43
5. Lesson Plan 5
The competence standard was “mengungkapkan makna dalam teks tulis
fungsional pendek dan esei sederhana berbentuk recount, narrative, dan procedure dalam
konteks kehidupan
sehari-hari ”. The basic competence was
“mengungkapkan makna dan langkah-langkah retorika secara akurat, lancar dan berterima dengan menggunakan ragam bahasa tulis
dalam konteks kehidupan sehari-hari dalam teks berbentuk:
recount”. The participant designed the lesson plan to teach recount text. This lesson
plan was different from the other lesson plans since there were no objectives formulated. However, as what had been explained in chapter one that learning
objectives and indicator were interchangeable since both were dealing with the target of learning, the researcher would analyze the indicator listed in this lesson
plan. The indicator listed had covered three learning domains which are
cognitive, affective and psychomotor. There were four indicators formulated in the cognitive domain. The participant separated the indicator as the product and
process of learning. As the product of learning, the participant formulated “students are able to make a text based on certain picture which is provided using
recount text”. This learning objective did not fulfill the criteria of clearly stated learning objective since there was no degree of learning presented. It only
presented students as the audience, make a text as the behavior and based on certain picture which is provided using recount text as the condition. From the
behavior, make a text means writing. This indicator required the students to write
44 recount text. Here, the level of thinking expected was in the fifth level of
cognitive, synthesis. As the process of learning in the cognitive domain, the participant listed
four indicators. They are 1 “students are able to identify the function of recount
text, 2 “students are able to identify the generic structure of recount text”, 3
“students are able to mention the topic of recount text”, and 4 “students are able to use the language feature”. All of the four formulations of indicators presented
students as the audience. The behaviors presented were identify the function of recount text, identify the generic structure of recount text, mention the topic of
recount text and use the language feature for the first, second, third and fourth learning objective. None of the four indicators presented the condition and the
degree of learning. The behavior presented in the indicators determined the level of thinking expected. To identify required the second level of cognitive domain
that was comprehend. To mention the topic required the first level of cognitive domain which was knowledge. Then, to use language feature required the third
level of cognitive domain that was application. In the affective domain, the participants formulated three indicators. They
were 1 “students are able to mention the certain values of the recount text”, 2
“students are able to respond to their teacher’s explanation”, and 3 “students are able to cooperate in pairs”. All of the three indicators presented students as the
audience. The behaviors presented were mention the certain values of the recount text, respond to
their teacher’s explanation and cooperate for the first, second, and third indicators. The first and the second indicators in affective domain did not
45 present the condition of learning. The condition of learning presented in the third
indicator, which was in pairs. Then, degree of learning did not present in all of the three indicators.
The last indicator was from psychomotor domain. I t was “students are able
to make a recount text in good order”. It presented students as the audience; make a recount text as the behavior, and in good order as the degree of learning process.
The condition of learning did not present here.
6. Lesson Plan 6
Kategori