101 classroom condition was conducive because each student had responsibility to
master their parts. Besides, the students cooperated with the others in the group discussion. They considered their friends in the group as the resource to
comprehend the materials. The questionnaire and the interviews described the students’ opinion about the implementation of the jigsaw technique. They agreed
that the jigsaw technique could improve their participation because this activity invited them to be responsible for their own parts.
B. Suggestions
The researcher addressed the suggestions for the English teachers of seventh grade students of Junior High School and other researchers.
1. For Englis h Teache rs of Seventh Grade Students of Junior High School
Using the jigsaw technique in the teaching and learning process is suggested
English teachers who want to improve their students’ participation. It is because the use of the jigsaw technique gives a lot of benefits to the students and
the teacher. As discussed before in the research findings, the students will have responsibility to master their materials. However, the teachers should pay
attention to the place for implementing the jigsaw technique. It needs a big place because the students will move to other groups. Besides, the teachers should
consider the time because it took a lot of time.
102
2. For Other Researcher
This research has limitations to see how the jigsaw technique improved the students’ participation in English teaching and learning process. Therefore, for the
future researchers who want to conduct similar research may use the data in this research to support their research. Besides, it is better if the researcher can provide
a large place for implementing the jigsaw technique in order to make the students feel comfortable in the discussion activity. In addition, the next researcher s should
prepare the variation of interesting texts to avoid the boredom of the students. Therefore, the result will be more effective.
103
REFERENCES
Aronson, E. 1978. The jigsaw classroom. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE Publications.
Aronson, E. 2002. Building empathy, compassion, and achievement in the jigsaw classroom.
San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Aronson, E., Patnoe, S. 1997. The jigsaw classroom. New York: Addison-
Wesley Longman. Berger, R., Hanze, M. 2007. Cooperative learning, motivational effects, and
student characteristics: An experimental study comparing cooperative learning and direct instruction in 12th grade physics classes.
Learning and Instruction, Vol. 17, pp. 29-41. Hollaendische Strasse:
University of Kassel. Bogdan, R. C., Biklen, S. K. 1982. Qualitative research for education: An
introduction to theory and methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
Brown, H. 1987. Principles of language learning and teaching. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs. NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Cohen, L Manion, L. 1997. Research in education. 4th ed. London: Routledge Falmer.
Cohen, M. 1991. Making class participation a reality. Political Science Politics, Vol. 24
4, pp. 699-703. IT Corbetta, P. 2003. Social research theory, methods and techniques. Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. Davis, K. 1990. Human relations at works. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Felder, R. 2001. Learning styles. Raleigh, NY: North Carolina State University. Retrieved May 2, 2013, from http:www4.ncsu.eduunitylockers
usersffelderpublicLearning_Styles.html Finocchiaro, M. 1958. Teaching English as a second language in elementary
and secondary schools. New York: HarperBrothers.
Hakkarainen, K. 1992. Jigsaw.
San Diego: American Educational Research Association.
Retrieved October 22, 2012, from http:www.mlab.uiah.fipolutYhteisollinentyokalu_jigsaw.html
Hamachek, D. 1990. Psychology in teaching, learning, and growth. 4th ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
104 Hawley, R Hawley, I. 1979. Building motivation in the classroom: A
structured approached to improving students achievement. Washington,
D.C: Education Research Associated. Johnson, D. W, Johnson, R. T. 1989. Cooperation and competition: Theory
and research. Edina, MN: Inter-action Book.
Kemmis, S Mc Taggart, R. 1988. The action research planner. 3rd ed. Geelong: Deakin University Press. Retrieved October 25, 2012, from
http:tapchi.vnu.edu.vnnn_2_09b4.pdf Kvale, D. 1996. Interviews. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Landis, P. H. 1952. Adolescene and youth: The process of maturing. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc.
Milne. J. 1991. Questionnaires: Advantages and disadvantages. Riccarton, Edinburgh : Learning Technology Dissemenation Initiative.
Retrieved May
5, 2012,
from http:www.icbl.hw.ac.ukltdicookbookinfo_questionnairesindex.html
Opdenakker. R. 2006. Advantages and disadvantages of
interview technique inqualitative research. Forum: Qualitative Social Research,
Vol 7 4, Art. 11. Wiesbaden: Freie Universitat Berlin.
Retrieved October 25, 2012, from http:www.qualitative-research.netindex.phpfqsarticleview175391
Oxford, R. 1997. Cooperative learning, collaborative learning, and interaction: Three communicative strands in the language classroom. The Modern
Language Journal, Vol. 81 4, pp. 443-456. Bethesda, MD: Educational
Research Service. Parpito, D.Y. 2012. Using ji
gsaw to improve students’ participation in learning English in grade XI IPA 1 SMA N 2 Klaten.
Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University. unpublished thesis
Patrick, H., Anderman, L. H., Ryan, A. M., Edelin, K., Midgley, C. 2001. Teachers’ communication of goal orientations in four fifth-grade
classrooms. Elementary School Journal, Vol. 102, pp. 35 –58.
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Rakhmawati, D. 2010. Task based language teaching in improving speaking
ability . Bandung: Universitas Pendidikkan Indonesia.
Ramsden, P 1992. Learning to teach in higher education. London: Routledge Falmer.
105 Rocca, K. A. 2010. Student participation in the college classroom: an extended
multidisciplinary literature review. Journal of Classroom Interaction, Vol. 59,
pp. 185-213. Housten, Texas: University of Housten. Sariefe, S Klose, M. 2008.
Students’ attitude toward assessing in-class participation. Teaching Learning Conference. Hawkes Bay, MA:
Eastern Institute of Technology. Savignon, S. J. 1983. Communicative competence: An experiment in foreign
language. Boston: Cengage Heinle.
Schmuck, R. A. 1997. Practical action research for change. Arlington Heights, IL: Skylight Professional Development.
Schreyer Institude for Teaching Excellence. 2007. Large class FAQ: Student involvementparticipation.
Rider Building: University Park, PA 16802. Retrieved October 22, 2012, from www.schreyerinstitute.psu.edu
Silbermen, M 1996. Active learning: 101 strategies to teach any subject. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Slavin, R. E. 1994. A theory of school and classroom organization : School and classrooom organization
. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaun. Slavin, R. E. 1995. Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice.
2nd ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Stipek, D. J. 1993. Motivation to learn: From theory to practice. 2nd ed.
Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Sugiyono 2010. Metode penelitian pendekatan kuantitatif, kualitatif, dan RD.
Bandung: Alfabeta. Tatar, S. 2005. Why keep silent? the classroom participation experiences of
non-native-englishspeaking students.
Language and
Intercultural Communication, Vol. 5,
pp. 284-293. ES Vandrick, S 2000. Language, culture, class, gender and class participation.
Paper presented at TESOL Annual International Convention, Canada: Vancouver.
Wade, R. 1994. Teacher education students’ views on class discussion:
implications for fostering critical reflection. Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 10,
pp. 231-243. ES Ziyani, I., King, U., Ehlers, V. 2004. Using triangulation of research methods
to investigate family planning practice in Swaziland. Africa journal of Nursing and Midwifery, Vol. 6
1, pp. 12-17.
APPENDICES
106
APPENDIX A
Covering Letter for the Head
of SMP N 8 Yogyakarta
107
108
APPENDIX B
Research Official Statement
from SMP N 8 Yogyakarta
109
110
APPENDIX C
Research Instruments
1. Observation Sheets
