105 The second part of the questionnaire was open-ended questions. This part was
aimed to obtain the opinions, comments, and suggestions from the experts. According to the results, all respondents agreed that the learning model offered
elaboration of the four language skills that could be presented into variations of classroom activities targetted upon choices of goals a teacher would like to obtain.
The designed materials provided balance language input and output. Hence, the respondents stated that the product was very useful for college students, especially
freshmen because each unit contained lessons related to campus life, which were real and contextual.
Instead of the opinion and general comments, the respondents also gave some suggestions related to improve the tentative product. The first suggestion was the
listening materials. It was expected that the audio could be better in terms of sound quality. Adding relevant videos could also be good models for students to learn.
The second suggestion was the section C or Let’s Practice should contain more
practices, from guided to less guided activities. The last suggestion was related to the layout. The researcher needed to revise some grammatical mistakes and
improve some instructions. Those suggestions were then used to revise the tentative product.
c. Main Product Revision
The conclusion drawn from the preliminary field testing was used as the basis to revise the product. There were six revisions conducted before the product was
implemented in the real c lass. First, adding picture in the ‘Let’s Practice’ in unit 1
to provide guide line for the students. Second, adding instructions in several parts of the units. Third, adding the sources of the provided pictures. Then, revising the
106 listening materials. Fifth, revising some grammatical mistakes. The last was adding
exercise in ‘Let’s Practice’ part.
4. Implementation
According to Rogers 2002, implementation is the presentation of the learning material model to the participants. In this study, the implementation did
not fully install the whole course program to the class. Because of the time- constraints, the implementaion was in form of try-out. After conducting the
preliminary field testing, the revised product was produced. The product of text based learning model for college general English was then tried-out. During the try-
out, the plan was put into action. The materials were delivered to the student group. This aimed to try-out the designed learning model to the students, obtain feedback
from the users, and make the appropriate adjustments to the product. Hence, this phase promoted students’ understanding of material, supported the students’
mastery of objectives, and ensured the students’ transfer knowledge from the material.
The participants of the try-out were the first semester students of Duta Wacana Christan University Yogyakarta. The researcher chose a class randomly.
The class consisted of 26 students who had different majors; Accounting and Information Engineering. There were 16 female students and 10 male students. The
researcher took part in the try-out as the teacher. Furthermore, the try-out was conducted three times. The materials were chosen randomly. At that time, the
teacher chose unit 1, along with the beginning of the semester. The activities which were provided in the class referred to the syllabus. The
topic of the first meeting was “welcome to campus” and the subtopic was “where PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
107 are you from?”. In the beginning, the teacher provided warming-up activity by
giving a game to greet other people in different ways. The next activities were similar what were written in the syllabus. Then, the subtopic of the second meeting
was “get an ID card”. The teacher started the activity with reviewing the previous material. Some students were also asked to perform what they had learned. After
that, the activities was based on the syllabus untill the last activity in which the students had role-
play. The third meeting discussed “make my personal information”. If the two previous meetings focused on listening and speaking, the
third meeting focused on reading and writing. The class began with reviewing previous material. Then, the teacher followed the actions written in syllabus. The
last activity, the students were asked to fill in different forms, such as registration form, opening bank account form, and departure or arrival form. The way to fill in
the form was not directly writing students’ data, but they did role-play. Thus, instead of writing their personal information, students still needed to use speaking
skill in the role-play. In other words, the receptive and productive skills were integrated in the learning process. The pictures of the learning process are showed
in Appendix 14. After the try-out finished, the researcher distributed questionnaire to gain user
validation or as main field testing. The main field testing would be figured out more in the Evaluation phase.
5. Evaluation
Evaluation constitutes the last step in ADDIE model, however it functions as the back and forth steps in the instructional design to measure the learning outcomes
Rodgers, 2002. Evaluating the designed model, in this study, meant making PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
108 changes to improve the product. Through the evaluation the researcher gained
positive or negative feedback which helped to improve the product. There are two kinds of evaluation, namely formative and summative evaluation Rodgers, 2002.
The researcher only conducted formative evaluation which took place during development and and after the try-out in order to know the weaknesses in the
instructional plan. It was in form of preliminary testing and main field testing. Preliminary field testing had been conducted in the Development stage, so the
researcher only did the main field testing in this stage. Summative evaluation was not conducted because of the time constraints and the main goal of this study was
producing an English learning model. Main field testing became the last step in this research before producing the
final product. This step was conducted after the product was revised based on the preliminary field testing results and tried-out to the college students in the first
semester. Hence, it was so called user validation. The purpose of main field testing was to measure the validity, reliability, and practicality of the designed product. It
would determine whether the product was acceptable or not. The researcher conducted main field testing by distributing questionnaires to the first semester
students of Duta Wacana Christian University Yogyakarta. The respondents were 21 students, consisting of 13 female students and 8 male students. The respondents
were from different majors; Accounting and Information Engineering. The questionnaire was distributed to obtain feedback for improvement and
more importantly to know whether the product is valid, reliable, and pratical. The questionnaire consisted of two parts, closed-ended and open-ended questions. The
first part provided seventeen statements in which the respondents could state their PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
109 agreement. The respondent’s agreement were differentiated into five points of
agreement; strongly agree, agree, doubt, disagree, and strongly disagree. Then, the data gathered were put in triangulation in order to gain the mean of each aspect.
The mean of each aspect showed the respondents tendency on each aspect of questionnaire. The higher the score meant the better the product was. The following
table showed the results of the user validation.
Table 4.9. Result of User Validation
Item Statements
Degree of Agreement Total
Respon- dent
Total Score
Mean 5
4 3
2 1
Construct validity 1.
I understand the learning goal in every
meeting. 7
13 1
21 90
4,29 Content validity
2. The materials in the
course book are suitable with my needs
on learning English. 12
6 3
21 93
4,43 3.
The materials support me to practice reading.
14 6
1 21
97 4,62
4. The materials support
me to practice writing. 11
9 1
21 94
4,48 5.
The materials support me to practice
listening. 10
9 2
21 92
4,38 6.
The materials support me to practice
speaking. 12
8 1
21 95
4,52 7.
The topics are interesting.
9 12
21 93
4,43 8.
The materials are relevant to the topics.
10 9
2 21
92 4,38
10. The activities are
various. 11
7 3
21 92
4,38 11.
The activities encourage me to
participate. 9
11 1
21 92
4,38 Mean
4,44 Face validity
