Designing english academic writing instructional materials for the dentistry students at Gadjah Mada University Yogyakarta - USD Repository

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  

INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS FOR THE DENTISTRY

STUDENTS AT GADJAH MADA UNIVERSITY

YOGYAKARTA

A Thesis

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree

in English Language Education

  

BY

RUTH HASTUTININGSIH

Student Number: 021214027

  

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM

DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION

FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

2008

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  

This thesis is dedicated to:

.

  

Everyone all over the world who has

helped me believe in my dreams

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

  I would like to express my deepest gratitude to the Lord Jesus Christ, who keeps pouring all His blessings to me with love. His never-ending love and guidance keep me on my destined path. He has been so kind to give me a chance to know number of people who took participation directly or indirectly in completing this thesis. First of all, I owe a great debt to Paulus Kuswandono. S.Pd., M.Ed., my sponsor who willingly reads and gives corrections, comments, and suggestions to my thesis.

  I owe a great debt to Prof. Dr. drg. Munakhir Mudjosemedi, S.U. as the dean of Dentistry Faculty Gadjah Mada University. drg. Muh. Masykur Rahmat, Sp.BM., as the Vice Dean 1, drg. Sri Suparwitri S.U., Sp.Ort., as the Vice Dean 2, drg. Bambang Priyono, S.U., as the Vice Dean 3 of Dentistry Faculty Gadjah Mada University who allow me to conduct research in Dentistry Faculty and the lecturer of English class Drs. Arief Rachman, M.Hum., who allows me to conduct his class. My thanks especially go to drg. Suryono, Ph.D., (Dentistry-UGM), dr. Michele Dawn Shen, M.Kes., (Medical-UGM), Miss Enny (PPBI-USD), Miss Siska (PPBI-UKDW), Pak Arief (English-UGM), whom I really appreciate for their big help in filling the questionnaires.

  My gratitude also goes to all of the lectures in English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University who have given me enough knowledge and who have provided me with examples of caring and perseverance that really enrich my life experiences. I would also like to thank to

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  Mbak Tari and Mbak Danik for helping me with the administrative matters. I am indebted to all students of first semester of Dentistry Faculty Gadjah Mada University and administration staff for helping me.

  To my parents, Soedarsono and Hanna to whom I owe the greatest debt of love and understanding, I want to dedicate this thesis to them. To my brothers Hastangka, S.Fil., Lindra, and Daniel. I thank them for all the fight and sharing. My thank goes to my friends for her sharing and unforgettable experiences, all friends of PBI 2002 that I cannot mention one by one, and my special thank goes to Heather for reading this thesis.

  Ruth Hastutiningsih

  PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE PAGE ……………………….…….……….………….…..………… i APPROVAL PAGE ………………………...…….………..…………….…. ii STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY …..…………..…..…….…. iv DEDICATION PAGE …………………………………...…......................... v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ………………………...…………………..…… vi TABLE OF CONTENTS …………………………..…........….…..……..… viii LIST OF FIGURES .…..….……………………………….………….......... x LIST OF TABLES ……..…………………………....................................... xi TABLE OF APPENDICES ..……………….…..………...……...………… xii ABSTRACT ……………………….……....……...…..………………..…… xiii ABSTRAK ……………………………..…....………..…............................... xiv CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ……….….……….…..…............................

  1 A. The Background of the Study ………..….….……….…………………..

  1 B. Problem Identification ………………………..….…..…………………..

  2 C. Problem Limitation ………………………..….…..……………………...

  4 D. Problem Formulation …………………...…………………...…………...

  4 E. Objectives of the Study …………..…………….…..…..……………..…

  5 F. Benefits of the Study ……………………....…..………..…………….…

  5 G. Definition of Terms …………………..……..…………...........................

  6 CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW ………………………….………….

  7 A Theoretical Description ………….…………...….……….…....................

  7 1. English for Academic Purposes ……...…….….……………………..

  7 a.) The Product Approach …………...........…………….………..

  8 b.) The Process Approach …………….….….…...........................

  9 c.) Summarizing and Paraphrasing …………………….………..

