THE CORRELATION BETWEEN VERBAL LINGUISTIC

INTELLIGENCE AND WRITING ABILITY OF THE FIFTH SEMESTER

STUDENTS OF ENGLISH EDUCATION STUDY PROPRAM OF UIN

RADEN FATAH PALEMBANG

UNDERGRADUATE THESIS

This thesis was accepted as one of the requirement to get the tittle of
Sarjana Pendidikan (S.Pd)

by
Siti Solehah
NIM. 13250083

ENGLISH EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM

FACULTY OF TARBIYAH

ISLAMIC STATE UNIVERSITY RADEN FATAH PALEMBANG

2017
ii
iii
iv
 Dedication
“You are not just brothers, my parents, my friends, and my partner in crime. I’m so
grateful to have you in my life. You are the only one who never leave me behind..” 

Motto

“it’s okay to be scare, it’s okay to cry, but giving up should not be an option”

v
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This thesis was written based on the research that the writer conducted in
September 6th until 8th 2017 at Islamic State University Raden Fatah Palembang
The writer would like to express her great thanks to Allah SWT that gives her
faith and strength in making this thesis.

Furthermore, the writer would like to express her appreciation to the

school for their assistence and cooperation. She also would like to express her
great gratitude two her two advisors, Hj. Lenny Marzulina, M. Pd and nova
Lingga Pitaloka, M. Pd, for the time, guidance, suggestions and patience during
the process of writing this thesis from the beginning until the end. In addition, the
writer would like to thank the examiners for the suggestions given in order to
improve the quality of this thesis.

At last, the writer would like to express gratitude to the Head of English
Education Study Program, Hj. Lenny Marzulina, M.Pd., the writer is also grateful
of the Dean of Tarbiyah and Teaching Faculty and all his staff members. The
greatest gratitude is also given to all of the lecturers who had taught her during the
study at English Education Study Program.

In addition, the writer would like to express her deepest appreciation to her
parents, brothers, and sisters for their love. She also likes to extend her gratitude
to her classmates and friends. There are few new things found in this study.
Hopefully, this thesis is useful for the writer, the students, the teachers, and the
others researchers and everyone who reads it.

Palembang, November 2017

Siti Solehah

vi
 ABSTRACT

This study investigated the correlation between verbal linguistic

intelligence to writing ability, and the influence of verbal linguistic intelligence
toward writing ability. The study was conducted at Islamic State University Raden
Fatah Palembang. The population of the study was English Education Study
Program Students of UIN Raden Fatah Palembang in academic year 2017/2018.
The sample was 70 students of the fifth semester students by using purposive
sampling method. The collected data were analyzed by using the correlation and
regression analysis and computerized with SPSS 20. Futhermore, it was found out
that there was significant correlation between verbal linguistic intelligence and
writing ability, as p-output was 0.00 which was smaller than 0.05 (0.00 < 0.05).
Besides, the correlation coefficient was in the strong level of correlation which is
.705. This study also indicated that there was a significant influence of verbal
linguistic intelligence with 49.7% contribution towards writing ability.

Keywords: verbal linguistic intelligence, writing ability

vii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

TITLE PAGE ............................................................................................ i

APPROVAL PAGE .................................................................................. ii

STATEMENT PAGE ............................................................................... iii

DEDICATION AND MOTTO ................................................................. iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...................................................................... v

ABSTRACT ............................................................................................... vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................... vii

LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................... xi

LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................. xii

LIST OF APPENDICES .......................................................................... xiii

LIST OF DOCUMENTATIONS ............................................................. xiv

I. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background ...................................................................................... 1

1.2 Problem(s) of the Study .................................................................... 7

1.3 Objective(s) of the Study .................................................................. 8

1.4 Significance of the Study ................................................................. 8

II. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Correlational Research ..................................................................... 10

2.2 The Concept of Intelligence ............................................................. 12

2.3 Theory of Multiple Intelligences ...................................................... 13

2.4 Theory of Verbal Linguistic Intelligence ......................................... 18

2.5 Student’s Verbal Linguistic Intelligence Characteristic ................... 19

2.6 The Concept of Writing .................................................................... 21

2.7 The Process of Writing ..................................................................... 23

viii
 2.8 The Student’s Difficulties in Writing .............................................. 25

2.9 Previous Related Study ................................................................... 25

2.10 Research Setting ............................................................................. 27

2.10.1 History of English Education Study Program ............................. 27

2.10.2 Geographic Location ................................................................... 27

2.10.3 Vision, Mission, and Aims .......................................................... 27

2.10.4 Lecturers in English Education Study Program ......................... 29

2.10.5 Students in English Education Study Program............................ 30

2.10.6 Organization Structure ................................................................ 31

2.11 Hypothesis ...................................................................................... 31

2.12 Criteria for Testing Hyphothesis ................................................... 32

III. RESEARCH METHOD

3.1 Research Design ............................................................................... 33

3.2 Research Variables ........................................................................... 34

3.3 Operational Definitions .................................................................... 34

3.4 Subject of the Study ......................................................................... 35

3.4.1 Population ...................................................................................... 35

3.4.2 Sample ........................................................................................... 35

3.5 Data Collection ................................................................................. 36

3.5.1 Verbal Linguistic Intelligence Questionnaire................................ 36

3.5.2 Writing Test ................................................................................... 37

3.6 Validity and Reliability .................................................................... 37

3.6.1 Validity .......................................................................................... 37

3.6.1.1 Verbal Linguistic Intelligence Questionnaire............................. 38

3.6.1.2 Writing Test ................................................................................ 38

3.6.2 Realibility ...................................................................................... 39

ix
 3.6.2.1 Verbal Linguistic Intelligence Questionnaire............................. 39

3.6.2.2 Writing Test ................................................................................ 39

3.7 Data Analysis ................................................................................... 39

3.7.1 Instrument Analysis ....................................................................... 40

3.7.1.1 Verbal Linguistic Intelligence Questionnaire Analysis.............. 40

3.7.1.2 Writing Test Analysis ................................................................. 41

3.7.2 Pre-requsite Analysis ..................................................................... 42

3.7.2.1 Normality Test ............................................................................ 42

3.7.2.2 Linearity Test ............................................................................. 43

3.7.3 Correlation Analysis ...................................................................... 43

3.7.4 Regression Analysis ...................................................................... 44

IV. FINDINGS AND INTERPRETATIONS

4.1 Research Findings ............................................................................ 45

4.1.1 Result of Students’ Verbal Linguistic Intelligence ....................... 45

4.1.2 Result of Students’ Writing Test ................................................... 47

4.2 Statistical Analysis ........................................................................... 48

4.2.1 Normality Test ............................................................................... 48

4.2.1.1 Normality Test of Verbal Linguistic Intelligence ...................... 49

4.2.1.2 Normality Test of Writing ability............................................... 50

4.2.1.3 Linearity Test ............................................................................. 51

4.2.2 Correlation Analysis ...................................................................... 52

4.2.3 Regression Analysis ...................................................................... 53

4.3 Interpretation .................................................................................... 55

V. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

5.1 Conclusions ...................................................................................... 61

5.2 Suggestions ....................................................................................... 61

x
REFERENCES .......................................................................................... 63

APPENDICES ........................................................................................... 67

xi
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 : Correlational Coefficient .................................................... 11

Table 2 : Lecturer of English Education Study Program ................... 29

Table 3 : Annual Students Composition ............................................ 30

Table 4 : The Organization Structure of English Education Study

Program .............................................................................. 31

Table 5 : Distribution of Population .................................................. 35

Table 6 : Distribution of Sample ........................................................ 36

Table 7 : Categorization of Student’s Linguistic Intelligence ........... 40

Table 8 : Range of Student’s Writing Ability .................................... 42

Table 9 : Descriptive Statistics of Verbal Linguistic Intelligence ..... 46

Table 10 : Distribution of Student’s Verbal Linguistic Intelligence.... 46

Table 11 : Descriptive Statistics of Writing Ability ............................ 47

Table 12 : Score Distribution of Writing Ability ................................. 47

Table 13 : Test of Normality of Verbal Linguistic Intelligence .......... 48

Table 14 : Test of Normality of Writing Ability.................................. 50

Table 15 : Linearity Test ...................................................................... 52

Table 16 : The Correlation between Students’ Verbal Linguistic

Intelligence and Writing ability .......................................... 53

Table 17 : The Regression Analysis of Students’ Verbal Linguistic

Intelligence and Writing ability ........................................... 54

Table 18 : R-square Analysis ............................................................... 55

xii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 : Q-Q Plot of Verbal Linguistic Intelligence ........................ 49

Figure 2 : Q-Q Plot of Writing Ability................................................ 51

xiii
 LIST OF APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1 Verbal Linguistic Intelligence Test Instrument

APPENDIX 2 Writing Test Instrument

APPENDIX 3 Assessment Rubric of Writing Test

APPENDIX 4 Raw Data of Verbal Linguistic Intelligence Score

APPENDIX 5 Raw Data of Writing test Score

APPENDIX 6 The Validity of Writing Test

APPENDIX 7 The Reliability of Writing Test

APPENDIX 8 Example of Students’ Verbal Linguistic Intelligence Test

APPENDIX 9 Example of Students’ Writing Test

APPENDIX 10 Research Gallery

xiv
 LIST OF DOCUMENTATION

1. Photocopy Kartu Mahasiswa

2. Photocopy Ijazah Sekolah Menengah Atas (SMA) Program 3 Tahun

3. Photocopy Pembayaran Tagihan Semester Mahasiswa

4. Photocopy TOEFL Prediction Test

5. Photocopy Transkrip Nilai Sementara Program Sarjana S.1

6. Photocopy Pengesahan Pengajuan Judul Skripsi

7. Photocopy Formulir Konsultasi Revisi Proposal Skripsi

8. Photocopy Penunjukan Pembimbing Skripsi

9. Photocopy SK Penunjukan Pembimbing Skripsi

10. Photocopy Surat Permohonan Penelitian

11. Photocopy Surat Keterangan Pasca Penelitian

12. Photocopy Daftar Mahasiswa Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris

13. Photocopy Thesis Consultation Card

14. Photocopy Tanda Terima Pembayaran Ujian Komprehensif, Munaqosyah,

dan Penyelesaian Ijazah

15. Photocopy SK Bebas Teori

16. Photocopy Sertifikat Pendidikan dan Pelatihan Keahlian Komputer

17. Photocopy Sertifikat Baca Tulis Al-Qur’an (BTA)

18. PhotocopySertifikat Praktik Pengalaman Lapangan Kependidikan (PPLK)

II

19. Photocopy Sertifikat Kuliah Kerja Nyata (KKN)

20. Photocopy Sertifikat OSPEK Fakultas Tarbiyah dan Keguruan UIN Raden
Fatah Palembang

21. Photocopy Sertifikat OSPEK UIN Raden Fatah Palembang

22. Photocopy Rekapitulasi Nilai Ujian Komprehensif

xv
 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

This is the opening chapter of this study. This chapter presents: (1)

background of the study; (2) problems of the study; (3) objectives of the study;

and (4) significance of the study.

1.1. Background

In Indonesia, English is mostly learned at schools or universities, but

English is completely a foreign language for language learners in Indonesia

(Setiyadi, 2006). In teaching learning English, learners are demanded to master

four skills of English. Those are listening, speaking, reading and writing. Writing

is mostly done outside classroom for which the students seek help from other

sources. It is often seen as a means of strengthening vocabulary or grammatical

knowledge rather than as a tool for communicating ideas (Sadeghi & Farzizadeh,

2012). However, students can ideally benefit from their individual potentials in

intelligences to draw on during the act of writing, an attempt the highlighting of

which will bring about valuable benefits.

Writing is productive skill which the students are not only asked to write

grammatically and correctly, but also they are asked to develop their ideas

logically (Brown, 2001). It is a complex activity which requires different kinds of

mental processes and skills on the part of language learner. Writers not only need

to generate and organize their ideas using the available tools of syntax,
 2

vocabulary, paragraph organization, but also they are required to turn their ideas

into a coherent text (Richards & Renandya, 2002).

In relation to the importance of writing, Nisa (2015) asserts that writing is

a very important subject because it has to share idea from our brain in writing. It

is not easy to choose the words and combine them into a good paragraph. Besides,

students have to pay attention in the grammatical sentence. According to Iskandar

(2017), writing ability is important for students in the process of English learning,

by writing, they students could remember and memorize vocabularies and

organize them into good paragraph. Hence, Suleiman (2000, p. 155) implies that

writing is a central element of language, any reading and language arts program

must consider the multidimensional nature of writing in instructional practices,

assessment procedures, and language development. In the process of teaching and

learning, writing plays a significant role through which learners can be assessed.

The ability to write well can have a profound impact on our lives.

However, writing is the most difficult skill for EFL students to master

(Richards & Renandya, 2002). As a skill, production of a piece of writing which

is coherent, fluent, and extended is probably the most difficult task to do with

language, even for a native speaker (Nunan, 2003). Jarvis (2000) also emphasizes

that many students do not enjoy writing because they feel that if they cannot do it

correctly at the first time when they will never get it. Even though, Sahran (2016)

asserts that main reason for this difficulty is the fact that writing is a very complex

process which involving both creating and organizing ideas and translating them

into cohesive texts which are readable. Many problems were found in writing.

