IMPROVING THE STUDENTS’ ARGUMENTATIVE WRITING ABILITY
THROUGH TREE DIAGRAM TECHNIQUE
Jumariati
Dosen Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, FKIP UNLAM
Abstract
This study was conducted to solve the students’ problem in writing argumentative
essay. The subject was 33 students of Writing III Course of English Department
FKIP UNLAM. It was carried out in two cycles following the steps suggested in a
classroom action research: planning, implementing, observing, and reflecting.
The data were obtained from the results of the students’ writing tasks, observation
checklists, and field notes. The findings showed that Tree Diagram Technique
(TDT) improved the students’ ability in writing argumentative essay. In Cycle
One, 18 out of 33 students (54.54%) achieved the score of 70 or more. However,
the number still did not meet the criteria of success so the action was continued to
Cycle Two. After the implementation of the technique in Cycle Two, there were 26
out of 33 students (83.87%) who achieved the criteria of success of the study.
With the findings and conclusion, it is suggested that: (1) students of writing
course utilize TDT to plan and organize their writings, (2) the teachers of writing
courses implement this technique in their teaching, and (3) the future researchers
conduct further study on the implementation of TDT aiming at improving not only
writing skill in other text types, such as descriptive, narrative, and expository
writings, but also in speaking and reading skills.
Key words: tree diagram technique, argumentative writing
In the context of teaching and learning English as a Foreign Language (EFL), writing
skill is considered difficult because it demands learner’s understanding of sentence construction
and sentence organization. The learners should master not only the grammar and vocabularies
but also the ability in expressing their ideas and opinions into good sentences. Heaton (1988:135)
mentions that writing is a complex subject that it is sometimes difficult to teach and learn.
Writing skill requires five basic components such as language use, mechanical skills,
treatment of content, stylistic skills, and judgmental skills. Language use refers to the ability in
writing correct and appropriate sentences. Meanwhile mechanical skill is the ability to use
writing conventions such as punctuation and spelling, correctly. Treatment of content means the
ability to think creatively to develop ideas or thoughts and excluding all irrelevant information.
Stylistic skill is the ability to manipulate sentences and paragraphs, that is, to create a tone in a
piece of writing, and also use the language effectively. Meanwhile judgmental skill refers to the
ability to write in an appropriate manner for a certain purpose with certain audience in mind. It
also includes the ability to select, organize, and order relevant information. Therefore, it is not
easy for learners to produce a good composition because they should be able to develop their
skills in these components.
The English Department students of FKIP UNLAM also face several difficulties in
writing concerning with grammar, mechanics, language, content and organization. Based on the
interview done to the students, it was found that the problems were: (1) lacked of knowledge on
grammar, vocabulary, and mechanics, (2) arranged their ideas into logical and well-connected
order, and (3) developed their ideas.
Thus, related to these problems, the researcher intends to help the students improve their
ability in writing essays by using a technique, namely a Tree Diagram Technique. Dealing with
this technique, Lee (2004:4) states that “Tree diagram is an outlining technique which is carried
out before the students start writing. It helps students plan their writing, organize their thoughts,
and clarify their thesis statement”. Therefore, tree diagram is a guide for students to plan their
writing before they start writing the first draft. In line with this, Riley (2002:1) points out that
tree diagram helps students see a start of their writing. It also helps them keep track of their
ideas. The tree diagram, started in the middle of 1980s, is a simple mnemonic device to guide
students through the steps of writing a well-developed paragraph and with some modifications
can be used in writing well-developed essay (Riley, 2002:1).
Basically, the components of a tree diagram consist of one trunk as the central
(controlling) idea and then supported by several branches as the supporting ideas. The branches
(supporting ideas) of the tree should be relevant to and develop the trunk (central idea).
Therefore, tree diagram not only shows the plan of the ideas in writing but also shows the
relationship among the ideas. By using tree diagram, students can plan their writing and organize
the relationship and the hierarchy of their ideas as well. As a result, they will be able to write
well-developed and well-organized essays.