  9

  2. Course Design ……………………...……………………………….... 10

  a. Course Design Models …………….....…...…….…………......….. 10 1) Kemp’s Model …………………….......……........................... 10 2) Hutchinson and Waters’ Model ……….......…..…..…………. 12

  b. Need Analysis ……………………….…......…..………….………. 13 1) Target Situation Analysis …………...…….…………..……... 14 2) Present Situation Analysis …………….……........................... 15 c Learning Objectives ………………...………….………..……..… 16 d The EAP Syllabus …………….………………………….………. 16

  3. Material Design ………………....…….….…...................................... 16

  a. Material Evaluation ……………..…….………………………… 18

  b. Material Development ………………….….................................. 19

  c. The Expanded Model ……………….…..…..……………..…….. 20

  4. Writing and Teaching Academic Writing ……....……………………. 22

  a. Process writing …………………………...…..….....…….……… 23

  b. Error Analysis ………………………..………….………………. 27

  PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY …………………......….…..….................. 31 A Method .…………………………………...…...…..…………………….. 31

  1. Educational Research and Development (R&D) …..………………… 31

  2. Need Survey ….…………………...….……………………………… 36 B Respondents ….. ……………………….….…..……………….. 37

  1. The Respondents of Need Analysis Survey ….……......………….…. 37

  2. The Respondents of Material Evaluation Survey …..……...………… 37 C Setting .…………………………......…....................................................... 38 D Instruments .……………………….……….……………………………...

  38

  1. Questionnaires ….………………….....……………………………….. 39

  2. Interviews …..…………………………...…..…..…………………….. 40

  3. Classroom Observation checklist .………....….……..…….…………. 41

  E. Writing Procedure Document (Error Analysis) ….…….…..…..……….… 42

  F. Data Gathering .……………………………….…..….…..…………….… 43

  G. Data Analysis ….………………………...….….….……........................... 43

  H. Research Procedure …………………...…….…………............................. 45

  CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS ………….… 47 A Conducting Needs Survey Research ……………………………….…… 46 B. Analyzing the Data …………………………………………………….... 49 C. Writing a Syllabus of Instructional Materials Development …………… 62 D. Developing Instructional Materials ….….……………….………………. 63

  1. Selection of the Writing Tasks …..…………………………………… 64

  2. The Technical Presentation …..…………………………………...….. 65

  E. Evaluating the Instructional Materials …..……………………………….. 66

  F. Revision the Instructional Materials …..…………………………………. 67

  1. The Second Research Respondents’ General Evaluation and Suggestions ….…………………………………...…………………… 67

  2. Discussion on the Design Materials Evaluation …..…………..……… 69

  G. Writing the Final Draft of the Materials ….……………………………… 70

  H. Presenting the Final Version of the Designed Materials …..……….….… 70

  CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS ….……….…........... 71 A. Conclusions …..………………………..…...…......................................... 71 B. Suggestions …..……………….….…..…..................................................

  72 BIBLIOGRAPHY …..……………………….……………………………… 74

  APPENDIX

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2. 1 Kemp’s Instructional Model: then relationship of each step in

the plan to the other step.

  

Figure 2. 2 A Learning Centered Approach to Course Design. (Hutchison

and Waters 1987:72) Figure 2. 3 The Materials Evaluation Process Model Figure 2. 4 A Materials Design Model. Figure 2. 5 An Expanded Materials Model Figure 2. 6 The Research Steps (Combined Models)

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1 The First Questionnaire (Need Analysis)Table 3.2 Tally Sheet for Analyzing Classroom Interaction (Checklist)Table 4.1 First Survey Data Setting ResearchTable 4.2 The Descriptive Statistics of the Respondents’ Opinion on the First Survey Research.Table 4.3 The Descriptive Statistics of Tally Sheet for Analyzing Classroom Interaction (Checklist)Table 4.4 Sub-Categorized ErrorsTable 4.5 The Second survey Research DataTable 4.6 The Descriptive Statistics of the Respondents’ Opinion on the Second Survey Research.Table 4.7 The Second Questionnaire Data Tabulation

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1 Permission Letters Appendix 2 Need Survey First Questionnaire (Need Analysis) Appendix 3 Need Survey Second Questionnaire Appendix 4 Worksheet Writing

Appendix 5 The Descriptive Statistics of the Respondents’ Opinion on the First

Survey Research.