There are some classification problems; capitalization, punctuation, poor

 3

organization, grammatical error, ideas and frustration and confused on supporting

ideas, and spelling error (Bahloul, 2007 as cited in Habibi, Wachyuni, & Husni,

2017). So it is normal, if the students think that writing is difficult subject because

they have to pay attention many things such as; idea, concept, vocabulary and

grammar.

Meanwhile, Alwasilah (2005, p. 1) argues that writing is the most

neglected skill in language education in Indonesia. Then, writing habit in

Indonesia is lower than reading habit (Khak, 2011). This situation is basically

supported by the fact that Indonesia is in a far move to consider English as the

foreign/ second language in the country. Moreover, Scopus and Scimago as the

indexers of many journals in the world note that in 2013, there were only 3.231

journal publications in Indonesia (Arradian, 2014). This number is far from

satisfying compared to Malaysia and Singapore’s. Thus, as stated in Surat Dirjen

Dikti No. 152/E/T/2012, there is a rule from Directorate General of Higher

Education of Indonesia that students have been required to write a research article

and publish it in a journal as a requirement for graduation since August 2012.

Masduqi (2011, p. 186) argues that the limited use of critical thinking skills and

meaningful activities are the reasons why students in Indonesia tend to be

ineffective in exchanging ideas and writing in English.

As stated by Cumming (2006, p.473), the psychology plays an important

role in writing. He believes that each student has individual traits and its effect on

their writing ability. One of the most important issues in psychology is multiple

intelligences, which affects learners’ achievement as well as their learning

strategies. According to Gardner (1983), each individual has a multitude of

 4

intelligences that are quite independent of each other. Intelligence as the ability to

solve the problems or to fashion products that are valued in one or more cultural

settings (Gardner, 1993, p.15; 2006, p.48; Hajhashemi, 2011). Gardner’s early

work in psychology and later in human cognition and human potential led to the

development of the initial nine intelligences. These intelligences (or

competencies) relate to a person’s unique aptitude set of capabilities and ways

they might prefer to demonstrate intellectual abilities.

Additionally, intelligences are involved and integrated to carry out

different task, solve diverse problems, and progress in various areas (Gardner,

2011). Hence, intelligences have an essential role for people to face the problems

in many sectors of life especially in learning language. Armstrong (2002) states

that intelligence is one of the causes which affect student’s success in learning the

second or foreign language. It can be implied that in learning English, the

intelligence is involved as the factor of student’s success. Intelligences theory,

promoted by Howard Gardner in 1983, has attracted many researchers and

educators throughout the world. He has identified that there are nine types of

intelligence (multiple intelligences) linguistic, logical-mathematical, spatial,

bodily-kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal, intrapersonal, naturalist and existential.

Gardner emphasizes that people have the multiple intelligences. But people single

out among them as a strong intelligence, an area where a person has considerable

computational power (Strauss, 2013). Kezar (2001) investigated multiple

intelligences theory’s application in higher education and concluded that using

multiple intelligences in higher education is crucial and plays a significant role in

 5

understanding the teaching and learning process. Hence, the main intelligences

that play an important part in language learning are verbal linguistic intelligence.

According to Gardner (2006) verbal linguistic intelligence is the

sensitivity to the phonological features of a language. Tek and Peng (2006) state

verbal linguistic intelligence is the capacity to use language (words), one’s native

language, and perhaps other language, effectively, either orally or in writing, to

express what is on one’s mind and to understand people. Verbal linguistic

intelligence is the ability to learn languages and use language to express what is in

one’s mind and to understand people. Those who have high linguistic intelligence

are well-developed in verbal skills and have sensitivity to sounds, meanings, and

rhythms of words (Hampton, 2008). And verbal linguistic intelligence use when

put down our ideas on the paper, create poetry or simply write a letter to a friend.

It means that the core ability to use language in the spoken or written form is

affected by the level of verbal linguistic intelligence.

As Muslims, the command to seek knowledge is almost like a mantra. This

is especially important to think about considering how God speaks of intelligence

and thinking in the Quran. Intelligence in Arabic called adz-dzaka ‫ الزك‬which

means understanding, speed, and perfection. It also called al-qudrah ‫ال قدره‬

(ability) to understand something quickly and perfectly. Moreover, verbal

linguistic intelligence is the intelligence related to language, including reading and

writing. It is mentioned In Surah Al-Alaq verse 1-5 Allah says:

               

        

 6

Read! In the name of your lord, who has created{1}, has created man from a
cloth{2}, read! And your lord is the most generous{3}, who has taught (the
writing) by the pen{4}, has taught man that which he knew not{5}.

The word for “Intellect” is ‘Aql ‫عقل‬, meaning sense, sentience, reason,

understanding, comprehension, discernment, insight, rationality, mind, intellect,

intelligence. The verb form that we will see commonly used in Qur’an is ‫ عقل‬to be

endowed with (the faculty of) reason, be reasonable, have intelligence, to be in

one’s senses, be conscious, to realize, comprehend, and understand. In the 49

references of the word in the Qur’an, God often speaks of the disbelievers who do

not comprehend.

Besides, Imam Syafi’i says factor that affect the intelligence is not only the

potential carried since birth, but the social and environment factors is also

influential. Rosulullah SAW said “the motion, passion and strength of the

assembled children with other friends in childhood will increase the ability to

sense when adults (H.R. Tirmidzi). Therefore, if want to develop that intelligence

properly, that should provide the media that can support the development of

intelligence itself (‘Aidh, 2007).

Based on the informal interview with the EFL students of UIN Raden

Fatah Palembang who had taken all the writing courses, some of them considered

the writing process were difficult, but some were not. They also did not enjoy

writing because they feel that if they cannot do it, and they still find it hard to

express their thoughts, feelings due to the lack vocabulary, make a paragraph

coherent and cohesion, and grammar mastery. Even though, most of the students

never identified their intelligence profile since they did not know what linguistic

intelligence was.
 7

Regarding the problem above, there had been many studies to investigate

the relationship of verbal linguistic intelligence and writing ability. Mulyaningsih,

Rais, and Sulistyawati (2012) conducted a research on the relationship of

grammar competence, verbal linguistic intelligence, and writing ability of Sebelas

Maret University. The researchers found that result there was a significant

correlation between verbal linguistic intelligence and writing ability. Sadhegi, and

Farzizadeh (2012) conducted a research on the relationship of multiple

intelligence and writing ability of Iranian EFL learners. The result showed that the

components of Multiple Intelligences, especially verbal linguistic intelligence did

not have significant correlation with the writing ability.

From the problems occurred above, it is assumed that the verbal linguistic

intelligence is one of factors influences one’s writing skill. Therefore, there will

be an investigation about the correlation between verbal linguistic intelligence and

writing ability. Therefore, in this study, the writer intends to investigate whether

or not there is a correlation between verbal linguistic intelligence and writing

ability of English Education Study Program Students of UIN Raden Fatah

Palembang.

1.2. Research Problems

Based on the background, the research problems are formulated in the

following questions:

1. Was there any significant correlation between verbal linguistic intelligence

and writing ability of English Education Study Program Students of UIN

Raden Fatah Palembang?

 8

2. Did verbal linguistic intelligence significantly influence writing ability of

English Education Study Program Students of UIN Raden Fatah Palembang?

1.3. Research Objectives

In accordance with the problems above, the objectives of this study are:

1. To find out if there was a significant correlation between students’ verbal

linguistic intelligence and writing ability of English Education Study Program

Students of UIN Raden Fatah Palembang.

2. To know if verbal linguistic intelligence significantly influences writing

ability of English Education Study Program Students of UIN Raden Fatah

Palembang.

1.4. Significance of the Study

This study was aimed to describe the correlation between verbal linguistic

intelligence and writing ability of English Education Study Program Students of

UIN Raden Fatah Palembang. The result of this research was expected to be

useful for:

1. For students, this study attempts to obtain a solution to help the students to be

capable of finding a context in which their potential strengths come to the

fore and their weaknesses are diminished, especially understanding the verbal

linguistic intelligence related to the students’ writing skill.

2. For teachers or lecturers, this study is expected to be useful for teachers or

lecturers who teach writing skills. They can improve their teaching and

learning processes through several media and methods that can help students
 9

improve their writing skills, and one way to improve writing skills is to

provide materials and tasks that can develop students' writing skills and it also

stimulate their linguistic intelligence.

3. For the next researchers, this research also will be useful reference for another

researcher if they want to make a research related to linguistic intelligence

and writing ability.

4. For the researchers herself, this study can be used a reference to conduct

relevant study, can increase her knowledge and expand her experience by

doing this research, stimulate her writing skill and linguistic intelligence, and

also it can be one of the requirements to complete the English Education

Study Program of UIN Raden Fatah Palembang.

 CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter discusses the followings: (1) correlational research; (2) the

concept of intelligence; (3) theory of multiple intelligences; (4) theory of verbal

linguistic intelligence; (5) student’s verbal linguistic intelligence characteristic;

(6) the concept of writing; (7) the process of writing; (8) student’s difficulties in

writing; (9) previous related study; (10) research setting; (11) research

hypotheses; (12) criteria for testing hypothesis.

2.1. Correlational Research

A correlational research design is useful to researchers who are interested

in determining to what degree two variables are related, however, correlational

research “does not “prove” a relationship; rather, it indicates an association

between two or more variables” (Creswell, 2008). The main purpose of a

correlational study is to determine relationships between variables, and if a

relationship exists, to determine a regression equation that could be used make

predictions to a population. In bivariate correlational studies, the relationship

between two variables is measured. Through statistical analysis, the relationship

will be given a degree and a direction. The degree of relationship determined how

closely the variables are related. This is usually expressed as a number between -1

and +1, and is known as the correlation coefficient. A zero correlation indicates

no relationship. As the correlation coefficient moves toward either -1 or +1, the

relationship gets stronger until there is a perfect correlation at the end points.
 11

The meaning of a given correlation coefficient can be seen below based on

Johnson and Christensen (2012, p. 340):

Table 1
Correlation Coefficient
Interval Coefficient Level of Correlation

0.00 – 0.34 Very Weak

0.34 – 0.40 Weak

0.41 – 0.64 Fair

0.65 – 0.84 Strong

0.85 – 1.00 Very Strong

1. Correlation coefficients below 0.35 show only slight relationship between

variables. These relationships have almost no value in any predictive sense.
2. Correlation coefficients between 0.4 and 0.6 may have theoretical or
practical value depending on the context.
3. Correlation coefficients that is 0.65 or higher will make accurate prediction
for most purpose.
4. Correlation coefficients over 0.85 indicate a close relationship between the
variable correlated and are useful in predicting individual performance.

There are two primary types of correlational research design; explanation

and prediction. Creswell (2005, p. 327) shows that the characteristics of this

design are that the researchers correlate two or more variables, collect data at one

point in time, analyze all participants as a single group, obtain at least two scores

for each individual in the group—one for each variable, report the use of the

correlation statistical test (or an extension of it) in the data analysis, and make

interpretations or draw conclusions from the statistical test results.

 12

Johnson and Christensen (2012, p. 339) add that in an explanatory study,

all the data on both variables will usually be collected within a fairly short time.

Often, the instruments used are administered in a single session, or in two

sessions—one immediately after the other. In a prediction design, researcher seeks

to anticipate outcomes by using certain variables as predictors. This design is

useful because it helps anticipate or forecast future behavior. The purpose of this

design is to identify variables that will positively predict an outcome or criterion.

In addition, the minimum acceptable sample size for a correlational study

is considered by most researchers to be no less than 30 (Fraenkel, Wallen &

Hyun, 2012, p. 338; and Creswell, 2005, p. 150).

2.2. The Concept of Intelligence

Many people are familiar with word “intelligences”, intelligence is ability

or capability people to doing certain aspect (Lestari, 2015). Louis (1939) defined

intelligence as independent factors and these are equally important. From those

two theories it can be inferred that intelligence is an important mentally factor for

each person. According to Gardner (1999), intelligence is much more than IQ,

because a high IQ in the absence of productivity does not equate intelligence. In

his definition, intelligence is a bio psychological potential to process information

that can be activated in a cultural setting to solve problem or create product that

are value in a culture. Detterman (2005) defines as a general mental capability to

give a reason, solve problem, think abstractly, learn, and understand new material

and profit from past experience.

 13

From several definitions above, the most popular is stated by Howard

Gardner. He has identified that there are nine types of intelligence (multiple

intelligences) linguistic, logical-mathematical, spatial, bodily-kinesthetic, musical,

interpersonal, intrapersonal, naturalist and existential, but researcher focus on

verbal linguistic intelligence.

2.3. Theory of Multiple Intelligences

Intelligence is broken down into nine different types, also called the nine

domains of intelligence. This categorization of intelligence was first theorized by

developmental psychologist Howard Gardner in his 1983 book, Frames of Mind:

The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. Since then, the Multiple Intelligences theory

been used as one of the primary models for research that has gone on concerning

human cognition. Gardner argues that there is no one true way to measure

intelligence and that the human brain is wired with a wide range of cognitive

abilities.

