Students hoped that teacher is active in process of learning and ready to At the same time, students hoped their colleagues to be active too in
82
way. It means that the difficulty of each task is gradually increasing. Being systematic means that students have less difficulties in order to complete the tasks
presented in each unit. The third one is the language use. There are two types of language use, namely: instructional language and language of the content. The
instructional language of the materials should be easy to understand, while the language of the content should at least equal to students’ proficiency or higher
than students’ proficiency in some cases. The last one is the lay out of the materials. How well lay out used in the materials may affect students interest. If
the lay out of the materials are well-designed, students will be interested in learning the materials. Thus, students are able to grasp the materials better.
83
References
Anthony, L. 1997. Defining English for Specific Purposes and the Role of the ESP Practitioner
from http:www.laurenceanthony.netabstractsAizukiyo97.pdf
, accessed on May 15, 2016.
Basturkmen, H. 2006. Ideas and Options in English for Specific Purposes. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associate Publisher.
Borg, W.R Gall, M.D. 1983. Educational research: An introduction.New York: Longman.
Brown, H.D. 2002. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. White Plains, NY: Pearson Education.
Prasetyo, F. D. 2013. Developing reading-writing learning materials for the students of year X of Pharmacy study program at SMKSMF Indonesia
Yogyakarta in the academic year of 20122013. Yogyakarta.
Graves, K. 2000. Designing language courses: A guide for teachers. Boston: Heinle Henle Publishing.
Hutchinson, T. Waters, A. 1987. English for specific purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jayanti, D. E. 2015. Developing Reading Learning Materials for The Grade X Students of Computer Engineering and Networking Program at SMKN 1
Pundong in The Academic Year Of 20142015. Yogyakarta. Nunan, D. 2004. Task-Based Language Teaching. Cambridge: CUP
Richard, J.C., Rodgers, T.S. 2001. Approaches and Methods in Language
Teaching. Cambridge: CUP Richards, J. 2001, Curriculum Development in Language Education.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press _________. 2006. Communicative Language Teaching Today. New York:
Cambridge University Press. Spitzmueller, J. 2007. Visible by Design: The Significance of Typography in
Media Communication. A presentation for Nihon University of Tokyo. From
http:www.spitzmueller.orgdocspres-tokio-2007-03-02.pdf accessed on May 16
, 2016 at 11.54.
84
Spratt, M., Pulverness, A., Williams, M. 2005. The TKT Course. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stifler, B.
n.d. Stages
in Writing
Process. From
http:www.billstifler.orgcstccstages.pdf assessed in march 31,2016 at
13.31. Suharto, G. 2006. Pengukuran dan penilaian hasil belajar bahasa inggris.
Yogyakarta: Pusat Pelayanan dan Pengembangan Bahasa. Tahir, A. 2011. Learning Needs
– A Neglected Terrain: Implications of Need Hierarchy Theory for ESP Needs Analysis. English for Specific Purposes
World 33:11. Tomlinson, B ed. 1998. Materials Development in Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ___________ ed. 2009. Principles and Procedures of Materials Development
for Language Learning. Accesed from http:www.iltec.ptpdfPrinciples20and20Procedures20of20Mater
ials20Development20Paper.pdf on May 14, 2016.
___________ ed. 2011. Materials Development in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.