  Appendix 6 Sub-Categorized Errors The Descriptive Statistics of the Respondents’ Opinion on the second Appendix 7 Survey Research. Appendix 8 The Designed Materials Syllabus and Lesson Plan Appendix 9 The Designed Materials Presentation.

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  

ABSTRACT

Hastutiningsih, Ruth. 2008. Designing English Academic Writing Instructional

Materials For The Dentistry Students At Gadjah Mada University Yogyakarta.

  Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma Yogyakarta.

  Nowadays the students must produce academic writing as an assignment and academic papers in order to finish their study. This study was meant to discuss how a set of academic writing instructional materials is designed and what the set of academic writing for the Dentistry instructional materials look like.

  In order to answer the first question on how to develop the instructional materials, two combined models of instructional design were employed, i.e. Hutchinson and Waters’ and Kemp’s model. The steps recommended in the two models were identifying learner, analyzing learning and target situation, determining learning objectives, listing the subject content, making a choice of learning activities determining support services and evaluating and opinion on ten instructional materials from English instructor and experienced in teaching writing English for dentistry students or graduate students of other studies. From the second survey research respondent opinion of the designed materials, it can be seen that between the ranges of scales 1-5 the mean scores of the answer were 4.0. It means that most of the respondents agree that the designed set of academic writing skill proposed in this study had fulfilled the requirements of suitable material. The results of the second survey research were used as the basis for the revision and improvement of the instructional materials.

  To answer the second question, text analysis of the Dentistry faculty textbooks, error analysis of the students writing drafts and the evaluation of the existing writing materials were carried out. The relevant tasks for the actual Dentistry students were drafting, identifying sentences, topic sentence, summarizing, outlining, paraphrasing, paragraph and essay writing.

  The designed materials consist of eight units. Each unit is presented in three sections and sequenced from easier to more difficult, simpler to more complex and from controlled to free activities. The “Pre-writing stage” section acts as the input stimulus to motivate students’ interest on the topic. Then, the “language focus” provides opportunity for the students to break the language into pieces, study how it works and put it back together again. The “Whilst-writing” section provides explanation on various tasks to practice writing ranging from simple to more complicated tasks. Besides that students are provided exercises on writing tasks based on each type of tasks. The “Post-writing” section provides revising and editing where the lecturer gives comment and students analyze their mistake

  Based on the conclusions, two suggestions are proposed. First, teachers need to carefully select materials in order to match the learners’ need. Second, it is suggested that the English Language Education Program of Sanata Dharma University train its students to be able to teach English for academic purpose and

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  

ABSTRAK

Hastutiningsih, Ruth. 2008. Designing English Academic Writing Instructional

Materials For The Dentistry Students At Gadjah Mada University Yogyakarta.

  Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma Yogyakarta.

  Sekarang ini mahasiswa harus menghasilkan penulisan akademik sebagai tugas kuliah dan makalah akademik dalam menyelesaikan studi mereka. Studi ini dimaksudkan untuk bagaimana satu rangkaian tugas-tugas menulis untuk mengembangkan kemampuan mahasiswa dalam menulis tugas akademik untuk mahasiswa Kedokteran Gigi didesain dan seperti apa bentuk kelompok tugas tugas menulis itu.

  Untuk menjawab pertanyaan pertama, yakni bagaimana mengembangkan materi pengajaran, dua model kombinasi rancangan instruksi pengajaraan digunakan yakni model Hutchinson dan Waters dan model Kemp langkah- langkah yang dianjurkan dalam dua model ini adalah mengidentifikasi pembelajar, menganalisa situasi dan target belajar, menentukan tujuan pembelajaran, mendaftar isi materi pembelajaran, memilih kegiatan belajar, menentukan jasa jasa pendukung dan mengevaluasi meteri yang telah didesain. Penelitian survey yang kedua dilakukan untuk memperoleh evaluasi dan pendapat tentang survey materi pengajaran dari instruktur bahasa Inggris yang berpengalaman mengajar bahasa Inggris untuk mahasiswa Kedokteran gigi atau mahasiswa S2 disiplin ilmu lain. Dari pendapat respondent penelitian survey kedua, dapat dilihat bahwa antara skala 1 sampai 5 skor rata-rata jawaban adalah 4.0 ini berarti bahwa sebagian besar responden setuju bahwa kumpulan tugas- tugas menulis yang disusun untuk mengembangkan kemampuan menulis tugas akademik mahasiswa yang diusulkan selama studi ini telah memenuhi tuntutan materi yang sesuai. Dari hasil penelitian ini digunakan sebagai dasar bagi revisi dan penyempurnaan materi pengajaran.

