The Content-Based Instruction Implementation in the International Class

in the whole teaching-learning process can be done. Thus, the emphasis of the language would also reach the spoken language too. There was also another reason of putting the emphasis on the writing language then. According to the teaching team, the students will mostly need the written language in their further education rather than the spoken language. The premise of their argument came from the fact that students will need to read scientific literature written in English in their further study more often than they need to communicate orally in English. Therefore, this was also aimed to familiarize the students with the English scientific literature. Thus, the researcher inferred that the definition of language used within this program was as text and discourse based, which was considered as a vehicle for learning the content. According to the definition of language in content-based instruction discussed in the Review of Related Literature, the third definition was also applied here. This defines language as something purposeful and may be used for specific purpose. In this case, the purpose was the academic one. Hitherto, the view of language as the combination of several skills was not demonstrated within the implementation. 4.1.2 The Implemented Principles of Content-Based Instruction in the International Class The teaching-learning process in the international class of SMAN 3 Yogyakarta reflected the implementation of two central principles of Content- Based Instruction as proposed by Richards and Rodgers 2001. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI Regarding the first central principle, that people learn a second language more successfully when they use the language as a means of acquiring information, rather than as an end in itself. The whole teaching learning process had reflected this. The method of learning a second language through the mean of using it to access and acquire information had been successfully implemented in the class. This was proven by the utilization of the language both as the pseudo- instructional language in the class and the language in the module. There was no emphasis on the formal aspect of the language or the linguistic fields. The corrective feedback was also absent in this case, since the teachers or lecturers never really pay any attention to the students’ use of English. Thus, students’ acquisition of the language was the by-product of this class, since the main objective is the content. The second central principle of Content-Based Instruction, that Content- Based Instruction better reflects learners’ needs for learning a second language, was also reflected here. According to the teaching team, the class mainly served students’ need of academic purposes, for the continuation of their study, especially those wanting to study abroad. Therefore, the main emphasis of this case was the effectiveness and the speed of learning and mastering the content. 4.1.3 The role of teacher and learner Theoretically, the ideal role of the teacher in this method is to be the facilitator and be responsible to create a truly-learner centred class. However, from several observations conducted by the researcher, this was not done yet by both the teachers and lecturers. In terms of being facilitators for learning the language, the teachers never really assumed this role. Based on the observation, the researcher can conclude that their orientation was to deliver the material to the students without thinking about the formal aspect of the language. In terms of spoken language, they rarely facilitated students to use it, neither did they give any example of the utilization. Some of the lecturers, fortunately, tried to provide the opportunity and facilitate the students in speaking the language by asking the question and expect the answer in English, or asking students to summarize what they knew about the lesson in English. However, in terms of writing, they did give the chance for students to make use of their English, though not providing the example. Most of the time, they did not even provide a good role model for the students in utilizing the language, furthermore not even being the facilitators. Since being a good role model is also a requirement for teachers and lecturers in a content-based instruction, it seems that this had not been done either. Their pronunciation of words were sometimes too Javanese, thus led the students to imitate their mispronunciation in the English conversation. In addition, they also did not show good competences in using the language, thus providing a poor role model for the students. From the students’ side, theoretically they should assume role as the autonomous being and responsible for their own learning process, since the real nature of content-based instruction is ‘learning by doing’ and collaborative learning is expected. In the case of learning a second language, the students in the international class of SMAN 3 Yogyakarta had already assumed that role. They PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI were responsible for their own learning process, since the teachers and lecturers never gave them the explanation of the language; rather only give them exposure of the target language. Therefore, they were learning and acquiring the second language by using it as the mean of acquiring the information about the subject matter, by using it to read and write, and sometimes for the presentation in the mathematic and science classes. However, regarding the expectation that the students are being active learners, this had not yet done. Most teaching-learning process conducted in the research setting still employed the old teacher centred process. 4.1.4 Comprehensible Input in the Material Delivery There were several types of material and input utilized in the whole teaching-learning process. These inputs will be elaborated below one by one regarding their characteristics of comprehensible input and the design. The result of the elaboration will provide the portrayal of the comprehensible input implementation within the material design of this international class. 4.1.4.1 The material delivery within the teachers’ class The lecturing activity within the teacher class was the most dominating activity within the teaching learning process. Though the main emphasis of this class was the written class, the explanation was also counted as one of the inputs in teaching-learning process. This goes along with the principle that in the immersion programme, the speech taking place around the students is considered as the comprehensible input. Thus, the researcher said that this input is totally comprehensible for the students, for it is in Indonesian, their native language. This is applied not only in the spoken language of the teacher, but also in the written language in form of notes in the blackboard. Hence, this input did not qualify in terms of Krashen’s criteria i + 1. There was no challenge posed towards students, therefore the utilization of previous competence to decode higher level of message and students subconscious taping towards higher level language proficiency were not triggered. 