Didik Rinan Sumekto, Widya Dharma University, Indonesia
Heny Setyawati, Semarang State University, Indonesia


Abstract: This study explores students’ performance in descriptive writing. Forty-five English Education sophomore students participated to be the respondents. The data were collected from students’ descriptive writing performance using a 5-Likert scale and they were quantitatively analyzed through the descriptive and factor analysis tests. Students’ descriptive writing were measured through the means of components of grammar, punctuation, coherence, cohesion, and content. Other substantial findings corresponded with the principal component analyses that determined the presence of 5 components with the eigenvalue outreaching 1, positioning 31%, 27.3%, 19.7%, 12.6%, and 9.4% of the variances accordingly. This referred to the factorial analysis that claimed 2 extracted components with a total of 58.32% of the variance. The component 1 was 31.00% and component 2 was 27.32%. The interpretation of these components is coherent with the pilot results on the descriptive writing performance scale, in which the component 1 shows the positive affect items and the component 2 partially indicates the negative affect items. 


Keywords: Analytic scoring, descriptive writing, factor analysis



Abstrak: Penelitian ini mengeksplorasi capaian peningkatan mahasiswa dalam menulis esai deskriptif. Empatpuluh lima mahasiswa pendidikan Bahasa Inggris berpartisipasi sebagai responden. Pengumpulan data diambil melalui hasil esai deskriptif mahasiswa dengan menggunakan 5 skala Likert dan analisis data dilakukan secara kuantitatif melalui uji deskriptif dan analisis faktor. Esai deskriptif mahasiswa diraih melalui rata-rata hitung komponen gramatika, tanda baca, koherensi, kohesi, dan konten. Temuan substansi lainnya terkait dengan analisis komponen utama yang menetapkan 5 komponen dengan raihan 1 nilai eigen yang menempatkan 31%, 27,3%, 19,7%, 12,6%, dan 9,4% varian. Temuan ini merujuk pada analisis faktor dengan 2 komponen yang diraih sebesar 58,32% dari keseluruhan varian, di mana komponen 1 sebesar 31,00% dan komponen 2 sebesar 27,32%. Tafsiran atas dua komponen ini koheren dengan hasil awal skala capaian peningkatan esai deskriptif, di mana komponen 1 menunjukkan butir positif dan komponen 2 menunjukkan sebagian butir negatif.


Kata Kunci: Penskoran analitik, esai deskriptif, analisis faktor


Analytic scoring; descriptive essays; lecturer’s assessment

Full Text:



Amy, D., & Victor, S. (2008). Learning to write and writing to learn in science: Refutational texts and analytical rubrics. Science Scope, 32(3), 14-18.

Baksh, A., Sallehhudin, M. A. A., Tayeb, Y. A., & Norhaslinda, H. (2016). Washback effect of school-based English language assessment: A case-study on students’ perceptions. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 24(3), 1087-1104.

Cyr, P. R., Smith, K. A., Broyles, I. L., & Holt, C. T. (2014). Developing, evaluating and validating a scoring rubric for written case reports. International Journal of Medical Education, 5, 18-23.

Gulley, B. (2012). Feedback on developmental writing students' first drafts. Journal of Developmental Education, 36(1), 16-36.

Jansrisukot, J. (2016). A study on the integration of learning outcomes, learning activities and assessments in teacher education. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 24(S), 169-182.

Jonsson, A., & Svingby, G. (2007). The use of scoring rubrics: Reliability, validity and educational consequences. Educational Research Review, 2, 130-144. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2007.05.002

Kargozari, H. R., Ghaemi, H., & Heravi, M. A. (2012). Cohesive devices in argumentative, descriptive, and expository writing produced by Iranian EFL university students. Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods, 2(3), 25-47.

Kaufman, J. H., & Schunn, C. D. (2011). Students’ perceptions about peer assessment for writing: Their origin and impact on revision work. Instructional Science, 39, 387-406. doi: 10.1007/s11251-010-9133-6

Kaven, J. (2013). The development of a valid and reliable general analytic rubric for a college-level public-speaking course. (Dissertation). Available from Education Resources Information Center. (ERIC No. 553452)

Lee, Y-. W., Gentile, C., & Kantor, R. (2008). Analytic scoring of TOEFL CBT essays: Scores from humans and e-rater. New Jersey: ETS.

Lenski, S. D., Ehlers-Zavala, F., Daniel, M. S., & Sun-Irminger, X. (2006). Assessing English-language learners in mainstream classrooms. The Reading Teacher, 60(1), 24-34. doi: 10.1598/RT.60.1.3

Loreto, S. D., & McDonough, K. (2013). The relationship between instructor feedback and ESL student anxiety. TESL Canada Journal/ Revue TESL Du Canada, 31(1), 20-41.