  Untuk menjawab pertanyaan kedua, analisa wacana buku-buku pegangan kuliah bahasa Inggris, analisa kesalahan dari naskah konsep mahasiswa dan evaluasi materi materi writing yang ada dilaksanakann. Tugas-tugas menulis yang relevan untuk kuliah kuliah kedokteran gigi yang sebenarnya adalah tugas mencatat, menulis, mengidentifikasi kalimat, menulis kalimat utama, meringkas, membuat garis besar, membuat konsep, membuat paraphrase, menulis paragraf dan menulis esei.

  Materi yang disusun terdiri dari delapan satuan pelajaran. Masing-masing satuan pelajaran disajikan dalam tiga bagian dan dirangkai dari yang lebih mudah ke yang lebih sulit, dari yang lebih sederhana ke yang lebih rumit, dari yang terkendali ke yang lebih bebas. Bagian tahapan “Pre-writing” berperan sebagai stimulus awal untuk memotivasi minat mahasiswa pada topik. Kemudian

  

“Language focus” memberi kesempatan pada mahasiswa untuk mengupas bahasa

menjadi bagian yang terkecil, mempelajari fungsinya dan menyusunnya kembali.

  Bagian “Whilst-writing” memberi penjelasan tentang tugas-tugas menulis yang

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  pada tugas-tugas yang rumit. Disamping itu siswa juga diberikan latihan soal menulis berdasarkan masing-masing tipe latihan. Bagian “Post-writing” memberikan pengoreksian dan pengeditan dimana dosen akan memberikan koreksinya dan komentarnya dan siswa menganalisa kesalahan tersebut.

  Berdasarkan kesimpulan yang diambil, ada dua saran yang diberikan. Pertama, pengajar perlu untuk menyeleksi materi secara berhati-hati supaya sesuai dengan kebutuhan pembelajar. Kedua, disarankan bagi Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Sanata Dharma untuk melatih mahasiswanya untuk mampu mengajar bahasa Inggris untuk tujuan khusus untuk memenuhi tuntutan pendidikan.

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION This study addresses Designing English Academic Writing Instructional Materials for the Dentistry Students at Gadjah Mada University Yogyakarta . This study intends to develop instructional materials for

  academic writing. To establish the purpose of this study, chapter one consists of several main parts. This chapter discusses the Background of the Study, Problem Limitations, Problem Formulations, Objectives of the Study, Benefits of the Research, Definitions of Terms.

A. The Background of the Study The ability to write in English is very important in current times.

  English is considered the most acceptable language among other international languages. This has created a need for mastering English. Many people study an English course to become competent with the language or learn it by themselves through books.

  Nowadays, in Indonesia, university students must produce academic papers written in English as a prerequisite to completing their study.

  Therefore, the immediate need to write in the English language motivates the students to take an English academic writing course. Undergraduate students face many kinds of writing tasks as they study their chosen degree program.

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  2 Naturally, these tasks are different from one-degree program to another. They are, however, similar in two respects. First, the tasks become more complex.

  Second, they need to be written in appropriate academic language.

  Writing skills are considered the most difficult aspect of language skills because it takes a long time to process and may be considered as a boring activity. Writing skills require students to express their ideas, opinions and thought in written form. Sometimes ideas just come out spontaneously; therefore, writing is a good tool to record our ideas without having lost any of the ideas.

  Another reason why writing in English is considered as one of the most difficult requirements is because they know what to write but they do not know how to phrase their ideas appropriately into their paper. Moreover, many students think in their first language and translate their thoughts a sentence per sentence as they write in English, rather than translating the broader ideas from the first to the second language.

B. Problem Identification

  The students of Dentistry Faculty in Gadjah Mada University are required to pass an English course that is offered by Dentistry Curriculum for Undergraduate students. Most students of the Dentistry Faculty have already mastered Basic English grammar but these students still have many problems in their writing.

