AN ERROR ANALYSIS OF THE STUDENTS’ RECOUNT WRITING OF THE TENTH GRADE AT SMAN 2 WEST JAKARTA IN THE 2013/2014 ACADEMIC YEAR

dwi ari setia wati; dra. roslaini, m. hum.; drs. siswana, m. pd.;

ARIEF RAHMAN. 1001065023. An Error Analysis of the Students’ Recount
Writing of the Tenth Grade Students at SMAN 2West Jakarta in 2013/2014
Academic Year. A Paper. Jakarta: The Study Programme of English Education,
The School of Teachers Training and Education, The University of
Muhammadiyah Prof. DR Hamka, 2014.
This research is conducted at SMAN 2 West Jakarta on the tenth grade
students which consists of 30 students .The objective of this research is to find out
the most types and sources of errors made by the students in recount writing. The
writer would like to offer some ideas on how to cope with such errors. So, the
writer hopes it could give information for teacher to do a proper remedial teaching
for improving the students‘ writing skill.
The writer uses a descriptive method. The writer administered a guided
task on recount writing. To differentiate errors and mistakes, the teacher gave
recount writing task to the students and then the students do that task. After that,
the teacher corrected students‘ recount writing by giving underlined mark to the
students‘ writing. In the second meeting, the teacher gave the writing back to the
student and told students‘ fault. Finally, the students rewrite the writing and gave
it to the teacher. The writing task was given on August 12th 2014 and August 21th
2014.The students wrote 3 paragraphs based on the questions given by the writer.
The study showed that the most types of errors done by the students were
in word choice 27,19%, omit a word with 19.87%, capitalization with14.31%,
punctuation with 11.76%, verb tense with 9.70%, and add a word with 6.52%.
The smallest typical errors done by the students was in spelling with 3.02%,
article with 2.54%, singular-plural with 2.38%, word order with 2.07%, word
form with 0,32%,incomplete sentence with 0.16%, meaning not clearwith0.16%,
and run on sentence with 0%. The most sources of errors done by the students
were intralingual transfer with 38%, interlingual transfer with 31%, context of
learning with 29%, communication strategies with 2%.