In addition, Arnold and Fonseca (2004, p. 125) argue that multiple

intelligence theory is an excellent tool to enable teachers to plan attractive ways to

provide learners with language learning practice. For instance, language learning

tasks can be developed around different types of intelligences. An activity such as

that of writing the lyrics of a song implies the use of linguistic and musical

intelligence. In a task where learners need to mime the title of a film for others to

guess, the bodily- kinesthetic and interpersonal abilities are brought into play.

Based on McClellan and Conti (2008, p. 16), multiple intelligences

celebrate the uniqueness and diversity of all students. Gardner suggests the need
 14

for a broader view of the human mind and of human learning than what currently

exists. Multiple intelligences hold that every student is smart not just in one or

two ways but in many. Gardner believes that instructors must attempt to reach all

students and develop their diverse intelligences. Moreover, they need to teach in a

variety of ways which provide varied learning experiences for students. According

to Hoerr (2000, p. 12), the importance of multiple intelligences theory in

education is: (1) highlighting uniqueness of each student; (2) bringing out the

students’ dominant intelligences; (3) helping learning through the dominant

intelligence; (4) providing variety of learning experiences; (5) presenting multiple

intelligences teaching; (6) providing variety of assessment methods; and (7)

providing variety of means of expression.

Armstrong (2009, p. 12) explains that multiple intelligence is the theory of

education and learning trend that can support curriculum designers and educators

with opportunity to apply it to educational settings as it can help both learners and

teachers. Chen, Moran and Gardner (2009, p. 3) show that many hundreds of

schools across the globe have incorporated multiple intelligences principles into

their mission, curriculum, and pedagogy; and hundreds of books have been

written (in numerous languages) on the relevance of multiple intelligences theory

for educators and educational institutions. Initially, multiple intelligences ideas

were introduced in the United States and the first multiple intelligences-inspired

experiments took place there.

In short, multiple intelligences theory was developed to show a fact that

human beings have very different kinds of intelligences and this is very important
 15

in learning and achieving their goals. Gardner has identified nine different types

of intelligences that each individual has the capacity to posses.

1. Verbal Linguistic Intelligence

Verbal linguistic intelligence involves the human capacity to think in

words and use these to make oneself understood. It is this type of

intelligence that allows a person to appoint complex meanings and express

these through the use of language. Though this human competence is widely

used, it is most evident in the way effective public speakers, novelists,

journalists, and poets make use of their meta-linguistic skills. In the early

stages of life, linguistic intelligence is exhibited in a person’s enjoyment of

crossword puzzles, storytelling, reading, and writing.

2. Logical Mathematical Intelligence

This type of intelligence equips a person with the ability to calculate

and carry out mathematical operations as well as mull over hypothesis and

propositions. Those who are “number or reasoning smart” tend to easily

recognize relationships and patterns, demonstrate sequential reasoning

skills, and generate and use abstract thoughts. When logical intelligence is

dominant in young adults, you’ll see them especially attracted to logic

puzzles, experiments, strategy games, and arithmetic problems. Later on,

you might see these youth going on to become detectives, scientists, and

mathematicians. Logical-mathematical intelligence has been closely linked

to fluid intelligence and general intelligence.

 16

3. Bodily Kinesthetic Intelligence

People with bodily-kinesthetic intelligence have an almost perfect

sense of timing, and their mind-body coordination is nearly faultless. Even

as a number of persons struggle to become well-coordinated, people who

possess this type of intelligence usually grow up to become craftspeople,

dancer, surgeon, athlete, and other careers involving exceptional mind-body

union.

4. Spatial Intelligences

Spatial intelligence defined as the human capacity to consider things

in three dimensions. This type of intelligence involves the following core

capacities: a dynamic imagination, image manipulation, mental imagery,

artistic and graphic skills, and spatial reasoning. People with spatial

intelligence are highly creative. At a young age, people with high spatial

intelligence are deeply entrenched in solving jigsaw puzzles or mazes, or

they may be using up their extra time by daydreaming or drawing. Spatial

intelligence is demonstrated mainly by “picture smart” people such as

architects, sculptors, painters, pilots, and sailors.

5. Musical Intelligences

This intelligence involved in this ability to recognize tone, rhythm,

timbre, and pitch is musical intelligence. With this type of intelligence,

people are able to detect, generate, reproduce, and contemplate music as

clearly exhibited by attuned listeners, musicians, composers, vocalists, and

conductors. You’ll find that young adults with musical intelligence are

frequently drumming, singing, or any other activity that demonstrates a

 17

melodic inclination. It is also interesting to note that a connection has been

shown to exist between emotions and music as well as mathematics and

music.

6. Interpersonal Intelligence

People who have interpersonal intelligence are able to understand

and communicate well. Interpersonal intelligence makes it possible for a

person to effectively communicate through verbal and nonverbal means, to

distinguish among others, to sense the temperament and moods of people,

and to consider various points of view. You’ll usually find this type of

intelligence manifested by politicians, social workers, actors, and teachers.

This type of intelligence can also be found in young adults who hold

leadership roles.

7. Intrapersonal Intelligence

People who have the remarkable ability to understand themselves,

their thoughts, and their emotions and are capable of using this knowledge

to plan their lives possess intra-personal intelligence. While intra-personal

intelligence does involve self-appreciation, it also comprises a wider

understanding of the human condition. As young adults, “self-smart” people

possess a deeper awareness of their own emotions, are self-motivated, and

tend to be shy. Examples of people with evident intra-personal intelligence

include philosophers, spiritual leaders, writers, and psychologists.

8. Naturalist Intelligence

Naturalistic intelligence refers to a human being’s sensitivity to the

natural world. This is the ability to distinguish among nature’s different

 18

features such as animals, plants, rock configurations, cloud formations, and

other such things. In the past, the naturalist intelligence was undoubtedly of

great value in a person’s survival. Farming and hunting were clearly among

the activities that relied on this type of intelligence. Today, naturalistic

intelligence remains a vital component of roles like being a chef or botanist.

This type of intelligence is also seen in the way consumers discriminate

among products.

9. Existential Intelligence

People with existential intelligence tend to mull over “deep”

thoughts. These thoughts may include the why’s and how’s of life and

death. While most people just shake these kinds of thoughts away,

individuals who are particularly keen to their own existence are drawn to

exploring such questions like why are people born, how do they get here,

and why do they die. They also have the capacity and sensitivity to tackle

thoughts about what lies beyond life and death. Though not much discussion

has been done about existential intelligence, it has also been called spiritual

or moral intelligence. Those with high existential intelligence are deeply

philosophical.

2.4. Theory of Verbal Linguistic Intelligence

Verbal linguistic intelligence includes one of the multiple intelligences.

According to Gardner (2006) verbal linguistic intelligence is the sensitivity to the

phonological features of a language. Tek and Peng (2006) state verbal linguistic

intelligence is the capacity to use language (words), one’s native language, and
 19

perhaps other language, effectively, either orally or in writing, to express what is

on one’s mind and to understand people. In verbal linguistic intelligence, there are

some characteristics or capacities which have to be owned. These capacities are

capacities to use language in the spoken and written form.

Meanwhile, Gardner, Chapman, and Freeman (1996) state that the people

who are strong in verbal linguistic intelligence usually have a good vocabulary,

potential which allow them to read book and to be absorbed in the book and

perform well. Weber (2005, p. 4) defines verbal-linguistic intelligence as

speaking, poetic or journalistic ability, sensitivity to the sounds, rhythms, and

meanings of words, as well as understanding different functions of language. This

kind of ability exhibits itself in its fullest form by poets (Gardner, 2006).

Finally, based on the theories above, it can be concluded that verbal

linguistic intelligence is the ability to use a language in the written form including

its capacities or aspects that are letter, structure of word, vocabulary, grammar,

and reading comprehension.

2.5. Student’s Verbal Linguistic Intelligence Characteristic

McKenzie (2014) describes the characteristics of the students’ verbal

linguistic intelligence as follows:

a. appreciate the subtleties of grammar and meaning

b. spell easily

c. enjoy word games

d. understand jokes, puns, and riddles

e. use descriptive language

 20

f. are good storytellers

g. internalize new information through lecture and discussion

h. demonstrate understanding easily through discussion and essay

Support this intelligence in the classroom by:

a. exploring new vocabulary

b. learning terms and expressions from other languages

c. encouraging opportunities for public speaking

d. incorporating drama into learning

e. keeping daily journals

f. promoting opportunities for creative writing

g. nurturing oral storytelling

h. including opportunities for expository and narrative writing

i. utilizing quality children's and young adult literature in the classroom

Learning capacities of student’s verbal linguistic intelligence adapted by

Armstrong (2009):

a. Understanding Order and Meaning of Words

b. Convincing Someone of a Course of Action

c. Explaining, Teaching, and Learning

d. Humor

e. Memory and Recall

f. “Meta-Linguistic” Analysis or the ability to understand another person’s

message as much by how they say it as what they say.

 21

2.6. The Concept of Writing

In word reference (2010), writing is one of the ways to give an idea or

message which is form in writing on a piece of paper or the other area. It is an act

of making marks on certain surface. Specifically, writing is one kind of expression

in language which is created by particular set of symbol, having conventional

values for representing the wordings of particular language which is drawn up

visually. Writing skill is complex and difficult to learn. Requiring mastery is not

only grammatical patterns but also the rule of writing such as high degree of

organization in the development of ideas and information and also choosing the

appropriate vocabularies and sentence structure to create a style which is

appropriate to subject matter (Jim 2010, p. 2). Therefore the write conclude that

Writing is making a hand writing where the one who write gives a form for

everything what he or she thinks and whatever he or she feels. A writer has to be

able in using written language to give an idea or message.

Moreover, Brown, (2001, p. 336) claims that writing is a thinking process.

Furthermore, he stated that writing can be planned and given with an unlimited

number of revisions before its release. In addition, writing has two steps process.

The first process is figuring out the meaning and the second process is putting the

meaning into language. Writing represents what we think. It is because the writing

process reflects things, which stay in the mind. Students who are reluctant to write

things down often suffer for this activity. The students find difficulties when they

start looking for some reasons to write and producing written sentences.

In addition, Urquhart and Mclver (2005, p. 5) state that writing is a

recursive process, which means students revise throughout the process, frequently
 22

moving back and forth among the stages. Then, students should learn strategies

for invention and discovery, and teachers should help students generate content

and discover a purpose. Harmer (2004) states that writing encourages students to

focus on accurate language use. It is because students consider the language use

when the students engage in their writing process. This activity will provoke

language development because the students resolve problems what writing puts in

students’ minds.

Types of writing activities to perform writing should be based on the

students’ level and capacity. Brown (2001, p. 343) describes there are five major

categories of classroom writing performance:

1. Imitative, or writing down

This type is at the beginning level of learning to write. Students will simply

write down English letter, words, and possibly sentences in order to learn

the conventions of the orthographic code.

2. Intensive, or controlled

This intensive writing typically appears in controlled, written grammar

exercises. This type of writing does not allow much creativity on the part of

the writer. A controlled writing is to present in which the students have to

alter a given structure throughout.

3. Self-writing

The most salient instance of this category in classroom is note-taking by the

students. Diary or journal writing also falls into this category.

 23

4. Display writing

For all language students, short answer exercises, essay examinations and

research reports will involve an element of display. One of the academic

skills of EFL students that they need to master is a whole array of display

writing techniques.

5. Real Writing

Some classroom writing aims at the genuine communication of messages to

an audience in need of those messages.

2.7. The Process of Writing

Writing process is a process which writer begins to write down their ideas

on paper which is valuable aid to the whole learning process. Wohl (1985, p. 2)

said that in almost all kinds of writing the basic structural unit is the paragraph.

Moreover, there are 3 writing processes:

1. Finding the Topic Sentence

Usually some students find difficulties in recognizing the topic sentence of

paragraph. The topic sentence is usually taken from several things such as:

an experience and from the book. A good topic sentence narrows the focus

and points to one particular aspect of the over theme. The topic sentence

usually represents the most general statement of the paragraph. The topic

sentence occurs most frequently at the beginning of a paragraph. When the

topic sentence does occur at the end, it serves to summarize the preceding

sentence and to conclude the paragraph.

 24

2. Developing Paragraph from Topic Sentence

Some students can write a paragraph without following any formal steps or

using formal techniques such as a topic sentence. Here are some steps to

develop a paragraph:

a. Choose a general topic of interest to you.

b. Narrow down the topic. Select one aspect of the topic and decide what

your main point is.

c. Write down the few facts, believe or opinion that are directly related to

your topic sentence details that will help to support or explain it.

d. Take a second look at your tentative topic sentence.

e. Using the fact and ideas from step three, develop the topic sentence into a

full paragraph. This is your final draft.

f. Think about unity as you read what you have written. Revise as

necessary and then write your final draft.