  There are a few students of Dentistry students who write their thesis in

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  3 English. The reason for this is that in Indonesia, not many research studies exist on writing courses designed to help such students complete a thesis writing to an acceptable standard.

  The Dentistry Department of Gadjah Mada University needs to reconstruct its old instructional materials and create a new English design subject. The reason is that the old design does not cover all the students’ needs in order to understand English textbooks and write academic writing well. It means that the design consists of one subject materials that are translating materials. There are many assignment papers and English books available as references that may be used in the Dentistry faculty. The students need guidance in writing skills in order to be able to write good paragraphs and summarize the books. Furthermore, there are not many alternative materials that are especially designed for Dentistry study. The materials used were authentic texts that did not represent the Dentistry field. There were no English materials or textbooks available for this department based on the Dentistry curriculum. Moreover, the Dentistry Department of Gadjah Mada University needs to design a new English syllabus because it is important in order to promote positive student behavior by addressing students learning needs.

  The problem with the Dentistry students’ lack of English writing ability is attributed to a number of factors. Firstly, students do not have sufficient knowledge and guidelines of how to write well. Secondly, writing activities are mostly applied to assignments when the lecturer cannot come to

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  4 the class. As a result, the lack of English writing skills and achievement of Dentistry students becomes an obstacle in producing good English writing, although several techniques have been applied to teach writing. Students still have trouble when they are asked to write. Thirdly, the students face difficulties in formatting a paragraph, summarizing, and organizing ideas to form well-developed English academic piece of writing.

  C. Problem Limitation

  The first semester students need to have a strong writing foundation because they will use more complex texts in the following semesters, it means that they need to prepare themselves from the very first of semester. The writing deals mostly with writing essays, research papers, report papers and summaries. Therefore, in this study the researcher limits the problem in writing a good paragraph and summarizing, organizing the idea to form well- developed English academic piece of writing. The researcher focuses on Designing English Academic Writing Instructional Materials for the Dentistry Students at Gadjah Mada University.

  D. Problem Formulation

  Based on the above discussion, two problems can be identified as follows:

  1. How is a set of instructional academic writing materials designed?

  2. What do the set of instructional materials for the Dentistry Students look

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  5

  E. Objectives of the Study

  The goal of this research is to design a set of English instructional materials for students of Dentistry. The aim of the research is to:

  1. Design a set of instructional academic writing materials.

  2. Present a set of English instructional materials

  F. Benefits of the Study

  The results of this study should make a beneficial contribution to the following:

  1. The students of the Dentistry department, who will be provided with scientifically well-developed English Academic Writing instructional materials that are developed based on general scientific research such as lab reports, argumentative pieces of writing and essays.

  2. The English lecturers of the Dentistry department, who will gain a set of English Academic Writing instructional materials matching the need of the Dentistry students.

  3. The researcher, who is a student of the English Education Program, will gain benefits from this research because she will learn how to design an instructional program in English for Academic Purposes and how to develop teaching materials.

  This may be the starting point to carry out further study in English skills in Dentistry students. Further research is needed because the materials need to be evaluated, reprogrammed and reconstructed as soon as the direct

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  6

G. Definitions of Terms

  This section aims to describe the terms concerning the research that are considered important for Dentistry students to know. Without the description of the terms there may be confusion, misunderstanding or misinterpretation about those terms, which is why the description of terms is very important and becomes an essential part to understanding the research.

  Defining the following terms:

  1. Academic writing (Robinson 1991: 103) is the kind of writing that is required in college or university. In order to write effectively, it takes practice to develop the skill. It is important, therefore, to bear in mind that writing is an ongoing process, not a finished “product”. This means that a piece of writing is never complete; it can be continuously reviewed and revised.

  2. Instructional materials as defined by Kemp (1977:134-136) stated that instructional materials mean those that would help teachers in transmitting information to their students so that the previously stated objectives can be optimally achieved.

  3. Course design According to Hutchinson and Waters (1987:65), course design is a process by which the raw data related to the learning needs is interpreted to make an integrated series of teaching-learning experiences.

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  7

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW The first part discusses the theoretical foundation underlying the study that

  will be presented in the theoretical description. The second part is the discussion of the theoretical framework of the study.