In this study, the tree diagram will be used in writing argumentative essay. Therefore, the
elements of the diagram are adjusted to the text type, that is, argumentative essay. The elements
of an introductory paragraph for an argumentative essay as proposed by Smalley, et al. (2001)
and Daly (1997) consist of the introduction to the topic and then supported by statements of: (1)
the importance of the topic, (2) the differences of opinion on the topic, (3) the indication of the
essay structure, and (4) the writer’s claim. Thus, these components are arranged into a tree
diagram; the introduction of the topic as the trunk and the other four components as the branches
which support and develop the topic. The following is the figure of a tree diagram for the
introductory paragraph:
Introduction to the topic
The importance of
the topic
The differences of
opinion on the topic
The structure of the
essay
The writer’s claim
Figure 1. Tree Diagram for the Introductory Paragraph
Meanwhile the tree diagram for the body paragraph can be presented following two
models of development (Smalley, et al., 2001:289). The first model consists of the writer’s
argument as the trunk and the evidence as the branches, while the second model consists of the
opponent’s argument as the trunk and the writer’s compromise, refutation, and the evidence as
the branches. Below are the figures of Tree Diagram for the body paragraph:
Writer’s argument 1
Evidence 1
Evidence 2
Evidence 3
Figure 2. The Tree Diagram for the Body Paragraph (Model One)
The next figure is the figure of a tree diagram for the body paragraph Model Two:
The opponent’s argument
The writer’s refutation
(evidence 1)
The writer’s refutation
(evidence 2)
Figure 3. The Tree Diagram for the Body Paragraph (Model Two)
Finally, the components for the concluding paragraph (Daly:1997) consist of the
restatement of the writer’s claim and statements of: (1) the summary of the arguments, (2) the
consequences of not following the writer’s claim, and (3) the benefit from following the writer’s
claim. The restatement of the writer’s claim is the trunk of the tree diagram, while the other three
components serve as the branches of the diagram. These components of an argumentative essay
should be included in the tree diagram. The Tree Diagram for the concluding paragraph can be
seen in the following figure:
The writer’s claim
Summary of the
arguments
Consequences of not
following the writer’s claim
Benefits from following
the writer’s claim
Figure 3. The Tree Diagram for the Concluding Paragraph
Thus, it can be seen that tree diagram serves as the outline which guides students in arranging
their ideas based on the topic and the supporting ideas.
METHOD
This study used a classroom action research (CAR) design. Vernster (2006:1) mentions
that action research is a process of research in which teachers investigate the teaching and
learning process so they can improve their own teaching and their students’ learning. In this
study, the researcher acted as the teacher and her collaborative teacher acted as the observer.
Since it dealt with classroom setting, the study was directed to solve the students’ problem, that
is, writing good argumentative essays.
The design of classroom action research used in this study was a cyclical process adapted
from the model developed by Kemmis and Mc Taggart (cited in Mc Niff, 1998: 26). It consisted
of four main stages, namely planning, implementing, observing, and reflecting the action. These
stages were preceded by a preliminary study to have detailed identifications and analysis of the
problem.
In the planning stage, the researcher and the collaborator prepared the action by (1)
designing the lesson plans, (2) preparing the research instrument, and (3) preparing the criteria of
success. The action was considered to be successful if 75% of the students’ final compositions
after the implementation of TDT in a cycle scored equal to or higher than 70 in the range of 0 to
100.
In the implementing stage, the action was conducted as it was planned. The researcher
became the teacher and her colleague became the observer. The action cycle consisted of three
meetings while each meeting took 2 x 50 minutes.
In the observation stage, data dealing with the teaching and learning activities in the
classroom using TDT were collected. In this phase, the observer recorded the data about the
students’ activities in the classroom following the guidelines in the observation checklist. In
addition, he recorded any events occur in the teaching-learning process by using field notes. The
observation was aimed at finding out whether the implementation of the technique had met the
criteria of success or not. Moreover, it was aimed at finding the strengths and weaknesses of the
action.
The last stage was reflecting which was aimed at evaluating the strengths and weaknesses
of the action implemented. It was also aimed at evaluating and judging the action whether it had
met the criteria of success of the study or not. For these reasons, the researcher and the
collaborator compared the data with the criteria of success of the study to get a conclusion. The
conclusion from a cycle determined whether the action was succeeded or not.
RESULTS
Cycle One
Based on the students’ final writings, it was revealed that they had improved their writing
abilities. However, the result was still unsatisfactory because the improvement did not meet the
criteria of success defined in the study. The number of students obtaining score equal to or
higher than 70 was 18 (54.54%). Meanwhile in the criteria of success, it is defined that the action
is successful if 75% of the students achieve score equal to or higher than 70. Since the
improvement of students’ writing had not achieved the criteria of success of the study yet, the
action still needed to be revised and improved.
The students’ participation during the writing stages was observed by using the
observation checklists and field notes. The result showed that students were active during the
teaching and learning activities. They drew the diagram to plan their writings and wrote the
rough draft based on the diagram. They were also willing to share their drafts to be checked by
their peer and revised their own drafts based on peer’s corrections and teacher’s comments. In
the editing stage, they checked their peer’s drafts for grammatical and mechanical accuracy and
then they wrote their own final drafts based on peer’s correction. Finally in the publishing stage,
all students published their writings on the whiteboard and then analyzed their friends’ works.
In conclusion, the students drew the diagram enthusiastically to plan and arrange their
ideas. Meanwhile the peer-assessment in the revising and editing stage encouraged them to work
cooperatively with their friends. However, based on the field notes, the students spent too much
time in revising. They got confused to give accurate evidence to support their arguments. This
was because they did not have complete notes on the sources of evidence they got from the
library research. Some students (6 out of 33 students) admitted that they did not do the library
research. Therefore, they depended on their knowledge of the topic, not on accurate evidence.