3. Editing the Finish Product

The final step in completing a piece of writing is editing. Editing is the

checking of one’s written work for various faults in making last-minutes

changes and correction. Students of English as second language must check

their writing for basic grammatical errors. Basic grammatical errors include

the improper use of tense and aspect agreement articles, word order and

other small but important details.

 25

2.8. The Students’ Difficulties in Writing

Heaton (1987) stated that the writing skills in a foreign language are

complex and difficult to learn not only the ability to use structures but also

conceptual of varied skills such as stylistic and mechanical skill. Stylistic skill is

the ability to manipulate sentences and use language effectively whereas

mechanical skill is the ability to use correctly those conventions peculiar to the

written language such as punctuation and spelling.

According to Nurgiantoro (2001, p. 298), there are some problems which

are faced by students in learning writing. They are:

a. Organizing idea

Organizing idea pulls information together so the mind can make sense of it.

b. Lack of vocabulary

Lack of vocabulary makes the students find difficulties to understand the

meaning.

c. Grammar accuracy

Grammar accuracy is obtained when each word in sentence represents the

meaning the writer intents to convey and are arrange in the correct order.

2.9. Previous Related Studies

Nurhayati, Noviaristanti, and Priyanto (2015) conducted a research on the

relationship of critical thinking, linguistic intelligence, and the writing ability of

the PT. Telkom Indonesia employees. The result from this research showed that

among the critical thinking levels, linguistic intelligence, and writing ability using

English, the correlation was quite significant. It means that the relation among the
 26

critical thinking level, linguistic intelligence, and writing ability were positively

related.

Wijaya (2014) conducted a research the correlation between undergraduate

EFL students’s MI and their writing achievement at Sriwijaya University with

different sample and population. The result from this research shows that there is

significant correlation between MI and writing achievement; linguistic

intelligence with coefficients (r) is 0,409 which is significant at 0,01 level (2-

tailed) and interpersonal intelligence with coefficients (r) is 0,354 which is

significant at 0,05 (2-tailed). Linguistic intelligence is the strongest one.

Mulyaningsih, Rais, and Sulistyawati (2012) conducted a research on the

relationship of Grammar Competence, Verbal Linguistic Intelligence, and Writing

Ability of Sebelas Maret University. The researchers found that result there was a

significant correlation between verbal linguistic intelligence and writing ability.

Sadhegi, and Farzizadeh (2012) conducted a research on the relationship

of multiple intelligence and writing ability of Iranian EFL learners. The result

showed that the components of Multiple Intelligences (linguistic, logical-

mathematical, spatial, bodily-kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal, intrapersonal and

naturalist) did not have significant correlation with the writing ability.

In comparison with the previous related studies above, this study has some

similarity since it has the same independent variable (verbal linguistic

intelligence). However, there are some differences of this research with the

researchers does is from population, sampling method, and sample. The first

research above investigated whether or not multiple intelligences had relationship

with writing ability; while this research focused on investigating the correlation
 27

between verbal linguistic intelligence and writing ability. Therefore, this research

is really new and different from the other research.

2.10. Research Setting

2.10.1. The History of English Education Study Program

In 2007 tarbiyah faculty in IAIN raden fatah opened new major,

English Education Study Program. This program was opened based on

consideration and high interest of society who wanted to follow this program,

so by the agreement and decision of DIRJEN PENDIS DEPAG RI No.:

DJ.I/178/2007 English Education Study program was opened.

2.10.2. Geographic Location

English education study program is located in jalan Prof. K.H. Zainal

Abidin Fikri, KM. 3,5, Lawang kidul, Ilir timur II, Pahlawan, Kemuning,

Kota Palembang, Sumatera Selatan. English Education is located in Tarbiyah

Faculty region; it is next to Arabic major and behind Islamic Education

major.

2.10.3. Vision, Mission and aims

2.10.3.1. Vision

In order to be the better major, this following is the vision of

English Education Study Program:

 28

“To be well-quality and healthy major also able to produce

professional English education graduates, Islamic characteristic,

integrated, and has international reputation in 2022.”

2.10.3.2. Mission

There are some missions that English Education study Program

would like to achieve as the following;

1. Organize and develop professional and well-quality English

Education.

2. Develop educational science research and teach relevant English

that related to society need.

3. Prepare professional English Education graduates, islamic

caracteristic, and have international reputation.

4. Develop devotion to society to be pro-active and particivative

suit to competency and capacity that related to English

Education.

5. Develop cooperation network or partnership with other

institutions domestic and abroad.

6. Develop and keep the value, and academic moral control the

quality of English education major.

2.10.3.3. Aims

To produce professional, islamic characteristic, intregated

graduates and have international reputation that can answer the

problem and society need that related to English education.

 29

2.10.4. Lecturers in English Education Study Program

There are 14 permanent lecturers in English education study program,

some of the lecturers are magister graduates and some of them have finished

their doctor program. The table of Lecturers English Education study program

is showed as the picture below:

Table 2
Lecturer of English Education Study Program

No. Name Place & Date Education Functional Competence

of Birth S1,S2,S3 & Academic
University Duty
1. Dr. Dian Palembang, S1 FKIP Lektor English/
Erlina, S.Pd, 02-01-1973 Unsri. S2 (IV/a) Linguistic
M.Hum UGM
S3 UNJ
2. Dr. Dewi Prabumulih, S1 FKIP Lektor English/
Warna, M.Pd 23-07-1974 Unsri, S2 (IV/a) Structure
Unsri, S3
UNJ
2. Drs. Herizal, Palembang, S1 FKIP Lektor English/
M.A 21-10-1965 Unsri, S2 (III/c) TEFL
University of Methodology
Canberra
Australia
3. Renny Kurnia Baturaja, 07- S1 Unsri, S2 Lektor Speaking
sari, M.Pd 06-1979 Unsri (III/c)
4. Dr. Annisa Palembang, S2 Unsri, S3 Lektor Writing
Astrid, M.Pd 23-11-1980 U. Semarang (III/d)
5. Hj. Lenny Rejang S1 Unsri, S2 Lektor Listening
Marzulina, Lebong, 31- Unsri (III/c)
M.Pd 01-1971
6. M. Holandyah, Ngulak,(Muba) S1 UPGRI, Lektor Reading
M.Pd 07-05-1974 S2 UPGRI (III/c)
7. Amalia Palembang, S1. U. Lektor English
Hasanah,M.Pd 31-07-1979 Padjajaran. (III/c)
S2. Unsri
8. Manalulaili, Sri Bendung S1 Unsri. S2 Lektor Education
M,Ed OI. 15-04- University of (III/c)
 30

1972 Flinders
9. Roma Nur Palembang, S1 FKIP Lektor ( English
Asnita. M.Pd 31-12-1975 Unsri. S2 III/c)
Unsri. S3
UNJ
10. Eka Sartika, Palembang, S1 UPGRI, Permanent English/
M.Pd 01-03-1985 S2 Unsri Lecturers Speaking
12. Beny Wijaya, Air Itam, 29- S1 Unsri, Permanent TEFL
M,Pd 09-1990 S2 Unsri Lecturer Methodology
13. Nova Lingga Sungai Lilin, S1 Unsri, Permanent Translation/
Pitaloka, M,Pd 26-10-1990 S2 Unsri Lecturer Speech
Winny agustia H
Palembang, S1 Unsri Permanent Structure
14. Riznanda, 18-081983 S2 Unsri Lecturer
M,Pd
(Source:English Education Study Program in academic year 2017-2018)

2.10.5. Students in English Education Study Program

There are 760 students in English Education study program; they are

from second semester until seventh semester. The table of student English

Education study program is showed as the picture below:

Table 3
The Student of English Education Study Program

No Semester Number of Student

1. I 122

2. III 153

3. V 132

4. VII 101

5. IX 95

6. XI 157
 31

Total 760

(Source:English Education Study Program in academic year 2017-2018)

2.10.6. Organization Structure

The organization structure is showed as the picture below:

Table 4

The organization structure of English Education Study Program

Dean

The Head of
PBI Major

Lecturer Secretary Bina Skripsi

Staff

Student

2.11. Hypotheses

The hypotheses of this study are proposed in the forms of null and research

hypotheses below:

1. Ho: There is no significant correlation between students’ verbal linguistic

intelligence and their writing ability of English Education Study Program

Students of UIN Raden Fatah Palembang.

Ha: There is a significant correlation between students’ verbal linguistic

intelligence and their writing ability of English Education Study Program

Students of UIN Raden Fatah Palembang.

 32

2. Ho: Students’ verbal linguistic intelligence does not significantly influence

writing ability of English Education Study Program Students of UIN Raden

Fatah Palembang.

Ha: Students’ verbal linguistic intelligence significantly influences writing

ability of English Education Study Program Students of UIN Raden Fatah

Palembang.

2.12. Criteria for Testing Hypothesis

To test the hypothesis above, the researcher will use the criterions from

Cresswell (2005, p.188);

1. If p- value is higher than 0.05 (p> 0.05), the level of significance is 5%, Ho is

accepted and Ha is rejected.

If p- value is less than 0.05 (p< 0.05), the level of significance is 5%, Ho is

rejected and Ha is accepted.

2. If F- obtained is lower than or same as F-table at significant level 5%, Ha is

rejected and Ho is accepted.

If F- obtained is higher than F-table at significant level 5%, Ha is accepted

and Ho is rejected.
 33

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHOD

This chapter discusses the following sub topics: (1) research design; (2)

research variable; (3) operational design; (4) subject of the study; (5) data

collection; (6) validity and reability; and (7) data analysis.

3.1. Research Design

In conducting this study, the researcher used correlational research in

terms of explanatory design to find out the correlation among variables. The

procedures were, first; the researcher identified the students’ verbal linguistic

intelligence by using questionnaire. Second, by using writing test, the students’

writing ability was obtained. Third, SPSS 20 was used in order to find out the

correlation between the variables based on the result of questionnaire and writing

test, and the influence of the variable(s). At last, the researcher discussed the

explanation and interpretation of the results. The research design was as follows:

X Y

X = Students’ verbal linguistic intelligence

Y = Students’ writing skill

3.2. Research Variable

According to Fraenkel et al. (2012, p. 80), a common and useful way to

think about variables is to classify them as independent or dependent. Independent

 34

variable is what the researcher chooses to study in order to assess their possible

effect(s) on one or more other variables. The variable that the independent

variable is presumed to affect is called a dependent variable. In commonsense

terms, the dependent variable depends on what the independent variable does to it,

how it affects it. It is possible to investigate more than one independent (and also

more than one dependent) variable in a study. In this study, the independent

variable is student’s verbal linguistic intelligence at UIN Raden Fatah Palembang,

meanwhile the dependent variables is their writing ability.

3.3. Operational Definitions

To avoid misunderstanding about the terms used in this study, it is

necessary for the writer to define them. Verbal Linguistic Intelligence is the

capacity to use words effectively, whether orally (e.g. as a story teller, orator, or

politician) or in writing (e.g., as a poet, playwright, editor, or journalist). The

Multiple Intelligence Questionnaire was use to determine the verbal linguistic

profile of English Education Study Program Students of UIN Raden Fatah

Palembang.

Writing ability is skill to produce something in written form so the students

can read, perform, or use it. Writing can be used as an indirect means of

communication to others to convey information. In this study, the students’

writing ability had been measured by using essay writing test.

 35

3.4. Subject of the study

3.4.1. Population

Population is the larger group to which one hopes to apply the results

(Fraenkel, Wallen, & Hyun, 2012, p. 91). The population of this study was all

the active students of English Education Study Program of UIN Raden Fatah

Palembang in the academic year 2017-2018. The distribution of population of

the study below to:

Table 5
Distribution of Population
Semester V Number of Students

A 28
B 33
C 26
D 29
Total 116

(Source: English Education Study Program of UIN)

3.4.2. Sample

In regard with Cohen, Manion & Morrison (2007), sample is smaller

group or subset. It often need to be able to obtain data from a smaller group or

subset of the total population in such a way that the knowledge gained is

representative of the total population (however defined) under study. The

sample of this study was taken by using purposive sampling method. Sugiyono

(2013, p. 215) states that purposive sampling is sampling technique with

certain considerations. It is used in both qualitative and quantitative research

(Johnson & Christensen, 2012, p. 235).

 36

In this study, the student’s verbal linguistic intelligence and their

writing ability was correlated. Therefore, in order to know the students’ writing

score, a group of students who had already taken all the writing courses

(writing I, writing II, and writing III) and has high verbal linguistic intelligence

profile from the population was considered as the sample. Since the students of

fifth semester had already finished writing course and their intelligence profile

was checked before they were determined as the sample. The distribution of

the sample of the study below to:

Table 6
Distribution of Sample
Semester V Number of Students

A 16
B 17
C 19
D 18
Total 70

3.5. Data Collection

There were two kinds of instruments used to collect the data; Verbal

linguistic intelligence questionnaire, and writing test.

3.5.1. Verbal Linguistic Intelligence Questionnaire

Johnson and Christensen (2012, p. 162) define questionnaire as a self-

report data-collection instrument that each research participant fills out as part

of a research study. It is the most frequently used data collection method in

educational and evaluation research (Radhakrishna, 2007).

