TEACHERS’ STRATEGIES IN ASSESSING WRITING IN AN EYL CONTEXT.

(1)

PAGE OF APPROVAL

ABSTRACT ………... i

DECLARATION……… ii

PREFACE ……….……….… iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……….…..……… iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS ……….……….………… v

LIST OF TABLES ……….………...……… ix

LIST OF PICTURES ……….……….. xi

LIST OF APPENDICES ……….……… xiii

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION……….……… 1

1.1 Background of the Study ……… 1

1.2 Questions of the Study ………….……… 4

1.3 Aims of the Study ………. 4

1.4 Limitation of the Study ………. 5

1.5 Significance of the Study….………..… 5

1.6 Methodology of the Study….………..………. 5

1.7 Organization of the Paper ……….. 7

(2)

CHAPTER II THEORETICAL FOUNDATION ………. 9

2.1 Writing ……….………. 9

2.1.1 The Nature of Writing ……….………. 9

2.1.2 Aspects of Writing ……….……….. 10

2.2 Teaching Program for Writing………..……... 11

2.2.1 Preparing a Lesson Plan……… 12

2.2.2 Strategies in Writing Activity……….………...… 14

2.2.2.1 Copying………..……..……….. 14

2.2.2.2 Word Activities ……….……… 19

2.2.2.3 Sentence Activities ……… 22

2.2.2.4 Creative Writing Activities………. 26

2.2.3 Doing the Assessment………..……… 29

2.3 Assessing Young Learners’ Writings ………..……. 30

2.3.1 Testing or Assessment……….. 31

2.3.2 The Reason for Assessing Young Learners’ Writings..……….. 31

2.3.3 Characteristics of Children in Writing Activities ……… 35

2.3.4 Principles for Assessing Writing ………. 38

2.3.5 Types of Assessing Writing ……… 39

2.3.6 The Correction Procedures in Assessing Writing……… 41

2.3.7 Other Things to Help Students When They Make Mistakes………… 44

2.4 Previous Researches on Assessing Writing……… 45

2.5 English as Local Content in Primary School………. 47

(3)

3.1 Statements of the Problem……….…….. 49

3.2 Methodology of the Study ……….. 49

3.3 Site and Participants ………... 50

3.3.1 The Site………..……… 50

3.3.2 The Participants ……….……... 52

3.4Data Collection Methods……….. 52

3.4.1 Class Observation……….. 53

3.4.2 Interviewing ………..……….……… 54

3.4.3 Document Analysis……… 55

3.5 Data Analysis ………..………... 56

3.5.1 Data Reduction…..………..……… 57

3.5.2 Data Display…..………..……… 58

3.5.3 Conclusion Drawing…..…….……….……..……… 59

3.6 Concluding Remark……….……….……… 59

CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS………. 60

4.1 The kinds of strategies are applied by the English teachers in assessing writing in EYL context in Primary School in Bandung ……. 60

4.2 Teachers’ reasons in choosing those assessment strategies………… 80

4.3 To what extent is the assessment appropriate for the teaching programs ……….……….……….……… 105

(4)

CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS……….. 112

5.1 Conclusions….……… 112

5.2 Suggestions……….. 113

BIBLIOGRAPHY ……….. 115

APPENDICES……….….. 122

(5)

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents the introduction of this study. The discussion begins with the background underlying this study. Statements of the problem, aims of the study, limitation of the study, significance of the study, and research method are presented next. Finally, this chapter is ended by presenting the paper organization.

1.1 Background of the Study

Since English develops as one of the foreign language subjects at schools in Indonesia, it becomes an important subject at schools. The students are expected to master English in this globalization era. It can be proved that English is taught to students of primary schools, junior high schools, and senior high schools, and also students at university.

The significance of English as one of local contents at primary schools is evident in local content curriculum No. 060/U/1993 in 25 February 1993. English program is given to fourth grade to sixth grade at primary schools. On the whole, primary schools are allowed to teach English subject as local content to students since fourth grade.

Teachers used many strategies in English teaching learning activities. The strategies of teaching English to young learners are not followed by the assessment strategy in the comments of Georgiou and Pavlou (2003) as cited in Masitoh (2008). Rixon (1995) also has stated in his research that many EYL

(6)

teachers especially the new ones were unclear about the strategy of the assessment.

All of the teachers need assessments in evaluating students. As explained by Pinter (2006) and Damayanti (2008), when the teachers would like to know the effectiveness of their teaching and the progress of their students’ learning in the classroom, they used assessment. Overall, assessment is one of the important parts in teaching and learning process.

Writing is one of the language skills that need to be learned by children. Writing is not an easy skill to be mastered. For most people, writing is a difficult and complex process. As outlined by Nunan (1998:86), writing is not only the action of arranging the words, but also arranging them into the well organized result.

Assessing writing to children and to adults is different in the comment of Weigle (2009:1). He states that what makes it different is that children have different characteristics from adults. It means that assessing writing to children needs certain strategies.