A. Theoretical Description

  This section contains six major discussions of theories underlying this study. Firstly, it discusses the definition of English for academic purposes, since the instructional materials designed are intended for the Dentistry students. Secondly, theories of instructional design models and processes are elaborated. The discussions are two instructional models; a need analysis, learning objectives, syllabus and instructional materials. Finally, an appropriate teaching method for academic writing is presented.

1. English for Academic Writing

  The instructional materials designed in this study are intended for the Dentistry students of Gadjah Mada University. As previously mentioned they are undergraduate students of Dentistry. This section will discuss the definitions of the English for Academic Purposes that underlie the design of the language course for the Dentistry students. The types of students taught in

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  8 8 through the university. They may be undergraduates or graduates. Robinson

  (1991:103) states that the design of an EAP course is based on a range of topics and texts from several disciplines. Of general current concern however, is the focus on discipline-specific topics and texts, such as, economics, medicine, and engineering. The format and development are similar in each, suggesting that the authors believe that students require practice in the same strategies and tasks, whatever the discipline. The researcher used two approaches; the product approach and the process approach Robinson (1991: 103). Two approaches used in teaching writing are namely process and product approaches.

  The feature of the product method is: Model

  → comprehension/analysis/manipulation → new input → parallel → text

  The features of the process approach are: Writing task

  → draft 1 → feedback → revision → input → draft 2 → feedback → revision draft 3

  (Robinson 1991: 103)

a.) The Product Approach

  A model is provided in the product approach and various exercises undertaken to draw attention to its important features. Students are required to

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  9 writing, its structure, cohesion, various grammatical aspects and academic style; also some incorporate elements of the process approach.

  b.) The Process Approach

  This approach relates to the principles of learner-centered learning, encouraging individuals to take more responsibility for their own learning.

  Drafting, feedback, revisions and informed choices, students can make clearer decisions about the direction of their writing.

  Feedback is an important element in the process approach to writing. Keh (1990) discusses three types of feedback: peer-evaluation, conferences (i.e teacher-students interaction and written comments by a teacher. She concludes that each type of feedback has its uses and advantages. From the point of view of academic writing, this approach has the advantage of drawing attention to the constant need to draft and revise; in other words, encouraging students to be responsible for making improvements for themselves.

  c.) Summarizing and Paraphrasing

  Summary writing is an important aspect of academic writing and is linked to academic reading, by means of note making. An integral part of reading and summarizing is paraphrasing. Paraphrasing is expressing someone else’s ideas in your own words, structure and style. This difficult but essential skill is practiced step by step. The integration of others’ writing has also been commented on by Leki and Carson (1994) who recommended that:

  ‘EAP writing classes need to move away from writing tasks that require

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  10 work that encourages students to integrate those opinions and experiences with external sources of information and argument.’

2. Course Design

a. Course Design Models

  Two course design models are used based on their applicability and practicality to a language course design. The instructional design is a complex process that is composed of many interrelated parts and functions that must operate in a coherent manner in order to achieve success. Dick and Reiser (1989:62-67) point out that instructional materials simply mean that the materials are planned or designed by the instructor. Instructional material design is done in order to set the context of instruction.

  The models of instructional design that will be presented in this study are designed by Kemp and by Hutchinson and Waters.

  The models of instructional design that are presented include:

1) Kemp’s Model

  Jerold E. Kemp (1977:8) states that the instructional design plan is designed to supply an answer to three questions:

• What must be learnt? (Objectives)
• What procedures and resources will work best to teach the designed learning levels? (Activities and resources).
• How will we know when the required learning takes place?

  (Evaluation)

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  11 Kemp (1977: 8) proposes an instructional design model, which consists of eight parts, namely:

• Consider the goals, list the topics, and state the general purposes for teaching each topic.
• Enumerate the characteristics of the leaner for whom the instruction is to be designed.
• Specify the learning objectives to be achieved in terms of measurable students’ behavioral outcomes.
• List the subject content that supports each objective.
• Develop pre-assessments to determine the students’ background and present their level of knowledge about the topic.
• Select teaching and learning activity and instructional resources that will address the subject content in order that students will accomplish the objectives.
• Coordinate such support services such as budget, personnel, facilities, equipment, and schedules to carry out the instructional plan.
• Evaluate students’ leaning in terms of their accomplishment of objectives, with a view to revising and reevaluating any phases of the plan that need improvement.

