Theoretical Framework Electronic lexicon on nursing (e-lon): a Computer Assisted Vocabulary Learning (CAVL) model to enhance nursing students` lexical retention.

Development research is different from instructional system design ISD. Development research attempts to produce the models and principles that guide the design, development, and evaluation processes, while instructional development typically builds on previous research. Stowe cited in Richey, Klein, and Nelson, 2007 opposes if ISD is viewed as research. He argues that ISD does not have ability to discover generalizable principles and its intent to produce context-specific solutions. Research has dual function; it can result in context-specific solutions and can serve a problem-solving function. In terms of the extent to generalizable or contextual specific solution, development research has two type particular emphases. They are labelled with Type 1 and Type 2 development research. The first type of development research is described as the entire development process of a specific intervention from exploratory studies through evaluation studies. In another word, it addresses not only product design and development, but also evaluation. Its focus is on a given instructional product, program, process, or tool Richey and Klein, 2005. The second type is oriented towards a general analysis of design, development, or evaluation processes. In this type the intention of the research can be a whole or particular component. Type 2 development research takes place after the actual design and development process completed Richey, Klein, and Nelson, 2007. It has more global orientation than Type 1. The distinctions between two types of development research can be seen in the table below. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI Table 3.1. A Summary of the Two Types of Development Research Richey, Klein, and Nelson: 2007, p.1103 Type 1 Type 2 Emphasis Study of specific product or program design, development, or evaluation projects Study of design, development, or evaluation processes, tools, or models Product Lessons learned from developing and analysing the conditions that facilitate their use New design, development and evaluation procedures or models, and conditions that facilitate their use Context-specific conclusions Generalized conclusions Looking at the objective of this study, the suitable type of development research is Type 2. According to Richey and Klein 2005, there might be various ways to construct the models of full design and development process. This type shows the application of a particular ISD model as well as the use of elaboration theory in content sequencing. Therefore, this study elaborates the product-oriented models and related theories to design a CAVL model to enhance nursing stude nts’ lexical retention. The implementation of development research often required multiple types of participants. Furthermore, the participants possibly vary among phases Richey and Klein, 2005. Utilizing Type 2 development research, this study needed to consider the following the most common participants proposed by Richey and Klein 2005, p.30. Table 3.2. The Most Common Participants in Type 1 Development Research FunctionPhase Type of Participant Product Design Development Designers, Developers, Clients Product Evaluation Evaluators, Clients, Learners, Instructors, Organizations Validation of Tool or Technique Designers, Developers, Evaluators, Users The participants in this study were nursing students, English lecturers, nursing lecturers, materials developer expert, and information technology expert. Each of participants contributed in different phases depends on the necessity of data collection.

B. Research Procedure

The researcher adapted two product-oriented models. Using the combination of those instructional development models constructed a suitable procedure in designing a CAVL model to enhance nursing students’ lexical retention. In line with the procedure of Type 2 development research, there were three phases containing several steps. The phases were need analysis, process of instructional design and development, and implementation and evaluation. Those three phases were the heart of instructional technology Richey and Klein, 2005.

1. Phase I: Need Analysis

Research and information collecting were conducted earlier to identify the learners’ characteristics, context that cover the analysis of constraints and resources in Seels and Glasgow’, and the goals. The result of need analysis was as an input for conducting the next phase.

a. Research Respondents

In the first phase, need analysis, involved nursing students, English lecturers, and nursing lecturers. Nursing students in the undergraduate study program who enrolled in English for nursing courses of STIKes Harapan Bangsa Purwokerto were the target learners. They were forth-semester nursing students as the primary data source. English lecturers that had important role in delivering English for nursing materials to students were involved as well. They were expected to give information about students’ characteristics including their English proficiency levels, learning goals of English for nursing courses, and the problems in teaching vocabulary. Since this study concern of nursing students’ vocabulary retention, nursing lecturers were involved to give information and suggestion on the selected words for nursing students.

b. Research Instruments

The four instruments were used to find out the learners’ need. The first was questionnaire which was intended to gain the information about learners’ beliefs in vocabulary learning and the vocabulary learning strategies applied. The second instrument used was interview to gain more detail information from the questionnaire. The vocabulary size level test was also used to measure the level of learners’ vocabulary level. The last instrument was vocabulary breadth test given to the target users in the preliminary research before designing the CAVL model. 1 Need Analysis Questionnaire The questionnaires used were in a printed form with the combination of closed answer and opened question. The benefit of using questionnaire was that the ability to collect data from a large number of respondent efficiently and quickly. According to Ary, Jacobs, and Razaveih 2002, there were two types of questionnaire which were structured and unstructured questionnaires. In structured questionnaire, the questions and answers were provided. The respondents had to determine the level of their agreement or preferences towards the statements which represent their opinions. Each level on the scale was assigned a numeric value or coding. Likert scale was applied in structured questionnaire. There were two possible response scales. In the need analysis questionnaire, the Likert scale with a