At present, mastery of English for educational and professional purposes increases because of the function of English as a language of world communication. The teaching and the assessment on writing are receiving more attention than ever before. From this real situation, there are found many kinds of research that are related to the assessment on writing in EYL context.

Many strategies, in assessing writing, have been conducted relating to EYL context. Research by Rixon and Rea-Dickins (1999) has showed that paper

(7)

and pencil test is mostly used by teachers to assess their students’ writings. They used paper and pencil test as major tools in assessing. The significance of assessing writing to EYL was evident in the comments of O’Connor (2001) in a report. He states that it was used as a measure of technical knowledge and understanding. That was traditional paper and pencil measures. As outlined by McKay (2006), preparing young learners to take a paper and pencil test was likely to be at the spread of real experience with the language such as writing e-mails to e-pals.

A study about assessing writing in adult second language (L2) has been done. Research which was carried out in Sweden investigated the promotion of self assessment and reflection in L2 classroom. Sullivan and Lindgren (2002:258) describe, “a method is intended in which the computer is used first to record a writing session, and then later to replay the entire text production in retrospective peer sessions”. The method offered the students with a chance to look into their own composing processes both linguistically and holistically. As they analyzed and discussed, this method is not limited to an L2 environment, but it is useful for the achievement process.

This study investigates the strategies that are used by teachers in assessing writing. The participants are the teachers at a primary school who teach students in the fifth grade. The second question of this study is why teachers choose the assessment strategies. And the last, it is to find the appropriate assessment for teaching program.

(8)

There are some differences between this study and previous studies. First, in this study, the participants are teachers while in the previous studies, they were students. Second, this study examines what teachers’ strategies are used in assessing writing without choosing the strategies first while in the previous studies, they chose the strategies first. And the last, this study observes how the teachers assess their students while the previous studies observed how a strategy of assessing writing was applied in the class. Based on the explanation above, the writer conclusively determines to carry “teachers’ strategies in assessing writing in EYL context” as the title of study.

1.2 Questions of the Study

There are three questions of study addressed in this paper:

1. What kinds of strategies are applied by the English teachers in assessing writing in EYL context at Elementary School in Bandung?

2. Why do teachers choose those assessment strategies?

3. To what extent is the assessment appropriate for the teaching programs?

1.3 Aims of the Study

This study is aimed:

1. To discover assessment strategies that are applied by English teachers in assessing writing in EYL context at Elementary School in Bandung;

2. To reveal teachers’ reasons in choosing those strategies; and 3. To know the appropriate assessment for the teaching programs.

(9)

1.4 Limitations of the Study

This study focuses on identifying teacher’s strategies that are used to assess young learners’ progress in writing at six selected elementary schools in Bandung. This study concerns with assessment strategies, reasons for choosing those assessment strategies, and the appropriate assessment for the teaching programs.

1.5 Significance of the Study

This study is expected to provide a portrait of the assessment strategies for young learners’ progress in writing at primary schools, teachers’ reasons in choosing those strategies, and the appropriate assessment for the young learners. Practically, it is estimated to provide valuable information for the teachers about assessment for young learners. Hopefully, some assessment strategies revealed from this study can be applied in assessing young learner at primary school. Hence, it will give significant contribution to English teachers at primary schools in assessing young learners.

1.6 Methodology of the Study

A description about methodology which consists of study design, data collection, and data analysis is explored below.

In order to answer the research questions, this study employs a qualitative research design. As discussed by Silverman (2005:15), through qualitative research design, the researcher can get complex and also holistic picture about the

(10)

problem. The researcher has an opportunity to get clear information of the assessment strategies used by English teachers at primary schools, the teachers’ reasons in choosing those strategies, and the appropriate assessment for the young learners. In qualitative research, the design allows the researcher to examine students’ written texts that were produced in natural classroom activities (Sugiyono, 2007:8; Alwasilah, 2006:78; and Fraenkel and Wallen, 1993:11).

Data analysis is done after all the data, which consisted of observation data, interview data, and document analysis, have been gained. In analyzing the data, the data from class observation, document analysis and interview are classified according to the research questions.

The data collected from the document analysis are also labeled. Those are analyzed descriptively. The data collected from the interview are transcribed, classified, and interpreted. The data collected from the classroom observation are transcribed, documented into observation sheets, classified, and interpreted.

This study applies the Interactive Model by Miles and Huberman (1984). There are three steps of analyzing the data. There are data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing. Data reduction means that the researcher summarized and chose the main items to construct particular pattern. Data display is the form of graphics, tables, charts, or citation. Conclusion drawing is explaining a new finding.

(11)

1.7 Organization of the Paper

This paper is organized in five chapters and each chapter has subtopics which elaborate the issue given. Chapter I presents introduction. It consists of background of the study, questions of the study, aims of the study, limitation of the study, significance of the study, methodology of the study, clarification of key terms, and organization of the paper. Chapter II presents literature review. It deals with the theoretical frameworks which are relevant with the study. Chapter III is methodology of the study. It elaborates the methodology used for this study including the research design, data collection, and data analysis and the procedure of the research. Chapter IV shows findings and discussions. It presents the findings of the study and the discussions. The result answers the research questions. Chapter V presents the conclusions and suggestions derived from this study.

