View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.

uk brought to you by CORE

provided by Online Journal System-Kumpulan Jurnal STKIP Singkawang ((Sekolah Tinggi Keguruan...

International Journal of Multi Disipline Science (IJ-MDS)

e-ISSN: 2615-1707 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.26737/ij-mds.v1i1.425

International Journal of Multi Disipline Science (IJ-MDS) is licensed under

a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

The Effectiveness of Four Corners Strategy in Teaching

Writing Hortatory Exposition Text

Monitha Geraldine
STBA Pontianak
[email protected]

Keywords: ABSTRACT
Four Corners Strategy, Writing, This research investigated the use of Four
Hortatory Exposition Text Corners Strategy in teaching writing
hortatory exposition text to the eleventh
grade students of SMAN 10 Pontianak in
academic year 2015/2016. Four Corners is
a strategy which allows students to think
about a concept from four different
perspectives of points of view. A quasi
experimental design was implemented to
achieve the purpose of this study. The
measurement technique was employed in
this research. The data collection
instrument was written test. This research
used the t-test formula to analyze the
quantitative data obtained through written
test. Furthermore, an analytic scoring
rubric was developed to assess the
students’ writing in hortatory exposition
text. The result of data analysis revealed
the superiority of the experimental group to
the control group. Hence, the four corners
strategy was effective in helping the
students to improve their writing hortatory
exposition text.

INTRODUCTION
In School-Based Curriculum (KTSP), students of Senior High School are claimed not
only to be able to speak but also to write various kinds of texts in English. There are 12
genres of texts that should be mastered by Senior High School students. They are
narrative, recount, procedure, descriptive, news item, report, analytical exposition,
hortatory exposition, spoof, explanation, discussion, and review text. One of the texts that
eleventh grade students should master is hortatory exposition text. Hortatory exposition
text is a type of spoken or written text that is intended to explain the listeners or readers
that something should or should not happen or be done.

95
A hortatory exposition text is a type of spoken or written text that is intended to explain
the listeners or readers that something should or should not happen or be done (Priyana,
2008:161). In other words, this kind of text can be called as argumentation. Hortatory
exposition text can be found in scientific books, journals, magazines, newspaper articles,
academic speech or lecturers, and research report (Anderson, 1997:124). Hortatory
expositions are popular among science, academic community and educated people.

The generic structure of hortatory exposition has three components: (1) Thesis, it is a
statement or announcement of issue concern. (2) Arguments, they show reasons for
concern that will lead to recommendation. (3) Recommendation, it includes the statement
of what should or should not happen or be done based on the given arguments (Priyana,
2008:165). Hortatory exposition text also has the language features. There are (1) Focuses
on generic human and non human participants, (2) It uses mental processes. Mental
processes is used to state what the writer or speaker thinks or feels about something. For
example: realize, feel etc, (3) It often needs material processes. It is used to state what
happens, (4) It usually uses simple past tense and passive voice, (5) Enumeration is
sometimes necessary to show the list of given arguments: firstly, secondly, and finally.

Based on the researcher‟s pre-research, it was found that most of the eleventh grade
students of SMAN 10 Pontianak in Academic Year 2016/2017 had the problem in writing
hortatory exposition text. Most of the students were difficult to write a hortatory
exposition text because they should be able to see the topic of the text from two sides: pro
and contra. They should also be able to write the arguments for each side. This thing
arised the problem because the students tended to respond a certain issue emotively
before knowing the facts and evidences. As a result, the students might feel difficult in
writing the arguments from the side with which they might not agree.

Another problem arised when the teacher gave the topic in which the students were not
familiar with. The students were difficult to develop their arguments because they did not
have sufficient prior knowledge about the issue being discussed. They were also not
given the opportunities to discuss their arguments with the other students. Whereas, in
writing hortatory exposition text the students can support their point of view through
survey results, interviews and research.