 37

To obtain the information about students’ multiple intelligences

questionnaire by Thomas Armstrong (1995) was distributed before the writing

test was conducted. There were 80 items in the questionnaire. Each item of the

questionnaire has 1) strongly disagree, 2) disagree, 3) agree, 4) strongly agree,

questions that be completed within 45 minutes.

3.5.2. Writing Test

To obtain the students’ writing ability, writing test was conducted.

There were three topics given to develop by the students, How Social Class

Affects the Quality of Education, Student’s Difficulties in Learning English,

and The Importance of English in Modern Era.

In assessing writing, the assessment rubric which is adopted from

Diablo Valley College is applied in this study. To validate the scoring scheme,

the writer used assessment rubric.

3.6. Validity and Reliability

Before the questionnaire and real test are administered, the researcher will

firstly consider their validity and reliability. Johnson and Christensen (2012, p.

137) explain that validity and reliability are the two most essential psychometric

properties to consider in using a test or assessment procedure. Validity refers to

the accuracy of the inferences or interpretations made from the test scores, while

reliability refers to the consistency or stability of the test scores.

3.6.1. Validity

Validity is based on the view that it is essentially a demonstration that a

particular instrument in fact measures what it purpose to measure (Cohen,

 38

Manion, & Morrison, 2007, p.133), whether it represents the content, whether

it is appropriate for the sample and whether it is comprehensive enough to

collect all the information needed (Radhakrishna, 2007). Thus, content validity

had been used.

3.6.1.1. Verbal Linguistic Intelligence Questionnaire

In this study, the questionnaire is adapted from Armstrong (1995).

MI questionnaire had been validated using content validity by

Mulyaningsih, Rais, and Sulistyawati (2012), Sadhegi, and Farzizadeh

(2012), Wijaya (2014), Hayati, Noviaristanti, and Priyanto (2015). The

results of the validity questionnaire were more than 0.70 which means the

questionnaire is valid.

3.6.1.2. Writing Test

To validate the writing test, construct validity was be used by using

expert judgement. The experts were asked to analyze the propozed

components, as well as the sub-components. Their judgements showed that

the instructions, topics, time allocation, content, and rubric were

appropriate. In choosing the experts, the following criteria were considered:

1. The raters had minimal TOEFL score 550.

2. The raters had teaching experience minimal 5 years.

3. The raters were Magister graduate of English Education Study Program.

 39

3.6.2. Reliability

3.6.2.1. Verbal Linguistic Intelligence Questionnaire

Since the questionnaire is adapted from Armstrong (1995). It’s also

has been proved the questionnaire also reliable. Fraenkel, Wallen, and Hyun

(2012, p.157) state that to decide if the questionnaire is reliable, the

coefficient should be at least 0.70, preferably higher.

The reliability also was checked by Mulyaningsih, Rais, and

Sulistyawati (2012), Sadhegi, and Farzizadeh (2012), Wijaya (2014),

Hayati, Noviaristanti, and Priyanto (2015).The results of reliability test were

more than 0.70.

3.6.2.2. Writing Test

To get the reliability of the writing test, inter-rater reliability was

used. Inter-rater realibily allowed the raters to give a degree or rating to the

instruments whether it was appropriate for the sample or not. Since it was

measure as the result of three raters, the result showed the instruction, topic,

time allocation and rubric were appropriate, and content was appropriate.

Thus, writing test was reliable.

3.7. Data Analysis

There were five procedures to analyze the data which function is to answer

the problem. The first; researcher did the pre-requisite test. Then, the students’

verbal linguistic intelligence questionnaire and writing test were observed and

analyzed. The next step was, after the data from both instruments input to SPSS,

answering the first problem by doing the correlation test. Then, if there was a
 40

correlation between the variables, the analysis would be continued to establish the

influence of verbal linguistic intelligence to writing ability. At last, there was

descriptive analysis in order to answer the result that occurred.

3.7.1. Instruments Analysis

The instruments, both verbal linguistic intelligence questionnaire and

writing test, were analyzed in order to gain the data of the study.

3.7.1.1. Verbal Linguistic Intelligence Questionnaire Analysis

Firstly, the writer was used MI questionnaire by Thomas Armstrong

in measuring students verbal linguistic intelligence. There were 80 items in

the multiple intelligences questionnaire consisting of 10 items for each type

of intelligences. Each item of the questionnaire has 1) strongly disagree, 2)

disagree, 3) agree, 4) strongly agree question. Answers are score with 1-4

point. If the score of student’s verbal linguistic intelligence was higher or

the same as the median, the students have linguistic intelligence profile. The

results will be classified for analyzing the frequency and percentage of

linguistic intelligence.

Table 7

The Categorization of Student’s Linguistic Intelligence

No Range Qualification Indicators

 Frequent misspelling

 Less communicate to other

1 0-15 Low
 Not interested in learning another

language
 41

 Not interested in word games (Scrabble,

Anagrams, or Password)

 Spins tall tales or tells joke and stories

 Good memory for names, places, dates,

2 16-28 Average or trivia

 Enjoy to speak or read another language

 Enjoy word games and reading books

 Write well and good vocabulary for age

 Spins tall tales or tells joke and stories

 Good memory for names, places, dates,

or trivia

 Enjoy to speak or read another language

 Enjoy word games and reading books

3 29-40 High  Spell words accurately and appreciates

nonsense rhymes, puns, tongue twisters,

etc

 Enjoys listening to spoken word (stories,

talking, or book)

 Communicates to others in a highly

verbal way

(Sources: Armstrong, 2009)

3.7.1.2. Writing Test Analysis

 42

Secondly, the students’ writing test was analyzed by the three raters,

those who validate the writing test, by using the rubric for essay writing

assessment from Diablo Valley College. There were five aspects of the

writing scoring system and the scale of each aspect is from one to six. As a

result, the highest point of all is 30. Since there were three raters, the

average points from them was determined as the students’ writing ability.

The result of students’ writing test was categoried into five

categories as follows.

Table 8

Range of Student’s Writing Ability

No. Range Qualification Grade

1. 25-30 Very Good A

2. 19-24 Good B

3. 13-18 Average C

4. 7-12 Poor D

5 0-6 Very Poor E

(Source: Diablo Valley College)

3.7.2. Pre-requisite Analysis

Since the study is in the notion of parametric statistics, correlation and

regression, it is necessary to do pre-requisite analysis. Thus, before analyzing

the data, the researcher finds out whether the data distribution between the

variable was normal and linear or not.

 43

3.7.2.1. Normality Test

A normality test was used to determine whether sample data had

been drawn from a normally distributed population or not. It was conducted

due to many parametric statistical methods, including Pearson correlation

test and multiple linear regression test, require an approximately normally

distributed dependent variable (Lofgren, 2013). Moreover, the researcher

applied Kolmogorov-Smirnov test by using SPSS 20. The data is distributed

normally if the p-value is higher than 0.05 (p > 0.5).

3.7.2.2. Linearity Test

The linearity test was conducted in order to recognize whether the

correlation between the variables is linear or not. The test is established as

the prerequisite test of linear regression test (Puriyatno, 2010, p. 73). Hence,

test for linearity by using SPSS 20 was conducted in order to recognize

whether the correlation of the variables is linear or not. Therefore, if the p-

value (linearity) is less than 0.05 (p-value < 0.05), the data correlation is

linear.

3.7.3. Correlation Analysis

To find out whether verbal linguistic intelligence of students, as whole,

have any correlation with students' writing ability or not, Pearson- Product

Moment Correlation Coefficient was used. There is no significant correlation if

P-value is higher than 0.05 and there is a significant correlation if P-value is

less than 0.05. After that, if there is any significant correlation between the
 44

variables, the analysis will be continued to see if there is any significant

influence between verbal linguistic intelligence and writing ability.

3.7.4. Regression Analysis

As there was probability of correlation, thus, in the study were

conducted Simple Regression test in relation to see the influence of students’

verbal linguistic intelligence as whole to the students’ writing ability. The

influence of the independent variable, verbal linguistic intelligence, was gained

by looking at the coefficient determination (R Square). In order to know how

much students’ verbal linguistic intelligence influences their writing ability,

the influence will be sigificant if F-obtained higher than F-table at significant

level 5%.
 CHAPTER IV

FINDINGS AND INTERPRETATIONS

This chapter discusses the following sub topics: (1) research findings, (2)

statistical analysis, and (3) interpretations.

4.1. Research Findings

There were two kinds of research findings in this study: (1) the result of

students’ verbal linguistic intelligence and (2) the result of students’ writing

ability.

4.1.1. Result of Students’ Verbal Linguistic Intelligence

The total active students in the fifth semester of English education

study program were 116 students. 90 students participated in this study, and the

others did not attend when conducting this study. The 10 items of verbal

linguistic intelligence questionnaire were used to investigate the participants’

verbal linguistic intelligence. The items were put in a 4-point Likert-Scale from

strongly agree to strongly disagree. Scoring of the scale by summing up the

weight for the option selected. The students with score 29 until 40 means that

high in verbal linguistic intelligence, then the students with score 16 until 28

means that had medium in verbal linguistic intelligence and the students had

low verbal linguistic intelligence when getting lower than 16. From the result

of students’ score above, there were 70 students who have high verbal

linguistic intelligence profile as participating in this study.

 46

The descriptive statistical analysis of verbal linguistic of the students

was found. The maximum score was 34, and the minimum score was 20. The

mean of verbal linguistic intelligence is 30.06 and the standard deviation is

2.865.

Table 9

Descriptive Statistics of Verbal Linguistic Intelligence

Descriptive Statistics

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

Verbal Linguistic
90 20 34 30.06 2. 865
Intelligence

Valid N (listwise) 90

The result of the verbal linguistic intelligence questionnaire revealed

that the majority of students, 70 out of 90 (77.8%), had high verbal linguistic

intelligence and as much as 20 students out of 90 (22.2%), had medium verbal

linguistic intelligence. Last but not least, there was no one categorized as low

verbal linguistic intelligence. The distribution of students’ verbal linguistic

intelligence can be seen the table below:

Table 10
Score Distribution of Verbal Linguistic Intelligence

Level of Verbal Linguistic Range Score Number of Percent

Intelligence Students (%)
High 29 – 40 70 77.8
Medium 16 – 28 20 22.2
Low 0 – 15 0 0
Total 90 100
 47

4.1.1. The Result Students’ Writing Test

The descriptive statistical analysis of students’ writing test was shown

in Table 11. The students’ score were calculated from the result of the three

raters. The maximum score was 23, the lowest score was 9, the mean of

students’ writing test was 15.61, and the standard deviation was .8953, this

mean score indicated that the level of students’ writing ability is average.

Table 11

Descriptive Statistics of Students’ writing ability

Descriptive Statistics

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

Writing Ability 70 9 23 15.61 3.895

Valid N (listwise) 70

For each category, 19 students had good writing ability, 33 students had

average writing ability, 18 students had poor writing ability, and there was no

students had very good and very poor writing ability. The distribution was

presented in the following table:

Table 12

Distribution of Student’s Writing Ability

Categories of Writing Ability Range Number of Students Percents (%)

Very Good 25-30 0 0

Good 19-24 19 27.14

Average 13-18 33 47.14

Poor 7-12 18 25.71

Very Poor 0-6 0 0

 48

Total 70 100

4.2. Statistical Analysis

There were three statistical analyses that the researcher applied in this study:

1. The statistical analysis of normality and linearity

2. The statistical analysis of correlation analysis between students’ verbal

linguistic intelligence and writing ability.

3. The statistical analysisis of regression analysis between students’ verbal

linguistic intelligence and writing ability.

4.2.1. Normality Test

Normality test were conducted prior to data analysis through SPSS

version 20 for windows. It was fundamental to see if the distribution of data

were normal for each variable and linear between variables. The data are

interpreted normal if p > 0,05. If p < 0.05, it means the data are not normal.

Kolmogrov-smirnov was used to see the normality.

4.2.1.1. Normality Test of Verbal Linguistic Intelligence Questionnaire

The result of normality test by using Kolmogrov-smirnov of verbal

linguistic intelligence questionnaire can be seen below.

Table 13

Test of Normality of Verbal Linguistic Intelligence Questionnaire

One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test

Verbal Linguistic Intelligence
N 70
 49

Mean 31.21
Normal Parametersa,b
Std. Deviation 1.667
Absolute .138
Most Extreme Differences Positive .138
Negative -.138
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z 1.158
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .137
a. Test distribution is Normal.
b. Calculated from data.

The data from the normality test was shown in table 13 indicated that

the data of verbal linguistic intelligence was normal and appropriate for data

analysis with coefficients .137. Since the significance value is higher than

0.05, it can be concluded that the data is normally distributed.

Moreover, Q-Q plot was also used to see the normality of the data

distribution of verbal linguistic intelligence. The normal Q-Q plot of Verbal

Linguistic Intelligence was illustrated in the following figures.

Figure 1

Q-Q Plot of Verbal Linguistic Intelligence

 50

The Q-Q plot showed that all the circles close to the line. It can be

concluded that there was a normal distribution of the data.

