palembang.
Siahaan, Sanggam. 2008. Issues in Linguistics.Yogyakarta :GrahaIlmu.
Slamento.2003.Belajar &Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhi.Jakarta:
BumiAksara.
Sternberg, R.1994. In Search of the Human Mind (395-396). New York: Harcourt,
NJ: Prentice Hall.
Stipek,D.1988. Motivation to Learn: From Theory to Practice. Englewood Cliff,
NJ: Prentice
Sudarwati, Th and Eudia Grace.2007.Look Ahead: An English Course for Senior
High School Students Xi.Jakarta: Erlangga
Wallace, Trudy.2005.Teaching Speaking, Listening, and Writing.Accessed from
http://www.curtin.edu.au/curtin/dept/smec/iae.On Saturday, Februari 4th,2017
Zarkasi. 2022. Learning the quran hadith With the mind map method to improve student learning outcomes.Malang.
Published
2023-12-04

Most read articles by the same author(s)

Obs.: This plugin requires at least one statistics/report plugin to be enabled. If your statistics plugins provide more than one metric then please also select a main metric on the admin's site settings page and/or on the journal manager's settings pages.