英語動詞の習得と英語ライティング能力の相関について

全文

(1)Title. 英語動詞の習得と英語ライティング能力の相関について. Author(s). イックサン, ヘリ・クルニアワン・アッハマド; 松岡, 信哉. Citation. 釧路論集 : 北海道教育大学釧路校研究紀要, 第42号: 181-198. Issue Date. 2010-12. URL. http://s-ir.sap.hokkyodai.ac.jp/dspace/handle/123456789/2364. Rights. Hokkaido University of Education.

(2) 釧路論集－北海道教育大学釧路校研究紀要－第42号（平成22年度） Kushiro Ronshu, - Journal of Hokkaido University of Education at Kushiro - No.42(2010):181-198. 英語動詞の習得と英語ライティング能力の相関についてヘリクルニアワンアッハマドイックサン・松岡信哉北海道教育大学釧路校英米文学研究室（研究生）北海道教育大学釧路校英米文学研究室. The Correlation between English Verb Tense Mastery and English Writing Ability Hery Kurniawan Akhmad IKHSAN, Shinya MATSUOKA Department of Anglo-American Literature, Kushiro Campus, Hokkaido University of Education Department of Anglo-American Literature, Kushiro Campus, Hokkaido University of Education. 概要英語ライティングには文法的知識の習得が不可欠であるが、本研究ではランダムに抽出した57名の被験者を対象に文法力テストとライティングテストを実施し、英語動詞の習得と英語ライティング能力との相関を検証した。収集したデータをPearson Product Moment Testで分析した結果、英語動詞の習得に関する記述統計分析の数値はmean: 18.65, median: 19.00, mode: 23.00, S.D.: 4.48であった。一方ライティング能力についてはmean: 123.40, median: 121.00, mode: 153.00, S.D. : 29.62である。推測統計分析の結果、二つの変数はリニアな相関関係を有していた。英語動詞の習得度と英語ライティング能力は正の有意味な相関を示しており、significance level (β)が0.01の場合correlation coefficient (r) は0.416であった。このような結果、英語ライティング能力の優劣には英語動詞の習得度合いが関与しているという仮説が支持された. INTRODUCTION. verb forms worked with auxiliary forms to perform the. Language has four basic skills: listening, speaking,. varied, crucial functions of verbs in sentences: tense or. reading, and writing. These four skills must be. time of actions, voice, and mood. English verbs basically. integrated in language teaching. Teaching writing in a. have only five forms, which are simple form (infinitive),. second or foreign language usually focuses on writing. third person singular, present participle, past tense,. as a convention for recording speech and reinforcing. and past participle. Of these five forms, only three can. grammatical and lexical features of language. Due to. be used alone as the predicate of a sentence, that is,. the complexity of grammatical and lexical features of. simple, the third person, and the past tense (Wishon. language, learning writing poses difficulties as does. and Burks, 1980). Tables 1 and 2 show the English. teaching it. The educated child learns the rudiments. verb forms. Frank mentioned, “The grammatical form. of writing in his or her native language, but very few. of verbs is usually discussed in connection with tense”. children learn to express themselves clearly with. (1972, p. 52), and in defining what tense is, Wishon and. logical, well-developed coherence that accomplishes an. Burks (1980, p. 192) said, “Tense means time. However,. intended purpose (Brown, 2004, p. 218).. it should be pointed out that time in relation to action is. . a concept that exists in the mind of speaker, reader, or. Nature of English verb tense. listener. Tense, in actual usage, refers consistently only. One of the parts of speech that play an important role. to grammatical forms.” Frank (1972, p. 47) said that. in communication, spoken as well as written, is verbs.. tenses indicate “… the time an event takes place…” and. The verbs themselves have their own types, functions,. Oxford Learner’s Pocket Dictionary says, “A tense is a verb. positions, and grammatical forms (Frank, 1972).. form that shows the time of the action” (1995, p. 427).. Axelrod and Cooper (1986, pp. 577-578) said that lexical. The definition of verb forms differs according to the. verbs were the main verbs in sentences and have five. way the term tense is interpreted. Wishon and Burks. forms, which might be regular or irregular; the lexical. indicated, “Often tense and time do not correspond at. － 181 －.

(3) ヘリクルニアワンアッハマドイックサン・松岡信哉 all. Verbs in the present time, for example, can indicate. tense system showing the changes of active and passive. future time” (1980, p. 192), while Frank (1972, pp. 52-. voice and progressive (continuous) forms of tenses:. 53) mentioned that the interpretation of tense was. present, past, future, present perfect, past perfect, and. commonly a semantic one, each tense roughly indicating. future perfect as shown in Table 3.. a kind of time and she proposed paradigms of the sixTable 1. English Verb Forms. Table 2. English Verb Forms. (Axelrod and Cooper, 1986, p. 577). (Wishon and Burks, 1980, p. 192). Table 3. Paradigm1 of the Six-tense Time System (Frank, 1972, p. 53). 1. The term paradigm means a display of all the forms of a particular part of speech. A paradigm for a verb is often called a conjugation; for a noun, a declension.. Nature of English writing. Byrne (1977, p. 1) said that “… when we write, we. Brown (2000, p. 5) said that language was complex. use graphic symbols: that is, letters or combination. and he quoted from Pinker’s The Language Instinct (1994),. of letters which relate to the sounds we make when. “Language is a complex, specialized skill, which. we speak...” Writing contributes to the following: (1). develops in the child spontaneously, without. the way people think; when we write, we compose. conscious effort or formal instruction, is deployed. meanings; (2) the way we learn; writing makes us more. without awareness of its underlying logic, is. active, critical readers; (3) learning; it tests, clarifies,. qualitatively the same in every individual, and. and extends understanding; (4) personal development; it. is distinct from more general abilities to process. makes us more potent thinkers and active learners; and. information or behave intelligently.” (p. 18).. (5) success in college and on the job. Also, the nature of. Therefore, language involves the four skills. Brown. writing is such that (1) writing is not a mystery, but a. (2001, p. 232) suggested that the teaching of language. skill that anyone can learn to manage; (2) it is a process. should be approached holistically, integrating the four. of discovery; (3) it gives form to thought; and (4) it. language skills.. takes time and hard work (Axelrod and Cooper, 1986,. － 182 －.

(4) 英語動詞の習得と英語ライティング能力の相関について p. 2). Byrne proposed that writing is an activity very. Micro-skills. different from speaking, and a comparison of writing. 1. Produce graphemes and orthographic patterns of. and speaking should help us to understand some of. English.. the difficulties involved in writing (p. 2). The problems,. 2. Produce writing at an efficient rate of speed to suit. both in the mother tongue and in a foreign language,. the purpose.. which are caused by writing, fall under three headings:. 3. Produce an acceptable core of words and use. psychological, linguistic, and cognitive, although these. appropriate word order patterns.. sometimes overlap to some extent (p. 4). Because of. 4. Use acceptable grammatical systems (e.g., tense,. these problems, then, there is a distinction between. agreement, pluralization), patterns, and rules.. learning to write in the mother tongue and in a foreign. 5. Ex p r e s s a p a r t i c u l a r m e a n i n g i n d i f f e r e n t. language (p. 5).. grammatical form.. Brown (2001, pp. 341-342) proposed some. 6. Use cohesive devices in written discourse.. characteristics of written language from the perspective of a writer, which are (1) permanence, (2) production. Macro-skills. time, (3) distance, (4) orthography, (5) complexity, (6). 7. Use the rhetorical forms and conventions of written. vocabulary, and (7) formality. In regard to permanence,. discourse.. he said that when something was written down and. 8. Appropriately accomplish the communicative. delivered in its final form to its intended audience,. functions of written texts according to form and. the writer abdicated a certain power to emend, to. purpose.. clarify, and to withdraw it. In regard to production. 9 . Convey links and connections between events,. time, a writer could indeed become a “good” writer by. and communicate such relations as main idea,. developing efficient processes for achieving the final. su p p o r t i n g i d e a , n e w i n f o r m a t i o n , g i v e n. product. In regard to the distance between the writer. information, generalization, and exemplification.. and the audience, Brown suggested that writers needed. 10. Distinguish between literal and implied meanings. to be able to predict the audience’s general knowledge,. when writing.. cultural and literary schemata, specific subject-matter. 11. Correctly convey culturally specific references in the. knowledge, and very importantly, how the writers’. context of the written text.. choice of language will be interpreted.. 12. Develop and use a battery of writing strategies,. In regard to complexity, writers must learn how to. such as accurately assessing the audience’s. remove redundancy, how to combine sentences, how to. interpretation, using prewriting devices, writing. make references, and how to create syntactic and lexical. with fluency in the first drafts, using paraphrases. variety. Writers can take advantage of the richness. and synonyms, soliciting peer and instructor. of their vocabulary. As for formality, he suggested. feedback, and using feedback for revising and. that writers learn how to describe, explain, compare,. editing. . (Brown, 2004). contrast, illustrate, defend, criticize, and argue, especially in academic writing (Brown, 2001, p. 340).. Brown (2004) said that the micro-skills applied. Basically, the process of writing can be sequenced into. more appropriately to imitative and intensive writing,. the following: inventing, planning, drafting, revising,. while the macro-skills applied to responsive and. and editing (Colderonello and Edwards, 1986). The. extensive writing. For assessing writing, he suggested. genres of written language generally can be grouped into. different types of assessments for different levels. academic, job-related, and personal writings (Brown,. of writing. For imitative writing, assessment would. 2004, p. 219). He further categorized the writing. involve (1) tasks in [hand] writing letters, words, and. performance into four types, that is, imitative, intensive. punctuation; and (2) spelling tasks and detecting. (controlled), responsive, and extensive. In defining the. phoneme-grapheme correspondences. The assessment. ultimate criteria of an assessment procedure, Brown. for intensive (controlled) writing used dictation and. proposed a taxonomy in which the writer should be able. dicto-comp, grammatical transformation tasks, picture-. to demonstrate the following micro- and macro-skills of. cued tasks, vocabulary assessment tasks, ordering. writing.. tasks, and short-answer and sentence completion tasks. The assessment for responsive and extensive writing involved assessment tasks such as paraphrasing, guided. － 183 －.

