st
The 61 TEFLIN International Conference, UNS Solo 2014
identifying the research problem, and reviewing items from previous studies may have been considered convincing enough by the Indonesian RA writers to justify their research project reported in the article.
2. Justifying the Importance of the Research Topic
The second question in this study is how the Indonesian writers argue for the importance of their research topic. The data analysis show the result as presented in Table 3 below.
Table 3: The ways Indonesian Writers justify their Research Topic
The Writer’s Ways of Justifying the Research Topic
Journal Disciplines Total
N=200 Social
Sciences n=50
Literature studies
n=50 Language
Studies n=50
Law sciences
n=50 A. Referring to the government
policy 15
10 5
33 63
B. Identifying the research problem 26
34 33
28 121
C. Reviewing the currect knowledge and practices
41 40
41 33
155 Table 3 shows that the majority of Indonesian authors support the importance their research topic by reviewing
the knowledge and practices andor identifying the research problem while some of them by referring to the government policy. It is also important to notice that, different from other disciplines, the majority of RA authors
in Law sciences justify their research topic by referring to the government policy. This is different from Swales’ CARS model in which ‘referring to the government policy’ and ‘identifying the research problem’ are not used
to establish a research territory Swales, 1990.
3. Justifying the Importance of the Research Project
The last research question addressed in this study is how the Indonesian writers argue for the importance of their research project reported in their RA introduction. The data analysis shows the results as
presented in Table 4. Table 4: The ways Indonesian Writers justify their Research Project
The Writer’s Ways of Justifying the Research Project
Journal Disciplines Total
N=200 Social
sciences n=50
Literature studies
n=50 Language
studies n=50
Law sciences
n=50 A. Indicating a gap in previous
studies 4
5 6
4 19
B. Claiming that the topic has never been investigated
3 4
4 -
11 C. Claiming that the topic is
necessary to investigate 6
8 4
10 28
D. Claiming interest in investigating the topic
3 6
6 30
45 Table 4 shows that very few Indonesian RA authors justify their research project based on an evaluation result of
previous relevant studies as it is commonly found in English RA introduction. According to Swales 2004, the English RA authors justify their research project by ‘indicating a gap or adding to what is known’ p:230.
These findings are mainly similar to the one found in previous studies, such as by Safnil 2001, Mirahayuni 2002 and Adnan 2009 in which the majority of Indonesian RA authors support the importance of
their research project reported in their RA introduction by using different rhetorical style. Evaluating other’s work in order to establish a knowledge gap and to justify their research project, as it is usually found in English
RA introduction, is not yet a common practice in the Indonesian RA introductions. There may be cultural andor academic reasons for this style choice which need to be further investigated.
Conclusion and Suggestion
It can be concluded that: a the majority of Indonesian RA introductions in the corpus of this study have a Move 1, 2 and 4 while only some of them have a Move 3; b the majority of Indonesian authors justify their
research topic by reviewing the knowledge and practices andor identifying the research problem; and c very few Indonesian RA authors justify their research project based on an evaluation result of previous relevant
1339
st
The 61 TEFLIN International Conference, UNS Solo 2014
studies as it is commonly found in English RA introductions Swales, 1990 and 2004. It is suggested that when writing an RA in English, the Indonesian authors must modify their rhetorical style to match the one acceptable
by English readers especially when justifying their research topic and project.
Bibliography
Adnan, Zifirdaus 2009 Some Potential Problems for Research Articles Written by Indonesian Academics When Submitted to International English Language Journals, the Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, Vol. 11
Issue 1. Dudley-Evans, Tony 1994. ‘Genre Analysis: An Approach to Text Analysis for ESP’, in M. Coulthard ed..
Advances in Written Text Analysis. London and New York: Routledge, pp: 219-228. Hunston, Susan 1994. ‘Evaluation and Organization in a Sample of Written Academic Discourse’, in M. R.
Coulthard ed., pp: 191-218. Mirahayuni, N. K. 2002 Investigating Textual Structure in Native and Nonnative English Research Articles:
Strategy Differences Between English and Indonesian Writers, Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, the University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Swales, John M. 2004 Research Genres: Explorations and Applications, Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press. _____________ 1990 Genre Analyses: English in Academic and Research Settings,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Safnil 2001 Rhetorical Structure Analyses of the Indonesian Research Articles, unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, the Australian National University, Canberra Australia.
