TEACHER-INITIATED PRE-EMPTIVE FOCUS ON FORM AND LEARNER UPTAKE IN COMMUNICATIVE ENGLISH CLASSES: A case study at an SMP in Bandung.

i

Table of Contents

Thesis cover…. ... iii Approval Sheet ... iiii Preface ... iiii Statement ... ivi

Acknowledgements ... v

Abstract ... vi

Table of Contents ... vii

List of Tables ... x

List of Figures ... xi

List of Appendices ... xii

Chapter One - Introduction... 1

1.1 Background of the Study... 1

1.2 Research Questions... 3

1.3 Research Goals... 4

1.4 Significance of the Study... 4

1.5 Definitions of the Terms... 4

1.6 Organization of the Study... 5

Chapter Two - Literature Review... 6

2.1 Introduction... 6

2.2. The Concept of Instructional Materials... 6

2.2.1 The Role of Materials in Relation to Other Elements ... 7

2.2.2 Characteristics of Good Materials ... 10

2.3 The Process of the Material Use... 12

2.3.1 Material Preparation... 13

2.3.1.1 Material Provided in the Textbook Unit ………... 14

2.3.1.2 Materials Provided in the Lesson Plan ………... 16

2.3.1.3 Material Modification .……….………... 18

2.3.2 Material Implementation ……... 21

ii

2.3.2.2 Types of Classroom Activities ………..………... 24

2.3.2.3 Types of Classroom Techniques .……….…... 26

2.4 Relevant Research ………..……….... 30

Chapter Three - Research Methodology... 36

3.1 Introduction ………... 36

3.2 Research Site and Participants ... 36

3.3 Research Design ………. ... 37

3.4 Data Collection ………... 38

3.4.1 Document Analysis ... 38

3.4.2 Classroom Observation ... 39

3.4.3 Interviews ... 39

3.4.4 Questionnaires ... 41

3.5 Data Analysis ………... 42

Chapter Four – Data Analysis and Discussion ... 44

4.1 Introduction ………... 44

4.2 The Data from Document Analysis ... 44

4.2.1 The Materials Provided in the Textbook Unit... 45

4.2.2 The Materials Provided in the Lesson Plan ... 48

4.3 The Data from Classroom Observation... 52

4.4 The Data from Teacher’s Interviews…... 55

4.4.1 General Descriptions of the Materials ………... 55

4.4.1.1 Teacher’s Definitions of A Good Material ... 55

4.4.1.2 Teachers’ Evaluation of the Textbook Unit... 57

4.4.2 Material Preparation ………... 61

4.4.2.1 The Sources of Materials ………... 61

4.4.2.2 Material Modification ……….………... 63

4.4.2.2.1 Reason to Modify the Materials ………... 63

4.4.2.2.2 Difficulties during Material Modification ... 67

4.4.2.2.3 The Effects of Material Modification …... 70

4.4.3 Material Implementation .………... 71

4.4.3.1 Implemented Classroom Activities …………... 72

4.4.3.2 Changes of Classroom Activities ………... 74

4.4.3.3 Difficulties in Delivering the Materials……... 76

iii Chapter Five – Conclusions, Limitations, and Suggestions of the Study ... 814

5.1 Introduction ………... 814 5.2 Conclusions ………... 81 5.3 Limitations of the Study ……... 83 5.4 Suggestions for Further Research ... 844 References... 85 Appendices ………... 91

iv

List of Tables

Table 4.1 The contents of the coursebook ……….………….. 44

Table 4.2 Planned Classroom Activities ……….………. 47

Table 4.3 Sources of English Instructional Materials ……….………… 49

Table 4.4 Implemented Classroom Activities ……….………... 72

Table 4.5 Changes of Classroom Activities and Reasons to change ………. 75

Table 4.6 Learning materials ………. 79

v

List of Figures

vi

List of Appendices

1. Appendix A. An Example of Questionnaire Sheet 109 2. Appendix B. An Example of Lesson Plan

3. Appendix C. An Example of Textbook Unit

4. Appendix D. Classroom Observation Procedure Result 116 5. Appendix E. Interview questions 1

6 CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Introduction

This chapter reviews relevant literature that informs the research work about the teachers’ material use. The literature falls into two main notions: the concept of instructional materials based on the works of Richards (1998, 2002), Richards and Rogers (1986), Brown (1995), Hutchinson and Waters (1995) and the use of the materials perceived by teachers and students in language teaching and learning based on the works of Grant (1987), Richards (2002), Harmer (2002), Ur (1996), Jensen (2001), McDonough and Shaw (1993), and Byrd (2001). First, the discussions of the concept of instructional materials specify the role of materials in relation to other elements, characteristics of good instructional materials, and types of instructional materials. Second, the discussions of the use of the materials specify the aspects in material preparation and material implementation. Third, relevant research in the use of instructional materials will be presented.

2.2 The Concept of Instructional Materials

Instructional materials have been defined as “any systematic description of techniques and exercises to be used in the classroom teaching” (Brown, 1995). This definition is in line with what the study tries to find out on how the teacher use the materials and how the students respond to it since the material itself consists of systematic exercises and techniques to use the exercises. Therefore, the study tries to reveal the use of materials with appropriate exercises and techniques as perceived by the teachers and the students.

7 Instructional materials exist in different forms of materials comprising textbooks, instructional aids (novels, plays, computer software, etc), and supplementary materials (maps, magazines, study guides, realias, workbooks, etc) (Richards, 2001). These forms of materials are important for the present study as to know to a certain extend the use of different kinds of materials in the classroom and how the students make responses to it. Referring to Beckman and Klinghammer (2006), the use of different materials here is as perceived by the teachers and the students.

The use of instructional materials can be seen from its relation to other elements. In practice, instructional materials are interacted with other aspects of teaching, and how it interacts with curriculum, methodology, teacher and students gives foundation to the role of the materials (Richards, 1990; vii). The role of the instructional materials is important in language teaching as it provides basis for the content of lessons, the balance of skills taught, and the kinds of language practice students take part in (Richards, 2001, 252).

The use of instructional materials can be analyzed from material preparation process to material implementation process (Byrd, 2001). These two steps from material preparation to implementation are everyday task of the teacher to use the materials. Respectively, Cameron (2003) refers the first to “task-as-plan” and the second to “task-in-action”. These two processes, therefore, will be used for the framework of the study.

2.2.1 The Role of Materials in Relation to Other Elements

In this section, the roles of materials in relation to other elements are discussed. As it is perceived, instructional materials cannot stand alone, but are interacted with the curriculum, teachers, students, and methodology (Richards, 1990; vii). The interaction views that materials cannot be seen in isolation; therefore, it is important to understand how instructional materials link to all those aspects of teaching and learning. In other

8 words, how instructional materials interact will give foundation to the teachers to use instructional materials in the process of teaching and learning.

In a more simple way, the relationship between instructional materials and other elements is also suggested by Waters and Hutchinson (1998). They illustrate a three way relationship as follows:

TEACHER

Learning Opportunities

LEARNERS MATERIALS

Figure 1. A three-way relationship

With two other components – teachers and students, teaching materials form a three-way process of interaction in the classroom (James, 2001; Waters and Hutchinson, 1995; Grant, 1987). Thus, in a complete form, these three factors provide learning opportunities in that the absence of one may result in the reduced quality of an effective teaching and learning.

Teachers need the materials for a number of reasons. For some teachers, teaching materials serve as their primary teaching resources while for some others they regard teaching materials primarily to supplement the teacher’s instruction (Richards, 2001; 252). These different views lie on different perspectives of the teachers based on their subject matter knowledge (what teachers need to know about what they teach) (Richards, 1998; 9) and length of experiences the teachers may have. Later, both perceptions will determine whether the teachers are textbook’s driven or creative one.

To describe a more practical relationship between materials and teachers in language learning, Smith (1981) cited in Brumfit 1985; 55) points out that what a teacher

9 does with the materials involves four fundamental processes: (1) presentation to the learner of the new material, (2) explanation to the learner of the meaning and form of the new material, (3) repetition of the new material until it is learned, and (4) transfer of the new material to other contexts by the learner. In short, these processes assert making the most of the teaching materials for the learners.

Indeed, the learners have been the focus of the materials. For learners, materials may provide the major source of contact they have with the language apart from the teacher (Richards, 2001; 252). For example, the learners use the materials for them to work out further exercises. Through completing tasks provided in the materials, the learners practice the knowledge apart of what has been given through the instruction of the teachers.

The role and uses of materials have been acknowledged significantly as Richards (2001, 252) points out that teaching materials provide basis for the content of lessons, the balance of skills taught, and the kinds of language practice students take part in. Similar to Richards, Richards and Rodgers (1986) also puts forward the same idea that instructional materials can provide detailed specifications of content, even in the absence of the syllabus.

As a matter of fact, the materials themselves will produce a detailed language syllabus (Hutchinson and Waters, 1995; 93). Further, they define syllabus as a document which says what will (or at least what should) be learnt (1995; 80). Of several kinds of syllabus, any teaching materials must, in reality, operate several syllabuses at the same time (Hutchinson and Waters, 1995; 89) in which two among others – functional and structural syllabus are a course should have, and are reflected in any instructional materials.

10 The interaction of instructional materials also involves the methodology. Richards (1990; 11) asserts the methodology does not only center on the choice of a “method”, but evolves out of the dynamics of the teaching process itself. In more detail, Richards characterizes methodology as the activities, tasks, and learning experiences selected by the teacher in order to achieve learning, and how these are used within the teaching/learning process. Thus, instructional materials cover them all in units of instruction.

Language methodology also talks about current language approaches such as communicative language teaching. This approach attributes a primary role to instructional materials. Materials are seen as an essential component of instructional design and are often viewed as a way of influencing the quality of classroom interaction and language use (Richards and Rodgers, 1986).

Instructional materials, as mentioned above, indeed play great role in the language course program. Cunningsworth (1995) cited in Richards (2001; 251) summarizes the role of materials in language teaching as:

• A resource for presentation materials (spoken and written)

• A source of activities for learner practice and communicative interaction

• A reference source for learners on grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, and so on • A source of stimulation and ideas for classroom activities

• A syllabus (where they reflect learning objectives that have already been determined) • A support for less experienced teachers who have yet to gain in confidence

With all the interaction above, now it is clear that instructional materials are not just things the teacher and students do in the classroom, but it embodies teaching and learning principles. They are all represented in an easy activity provided by the teacher for the most use of materials for the students.

11 2.2.2 Characteristics of Good Instructional Materials

Good instructional materials are an important part of the process of instruction (Richards, 1990; 15) which is in principle having an underlying instructional philosophy, approach, method, and content, including both linguistic and cultural information (Littlejohn and Windeat, 1989 cited in Kitao and Kitao, 1997). In addition, the material itself is basically written based on beliefs that the writers have about what language is and how it should be taught.

Instructional materials are considered good for several characteristics. First, the materials promote integrated skills (Brown, 2001) delivered in communicative activities (Clarke, 1989) cited in Kitao and Kitao (1997). Second, the materials are authentic (Richards, 2001; 252: Hutchinson and Waters (1995; 159), realistic (Grant, 1987; 15), contextualized (Clarke, 1989) cited in Kitao and Kitao (1997), and relevant to the learners (Kitao and Kitao, 1997; Hutchinson and Waters, 1995; 8). With the clear relevance of the English course (materials) to learners’ needs, Hutchinson and Waters (1995; 8) believe it will improve the learners’ motivation and thereby make learning better and faster.

Good materials, of course, are not easy to find and able to do many of the things that a teacher would normally do as part of his or her teaching. In addition to the characteristics of instructional materials mentioned above, referring to Rowntree (1997; 92) cited in Richards (2001; 263), good materials should:

• Arouse the learners’ interest • Remind them of earlier learning

• Tell them what they will be learning next • Explain new learning content to them

• Relate these ideas to learners’ previous learning • Get learners to think about new content

• Help them get feedback on their learning • Encourage them to practice

• Make sure they know what they are supposed to be doing • Enable them to check their progress

12 In similar vein, Tomlinson (1998) suggests that good teaching materials have the following characteristics:

• What is being taught should be perceived by learners as relevant and useful. • Materials should require and facilitate learner self-investment.

• Learners must be ready to acquire the points being taught.

• Materials should expose the learners to language in authentic use.

• The learners’ attention should be drawn to linguistic features of the input.

• Materials should provide the learners with opportunities to use the target language to achieve communicative purposes.

• Materials should take into account that the positive effects of instruction are usually delayed.

• Materials should take into account that learners have different learning styles. • Materials should take into account that learners differ in affective attitudes. • Materials should permit a silent period at the beginning of instruction.

• Materials should maximize learning potential by encouraging intellectual, aesthetic, and emotional involvement that stimulates both right and left brain activities. • Materials should not rely too much on controlled practice.

• Materials should provide opportunities for outcome feedback (cited in Richards (2001; 263)

To sum up, it is important for teachers to know characteristics of good materials as they use the materials for the students. It is also noted that no matter good they are, they may still fail to predict what actually happens when the material is used (Harmer, 2001; 301). Through knowing characteristics of good materials, therefore, it is expected that it equips teachers to choose and use the materials and the students to choose the materials to work on based on their needs and interests.

2.3 The process of the material use

The process of the material use is defined as a process of using the materials by the teacher. The use of materials can be done in different ways. First, a teacher just directly uses what is in the book. Second, a teacher does not use the materials from the coursebook. Third, a teacher select, adapt, or design his/her own materials from the coursebook (Grant,

13 1987). Thus, even though not all the teachers use a lesson plan in using the materials, in this study, the teachers are required to write a lesson plan to give a description of material use. The use of materials involves two processes – material preparation and material implementation (Byrd, 2001; 415). Material preparation deals with what materials a teacher needs to prepare before teaching; whereas material implementation is the actual use of the materials in the class. Both processes are what every teacher has always been through and what a teacher always does in any instructional program.

In preparing the materials, teacher’s roles are mainly selecting the materials. Selection of materials, according to Byrd (2001), is important for teachers to understand for the most effective classes for their students and for themselves. In selecting the materials, it is not merely a simple step for teachers to follow. In fact, it involves a number of activities to do such as designing the materials, evaluating the materials, and adapting the materials. In short, those skills are needed in preparing the materials.

Selecting materials will be different in criteria from one school to another. The criteria relate to two general requirements for selections: materials must first have a clear connection to established educational objectives and second address the needs of the

students for whom they are intended (see

http://www.ncte.org/positions/statements/selectingelamaterial). The criteria for material selection in this study refer to the two requirements above. The objectives of the program as the educational institution (STIA LAN) suggest is to provide General English course that enables them to communicate in English for them as government employees. For the second criteria, relevancy to students’ needs, the teachers refer to the students’ needs analysis data from the previous term. According to NCTE guideline (http://www.ncte.org/positions/statements/selectingelamaterial), selection procedures may vary in terms of the size of the group, non-teacher participants, and schedules, but certain

14 elements are important. However, taking into account the principles of making materials by Hutchinson and Waters, 1998; 108-109), a model to provide a framework is made consisting of four elements: input, content focus, language focus, and task. The following is an example of the procedure of material design (Nunan and Lockwood, 1989 cited in Nunan 1998; 216-217):

Step 1 Select topic Step 2 Collect data

Step 3 Determine what learners will need to do in relation to the texts Step 4 Create pedagogical activities/procedures

Step 5 Analyse texts and activities to determine the language elements Step 6 Create activities focusing on language elements

Step 7 Create activities focusing on learning skills/strategies Step 8 Create application tasks

When the process of writing begins, further decisions need to be made. These concerns are: (1) choosing input and sources, and (2) selecting exercise types (Richards, 2001; 265). In choosing input and sources, Richards further says that we need to identify types of materials first such as grammar materials, listening materials, reading materials, writing materials, and speaking materials, followed by posing questions to each material with the purpose of initiating the learning process and that students respond to in some way in using the materials (2001; 265).