  The eight steps suggested by Kemp are flexible and clear. There is interdependence among eight elements. A designer can start whichever step they choose. It is because all steps are interrelated. The strength of Kemp’s

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  12 that may start from any of the steps, whenever the designer is ready. Therefore the steps are interdependent on each other however they can also stand by themselves. The relationship of each step in the plan to the other step can be seen below:

  Figure 2. 1 Kemp’s Instructional Model: then relationship of each

step in the plan to the other step (Kemp 1977:9).

  Goals, topics, & General Purposes

  Evaluation Learner Characteristic

  Support REVISION

  Learning services Objectives

  Teaching/learning Subject

  Activities, Resources

  Pre- assessment

2) Hutchinson and Waters’ Model

  Hutchinson and waters (1987:72) offer a learning centered approach to course design. Hutchinson and Waters (1987:21) state that course design is “the process by which raw data about a learning need is interpreted in order to produce an integrated series of teaching-learning experiences, whose ultimate aim is to lead the learners to a particular state of knowledge.” This approach holds on to the principle that the learner is the one who determines the

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  13 There are two reasons why this approach should be used. First, learning, as an internal process, is seen as a process where the learners use their existing knowledge and skills to process the information being presented to them. Therefore, learning depends on the knowledge that the learners already have and their ability and motivation to use it. Secondly, a learning centered approach to course designs considers the learners at every step of the design process.

  Figure 2. 2 A Learning Centered Approach to Course Design. (Hutchinson and Waters 1987:74)

Identify learners

Theoretical view of language

  Analyze learning situation Theoretical view of learning

  Analysis of target situation Identify skills and knowledge needed to function in the target situation Write

syllabus/materials to

exploit the potential of the learning situation in

the acquisition of the

skills and knowledge

required by the target

situation Identify students’ attitudes/wants/potential

  Identify needs/potential/constraints of learning/teaching situation Course Evaluation

  Course Evaluation Teach course

  Teach course

b. Needs Analysis

  A needs analysis is considered to be the first important procedure. Some researchers consider the needs analysis as a criteria of ESP, because without it

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  14 the course designers will find difficulties. Widdowson (1981:2) defines that needs mean what they students have to be able to do at the end of their language course. Mountford (1981:27) has another definition of needs analysis. He says that needs mean what the users-institution or society at large regards as necessary or desirable to be learnt from a program of language instruction. To determine what English the students need, a needs analysis must be carried out. It simply identifies the learners’ personal, socio-cultural, and educational traits, their expectations and interest and what the students need to do in English tasks, the context in which they will do it texts and what their current level of English is. Because of the various definitions of needs, course designers define needs as what a particular group of students need English for.

1) Target Situation Analysis

  Target situation analysis concerns the learner’s future roles and the linguistics skills and knowledge required to perform competently in writing in a target context. This involves mainly objective and product-oriented data: identifying the contexts of language use, observing the language events in these contexts, listing the genres employed, collecting and analyzing target genres.

  Hutchinson and Waters define target needs as an umbrella term for necessity, lacks and wants. Necessity is what the learners need to know in order to function effectively in a target situation. Lacks mean the gap between

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  15 the target proficiency and the existing knowledge that the students already have. Wants are the perceived needs by the students. What the students want to learn may not necessarily match what they need to learn. Hutchinson provides a simple framework and Waters (1987:59) outlines the kind of information that course designers need to gather from an analysis of target needs.

• Why is the language needed?
• How will the language be used?
• What will the content areas be?
• Who will the learner use the language with?
• Where will the language be used?
• When will the language be used? This question outline is used as source of information for the course designer to gather from an analysis of target needs. The materials course designer is made to reflect on this outline.

2) Present Situation Analysis

  Present situation analysis refers to information about learners’ current abilities, familiarity with writing processes and writing genres, their skills and perceptions; what they are able to do and what they want to do at the beginning of the course. Data can therefore be objective (age, proficiency, prior learning experiences) and subjective (self perceived needs, strengths, and weaknesses).

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  16 Hutchinson and Waters have defined the gap between the target situation and the present situation as the learning needs. Hutchinson and

  Waters (1987:62-63) have developed a checklist to analyze learning needs. They are stated as follows: