A Study On The Second Year Students’ In Writing Recount Text At SMPN 1 Singingi

Mexyoner, Mexyoner (2018) A Study On The Second Year Students’ In Writing Recount Text At SMPN 1 Singingi. Other thesis, Universitas Islam Riau.

Preview	Text abstrak.pdf Download (343kB) | Preview
Preview	Text kata_pengantar.pdf Download (301kB) | Preview
Preview	Text daftar_isi.pdf Download (307kB) | Preview
Preview	Text bab1.pdf Download (237kB) | Preview
Preview	Text bab2.pdf Download (353kB) | Preview
Preview	Text bab3.pdf Download (385kB) | Preview
	Text bab4.pdf Restricted to Repository staff only Download (560kB) | Request a copy
	Text bab5.pdf Restricted to Repository staff only Download (300kB) | Request a copy
Preview	Text daftar_pustaka.pdf Download (305kB) | Preview

Abstract

Paragraph writing or the organization of paragraph was of primary importance. The ideas in the paragraph must be presented in logical order by using transition words or connecting words which indicate the relationship between the ideas This research was qualitative research which the sample was second year students at SMP Negeri 1 Singingi. The writer used students’ recount text writing to be his instrument. The writer interpreted the data by using Harris components of scoring rubrics. The students’ writing reount text was rated by two raters. Based on the research’s interpretation, this research found that the students has “good” ability in writing recount text with the students’ average score in terms of grammar was 3.8. They make frequent standart of grammar which occasionally obscure meaning. In vocabulary, the students average score was 3.8. They frequently use the wrong words. In mechanics the students average score was 3.0. They make many errors in punctuation and capitalization. In fluency, the students average score was 3.1. Their speed and fluency were rather weakly. In organization, the students average score was 2.8. Their ideas were so obscure, almost comprehension was impossible made. The students get the lowes score in grammar. As summary that the mean score was 3.3 and it was categorized as “good” level.

Actions (login required)

View Item