In accordance with the statement above, it was necessary for a teacher to do an innovation
in teaching writing hortatory exposition text. One of the alternative ways is by
implementing Four Corners strategy in teaching writing hortatory exposition text. Four
Corners is a strategy which allows students to think about a concept from four different
perspectives of points of view. The Four Corners is the strategy that is used to promote
the equal participant among group; each participant has a turn to offer or his answer about
the topic in the discussion. The purpose of Four Corners strategy is to provide content-
rich topics in every unit, extensive opportunities to practice natural English, integrated
skills, and a wide variety of engaging students‟ involvement. It is most suitably applied
when students are lethargic and need some meaningful physical movement in order to
refocus (Walqui, 2000:35). Furthermore, Guillaume (2007:20) stated that Four Corners
strategy is a cooperative learning strategy that provides students with the opportunity to
think about their opinions and then discuss those opinions with others.

96
There was a previous research about the Four Corners strategy. Rahayu (2013) conducted
a reseach about the use of Four Corners strategy in teaching speaking to senior high
school students. Her study revealed that the Four Corners strategy was very useful in
helping the students to enhance their speaking ability. It was proven by the increasing
number of students participation in the process of teaching and learning speaking.
Nevertheless, there had been few researches about teaching writing by using Four
Corners strategy.

Regarding to the statement above, the researcher was encouraged to fill in the research
gap and investigate the effectiveness of four corners strategy in teaching writing hortatory
exposition text to the eleventh grade students of SMAN 10 Pontianak in academic year
2015/2016. Therefore, a quasi experimental design was utilized in this research. To sum
up, there was a strong belief that this research would promote the four corners strategy as
an effective strategy in teaching writing hortatory exposition text.

METHOD
Research design plays a crucial role in a research because the quality of research greatly
depends on the design. In this research, the writer uses the form of quantitative approach
to analyze the data. The quasi experimental research was selected to be implemented in
this research. The researcher used quasi experimental research because all classes in
SMAN 10 Pontianak had already set by the teachers based on the level of students‟
achievement. Therefore, the researcher could not randomly assign the research
participants. Quasi experimental research defined by Ary, et al. (2010) is a type of
evaluation which aims to determine whether a program or intervention has the intended
effect on a study‟s participants. In this research, the researcher focussed on one form of
quasi experimental studies that was a pre-post test design with a control group.

The procedure of quasi-experimental study which applied in this research was described
in the following steps. The first step was the researcher applied the pre-test for both
groups. After that, the researcher gave the treatments to the experimental group. The
treatment was implemented in the process of teaching writing hortatory exposition text. In
the process of teaching writing hortatory exposition text, the researcher used a four
corners strategy as the treatment. The third step was the researcher applied the post test
for both classes. The fourth step was comparing the result of pre-test and post-test to
determine the students. Lastly, the research applied the appropriate statistical formula (t-
test and effect size formula) to determine whether the students‟ writing in hortatory
exposition text had improved significantly or not after implementing the four corners as a
teaching strategy.

Because the fixed classrooms had been set by the teacher, it was impossible to randomize
each indivual. Therefore, cluster sampling was applied in this research. Cluster sampling
is a probability sampling procedure in which elements of the population are randomly
selected in naturally occurring groupings or clusters (Thompson, 2002:27). When the
clusters have been selected, all participants must take part in the research (Ary, et al.,
2010).

97
One way to randomize the sample is through a lottery using slips of paper (Ary, et al.,
2010). Based on this recommendation, the researcher applied the procedure. The sample
of experimental reserach was determined through the lottery in which four small folded
pieces of paper with alphabetical codes from A to F representing all the classes in the
eleventh grade were put into a small box. The box was closed and shaken afterwards.
Finally, the box was opened and one piece of paper was picked and opened out of its
folds. The first selected class (i.e. Class XI IPS 1) was experimentally assigned, whereas
the second selected one (i.e. Class XI IPS 3) was the control group.