4.1.4.2 The material delivery within the lecturers’ class Just like the lecturing within the teachers’ class, this activity also dominated the teaching-learning process. Referring to the observation result, there were different results for different subject matters. The physics class explanation was delivered using Indonesian, but the presented power point material used English. Regarding the analysis of comprehensible input i + 1, the presented material was not adjusted to the students’ level, merely taken from the university level textbook. However, in the case of biology and chemistry, both spoken and written inputs were given in the adjusted level. This, in turn, led to the decoding process of the transmitted message by utilizing students’ previous schemata background knowledge. However, there was also an interesting point from the comprehensible input hypothesis in the immersion class formulated by Krashen 1985 about the fact that students are allowed to give respond in their first language simultaneously with their silent period in second language to gather enough grammatical rule and vocabulary items. This point was applied only in the lecturers’ class. Most of the students in the biology and chemistry class were allowed to ask questions using Indonesian, thus utilizing their first language. Consequently, this proved that there was silent period for the students to gather enough formal aspect of the language, therefore increase their communication and chance of getting enough comprehensible input. 4.1.4.3 The modules The modules were made by the teaching team for the class use. These modules were written in English, thus providing more exposure of written English. However, although the students might find the modules not too difficult to understand and master the modules in terms of the simple language, the writer finds it rather difficult to understand in terms of the grammar or the sentence structures. The writer finds many incorrect sentence structures which may lead the students into misconception of the sentence meaning, such as The moment of inertia of an object about an axis is that property of the object that causes it to resist a change in its angular velocity about that axis. Such case appears especially when the modules being used in the teaching learning activities were the ones being compiled and translated by the teacher himself. Thus, the poor sentences came from certain teachers lack of translating skill and English mastery. 4.1.4.4 The Handouts Given in the Lecturers’ Class In the lecturers class, most of the handouts given were taken from the authentic materials, mainly the textbook for college level. Therefore, the language used in the handout contains no misspelled words or ambiguous sentences which may cause misconception for the students. This handout fulfils the criteria of authentic material in the comprehensible input, but lack in the adjustment of i + 1, since the level is far beyond students English level. Thus, in general, the handout is not comprehensible enough for students. 4.1.5 Types of Content-Based Instruction implemented Departing from the observation result, the researcher did not see the implementation of one out of three different prototypes given by Brinton 2003. It even seemed that the proponent of this international class did not consider the three prototypes of Content-Based Instruction. Therefore, the implementation of Content-Based Instruction within this class was only based on the increasing exposure of English towards the students. This class certainly did not implement the theme-based language instruction, for there is no specific theme serving as the point of departure for instruction in teaching all the language skills. There were some themes, if it can be called that, in class. However, the themes were not fully utilized to teach the language skills. Even there was no explicit effort from the teacher to at least touch the language skills. These themes were utilized as the main material, without PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI considering the language skills. The expectation of this prototype to provide rich input for lesson that is language-based or skill-based was not fulfilled as well. Referring to the second prototype, sheltered content instruction, the conditions applied are not all implemented. In the ideal implementation of this prototype, the subject-matter teacher should also have the capability in teaching second language. This principle of special training in working with second language for the subject-matter teacher is not fulfilled yet. According to the interview with the teaching team, the subject-matter teachers were still in the process of training. On the other hand, some guest lecturers were more capable in delivering the material in English. However, the modification in the presented material was sometimes too far, thus leaving English and fully used Indonesian. The main objective of the modification was to enable students comprehend the material, yet the use of Indonesian did not facilitate the students in fully learning the language, neither did the lecturers not fulfil the next principle, namely spending more time helping students with language-related issues. Most of the time, the lecturers did the code-switching from English to Indonesia within the class. This action could be triggered by their incapability of finding the English expression or adjusting their level to the students. In terms of the third prototype, adjunct instruction, there was no full application of this type. Departing from the basic nature of this instruction, in which the same material was used by two different instructors, one used it to teach the subject matter, whereas the other used it to teach the language skill, the PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI researcher saw no implementation of this type. In the case of instructors, there were two instructors, the teacher and the lecturer. However, they carried with themselves the same task, focusing on the subject matter and not the language skills. The language proficiency level of this class was in the middle, as they already learned English from the elementary school. Thus, they were assumed to have mastered the basic of the English. The conceptual complexity of the subject matter was actually in their level according to the national curriculum. Due to the basic nature of adjunct and sheltered instruction which makes them unsuitable for the lower level learners. the full implementation of the sheltered and adjunct instruction was possible and suitable for them, since they are not in a lower or beginner level. However, these possible prototypes were still not implemented fully.