1340
st
The 61 TEFLIN International Conference, UNS Solo 2014
THE LEARNING OF ENGLISH AS A FOREIGN LANGUAGE: WHAT EFL TEACHERS SHOULD KNOW
Santi Chairani Djonhar
Universitas Muhammadiyah Prof. DR. HAMKA UHAMKA Jakarta
Abstract : There are preconditions that make learning a foreign language possible such as sufficient exposure
and opportunities to use the language. This is consonant with Chomsky’s 1999 statement “…… language learning is not something that a child does; it is something that happens to the child placed in an appropriate
environment”. This study investigates an Indonesian child a boy, aged 6 years who learns English regularly by for example, watching his English movies from Cabled TV programs like Disney Channel and Nickelodeon and
he frequently communicates in English at home, particularly with his only younger brother and mother. This is a longitudinal study in which the data was collected for 18 months January 2001 - July 2002 by recording the
child’s spontaneous speech at home environment. The data was transcribed then analyzed to see the development of his English syntactic constructions: infinitival and sentential complements, relative clauses, and conjoined-
clause constructions Tomasselo, 2003; Diessel, 2004; O’Graddy, 2005. The findings of this study show that the development of these 3 types of sentence constructions is the same as that of English children. This phenomenon
invites EFL teachers to provide their students with a lot of exposure to and opportunitiesn to use English as much as they can.
Keywords : foreign language, opportunities, exposure, practice, language development
Introduction
In more than two decades the national-plus schools have been mushrooming and in Jakarta the number of this schools amounts to one hundred Marshal, 2006. The schools usually use English and Indonesian as
medium of instruction. The subject of this study is a boy, called Ray aged 6;1. Ray lives with his Indonesian parents and his younger brother, Nara. Ray and Nara go to an elementary school - a national-plus school
HighScope Indonesia
in South Jakarta. The school uses English and Indonesian as the medium of instruction, and the ratio of use between these two languages is approximately 70 English and 30 Indonesian. In
addition, all extracurricular activities such as swimming, baseball, and arts are conducted in English. Ray actively uses English inside and outside school since he is placed in an environment where people
in this school community such as peers, teachers, school administrators, and school staff use English as the language as the language for communication. It happens to be that Ray does not have friends at his age in his
neighborhood and he does always meet his cousins and other relative who speak Indonesian. So, by chance, Ray rarely speaks Indonesian in his home environment; beside, Ray’s got lot of exposure to English since regularly
he watches to English programs such as quizzes and cartoon movies. In addition, his hobby is reading English books. Foley and Thompson 2003 and Moon 2000 stated that children in EFL setting may also enhance their
learning of a foreign language as along as they live in a “community” where people in that community use English actively and these children feel comfortable in learning and using the language.
Theoretical Framework and Research Method
The objective of this study is whether his English learning adopts the universal principles of language acquisition as they are applied to English or not. There is a subsidiary question pertinent to the objective of this
study: How this child developed his complex sentences, i.e. infinitival and sentential complements, relative clauses, and conjoined-clause constructions.
This study is in the area of language acquisition; it is based on a substantial naturalistic corpus of spontaneous speech on one subject a boy named Ray learning English in Indonesia. His speech was audio-
recorded in 18 months when he was 6;1 to 7;7. When the data was taken he was in the first to second grader of Elementary National-plus school in Jakarta. The recording of his speech was mostly taken at home and other
places such as the swimming pool, base-ball court, and during the trips to places like Malang, Bandung, and Malaysia. The data was taken by-weekly during the weekends. The data collected in 18 months was
transcribed; then, each sentence construction was analyzed in three phases January to June 2011, July to December 2011, and January to July 2012 to see how this child developed these complex sentences.
Research Findings and Discussion
The earliest complex sentences involving to-infinitives that English speaking children learn and use are sentences that use matrix wanna + V, hafta + V, gotta + V, needta + V, and gonna + V. Ray also used these
1341
st
The 61 TEFLIN International Conference, UNS Solo 2014
matrix verbs in his speech like I wanna play, you hafta request, I gotta search the entire island, and I needta talk to Mom
. Unlike English children, Ray produced complex sentences involving wh-infinitival and sentential complements at the same time. He also developed a number of wh-infinitives just like the subject in Hakuta
1976 study, for example, I know what to do, I teach myself how to make boomerang. Later, he used matrix clause I know with other infinitive phrases starting with other question words other than what and how such as in
I know where to go, I know who to see .
