45
considered to give the opportunities to the students to evaluate their peers, particularly their arguments in their critical writing
2. Cycle 1
Cycle 1 was conducted in two meetings on Wednesday, March 23
rd
2016 and Wednesday, March 30
th
2016. Each meeting in cycle 1 consisted of four steps: the planning, the action, the observation, and the reflection.
a. Planning
The researcher presented the result of the preliminary study to Mr. Priyatno Ardi, S.Pd., M.Hum. as the lecturer of CRW II. The result of the preliminary study
was considered in composing the lesson plan of cycle 1. Collaborative learning was also suggested to the lecturer to be implemented in the meetings during the
research. As the result, the lecturer agreed to apply collaborative learning to help the students improve their critical thinking skills in CRW II.
The lesson plan consisted of eight parts: goals, indicators, materials, source of learning materials, learning methodology, learning media, learning steps, and
learning assessment. The goals were taken from the syllabus of CRW II from the lecturer. The indicators consisted of two points: behavioural indicator students’
participation during discussion in small group and prod uct indicator students’
score in argumentative essay. Three techniques from collaborative learning method were implemented in the lesson plan: peer involvement, peer assessment,
and peer feedback. Peer involvement was implemented to give students opportunities to share their arguments in discussions. The type of the peer
involvement was intra class in small group work with each group consisting of PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
46
around three to four students Gaies, 1985. Peer assessment was implemented to give students’ opportunities to share their arguments on their argumentative essay
with their peers, to assess each others’ draft, and to give feedbacks as the result of the assessment so that their peers could revise the draft and also improve their
arguments in the essay. The type of the peer assessment was assessment of a specific performance to assess students’ writing performance Brown, 2004.
Scoring rubric was designed as an instrument to help the students during the peer assessment. Peer feedback was implemented to facilitate the students to give
feedback to their peers in evaluating their drafts. The type of the peer feedback was student-initiated correction and editing which gave students opportunity to
work in pairs or small groups, exchange and compare their papers, and have discussion on their papers. Feedback is given to each other in the discussion while
teacher may circulate among the students to monitor the discussion Gaies, 1985. The materials were argumentative essay; the students brought their
argumentative essay draft, exchanged their drafts with their peers, shared arguments on their drafts, assessed their peers’ drafts, and gave feedback on their
peers’ draft. All teaching-learning activities were structured with critical thinking skills as the goal of the learning process in frame of Bloom revised taxonomy by
Anderson et al. Eds., 2001 with the last three levels of the cognitive process dimension as the critical thinking skills: analyzing, evaluating, and creating claims
and arguments. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