4.2 The Influence of CBI towards Students’ writing proficiency

In this section, the researcher discusses the overall influence of Content- Based Instruction in the international class towards students’ English writing proficiency. The influences will be discussed through several criteria, from the general writing proficiency to the more specific ones like the awareness, idea development, organisation, sentence structure, and the wording. The sections below are devoted to give sufficient elaboration on each criterion. 4.2.1 Learners’ general writing proficiency development The learners’ general writing proficiency development was acquired through the comparison between the pre-test and the post-test result. The given predicate was determined through the explained steps in the previous chapter. The overall average score of the test is utilized to determine the average proficiency of the whole class. Based on the result of the pre-test, the researcher got the data that the average initial competence of the class was in the medium level, with the value 2,17. From the 20 respondents, there were 2 respondents 10 with the excellent proficiency in writing. Those having good proficiency in writing are only 3 respondents 15, while 45 of the respondents 9 people were having medium proficiency. The rest of the respondents, 6 people 30 were having bad writing proficiency. Thus, most of the respondents were in the medium level. In the criteria of the scoring, we can see that the lowest average score comes from the awareness section 1,9. The highest average score comes from the wording section 2,45. This means that this class was good in the register and vocabulary mastery, but weak in the awareness towards the audience of the composition. For the comparison of the improvement, the post-test was also conducted and analyzed through the same rubric. The scoring standards used in this analysis was also similar to the one used in the pre-test. The result of the post-test can be seen in the table in the Appendix 12 and 13. Seeing solely from the average ability of the class, we found the value 2,59, which means that the class had improved their grade from medium writing proficiency to good writing proficiency. Even though the increase was not too high, their proficiency entered a new level. This means that there was a positive effect from the Content-Based Instruction to the writing proficiency as a whole. From 20 respondents, 3 respondents 15 were having excellent writing proficiency. Previously in the post test, only 2 respondents had this level. There is an increase in the number of students achieving this level. Respondents with good writing proficiency level are now 9 people 45. This level had the biggest increase in terms of quantity, from only 15 to 45. This increase is quite significant in number. The medium writing proficiency level is now reached by 7 respondents 35, and only 5 1 respondent still possess bad writing proficiency level. The decreasing number of respondents in the bad writing proficiency level is also quite significant. Interestingly, though there was increasing proficiency level, there were one respondents with a decreasing level, from excellent to good, with the decreasing score of 0,4. His score dropped in the wording and structure criteria. The reason for this dropping level will be elaborated in the later sections. Comparing from the pre-test result and the post-test result, we can also see that the average score of each criterion is also increasing. The awareness criterion increases its average score from 1,9 to 2,5. The idea development criteria also increased from 2,4 to 2,5. Organisation criterion increased from 1,95 to 2,75, while structure increased from 2,15 to 2,45. The last criteria, wording, increased its average score from 2,45 to 2,75. Criterion Group Mean t-test Significance General Writing Proficiency Pre-test N=20 Post-test N=20 2.17 2.59 -1.849 0.073 Significant p0.05 p0.10 Table 4.1 The Result of t-test for Pre-test – Post-test According to the t-test result of the general writing competence in the class, the increase is significant. The clue of the existence of significant increase lies in the t-result of -1.849. With the amount of respondents of 20, this score is equal with 0.073 in the p-value or the significance. This score lies between the threshold of 0.05 – 0.10. As the rule of thumb in the social statistical research, 0.10 is the limit of tolerance in the significance. Thus, it can be concluded that there is a significant increase in the general writing skill proficiency of the learners from the international class. The next sections would elaborate more on each criterion. The analysis of the implementation of each criterion in the students’ writing would be explained there, along with some examples from students’ works. 4.2.2 Learners’ awareness of the audience and or purpose Learners’ awareness of audience and or purpose is one of the criteria included in the scoring process of the whole class’. In this criterion, the ways in which the writer’s personality and attitude towards the topics are revealed to the audience. This awareness also plays an important part to maintain the PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI communication between the readers and the writer, and thus can be regarded as the difficult part in writing, since it actually is a one-way communication. Criterion Group Mean t-test Significance Learners’ Awareness Pre-test N=20 Post-test N=20 1.90 2.50 -2.108 0.042 Significant p0.05 p0.10 Table 4.2 The Result of t-test for Learners’ awareness Seeing from the result of t-test, we can see that there is a significant increase in this criterion, with the final score of 0.042 in the significance value. This value means only 4,2 of the total respondents who show no improvement. Related to the rule of thumb in the social statistical research, this notes significance. Especially due to the fact that in the post-test, the score for this criteria is the lowest among others. However, in the post-test result, the average learners’ awareness score is 2,5, not the lowest one. In the pre-test, most of the mistakes done within this criterion is the lack of communication effort towards the reader. Most writers were busy with themselves and seemed to forget that there will be many people reading their composition later. Thus, they went very straight to the point, and therefore, they only put and wrote what they had in mind. Most of the cases, they even seemed not to have any clear purpose of writing, instead of only pouring the idea. One of the examples in the pouring ideas without considering the purpose or even suitable tone came from Sumbadra’s all names of the respondents are disguised work in pre-test, where she tried to explain about the process of photosynthesis.