Enhancing Six 6A6’s Students Proficiency in Constructing Plausible Report Writing

Format Using ‘Direct Response Method’

By

Zaini Akmal bin Saad, MUET Teacher

SMK Dato’ Syed Ahmad, 06300 Kuala Nerang, Kedah

Abstract

In this paper, I will be sharing my first approach in enhancing six of my students’ proficiency
in constructing a valid report writing format as required by MPM. This approach exploited a
direct-response method in which every aspect of report writing format is to be explained in
detail using a complete reference to what the students had produced during their
examination. The first indication of the element regarding whether the strategy method, in
which a student makes conditional decisions for each possible information set, leads to
different experimental results than does the more standard direct-response method, in which
the students learn the consequences of the actual format and then chooses a response. Of
the twenty-eight elements, six that have no difference; all the six students were able to
master the concept of report writing format. I also find some indications about the underlying
determinants of when the direct-response method leads to different responses. For example,
it appears that the report writing format required by MPM differs from what they had learnt
at SPM level. In addition, it also appears that difference across these elicitation methods are
more likely when students were too much absorbed in contingent choices. Finally, in no case
does the researcher finds that a low-proficiency in report writing format is not observed with
the direct-response method.
1.0 Reflection of Principles and Practices

Despite over a decade of being a MUET teacher in SMK Dato’ Syed Ahmad, Kuala
Nerang; I still consider myself new and have a lot to learn. The reform of MUET
syllabus since the first time I taught in 2002 had never failed to surprise me. The
present syllabus was put into act beginning of MUET Mid-year 2008. The latest format
required the candidates to produce a report based upon the given stimulus in about
150 – 200 words.

As a teacher, I believe it was my duty to prepare myself thoroughly in equipping my

students with specific knowledge of report writing format simply to satisfy the MPM’s
devours.

Ten years has passed and during the previous pre-trial examination for 18P2 batch, I
noticed some unsolicited tendencies of six of my students in which posed a different
report writing approach as MPM (Majlis Peperiksaan Malaysia) prerequisites. If I didn’t
know any better, their approach to report writing format resembles of those in SPM
level and in complete contrast of a report writing should be produced at MUET level.

Although the students had been reminded repeatedly for numerous times since their
first semester, then again, history repeats itself. Nevertheless, the blame should be
placed on my shoulder as I did not emphasize on the importance an accurate report
writing format while having lessons with them. I also believe that my lecture-style
approach with the students should be amended to meet the lesson objective. But, a
large class of 24 students at one go hindered the cause.

My involvement in marking the writing paper for MUET since 2004 has helped me a lot
in exposing myself into knowing what MPM really wants to meet the assessment
criteria of the examination. Attending the CEFR (Common European Framework of
Reference) course in the end of 2017 had opened my eyes into implementing the
direct-response approach with my students. Using this approach seemed to be highly
effective as the instructor would be able to focus on certain ‘loopholes’ which might
jeopardise the whole students’ produce.

The main obstacle of using this approach is that it is time-consuming and that is why I
intended to implement it only on problematic students and the six students that I chose
based upon their recent report writing examination had met the characteristics that I
have been looking for.
2.0 Research Focus

This paper focuses on enhancing the students’ ability to meet the requirements of
report writing format which conforms to MPM standard. The importance of this
research is beyond any dispute as the format of report writing will determine whether
the MUET candidates would be able to secure a good band or not in their writing paper.
Using a direct-response method would enable the students to meticulously enquire
every little detail and obtain a direct response from their instructor in order for them to
improve themselves for the better.

Failure in producing a well-written report writing produce would cost the students their
precious marks. As customized by MPM, each report writing produce should offer the
elements of a valid title, an introduction, an overview, analyses, syntheses and a
conclusion. These six criteria are the report format which conform to the assessment
criteria in marking this question. Hence, the research focus is to enhance the students’
ability to produce a report which meets the prerequisites.

3.0 Research Objective

3.1 General Objective

The general purpose of this research is to enhance the Form Six students’ ability to
produce accurate report writing format meeting the criteria set by MPM.

3.2 Specific Objectives

i. Guiding students in constructing error-free sentences in report writing.

ii. Assisting students in enhancing their ability to acquire better MUET band.

4.0 Target Group

The target group for this action research consists of six students from class 6A6. The
six were selected based upon their weak performance in the recent pre-trial
examination which took place in mid-March 2018. Despite the average performance of
all the students in class 6A6, only six were chosen as this time-consuming action
research need to be within the researchers control ensuring an optimal outcome.
5.0 Research Methodology

5.1 Problem Review

Table 1: Data Acquisition Method

Steps and Evaluation Target Group Purpose
Dates Method
Step 1 Students sit for 23 students of 6A6 Identifying the state of
25 March pre-trial MUET readiness of form six
2018 exam (paper 4) students for the coming
general exam.
Step 2 Marking of 23 students of 6A6
28 March students’ written
2018 produce