The Effect Of Using Collaborative Method On Students’ Descriptive Text At SMAN 3 Kediri

Abstract

^{Managing learning in education by using the right model or method will provide
good social skills and high motivation for students. We know that there are many
types of strategies in teaching English. However, on this occasion, the researcher
wants to examine the effect of collaborative writing in improving students' abilities
which can be one of the alternative ways. Some studies show that collaborative
writing can increase students' motivation in improving writing skills. whether
collaborative method has a significant effect for writing descriptive text in learning.
In addition, the purpose of this study in general is to obtain information or an
overview of the effects of collaborative writing method in descriptive text in English
language learning. This research uses quantitative methods with a quasiexperimental approach. This research was divided into control class groups and
experimental class groups and used data analysis techniques in the form of pretests
and posttests. The experimental samples were taken from class XI-B and class XIC which each class used different treatments. The calculation results showed a
significant effect of collaborative writing method on students' writing ability. Evident
from the calculation of the control class before treatment, the average score of the
control group was 38.00. After the treatment, the average score increased by 17.8
points to 55.80. This means that there is not much significant difference between
the control group taught with conventional methods. The experimental group before
treatment was 40.85. While after treatment using the collaborative writing method,
the average score increased by 38.4 points to 79.25. From the data above, the
researcher concluded that the use of conventional methods can develop students'
writing skills. Although the value of this conventional method is worse than the
collaborative writing method and the average value of this method shows only 38.00
and 40.80 so that the average value of the control group is lower than the
experimental group.}