52 writing, review what they have learnt, and compare the text with another kind of
text. The next stage of developing this instructional material is deciding
teaching learning activities and resources. The activities are done individually, pair work, group work, and whole class discussion. The pair work and group work
increase the social relationship among students. The whole class discussion increases the social relationship between teacher and students. While in individual
activities, the students have the opportunity to develop themselves in writing. The resources of designing the instructional materials are taken from text
books, electronic book, electronic journals, World Wide Web, and article.
4. Preliminary Field Testing
Preliminary Field Testing was carried out to obtain the evaluation of the designed materials by distributing the questionnaire and the designed materials to
three English Language Education lecturers of Sanata Dharma University and two English teachers of SMA N 1 Depok. The data obtained from the
questionnaire was presented as follows. a. Description of the Evaluators
The evaluation of the designed materials was obtained by using questionnaire. It included three sections. The first section was the evaluator’s
identity name, educational background, and teaching experiences. The second section described the evaluators’ opinion toward the designed materials the
extent of degree of agreement toward the designed materials. The last section was
53 the evaluators’ comments, suggestions, opinions, or criticism toward the designed
materials. The evaluators of the designed materials were three English Language
Education lecturers of Sanata Dharma University and two English teachers of SMA N 1 Depok. The feedbacks, comments, suggestions, and opinions obtained
from the Preliminary Field Testing were used as the basis to improve and revise the designed materials. The descriptions of the evaluators were described as
follows:
Table 4.4 The Description of the Evaluators
Group of Participants
No Educational
Background Teaching Experiences
in years
S1 S2 S3 1-5 6-10 11- 15
16- 20
21- 25
25
English Teacher of SMA N 1 Depok
1. √
√ 2.
√ √
English Language Education
Lecturers of Sanata Dharma
University 1.
√ √
2. √
√ 3.
√ √
b. Data Presentation and Analysis The data obtained from the Preliminary Field Testing revealed the
evaluators’ opinion on the designed materials. The judgments of the evaluators used four degree of agreements.
1 : strongly disagree with the statement 2 : disagree with the statement
54 3 : agree with the statement
4 : strongly agree with the statement The descriptive statistics of the evaluators’ opinions on the designed
materials were presented in Table 4.4:
Table 4.5 The Descriptive Statistics of the Evaluators’ Opinion
No Statements Frequency of the
Degree of Agreement 1 2 3 4
1. The designed materials are able to achieve the
competency standards stated in the School Based curriculum.
100
2. The designed materials are able to achieve the
basic competencies stated in the School Based curriculum.
80 20
3. The indicators are well - formulated.
80 20
4. Generally, the content of the materials are well-
elaborated. 20 60 20
5. The activities in each unit are relevant to the topic
in each unit. 20 40 40
6. The activities in each unit are well – elaborated
and can facilitate the students to achieve the competency standards and basic competencies
40 40 20
55
Table 4.5 Continued
No Statements Frequency of the Degree
of Agreement 1 2 3 4
7. The activities in each unit can facilitate the
students to achieve the indicators. 80
20
8. The activities in each unit are the realization of
genre based approach. 60
40
9. The activities are interesting and various enough
to motivate students to be more active. 40
60
10. The activities given can help the students to produce well - writing products
80 20
11. Pictures provided can brainstorm students’ idea on the topic.
60 40
12. The instruction of each activity in each unit is clear enough to be understood by the students.
60 40
13. The time allocation is suitable for each unit. 80
20 14. Generally, the designed materials will enable the
students to increase their ability in writing. 20
80
15. Generally, the designed materials are good looking to encourage students’ motivation.
60 40
16. The designed materials are relevant to the students’ knowledge and skill level.
40 60
56 The result of the descriptive statistic indicated that the average of agree
statements of the designed materials was 88.75. The designed materials were poor in the content, activities, and skill level relevance. In the other hand, from
this result, it could be concluded that the designed materials were acceptable and appropriate to be implemented in the school. However, the designed materials
were still needed to be revised and improved as suggested by the evaluators. The evaluators also gave comments, suggestions, opinions, or criticism
toward the designed materials. The evaluators’ comments and opinions based on the questionnaire are described as follows:
1. Generally, the materials and activities were good enough to improve students’ writing abilities.
2. The pictures were attractive. 3. The instructions were easy to be understood.
The evaluators’ suggestions’ and criticism are described as follows: 1. The activities were monotonous. It would be better if the activities in each unit
are more various. 2. It would be better if the researcher broadens the exercises and vocabulary
difficulties level which were relevant to the students’ age and grade. 3. The exercises were too simple for the students of their grade in vocabulary
case. 4. The writing tasks sometimes did not ask the students to write different thing.
5. Some exercises looked difficult. It was better to give example.
57 6. In the Independent construction and Linking Related Text, the generic
structure could not be seen. The students should see it in their own work. 7. Besides the lesson plan, a teacher’s guideline might be provided to give
instructions for the teacher. 8. For the lesson plans, the terms of pre activities, while activities, and post
activities were not in line with the steps of the genre approach. Another teacher might be confused reading the lesson plan because they did not go
hand in hand. 9. The sources of the materials were questionable.
5. Main Product Revision