The researcher used measurement technique to measure the students‟ writing in hortatory
exposition text. Since the data was obtained by using measurement technique, the
relevant tool to collect the data was written test. It was used to assess students‟ writing
performance. Students were asked to write a hortatory exposition text based on the topic
given. The students‟ score from the test was used to find the mean score. In assessing the
students‟ writing performance, the researcher provided the analytical scoring rubric so
that the scoring would be more objective.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

From the result of the pre-test, it was found that both students in experimental and control
group got difficulties in developing arguments „for‟ and „against‟ the issue. The students‟
difficulties in developing and strengthening ideas could be clearly seen when the students
were given a topic by the researcher to write. The students were not able to strengthen
their topic sentence by giving some examples and evidences. In addition, the students
encountered difficulties in writing a thesis for hortatory exposition text. When they wrote
the thesis, they were unable to provide the sufficient background information and outline
the issue or topic being discussed. Therefore, both students in experimental and control
group only got 18.24 and 18.40 for their content. Based on the scoring rubric that was
used for assessing the students‟ writing, the arguments‟ scores of both groups were
considered as “average”.

This condition was in contrast with the students‟ score after implementing four corners
strategy in the process of teaching writing hortatory exposition text. From the result of the
post-test, it could be seen that the students‟ writing ability in writing hortatory text had
been improved. The mean score of experimental group was 71.50, the highest score was
95, and the lowest score was 65. Meanwhile, the students‟ mean score in control group
was 50.70, the highest score was 78, and the lowest score was 50.

After implementing the four corners strategy for teaching writing hortatory exposition
text, the students in experimental group were able to develop and strengthen their
arguments „for‟ and „against‟ the issue by providing some examples and evidences to
support their statement of position. The students‟ argument score after implementing four
corners strategy was 28.45. The difference was about 5.17 if it was compared with the
students‟arguments score before implementing four corners strategy. Meanwhile, the
students‟ arguments score in control group was 20.60. It showed that the score was lower
than the pre-test‟s score. Based on the scoring rubric that was used for assessing the
students‟ writing, the arguments‟ scores of experimental group was considered “good”.
Meanwhile, the students‟ arguments scores of control group is considered “average”.

98
Therefore, it could be concluded that there was an increase on the students‟ arguments
score of experimental group from “average” to “good”.

In addition, the students‟ post-test score of experimental group in writing a thesis and a
recommendation aspect which were 24.07 and 19.70 also showing that their scores were
increased after the researcher giving the treatment. The differences were about 2.83 and
1.23 if they were compared with the scores before implementing the opinion-gap activity.
Meanwhile, the students‟ post-test score of control group in statement of position and
recommendation aspect which were 19.53 and 18.60. In this case, the students‟ score of
control group in thesis aspect was higher than the score in pre-test. However, the
students‟ score of control group in recommendation aspech had decreased from 18.57 to
18.40.

Based on the gathered data and related analysis, it was also found that the students were
not familiar with hortatory exposition writing at the beginning of the study. The students
only knew that the hortatory exposition text had a thesis, arguments and a
recommendation, but they did not know how to develop arguments in hortatory
exposition text. When the students were given the topic, they only could write the topic
sentence. They were not able to strengthen their topic sentence by giving some
arguments. During the process of teaching writing hortatory exposition text with their
teacher, the students were only asked to create a hortatory exposition text without having
practices how to develop arguments in that text. Hence, the major points of their hortatory
exposition text were still lack of relevant arguments.

Those students were just able to write paragraphs and the performance of the pre-test
hortatory exposition writing was just the same with the model of text they had learned in
the previous writing courses taught by their teacher. In fact, they had developed their own
text based on the concept that a text was a complete paragraph with an introductory
paragraph, three or more body paragraphs, and a concluding paragraph. Meanwhile, in
writing hortatory exposition text, the students are required to be able to create the thesis
which can state the announcement of issue concern. They also must be able to write
arguments which can show reasons for concern that will lead to recommendation.
Another requirement that the students need to fulfill in order to write a good hortatory
exposition text is that they must be able to write the statement of what should or should
not happen or be done based on the given arguments.

The significant difference was found in the aspect of content especially in developing
arguments in the hortatory exposition text. The students in experimental group were
easily to develop their arguments after the writer implemented Four Corners strategy
during the process of teaching writing hortatory exposition text. It happened because the
writer asked the students to discuss with their group in order to make good arguments and
recommendation. The writer gave the statement to the students and she asked the students
to express their attitudes toward the topic given by using expression of attitudes that
already taught by her.

Furthermore, another feature which could be referred to as a reason for the

outperformance of the experimental group was the collaborative and interactive nature of
the Four Corners strategy. In the experimental group, the students engaged in discussion
and exchange of ideas. Therefore, the language use and language learning took place
simultaneously. After discussing the material, each group was asked to present the report

99
of their work in front of the classroom so that the other students could give feedback to
them. The feedback given covered the arguments and recommendation that they already
made with their group. It came from peers from other groups and sometimes from the
teacher. The students in experimental group could use such a feedback both during the
elaboration that is during the writing process and after that on their final products during
the recommendation. Therefore, the feedback can be thought of as an advantage for this
group while in the traditional class the student wrote their text individually.

In addition, at the beginning of the study the learning context was unnatural because the
students were not given the opportunities to interact each other when they finished their
task. The students only focused in writing without having any peer-review activity with
the other students. The teacher had a dominant role in the process of teaching writing
hortatory exposition text. The class situation was not alive and the students are
uninteresting in writing activities. They only create a hortatory exposition text based on
the topic given by the teacher. The students also did not have any opportunity to
participate in writing since the teacher did not create such activity which could involve
the students working collaboratively with their friends. As a result, the students were very
passive. This learning condition is very contrast with the condition after implementing
Four Corners strategy in the process of teaching writing hortatory exposition text.
From the result of t-test computation, it was found that t-obtained was 3.26. The
researcher applied the significance level (α) of 0.05 with degree of freedom (df) = N 1+N2
– 2= 30+30-2=58. Based on the table, for (α) 0.05 with (df)= 58, it was found that the
tratio=3.26> tcritical=(2.000). This finding indicated the significant difference result between
pre-test and post-test. Therefore, the null hypothesis (Ho) was rejected and the alternative
hypothesis (Ha) was accepted. In order to find out how significant the effectiveness of the
treatment given to the experimental group, the researcher analyzed the effect of the
treatment (Effect Size). From the result of the computation, it was found that the effect
size of the treatment was 0.82. Based on the Cohen‟s criteria, it was qualified as
“moderate”. In conclusion, the use of four corners strategy was effective in teaching
writing hortatory exposition text to the eleventh grade students of SMAN 10 Pontianak.

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

Based on the result of the research, it could be concluded that Four Corners strategy was
helpful for the students in the process of teaching and learning writing. The current study
made it clear that Four Corners strategy was definitely more effective than traditional
approach in teaching writing in general and in teaching writing mode like hortatory
exposition text in particular. In fact, teaching writing to the eleventh grade students
through Four Corners strategy had all of the advantages of the process approach to
writing such as the focus on the processes involved in the preparation, introducing
statement, discussion and reflection.

Four Corners strategy paid enough attention to all of the processes which are involved in
producing a good hortatory exposition text. It fully considered such processes and helped
students to brainstorm and develop more new ideas; it also activated their previous
schemata and background knowledge, motivates the students and encourages them to
write with concerning over specific language items.

100
Related to the findings of the research, there are some suggestions: (1) to the academic
institution. There is a need in the classroom activities to provide more activities to have
writing task because it will encourage the students to write. The students need more
opportunities to interact with their friends during the process of completing the writing
task. Considering the potential of Four Corners strategy in improving students‟ writing
skills, it is necessary for the teacher to learn about it. Therefore, the school can facilitate
this by conducting workshops on Four Corners strategy, (2) to the English teachers. This
study can be used as a reference for the English teachers in improving the quality of
teaching by applying the suitable technique toward improving the students‟ writing
ability. Besides, the teachers can apply Four Corners stratey in the other aspect of English
skills like reading, listening, or speaking. The research findings are expected to give
insight to the teaching writing, (3) to other writers. This research is also expected to be
beneficial to other writers particularly those who are interested in conducting a similar
research by implementing four corners strategy to other English skills.

