86
acceptable suggestions to develop the material. The improvement by the writer are:
a. The writer changed or revised some instructions that were too long.
b. The writer revised and lessened the conversation part.
c. For mathematics part of comparing and ordering integers unit 3, the writer
gave more examples. It is expected that learners will get correct examples to compare and order integers.
d. The writer gave more explanation about how to make questions related to
“rounding and estimation”. Examples were also added. e.
The writer checked the designed materials again and corrected the spelling word mistakes.
f. The time allotment in lesson plan was reearranged. The writer added the time
for roleplay and lessened the time for the other activity which considered too long.
However, there was a suggestion which the writer considered unacceptable.
This suggestion
was to
vary the
activities in
Focus...Focus...Focus... part with songs and tounge twister game. The writer believe that songs and tounge twister game might be interesting, but they are time
consuming and do not enhance learners to talk more. Therefore, the writer does not change the activities in Focus...Focus...Focus... part.
After some improvements were made on the designed materials, the writer presented the final version of the designed materials.
87
2. Discussion on the Study
Upon completion of the thesis, the writer defended the thesis before the Board of Examiners. The total number of the Board of Examiners were three
people. All of them are the lecturers of the English Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University. In this oral examination, the writer presented the
summary of the study and then clarified the content in question and answer session. Many suggestions, criticicm, and corrections were obtained for the sake
of improving the quality of the thesis and the designed materials. They were: a.
The figure of the steps of the designed materials on page 42 had to be checked again whether the line was dotted or solid in order to make the
theoretical framework consistent with the instructional design models adapted by the writer.
b. The writer needed a theory of syllabus as a guidance in making a well
developed-syllabus. c.
The writer had to find a better way to write the figure of the summarize of the research procedure the correspondence of the Small Scale Educational R
D Cycle and the adapted instuctional desing models. d.
The questionnaire of the Research and Information Collecting was poorly designed. The writer had to delete some questions which were not necessary
to ask and revised the accuracy of the language. In addition, to make more valid data, it was suggested that an observation was needed.
e. One of the Board of Examiners suggested that it was much better to use
different picture for the interface. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
88
f. The examples of classroom language expressions and mathematics parts in
the interface should refer to the model conversation in each section. Considering all the suggestions, criticism, and corrections from the Board
of Examiners, the writer made revisions. The revisions are: a.
The writer checked the figure of the adapted instructional designed models Kemp and Yalden and changed the dotted line used in the figure of the steps
of the designed materials into the solid one. b.
To develop the syllabus, the writer adapted the format of syllabus design proposed by Depdiknas Model Pengembangan dan Pelatihan Silabus, 2003:
14 which consists of seven elements. They are competency standard, basic competence, indicators, main materials, learning experience, time allocation,
and sources. c.
The writer changed the figure of the summarize of the research procedur suggested by one of the Board of Examiners.
d. The writer deleted two questions and revised one question for its accuracy.
However, for the observation, the writer could not do it since it needed a lot of time to do.
e. The writer changed and used different picture for the interface to make the
picture relevant with the title of each unit. f.
The writer changed the examples of language expressions and mathematics part which do not refer the model conversation with the suitable ones.
