A Comparative Study between Presentation, Practice, Productive (PPP) and Artworks Techniques toward the Enhancement of Students’ Descriptive Writing Skills

Acuity Pub Date : 2018-08-01 DOI:10.35974/acuity.v3i2.649
F. Silalahi
{"title":"A Comparative Study between Presentation, Practice, Productive (PPP) and Artworks Techniques toward the Enhancement of Students’ Descriptive Writing Skills","authors":"F. Silalahi","doi":"10.35974/acuity.v3i2.649","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this study is to find out whether there is any significant difference in enhancing students’ descriptive writing skills between students who acquires Presentation, Practice, Production (PPP) and students who acquires Artworks Technique. This is a quantitative study, utilizing comparative design in order to compare different treatments toward students’ enhancement in descriptive writing skills. The researcher compares the result through pre-test and post-test. After analyzing the data, the researcher found out after being treated using two techniques: PPP and Artworks, students’ skills in descriptive writing is achieved. However, the normalized gain score falls in Low criterion. Aside from that, based on the data analysis there is significant difference between two techniques: PPP and Artworks in enhancing students’ descriptive writing skills. In addition to that, the students give positive response after being treated. From the response questionnaire, the mean score falls in High criterion. The scope and delimitations of this study evolve around components of two techniques: PPP and Artworks to provide insights toward enhancing students’ ability in writing descriptive text.   Keywords Presentation Practice Production (PPP), Artworks, Descriptive Writing Skills  ","PeriodicalId":33744,"journal":{"name":"Acuity","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acuity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35974/acuity.v3i2.649","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

The aim of this study is to find out whether there is any significant difference in enhancing students’ descriptive writing skills between students who acquires Presentation, Practice, Production (PPP) and students who acquires Artworks Technique. This is a quantitative study, utilizing comparative design in order to compare different treatments toward students’ enhancement in descriptive writing skills. The researcher compares the result through pre-test and post-test. After analyzing the data, the researcher found out after being treated using two techniques: PPP and Artworks, students’ skills in descriptive writing is achieved. However, the normalized gain score falls in Low criterion. Aside from that, based on the data analysis there is significant difference between two techniques: PPP and Artworks in enhancing students’ descriptive writing skills. In addition to that, the students give positive response after being treated. From the response questionnaire, the mean score falls in High criterion. The scope and delimitations of this study evolve around components of two techniques: PPP and Artworks to provide insights toward enhancing students’ ability in writing descriptive text.   Keywords Presentation Practice Production (PPP), Artworks, Descriptive Writing Skills  
展示、实践、生产(PPP)和艺术作品技术对提高学生技能的比较研究™ 描述性写作技巧
本研究的目的是为了了解学习展示、实践、生产(PPP)的学生与学习艺术技巧的学生在提高学生的€™描述性写作技能方面是否存在显著差异。这是一项定量研究,利用比较设计来比较不同的治疗方法对学生描述性写作技能的提高。研究者通过前测和后测对结果进行比较。在分析数据后,研究人员发现,在使用PPP和艺术品两种技术进行处理后,学生的描述性写作技能得到了提高。然而,归一化增益分数落在Low准则下。除此之外,基于数据分析,PPP和艺术品两种技术在提高学生的€™描述性写作技能方面存在显著差异。除此之外,学生们在接受治疗后也给出了积极的反应。从回应问卷来看,平均分属于高标准。本研究的范围和界限围绕两种技术的组成部分演变:PPP和艺术品,以提供对提高学生写描述性文本的能力的见解。Â关键词演示实践生产(PPP),艺术品,描述性写作技巧Â
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信