Later, Ray could produce complex sentences involving other matrix verbs think, guess, mean, wish, hope, say, and see. For example, I think I’m going to die, I thought I left it, I guess, I lose, I mean baby pokemon
not grow up, I wish I know, I wish you were reptile, I hope I can find this, Ayah said I can play anytime, See there is a wild goat
. At the end of this study, Ray could produce a complement that involves matrix promise, like I promise you to speak English and you can record me
. Children up to the age of nine still misinterpret utterances employing the semantic principle or what C. Chomsky called Minimal Distance Principle MDP in
which the subject of infinitive phrase to speak English is the closest NP you not I. In addition, Ray at this stage could produce complex sentences using matrix verbs forget, look, remember, believe, seem, wonder, bet, and
mind like in I forget today is Monday, Look what you have done, Remember you are the judge, I can’t believe his
eyes are fierce, It seems that you have to be on your own, I’m wondering If I can ask for help, I bet he is, D’you mind if I watch this
? Relative clauses are problematic for English children; they have difficulties forming what Slobin
1973, Tavakolian 1981, MacWhinny 1999, and Tomasello 2003 called as center embedded clauses. For example, clauses that modify subject, like in The man who stole my car ran away. The earliest relative clauses
that Ray produced were not center-embedded clauses like in I’ll get anything I want. Like most English children, Ray also made some errors in constructing relative clauses. He missed the relative pronouns in most utterances
that involve relative clauses like in This is Jeff in here is taping from the ball contest. Later he could use center- embedded clauses in his speech. It is used as independent clauses to respond to questions, like in Q: Who is punk,
Ray
? R: Somebody who gives money to the bully.
The earliest relative clauses produced by children were a “presentational relative constructions” Diessel, 2004; Tomasello, 2003 which are formulaic and consist of pronominal subjects That, This, There, and
It . Ray also produced such kind of relative clauses in his speech like in This is professor Oak who give Pokeball,
This is where I found Gym Leader, There was a witch who eats the girl . In this process, Ray produced a number
of embedded clause constructions like in Everyone who has ticket will meet Crabby, the clown. He even could produce relative phrases using present or past participles in his speech like in The big wave coming destroyed the
castle, There is a guy named Max Salome
. There are two ways to construct complex constructions: those that involve coordination in which two
independent clauses are linked in an equal manner and those that involve subordination, in which one clause a subordinate clause is to modify another clause a main clause. However, the distinction between coordination
and subordination is not so clear for young children Tomasello, 2003. What children understand is there are clauses that are integrated, typically with connectives, to form conjoined-clauses. Bloom 1990. James 1990,
and Diessel 2004 found that the first connective to emerge was and; and later, other connectives such as because, but
, and if to make up conjoined-clause constructions. In the beginning most of Ray’s sentences are simple. However, he also produced multi-clause
utterances that involved the connectives and, but, because, and if. Connective and is used in two kinds of utterances: non-conjunction constructions Diessel, 2004 like in I go to beach. I swimming and multi functions
of and-clauses, used in a variety of semantic relations James, 1990; Diessel, 2004, as additive clause in My toy is car and I love my toy
, as temporal clause in I eat and my brother bought a “crash gear”. Connective but is used once like in I very, very angry but I forget you. Connective because is used to introduce an isolated
utterance as a response to a causal why-question in Why do you like the book? R: Because cool, while connective if
is used in adverbial clauses in If I friend with Titan, I want to play ball. English children acquire connectives when and before later than other connectives and, but, and because
Diessel, 2004. Ray used connectives when in some sentences like in It don’t work when he don’t make strategy
, connective before in before I change my mind I throw you up the junk. until and or are two connectives produced later by children in Diessel’s 2004 and Tomasello’s 2003 studies. Ray produced these two
connectives, until in I train and train the baby Pokemon until become big and or, in Stay back or the lady will get hurt
. In Diessel’s 2004 and Tomasello’s 2003 studies it was found that the connectives because and so
appeared at the same time in English children’s speech. In contrast, the emergence of the connective so was much later than because in Ray’s speech. For example, I should bring helmet, so I can’t die. Other connectives
produced are then to signal temporal clauses in We run, then we got back there, whether in I don’t care whether is hot
, wherever in I see wherever he come, and as in Do as I say. The uses of connectives to connect two clauses related semantically and pragmatically have developed
in Ray’s speech at the end of the study. Speakers do not always use connectives to link two clauses to make the
1342
st
The 61 TEFLIN International Conference, UNS Solo 2014
communication natural and effective. In some contexts, Ray omitted the connectives, and this is done appropriately. He omitted connectives but in This is my best toys. I want to get more, because in You can’t get in
my room. I want to play band , and so in I’m getting hiccough. I’ll get some water. The last connective produced
in Ray’s speech is or else used as a warning or a threat like in Nara, get down my dollies, or else All in all, Ray within 18 months produced 17 connectives to form conjoined clauses and this has proved that his development
of English is tremendous.
Conclusion
Ray’s development of English complex sentences is significant since within 18 months he could produce various sentence constructions accordingly. The findings of the study have proven that the acquisition of
his English is similar if not the same as that of English children. Ray is a native Indonesian who learns English in a foreign setting, yet the process of English development follows the same path as that of English children. This
is because there are liable universal principles apparently underlying this condition: innate capacity in a child’s brain to learn any language in his environment, a child’s prime time in learning language, sufficient exposure to
and opportunities to use the language; and this is apparently applicable to the learning of language. I would like to suggest, therefore, that providing learners of English as a foreign language with exposure to and opportunities
to use the language both inside and outside the classroom is essential since this is the main ground to acquire the language learned.
Reference
Bloom, P., 1990. Syntactic Distinctions in Child Language. Journal of Child Language 17, 343-355. Chomsky, N. 1999. On Nature, Use, and Acquisition of Language. In W.C. Ritchie and T. K. Bathia Eds.
Handbook of Child Language Acquisition . New York:Academic Press.
Diessel, H. 2004. The Acquisition of Complex Sentences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Foley, J. and L.Thompson. 2003. Language Learning: A lifelong Process. London: Arnold.
Hakuta, K. 1976. A Case Study of a Japanese Child Learning English as a Second Language. Language Learning
26 2, 321-351. James, S.L. 1990. Normal Language Acquisition. Boston: Little, Brown and Company
Moon, J. 2000. Children Learning English. Oxford: Macmillan Publishers Ltd. O’Grady, W. 2005. How Children Learn Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tomasello, M. 2003. Constructing a Language: A Usage-Based Theory of Language Acquisition. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.
1343
st
The 61 TEFLIN International Conference, UNS Solo 2014
A VIGNETTE ON REFLECTIVE TEACHING: POTENTIAL CHALLENGES FACED BY FUTURE ESP PRACTITIONERS
Sari Hidayati, M.A.
Yogyakarta State University sari_hidyahoo.com
Abstract : As ESP English for Specific Purposes is designed to meet specific needs of learners Dudley-Evans
St. John, 1998, developing such a course will involve compex procedures of, as proposed by Hutchinson and Waters 1987, among others, Language Descriptions, Theories of Learning, and Needs Analysis. In line with
this, Dudley-Evans and St. John 1998 claims that an ESP practitioner, thus, plays the roles as a teacher, course designer and materials provider, collaborator, researcher as well as evaluator. This paper presents a vignette
based on teaching experiences gained from the course of ESP taken by six-semester students of an English Education Study Program. It will highlight some hindrances, in particular, met by the students in their project on
ESP course design. The potential challenges faced by the students, as future ESP practitioners, in developing ESP courses will therefore be discussed. It is expected that the discussion will be of beneficial contribution to
students wishing to work in ESP area, teachers of vacational schools, as well as lecturers of ESP-related courses on future practice of ESP as an approach to course design.
Keywords : English for Specific Purposes, course design, reflective teaching
English for Specific Purposes ESP
English for Specific Purposes ESP, under the umbrella of English Language Teaching ELT, was initially developed at the end of Second World War in 1945 as the response of expansions in science,
technology and commerce which brought a consequence of English becoming the accepted international language. The growing number of people who needed to learn English in different fields, such as bussinesman
who wants to be able to conduct bussiness presentations, and engineers who needed to read manuals, etc, urged ELT practitioners to develop a course that meet learners’ specific needs.
In its development, ESP is defined by Hutchinson and Waters 1987 as an approach to language learning, which is specifically aimed to meet particular needs of learners. Being simply an approach, ESP does
not refer to a special form of language, grammar nor different form of language teaching. Rather, it is an aproach to course designs that accomodate particular needs of learners.
Graves 1996b proposed that developing a course includes a cycle of planning a course, teaching the course, and modifying the plan, in which teachers are believed to involve in the whole tasks. As ESP English
for Specific Purposes is designed to meet specific needs of learners Dudley-Evans St. John, 1998, developing such a course will involve compex procedures of, as proposed by Hutchinson and Waters 1987,
among others, Language Descriptions, Theories of Learning, and Needs Analysis. Besides, Graves 1996a also listed the component of ESP course development framework as Needs assessment, Determining goals and
objectives, Conceptualizing content, Selecting and developing materials and activities, Organization of content and activities, Evaluation and Consideration of resources and constraints p. 13. In line with that, Dudley-Evans
and St. John 1998 claims that an ESP practitioner, thus, plays the roles as not only a teacher, course designer and materials provider, but also collaborator, researcher as well as evaluator.
This paper describes the challenges faced by students taking ESP as university subject partcularly in conducting project on course design.
ESP in the Curriculum
This part will describe the context of ESP as a course taught at university level. In English Education Study Program, Yogyakarta State University, ESP course has two credits and is taken by students in their sixth
semester. The class is usually attended by betweeen 40 and 50 students. In terms of the background knowledge of students, before taking ESP subject the students took subjects such as Sociolinguistics, TEFL Methodology,
English Instructional Technology, and School Curriculum Development that supposedly support students in understanding theories learned in ESP subject. Meanwhile, some other similarly supporting subjects, such as
Materials Development and Language Assessment are taken in the same semester.
Referring to the course outline, this course is one of the units in ELT series leading to the effort to develop the students’ language awareness through the teaching and learning activities covering the cognitive,
affective, and psychomotoric domains. As an integral part, this course has the aim to provide knowledge on English Language Teaching Programs for specific purposes based on the needs theories for the learners.
1344
st
The 61 TEFLIN International Conference, UNS Solo 2014
Besides, this course is aimed at providing skills in designing programs on English for Specific Purposes whether for the needs of occupational or general schools and creating an attitude to give an emphasis on the
learner and the practical needs of learning English. Another aim of this course is to provide experiences and exercises in specific vocabulary for specific discipline. This course covers practical experiences in fieldworks,
lectures on theories covering the topics of the background of ESP, the development of ESP, learners’ needs analysis, various approaches in ESP, a review on ESP syllabi, and the writing of material development.
Transferring the course description to the reality, in ESP class that I taught, I decided to divide the syllabus into two major themes, namely discussions of theories and workshops. The ultimate goal is that I can
bring into the classroom the real life experience of designing ESP courses. To achieve this, I designed a syllabus that focused more on the workshops than the discussions of theories. The previous academic year experience in
fact showed that focusing more on the theory discussions would not be enough to give ample opportunity for students to come up with their course design.
Topics covered in discussion sessions include basic concepts as What is ESP? and The Development of ESP. Meanwhile, fundamental topics in framework of ESP course design such as ESP as an Approach,
Conceptualizing Content, Formulating Goals Objectives, Needs Analysis Assessing Needs, Organizing the Course syllabus design, and Materials Development and Evaluation were integrated into the workshops. By so
doing, the concepts and theories can thus be applied into students’ projects immediately after they have been discussed.
During the workshops, the students work in groups of 4-5 members, in which they will stay for the whole project. As some topics need a follow-up outside classsroom, they need more than one meeting to
complete. For example, the topic of Needs Analysis and Assessing Needs took 3 meetings for students to come up with the result. The first meeting was allocated for a discussion of the concepts, followed by students’ work
on a brief description of the target learners and a list of interview questions for the Needs Analysis process. The meeting was followed by students’ project outside classroom to conduct Needs Analysis by interviewing and or
observing the target learners. In the next meeting, students presented the result of the interview and observation and received feedback from the class and lecturer. Finally, in the last series of meeting the students handed in the
final draft of the Needs Analysis, shared their experiences to class and reflected upon what they did during Needs Analysis process based on the guiding questions.
Reflective Teaching: Challenges in Designing ESP course
The result of students’ final project reveals that conducting workshops comprising a brief discussion of the concepts and theories directly followed by students group work potentially assists the students to manage
how to apply the concepts into the practice. However, from the students’ work as well as students’ questionnaires, it is indicated that students still had difficulties mostly in formulating goals and objectives,
designing syllabus, and developing materials, which are elaborated as follows:
A. Determining Goals and Objectives.