Maraschiello, R. F. (2003). Toward establishing the validity and reliability of a developmental writing assessment scale (Dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3129089)

Martinez, K. (1997). The effect of a rubric on evaluating and improving student writing. Published Thesis, Caldwell College, New Jersey.

Matsuno, S. (2009). Self-, peer-, and teacher-assessments in Japanese university EFL writing classrooms. Language Testing, 26(1), 75-100.

Meletiadou, E. (2012). The impact of training adolescent EFL learners on their perceptions of peer assessment of writing. Research Papers in Language Teaching and learning, 3(1), 240-251.

Meisels, S. J., Xue, Y., & Shamblott, M. (2008). Assessing language, literacy, and Mathematics skills with work sampling for head start. Early Education and Development, 19(6), 963-981. doi: 10.1080/10409280801971890

Mertler, C. A. (2001). Designing Scoring Rubrics for Your Classroom. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 7(25). Retrieved 3 March 2018, from

Mubarok, H. (2017). Students’ Perception toward the Implementation of Peer Assessment in Writing: Before and After Revision. Celt: A Journal of Culture, English Language, Teaching & Literature, 17(1), 13-26. Doi: 10.24167/celt.v17i1.

Nezakatgoo, B. (2011). The effects of portfolio assessment on writing of EFL students. English Language Teaching, 4(2), 231-241. doi: 10.5539/elt.v4n2p231

O’Neill., Moore, C., & Huot, B. (2009). A guide to college writing assessment. Utah: Utah State University Press.

Pallant, J. (2011). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS (fourth ed.). New South Wales: Allen & Unwin.

Pappamihiel, N. E., Nishimata, T., & Mihai, F. (2008). Timed writing and adult English-language learners: An investigation of first language use in invention strategies. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51(5), 386-394.

Penner, I. S. (2007). Comparison of effects of cognitive level and quality writing assessment (CLAQWA) rubric on freshman college student writing. College Student Journal, 447-461.

Polston, K. P. (2013). Self- and peer-assessment of product creativity in a collaborative environment: A research study with undergraduate textile and apparel designers. (Dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3690347)

Prastika, W., Setiawati, E. E. D., & Sumekto, D. R. (2018). Analyzing the eleventh-year-students descriptive writing skills documented in the academic year of 2017-2018. English Focus: Journal of English Language Education 1(2), 108-118

Qu, W., & Yang, S. (2010). A peer and self-assessment project implemented in practical group work. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 1(6), 776-781.

Randi, J., & Jarvin, L. (2006). An “A” for creativity: Assessing creativity in the classroom. Thinking Classroom, 7(4), 26-32.

Schirmer, B. R., Bailey, J., & Fitzgerald, S. M. (1999). Using a writing assessment rubric for writing development of children who are deaf. Exceptional Children, 65(3), 383-397.

Spence, L. K. (2010). Discerning writing assessment: Insights into an analytical rubric. Language Arts, 87(5), 337-352.

Sumekto, D. R. (2018). Investigating the influence of think-pair-share approach toward students’ reading achievement. Lingua Cultura, 12(2), 195-202. doi: 10.21512/lc.v12i2.4011

Sumekto, D. R. (2017). The Effectiveness of pre-service English teachers’ collaborative genre-based writing feedback. Lingua Cultura, 11(1), 31-38. doi: 10.21512/lc.v11i1.1595

Sumekto, D. R., Saleh, M., Retmono., & Sofwan, A. (2015). Pre-service English teacher’s perception on collaborative genre-based writing. The Journal of Educational Development, 3(2), 125-132.

Sumekto, D. R. (2014a). Students’ oral skill improvement as revealed in learning-based performance. English Review: Journal of English Education, 3(1), 91-102.

Sumekto, D. R. (2014b, 7-9 October). Higher education students’ perception about peer assessment practice. Paper presented at The 61st TEFLIN International Conference 2014, “English Language Curriculum Development: Implications for Innovations in Language Policy and Planning, Pedagogical Practices, and Teacher Professional Development”, Indonesia. Retrieved from

Telçker, H., & Akcan, S. (2010). The effect of oral and written teacher feedback on students’ revisions in a process-oriented EFL writing class. TESL Reporter, 43(1), 31-49.

Weigle, S. C. (2002). Assessing writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wiseman, C. S. (2008). Investigating selected facets in measuring second language writing ability using holistic and analytic scoring methods. (Dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3327031)



  • There are currently no refbacks.


Social Media:



 Creative Commons License
Jurnal Cakrawala Pendidikan by Lembaga Pengembangan dan Penjaminan Mutu Pendidikan UNY is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Based on a work at

View Our Stats

Flag Counter