ENGLISH REVIEW: Journal of English Education p-ISSN 2301-7554, e-ISSN 2541-3643

Volume 7, Issue 1, December 2018 https://journal.uniku.ac.id/index.php/ERJEE

SOLVING THE STUDENTS’ PROBLEMS IN WRITING

ARGUMENTATIVE ESSAY THROUGH COLLABORATIVE
WRITING STRATEGY
M. Fadhly Farhy Abbas
English Education Department, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Lancang
Kuning Pekanbaru, Indonesia
E-mail: [email protected]

Herdi
English Education Department, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Lancang
Kuning Pekanbaru, Indonesia
E-mail: [email protected]

APA Citation: Abbas, M. F. F., & Herdi, H. (2018). Solving the students’ problems in writing
argumentative essay through collaborative writing strategy. English Review:
Journal of English Education, 7(1), 105-114. doi: 10.25134/erjee.v7i1.1499.

Received: 10-08-2018 Accepted: 21-10-2018 Published: 01-12-2018

Abstract: This research is based on the students’ problems in writing argumentative essay,
especially in developing and organizing ideas, using good grammar and diction, and applying
correct writing mechanics, such as the use of capital letter, spelling, and punctuation. The purpose
of this research is to solve the students’ problems in writing argumentative essay through
collaborative writing strategy. The design employed in this research was classroom action
research. The participants involved in this research were 23 students of English Education
Department, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, University of Lancang Kuning
Pekanbaru, Indonesia. The instruments used in this research were writing test, field note,
observation checklist, and interview. Based on the result of the test, the students’ score had
reached the criteria of success set, and it was significantly improved from the result before the
research conducted. The mean score of the mid-term test was 54.9, and the mean score of the cycle
test was 74.3. In addition, based on the data gained from the field note, observation checklist, and
interview, it was found that the students were active, creative, and enjoy the learning process. In
conclusion, the use of collaborative writing strategy can solve the students’ problems in writing
argumentative essay as well.
Keywords: writing skill; writing aspects; argumentative essay; collaborative writing strategy;
classroom action research.

INTRODUCTION mechanics including the use of capital letter,

Basically, writing is an activity of spelling, and punctuation (Brown, 2015).
expressing, developing, and organizing ideas In accordance with the above statement,
into written form. The more ideas the writers both aspects of writing are still difficult to be
have, the better writing product will be. applied by the students of English Education
However, to express, develop, and organize Department, Faculty of Teacher Training
ideas into written form is not easy. There are and Education, University of Lancang
two aspects in writing that must be Kuning especially for the students who are
considered by the writers. First, writing already studying academic writing course. In
process, such as pre-writing, drafting, Academic Writing course, the students are
revising, editing, and publishing targeted to be able to write essay in the form
(Fachrurrazy, 2011). Second, micro and of argumentative essay.
macro skills of writing, such as the ability to Argumentative essay is a scientific paper
use word diction , grammar, and writing that contains arguments, explanations,
105
M. Fadhly Farhy Abbas & Herdi
Solving the students’ problems in writing argumentative essay through collaborative writing strategy