4.2.1.2. Normality Test of Writing Test

The result of normality test by using Kolmogrov-smirnov of writing

test can be seen below.

Table 14

Test of Normality of Writing Ability

One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test

Writing Ability

N 70

Mean 15.61
Normal Parametersa,b
Std. Deviation 3.895

Absolute .079

Most Extreme Differences Positive .078

Negative -.079

Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z .662

Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .774

a. Test distribution is Normal.

b. Calculated from data.

The data from the normality test was shown in table 14 indicated

that the data of writing ability was normal and appropriate for data analysis

with coefficients .774. Since the significance value is higher than 0.05, it

can be concluded that the data is normally distributed.

 51

Moreover, Q-Q plot was also used to see the normality of the data

distribution of writing ability. The normal Q-Q plot of writing ability was

illustrated in the following figures.

Figure 2

Q-Q Plot of Writing Ability

The Q-Q plot showed that all the circles close to the line and it is

not too far from one circle to another. It can be concluded that there was a

normal distribution of the data.

4.2.1.3. Linearity Test

For linearity test, deviation of linearity was obtained by using SPSS

20 in order to recognize whether the variables were linear or not. Therefore,

if the probability was more than 0.05, the two variables were linear. The

result of linearity test can be seen below.

 52

Table 15

Linearity Test

ANOVA Table
Df Mean Square Sig.
(Combined) 14 7.847 .000

Verbal Between Linearity 1 95.282 .000

Linguistic Groups
Deviation from
Intelligence * 13 1.121 .704
Linearity
writing Ability
Within Groups 55 1.490
Total 69

Based on the ANOVA output table, value sig. deviation from

linearity was .704 > 0.05, it can be concluded that there is a linear

relationship between the variables of verbal linguistic intelligence and

writing ability.

4.2.2. Correlation Analysis

Related to the first problem in the research which aim was to seek the

significant correlation between students’ verbal linguistic intelligence and their

writing ability, the researcher used Pearson Product Moment Correlation

Coefficient to answer the first question. Moreover, based on the correlational

analysis which can be seen in the Table 15 revealed that the correlational

coefficient of the test was .705. It was showed that r-obtained (.705) was higher

than r-table (.235), which means that there was a correlation between verbal

linguistic intelligence and writing ability of the fifth semester students of

English Education Study Program of UIN Raden Fatah Palembang.

 53

Table 16

The Correlation between Students’ Verbal Linguistic Intelligence and

Writing Ability
Correlations

Verbal Linguistic Writing Ability

Intelligence

Verbal Pearson Correlation 1 .705**

Linguistic Sig. (2-tailed) .000
Intelligence N 70 70
**
Pearson Correlation .705 1
Writing
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
Ability
N 70 70
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Moreover, since the correlational coefficient of the test was .705,

Johnson and Christensen (2014, p. 340) claim that this level of correlation was

strong since the correlation coefficient almost reached 1 point hence it also

could be inferred that there was a strong correlation between the variable and

the correlation was in the positive direction. The positive direction means the

higher verbal linguistic intelligence level the students have, the higher their

score of writing test.

Therefore, since the data provided that there was a significant

correlation between the variables, the further analysis was conducted in the

term of finding the significant influence between the variables.

4.2.3. Regression Analysis

This section answered the second research problem by analyzing the

result of descriptive statistic for verbal linguistic intelligence and writing

 54

ability. In addition, since there was significant correlation between verbal

linguistic intelligence and writing ability, it can be inferred that students’

verbal linguistic intelligence has significant influence on their writing ability.

However, regression analysis was still used to find out if students’ verbal

linguistic intelligence influenced their writing ability.

Table 17

The Regression Analysis of Students’ Verbal Linguistic Intelligence and

Writing Ability
Coefficientsa
Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized T Sig.
Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
(Constant) -35.782 6.281 -5.697 .000
Verbal
1
Linguistic 1.647 .201 .705 8.194 .000
Intelligence
a. Dependent Variable: writing Ability

The result indicated that the students’ verbal linguistic intelligence

significantly influenced writing ability with t-value (8.194) was higher than t-

table (1.667) with sig.value (.00) was lower than probability (.05). Therefore,

there was significant influence between student’s verbal linguistic intelligence

and writing ability of the fifth semester students of English Education Study

Program of UIN Raden Fatah PalembangIn addition, to know the percentage of

verbal linguistic intelligence influence on writing ability, R-square was

obtained. The result of the analysis shown in Table 18 below.

 55

Table 18

R-square Analysis
Model Summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R Std. Error of the

Square Estimate
1 .705a .497 .489 2.783
a. Predictors: (Constant), Verbal Linguistic Intelligence

Table 18 revealed that the R-square was .497. It means that the

students’ verbal linguistic intelligence gave significant effect in the level of

49.7% toward writing ability, and 50.3% was unexplained factors value.

4.3. Interpretation

In order to strengthen the value of this study the interpretation is made based

on the result of data analysis. According to the findings, there was a significant

correlation between verbal linguistic intelligence and writing ability. Also, there

was a significant influence of verbal linguistic intelligence on writing ability in

which verbal linguistic intelligence contributed 49.7% to students’ writing ability.

Based on the result of Pearson Product Moment Correlation, it was found

that there was a strong and positive correlation between verbal linguistic

intelligence and writing ability of the fifth semester students of English Education

Study Program of UIN Raden Fatah Palembang (r= .705). This means that verbal

linguistic intelligence had relation to their performance in writing. The

explanation to support this finding is that from the beginning of the first semester

the participants had been involved in English writing practices and assignments or
 56

explores to English writing materials and interactions from printed textbooks,

online media, and social network.

The data distribution shows that most of the students were in high level of

verbal linguistic intelligence. This finding was the same as the study conducted by

Saricaoglu and Arican (2009) imply that students were high types of intelligences

and the students' success in writing, listening, and grammar. It is in line with what

Hosseini (2012) within whose study the linguistic intelligence served as the best

predictor of the writing performance of participants. The importance of verbal

linguistic intelligence should not be ignored in current educational systems. It is

because verbal linguistic intelligence can provide as s pattern in developing

strategies for student success, (Armstrong, 2002). Meanwhile, the theory above

gave positive impact for analyzing the data in the finding.

Next, for writing ability the data distribution shows there was a big

percentage was in average score. However, there was no one in a very good level

of writing ability. This might happen due to some factors involving in

comprehension. Based on conducting the research in PBI A, B, C, D class, it was

found that they did not focus in doing the writing test, because the research was

done after they had taken subjects at college. Some of them were also doing the

test by cheating with their friends. As stated by Jarvis (2000) emphasizes that

many students do not enjoy writing because they feel that if they cannot do it

correctly at the first time when they will never get it. Even though low and

average proficiency students are recommended to write freely without worrying

about their spelling and grammar, they still find it hard to express their thoughts
 57

and feelings due to the lack of vocabulary knowledge, writing practice and

reading (Muslim, 2014 p. 105).

Furthermore, the finding revealed that there was significant correlation

between verbal linguistic intelligence and writing ability, and the strength of the

correlation was high. It indicates that high in linguistic intelligence profile, the

higher score the students get in writing ability. It is likely caused by the verbal

linguistic intelligence is the ability to use a language in spoken or written form to

express what is on one’s mind and to understand people. It means that the core

ability to use language in the spoken or written form is affected by the level of

verbal linguistic intelligence. As stated by Harbi (2005, p. 3), someone who has

strong verbal linguistic intelligence is he/she has highly developed skills for

reading, speaking, listening, writing, and tends to think in words. Moreover,

verbal linguistic intelligence gives contribution to writing ability. It deals with

verbal linguistic intelligence as the core ability to use language in written form.

Gardner (2006) points out that verbal linguistic intelligence is the ability or

potential to find and solve the problem, it is fulfill the problem that students have

which is discussed in this case is writing score. It should be verbal linguistic

intelligence became the cause of student’s decreased or increased score of the

subject, and the result of this research showed it.

According to Gardner (1993), writing activity is an activity mastered by

those who have linguistic intelligence. The characteristics of linguistic

intelligence comprise; the passion of writing creatively at house, composing

factious story, telling jokes and fairytale, having strong mind in memorizing
 58

names, dates, or small things, enjoying reading books in the spare times, spelling

out words fast and easily, enjoying funny rhymes and word games, enjoying

crossword puzzle or playing games such as scrabble or anagram, enjoying to

listening spoken words (story, radio program, reading books, etc.), having

extensive vocabularies for particular age group, and having excellences at school

lessons involving the activities of reading or writing. Furthermore, Armstrong

(2002) mentions that one with higher linguistic intelligence may think through

words, love the activities of reading, writing, telling story, and playing word

games. Based on the explanation, the verbal linguistic intelligence relates closely

with the English learning, and one of them involves writing skill.

The finding in the study was in line with the study of Ahmadian and

Hoseeini (2012). They found the relationship between language learners’ multiple

intelligence (MI) and their writing performance. The results of regression analysis

showed that among all eight intelligences, linguistic intelligence is the best

predictor of writing performance. Those who have high linguistic intelligence are

well-developed in verbal skills and have sensitivity to sounds, meanings, and

rhythms of words (Hampton, 2008).

Then, Sarani, Abdullah, Keshavarz, Atefeh, and Zamanpour, Enayatollah

(2012) also investigate the relationship between MI sub-scales and students’ EFL

narrative writing composition including the writing components. The result of the

research indicates that almost all of MI sub-scale has negative relationship with

narrative writing composition. The positive relationship is only between narrative

writing composition and verbal linguistic intelligence. It means the contribution of

 59

students’ verbal linguistic intelligence to writing ability is showed by aspects of

verbal linguistic intelligence; letter, structure of word, vocabulary, grammar, and

reading comprehension, which is implemented in students’ writing. The example

of this implementation is taken from one of the students who reach the highest

score of writing ability and the second highest score of verbal linguistic

intelligence.

Mulyaningsih, Rais, and Sulistyawati (2012) also indicated the existence

of a significant positive correlation between of Grammar Competence, Verbal

Linguistic Intelligence, and Writing Ability of Sebelas Maret University. Both

grammatical competence and verbal linguistic intelligence have contribution to

writing ability. In this study, the contribution of students’ verbal linguistic

intelligence to writing ability was showed by aspects of verbal linguistic

intelligence; letter, structure of word, vocabulary, grammar, and reading

comprehension, which is implemented in students’ writing. Based on the result, it

can be concluded that there is a positive correlation between verbal linguistic

intelligence and writing ability. It means that students’ verbal linguistic

intelligence gives certain contribution to their writing ability and the improvement

of students’ verbal linguistic intelligence will be followed by their writing ability.

Nurhayati, Noviaristanti, and Priyanto (2015) conducted a research on the

relationship of critical thinking, linguistic intelligence, and the writing ability of

the PT. Telkom Indonesia employees. The result from this research showed that

among the critical thinking levels, linguistic intelligence, and writing ability using

English, the correlation was quite significant. It means that the relation among the
 60

critical thinking level, linguistic intelligence, and writing ability were positively

related. Based on the result, the increase or decrease of independent variables,

critical thinking and verbal linguistic intelligence, will be followed by the increase

or decrease of dependent variable, writing ability.

On the contrary, Sadhegi, and Farzizadeh (2012) conducted a research on

the relationship of multiple intelligence and writing ability of Iranian EFL

learners. The result showed that the components of Multiple Intelligences

(linguistic, logical-mathematical, spatial, bodily-kinesthetic, musical,

interpersonal, intrapersonal and naturalist) did not have significant correlation

with the writing ability. It indicates that the differences of means between high

verbal linguistic intelligence and low one are not significant. Even though college-

students with higher verbal linguistic intelligence also perform higher in writing

activity, in fact, the differences between high and low verbal linguistic

intelligence are not quite significant in writing activities. The level of verbal

linguistic intelligence either low or high, surprisingly does not give significant

effect in writing activities though students with high verbal linguistic intelligence

could make better writing. This indicates that high verbal linguistic intelligence

does not automatically emerge and initiate students to make better writing task.

In short, the total contribution of students’ verbal linguistic intelligence

and their writing ability showed significant correlation and influence. However

the unexplained factors also had contribution on students’s writing ability. The

findings of this study may have some pedagogical implications for teachers or

lecturers, students, and next researcher.

 61

Finally, this study was successful in investigating the correlation and the

influence between verbal linguistic intelligence and writing ability of the fifth

semester students of English Education Study Program of UIN Raden Fatah

Palembang.
 62

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

This chapter draws the conclusion and suggestion which is laid from all of

the description, explanation and discussion from all of the previous chapters.

5.1. Conclusion

Based on the findings and discussions, it was found that the finding

accepted the theory that students' verbal linguistic intelligence is factor that affects

their writing ability significantly. The finding indicated that the alternative

hypothesis was accepted while the null hypothesis was rejected as the correlation

coefficient was .705, and the p-value was .00 which was less than .05 (.000 < .05).

