61
become more valuable, interesting and fun for the students. They enjoyed the process of learning and created improvement in their score. The observer also
emphasized that the communication in English was fulfilled in the learning process.
B. Recommendation
In this section, the researcher suggests several recommendations to the English teachers and the future researchers who intend to conduct a research on
improving student participation through Student Team Achievement Division method.
1. For English Teachers
It is suggested to the teachers who experience low student participation problem in teaching English to use Student Team Achievement as the strategy to
improve student participation. It is because Student Team Achievement Division method provided a lot of benefits for the teacher and most importantly for the
students, which have been explained by the researcher in chapter II and IV. It is also suggested to the teacher to pay more attention to the study group and
individual improvement score which are the key of students‟ better performance.
2. For Future Researchers
For the future researchers who are interested in the same topic of the research, the researcher allows them to use the data and results of this research. It
is suggested for the future researchers to elaborate their data through 5 essentials elements of cooperative learning. In doing cooperative learning research to
improve student participation, the future researchers should pay attention to the
62
research instruments needed. If the researchers want to use questionnaire, they should use detail statement in the questionnaire using 5 essentials elements as the
basic focus in making the questionnaire. It is because those five essential elements are the supporting key of successful cooperative learning. The research should be
patient in doing the research because there may be some difficulties in implementing this method in the classroom. However, the researchers should
remember that doing classroom action research is for the sake of the improvement and change in the learning or teaching process.
63
REFERENCES
Borich, G. D. 1996.
Effective teaching methods
3
rd
ed.. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.
Burns, A. 2009.
Doing action research in English language teaching.
London: Routledge Taylor and Francis group.
Clark, L. H., Starr, I. S. 1991.
Secondary and middle school teaching method.
New York: Macmillan Publishing Company. Davis, B. G. 1993.
Tools for teaching
. San Fransisco: University of Berkeley. Department of Education of Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. -.
Adolescence: Healthy lifestyle
. St. John‟s, NF: Division of Program Development.
Felder, R. M., Brent, R. 2007.
Active learning: Models from the analytical sciences,
ACS Symposium Series 970, Chapter 4 Mabrouk, P.A., Ed.. Washington, DC: American Chemical Society.
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E. 1990.
How to design and evaluate resea rch in education
. New York: McGraw-Hill. Hamachek, E. D. 1985.
Psychology in teaching, learning, and growth
3
rd
ed.. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Hapsari, R. 2011.
Increasing the participation of class XF students of SMA BOPKRI 1 Yogyakarta in English class through active learning
. An Undergraduate Thesis. Sanata Dharma University, Yogyakarta.
Harmin, M., Toth, M. 2006.
Inspiring active learning
. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R. 1988.
The action resea rch planner.
Geelong, Victoria: Deakin University Press.
Larsen-Freeman, D. 2000.
Techniques and principles in language teaching
2
nd
ed.. Oxford: Oxford University Press. McNiff J., Whitehead J. 2002.
Action research: Principles and practices
. New York: Routledge Falmer.
Nugroho, D.Y. 2011.
The use of pictures series to help the students of SMA N 10 Yogyaka rta 20102011 Academic Year write a recount text: cla ssroom
action resea rch.
An Undergraduate Thesis. Sanata Dharma University, Yogyakarta.