(5) ヘリクルニアワンアッハマドイックサン・松岡信哉 question and answer, and paragraph construction.. however, even native speakers may encounter. Scoring methods used in assessing writing basically. difficulty in putting together many sentences. can be grouped into two: one for imitative and intensive. having time verbs: time may need to be expressed. (controlled) and the other for responsive and extensive. consistently from sentence to sentence, or shifts. levels of writing. For the earlier levels, especially for. in time perspective may need to be managed. the intensive one, Brown proposed a scoring scale. smoothly. In addition, certain conventions permit. emphasizing grammatical and lexical aspects (see Table 4).. time to be expressed in unusual ways: history can be written in present time to dramatize events, or characters in novels and films may be presented. Table 4. Scoring Scale for Controlled Writing. as though their actions are in present time.”. (Based on Brown, 2004, p. 228). Both the statement of Axelrod and Cooper’s and the reality that people often find it difficult to write because they lack adequate mastery of grammatical structure emphasize that composing writing without verb tense capability leads to problems. Although some factors are found to contribute to good writing, some researches In assessing responsive and extensive writing, Brown. investigate the relationship between English verb. used three major approaches: holistic, primary trait,. tense mastery and English writing ability. Therefore,. and analytical (2004, p. 241) as follows:. this study will analyze the correlation between them,. “In the first method, a single score is assigned. addressing the following research questions.. to an essay, which represents a reader’s general. 1. How complete is the students’ mastery of English. overall assessment. Primary trait scoring is. verb tenses?. a variation of the holistic method in that the. 2. How advanced is the students’ ability in English. achievement of the primary purpose, or trait,. writing?. of an essay is the only factor rated. Analytical. 3. Is there a positive and significant correlation. scoring breaks a test-taker’s written text down. between English verb tense mastery and English. into a number of subcategories (organization,. writing ability?. grammar, etc.) and gives a separate rating for each.”. METHODS. Especially for the analytical scoring, Brown suggested. Participants. an analytic scale as shown in Table 5. The scoring scale. The participants were 114 third - year students. presented in Table 2 is one of the scales for scoring. enrolled in an English class at National Senior. writing. Jacobs et al. (1981)、quoted in Brown (2004, p.. High School of Piyungan, in the Special Province of. 246), suggested a scoring scale as presented in Table 6.. Yogyakarta, Indonesia, in the 2008/2009 academic year.. Brown (2004, p. 246) said that formats and categories. They had studied English for at least five years since. for scoring could vary and might be influenced by the. they were in junior high school. In the last year of their. curricular goals, students’ needs, level of proficiency, the. senior high school studies, they were learning/being. aspects of writing emphasized (e.g., syntax rather than. taught how to write according to the requirements of. mechanics), and genre of writing; but analytical scoring. the national curriculum. These requirements include. offers a little more backwash than a single holistic or. categories such as narrative (narration, news item,. primary trait score.. and recount), descriptive (description, report, and explanation), and argumentative (analytical exposition,. Research questions. hortatory exposition, and discussion). This study. On the relation between verb tenses and writing,. randomly took 57 students from among the 114 students. Axelrod and Cooper (1986, p. 578) said:. as the sample for the purpose of this study’s analysis.. “Native speakers of English know the tense. . system and use it confidently. They comprehend. Instruments. time as listeners and readers. As talkers, they. A multiple-choice test was used to measure the. use the system in combination with adverbs of. students’ English verb tense mastery and an essaywriting test was applied to measure their English. time to identify the times of actions. As writers,. － 184 －.

(6) 英語動詞の習得と英語ライティング能力の相関について Table 5. Analytic Scale for Rating Composition Tasks (Brown & Bailey, 1984, pp. 39-41). － 185 －.

(7) ヘリクルニアワンアッハマドイックサン・松岡信哉 writing ability. The writing ability referred to the. Final National Exam (Standar Kompetensi Lulusan dan. students’ ability to compose intensive (controlled). Spesifikasi Ujian Akhir Bahasa Inggris SMA). Tables 7. writing rather than responsive or extensive writing. The. and 8 specify the materials involved in both tests,. mastery of verb tenses was observed in relation to the. addressing their content validity.. grammatical-structural aspect of writing. The text-types. A trial of both instruments was held on November 1,. used to test the students’ mastery of verb tenses were. 2008, to determine their reliability. The instruments. adapted from materials commonly used in teaching the. were applied to 26 students. The computation used. course, Basic Competence in English for Indonesian. ANATES ver.4.0.2 to measure their correlation coefficient. Senior High School: Listening and Reading (Standar. (r-value). The results showed the correlation coefficients. Kompetensi Lulusan Bahasa Inggris SMA: Menyimak. were 0.560 for the English verb instrument and 0.8349. dan Membaca), which features narrative, descriptive,. for the English writing instrument. The interpretation. and argumentative writing; while materials to test. of the correlation coefficient was then based on. the students’ writing ability were adapted from the. categories proposed by Arikunto (1989, p. 81) as shown. Basic Competence in English for Senior High School’s. in Table 9. She said that a reliable test should have. Table 6. Scoring Scale for Writing (Jacobs et al., 1981). Table 7. Specification Table for Test Instrument measuring English Verb Tense Mastery. Table 8. Specification Table for Test Instrument measuring English Writing Ability. － 186 －.

(8) 英語動詞の習得と英語ライティング能力の相関について the r-value of at least 0.400. Since each of the r-values. Analysis. was higher than 0.400, it meant that both the test for. For the multiple-choice test items assessing English. English verb mastery and that for English writing. verb tense mastery, score (1) was given to each correct. ability were reliable.. answer while each incorrect answer was given (0). Basically, the writing was analyzed in regard to its. Table 9. Interpretation of Correlation Coefficient of. five general components. An analytic scoring scale. Reliability (Arikunto, 1989, p.71). was used for the scoring and the details of the scoring scale are presented by Brown and Bailey (1984, pp. 3941); they are (1) Organization: introduction, body, and conclusion; (2) Logical development of ideas: content; (3) Grammar, (4) Punctuation, spelling, and mechanics; and (5) Style and quality of expression. Since the study was conducted with high school students, not with college or university students, the analytic scoring system was simplified. The writer, then, used the scoring scale proposed by The Board of Research and Development,. Procedures. The Ministry of National Education of Indonesia (Pusat. The study was conducted from November 3, 2008, to. Penilaian Pendidikan, Badan Penelitian dan Pengembangan,. November 15, 2008. In the first week of the experiment,. Departemen Pendidikan Nasional, 2004) as shown in Table. the researcher conducted a training session, which. 10. Then, each item on the writing test was scored using. was supposed to improve participants’ understanding. the latter scoring scale.. of English verb tenses and their English writing. To analyze the participants’ work, we used SPSS. performance. In this section, the researcher explained. for the statistical analysis covering the descriptive -. the benefits of having a good understanding of verb. inferential statistics. With the descriptive statistics,. tense and its effect on good writing performance. Then,. the range, mean, median, mode, and standard. the researcher reminded participants of English verb. deviations were calculated, while the latter one. tenses by giving them a brief explanation and some. was used to examine the Pearson Product-Moment. practice exercises. Next, the researcher demonstrated. correlation coefficient for hypothesis testing. Using a. what the participants would be asked to do when the. standard normal distribution as shown on Chart 1, the. real study was conducted. After that, the participants. participants’ score distributions on both the tests of. were given controlled-writing samples of various text-. English verb tense mastery and English writing ability. types, addressing either narrative, descriptive, or. are grouped into categories as shown in Tables 11 and. argumentative writing. Finally, the participants were. 12.. asked to practice composing texts.. . In the second week, participants were asked to do the real tests to measure their mastery of English verb tenses and ability in composing texts. The allocated time was 60 minutes for the first test and 120 minutes for the latter. Work from fifty-seven of 114 students was randomly selected for analysis.. . － 187 －.

(9) ヘリクルニアワンアッハマドイックサン・松岡信哉 Table 10. Analytic Scoring Scale for English Writing Ability (proposed by The Board of Research and Development, The Ministry of National Education of Indonesia, 2004). Chart 1. A Curve for Standard Normal Distribution. * μ (Mean) ** σ (Standard Deviation). Table 11. Categories of Participants’ Scores on English Verb Tense Mastery. － 188 －.

(10) 英語動詞の習得と英語ライティング能力の相関について Table 12. Categories of Participants’ Scores on English Writing Ability. RESULTS. deviation was 4.48.. Descriptive statistics. Addressing the second research question, Table 17. As the result of the first research question, Table 13. shows participants’ test scores for English writing.. shows participants’ test scores on English verb tense. Table 18 shows the distribution of score frequencies. mastery. Table 14 shows the Distribution of Score. on the English writing test. The achieved scores and. Frequencies of the English Verb Tense Mastery Test.. percentages are used to categorize the students into four. The achieved scores and percentage were used to. categories (good to excellent, average to good, poor to. categorize the students into five categories (excellent,. average, and poor) as shown in Table 19. The complete. good to excellent, average to good, poor to average, and. descriptive analysis of the participants’ scores on the. poor) as shown in Table 15. The complete descriptive. English writing test is shown in Table 20 in which the. analysis of the participants’ scores on the English verb. minimum score was 40.00 (24.24%), and the maximum. tense mastery test is shown in Table 16 in which the. score was 158.00 (95.76%) of the total possible score. minimum score was 10.00 (35.71%), and the maximum. of 165.00. The mean was 123.40 (74.79%), which is. score was 28.00 (100%) of the total possible score of. above 82.50 (50%). The median was 121.00 (73.33%).. 28.00. The mean was 18.65 (66.61%) which was above. The mode was 153.00 (92.73%) indicating the highest. 14.00 (50%). The median was 19.00 (67.86%). The. frequency from the score distribution. The standard. mode was 23.00 (82.14%), which indicates the highest. deviation was 29.62.. frequency of the score distribution. The standard. . Table 13. Participants’ Test Scores on English Verb Tense Mastery. － 189 －.

(11) ヘリクルニアワンアッハマドイックサン・松岡信哉. Table 14. Distribution of Test Score Frequencies for English Verb Tense Mastery. － 190 －.

(12) 英語動詞の習得と英語ライティング能力の相関について. *Valid (a test taker who answered all test items as expected) Table 15. Categories of Participants’ Test Scores on English Verb Tense Mastery. Table 16. Participants’ Score Distribution on the English Verb Tense Mastery Test. *Valid (a test taker who answered all test items as expected) **Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown . － 191 －.

(13) ヘリクルニアワンアッハマドイックサン・松岡信哉 Table 17. Participants’ Test Scores on English Writing Ability. － 192 －.

(14) 英語動詞の習得と英語ライティング能力の相関について. Table 18. Distribution of Test Score Frequencies for English Writing Ability. *Valid (a test taker who answered all test items as expected). － 193 －.

(15) ヘリクルニアワンアッハマドイックサン・松岡信哉 Table 19. Categories of Participants’ Test Scores on English Writing Ability. Table 20. Participants’ Score Distribution on the English Writing Ability Test. Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown Inferential statistics. no difference in the samples tested or no correlation. Addressing the third research question, we applied. between them. When the coefficient of significance (sig.). inferential statistics. Before analyzing the correlation,. is lower than 0.05 (< 0.05), then, the null hypothesis. we did an analysis on the normality and linearity of. (H0) is rejected. It means that there is a difference. both groups of score distribution. Table 21 shows a data. or a correlation between the samples tested. The. summary of both groups. Table 22 shows the result for. computation on Table 25 shows that the coefficient. normal distribution testing while Tables 23 and 24 show. of significance is 0.001. It is lower than 0.05 (<0.05),. the result for linearity testing using Kolmogorov-Smirnov. which means that there is a correlation between the. Test and ANOVA.. two variables, English verb tense mastery and English. To test the correlation between the two variables,. writing ability. The correlation coefficient of 0.416 shows. this study applied the correlation test of Pearson Product. that there is significant correlation between the two. Moment. Table 25 shows the results of the computation.. variables.. Null hypothesis (H0) indicates that there is no. From the computation presented above, it can be. difference between one sample and another (Hadi,. stated that there is a positive, significant, and linear. 2004, p. 211). The result of the computation using. correlation between English verb tense mastery. Pearson Product Moment should be compared with the. and English writing ability in which the correlation. requirements in which the coefficient of significance. coefficient is 0.416 with a level of significance (β) of 0.05.. (sig.) is higher than 0.05 (> 0.05); then, the null. Therefore, the hypothesis stating that there is a positive. hypothesis (H0) is accepted. It means that there is. and significant correlation between English verb tense. － 194 －.

(16) 英語動詞の習得と英語ライティング能力の相関について mastery and English writing ability is accepted. Table 21. A Summary of Data of the English Verb Tense Test and English Writing Test. Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown Table 22. Normal Distribution Testing on Variables (One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test)*. *Test distribution is Normal. Table 23. Linearity Testing on Variables (ANOVA). *Predictors: (Constant), Tenses **Dependent Variable: Writing . － 195 －.