It can be implied that there was a significant correlation between students' verbal

linguistic intelligence and writing ability of the fifth semester students of English

Education Study Program of UIN Raden Fatah Palembang. This result also means

that the students with high verbal linguistic intelligence profile, has good writing

ability. It is proven by the Pearson Product Moment correlation coeeficient result

which the value is 0.705. Additionally, the linear regression analysis showed that

students’ verbal linguistic intelligence (49.7%) significantly influenced their

writing ability.

5.2. Suggestion

The results of this study show that there was a significant correlation

between verbal linguistic intelligence and writing ability. It can be reached some
 63

suggestions for the students, teachers or lecturers, and everyone involved in the

teaching and learning process of writing skills.

For students, since the verbal linguistic intelligence was important to master

of language, they have to improve and explore themselves in the certain learning

so that they can achieve more in learning not only in writing subject but all

subjects. Furthermore, this finding could imply that students still need to know

and understand their intelligences. Due to this fact, since verbal linguistic

intelligence contributed to the students of English Education Study Program of

UIN Raden Fatah Palembang, it was suggested that lecturers should consider on

the verbal linguistic intelligence as the factor that affect on language or writing.

Finally, it was recommended that further research be conducted to consider

whether teaching approach, teaching method, teaching strategy, or teaching

technique related to develop students’ verbal linguistic intelligence. Since, this

study involved small number of participants, it is highly recommended to

involved larger number of participant. Additionally, for future researchers who

have interest in this subject and there are possibilities to correlate them with other

variables since there are still many unexplained factors that can give contribution

for students’ writing ability.

 REFERENCES

‘Aidh. (2007). Membina Rumah Tangga Bahagia. Bandung, Indonesia: Sinar

Baru Algensindo.
Ahmadian, Moussa., & Hosseini, Samaneh. (2012). A study relationship between
iranian efl learners’ linguistic intelligences and their writing ability. Journal
of Language, Culture, and Translation (LCT), 3(1), 1-22. Retrieved from
http://www.mcser.org/images/stories /2_journal/mjssjan2012/moussa%20a
hmadian.pdf.
Armstrong, T. (1995). Multiple Intelligences in the Classroom. Alexandria, V.A:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Armstrong, T. (2002). You’re smarter than you think: A kid’s guide to multiple
intelligences. Minneapolis, MN: Free Spirit.
Arradian, D. (2014, February 5). Picu produktivitas publikasi ilmiah. Koran
Sindo. Retrieved from http://www.koran-sindo.com/node/364607.
Brown, D. H. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to
language pedagogy. San Francisco, CA: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Brown, H. D. (2004). Language assessment: Principles and classroom practices.
New York, NY: Pearson Education, Inc.
Callahan, S. (2000). Responding to the invisible student. Assessing Writing. 7(1),
57–77.
Cohen, P. (2012, January 19). A sharper mind, middle age and beyond. New York
Times. Retrieved from
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/22/education/edlife/a-sharper-mind-
middle-age-and-beyond.html.
Cohen, P., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education
(6th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and
evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH:
Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.
Cumming, A. (2006). Teaching writing: Orienting activities to students' goals.
Berlin, Germany: Mounton De Gruyter.
Dawson, C. (2002). Practical research methods. New Delhi, India: UBS
Publishers’ Distributors.
Detterman, D.K. (2005). Intelligence. Encarta 2005.[CD-ROM] 1998-2004
Microsoft Corporation. Developed for Microsoft by Bloomsbury Publishing
Plc. Cited by Ivana Cimermanova, “Intelligence and Language Learning”
 65

Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate
research in education (8th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Companies,
Inc.
Gardner, H. (2006). Multiple intelligences: New horizons. New York, NY: Basic
Books.
Gardner, H. (2011). The unschooled mind: How children think and how school
should teach (12th ed.). New York, NY: Basic Books.
Gardner, H., & Kane, J. (1999). Are there additional intelligences? The case of
naturalist, spiritual and existential intelligences, in education, information
and transformation. Prentice Hall, NJ: Englewood Cliffs.
Gunawan, M, A. (2013). Statistik: Untuk penelitian pendidikan (1st ed).
Yogyakarta, Indonesia: Parama Publishing.
Habibi, A., Wachyuni, S., & Husni, N. (2017). Students’ perception on writing
problems: a survey at one islamic university in Jambi. Ta’dib, 22(1), 896-
108.
Hampton, R. (2009, February 5). Multiple intelligences. Retrieved, from
http://lth3.k12.il.us/rhampton/mi/mi.html.
Heaton, J.B. (1987). Writing English Language Tests. London, England:
Longman.
Iskandar, J. (2017). Teaching descriptive writing by using cubing strategy to the
eighth grade students of smp n 22 Palembang. Jurnal Pendidikan dan
Pengajaran,4(1), 52-66.
Jarvis, scott. (2000). Methodological rigor in the study of transfer: Identifying L1
influence in them interlanguage lexicon. Language learning, 50(2), 245-
309.
Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2012). Educational research: Quantitative,
qualitative, and mixed approaches (4th ed.).Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
Publications, Inc.
Kezar, A. (2001). Theory of multiple intelligences: Implications for higher
education. Innovative Higher Education, 26(2), 141-154.
Khak, A. (2011, November 23). Minat baca Indonesia rendah. Minat menulis
lebih rendah lagi. Kompas. Retrieved from
htt://www.rimanews.com/read/20111123/47177/minat-baca-indonesia-
rendah-minat-menulis-lebih-rendah-lagi.
Lestari, T. (2005). Kumpulan teori untuk kajian pustaka penelitian kesehatan (1st
ed.). Yogyakarta, Indonesia: Nuha Medika.
Marefat, F. (2007). Multiple intelligences: Voices from an EFL writing class.
Pazhuhesh-e-Zabanha-ye Khareji, 32(1), 145-162.
 66

Masduqi, H. (2011). Critical thinking skills and meaning in English language

teaching. Teaching English as a Foreign Language in Indonesia, 2(2), 185-
200.
McKenzie, W. (2014). Multiple intelligences survey. Retrieved from
http://surfaquarium.com/MI/inventory.htm.
Mulyaningsih., Rais., & Sulistyawati. (2012). The relationship of grammar
competence, verbal linguistic intelligence, and writing ability of Sebelas
Maret University. Jurnal FKIP, 2(1), 24-33.
Nisa, A. F. (2015). Improving students’ writing skill by using inquiry teaching at
the eighth grade students of mts n 2 Palembang. Jurnal Pendidikan dan
Pengajaran, 2(1), 77-86.
Nunan, D. (1999). Second language teaching and learning. Boston: Heinle &
Heinle.
Nunan, D. (2003). Practical english language teaching. New York, NY: Mc.
Graw Hill.
Nurfuadah, R. N. (2013, September 10). Ini penyebab kampus RI lemah di dunia.
Okezone. Retrieved from
http://kampus.okezone.com/read/2013/09/10/373/863655/ini-penyebab-
kampus-ri-lemah-di-dunia.
Nurgiantoro. (2001). Penilaian dalam pengajaran bahasa dan sastra. Yogyakarta,
Indonesia: BPFE.
Nurhayati, I. K., Noviaristanti, S., & Priyanto, T. (2015). Indonesian Employees’
Writing Skills, Linguistic Intelligence, and Critical Thinking Levels
International Seminar and Conference on Learning Organization, 1, 1-6.
Priyatno, D. (2010). Paham Analisa Statistik Data dengan SPSS. Yogyakarta,
Indonesia: MediaKom
Radhakrishna, R. B. (2007). Tips for developing and testing questionnaires/
instruments. Journal of Extension, 45(1). Retrieved from
http://www.joe.org/joe/2007february/ tt2.php
Richards, J. C., & Renandya, W. A. (2002). Methodology in language teaching:
An anthology of current practice. London, England: Cambridge University
Press.
Sadeghi, K., & Farzizadeh, B. (2012). The Relationship between Multiple
Intelligences and Writing Ability of Iranian EFL Learners. English
Language Teaching, 5(11), 136-142.
Sahran, I. (2016). Morphological errors in narrative writing of eleventh grade
students at MAN 2 Palembang. Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pengajaran, 3(2),
101-117.
 67

Sarani., Keshavarz., and Zamanpour. (2012). The relevance of multiple

intelligence theory to narrative performance. A Study of Iranian
Undergraduates of English, 2(3). Retrieved from
www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/1 3090.
Setiyadi, B. (2006). Teaching English as a foreign language. Yogyakarta,
Indonesia: Graham Ilmu.
Strauss, V. (2013, October 16). Howard Gardner: “Multiple Intelligences” are not
“Learning Styles”. Washington Post. Retrieved from
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ answer-
sheet/wp/2013/10/16/howard-gardner-multiple-intelligences-are-not-
learning-styles/.
Suleiman, M. F. (2000). The process and product of writing: Implications for
elementary school teachers. ERIC Digest, ERIC Identifier ED 442299.
Retrieved from http://doi/10.18052//www.scipress.com/ILSHS.6.1.
Tek., & Peng. (2006). The Theory of Multiple Intelligences and Its Applications
in Science Classroom. Retrieved from
http://www.recsam.edu.my/html/onlin eJ.html.
Urquhart, V., & Mclver, M. (2005). Teaching writing in the content areas.
Virginia: ASCD.
Weber, E. (2005). MI Strategies in the classroom and beyond: Using roundtable
learning. USA: Pearson Education, Inc.
Wijaya, B. (2014). The correlation between undergraduate students’ multiple
intelligences and their writing achievement. Journal of Teaching and
Education, 3(1), 123-129.
 68

A
P
P
E
N
D
I
C
E
S
 69

Multiple Intelligences Questionnaire

Name : Semester:

NIM :

Direction: For each of the statements below, please indicate the extent of your real condition by
placing a tick (√) in the appropriate box SD, D, A, or A.

SD : Strongly Disagree

D : Disagree

A : Agree

SA :Strongly Agree

No Question List SD D A SA

1 Books are very important to me

I can hear words in my head before I read, speak,

2
or write them down

I get more out of listening to the radio or a

3 spoken-word recording than I do from television
or films.

I enjoy word games like Scrabble, Anagrams, or

4
Password

I enjoy entertaining myself or others with tongue

5
twisters, nonsense rhymes, or puns
 70

Other people sometimes have to stop and ask me

6 to explain the meaning of the words I use in my
writing and speaking.

English, social studies, and history were easier for

7
me in school than math and science

Learning to speak or read another language (e.g.,

8 French, Spanish, and Germany) has been
relatively easy for me.

My conversation includes frequent references to

9
things that I’ve read or heard.

I’ve written something recently that I was

10 particularly proud of or that earned me recognition
from others.

11 I can easily compute numbers in my head

Math and/or science were among my favorite

12
subjects in school

I enjoy playing games or solving brainteasers that

13
require logical thinking.

I like to set up little “what if” experiments (for

14 example, “What if I double the amount of water I
give to my rosebush each week?”)

My mind searches for patterns, regularities, or

15
logical sequences in things.

16 I’m interested in new developments in science.

 71

I believe that almost everything has a rational

17
explanation.

I sometimes think in clear, abstract, wordless,

18
imageless concepts

I like finding logical flaws in things that people

19
say and do at home and work.

I feel more comfortable when something has been

20 measured, categorized, analyzed, or quantified in
some way.

I often see clear visual images when I close my

21
eyes.

22 I’m sensitive to color.

I frequently use a camera or camcorder to record

23
what I see around me.

I enjoy doing jigsaw puzzles, mazes, and other

24
visual puzzles

25 I have vivid dreams at night.

I can generally find my way around unfamiliar

26
territory.

27 I like to draw or doodle

28 Geometry was easier for me than algebra in school

29 I can comfortably imagine how something might

appear if it were looked down on from directly
 72

above in a bird’s-eye view.

I prefer looking at reading material that is heavily

30
illustrated.

I engage in at least one sport or physical activity

31
on a regular basis

I find it difficult to sit still for long periods of

32
time.

I like working with my hands at concrete activities

33 such as sewing, weaving, carving, carpentry, or
model building

My best ideas often come to me when I’m out for

34 a long walk or a jog or when I’m engaging in
some other kind of physical activity.

35 I often like to spend my free time outdoors.

I frequently use hand gestures or other forms of

36
body language when conversing with someone.

I need to touch things in order to learn more about

37
them

I enjoy daredevil amusement rides or similar

38
thrilling physical experiences

39 I would describe myself as well coordinated.

I need to practice a new skill rather than simply

40
reading about it or seeing a video that describes it.
 73

41 I have a pleasant singing voice

42 I can tell when a musical note is off-key.

I frequently listen to music on radio, records,

43
cassettes, or compact discs.

44 I play a musical instrument.

My life would be poorer if there were no music in

45
it.

I sometimes catch myself walking down the street

46 with a television jingle or other tune running
through my mind.

I can easily keep time to a piece of music with a

47
simple percussion instrument

I know the tunes to many different songs or

48
musical pieces.

If I hear a musical selection once or twice, I am

49
usually able to sing it back fairly accurately.

I often make tapping sounds or sing little melodies

50 while working, studying, or learning something
new.

I’m the sort of person that people come to for

51
advice and counsel at work or in my neighborhood

52 I prefer group sports like badminton, volleyball, or

softball to solo sports such as swimming and
 74

jogging.

