35
its lesson plan. In developing assessment instrument, the researcher made a self- evaluation assessment for the learners in every unit. In developing instructional
strategy, the researcher adopted Willis’ task sequence 1996, namely, pre-task,
task cycle, and language focus to make the suitable phases strategies for creating speaking materials.
3. Developing Preliminary Form of Product
In this phase, the researcher employed the seventh step of Dick and Carey’s 2009 instructional design model, namely, develop and select
instructional resources. The organized subject content was developed into learning materials. Tasks and instructional resources were selected based on their
appropriateness with the available support service , learners’ characteristics and
skills. In developing preliminary form of product, the researcher selected the subject contents and made the preliminary design based on the syllabus used. The
researcher adapted the authentic speaking materials by applying the principles of materials adaptation by Tomlinson and Masuhara 2004; they are plus, minus,
and zero categories p. 16.
4. Preliminary Field Testing
In this step, the researcher empployed the tenth step of Dick and Carey’s
2009 instructional design model, namely, design and conduct summative evaluation of instruction. The researcher conducted summative evaluation first or
experts ’ validation than formative evaluation which was placed in the end of the
steps. The purpose of summative evaluation was to gain feedback and suggestions of the new educational products from the experts. Thus, it is important to employ
36
the summative evaluation first than formative evaluation, because it could help the researcher to develop and improve the designed materials before applying the
designed materials to the target learners. In this study, expert validation was conducted by distributing evaluative
questionnaires to two English lecturers from English Language Education Study Program background of Sanata Dharma University to assess the designed
materials. Then, the feedback and suggestions would be used as the consideration to improve the designed materials.
5. Main Product Revision
This step was to revise the designed materials as the ninth step of Dick and Carey’s 2009 instructional design model based on the results of preliminary
field testing as experts’ validation. After gaining the results of preliminary field
testing, the researcher made the final version of the designed materials.
6. Main Field Testing
This step employed the eighth step of Dick and Carey’s 2009 instructional design model. This step determined whether the designed materials
met the learners’ needs or not. After revising the designed materials, the
researcher taught the learners using the designed materials which had been revised. Then, the researcher distributed evaluative questionnaire to the learners as
formative evaluation to gain feedback and suggestions from the learners whether the speaking materials really helped them to be able to speak in English fluently
and accurately based on the needs as the tour guides of Kalisuci Gunungkidul.
37
The summary the six steps of R D cycle which were combined with the steps in
Dick and Carey’s instructional design model can be seen in Figure 3.1 on the following page.
38
: continuing to : feedback
Figure 3.1 A Combination of Dick and Carey’s ID Model and the Six Steps of RD Cycle
Identify Instructional Goals
Conduct Instructional Analysis
Analyze Learners and Contexts
Write Performance Objectives
Develop Assessment Instruments
Develop Instructional Strategy
Develop and Select Instructional Materials
Research and Information Collecting
Planning
Developing Preliminary Form of Product
Preliminary Field Testing
Main Product Revision
Main Field Testing
Design and Conduct Summative Evaluation of Instruction
Revise Instruction
Design and Conduct Formative Evaluation of Instruction
39
B. Research Setting
