AN ERROR ANALYSIS OF STUDENTS’ ANALYTICAL EXPOSITION WRITING OF THE ELEVENTH GRADE STUDENTS OF SMA N 23 JAKARTA IN THE 2013/2014 ACADEMIC YEAR

maulitha noor; siswana, m. pd.; gigih anggana yuda, m. pd.;

RIZKI CAHYANINGSIH. 1001065193. An Error Analysis of Students’ Analytical
Exposition Writing of the Eleventh Grade Students of SMA N 23 Jakarta in the 2013/2014
Academic Year. The paper: Jakarta. The Study Programme of English Education, The
Department of Language and Art Education, The School of Teacher Training and Education,
The University of Muhammadiyah Prof. DR. HAMKA, Jakarta 2014.
The population of the study was the eleventh grade students of SMA Negeri 23
Jakarta the 2013/2014 academic year. It consisted of 239 students in the six classes, but the
writer only took 30 students of 39 students of the XI IPA 1 as the sample of this research. The
objective of the research was to find out the types and sources of errors that the students done
in their writing. The writer would like to offer some ideas on how to cope with such errors.
Therefore, the writer hoped it could give information for the teachers to do a proper remedial
teaching design for improving the students’ writing skill, while for the students they were
expected not to make the same errors. The method applied in this research was a descriptive
analysis. The writer administered a guided task on analytical exposition writing. Moreover,
the writer analyzed the writing errors done by the students.
The writer found that the most typical error of students at SMAN 23 Jakarta in their
writing was in word choice with 16.2 %. It was followed by add a word with 15.9 %, verb
tense with 15.8 %, omit a word with 11.1 %, spelling with 10.5%, punctuation with 10.4 %,
singular-plural with 5.2 %, capitalization with 5.2 %, run on sentence with 2.5 %, incomplete
sentence with 2.3 %, word form with 1.6 %, word order with 1.4 %, meaning not clear with
1.3 %, and the last place was article with 0.3 %. Moreover, the writer concludes that the
students made errors mostly caused by interlingual transfer. Then, context of learning,
intralingual transfer and the least was communication strategies.