When I have a problem, I’m more likely to seek

53 out another person for help than attempt to work it
out on my own.

54 I have at least three close friends

I favor social pastimes such as Monopoly or

55 bridge over individual recreations such as video
games and solitaire.

I enjoy the challenge of teaching another person,

56
or groups of people, what I know how to do.

I consider myself a leader (or others have called

57
me that).

58 I feel comfortable in the midst of a crowd.

I like to get involved in social activities connected

59
with my work, church, or community.

I would rather spend my evenings at a lively party

60
than stay at home alone.

I regularly spend time alone meditating, reflecting,

61
or thinking about important life questions.

I have attended counseling sessions or personal

62
growth seminars to learn more about myself

63 I am able to respond to setbacks with resilience

64 I have a special hobby or interest that I keep pretty

 75

much to myself.

I have some important goals for my life that I

65
think about on a regular basis

I have a realistic view of my strengths and

66 weaknesses (borne out by feedback from other
sources).

I would prefer to spend a weekend alone in a

67 cabin in the woods rather than at a fancy resort
with lots of people around.

I consider myself to be strong willed or

68
independent minded.

I keep a personal diary or journal to record the

69
events of my inner life.

I am self-employed or have at least thought

70
seriously about starting my own business

I like to spend time backpacking, hiking, or just

71
walking in nature.

I belong to some kind of volunteer organization

related to nature (e.g., Sierra Club), and I’m
72
concerned about helping to save nature from
further destruction.

73 I thrive on having animals around the house.

I’m involved in a hobby that involves nature in

74
some way (e.g., bird watching).
 76

I’ve enrolled in courses relating to nature at

75 community centers or colleges (e.g., botany,
zoology).

I’m quite good at telling the difference between

76 different kinds of trees, dogs, birds, or other types
of flora or fauna.

I like to read books and magazines or watch

77 television shows or movies that feature nature in
some way.

When on vacation, I prefer to go off to a natural

78 setting (park, campground, hiking trail) rather than
to a hotel/resort or city/cultural location.

I love to visit zoos, aquariums, or other places

79
where the natural world is studied.

80 I have a garden and enjoy working regularly in it.

 WRITING TEST

Name :

Semester :

Class :

Direction:

1. Write an academic essay that consists of at least 250 words.

2. Time limit is 45 minutes.

3. Choose one the following topics:

a. The Importance of English in Modern Era

b. How Social Class Affects in quality of Education.

c. Student’s Difficulties in Learning English.

 WRITING ANSWER SHEET

Name : Class: Topic: 1/ 2/ 3 *)

.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................
 Rubric for Essay Writing Assessment

6 5 4 3 2 1

A level 6 essay A level 5 essay A level 4 essay A level 3 essay A level 2 essay A level 1 essay
will be will be will be will be will be will be
characterized by characterized by characterized by characterized by characterized by characterized by
most of the most of the most of the most of the most of the most of the
following following features following following following following
features features features features features

Displays Displays clear Conveys Conveys Reveals Demonstrates

originality and thinking. basically simplistic ideas. confusion or confusion or
depth of thought. Expresses ideas intelligible ideas. Lack of takes an inability to
Expresses ideas clearly. Style is bland, vocabulary extremely comprehend the
Ideas
fluently and pedantic or hinders clarity of simplistic prompt.
gracefully. formulaic expression. approach to the
prompt.

Shows a Shows Shows attempt to Shows attempt to Shows inability Shows inability
sophisticated competence in organize an essay organize an essay to organize an to organize
sense of organization but with a thesis. and limited essay. thoughts into
paragraph and lacks Demonstrates ability to Paragraphs are paragraphs.
essay sophistication. ability to organize not carefully and Essay may be
organization and Paragraphs are organize individual logically one rambling
links paragraphs well developed individual paragraphs but developed. paragraph or a
Organization smoothly with but lack paragraphs paragraphs are Transitions are series of
effective appropriate although formulaic, missing or insubstantial
transitions. transitions organization underdeveloped inappropriate so paragraphs.
unevenly and repetitive. that relationships
developed or Transitions between ideas are
formulaic and generally illogical.
transitions lacking.
generally
lacking.

Shows ability to Uses some varied Uses basically Lacks sentence Uses simple Contains frequent
structure sentence patterns the same variety and sentences fundamental
sentences to with only sentence patterns contains errors in excessively. sentence errors.
advantage, occasional errors throughout the structure. (Errors Contains frequent May contain
exhibiting a in structure. essay with some appear due to errors in many run-ons
sophisticated (Errors appear errors in inability to write structure. (Errors and fragments.
command of due to structure. (Errors compound or appear due to (Errors appear
Sentences sentence variety. carelessness or to appear due to complex confusion with due to inability to
(Errors, if any, mishandling of confusion with sentences.) boundaries.) write simple
appear to be such features as compound or sentences.)
proofreading colons or complex
lapses.) semicolons.) sentences.)
 Virtually free of Contains only Contains some Contains many Contains serious Contains frequent
punctuation, occasional common common punctuation, intrusive
capitalization, punctuation, punctuation, punctuation, capitalization punctuation,
spelling, usage capitalization capitalization capitalization spelling, usage, capitalization
and ESL errors spelling, usage spelling, usage spelling, usage and ESL errors spelling, usage
Mechanics and ESL errors. and ESL errors. and ESL errors, which interfere and ESL errors
though the errors with meaning. which hinder
are not frequent communication.
enough to be
distracting.

Displays Shows a good Exhibits Exhibits some Lacks control Diction and
sophisticated vocabulary range generally problems in over diction and syntax are so
vocabulary range and good competent diction and syntax which garbled as to
and exceptional command of the language use syntax but they interferes with render the
Vocabulary
facility with the language. with some do not interfere meaning. writing nearly
language. awkwardness in with readability. incomprehensible
syntax. .

(Diablo Valley College)

 Scores of MI Questionnaire

No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Total Level

1 4 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 29 High

2 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 29 High

3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 29 High

4 4 3 4 4 3 3 4 4 4 3 33 High

5 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 30 High

6 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 4 3 2 31 High

7 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 32 High

8 4 3 3 4 3 4 4 2 3 3 33 High

9 4 2 3 3 3 2 4 3 3 3 30 High

10 4 4 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 33 High

11 4 3 3 4 3 3 4 2 3 3 32 High

12 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 2 3 3 30 High

13 3 3 3 4 3 3 4 2 3 4 32 High

14 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 29 High

15 3 3 3 2 4 3 4 3 3 3 31 High

16 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 4 3 4 31 High

17 3 3 2 4 3 3 4 3 3 3 31 High

18 4 3 3 1 3 4 3 2 3 3 29 High

19 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 2 3 3 33 High
20 4 3 2 2 4 2 3 3 3 3 29 High

21 3 3 2 3 2 3 4 2 4 3 29 High

22 2 3 3 3 3 4 2 3 4 2 29 High

23 4 2 2 4 3 3 2 3 3 3 29 High

24 4 2 3 3 2 4 3 2 3 3 29 High

25 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 30 High

26 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 30 High

27 4 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 4 30 High

28 3 3 3 2 3 3 4 3 3 4 31 High

29 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 31 High

30 4 4 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 31 High

31 3 3 3 4 3 3 4 2 3 3 31 High

32 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 2 3 3 31 High

33 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 2 3 30 High

34 4 3 3 4 4 4 3 2 3 4 34 High

35 4 3 3 4 3 4 2 3 4 4 34 High

36 4 3 3 3 3 2 4 2 3 3 30 High

37 4 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 33 High

38 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 32 High

39 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 31 High

40 2 3 3 4 4 3 4 3 4 4 34 High
41 4 3 4 4 4 3 3 2 3 3 33 High

42 4 3 4 4 3 4 3 4 3 2 34 High

43 4 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 33 High

44 4 3 4 4 1 3 2 3 4 4 32 High

45 2 4 3 2 3 4 4 3 3 4 32 High

46 3 3 3 3 2 4 3 4 3 4 32 High

47 4 2 4 4 3 4 4 3 3 3 34 High

48 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 31 High

49 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 29 High

50 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 33 High

51 4 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 33 High

52 4 4 4 4 1 3 4 3 3 4 34 High

53 3 3 4 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 29 High

54 4 2 4 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 32 High

55 4 3 3 1 4 4 3 3 3 4 32 High

56 3 3 4 4 3 3 4 3 3 3 33 High

57 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 2 31 High

58 3 3 3 2 4 3 3 2 3 3 29 High

59 2 2 3 4 3 3 4 2 3 3 29 High

60 3 3 4 1 4 4 4 4 3 4 34 High

61 4 3 2 4 2 4 2 4 2 3 30 High
62 4 3 2 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 29 High

63 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 3 33 High

64 4 3 4 4 3 3 4 1 3 3 32 High

65 2 1 4 4 3 3 1 3 4 4 29 High

66 4 3 2 4 4 3 4 2 3 4 32 High

67 3 4 3 4 3 3 4 2 3 3 32 High

68 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 4 3 3 30 High

69 4 3 2 4 3 4 4 2 3 3 32 High

70 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 4 2 3 32 High

71 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 27 Moderate

72 3 2 2 2 2 3 2 3 3 3 25 Moderate

73 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 1 2 2 24 Moderate

74 3 2 3 1 2 3 3 2 2 2 24 Moderate

75 2 2 2 4 3 3 4 3 1 4 28 Moderate

76 2 3 2 3 3 3 4 2 3 3 28 Moderate

77 3 3 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 28 Moderate

78 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 2 3 3 27 Moderate

79 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 1 3 3 27 Moderate

80 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 28 Moderate

81 3 2 1 3 3 3 4 2 2 3 25 Moderate

82 4 2 2 2 3 4 2 2 3 3 27 Moderate
83 3 3 3 3 2 3 1 3 3 3 27 Moderate

84 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 3 3 2 24 Moderate

85 2 4 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 28 Moderate

86 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 25 Moderate

87 3 2 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 27 Moderate

88 3 2 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 4 28 Moderate

89 1 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 20 Moderate

90 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 21 Moderate

N Minimum Maximum Mean

Verbal

Linguistic 90 20 34 30.06

Intelligence
 Score of Writing Test

No Name Rater 1 Rater 2 Rater 3 Total mean

1 P1 8 11 8 27 9

2 P2 10 11 12 33 11

3 P3 13 15 14 42 14

4 P4 23 23 23 69 23

5 P5 6 12 12 30 10

6 P6 22 18 17 57 19

7 P7 21 22 20 63 21

8 P8 20 20 23 63 21

9 P9 13 17 12 42 14

10 P 10 16 21 17 54 18

11 P 11 19 21 23 63 21

12 P 12 7 10 13 30 10

13 P 13 15 19 20 54 18

14 P 14 6 12 15 33 11

15 P 15 9 12 12 33 11

16 P 16 19 17 18 54 18

17 P 17 10 17 15 42 14

18 P 18 6 12 12 30 10

19 P 19 13 21 20 54 18

20 P 20 6 14 13 33 11

21 P 21 7 11 12 30 10

22 P 22 7 11 15 33 11

23 P 23 14 15 13 42 14

24 P 24 5 10 12 27 9

25 P 25 10 17 15 42 14
26 P 26 7 10 10 27 9

27 P 27 10 17 15 42 14

28 P 28 15 17 13 45 15

29 P 29 17 14 14 45 15

30 P 30 13 16 17 45 15

31 P 31 14 15 17 45 15

32 P 32 6 10 11 27 9

33 P 33 14 17 14 45 15

34 P 34 18 18 18 54 18

35 P 35 22 21 23 66 22

36 P 36 15 17 16 48 16

37 P 37 12 17 19 48 16

38 P 38 18 15 15 48 16

39 P 39 9 18 12 39 13

40 P 40 26 21 22 69 23

41 P 41 14 19 18 51 17

42 P 42 16 22 19 57 19

43 P 43 14 20 14 48 16

44 P 44 16 22 19 57 19

45 P 45 12 20 19 51 17

46 P 46 17 17 14 48 16

47 P 47 18 21 18 57 19

48 P 48 11 13 12 36 12

49 P 49 9 13 17 39 13

50 P 50 23 21 22 66 22

51 P 51 21 18 21 60 20

52 P 52 15 22 23 60 20
53 P 53 9 14 16 39 13

54 P 54 21 23 19 63 21

55 P 55 19 20 21 60 20

56 P 56 18 18 21 57 19

57 P 57 13 17 18 48 16

58 P 58 14 17 17 48 16

59 P 59 18 21 12 51 17

60 P 60 20 20 23 63 21

61 P 61 15 16 20 51 17

62 P 62 19 19 22 60 20

63 P 63 20 21 19 60 20

64 P 64 9 13 17 39 13

65 P 65 9 15 12 36 12

66 P 66 7 14 18 39 13

67 P 67 9 16 14 39 13

68 P 68 12 12 12 36 12

69 P 69 10 21 20 51 17

70 P 70 8 16 12 36 12

Descriptive Statistics

N Minimum Maximum Mean

Writing Ability 70 9 23 15.61

DOCUMENTATION