2.3.1 Material preparation

Material preparation is the first step a teacher needs to do in using the materials. The goal of material preparation is to create materials that can serve as resources for effective learning (Richards, 2001; 262). Similar to Richard, Brown (1995; 163) says material preparation is considered as a process of developing materials as a resource of learning and teaching as an answer to uncovered suitable materials that dissatisfy the needs

15 of the learners. Therefore, developing materials from an existing coursebook in material preparation phase is necessary to take place.

In developing materials, there are processes to follow: preparation, representation, selection, adapting and tailoring to student characteristics (Schulman, 1987) cited in Richards (2001; 262). Basically the goal of the above processes is to develop a sequence of activities that leads teacher and learners through a learning route that is at an appropriate level of difficulty, is engaging, and that provides both motivating and useful practices (Richards, 2001; 262-263).

However, to realize the goal above, first teacher should be able to evaluate the existing coursebook (Brown, 1995; 19). From the result of the first step, then, though not all the teachers do this, the teacher writes a lesson plan. The lesson plan provides planned materials to be used. Lastly, the teacher should also know how they modify the materials with the purpose to maximize the appropriacy of teaching materials in context, by changing some of the internal characteristics of a coursebook to better suit particular circumstances (McDonough and Shaw, 1993; 85).

2.3.1.1 Materials Provided in the Textbook Unit

In this section, the teacher should be familiar with the coursebook he/she is using. The familiarity with the coursebook, according to Savignon (1983; 138), help the teacher and students to what they will teach and what they will learn, which is in principle to be followed systematically as the basis for a language course” (Ur, 1996; 183). Therefore, in this study, the teacher will be exposed to be familiar with the contents and topics of the materials, the distribution of the four language skills, the kinds of activities, and the organization of the coursebook.

16 The contents and the topics in the coursebook may not be necessarily relevant or interesting for the class (Ur, 1996; 185) as Richards (2002; 255-256) argues that it does not suit the target learners’ related factors such as age, gender, cultural background, etc. Given the fact that no textbook can ever meet universal standards of excellence (Savignon, 1983; 138, McDonough and Shaw, 1993), therefore Grant (1987; 14) suggests that the content may need to be changed to be more reflective to students’ needs and interests.

As mentioned earlier that content of English textbook should be useful, meaningful and interesting for students (Kitao and Kitao, 1997), it asserts the need to have communicative content that allows the students to practice communication. The content itself, according to Brumfit (1985; 88), refers to the items of the language that may be selected for the syllabus or curriculum design, or to the topics which may be included in reading, writing, or speaking – the subject matter of linguistic interactions.

Besides the linguistic features, the content of the instructional materials also include cultural information. Sometimes, misunderstanding occurs due to the cultural differences. For example, an expression in asking permission such as “do you mind if I smoke?” is misinterpreted by Indonesian. In the target culture, this question requires “No” answer when smoking is allowed. On the other hand, Indonesian would say “Yes” to indicate that smoking is allowed. Besides to avoid cultural communication breakdown, cultural content also widens the horizon of the students about other cultures.

In terms of specification of the content, there are two possible contents of the instructional materials – general contents and subject-specific contents (Hutchinson and Waters, 1995). The first allows for general content of any communicative situations, and is not specifiable for topics. In a mean time, different from general content, subject-specific content is easily characterized by its content (Science, Medicine, Commerce, Tourism,

17 etc.). Both content differences clearly determine the use of materials for which students the materials are intended to.

One of the characteristics of communicative textbooks is that they usually have a good balance of the four language skills (Grant, 1987; 14). With the four language skills explored in the materials, it is expected that it provides overall competence in the foreign language where the students can learn the language comprehensively (McDonough and Shaw, 1993; 201) from the productive skills (speaking and writing) to receptive skills (reading and listening). However, in practice, these four language skills are interchangeable according to teachers’ decisions seeing the dynamic of classroom circumstances (Graves, 2003; 228; McDonough and Shaw, 1993; 85).

The coursebook is also a source of activities for learner practice and communicative interaction (Cunningsworth, 1995 cited in Richards, 2001; 251). The students will find more activities in the coursebook with the objective to give more options which are relevant and interesting for the students to learn. Basically there are two activities in the coursebook, namely communicative activities and grammar activities. In communicative-based activities, the materials are used for real-life purposes (Grant, 1987; 15), for example writing a postcard to a pen friend. On the other hand, grammar activities are given to provide a controlled practice of the language focus being learnt.

The coursebook is designed according to certain stages (Muller, 2005). In general organization, for example, New Interchange (Richards, 2000), is composed based on PPP structure (Presentation Practice Production-based textbook). Similar to New Interchange, another textbook presents the textbook organization in Pre-Activity, Whilst Activity, and Post Activity. In a more complete organization, it may refer to Ur (1996)’s format with warm up, lead-in, presentation, controlled practice, freer practice, and feedback or review. For other textbooks, the organization of the coursebook might be different (Muller, 2005).

18 2.3.1.2 Materials Planned in the Lesson Plan

In this section, the teacher writes a lesson plan as a map plan for organizing the materials taken from different sources into a ready material to use as a record of material preparation including which materials will be used, and what teaching techniques will be employed. A teacher may decide to reorganize and arrange the units and reorder the sequence of activities for a particular reason (Richards, 2001; 260).

As early mentioned that not all the teachers write a lesson plan in using the materials, in this study, the lesson plan is required to give a description of material use. To write a lesson plan, it is an important skill for a teacher as Jensen said, all good teachers have some type of plan when they walk into their classroom (2001; 403). Serving as a map or checklist that guides us in knowing what we do next (Ur, 1996), basically, according to Jensen, the lesson plan decides what to teach, in what order, and for how much time one activity is done (2001; 403). He also reminds us that a good lesson plan guides but does not dictate what and how we teach.

As a guidance of our teaching, then the lesson plan has certain stages to follow though according to Jensen (2001), there are a variety of formats to use when creating a lesson plan. In general, like most activities, a lesson plan has stages: a beginning, a middle, and an end. Whereas in detail, a teacher must consider the background of the students, the objectives of the lesson, the skills to be taught, the activities, the materials and texts, the time constraints, and the connections to previous and future lessons (Jensen, 2001; 404). In this study, the study seeks for the activities and the sources of material used in the lesson plan.

For the stages of activities in a lesson plan, Ur (1996) organizes activities into a sequential step – warm up, lead-in, presentation, controlled practice, freer practice, and feedback or review. In a shorter step, Savignon (1983) divides the stages consecutively

19 into Presentation, Practice, and Production (PPP). With these stages in a lesson plan, it aims at helping the teacher classify the materials according to the stages. In conclusion, both formats assert the stages of the activities in a lesson plan which is believed to be the same as the format used in the implementation process (Byrd, 2001).

As the material is defined as “any systematic description of techniques and exercises to be used in the classroom teaching (Brown, 1995), therefore, in this study not only the selected materials are outlined, but also the techniques or procedures how the materials are implemented are also described.

With the fact that the teacher cannot take the whole materials in the coursebook into a classroom practice (Jensen, 2001; Brown, 2001), therefore the teacher needs to select which materials are to use and which materials are to dispose. Jensen (2001) says that this selection practice is due to the time constraints which cannot cover the whole materials. In addition, Kitao and Kitao (1997) also say that this selection of the materials is the teacher’s efforts to find and make more meaningful, and interesting materials for the students. Finally, through the lesson plan, then the selected materials will be outlined.

Similar to the definition of materials given by Brown (1995), Gebhard (2000; 99) notes that materials also accompany teaching manuals with some useful suggestions and techniques which according to McDonough and Shaw (1993) are selected according to the aspect of the materials that needs alteration. However, in general, teachers will use techniques which are more interactive, interesting and motivating for the students (Kitao and Kitao, 1997). Therefore, to be more communicative and more fun in practicing the language, the teacher likes to use games as the technique to deliver the materials (McDonough and Shaw, 1993; 163). Other techniques are also used to promote communicative acts among the students.

20 2.3.1.3 Material Modification

In using the material, the teacher modifies to certain extend, though every teacher does not always go through, the materials he/she is going to use. Modifying material is aimed at making the most use of the materials by referring to the needs of the students, existing materials, and the teacher’s style (Grant, 1987; Hutchinson and Waters, 1995) with asserting the needs to personalize, individualize or localize the content of the materials (McDonough and Shaw, 1993; 87). Therefore, in modifying the material, according to Grant (1987; 16), a teacher has a role (1) to decide what methods and materials are most appropriate, given the aims of the syllabus, and (2) to decide whether to use, adapt, replace, omit or supplement the methods and materials used in the textbook.

Material modification may occur in different forms. According to McDonough and Shaw (1993), the teacher may modify the objective of the lesson, the organization of materials, the activities, teaching techniques, the instruction, classroom management, language skills, and time allotment for doing the tasks. Various changes of the materials occur due to the dynamic circumstances of the classroom (Graves, 2003; 228), and these changes, according to McDonough and Shaw (1993), will lead to a greater appropriacy.

When the process of modifying the materials begins, further decisions need to be made. These concerns are: (1) choosing input and sources, and (2) selecting exercise types (Richards, 2001; 265). In choosing input and sources, we need to identify types of materials first such as grammar materials, listening materials, reading materials, writing materials, and speaking materials, followed by posing questions to each material with the purpose of initiating the learning process and that students respond to in some way in using the materials.

Posing questions to the materials are one of the ways to evaluate existing teaching materials. The ability to evaluate teaching materials efficiently is a very important

21 professional activity for EFL teachers (McDonough and Shaw, 1993; 63). With the fact that no single book really matches classroom needs (Brown, 1995; 157), therefore it is important to be able to evaluate the books on some sensible, principled basis (Grant, 1987; 118) through a process of evaluation starting from deciding how book should be most profitably used in the classroom to how it should be adapted.

The teacher evaluates the materials according to the treatment and presentation of the skills, the sequencing and grading of the materials, the type of reading, listening, speaking and writing materials contained in the teaching materials, appropriacy of tests and exercises, self study provision and teacher-learner ‘balance’ in use of the materials (McDonough and Shaw, 1993; 77).

The overall assessment to the materials refers to the suitability of the materials by considering the following parameters: the usability factor, the generalizability factor, the adaptability factor, and the flexibility factor (McDonough and Shaw, 1993; 78). Thus, when material evaluation is achieved, it is hoped that we can then reach our own conclusions regarding the suitability of the materials for specified groups or individuals. However, material evaluation is only one part of a complex process and that materials once selected can only be judged successful after classroom implementation and feedback.

Adaptation is essentially a process of “matching” what the books offer and what we have. There must be reasons to consider why we need to match the two factors in adapting certain teaching materials. These reasons, according to McDonough and Shaw (1993; 85) will depend, of course, on the whole range of variables operating in his/her own teaching situation, and one teacher’s priorities may well differ considerably from those of another. The reasons covered may include (a) aspects of language use, (b) skills, (c) classroom organization and (d) supplementary material (McDonough and Shaw, 1993; 87).

22 Modifying materials may take a variety of forms. The techniques are covered as follows covers the techniques as follows:

• Modifying content. Content may need to be changed because it does not suit the

target learners’ related factors such as age, gender, cultural background, etc.

• Adding or deleting content. The book may contain too much or too little for the

program.

• Reorganizing content. A teacher may decide to reorganize and arrange the units and

reorder the sequence of activities for a particular reason.

• Addressing omissions. The text may omit items that the teacher feels are important.

• Modifying tasks. Exercises and activities may need to be changed to give them and

additional focus.

• Extending tasks. Exercise may contain insufficient practice and additional practice

tasks may need to be added (Richards, 2001; 260).

In addition, similar techniques are summarized as follows:

1. Adding, including expanding and extending. Extending can be used for example the

students find the explanation of a new grammar point rather difficult, so further exercises are added before they begin the practice material. Another, more far-reaching perspective on addition of materials can be termed expanding such as if there is insufficient coverage of the skill of listening, the reading passage provided may also be paralleled by the provision of listening comprehension material.

2. Deleting, including subtracting and abridging. Reducing the length of materials is

called subtracting such as some of the language function like “giving directions” or “greetings” may be useful; “expressing sympathy” or “ordering things’ may not.

Abridging, on the other hand, is attached to the need for example to change the lengthy

grammatical explanation to be more communicative.

3. Modifying, including re-writing and re-structuring. Rewriting is needed for example if

audio material is not available, then the teacher can re-write a reading passage and deliver it orally. On the other hand, for example, where the class is too large for the total number of roles available, then the teacher needs to re-structure the activity and assigns one role to a number of pupils at the same time.

4. Simplifying. To avoid the confusion, therefore the teacher simplifies the instruction

and explanation that accompany exercises and activities.

5. Re-ordering. It is putting the parts of a coursebook in a different order (McDonough

and Shaw (1993; 88).

In practice, language teachers will not use all the techniques for a particular unit of a lesson in the implementation phase. Instead, techniques can be used individually or in combination with others depending on the teacher’s decision underlying the adaptation towards particular part of a given teaching material.

23 2.3.2 Material implementation

Material implementation is presenting materials and activities in the class. This stage is carried out to see how a teacher and students use the materials for the most effective use of them. At this stage, the study tries to discover how the teacher particularly uses the materials and how the students respond to the teacher’s use of materials. This stage is also intended to see to which degree the plan is carried out. The purpose of this stage, according to Graves (2003; 239), is to show some of the ways language teachers use the materials and techniques as they set up in the lesson plan.

In the second stage of material use, the teacher tries out the materials prepared beforehand and scrutinizes the material for the most effective use of it. For this purpose, with reference to Graves (2003; 239), classroom observation is held to see first, how the teacher organizes the materials; second, what sort of types of the materials frequently used; and third, the strategies used to use the materials. These three factors correspondingly will determine the effective use of the materials, and will be elaborated further in the following section.

2.3.2.1 Material Organization

Material organization provides a visible outline for what is to be learned in the classroom. Just like the sequential step of organizing materials in the lesson plan, material organization in the implementation process serves as a map that guides step by step in using the materials (Graves, 2003; 228). Therefore, both processes, according to Byrd (2001), are argued to be the same in the sense that it is not exactly the same since what has been planned may change due to the circumstances of the students’ needs or teacher’s preferences in using the materials.

24 Just like the coursebook, instructional materials are organized around key features of language which includes topics and associated vocabulary, grammar structures, and social and cultural interaction skills (Graves, 2003; 228). Instructional materials also emphasize two or more of the four skills of speaking, listening, reading, and writing. The choices of the key features and the language skills are a flexible decision of a teacher to change as to see the dynamic circumstances of the classroom.

Material organization in the implementation phase, in this case, organization within a method refers to the procedure covering the actual moment to moment techniques, practices, and behaviors that operate in teaching a language. At the level of procedure, there are three dimensions to a method: (a) the use of teaching activities (drills, dialogues, information-gap activities, etc.) to present a new language and to clarify and demonstrate formal, communicative, or other aspect of the target language; (b) the ways in which particular teaching activities are used for practicing language; and (c) the procedure and techniques in giving feedback to learners concerning the form or content of their utterances or sentences (Richards and Rodgers, 2002; 31).

Material organization also means classifying the materials based on the stages of the activities. In general, like most of activities, the teacher organizes the activities into three stages – pre activity, whilst activity, and post activity. There are several labels that refer to the procedures of activities as put forward by Savignon (1983) with PPP (presentation, practice, production), Ur (1996) with verbalization, automatization, and autonomy; Harmer (1998) with engage, study, activate; Harmer (1991) with lead-in, elicitation, explanation, accurate reproduction, and immediate activity. All of these labels, according to Jensen (2001) describe stages in which first, the language form or content is introduced and presented; second, comprehension is checked before a form of guided practice is implemented; and third, some types of less structured, communicative activity

25 so that students can practice what they have just learned in a less controlled, more natural situation.

From the various stages of activities above, it can be summarized that stages of activities can cover warm up, lead-in, presentation, controlled practice, freer practice, and feedback or review. Lessons usually begin with warm-up and/ or review activities. Once warmed up, the class is then ready for the presentation and practice stages of the lesson. In short, all different stages help the teacher organize the materials to be more effective in implementing the materials.

However, in practice, the teacher does not always conduct the activities as planned, and this is due to several reasons. Time management, according to Jensen (2001), becomes the major reason one activity is canceled to use or for another case, it takes longer time to do one activity. Second, the use of the materials can also change due to the seating arrangement which is different from what is required from the activity. Third, grouping types can also change if the students prefer to work best in one particular type of grouping. All of the changes of the activities derive from the teacher’s decisions in order to meet the dynamics of the classroom.

2.3.2.2 Types of Classroom Activities

Types of materials are distinguished based on the language skills used. It is important to make certain that the language skills are appropriately distributed in order to make a comprehensive coverage of the English learning (McDonough and Shaw, 1993; 74). Not only are the four language skills learnt but also the grammar, vocabulary and pronunciation are also introduced to enrich students’ understanding toward the language being learnt. Each of the four language skills including grammar, vocabulary and pronunciation will be elaborated further in the following section.

26 Often times, reading materials are regarded as monotonous activities, for which the teacher often skips the activity and changes it into oral activities. It is often found the reading materials still emphasize on structural usage that make the sentences in isolation with little attempt at coherence (Jensen, 2001). This artificial reading material with repeated structural patterns makes the whole text feel awkward and inauthentic. It is worsen with the choice of the text which is not familiar with the students’ world (Byrd, 2001). In addition, reading materials do not really provide learners with useful texts or effective strategies to improve their reading abilities.

As with reading, listening is rarely exercised due to the fact that it often fails to provide a contextual knowledge, to recognize “signals”, and to keep up with the speed of delivery (McDonough and Shaw, 1993; 139). This condition is worsen with the rare listening materials found in the coursebook and the unavailability of the listening aids makes the teachers to be more creative with an enjoyable activity to learn by for example providing authentic materials taken from the radio or television. For more ideas, Grant (1987) and McDonough and Shaw (1993) have provided suggested listening activities which some of them do not require a tape recorder.

Writing is not a matter of joining sentences, but more importantly, it provides a more communicative intention. Traditionally, few teachers still simply ask the students to write their holiday experiences, for example, and leave the work without any further correction. For another case, the teachers are too concerned on correcting students’ structural mistakes in the level of words or sentences. The coursebook also neglects the writing materials (McDonough and Shaw, 1993; 179) where it is common to find writing tasks ‘bunched’ at the end of a unit, either as supplementary work in class or set for homework and returned to the teacher for later correction. However, for the new trends, the

27 writing materials have oriented to ‘process’ rather than ‘product’ and moved to create an essay on a given topic which is more real-life and purposeful for the students.

In a communicative classroom nowadays, speaking materials dominates the activities in the coursebook for the students to learn. In general, speaking materials are realized in the form of dialogue, peer conversation, simulation, role play, discussion, etc. In addition, according to McDonough and Shaw (1993; 163), speaking activities based on games are often used to give a sense of fun in practicing the language. Those activities above assert the need of communication for the students to express ideas orally and communicate with others successfully. With the communication purposes, the teacher provides speaking materials which involve the students’ oral interaction.

Addition to the four language skills above, the teacher also provides the students with the grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation materials. These materials serve as the enrichment activities toward the four language skills. Even though some claim that those materials do not promote the communication activities, the teacher can give the sense of “communicative” to those activities.

With the whole language skills explored in the materials, it is expected that the students learn the language comprehensively because in practice these language skills may be taught in an integrated way in the classroom (McDonough and Shaw, 1993; 201). This idea of skill integration (Brown, 1994; McDonough and Shaw, 1993) is taken into consideration that in order to provide overall competence in the foreign language, it is going to involve more than performing in the four language skills separately, but involve them in effective, combined use of the skills which depend on the nature of the interaction taking place (McDonough and Shaw, 1993; 203).

28 2.3.2.3 Types of Classroom Techniques

Instructional materials are regarded as effective materials depending upon the techniques the teachers use. Good techniques or methods the teacher use will characterize the good materials (Richards, 2001). Accordingly, the appropriate use of material and method will determine the quality of language teaching (Richards and Rodgers, 2002) as they said the quality of language teaching will improve if teachers use the best available approaches and methods (Richards and Rodgers, 2002). With the belief that there is no best method to use the materials (Nunan, 2003; Brown, 1995), different teachers will come up with different techniques to use one material.

The term ‘techniques’ is used in this study as a super ordinate term to refer to various activities that either teachers or learners perform in the classroom (Brown, 1994; 137). Brown also mentions that the term “techniques” are considered to be virtually synonymous that include task, activity, procedure, practice, behavior, exercise, and strategy (1994; 137). In a broader term, the term techniques should be seen from the relationship among the term approach, method, and technique (Anthony and Rodgers, 1986; McDonough and Shaw, 1993; Brown, 1994; Brown, 1995; Nunan, 2003; Kumaravadivelu, 2008). In a practical definition, the term technique, according to Brown (1994; 5), is defined as ways of presenting the materials and teaching.

As mentioned earlier, different teachers will use different techniques to use one material. The differences to the use of various techniques are influenced by several factors.

First, the teacher factor covers teacher’s teachings skills and subject matter and contextual

knowledge (Richards, 1998). Teacher’s teaching skills are practical ways of conducting instruction in any situation based on pedagogical reasoning skills and decision making. For example, a traditional teaching technique such as drilling is to certain extend still appropriate in communicative teaching (Richards, 1998). The second important factor is

29 the subject matter and contextual knowledge of a teacher. The subject matter knowledge refers to what teachers need to know about what they teach, and how the practice of language teaching is shaped by the contexts in which it takes place (Richards, 1998).

Second, the techniques should be based on what the materials can offer

(McDonough and Shaw, 1993), which among others are choices of topics, skills covered, proficiency level, and grading of exercises. From those features mentioned above, then the teacher will get the idea on how the materials are used. In addition, the availability of teacher’s guide will also help the teacher with the suggested techniques provided along with the materials although it is not a must for teachers to follow the techniques suggested by the materials. The teacher, in this case, personalizes the materials using the techniques the teacher thinks it will be the appropriate technique to use.

Third, learners’ factor becomes the next factor the teacher must consider to use one particular technique. The learners’ factor includes learner characteristics, class size, and physical environment in the classroom (McDonough and Shaw, 1993; 83). In detail, the teacher must carefully see learner’s proficiency level, learner’s learning style (Grant, 1987), and learner’s motivation (Brown, 1994). Teacher’s techniques will also be influenced by the class size and numbers of the students where grouping is really affected by this factor.

By referring to those three factors above, the teacher considers using one particular technique, and this consideration may change from the techniques suggested in the lesson plan (Jensen, 2001) due to the fact that, according to Richards (1990; 37) summarizing from several sources, teaching is not static or fixed in time but is a dynamic, interactional process of interaction in which the teacher’s “method” results from the process and the instructional tasks and activities over time.

30 In practice, there are many techniques that a teacher can use to exploit the best delivery of the materials. Reading, for example, will vary in techniques according to local circumstances (McDonough and Shaw, 1993; 112). Therefore to design the techniques, Brown lists principles for designing interactive reading techniques as follows

1. Use interactive techniques

2. Use techniques that are intrinsically motivating 3. Balance authenticity and readability in choosing texts 4. Encourage the development of reading strategies 5. Include both bottom-up and top-down techniques 6. Follow up the SQ3R” sequence

7. Subdivide your technique into pre-reading, during-reading, and after-reading phases

8. Build in some evaluative aspect to your techniques (2001; 313-316).

Similar to Brown, White (1991) in McDonough and Shaw (1993) and Grant (1987) also provide general stages or procedures of a reading lesson as recommended in the textbook. This procedure is certainly workable, but it could become very monotonous. Therefore, Grants (1987) suggests it is important that teachers should develop other approaches too, to make the lessons more lively and interesting.

Techniques for teaching listening will vary considerably across proficiency continuum (Brown, 2001). Referring to Peterson (1991), Brown provides examples of listening techniques based on the levels (2001; 260-264) with previously following the practical principles in applying the techniques developed by Brown (2001; 258-259) that the technique should be interactive, intrinsically motivating, authentic, provided with listeners’ responses, adaptable for the development of listening strategies, and based on bottom-up and top-down listening techniques.

As a skill which enables us to produce utterances, speaking is learnt to activate a range of appropriate expressions that can be used to communicate something. To achieve this, according to McDonough and Shaw (1993; 162), teachers need to come up with

31 techniques that provide opportunities to actively use the language that they know in meaningful activities that they feel motivated to talk about such as through simulation/role play, problem solving, interview, etc. The activities can also be presented in a communication game involving practice of oral strategies such as filling in questionnaires and guessing unknown information (McDonough and Shaw, 1993; 163). Those activities, according to Brown, should be based on principles of designing speaking techniques.

1. Use technique that cover the spectrum of learner needs 2. Provide intrinsically motivating techniques

3. Encourage the use of authentic language in meaningful context 4. Provide appropriate feedback and correction

5. Capitalize on natural link between speaking and listening

6. Give students opportunities to initiate oral communication (2001; 275-276).

As another productive skill to learn, principally, writing conveys the communication through the written message. Therefore, (Brown, 2001; 346-348) suggests that teachers need to design the techniques which are based on certain principles.

1. Incorporate practices of “good” writers 2. Balance process and product

1. Account for cultural/literacy background 2. Connect reading and writing

3. Provide as much authentic writing as possible

4. Frame your techniques in terms of prewriting, drafting, and revising stages

Since the integration of the four skills cannot be avoided, teachers need to use an integrated technique instead as it is argued by Brown (2001) that through the four integrated skills, it gives students greater motivation and a chance to diversify their efforts in more meaningful tasks. Therefore, since communication requires an integrated technique to learn a language comprehensively, various techniques should be developed and improved for a better retention of effective speaking, listening, reading, and writing (Brown, 2001; 233).

32 2.5 Relevant research

Researches conducted in the study of the use of the materials have focused on two areas of research – the study of the material analysis and the study of the implementation analysis. The present study tries to discover how the teacher uses the materials for instructional purposes starting from the material preparation to material implementation.

Previous researches relevant to the present study have been conducted. The previous studies focus on several topics of research such as the study of the use of teaching resources (Richards, Tung, and Ng, 1992 in Richards, 1998), material adaptation (Yan, 2007), material evaluation analysis (Litz, 2006), teachers’ perceptions on published materials (Zacharias, 2003); strategies of teachers’ approaches to published coursebooks (McPherson, 2005), material analysis and their relevance to students’ needs (Meisuri, 2009), textbook use (Woodward, 1993; Studolsky, 1989 cited in Richards, 1998; 132-133; Moulton, 1994), and teachers’ and students’ perspectives on teaching materials (Johansson, 2006).

A survey of ESL teachers in Hong Kong on teaching resources conducted by Richards, Tung, and Ng (1992) reveals that first, teachers’ primary teaching resources were textbooks, supplementary materials, and audiotapes. Second, the primary functions of the textbook were to provide practice activities, language models, and information about the language. Third, most teachers reported that they do not rely on a single textbook, but use a separate textbook for each language skill. Only few of the teachers were found to use exercises and materials that the teachers have already prepared (cited in Richards, 1998; 127).

Another study is also conducted by Yan (2007) investigating English teachers' materials Adaptation. Yan’s study found that all trainees made changes to the textbook to varying degrees and their adaptations were generally satisfying. The adaptation practice is

33 also found in the study conducted by Zacharias (2003) as to suit the learners’ needs, and parts of the textbooks which are considered superfluous might be alleviated or eradicated through supplementing, modifying, and adapting problematic aspects of the coursebook (Litz, 2006. The textbook evaluation also found that the particular textbook being evaluated actually stood up reasonably well to a systematic in-depth analysis and that the positive attributes far out-weighed the negative characteristics (Litz, 2006)

Zacharias (2003) conducted a survey to 13 English teachers in five universities in Central Java. The survey found that most of the respondents favored English-speaking published materials than locally-published materials. Based on her observation, even though the respondents used the English speaking materials, in practice the study found many instances in which the teachers needed to modify the materials to suit their learners. For example, one of the teachers asked the class when and how Indonesians asked for and offered forgiveness.

McPherson (2005) emphasizes the importance of the teacher’s approach to published course books which can ensure that such material does provide a valuable and meaningful framework for a study program. The study reveals the approach the teacher conducts should follow certain strategies - ensuring personal relevance; being flexible about identifying local relevance; allowing for heterogeneity; providing achievable memorable tasks. The study also shows strategies for extending the work done on a coursebook unit – ensuring coherence; inserting personal writing; revisiting an aspect of language form; encouraging a personal evaluative responses to the material; extending the speaking skills component of the unit.

A multisite research (in United States and several developing countries) on how teachers use the textbooks and other print materials concluded several findings. First, teachers in US may “over use” textbooks than in developing countries, in the sense that

34 many use them almost as exclusively as the curriculum and sources of all instructional materials. On the other hand, teachers in several developing countries do not use materials during large portions of the lessons. Second, the study found that different teachers use textbooks differently. The last, the research shows that teachers' practices vary considerably, and interestingly experienced teachers use textbooks more often than do their novice colleagues (Moulton, 1994).

In an investigation on how teachers use textbooks, Studolsky (1989) found that even when the choice and sequence of topics to be taught was determined by the textbook, teachers still had to make significant decisions concerning time allocation, expected standards of performance, and modifying instruction to suit different student abilities within the same class. Studolsky also found that six teachers she observed varied considerably in their use of textbooks, and differed most in their use of classroom practices and teaching techniques and their use of activities from the teacher’s edition (cited in Richards, 1998; 127).

The recent study conducted in analyzing the materials and their relevance to students’ needs (Meisuri, 2009) found that first, the materials provided in the teaching and learning process is locally designed materials written by the lecturers. Second, the materials focused on the grammar for learning and completed with the availability of language skills, the mixture of general and specific vocabulary and topic/theme. Third, the selection of the materials was adopted and adapted from authentic and created materials. The last, regarding the materials relevance to the students, the study found that the materials were not fully relevant to the students’ needs, especially in term of the objective and language skills provided.

Regarding the students, a study conducted by Johansson (2006) revealed that their requests of teaching material varied. The majority however preferred either alternative

35 material or a combination with course books. In addition, they also declared that they are encouraged to influence the choice of material. From the same study, Johansson (2006) also showed that coursebooks should not be the only teaching material used in the classroom; they believed that the use of coursebooks alone would be boring and not very stimulating for the students.

With all relevant research explained above, therefore, the present study tries to discover how English teachers use the materials seen from preparation to implementation process and how the students respond to it.

36 CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This chapter discusses overview of the methodological aspects of the study. The overview begins with the discussion of research site and participants of the study, followed by the procedures of the qualitative method which becomes the research design of the study. The present study obtains research data from interviews, document analysis, classroom observation, and questionnaires. In this study, interviews serve as the main source of data. The data obtained from those data collection techniques are further analyzed to get the findings of the study.

3.2 Research Site and Participants

The research was conducted in the Language Centre of STIA LAN Bandung (State School of Administration Sciences) where the researcher is one of teachers. STIA LAN offers an English enrichment program at the first semester with the aim at providing basic communication of English. Therefore, by the end of the program, it is hoped the students will be able to communicate in simple English with friends and lecturers at campus as well as with their colleagues at work or when they serve the foreign society considering that the students are government employees and come from different state agencies throughout Indonesia.

The class meets six sessions with two teaching hours for each session. There are eight classes taught by eight teachers. In each class, there are around 20 students at the most with the average age is around 25 years of age. The students are given a coursebook “New Headway” for pre-intermediate students as the primary workbook the students do in the classroom.

37 There are 8 (eight) English teachers (referred to here as T) involved in this study (T1, T2, T3, T4, T5, T6, T7, T8). There were no specific criteria in the selection of these teachers, but only those who were teaching on the enrolled term became the subject of the study. There were five male teachers and three female teachers whose average age is 27 years of age. They had an undergraduate degree of English language and pedagogy, and have had one or two years of teaching experiences.

3.3 Research Design

The study employed a qualitative approach since it is relevant to the purpose and research questions of the study that are how teachers use the materials and how the students respond to it. In line with this, Woods (1999; 2) characterizes the qualitative study with “life as it is lived, things as they happen, situations as they are constructed in the day-to-day, moment-to-moment course of events.” This research particularly seeks lived experiences in real situations and is interested in how materials are used by the teacher. With an emphasis on process, therefore, this research analyzes the process the teachers use the materials from the preparation stage to the implementation stage.

Accordingly, a case study was used as the method of the study. Wallace (2000; 47) defines a case study as the systematic investigation of an individual ‘case’, whether that refers to one teacher, one learner, one group, one class, or whatever. In this research, a group of teachers was investigated for their use of materials. In addition, a case study is also relevant to the research since the researcher gathers evidence from multiple sources (McKay, 2008; 17). In this study, as will be discussed later, the data for this research were taken from multiple data collection techniques, namely: interviews, document analysis, classroom observation, and questionnaires. Each data collection will be presented below.

38 3.4 Data Collection

As mentioned earlier, three data collection techniques were used in this study; interviews, document analysis, classroom observation, and questionnaires. Furthermore, these multiple methods of data collection were taken into account to triangulate the data. With this triangulation, it verified the validity of the information being collected (Blaxter et al., 2006; 86), and therefore the subjectivity of the study can be avoided because according to Blaxter et al., the findings from one type of data collection can be checked against the findings deriving from the other types (2006; 85).

In the following section, each of the data collection will be elaborated further.

3.4.1 Document Analysis

In this study, document analysis tries to depict the evidence of what the teachers do during the preparation process in a written form. This type of data collection technique, according to Merriam (1988), is considered as “objective sources of data compared to other forms”. The document data is also used to triangulate the interview data.

The document data investigated in this study were taken from the materials provided in the textbook unit and lesson plan. For the purpose of the study, only one unit is used. The consideration is that the study only limits for one unit teaching process of how teachers use the material. On the other hand, the lesson plan here is not necessarily a detail document but a written indication that the teacher has thought in advance about the ‘why’, ‘what’, and ‘how’ of the lesson (Gabrielatos, 2004). In this study, the teachers were obliged to submit their lesson plans (see an example of lesson plan in Appendix B) to see the outline of what he/she was going to do in the classroom. From the lesson plan, we will know which materials are used, whether adaptation to materials takes place, what delivery

39 strategies are used, and whether the activities are organized based on certain lesson structure.

3.4.2 Classroom Observation

Classroom observation was conducted to find how the teachers use the materials in the implementation process. Observations, according to Merriam (1988), were useful in such a way that they showed things that had become routines to the participants themselves, things which may lead to understanding the context. The use of audio or video recording of lessons also provides a more reliable record of what actually happened in the classroom (Richards, 1990). During observations, the researcher was an observer and did not take part in any classroom activity.

The whole processes of classroom activities were recorded through the use of video

recorder. As Merriam (1988) suggests that recording make the data analysis easier. The

video also helps the researcher give the description of the material implementation which later will be cross checked to the interview result. The study seeks for what activities are conducted in the classroom. The list of activities as a result of classroom observation data can be seen in Appendix D. Due to the limitation of the time, the observations were conducted to the first four teachers (T1, T2, T3, T4).

3.4.3 Interviews

In this study, the main sources of data were the interviews that I undertook with the eight teachers as the respondents of the study. Merriam (1998) defines interview as “the person-to-person encounter in which one person gains information from another.” In this case, interviewing teachers were carried out to get in-depth information (Alwasilah, 2002) of their knowledge, beliefs, attitudes and practices (Baker and Johnson in

multilingual-40 matters.net/le/012/0229/le0120229.pdf), for this particular study, of how teachers use the materials.

Therefore, in order to answer the research question, a list of questions (see the Appendix E) was formulated in a semi-structured interview. In this type of interview, the interviewer has more freedom to deviate from the set questions (Sproston, 2005) with the expectation that teachers would account for their answers and that the researcher might have queried those accounts further (Nicholson, 2002 in http://www.aare.edu.au/02pap/nic02194.htm). This study thus employs semi-structured interviews to generate teachers' talk about their use of materials in an attempt to make visible their understandings of the use of materials that they do.

The questions of the interview were generated from four categories – (1) general questions; (2) material preparation; (3) material implementation; (4) reflection (see the detail questions in Appendix E). First, general questions ask about the general description of the materials the teacher used including the objective of the lesson (Q1), the characteristics of the materials (Q2), and the evaluation of the textbook unit (Q3). Second, the material preparation seeks for sources of materials (Q4), classroom activities (Q5, Q6), and material modification ((Q7, Q8, Q9, Q10). Third, material implementation will seek for classroom activities (Q11, Q12, Q13), and difficulty in delivering the materials (Q14). The last, the section tries to reflect on the teacher’s material use.

The interview was taken place shortly after the class finished. Then, the teacher was interviewed around 30 minutes. The interview was recorded using the tape-recorder, and then transcribed. To reveal the findings, the interview data will be supported by other data collection techniques.

41 3.4.4 Questionnaires

In this study, questionnaires were used to give the information about the use of the materials in the written response. Questionnaires, according to Alwasilah (2002; 151), were argued to know the respondents’ opinion, attitude, and perception. Alwasilah further contends that questionnaires could be used to judge factual information. In similar veins, Richards (2001; 60) says that questionnaires can also be used to elicit information about many different kinds of issues.

Richards (2001; 60) contends that questionnaires have a set structure (in which the respondents choose from a limited number of responses) or unstructured (in which open-ended questions are given that the respondent can answer as he or she chooses. For this study, the study tries to combine both types. Further, in this study, the questionnaires serve as additional data collection to the interview since this questionnaire was given to the students to reveal their responses about the materials and the teacher who uses the materials.

The questionnaires in this study (see Appendix A) have two issues to reveal; first, what they think of learning materials and what responses were made to how teacher uses the materials. The questionnaire used in the study is modified from WIP (2008). Learning materials are further jotted down into three questions about the material suitability to the students’ needs (Q1), the degree of material difficulty (Q2), and materials’ drive to interaction (Q6). Similar to learning materials, teacher’s use of materials is also broken down into three questions – teacher’s techniques in delivering materials (3), organizing skills in delivering materials (Q4), and teacher’s knowledge of the materials (Q5).

85 REFERENCES

Alwasilah, A. Chaedar. 2002. Pokoknya Kualitatif: Dasar-dasar Merancang dan Melakukan Peneltian Kualitatif. Pustaka Jaya. Jakarta.

Blaxter et al. 2006. How to Research. 3rd ed. Open University. England.

Brown, H. Douglas. (2001). Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. Prentice Hall Regents. New Jersey.

Brown, H. Douglas. 1994. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. Longman. New York.

Brown, James Dean. (1995). The Elements of Language Curriculum: A Systematic Approach to Program Development. Heinle & Heinle Publishers. Boston.

Brumfit, Christopher. (1985). Communicative Methodology in Language Teaching: The roles of fluency and accuracy. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

Byrd, Patricia. 2001. Textbooks: Evaluation for Selection and Analysis for Implementation. In Teaching English as A Second or Foreign Language, Marriane Celce- Murcia (Ed.) 3rd. Heinle-Heinle. United States.

Bolitho, Rod. 1988. Language Awareness on Teacher Training Courses. In Explorations in Teacher Training: Problems and Issues, Tony Duff (Ed). Longman. Great Britain.

Baker, Caroline D., and Johnson, Greer. Interview Talk as Professional Practice. Available [on line] at multilingual-matters.net/le/012/0229/le0120229.pdf Cameron, Lynne. 2001. Teaching Language to Young Learner.CUP: Cambridge.

Clarke, D. F. (1989). Communicative theory and its influence on materials production. In Kitao, Kenji, and Kitao, S. Kathleen. 1997. Selecting and Developing

Teaching/Learning Materials. The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. IV, No. 4, April 1997 Available [on line] at: http://iteslj.org/Articles/Kitao-Materials.html

Cresswell, John. 1994. Research Design: Qualitative and Quantitative Approach. SAGE Publication, Inc. California

86 Cunningsworth, A. 1995. Choosing Your Coursebook. In Richards, Jack. (2001).

Curriculum Development in Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press. New York.

Dudley-Evans, T., and M. St. John. 1998. Development in English for Specific Purposes. In Richards, Jack. (2001). Curriculum Development in Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press. New York.

Gabrielatos, Costas. 2004. Session Plan: The Coursebook as a Flexible Tool. Available at gabrielatos.com

Gebhard, Jerry G. (2000). Teaching English as a Foreign or Second Language – A teacher self-development methodology guide. The University of Michigan Press. Michigan.

Grant, Neville. (1987). Making the Most of Your Textbook. Longman. New York.

Graves, Kathleen. 2003. Coursebooks. In Practical English Language Teaching, David Nunan (Ed). McGraw Hill. New York.

Hutchinson, T. and Waters, A. (1987). English for Specific Purposes: A Learning Centered Approach. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

Harmer, J. (2001). The Practice of English Language Teaching. Pearson Education Limited. England.

Harmer, J. (1998). The Practice of English Language Teaching. Pearson Education Limited. England.

Harmer, J. (1991). The Practice of English Language Teaching. ELBS. Hongkong.

Huda, N. 1999. Language Learning and Teaching: Issues and Trends. IKIP Malang Publisher. Malang.

Johansson, Therese. 2006. Teaching material in the EFL classroom – teachers’ and students’ perspectives.

Jensen, Linda. 2001. Planning lessons. In Teaching English as A Second or Foreign Language, Marriane Celce- Murcia (Ed.) 3rd. Heinle-Heinle. United States.

87 James, Peter. 2001. Teacher in Action: Task for in-service Language Teacher Education

and Development. Cambridge Univ. Press. Cambridge.

Kumaravadivelu, B. 2008. Understanding Language Teaching – From Methods to Post Methods. Lawrence Elbraum Associates Publishers. London.

Kitao, Kenji, and Kitao, S. Kathleen. 1997. Selecting and Developing Teaching/Learning Materials. The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. IV, No. 4, April 1997 Available [on line] at: http://iteslj.org/Articles/Kitao-Materials.html

Litz, David R. 2006. A Textbook Evaluation and ELT Management: A South Korean Case Study. Available [on line] at http://www.asian-efl-journal.com

Liz & John Soars. 2001. New Headway English Course for Pre-intermediate level.

Littlejohn, A., & Windeatt, S. (1989). Beyond language learning: Perspective on materials design. In Kitao, Kenji, and Kitao, S. Kathleen. 1997. Selecting and Developing Teaching/Learning Materials. The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. IV, No. 4, April 1997 Available [on line] at: http://iteslj.org/Articles/Kitao-Materials.html

Lun, Lee Siu. 2006. Matching Teachers’ needs and Students’ needs. The Fifth Annual Conference of NCOLCTL. The Chinese University of Hong Kong

McKay, Sandra Lee. 2008. Researching Second Language Classroom. Lawrence Elbraum Associates Publishers. London.

Maxwell. (1996). Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach. SAGE Publication, Inc. California.

Merriam, Sharan B. (1988). Case Study Research in Education: A Qualitative Approach. Jossey-Bass Inc. Publisher. California.

McDonough, Jo. and Shaw, Christopher. (1993). Materials and Methods in ELT: A teacher’s guide. Blackwell. Oxford.

McPherson, Kate. 2005. Maximising student attention to classroom learning materials. CamTESOL Conference on English Language Teaching: Selected Papers, Volume 1, 2005.

Moulton, J. 1994. How Do Teachers Use Textbooks and Other Print Materials? - A Review of the Literature.

88 Miles, Mathew B., and Huberman, A. Michael. 1984. Qualitative Data Analysis: A

Sourcebook of New Methods. Sage Publications. London.

Meisuri. 2009. An Analysis of the Materials of English Subject and Their Relevance to the Students’ needs - A Case Study at a State Institute for Islamic Studies. Unpublished Thesis. Indonesia University of Education.

Muhammad, Razia Fakir., and Kumari, Roshni. 2007.Effective Use of Textbooks: A Neglected Aspect of Education in Pakistan. In Journal of Education for International Development 3:1.

Muller, Theron. 2005. Adding Taks to Textbooks for Beginner Learners. In Teachers exploring Tasks in English Language Teaching, Corrony Edwards and Jane Willis (Ed). Plagrave McMillan. Great Britain.

Nunan. David. (2000). Language Teaching Methodology: A Textbook for Teachers. Pearson Education Limited.

NCTE guideline. Guidelines for Selection of Materials in English Language Arts Program.Available online at

http://www.ncte.org/positions/statements/selectingelamaterial

Nunan, David. 2003. Methodology. In Practical English Language Teaching, David Nunan (Ed). McGraw Hill. New York.

Nunan, David. 1998. Language Teaching Methodology – A Textbook for Teachers. Prentice Hall. Great Britain.

Nicholson, Helen. 2002. Interpreting teacher talk in culturally diverse schools: The significance of critical realist and social constructionist understandings. Available [on line] at http://www.aare.edu.au/02pap/nic02194.htm

Peterson, Pat. Wilcox. 1991. A Synthesis for Interactive Listening. In Brown, H. Douglas. (2001). Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. Prentice Hall Regents. New Jersey.

Prabhu, N.S. 1987. Second Language Pedagogy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Richards, Jack C. and Rodgers, Theodore S. (1986). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching – A Description and Analysis. Cambridge Univ. Press. Cambridge.

89 Richards, Jack C. and Rodgers, Theodore S. (2002). Approaches and Methods in

Language Teaching – A Description and Analysis. Cambridge Univ. Press. Cambridge.

Richards, Jack. (2001). Curriculum Development in Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press. New York.

Richards, Jack C. (1998). Beyond Training. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

Richards, Jack C. 2000. New Interchange English Course. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

Richards, Jack C. (1990). The Language Teaching Matrix. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

Richards, Jack C. and Rodgers, Theodore S. (2002). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

Rowntree, D. 1997. Making Materials-based Learning Work. In Richards, Jack. (2001). Curriculum Development in Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press. New York.

Savignon, Sandra J. (1983). Communicative Competence: Theory and Classroom Practice: Text and Contexts in Second Language Learning. Addison-Wesley Publishing. Reading.

Shulman, L. 1987. Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform. In Richards, Jack. (2001). Curriculum Development in Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press. New York.

Smith, Larry E. 1981. English for Cross-Cultural Understanding. In Brumfit, Christopher. (1985). Communicative Methodology in Language Teaching: The roles of fluency and accuracy. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

Sproston, Carlyn. 2005. When Students Negotiate: an action research case study of a year 8 English class in a Catholic secondary college. Unpublished Dissertation.

Australian Catholic University.

Studolsky, S. 1989. Is teaching really by the book? in Richard, Jack C. (1998). Beyond Training. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

90 Tomlinson, B. 1998. Materials Development in Language Teaching. In Richards, Jack.

(2001). Curriculum Development in Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press. New York.

Tung, P. and Ng, P. 1992. The Culture of the English Language Teacher. In Richard, Jack C. (1998). Beyond Training. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

Ur, Penny. (1996). A Course in Language Teaching: Practice and Theory. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

Yan, Chanmei. 2001. Investigating English Teachers’ Materials Adaptation. Chinese EFL Journal. Vol. 1 Issue 1. March 2001. Available [on line] at http://www.chinese-efl-journal.com

Wallace, Michael J. 2000. Action Research for Language Teachers. Cambridge Univ Press. Cambridge.

White. 1991. In McDonough, Jo. and Shaw, Christopher. (1993). Materials and Methods in ELT: A teacher’s guide. Blackwell. Oxford.

Woods, Peter. 1999. Successful Writing for Qualitative Researchers. Routledge. New York.

Woodward, A. 1993. Introduction: Learning from Textbooks. In Richards, Jack C. (1998). Beyond Training. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

Wikipedia.com.

WIP. 2008. Assessment Weekly Report. Unpublished Report. Sorrowako.

Zacharias, Nugrahenny T. 2003. A Survey of Tertiary Teachers’ beliefs about English Language Teaching in Indonesia with Regard to the Role of English as a Global Language. Unpublished MA-ELT THESIS. Assumption University of Thailand.

Zacharias, Nugrahenny T. 2005. Teachers’ beliefs about Internationally Published Materials: A Survey of Tertiary English Teachers in Indonesia. RELC Journal. Available on line at http://rel.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/36/1/23