REFERENCES

Anderson, M. and Anderson, K. (1997). Text Types in English. Macmillan: MacMillan

Education Australia PTY LTD.

Ary, D., Lucy, C., Jacobs, & Sorensen. (2010). Introduction to Research in Education.
Canada: Wadswort, Cencage Learning.

Belcher, D. and Liu, J. (ed). (2004). Genre and Second Language Writing. Michigan: The
University of Michigan Press.

Blerkom, M.L.V. (2009). Measurement and Statistics for Teachers. New York:
Routledge.

Cohen, L. et al. (2007). Research Methods in Education. Sixth Edition. London and New
York: Routledge-Falmer is an imprint of the Taylor and Francis Group.

Crawford, Matheus, Samuel and Makinster, J. (2005). Teaching and Learning Strategies
for the Thinking Classroom. New York: The International Debate Education
Association.

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating

Quantitative and Qualitative Research (4 th ed). Boston: Pearson Education.

Davis, K. W. (2004). Manage Your Writing. Indiana Polis: Komei Inc.

Depdiknas. (2006). Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan (KTSP). Jakarta: Depdiknas.

Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. W. (2011). Educational Research: Competencies
for Analysis and Applications (Tenth ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson
Education.

101
Ghaith, G. (2002). Writing. Beirut: American University of Beirut.

Grenville, K. (2001). Writing From Start To Finish A Six-Step Guide. Australia: Griffin
Press South.

Guillaume, M. A., Yopp, Helen, R., & Yopp, Kay, H. (2007). 50 Strategies for Active
Teaching. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.

Harmer, J. (2004). How to Teach Writing. London: Longman. Hill Book Company.

Heaton, J. B. (1975). Writing English Language Test. London: Longman.

Johnson, A. P. (2008). Teaching Reading and Writing; A Guidebook for Tutoring and
Remediating Students. Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Education.

Lodigo, M., Spaulding, D., & Voegtle, K. (2010). Methods in Educational Research. San
Fransisco: Jossey-Bass.

Marzano, R.J. (2005). A Handbook for Classroom Management that Works. United
States: ASCD.

McCaskill. (1998). Grammar, Punctuation and Capitalization. A Handbook for Technical

Writers and Editors. Hamptonm Virginia: Langley Research Center.

Meyers, A. (2005). Gateaways to Academic Writing: Effective Sentences, Paragraphs

and Essays. United States: Longman.

Nation, I.S.P. (2009). Teaching ESL/EFL Reading and Writing. New York: Routledge.

Priyana, J. (2008). Interlanguage: English for Senior High School Students XII Science
and Social Study Program. Jakarta: Pusat Perbukuan, Departemen Pendidikan
Nasional.

Rumsey, D. (2010). Statistic Essentials For Dummies. Indiana: Wiley Publishing, Inc.

Samsudi. (2008). Statistika. Semarang: Fakultas Teknik Universitas Negeri Semarang.

Sudarwati and Grace, E. (2007). Look Ahead: An English Course for Senior High School
Students Year XI, Science and Social Study Program. Jakarta: Erlangga.

Thompson, S. K. (2002). Sampling. New York: Wiley & Sons.

Walqui, A. (2000). Contextual Factors in Second Language Acquisition. Eric

Digest. Washington DC: ERIC Cleaninghouse on Languages and Linguistics.
section “The Learning Process”, para. 2.

Weigle, S. C. (2002). Assessing writing. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

102
Westat, J.F. (2002). The 2002 User Friendly Handbook for Project Evaluation. The
National Science Foundation: Division of Research, Evaluation and
Communication.

103