1.8 Definition of Key Terms

Some terms used in this study would be clarified in order to avoid unnecessary missunderstanding. They include assessment, young learners, primary school, English teacher, and strategy.

As defined by Pinter (2006:131), assessment refers to the process of data analysis that teachers use to get evidence about their learners’ performance and progress in learning. Assessment in this study refers to any systematic way of finding out about people’s level of knowledge or skill, in this case the people are young language learners at primary school.

(12)

The writer also would like to define evaluation term to differentiate the meaning. In the explanation of Brown (2004:5), he describes that evaluation concerns systematic ways of finding out about the value and impact of processes and things such as teaching program, teaching material, etc.

Young learners in this study refer to children who are in the fifth grade of elementary school. As defined by Pinter (2006:2), young learners are children who are around five until thirteen years old. And in Indonesia, children in fifth grade are they who are around eleven to thirteen years old.

As explained by Oxford dictionary (1987:426), primary school is where primary education is given. It is the first stage of education. Primary schools in this study refer to the elementary schools which put English as one of the subjects in their curriculum.

English teachers in this study refer to those who teach English in fifth grade at elementary school. In this study, there are six teachers chosen.

As fined by Oxford dictionary (1987:552), strategy is plan of action in education, politics, or business, etc. In this study, strategy means any action plan of variety exercises, activities, or tasks used for administering the assessment in the classroom.

(13)

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter discusses the research methodology used in the study. It covers statement of the problem, methodology of the study, definition of key terms, site and participants, data collection methods, data analysis, and concluding mark.

3.1Statements of the Problem

This study was conducted to answer the following questions:

a. What kinds of strategies are applied by the English teachers in assessing writing in EYL context at Primary School in Bandung?

b. Why do teachers choose those assessment strategies?

c. To what extent is the assessment appropriate for the teaching programs?

3.2 Methodology of the Study

In this study, descriptive method was used. Through qualitative research design, Silverman (2005:15) states “the researcher can get complex and also

holistic picture about the problem” and it is evident in the comments of Sugiyono

(2006) and Sukmadinata (2007) when they state that the purpose of conducting the descriptive method is to give a portrait in real condition without interference from the researcher. In this method, the researcher has an opportunity to get clear

(14)

information of the assessment strategies used by English teachers at primary

schools, the teachers’ reasons in choosing those strategies, and the appropriate assessment for the young learners.

In qualitative research, as explained by Sugiyono (2007:8), the design

allows the researcher to examine students’ written texts that were produced in

natural classroom activities. The idea is same with Alwasilah (2006:78) and Fraenkel and Wallen (1993:11) when they state that, in the natural classroom, the

researcher can use the result of students’ written as data. The descriptive method

is also used for solving the found problems in the research (Arikunto, 2006; and Sukamandinata, 2007). In order to keep the naturalness, the researcher avoids any act of manipulations or interventions to the classroom activities by focusing on assessment.

As discussed by Nunan (2000:79), this method also allows the researcher to investigate a phenomenon in single case or in a single instance of a class. Moreover, by using case study, Cresswell (1994:61) also acknowledges that the exploration can be conducted over time through detailed in collecting many sources of information. Therefore, this study used class observation, interviewing, and document analysis (Alwasilah, 2006:142).

3.3 Site and Participants 3.3.1 The Site

The study was conducted in six public elementary schools in Bandung. The six schools were chosen for several purposes. As discussed by Soy (1992) as

(15)

cited in Setiyadi (2006) that subject for case study is selected on purpose. The schools chosen were school A, school B, school C, school D, school E, and school F. School A and school B are the nearest to city center in Bandung, A grade accredited school, and considered as the most favorite school in Bandung. Different from school A and school B, school C and school D are around city center of Bandung. It is not far from the city center. Those are B grade accredited School, and considered as favorite school in Bandung. Meanwhile, school E and school F are very far from the city center but still in the area of Bandung city. The schools are accredited C or have not been accredited. Those schools are considered less favorite.

Based on the data gained from Regional Office of Education in Bandung, school A and school B have more complete facilities and better quality of teaching and learning facilities than schools C and D which are accredited B. The following is the description of six selected schools in the form of table 3.1.

Six Selected Elementary Schools

Location Assumption of KKG School Qualification, Accredited by Regional Office of

Education in Bandung

SDN A The nearest to the city center

The most favorite school

Grade A SDN B The nearest to the

city center

The most favorite school

Grade A SDN C Near city center Favorite school Grade B SDN D Near city center Favorite school Grade B SDN E Far from city center Less favorite school Grade C or not

accredited SDN F Far from city center Less favorite school Grade C or not

accredited

Taken from Regional Office of Education of Bandung Center and KKG (2012)

Table 3.1

(16)

3.3.2 The Participants

There was one participant for each school. So there were six participants who took part in this study coded as Teacher 1 (T1), Teacher 2 (T2), Teacher 3 (T3), Teacher 4 (T4), Teacher 5 (T5), and Teacher 6 (T6).

Respondents Schools Grades Assessments Symbol Educational Background Experience of Teaching Teacher 1 (T1)

A Teaches

grade 6

(As 1) S1, English

Department, STKIP Siliwangi 8 years Teacher 2 (T2)

B Teaches

grade 6

(As 2) S1, Business

Management, UPI

5 years

Teacher 3 (T3)

C Teaches

grade 6

(As 3) S1, English

Department, UPI

2 years

Teacher 4 (T4)

D Teaches

grade 6

(As 4) D1, PGTK,

LPGTK Tadika Puri

6 years

Teacher 5 (T5)

E Teaches

grade 6

(As 5) S1, PGSD,

15 years Teacher 6

(T6)

F Teaches

grade 6

(As 6) S1,

Mathematic, UNINUS Bdg

11 years

Table 3.2

Respondents of the Research

The differences of the educational background of the teachers, facilities, and other factors would influence the way teachers teach English to the students. It would be necessary for the researcher to get more information in this study.

3.4 Data Collection Methods

In collecting the data of qualitative research, as described by Alwasilah (2000:150), it is better to use triangulation strategy. Triangulation strategy in

(17)

collecting the data is a strategy that combines more than one method of collecting data for the research. Using only a single method in gaining the data cannot provide enough data and description of the phenomena happen in doing qualitative research. Using triangulation in which more than one method used in the research can facilitate understanding for the researcher.

The three advantages of using triangulation strategy are evident in the comment of Alwasilah (2000:150) when he explains that it can reduce the limitation of data used and research findings and it can reinforce the validity of the research. It is in line with Patton (1980) as cited in Sugiyono (2007:241) that

“triangulation can build on the strengths of each type of data collection while

minimizing the weakness in any single approach”.

Based on what had been elaborated above, triangulation strategy in collecting the data which employed more than one data collecting method was used. Alwasilah (2006:142) acknowledges that in collecting data, the researcher can use class observation, interview and document analysis.

3.4.1 Class Observation

Observations were conducted to gain the information of what the teachers did in teaching writing and also the writing assessment to young learners. In this study, the researcher used the passive participant observation where the researcher is present at the scene of action but does not interact or participate (Sugiyono, 2006:312).

(18)

The observations provide data related to the physical place, actor, activity, act, time, goal, and feeling (Sugiyono, 2006:314). The data collected from the classroom observation were documented into observation sheets, classified, and interpreted (Alwasilah, 2006:175). Field note was used in taking data from observation, the guide of which is attached (See Appendix 4). In the observation, the researcher made no effort to manipulate variables and noted what happened as things naturally occurred (Wallen and Fraenkel, 1993).

The observations were conducted three times for each class including the focused and selective observation. There were six teachers from six schools observed for this study. There were three observations conducted in the process of assessing writing: Observation 1 and 2 (in January 2012, week 1 and 3), Observation 3 and 4 (in February 2012, week 1 and 4), and Observation 5 and 6 (On March 2012, week 2 and 3). It was about an hour for each meeting because at elementary school, the time allocation for teaching English was an hour. There were also coding to ease the process of the identification of the phenomena occurred from the transcribed recording (Alwasilah, 2008:159).

3.4.2 Interviewing

This study employed interview as an instrument to gain detail information. The some information that might not be acquired from documents could be obtained from interview (Alwasilah, 2006). Purposes of conducting interviews

were to find out the teachers’ strategy in assessing writing to young learners, teachers’ reasons in choosing those strategies, and to know the appropriate

(19)

assessment for the young learners. The interview was done after the class observations had been conducted.

The interviews were conducted two times: Interview to the teacher (24th January 2012) and interview to the students (in January until March 2012). Furthermore, interviews can be useful to clarify information that has been gained from observations. The data collected from the interview are transcribed, classified, and interpreted (Alwasilah, 2006:175).

Number Aspects Assessed

Aspects Categories

1 Assessment The concept of assessing students’ achievement

2 Linkage of the assessment with the instructional

goals

3 Congruent assessment with the activities

Adapted from Reiser and Dick (1996), Cameron (2001), and Damayanti (2008)

Table 3.3 Interview Guidance

The assessment was observed whether the assessment was able to measure what was expected to be achieved by students. Secondly, it was observed whether the assessment connects with the instructional goals. Finally, the assessment was observed whether it was congruence with the instruction that had been done.

3.4.3 Document Analysis

Lesson plans and syllabuses were collected to get a portrait of what

aspects are taken into six English teachers’ lesson plans of six primary schools.

Document analysis was conducted because documents are natural sources that can give real information (Alwasilah, 2006). Lesson plans, syllabuses, schedules,

(20)

difficult or even impossible to obtain through direct observation (Fraenkel and Wallen, 1993:390).

Syllabuses and lesson plans each teacher made for a half of even semester, term 2011/2012, were collected in this study. These documents are important to analyze what type of assessment of writing set by each teacher and what kind of syllabus the teachers made. The data collected from the document analysis would be labeled and classified. It was analyzed descriptively (Alwasilah, 2006:175).

3.5 Data Analysis

The qualitative method was used to identify assessment strategies used by English teachers at primary schools, teachers’ reasons in choosing those strategies, and the appropriate assessment for the young learners. In the comments of Basrowi and Suwandi, (2008), in qualitative research, data analysis begins when the observations started and this study applied the Interactive Model by Miles and Huberman (1984) as cited on Sugiyono, (2007).

Data analysis was done after all the data, which consisted of observation data, interview data, and document analysis, had been gained. In analyzing the data, the data from class observation, document analysis and interview were divided based on the research questions such as the assessing strategies used by the teachers in assessing writing to young learners (which included correct all the mistakes, correct mistakes selectively, indicate mistakes so that the students can correct them, and let the students identify and correct their own mistakes),

(21)

teachers’ reasons in choosing those strategies, and to know the appropriate

assessment for the young learners.

This study applied the Interactive Model by Miles and Huberman (1984 as cited on Suwandi, 2008). There are three steps of analyzing the data. There are data reduction, data display, and drawing conclusion.

3.5.1 Data Reduction

The data collected from the observations were carefully elaborated. The more the data collecting process conducted, the more data gathered. In this process, the data were reduced. As defined by Miles and Huberman (1984) as cited on Suwandi (2008), reducing data means that the researcher summarized and chose the main items to construct particular pattern. Focused on contributing items and deleting inappropriate data were done to give a clear picture of what is actually needed. The data below are the example of data reduction in interviewing teacher.

Contributing item

Researcher : Berdasarkan pengalaman Anda, seperti apakah buku teks yang baik?

Teacher : Banyak gambar, materi beragam. Satu materi bisa dieksplor bisa masuk kemana aja dan berwarna isi bukunya.

Deleting item

Researcher : Apakah Anda pernah mengadakan tes tulis? Kalau ya, seperti apa?

(22)

Teacher : Iya pernah. memberikan tes membuat kalimat pendek, positif, interogatif, dan negative.

3.5.2 Data Display

After the data were reduced and the important items remained, the next step was to display the data. Sugiyono (2007:341) acknowledges data display could be presented in the form of graphics, tables, charts, or citation. So, in qualitative research, data display can be presented by brief narration, tables, flow charts, or interrelation of categories.

As explained by Miles and Huberman (1984) as cited on Sugiyono (2007: 341), the most of data display for qualitative research data in the past has been narrative text. Here the researcher has to make a deep understanding to the data until particular relationships between one item and another comes up and creates certain patterns. Once the pattern is found, it must be supported by the data along the research and displayed in the end of the report. The data below are the example of data display in class observation.

Observation Strategies in Writing Activity

Types of Assessing Writing

The Correction Procedure by

Teacher

#1 Forming Dialogue Assessing writing by

Portfolio Assessment

Correct all mistakes

#2 Labeling items Assessing writing by

observation

Correct mistakes

selectively

(23)

3.5.3 Drawing Conclusion

This third step of Interactive Model, as outlined by Miles and Huberman (1984), is drawing a conclusion. The beginning conclusion is still temporary and may change when new findings appear. So, the conclusion in data analysis is placed in the end. In here, the findings from data analysis are explained in conclusion.

3.6 Concluding Remark

This chapter has described the research methodology which underlies the data collection of the qualitative research. It consists of the research questions, research method, setting of the study, data collection method and data analysis method. Moreover, in gathering the data, the researcher employs classroom observation, interview, and document analysis.

(24)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

This chapter presents the conclusions of important phenomenon mentioned in the previous analysis as the answers to the research problems and some suggestions, especially for further study in this domain of teaching English to young learners.

5.1 Conclusions

This study investigates the teachers’ strategies in assessing writing in EYL context. From the results and discussions in the previous chapter, several conclusions can be drawn.

This study examines the strategies applied by six English teachers in assessing writing, why the teachers choose those assessment strategies, and to what extent the assessment is appropriate for the teaching programs in EYL context.

The first question is answered by the data from class observation and interview. It is found that three strategies of assessing writing are used by teachers. They are portfolio, observation, and K-W-L strategies. The second question is answered by the data from interview to the students and teachers; and class observation. There are found the teachers’ reasons in choosing those assessment strategies. For portfolio strategy, teachers’ reasons are that this strategy is easy to be used, teachers can give comments on their works, it is

(25)

suitable for students in elementary school, and teachers specifically know students’ mistakes. For observation strategy, their reasons are that teachers can assess students without disturbing children activities, teachers just prepare the point for assessing, students could not cheat on exam, and the assessment can be used during teaching learning activity. The last is K-W-L strategy. It is what they know, what they want, and what they have learnt. The reasons are that this strategy can be used at the end of the class to know what students have learnt, it is easy for teacher to use this strategy, and teacher just gives directions.

The last question is answered by the data from class observation, interview and document analysis. It is also found that the appropriate assessment for the teaching program is to make the assessment suitable with the syllabus, lesson plan, and the activity in the class. The portfolio and observation strategies are appropriate for teaching program in elementary school. In K-W-L strategy, there is not appropriate for teaching program. Between class observation and document analysis are not found appropriate material.

Based on the explanations above, it can be concluded that there are principles common to all teachers under investigation, i.e. suitability, practicality, and comprehensiveness. First, all the teachers appear to believe that the assessment should be suitable with students, lesson plan, activity in the class, and syllabus. Second, teachers choose observation and portfolio strategies because the strategies are practicality. Teachers need strategy that can be applied to assess students’ writings. Third, the assessment should be relatively comprehensive. An example will be the use of portfolio strategy. This strategy is useful to give

(26)

comment on students’ works and the advantage for students is they know their mistakes. This strategy is suitable for students in elementary school. Teachers can know the developments of their students’ writings.

5.2 Suggestions

Based on the findings of this research, the researcher proposes several suggestions as follows:

1. It is expected that the concern of strategies in assessing writing receive more emphasis in the curriculum of English learning especially in elementary school;

2. Portfolio and observation strategies can be used for assessing writing to elementary students by the teacher.

3. Teachers are suggested to prepare assessment before give it to students; and

4. It is important for teacher to make assessment which is based on syllabus, lesson plan, and learning activities.

(27)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alwasilah, A. Chaedar. 2005. Pokoknya Menulis. Bandung: Kiblat Buku Utama.

Alwasilah, Chaedar. (2006). Pokoknya Kualitatif. Bandung: Pustaka Jaya.

Aridah. (n. d.). The Role of Feedback in the Teaching and Learning of Writing. Retrieved on March 10, 2011. From http://isjd.pdii.lipi.go.id/admin/jurnal/3203105114.pdf.

Arikunto, Suharsimi. (2006). Prosedur Penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.

Aryani,Yunita. (2007). A Research: Solusi Peningkatan Kemampuan Bahasa Inggris bagi Siswa Sekolah Dasar Negeri (SDN). [Online]. Available at:

http://www.google.co.id/#sclient=psy-ab&hl=id&site=&source=hp&q=era+globalisasi+bahasa+inggris+pelajar&oq=era+gl obalisasi+bahasa+inggris+pelajar&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=69112l3027

66l0l303417l38l28l0l7l0l0l119189l711478l9-7l21l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=456cf6d131edb193&biw=1280&bih=632 (October 15, 2011)

Astuti, Griya. (2006). Final Model Penelitian Kelas. [Online]. Available at: http://www.puskur. [August 20, 2008]

Blanchard, Karen. (2004). Ready to Write More. America: Longman.

Brown, H.D. (2001). Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach Language Pedagogy 2nd ed. New York: Longman.

Brown, Douglas H. (2004). Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom Practices. New York: Pearson Education.

Burton, E. Changing Assessment, Changing Instruction [Web site]. September 26, 2009. Available at: http://cnx.org/content/m32053/1.2/.

Byrne, Donn. (1988). Teaching Writing Skill. Longman Handbook for Language Teachers. Singapore: Longman Group Ltd. England.

Cameron, L. (2001). Teaching Languages to Young Learners. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

(28)

Caudery, Tim. (1990). The Validity of Timed Essay Tests in the Assessment of Writing Skills. ELT JournalELT J (1990) 44(2): 122-131 doi:10.1093/elt/44.2.122 [Online]

Available at:

http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/search?fulltext=assessment+on+writing&submit=yes&x =6&y=8. (February 11, 2012).

Cresswell, J.W. 1994. Research Design: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. London: Sage Publication.

Cohen, Andrew. D. 1998. Strategies in Learning and Using Second Language. England: Pearson Education.

Coombe, Christine. (2011). Assessing Young Learners. [Online]. Availabe at:

www.google.co.id/#sclient=psy-ab&hl=id&biw=1280&bih=669&sclient=psy-ab&q=K-W-L+charts+coombe+and+college&pbx=1&oq=K.

Damayanti, Ika Lestari. (2008). English for Young Learners: Assessment on Young Language Learners. Indonesia University of Education: Unpublished.

Damayanti, Ika Lestari. (2008). Young and Older Learners: Similarities and Differences. Indonesia University of Education: Unpublished.

Doran, Velma. (2002). A Journal: Observation, Assessment, and Portfolios in the Early Childhood Classroom. Teachers’ Resource Centre.

Emilia, Emi. (2008). Menulis Tesis dan Disertasi. Bandung: Alfabeta.

Fitzpatrick, Mary. (2005). Engaging Writing: Paragraphs and Essays. USA: Longman. Georgiou, Ionnou Sophie and Pavlou, Pavlos. (2003). Assessing Young Learners. London:

Oxford University Press.

Goubil-Gambrell, Patricia. (1992). A Practitioner’s Guide to Research Methods. [online]. Availabe at: htmlhttp://www.allbusiness.com/technical-communication/41372-1. [April 20, 2010].

Hall, Nigel and Robinson, Anne. (1995). Exploring Writing and Play in the Early Years. Great Britain: The Manchester Metropolitan University Education Series.

Harmer, Jeremy. (2001). Fourth edition. The Practice of English Language Learning. Pearson Longman.

(29)

Harmer, Jeremy. (2004). How to Teach Writing. Malaysia: Longman.

Heaton, B.J. (1995). Writing English Language Tests. London: Longman.

Hills, Tynette W. (1997). Critical Issue:Assessing Young Children’s Progress Appropriately. (Available at: http://www.projectconstruct.org/)

Ho, B. (2006). Effectiveness of Using the Process Approach to Teach Writing in Six Hong Kong Primary Classrooms. Retrieved on February 27, 2011. From http://www.cityu.edu.uk/en/reseach/spring2006ho.pdf.

Hyland, Ken. (2002). Teaching and Researching Writing. Great Britain: Longman.

Idris, Nuny Sulistiany, M.Pd. Evaluasi pembelajaran Bahasa dan Sastra Indonesia. Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, FPBS: Unpublish. [Online]. Available at: http:///www. siswijaya.tripod.com/Indonesia.pdf (October 13, 2011).

Ioannu-Georgiou, S. and Pavlou, P. (2003). Assessing Young Learners. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Available at: http://books.google.co.id/books?id=2Iqo86kJQmEC&printsec=frontcover&dq=georgi

ou+and+pavlou&source=bl&ots=PFrmT58Ol-&sig=6NWMrnIsyszyQxeGyCyr43QFPTc&hl=id&ei=yYTATKOzloPfcY_wqe0L&s a=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q &f=false).

Iskandarwassid and Sunendar. (2008). Strategi Pembelajaran Bahasa. Bandung: ROSDA.

Istiqomah, M.Pd. (2011). Globalisasi dan Bahasa Inggris. [Online]. Available at:

http://www.psb-psma.org/forum/forum-mata-pelajaran/bahasa-inggris/3948-globalisasi-dan-bahasa-inggris (October 13, 2011).

Katz, Lilian G. (1998). A Developmental Approach to Assessment of Young Children.

(available at:

http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSea rch_SearchValue_0=EJ456271&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=EJ4562 71) (October 11, 2011).

Kim, J and Kim, Y. (2005). Teaching Korean Universiy Writing Class. Asian EFL Journal volume 7 Issue 2 Article 5. Retrieved January, 2010 from http://www.asian-efl-journal.com.

Kristina, Annisa. (2011). Pentingnya Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Inggris bagi Siswa SD. [Online]. Available at: http://blog.unnes.ac.id/kristinapgsd/2011/05/05/pentingnya-mata-pelajaran-bahasa-inggris-bagi-siswa-sd/ (October 15, 2011).

(30)

Leo, Sutanto. (2007). English for Academic Purpose: Essay Writing. Yogyakarta: CV. ANDI OFFSET.

Lewis, Marilyn. (2002). Giving Feedback in Language Classes. Singapore: SEAMEO.

Listia, M.Pd., Rina. 2008. Kendala Pengajaran Bahasa Inggris di Sekolah Dasar. English Departement of FKIP Unlam. [Online]. Available at: http://pbingfkipunlam.wordpress.com/category/rina-listia/ (December 18, 2011). Linse, T. Caroline. (2005). Practical English Language Teaching Young Learners. New

York: McGraw-Hill.

Masitoh, Siti. (2008). Assessment Techniques Administered in English Language Classroom for Young Learners. A report in Indonesia University of Education (UPI): Unpublished.

Maulina, Mia Rahmawati. (2006). Effective Assessment for Young Learners’ progress and Achievement in Learning English. A Research Paper. English Department of Indonesia University of Education: Unpublished.

McCauley, Louise. (2004). The Developmental Assessment of Young Children. (Available at: http://scholar.google.co.id/scholar?q=The+Developmental+Assessment+of+Young+C hildren+Louise+McCauley&hl=id&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart)

McKay, Penny. (2006). Assessing Young Language Learner. Cambridge University Press.

[Online]. Available at:

http://www.google.com/books?hl=id&lr=&id=aaTCnK2EjG0C&oi=fnd&pg=PA26& dq=assessment+of+young+learner:+reasons+and+means+rixon&ots=CdaNx_YC01& sig=NHC7M9tmz88zUbrMp3I18YXJ7lI#v=onepage&q=pencil&f=false (October 10, 2011).

Mooney, Carol Garhart. (2000). Theories of Childhood. St. Paul: REdleaf Press.

Musthafa, Bachrudin. (2008). Teaching English to Young Learners: Principles & Techniques. Modul. Bandung: SPs UPI.

Musthafa, Bachrudin. (2010). Teaching English to Young Learners in Indonesia: Essential

Requirements. [Online]. Available at:

http://jurnal.upi.edu/conaplin/view/76/Teaching%20English%20to%20Young%20Lea rners%20in%20Indonesia:%20Essential%20Requirements

(31)

Nurhasanah. (2007). Pengajaran Bahasa Inggris untuk Anak Anatara Kenyataan dan Harapan. Indonesia University of Education.