proofs, or reasons. Generally, in an based on ideas that have been generated

argumentative essay, there is an objective previously. The third step is revising and
review or information followed by editing. At this step, the helper is asked to
examples, analogies, and cause and effect revise the draft that has been written by the
relationship (Housden, 2013). Further, writer, and the writer rewrites the revised
Bowell and Kemp in Ibrahim, Eljack, and ideas to become a well-written article. Then,
Elhassan (2015) explain that the argument the helper and writer edit the revised draft
displayed with good and right reasons is an simultaneously. The editing process focuses
attempt to influence, invite someone or lead on the use of grammar, vocabulary or
opinions to certain things. Besides, mechanics of writing. The last step is
argumentative essay can also contain publishing. In this step, the students display
arguments about pro (supporting ideas) and the results of their writing in front of the
contra (conflicting ideas) on the issues or class. Then, the lecturer asks other students
topics being discussed (Boun, 2009). to check the results of the writing to get
Based on the teaching experience, the feedback. After that, the lecturer gives an
researchers found various problems in assessment towards the students’ work.
writing argumentative essays faced by the In accordance with the above
students. The students felt difficult when description, aim of this research is to solve
developing and organizing ideas, using the students’ problems in writing
correct grammar and word choices, and argumentative essay through collaborative
applying correct writing mechanics, such as writing by considering these two things,
the use of capital letter, spelling, and namely; (1) measuring the students’
punctuation. The difficulty faced by the improvement in writing argumentative
students in writing argumentative essays can essay, and (2) identifying the factors that
be seen from the results of the mid-term test influence the students’ improvement in
in which the obtained score was 54.9, and it writing argumentative essay.
was categorized into poor level ability.
Based on the above problems, the METHOD
researchers want to apply a learning strategy The research design used in this study was
to solve or overcome the problems faced by classroom action research. In this research,
students in writing argumentative essay. The the researchers worked collaboratively with
strategy is Collaborative Writing. This other English lecturers as the research
strategy requires students to write together in collaborator. This research consisted of 4
pair consisting of helper and writer. The steps or procedures, namely plan, action,
writing activity starts from planning, writing observation, and reflection. This steps was
the draft, revising, and editing an article called as the research cycle.
(Abbas, Fachrurrazy, & Wahjudi, 2013). The participants involved in this study
This strategy is expected to help students in were the 23 students of English Education
solving the problems they face in writing Department, Faculty of Teacher Training
argumentative essay. and Education, University of Lancang
There are several steps or procedures Kuning Pekanbaru, Indonesia in the 4th
that must be taken in implementing semester in 2017/2018 Academic Year who
Collaborative Writing strategy in learning took academic writing course. The students
process (Zuhri, 2009). The first step is idea were chosen because of their low ability in
generation. In this step, the students are writing argumentative essay.
asked to generate as many as ideas based on The data were collected by using
the topic assigned or picture provided by the instruments, such as writing test, field note,
lecturer. The second step is drafting. At this observation checklist, and interview. After
step, the students are asked to write a draft collecting the data, the researchers assessed
of the topic assigned which has been given and analyzed the students’ test results using
106
ENGLISH REVIEW: Journal of English Education p-ISSN 2301-7554, e-ISSN 2541-3643
Volume 7, Issue 1, December 2018 https://journal.uniku.ac.id/index.php/ERJEE

the scoring rubric and final score category (Adapted from Abbas, 2015, 2018).
provided in Table 1 and Table 2 below

Table 1. The scoring rubric for argumentative essay assessment

Aspects Criteria Scores Category
Thorough development of topic 20 Very Good
Content: Relevant to topic but lacks detail 15 Good
topic development Inadequate development of topic 10 Fair
Does not show knowledge of topic 5 Poor
Organize paragraph well and show good coherence 30 Very Good
and chronological order
Organization: Loosely organized but ideas stand out 25 Good
unity, coherence, Incoherent ideas and lacks logical sequencing 20 Fair
logical order
Does not organize paragraph well and does not show 15 Poor
good coherence and chronological order
Employ accurate and effective choice of 20 Very Good
words/diction
Vocabulary: Employ accurate diction, but not effective 15 Good
word choice/ Employ lacks accuracy of diction, but meaning not 10 Fair
diction obscured
Errors in applying diction or word form, and meaning 5 Poor
obscured
Use correct grammar (pronouns, subject-verb 20 Very Good
agreement, etc)
Several errors of tense, pronouns, subject-verb 15 Good
Grammar: agreement, etc, but meaning not obscured
sentence structure/ Major errors of tense, pronouns, subject-verb 10 Fair
construction agreement, etc, and meaning obscured
No mastery of sentence construction and dominated 5 Poor
by errors
Very little errors of mechanics 10 Very Good
Mechanics: Few errors of mechanics, but meaning not obscured 9 Good
spelling, Many errors of mechanics, and meaning obscured 7 Fair
punctuation, and
capitalization Dominated by errors of mechanics 5 Poor

Table 2. The final score category

Range of Final Scores Category
86 – 100 Very Good
71 – 85 Good
56 – 70 Fair
10 – 55 Poor

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION by the students. Morover, based on the

Based on the results of field notes, interview, it was found that the students felt
observation checklists, and interviews, the active, creative, and enjoyable during the
researchers found information that the learning process. It was indicated that there
learning process in the classroom run well. were other factors that influence the
Based on the results of field notes, it was students’ ability in writing argumentative
found that the students were very active essay besides the result of the test.
during the learning process through In relation to the above statement, the
collaborative writing strategy. findings from each meeting of teaching and
Based on the results of the observation learning process can be described as follows.
checklist, it was found that every step of At the first meeting, the learning process
collaborative writing strategy was done well begun with the introduction. Before the
107
M. Fadhly Farhy Abbas & Herdi
Solving the students’ problems in writing argumentative essay through collaborative writing strategy