(17) ヘリクルニアワンアッハマドイックサン・松岡信哉 Table 24. F Distribution (α=5%). *To be linear, the coefficient of F, as a result of linearity testing, should be higher than the F table value as shown in Table 24. The computation of F, that is 11.526, was higher than the F table value, that is, 4.010 for 57 subjects. Therefore, the relation was linear. Table 25. Correlation Test of Variables. **Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). Table 26. Summary of Participants’ Correctness on Test Items of English Writing Ability. － 196 －.

(18) 英語動詞の習得と英語ライティング能力の相関について DISCUSSION. meaning that participants could handle the task well.. English Verb Tense Master y. Table 26 shows the summary of participants’ correctness. Of the 57 participants, only 27 (47.37%) gave correct. on test items of English writing ability.. answers on item number 19, while 30 participants. By using the categories in Table 11, the following. (52.63%) gave incorrect answers. It was the lowest. conclusions can be drawn about the 57 students’ ability. frequency of students answering correctly. This shows. in English writing: 1. students’ ability to re - arrange jumbled. that most students, in this study, did not know and had. sentences into coherent paragraphs is average. not mastered the usage of “the Present Perfect Tense”. to good;. adequately. Answers by participants for item number. 2. students’ ability to write a simple letter is. 23, in which 28 of 57 participants gave the correct. average to good;. answer, showed that some, though not enough, could. 3. students’ ability to complete a simple. handle the usage of “the Present Perfect Continuous. conversation is average to good;. Tense,” since only 49.12% of participants answered. 4. students’ ability to write a short paragraph. correctly. Apart from the participants’ weaknesses in the. based on guidance provided by describing. mastery of English verb tenses, some strengths could. pictures is average to good;. be seen here. Answers on item number 9 indicate that. 5. students’ ability to write a short paragraph. participants were able to understand the usage of “the. based on guidance provided by composing a. Present Continuous Tense.” It garnered the highest. similar paragraph about themselves is average to good;. score by participants with 50 of 57 participants (87.72%). 6. students’ ability to write a short paragraph. giving correct answers. By using the categories in Table 11, the following. based on guidance provided by creating a. conclusions can be drawn about the 57 students’. paragraph on the basis of the conversation provided is average to good;. mastery of English verb tenses:. 7. students’ ability to write memos issuing. 1. students’ mastery of the Simple Present. warnings is average to good;. Tenseis average to good;. 8. students’ ability to create a summary of a. 2. students’ mastery of the Present Continuous. passage/paragraph provided is average to good;. Tense is average to good;. 9. students’ ability to complete the sentences. 3. students’ mastery of the Simple Past Tense is. based on the paragraph and to make a. average to good;. summary of it is average to good;. 4. students’ mastery of the Past Continuous Tense. 10. students’ ability to create a descriptive or. is average to good;. narrative text by writing a paragraph on the. 5. students’ mastery of the Present Perfect Tense. basis of the data provided is average to good;. is average to good;. 11. students’ ability to create a descriptive or. 6. students’ mastery of the Present Perfect. narrative text by writing a paragraph that is. Continuous Tense is average to good;. similar to two short paragraphs containing. 7. students’ mastery of the Present Future Tense. change in verb given is average to good;. is average to good;. 12. students’ total ability in English writing is. 8. students’ total mastery of English verb tense. average to good.. patterns is average to good. To help students to improve their writing ability, it English Writing Ability. might be helpful to focus not only on how to compose a. Of the 57 participants, some were able to complete a. descriptive and narrative text but also on the specific. simple conversation with 57.31% correctness, which was. verb tenses such as simple present tense, simple past. the lowest score in correctness. It indicated that some. tense, and present perfect continuous tense.. students were not able to compose text of conversation. . a d e q u a t e l y. T h e d a t a a l s o s h o w e d t h a t s o m e. CONCLUSION. participants were able to write a short paragraph on. From the study, some conclusions can be drawn based. the basis of guidance provided with 91.46% correctness;. on the research questions. First, the research findings. this exercise garnered the highest scores in correctness. point out that the mean value of English verb tense. － 197 －.