In general, the teaching and learning activities in Cycle 1 had worked well. However,
there were still some problems occurred. First, the students had problem in citing the source of
evidence to support their arguments because they did not have complete notes on the source.
Therefore, the researcher and the collaborator decided to give students the form to guide them in
doing library research. The form contained guidelines to write the source of evidence including
the title of the article, the author, the date and the year of the article published, and the relevant
ideas of the articles with their essay topic. Second, the students still had problem with sentence
structure even though their peer had helped them in the editing stage. It might be caused by the
time limitation which was insufficient for them to edit their peer’s drafts. Therefore, the
researcher and the collaborator decided to add the time allocated for peer-revising and peerediting stage, that was, from 20 minutes in Cycle 1 to 40 minutes for each peer-revising and
peer-editing stage. The collaborative teacher also decided to assist the teacher in guiding the
students during these two stages. Thus, both the teacher and the collaborator would guide the
students in doing peer-revising and peer-editing.
Cycle Two
From the result of the students’ writings, there were 26 students (83.87%) who scored
equal to or higher than 70. Thus, 83.87% of the students were able to achieve the criteria of
success of the study. Furthermore, there was no student scored below 60. It could be inferred that
the action done in Cycle 2 was successful.
In addition, the result of the observation showed that the students were active in the
writing stages. They participated actively in drawing the tree diagram to plan and organize their
ideas. They were also active in drafting, responding their peer’s draft using the revising
guidelines, and revising their own draft based on peer’s correction. In the editing stage, the
students were active in checking the grammatical and mechanical accuracy of their peer’s draft.
They were also willing to write the final drafts based on peer’s corrections and teacher’s
suggestion. Meanwhile in the publishing stage, all students published their writing products and
analyzed their friend’s works.
Moreover, the result of the field notes showed that the collaborator’s assistance in peerrevising and peer-editing also contributed to the students’ writing improvement. In addition, the
form of the library research had helped the students record the source of the evidence. They
could give accurate and relevant evidence to support their arguments by using the information
recorded in the form of library research. As a result, they improved their scores in writing.
Based on the reflection of the findings in Cycle 2, it could be concluded that the action
had achieved the criteria of success of the study; the numbers of students achieving the minimum
score had been 83.87%. In addition, the students were also active during the implementation of
TDT.
DISCUSSION
In this study, TDT was designed to achieve the instructional objective of teaching
argumentative essay, that was, to help the students write a good argumentative essay. It can be
achieved by using tree diagram technique in the teaching and learning procedures. The teaching
and learning procedures consist of writing stages such as pre-writing, whilst-writing, and postwriting.
Pre-writing stage dealt with the activity of drawing tree diagram to plan and arrange the
students’ ideas. As Riley (2002:2) states that tree diagram helps students plan their writing and
organize their thoughts during the pre-writing stage. Prior to drawing the diagram, the teacher
offered three topics and asked the students to select one. Then, they decided their stand on the
topic and planned their writings using the tree diagram. As stated by Tompkins and Hoskisson
(1991:227) that pre-writing is the planning and preparation that is done prior to drafting. During
this stage, a writer generates whatever ideas come up and plans the organization of the ideas. In
this study, the students put the relevant ideas and the main points of their topic into the diagram.
The ideas they wrote could be in forms of phrases or short sentences. The teacher guided them
by displaying the models of tree diagram for an argumentative essay and encouraging them to
write the relevant ideas and arrange the ideas using the tree diagram.
In the whilst-writing stage, the students wrote the rough drafts based on the information
in the tree diagram. Smalley, et al. (2001:8) state that in the drafting stage, a writer writes down
his ideas or composes the first draft based upon the prewriting activities. In the present study,
students put the ideas in the diagram into the drafts. They focused on the content of the draft and
not on the sentence structure or mechanics. The next activity was responding to other’s draft in
the form of peer-revising. In this stage, students revised their peer’s draft using the guidelines
provided to clarify the content of the drafts. As it is stated by Seow (in Richards & Renandya,
2002:317) that responding is given after students have produced the first draft and just before
they proceed to revise. He also points out that peer responding can be effectively carried out
either in small groups or in pairs by using the aid of guidelines.
After responding to their peer’s draft, students wrote their own drafts based on peer’s
corrections. After that, they did peer-editing to check the sentence structure and mechanics
problem occurred in the drafts. Then, they wrote the final drafts based on peer’s correction. In
line with this, Smalley, et al. (2001:9) add that in editing stage, a writer has a chance to rephrase
the sentences and check the grammatical and mechanical accuracy prior to submitting the final
products.