introduction activity, the researchers the students were asked to display their
conducted a warming up activity in the form written work in front of the class. This was
of recalling what students understood about done so that all students in the class could
the argumentative essay and how to write it understand and could give feedback on their
down. This was done to make sure whether friends’ work. At this meeting, the students
the students understood about argumentative got good input in learning to write
essay or not. Argumentative essay.
After the recalling process done, the At the fourth meeting, the researchers
researchers provided an example of an gave an assessment toward the students’
argumentative essay to students to be work in writing argumentative essay. The
analyzed or discussed together. Then, the assessment focused on aspects of content
researchers asked the students to look for the (topic development), Organization (structure
main idea of the essay, understood the of paragraph), vocabulary (diction/word
development of the idea, and determined the choice), grammar (sentence sturcture), and
language characteristics used, such as tenses mechanics (writing mechanism). At this
and other aspects of writing. Then, the meeting, the researchers assessed in terms of
researchers asked the students to exchange content that can be seen from the topics
their worksheets with their friends to get development capabilities at the
feedback. Argumentative Essay writing. Then, the
After the above process was completed, researchers assessed in terms of organization
the researchers introduced a teaching which can be seen from the paragraph
strategy called Collaborative Writing structure in the writing. Then, the
strategy and its implementation in the researchers assessed in terms of vocabulary
teaching and learning process. After that, the that can be seen from the students’ ability in
researchers asked the students to make a word selection in the argumentative essay
group in pairs and determined one student as writing. Furthermore, the researchers
a writer and other students as helper. assessed in terms of grammar that can be
Furthermore, the researchers provided a seen from the good grammatical abilities of
topic about Education to be written by the the argumentative essay writing. Finally, the
students into an Argumentative essay. Then, researchers assessed in terms of mechanics
the researchers asked the students to find that can be seen from the ability of the
many ideas that should be written into the writing mechanism in the argumentative
initial draft. Then, the researchers assigned essay.
the students to work at home. At the fifth meeting, the cycle test was
At the second meeting, the students were administered. Therefore, the researchers
asked to submit the assignment given at the carried out the stage of giving a writing test
first meeting (generating idea and drafting). to students to measure the extent of student
Then, the researchers gave comments on the achievement in the process of writing
students’ work both in spoken and written argumentative essays. After the test, the
comments. After giving comments on researchers assessed the students’ work and
students’ work, the researchers assigned the the results of the assessment can be seen in
students to revise and edit again the drafts Table 3.
that have been made. The revising and Table 3. The result of test cycle
editing process were focused on the use of Test Score Category
appropriate language features, correct choice Cycle 74.3 Good
of words, and correct use of writing
mechanics, such as spelling, punctuation, Based on the result of the test cycle
and capital letters. provided in Table 3, it can bee seen that the
At the third meeting, the learning process result of test cycle was in good category. It
focused on publishing stage. At this stage, means that this score was in good level of
108
ENGLISH REVIEW: Journal of English Education p-ISSN 2301-7554, e-ISSN 2541-3643
Volume 7, Issue 1, December 2018 https://journal.uniku.ac.id/index.php/ERJEE

ability. The score achieved by the students 54.9 and the score for the cycle test was
was 74.3. In relation to the result of the test 74.3.
cycle, the comparison of the result of the test In relation to the the results above, in the
cycle and mid term test result can clearly be mid term test, there is no students who got
seen at Table 4. the score above the standard score. The
Table 4. The result of the writing tests score that the students obtained was the
No Test Score Category score that was in fair and poor score
1. Mid term 54.9 Poor category. Furthermore, from 23 students
2. Cycle 74.3 Good
who were participated in this research, 12
students were achieved fair score category,
Based on the information provided in and 11 students got the poor score category.
Table 4, it can be seen that the average score In the cycle test, it was found that the
of the students mid term test was 54.9 and it overall score of students was in good
was categorized into poor level of ability. category. From 23 students involved in this
However, after conducting the research for 5 research, there were 5 people who got very
meetings (1 cycle), the average score of the good category, 12 people got good category,
students increased significantly. The mean and 6 students got fair score category.
score of the students in this test was 74.3, Furthermore, the details can be seen in Table
and it was categorized into good level of 5.
ability. Table 5. The comparison of participants
Referring to the results of the tests amount and the score categories achieved
showed on the Table 3 and Table 4, the No Tests Amount of Score
results of the writing tests obtained by Participants Category
students can be described in Diagram 1. 1. Mid 12 Fair
term 11 Poor
5 Very Good
2. Cycle 12 Good
6 Fair