O’Connor, Barbara and members. (2001).The International ICT Literacy Panel. [Online]. Available at: http://www.google.co.id/#sclient=psy-ab&hl=id&site=&source=hp&q=the+International+ICT+Literacy+Panel+&btnK=Pen elusuran+Google&oq=&aq=&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=&gs_upl=&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw .,cf.osb&fp=172737b989d926e8&biw=1280&bih=632 (October 11, 2011)

O’Donell, Teresa O. and Paiva, Judith L. (1993). Independent Writing. Boston,

Massachusetts: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.

Oshima, A, and Ann, H. (1999). Writing Academic English: Third Edition. New York: Longman.

Pinter, Anna Maria. (2006). Teaching Young Language Learner. Oxford University Press. Plakans, Dr. Lia. Foreign Language Teaching Methods. The University of Texas at Austin.

[Online]. Available at: http://coerll.utexas.edu/methods/modules/assessment/01/ (November 1, 2011).

Raharja, Setya. (2006). Need Assessment untuk Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Multikultural di Sekolah Dasar di Propinsi Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta. [Online]. Available at: http://www.google.co.id/#sclient=psy-ab&hl=id&source=hp&q=penelitian+tentang+assessment+di+sekolah+dasar&oq=pen elitian+tentang+assessment+di+sekolah+dasar&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl =833278l845168l0l845720l50l30l0l0l0l0l0l0ll0l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp =62ae241abec256a6&biw=1280&bih=632 (October 27, 2011).

Rixon, Shelagh. (1999). Assessment of Young Learners’ English: Reasons and Mean. UK: University of Warwick.

Rixon, Shelagh. (1995). Assessment of Young Learners of English [Online]. Available at:

http://www.google.co.id/#sclient=psy-ab&hl=id&site=&source=hp&q=research+assessing+young+learner+rixon+pencil&o q=research+assessing+young+learner+rixon+pencil&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs

_upl=3205l17019l0l17322l37l29l0l0l0l0l2761l4836l9-2l3l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=b7730b97b1285ed7&biw=1280&bih=632 [October 11, 2011].

Shaaban, Kasim. (2006). Assessment of Young Language Learners. [Online]. Available at: http://exchanges.state.gov/forum/vols/vol39/nõ/pl6.htm. [January 6, 2010].

(32)

Setiono. (2001). Teaching Writing to College Students Indonesia: Problems and Challenges. Atman an Jaya April 2001: 32-44.

Sharifi, Ahmad. (2011). The Role of Portfolio Assessment and Reflection on Process Writing. Asian EFL Journal Volume 12 Issue 1 Article 6. [Online]. Available at: http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/March_2011_as.php (October 27, 2011).

Silverman, D. 2005. Doing Qualitative Research. London: Sage Publication.

Slattey, Mary and Willis, Jane. (2001). English for Primary Teachers. London: Oxford University Press.

Smith, Jo. (2006). Young Learners Assessment. [Online]. Available at: http://www.britishcouncil.org/portugal-ie2006w-jo-smith.pdf.

Sugiyono. (2006). Metode penelitian Pendidikan: Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif dan R&D. Bandung: Alfabeta.

Suhardjito, Warsono, and Rokhman. (1999). Model pengembangan motivasi belajar Bahasa Inggris sebagai muatan lokal pada siswa SD di Jawa Tengah. [Onine]. Availabe at: http://openlibrary.org/books/OL3773759M/Model_pengembangan_motivasi_belajar_ bahasa_Inggris_sebagai_muatan_lokal_pada_siswa_SD_di_Jawa_Tengah. (October 13, 2011).

Sukmadinata, Nana Syaodih, Prof. Dr. (2007). Metode Penelitian Pendidikan. Bandung: Rosda.

Sullivan, Kirk and Lindgren, Eva. (2002). Self-Assessment in Autonomous Computer-Aided Second Language Writing. ELT Journal page 258-266 doi:10.1093/elt/56.3.258.

[Online] Available at:

http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/search?fulltext=assessment+on+writing&submit=yes&x =6&y=8. (February 11, 2012).

Tim Jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, (2010). Pedoman Penyusunan Skripsi. Bandung: Jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris FPBS UPI.

Unsworth, Len. (1994). Literacy Learning and Teaching: Language as Social Practice in the Primary School. Sidney: The University of Sidney.

Vale and Feunteun. (1995). Assessing Young Learners. [Online]. Availabe at:

http://www.google.co.id/#sclient=psy-ab&hl=id&source=hp&q=Vale+and+Feunteun+1995+assessment&oq=Vale+and+Fe unteun+1995+assessment&aq=f&aqi=&aql=1&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=24057l26055l1l26

(33)

446l11l10l0l5l0l3l1294l5154l6-3.2l6l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=4902246fcf51a35&biw=1280&bih=632 (October 25, 2011).

Wallen, Norman E, and Fraenkel, Jack R. (1993). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education. Oxford.

Weigle, Sara Cushing. (2009). Assessing Writing. UK: Cambridge University Press.

Wikipedia. Kecerdasan. [Online]. Available at: http://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kecerdasan (October 14, 2011).

Yuliani, Desi. (2010). Classroom Assessment Techniques for Young Learners in MUF Framework. A Report in Indonesia University of Education (UPI): Unpublished.