112
The next part is the main activities in a lesson, Task Cycle. This part consists of three phases, task, planning, and report.
Language Focus is the next part of the unit. This part consists of two main phase, analysis and practice.
The last part of the unit is reinforcement. The reinforcement covers self-reflection and vocabulary list. The availability of the self-reflection is
essential to check the students’ understanding towards the materials. The vocabulary list provides a list of words related to the topic of the unit.
B. Suggestions
The final product of this research is speaking materials for the intermediate level students of International Accounting Education study
program of Yogyakarta State University used in English Tutorial Program at the Centre for Language Development. This researcher would like to give some
suggestions to the following parties.
1. Material Developers
There are some aspects need to be considered by material developers during the process of production and development of learning materials.
Materials and activities should all support articulated learning outcomes which reflect what students should be able to do at the end of the lesson.
Topic, input, and activities used in developing materials should be appr
opriate with the students’ needs and the program that they take. To
113
support the materials development, it is recommended doing needs analysis before developing the materials for a certain course. The needs analysis
defines the target population, their needs, wants, and lacks, the materials content, and skills required to meet the objective.
The success of a lesson has much to do with how well the material developers manage to match the material content to the backgrounds of the
students. The learning outcomes have to reflect the measurable skills, abilities, knowledge, and values that students should be able to do or
demonstrate as a result of completing the course. In order to translate outcomes into course content, material developers should think about what
skills or language functions will demonstrate the achievement of the learning outcomes. The material developers also need to reveal the
knowledge and skills the students already have as well as what they still need. How the language functions will be carried out in the course through
certain activities also has to suit the students’ wants and needs. In short, material developers should consider the principles of
language teaching to meet the needs and wants of the learners. Materials need to be developed in such a way that the teacher can make use of them as
a resource and not have to follow them as a script.
2. ESP Teachers
Developing teachinglearning materials for ESP is more demanded than that for general English because the availability of the ESP learning
114
materials in public is very rare. Because of this, it is suggested that teachers of ESP develop their own specific materials for their own target language
learners. In developing the ESP learning materials, every teacher can follow any approach heshe is familiar with and heshe can develop hisher teaching
materials by applying the principles and procedures of language teaching materials including formulating their teaching objectives and syllabus,
adapting and or supplementing the existing materials, and or creating their own materials.
The same level of specific language for the same level of students may have different teachinglearning materials especially if the material
developer and the proficiency level of the students are different. Therefore, there will never be perfect teachinglearning materials that can be used
anywhere, anytime for the same level of students. This is why I strongly suggest that a teacher develop hisher own teaching materials for hisher
own specific target learners. If a teacher has to use a textbook for some reason, still she has to adjust it with the target learners. There may be some
parts of the textbook which are not exactly suitable for the target learners. A teacher is somewhere in the middle where she uses a textbook for hisher
learners to learn but there is also some space for individual teachers to contribute.
115
References
Altbach, Philip.G. January-February 2004. The Costs and Benefits of World- Class Universities. Academe, retrieved from
www.aaup.org on July 8, 2013
Basturkmen, H. 2010. Developing Courses in English for Specific Purposes. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bialystok, E. 1988. Levels of Bilingualism and Levels of Linguistic Awareness: Developmental Psychology, 24, 560
–567. Borg, W.R. Gall, M.D. 1983 Educational Research: An Introduction 4
th
Edition. New York: Longman, Inc. Brown, H.D. 2001. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to
Language Pedagogy Second Edition. Longman. Brunton, M. 2009. Evaluation of Highly Recommended: A textbook for the Hotel
and Catering Industry. ESP World. 122, Vol. 8, retrieved from http:www.espworld.infoArticles_22esp20essay20for20publication.
htm on June 21, 2013
Carver, D., 1983. Some Propositions about ESP. The ESP Journal 2, pp.131- 137, retrieved from
http:dx.doi.org10.10160272-23809390003-P on
June, 21 2013. Cunningsworth, A., 1995. Choosing Your Textbook. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press. Dudley-Evans, T. St. John, M. J. 1998. Developments in English for Specific
Purposes: A Multidisciplinary Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ellis, R. Rathbone, M. 1987. The Acquisition of German in A Classroom Context. Mimeograph. London: Ealing College of Higher Education.
Ellis, R. 1990. Instructed Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Ellis, R., 2003, Task-based Language Learning and Teaching, Oxford: Oxford University Press..
Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., Borg, W. R. 2003. Educational research: An Introduction 7th ed.. Boston, MA: A B Publications.
116
Harmer, Jeremy. 2001. The Practice of English Language Teaching Third Edition. Longman.
Hornby, A.S. 1995. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English.
London: Oxford University Press. Hutchinson, T. Waters, A. 1987. English for Specific Purposes: A learning
Centered Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hutchinson, T. Waters, A. 1992. English for Specific Purposes: A Learning-
Centered Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hyland, K. 2006. English for Academic Purposes: An advanced resource book.
London: Routledge. Khoon, K.A. 2005. Hallmark of a World-Class University. College Student
Journal, retrieved from http:findarticles.comparticlesmi_m0FCRis_4_39ai_n16123684
on July 8, 2013
Krashen, S. 1985. The Input Hypothesis. London: Longman. Long, M.H. 2005. Second Language Needs Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, retrieved from http:dx.doi.org10.1017CBO9780511667299
on June 25, 2013. Lynch, B. K. 1996. Language Program Evaluation: Theory and practice.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. McDonough, J. and Shaw, C. 2003.
Materials and Methods in ELT: A Teacher’s Guide. 2nd Publishing. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
Niland, J. 2007. The Challenge of Building World-Class Universities. In Sadlak, J. And Liu, N.C. eds., The World Class University and Ranking: Aiming
Beyond Status. Bucharest: UNESCO-CEPES. Niland, J. 3 February 2000. The Challenge of Building World Class Universities
in the Asian Region, retrieved from http:www.onlineopinion.com.auview.asp?article=997
on July 8, 2013 Nunan, D. 1989. Designing Tasks for the Communicative Classroom.
Cambridge. Cambridge University Press. Nunan, D. 1991. Language Teaching Methodology. Prentice Hall.
Nunan, D. 2004. Task-Based Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press
117
Richads, J.C and Renandya, W.A. 2002. Methodology in Language Teaching: An Anthology of Current Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. 2001. Curriculum Development in Language Education.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Richards, J., Platt, J. Webber, H. 1986. A Dictionary of Applied Linguistics.
London: Longman. Richards, J. Rodgers, T. 2001. Approaches and Methods in Language
Teaching. Second Edition. New York: Cambridge University Press. Richards. J. Schmidt, R. 2002. Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching
and Applied Linguistics. Harlow: Pearson. Salmi, J. 2009. The Challenge of Establishing World-class Universities.
Washington DC: The World Bank. Shambaugh, N., S. G. Magliaro 2006. Instructional Design: A systematic
approach for reflective practice. Boston: Pearson A and B. Sharwood Smith, M. A. 1981. Consciousness-Raising and the Second Language
Learner. Applied Linguistics. Sherris, A. 2008. Integrated Content and Language Instruction. Washington,
D.C: Center for Applied Linguistics. Strevens, P. 1988. ESP After Twenty Years: A re-appraisal. In M. Tickoo Ed.,
ESP: State of the art pp. 1-13. SEAMEO Regional Language Centre. Suharto, G. 2006. Penilaian Pembelajaran Bahasa Inggris. Yogyakarta: P2B
Syme, Ireland, Dodds. Accounting 1 7
th
Edition. Canada: Pearson Canada Tomlinson, B. ed.. 1998. Materials Development in Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Tomlinson, B. 2003. Developing Materials for Language Teaching. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press. Willis, J. 1996. A Framework for Task-Based Learning. Longman
118
APPENDICES
119
APPENDIX A
THE NEEDS ANALYSIS
QUESTIONNAIRE
120
Kepada Mahasiswa dan mahasiswi semester 4
Jurusan Pendidikan Akutansi Internasional Fakultas Ekonomi
Di Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta
Sehubungan dengan dilaksanakannya penelitian tentang pengembangan materi pembelajaran Speaking yang digunakan dalam kegiatan English Speaking
Club untuk mahasiswa Pendidikan Akuntansi Internasional di Pusat Pengembangan Bahasa, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, saya mengharapkan
kesediaan Anda untuk meluangkan waktu mengisi angket berikut ini. Angket ini terdiri dari dua bagian. Bagian pertama bertujuan untuk
mengetahui identitas Anda, sedangkan bagian kedua bertujuan untuk mengetahui kebutuhan belajar Bahasa Inggris sesuai dengan sudut pandang Anda.
Angket ini tidak akan berpengaruh terhadap nilai pembelajaran Bahasa Inggris Anda, melainkan hanya untuk mengumpulkan informasi mengenai
kebutuhan belajar Bahasa Inggris Anda dalam kegiatan English Speaking Club, sesuai yang Anda harapkan. Data yang Anda berikan akan saya jaga
kerahasiaannya sesuai dengan kode etik penelitian. Terima kasih atas kesediaan Anda mengisi angket ini.
Yogyakarta, Juni 2013 Peneliti,
Reni Nastiti NIM: 09202241004
121
ANGKET DATA PENELITIAN 1.
Data Pribadi Mahasiswa
Nama :
Umur :
Jenis Kelamin : L P lingkari salah satu
Alamat :
2. Kebutuhan Belajar Mahasiswa
