Main Article Content


The objectives of this study are to investigate the use of WhatsApp messenger to develop students’ writing skills, and to find out the benefits and challenges of the use of WhatsApp messenger to develop students’ writing skills. The design of this study was classroom action research. The researcher used observation, interview, and test to collect the data. In analyzing the data, the researcher followed the procedure of data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing. The study reports that there was an improvement of the students’ recount text writing skill through scientific approach. In cycle I, the percentage of scores covers steps of rhetorical was (67.50%), grammar (71.25%), vocabulary (66.25%), clarity of meaning (67.50%), and relation between ideas (63.75%). In cycle II, the percentage of scores covers steps of rhetorical was (78.75%), grammar (78.75%), vocabulary (76.25%), clarity of meaning (87.50%), and relation between ideas (81.25%). This study also reports some benefits of using WhatsApp messenger were; the students used their creativity in teaching and learning activity, were interested in teaching and learning processes, and conveyed their assumptions in associating and networking freely. In contrast, it also had challenges in teaching and learning processes. The challenges were; most of students were not enthusiastic to follow teaching and learning of WhatsApp messenger. They must be persuaded to ask questions in questioning phase and they must be directed to be disciplined in the classroom.



Online Language Learning WhatsApp Messenger Teaching Writing Skills

Article Details

Author Biographies

Nur Hartati, 3Universitas Sarjanawiyata Tamansiswa Yogyakarta



Andhi Dwi Nugroho, Universitas Sarjanawiyata Tamansiswa Yogyakarta



Nanang Bagus Subekti, Universitas Sarjanawiyata Tamansiswa Yogyakarta



How to Cite
Hartati, N., Nugroho, A. D., & Subekti, N. B. (2023). Developing Junior High Students’ Writing Skills through WhatsApp Messenger. FOSTER: Journal of English Language Teaching, 3(4), 224-234.


  1. Arikunto, S. 2018. Prosedur Paenelitian Suatu Pendekatan Praktek. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.
  2. Artono Wardiman, 2008. English in Focus: for Grade VIII Junior High School (SMP/MTS). Jakarta:PusatPerbukuan, DEPDIKNAS.
  3. Brown, H. D. 2000. Teaching by Principle: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. New York: Longman.
  4. Dorothy E Zemach and Lisa A Rumisek. 2005. Academic Writing from Paragraph to Essay. Oxford:Macmillan.
  5. Elizabeth, M. E. S. and Rao, D. B. 2014. Acquisition of English Vocabulary. New Delhi: Discovery Publishing House.
  6. Ellis, R. & Barkhuzein,G. 2003. Analyzing Learner Language. New York: Oxford University Press.
  7. Ellis, R. 1996. Task-based Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  8. George E. Wishon and James M. Burk. 1980. Let’s Write English. New York: American Book Company.
  9. Gerot L, and Wignell P. 1995. Making Sense of Functional Grammar. Australia: Gerd Stabler Antipodean Educational Enterprises.
  10. Goldman, B. 1978. Reading and Writing in the Arts. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.
  11. Hornby, A. S. 1995. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  12. Kemis, S. and Tagart, 1998. The Action Research Planner. Victoria: Deakin University.
  13. Nunan, D. 1992. Syllabus Design: Language Teaching: ASA Scheme for Teacher Education. London: Oxford University Press.
  14. Spratt, M., Pulverness, A. and Willimas, M. 2005. The TKT; Teaching Knowledge Test Course. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  15. Sudarwati, M., and Eudian Grace. Look Ahead; An English Course for Senior High School Student Year 1. Jakarta: Penerbit Erlangga.