56
the results of this step, there will be suggestions for the researcher to revise the materials. In order to be more easier in analyzing the mistakes in the materials, the
suggestions will be classified into several categories.
5. Main Product Revision
In main product revision, the materials that were previously evaluated were then revised. According to Borg and Gall 1983
, “revised educational product is expected to be more suitable to be used
in the classroom” p. 784. The data analysis from previous step will produce a list of suggestion. By following
the suggestions, some revisions were made. In revising the materials, the researcher needs to adjust the materials with
the results of the need analysis, as well as the context of the target research. For example, if there is revision to simplify the language used in the materials, the
new version of language should be suitable with the students’ English proficiency.
This step expects the researcher to not only revise the materials, but also consider several reasons behind the revision.
6. Main Field Testing
This is the step of implementing the revised materials with the real learners in the classroom. Borg and Gall 1983 state that:
The main purpose of the main field test is to determine the success of the new product in meeting its objectives and to collect
information that can be used to improve the course in the next revision p. 784.
In this step, the data were analyzed by using some statistical technique
through the scores analysis of pre-test and post-test. Conducting interviews with the learners was also done to get the information related to the materials taught to
57
them. Meanwhile, from the teacher’s perspective, the data from the teacher’s field
notes were also used to support other data.
7. Operational Product Revision
In this step, materials revision is done, like what happen in main product revision step. According to Borg Gall 1983
, “revision of product is as suggested by main field-
test results” p. 775. After done with main field testing, some suggestions were obtained through the field notes and interview results. The
analysis results obtained in main field testing became a guideline to revise the materials.
Additionaly, the revision in this step is done based on the suggestions proposed by the students as the users of the materials, meanwhile, in main product
revision, the suggestions were from the evaluators. Therefore, the revision on this step will be more on the practicality of the materials in the classroom. After the
materials are revised, the processes of RD steps have been all accomplished in this research.
B. RESEARCH PROCEDURE
The procedure of the research combined both Borg and Gall’s 1983 R
D steps and Morrison et al.’s 2011 instructional design model. The complete figure of the framework of the research can be seen at the end of chapter 2 which
is on page 40. The following section will deal with the explanation of the combination part per part. The following figure represents the combination of
RD and instructional design model. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
58
Figure 3.1. The Combination of RD Steps and Instructional Design Model