Based on the information provided in

Table 5, it can be seen that there was an
improvement from the results of the Mid-
term test. It showed that collaborative
writing strategy was effective and beneficial
in improving students’ writing skill. It means
that the use of collaborative writing can
improve the students’ writing skill.
Diagram 1. Comparison of mid results and In accordance with the above
cycle test explanations, the five aspects of writing
(content, organization, vocabulary, grammar,
Based on Diagram 1, it can be clearly and mechanics) became the focus of writing
seen that the score obtained in the mid term assessment in this research. Moreover, the
test was lower than the score achived in the scores obtained for every single aspect of
cycle test. The score for mid term test was writing can be seen in Diagram 2.

109
M. Fadhly Farhy Abbas & Herdi
Solving the students’ problems in writing argumentative essay through collaborative writing strategy

Diagram 2. The writing aspects

Diagram 2 shows the criteria assessed and chronological order (did not organize
were the development of a deep topic paragraph well and did not show good
(thorough development of topic) in the coherence and chronological order) with a
category of very good, related to the topic poor category.
but not detailed in the explanation (relevant Third, for the aspect of vocabulary, the
to topic but lacks details) with good score ontained was 15 and it was in good
category, inadequate development of topic in category. The criteria assessed were about
the fair category, and does not show a the ability in using correct word choice in
scientific understanding of the topic (do not the category of very good, using accurate but
show knowledge of topic) with a poor ineffective diction (employ accurate diction,
category. but not effective) with good category, using
First, in the aspect of content in the cycle diction or words that were less precise but
test, the score obtained was 16.5 and it was the meaning of the word was not too vague
categorized into good score category. There (employ lacks accuracy of dictionaries, but
was no problem in developing the topic of meaning not obscured) in the fair category,
the assigned task. Second, in the aspect of there was an error in the selection of diction
organization, the score was 21.7 and it was or word form and meaning of the word was
in the fair category. According to the scoring unclear (errors in applying diction or word
rubric, the criteria assessed was to compile form, and meaning obscured) with the poor
paragraphs well and show good category.
chronological coherence and arrangement Fourth, for the grammar aspect, the score
(organize paragraph well and show good ontained was 13.5 and it was in the fair
coherence and chronological orders) in the category. The criteria assessed were about
category of very good, poorly structured the ability in using good grammar, such as
which was very good (loosely organized but pronouns, subject and verb agreement, and
ideas stand out) with good categories, there many others. It covered; 1) the use of correct
was no idea or coherence and incoherent grammar, pronouns, subject-verb agreement,
ideas and lack of logical sequencing in the and so on, with very good category, 2) there
fair category, and paragraphs were not well were some errors in the use of tenses,
organized and did not show good coherence pronoun, subject-verb agreement and so on,

110
ENGLISH REVIEW: Journal of English Education p-ISSN 2301-7554, e-ISSN 2541-3643
Volume 7, Issue 1, December 2018 https://journal.uniku.ac.id/index.php/ERJEE

but the meaning was not vague (several very few errors in the writing mechanism
errors of tense, pronouns, subject-verb (very little errors of mechanics) with very
agreement, but meaning not obscured) with good category, 2) some errors that occured
good category, 3) there were many errors in in the writing mechanics but the meaning
the use of tenses, pronouns, the suitability of was not vague (few errors of mechanics, but
the subject and verb and so on and their meaning not obscured) with good category,
meaning were vague (major errors of tense, 3) many errors occured in the writing
pronouns, subject-verb agreement, and so mechanics and the meaning was fuzzy
on, and meaning obscured) in the fair (many errors of mechanics, and meaning
category, and 4) not mastering the sentence obscured) with the fair category, and 4)
structure and dominated by errors (no dominated by errors in the writing
mastery of sentence structure and dominated mechanics with poor category. In other
by errors) in the poor category. words, if the overall average score was
Fifth, in the mechanics aspect, the score obtained then the score would be in good
obtained was 7.6 and it was categorized into level ability. The details is presented in
fair category. The criteria assessed were; 1) Table 6.

Table 6. The students’ writing test results per writing indicator

Tests Aspects
Content Organization Vocabulary Grammar Mechanics
Mid term 12.6 (fair) 13.2 (poor) 11.9 (fair) 9.8 (poor) 7.2 (fair)
Cycle 16.5 (good) 21.7 (fair) 15 (good) 13.5 (fair) 7.6 (fair)

In accordance with the information for vocabulary in mid-term was 11.9, and it
provided in Table 6, it can be seen that the improved in the test cycle to 15. For
scores obtained by the students in the mid- grammar aspect, the score in mid-term was
term test were lower than the scores obtained 9.8, and in the test cycle was 13.5. At last,
in the cycle test. The score for content in the the score for mechanics in mid-term test was
mid-term test was 12.6 and it was improved 7.2 and it was improved to 7.6 in the test
in the test cycle to 16.5. The score for cycle. Furthermore, the clear information
organization in mid-term test was 13.2 and about the comparison of the writing test can
improved in the test cycle to 21.7. The score be seen in Diagram 3.

Diagram 3. Significant comparison between mid-term results and cycle test results

111
M. Fadhly Farhy Abbas & Herdi
Solving the students’ problems in writing argumentative essay through collaborative writing strategy

In line with the information in Table 6 mid-term test can also be seen in Diagram 4.
and Diagram 3, the results of the students’

Diagram 4. The students’ mid-term test results per assessment aspect

The Diagrams show the comparison of the research until cycle 1. It means that the
students’ test results in writing research was not continued to the next cycle.
argumentative essay. It can be clearly seen It was because there was a match between
that the students’ achievement improves achievement and the criteria of success set in
from mid term results to the cycle test. In this research. The scores achieved by the
other words, the students scores in the cycle students were higher than the minimum
test were higher than the mid term scores. It passing score.
means that there has been an improvement in In line with the previous explanation, it
the students’ ability in writing can be stated that good ability of the students
Argumentative essay after conducting the in writing argumentative essays was
research using Collaborative Writing basically influenced by the students’ good
strategy. Thus, it can be stated that the ability in applying the Collaborative Writing
implementation of the Collaborative Writing strategy. This research result was in line
strategy in learning Argumentative essay with previous research conducted by Abbas,
writing could help students in improving Fachrurrazy, & Wahjudi (2013), Zuhri
their writing skill. (2009), Wahyuni (2017), Soraya (2016), and
Based on the results obtained from each Lestari, Setyowati, Sukmawan, and Latief
research instrument, it can be stated that the (2017) about the implementation of
ability of the 4th semester students of English collaborative writing strategy in improving
Education Department, Faculty of Teacher the students’ writing skill. Based on the
Training and Education, University of results of this research, it was proven that the
Lancang Kuning in Academic Year implementation of the collaborative writing
2017/2018 in writing argumentative essay strategy in the learning process could
were categorized into good level of ability. improve the students’ skill in writing.
Then, the researchers decided to complete
112
ENGLISH REVIEW: Journal of English Education p-ISSN 2301-7554, e-ISSN 2541-3643
Volume 7, Issue 1, December 2018 https://journal.uniku.ac.id/index.php/ERJEE

In accordance with the above statement, vocabulary, the score is 15 and it is

the research conducted by Sarmidi (2009) categorized into good. The criteria is that
and Isnawati (2009) were also related to the students use accurate but ineffective diction
results of this research. This was because (employ accurate diction, but not effective)
each stage of writing process was correctly so that they can be categorized into good
applied by the students in the learning category. Fourth, in the grammar aspect, the
process. Therefore, this activity let the score obtained is 13.5 and the category is
students to write smoothly and correctly. In fair. The criteria is that there are many errors
other word, this process let the students to in the use of tenses, pronouns, suitability of
improve their writing skill, especially in subjects and verbs and so on and their
writing argumentative essay. meaning was vague (major errors of tense,
Pertaining to the above explanation, pronouns, subject-verb agreement, and so
although the writing skill of the students in on, and meaning obscured) so that it can be
writing argumentative essays was good, categorized into fair level. In the fifth aspect,
there were two things became the the score obtained for mechanics is 7.6 and it
weaknesses in this research. First, the is in the fair category. The criteria is that
limited time in the learning process was a bit there are many errors in the writing
of a constraint in this research. 90 minutes or mechanism and the meaning is unclear
2 credits for writing class was too short and (many errors of mechanics, and meaning
not enough. So, it was recommended that the obscured), dominated by errors in the
time allocation for writing lectures to be writing mechanism so that it is categorized
added at least 3 credits. Second, not all into poor level. In addition, the mean score
students achieved good score category in obtained by the students is 74.3 and it is
this research. It was found that 6 students categorized into good level of ability.
who obtained score below the passing score, In relation to the above explanation, it
and the score was in the fair and poor can be concluded that the use of
category. Thus, the researchers suggest the 6 collaborative writing strategy can solve the
students to practice writing harder and more students’ problems in writing argumentative
actively so that their writing skill can be essay. In other word, the implementation of
improved. The more often the students collaborative writing strategy in the teaching
practice writing, the better writing skill of argumentative essay writing can improve
would be. the students’ writing skill. Moreover, this
improvement is supported by two points,
CONCLUSION namely; 1) The mean score of the students
Based on the analysis, there are some points is 74.3 and it is categorized into good level
that need to be highlighted. First, in the of ability, and 2) The factors that influence
aspect of content, the score obtained is 16.5 the students’ improvement in writing
and it is in the good category. From the argumentative essay are; the students are
rubric, this category can be seen from the active, creative, and enjoy the learning
criteria, such as; develop ideas relevant to process by using collaborative writing
the topic but less detail so that they can be strategy.
categorized into good. Second, in the aspect
of organization, the score achieved is 21.7 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
and it is in the fair category. Based on the In this part, the researchers need to express
rubric, the criteria for students in this study many thanks to the persons who helped in
is there is no coherence on paragraph the research. First, the researchers would
composition and ideas are also less logical in like to say thank to Ministry of Research,
order (incoherent ideas and lack of logical Technology, and Higher Education of
sequencing) so that they can be categorized Republic of Indonesia (KEMRISTEKDIKTI
into fair level. Third, for the aspect of RI) who gave financial support. Second, the
113
M. Fadhly Farhy Abbas & Herdi
Solving the students’ problems in writing argumentative essay through collaborative writing strategy

researchers also would like to say thank to essay writing help develop leaners' critical
LPPM and team of Universitas Lancang thinking. SUST Journal of Humanities, 16(4).
Isnawati, U.M. (2009). Improving the writing ability
Kuning Pekanbaru, Indonesia who provided of the 11th grade students of MA Hasyim Asy’ari
good service for the researchers during the Kembangbahu Lamongan through the
research. At last, the appreciation goes to the implementation of the scaffolding strategy.
research assistants, head of English Unpublished Thesis. Malang: Universitas Negeri
Education Department, and head of UP2M Malang.
Lestari, Setyowati, S., Sukmawan, & Latief, M. A.
of FKIP UNILAK who supported totally (2017). Solving the students’ problems in writing
during the research. argumentative essay through the provision of
planning. A Journal of Culture, English
REFERENCES Language, Teaching & Literature, 17(1), 87-
Abbas, M. F. F. (2018). Assessing EFL students’ 102.
ability in developing idea to organize academic Sarmidi. (2009). The use of directed writing activity
essay. IOP Conference Series: Earth and strategy to enhance the students’ skill in writing
Environmental Science 175(1), 012-074. recount texts at MTSN Margoyoso-Pati.
Abbas, M. F. F. (2015). Analysis of students' ability Unpublished master’s thesis. Malang:
in writing a research proposal. ELT-Lectura, Universitas Negeri Malang.
2(2). Soraya, K. (2016). The effectiveness of collaborative
Abbas, M., Fachrurrazy, F., & Wahjudi, A. (2013). writing strategy (CWS) in writing lesson
Applying collaborative writing process strategy regarded to the students’ creativity. Lingua
to improve students’ ability in writing a narrative Cultura, 10(2), 63-67.
text. disertasi dan tesis Program Pascasarjana Wahyuni, S. (2017). Improving students` ability in
UM. writing through collaborative writing strategy at
Boun, E. (2009). Argumentative essay. Retrieved the islamic junior high school Muhammadiyah
June 6, 2017, from www.buowl.boun edu. 01 Medan. Unpublished thesis. Medan:
Brown, H. D. (2015). Teaching by principles: An Department of English Education Faculty of
interactive approach to language pedagogy (5th Tarbiyah and Teacher Training State Islamic
ed.). White Plains, New York: Pearson University of North Sumatera. Retrieved from
Education. http://repository.uinsu.ac.id/2643/1/COVER%20
Fachrurrazy. (2011). Teaching English as a foreign SKRIPSI%20CIWA.pdf.
language for teachers in Indonesia. Malang: Zuhri, S. (2009). Improving the ability in writing a
Universitas Negeri Malang Press. recount text of the first year-students of MAN
Housden, E. (2013). Senior text types: A writing Wlingi through collaborative writing strategy.
guide for students. Farrbooks: Quendsland. Unpublished master’s Thesis. Malang:
Ibrahim, M. E. E., Eljack, N. S. A., & Elhassan, I. B. Universitas Negeri Malang.
M. (2015). To what extent can argumentative

114