In the post-writing stage, the students published their final writings on the whiteboard in
the classroom. Based on Seow’s statement in Richards and Renandya (2002:319), post-writing
stage is used to share the students’ final products either by reading the drafts aloud or publishing
the drafts. It motivates the students to write to their best and increases their awareness of the
neatness of their writings. In the present study, the teacher invited the students to come in front
of the class to analyze their friends’ works. It was aimed at sharpening their knowledge on the
components of the essay. In addition, the teacher asked them to come up in group to encourage
them in analyzing and giving comments. The activity of giving comments was also aimed at
improving their fluency in speaking English. This activity was not scored.
In relation with the use of tree diagram, this study is in line with the study conducted by
Lee (2004) on the use of TDT to improve the students’ achievement in writing a cause and effect
essay. The subject of her study was the second semester students taking English Proficiency
course of Nanyang Technological University in Singapore. This study focused on improving
students’ achievement in writing a cause and effect essay while the present study focused on
argumentative essay. Moreover, the previous study used teacher-student conference in the
sharing stage while this study used peer-assessment and publishing to give feedback on the
students’ writing products. However, both studies showed the improvement of students’
achievement in writing after the implementation of TDT.
It can be concluded that the implementation of Tree Diagram Technique had improved
the students’ achievement in their writing and their involvement in the teaching and learning
process as well. Therefore, this technique can be used in the classroom as an alternative
technique for teaching writing.
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
Conclusions
The research findings show that the technique in teaching writing by using tree diagram
has improved the students’ writing ability. The tree diagram is used as the outlining technique to
guide the students in planning and organizing ideas in the pre-writing stage. The improvement of
the students’ writing ability is finally achieved through careful and well-designed writing
procedures.
The procedures in implementing the technique are: (1) pre-writing, that is, drawing tree
diagram to plan and organize the ideas in writing, (2) whilst-writing, consisting of drafting,
revising, and editing, and (3) post-writing that is used to share the students’ final writings in the
form of publishing. Through these stages, students can plan their writings, write their rough
drafts, check their peer’s drafts in terms of content, grammatical, and mechanical areas, and
rewrite the drafts based on peer’s corrections. As a result, they can improve the quality of their
writings. Furthermore, they learn how to respond to their friends’ final writings in the publishing
stage. This is to say that TDT can be an effective technique in teaching writing if it goes along
with those writing stages.
Moreover, the result of the observation shows that the implementation of TDT within the
writing stages encourages the students to work cooperatively with their peer to improve their
writings. In conclusion, TDT is effective to improve the students’ ability in writing, not only in
terms of unity and organization, but also in terms of sentence structure, vocabularies, spelling,
and punctuations.
Suggestions
With the findings, discussions, and conclusions, some suggestions are addressed to
different parties. First, the English Department students utilize tree diagram to plan the ideas
before they start writing. The diagram helps them arrange their ideas based on logical
connection. As a result, they are able to write well-organized essay. Second, the English teachers
implement Tree Diagram Technique in their teaching writing. It has already been proven by
previous studies, including this one, that Tree Diagram Technique is effective to improve the
students’ writing ability. Moreover, tree diagram can be used either for planning a paragraph or
an essay. Therefore, teachers can modify the diagram to adjust to the students’ level and need.
Finally, the suggestion is for the future researchers to conduct further study on the
implementation of Tree Diagram Technique aiming at improving not only writing skill of the
other text types, such as descriptive, narrative, and expository writings but also speaking and
reading skill. They are suggested to develop the technique and make adjustment concerning the
components of the tree diagram and the teaching procedures.
REFERENCES
Daly, B.1997. Writing Argumentative Essay. (Online), (http://www.argumentative
essay.org, accessed on November, 5, 2008)
Heaton, J.B. 1988. Writing English Language Tests. London: Longman
Lee, C. C. 2004. Seeing is Understanding: Improving Coherence in
Students’ Writing. (Online), ( http://www.tesljournal.org, accessed on
March 16, 2008)
Mc Niff, J. 1998. Action Research: Principles and Practice. New York:
Macmillan Education, Limited.
Riley, K. 2003. The Tree: a Graphic Organizer for Paragraph and
Summary Organization. (Online), (http://www.thetree.org., accessed
on March 30, 2008)
Seow, A. 2002. The Writing Process and Process Writing. In Richards, J. (Ed).
Methodology in Language Teaching: an Anthology of Current Practice
(p315-320). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Smalley, R.L., Ruetten, M.K., & Kozyrev J.R., 2001. Refining Composition Skills:
Rhetoric and Grammar. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publisher.
Tompkins, G.E & Hoskisson, K., 1991. Language Arts: Content and Teaching
Strategies. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
Vernster, C. 2007. Action Research . Methodology Article. (Online), (http://www.
teachingenglish.org.uk., accessed on March 10, 2008)