(19) ヘリクルニアワンアッハマドイックサン・松岡信哉 mastery is average to good (18.6491) and the mean of. Calderonello, A. H. and Bruce L. Edwards, Jr. 1986.. English writing ability is average to good (123.4035).. Roughdrafts: The Process of Writing. Boston: Houghton. These findings prove that if the mean of English verb. Mifflin Company.. tense mastery is average, that of English writing ability. Departemen Pendidikan Nasional. 2004. Standar. will be good. Second, other findings indicate that for. Kompetensi Lulusan dan Spesifikasi Ujian Akhir SMA:. some students, weaknesses are found both in English. Bahasa Inggris. Jakarta: Pusat Penilaian Pendidikan-. verb tense mastery and in English writing ability. In. Badan Penelitian and Pengembangan Pendidikan.. regard to English verb tenses, the students’ grasp of the. __________. 2004. Standar Kompetensi Lulusan Bahasa. usage of the Present Perfect Tense is weak. At the same. Inggris SMA: Menyimak dan Membaca. Jakarta:. time, generally, students show that they have mastered. Pusat Penilaian Pendidikan-Badan Penelitian and. the English verb tenses adequately (average to good).. Pengembangan Pendidikan.. In English writing, students are weak in completing a. __________. 2004. Skala Penilaian Ujian Akhir Bahasa. simple written conversation, but generally, their English. Inggris SMA: Writing. Jakarta: Pusat Penilaian. writing ability is good to excellent. Third, apart from the. Pendidikan-Badan Penelitian and Pengembangan. above findings, the test distribution indicates that both. Pendidikan.. English verb tense mastery and English writing ability. Frank, M. 1972. Modern English: A Practical Reference. are normally distributed. English verb tense mastery. Guide. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.. and English writing ability have normal linearity. The. Hadi, S. 2004. Statistik 3. Yogyakarta: Penerbit Andi.. hypothesis testing states that the relationship between. Jacobs, H. L., Zinkgraf, S. A., Wormuth, D. R.,. English verb tense mastery and English writing ability. Hartfiel, V. F. and Hughey, J. B. 1981: Testing. obtains a correlation of r-value 0.416, with level of. ESL Composition: A Practical Approach. Rowley, MA:. significance (β) of 0.05. Therefore, the hypothesis stating. Newbury House. that there is a positive and significant correlation. Pinker, S. 1994. The Language Instinct. New York:. between English verb tense mastery and English. William Morrow.. writing ability is accepted.. University of Oxford. 1995. Oxford Learner’s Pocket. Since the study involved only senior high school. Dictionary, New Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.. students, one should be wary of generalizing these. Wishon G. E. and Julia M. Burks. 1980. Let’s Write. findings. A similar study should involve various levels of. English, Revised Edition. New York: American Book. participants in the future.. Company.. REFERENCES. (ヘリ・クルニアワン・アッハマド・イックサン北海道. Arikunto, S. 1989. Dasar-Dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan.. 教育大学釧路校研究生). Jakarta: Bina Aksara.. (松岡信哉北海道教育大学准教授) . Axelrod, R. B. and Charles R. Cooper. 1986. The St. Martin’s Guide to Writing. New York: St. Martin's Press. Brown, H. D. 2000. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching, 4th Edition. San Francisco: Longman. ___________. 2001. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy, 2nd Edition. San Francisco: San Francisco University State University. ___________. 2004. Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom Practices. San Francisco: San Francisco State University. Brown, J. D. and Bailey, K. M. 1984. A Categorical Instrument for Scoring Second Language Writing Skills: Language Learning. Michigan: Language Learning Research Club, University of Michigan. Byrne, D. 1977. English Teaching Extracts. London: Longman.. － 198 －.

(20)