INTEGRATING CHARACTER EDUCATION INTO ENGLISH TEACHING THROUGH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING : A Case of Class 3 A of SDN Sendang Mulyo 04 Kota Semarang -

INTEGRATING CHARACTER EDUCATION INTO ENGLISH
TEACHING THROUGH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF
COOPERATIVE LEARNING :
A Case of Class 3 A of SDN Sendang Mulyo 04
Kota Semarang

THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Master Degree of
English Education

by
SETYONO NIM:
0204511028

SEMARANG STATE UNIVERSITY (UNNES)
GRADUATE PROGRAM
ENGLISH STUDIES
2016

\PPRO\"AL

ThIS

thesis entitled "I. 'TEGRA TI. G CH.\R-\CfER

TE:\CIII~G

THROlGII

TilE

EDlCATIO~

"IPLE\1E~T:\TIO~

OF

I~TO E~GLlSII
COOPERATIVE

LE:\R~I. 'G: :\ Case of Class 3:\ of SD~ Sendangmulyo O~ Kota Sernarang by

Name

SRN
Study Program

Setvono

. 0204511 02X
Lnglish Language Education

has been examined and defended

In

front of the board of examiners. graduate program of

Sernarang State Uruversity (Unnes : on Friday. February 26,2016
Sernarang. February 26, 2016

Board of Examiners

Chairman.

1/
Ie

Secretary,

f1;

'l-~

6r .lanuarius Mujiyanto. M.Hum
NIP IQ5312131Q83031002

Prof )r Tri Joko Raharjo, M Pd
NIP IQ59030119851 11001

Examiner 1

Drs. Ahm d Sofwan, M A.Ph D
NIP IQ6204271989011()01

Examiner 3

Dr ISS\ Yuhasn. \,1 Pd
;-..JIP 1962(1713 I (}q()(J32001

II

Df('I_ARATIO:\

1 hereby declare that this thesis draft IS definitely my own work I am completely
responsible for the content of this thesis draft Other writers' opinions or findings
Included III this thesis draft are quoted or Cited in accordance with the ethical
standards.

Semarang. January 2016

Seryono

SRl\ .0204511028

III

MOTTO AND DEDICATION

If you never tasted a bad apple, you would not appreciate a good apple.
You have to experience life to understand life (Leon Brown)

To:
My beloved wife,
My daughter and son
….

iv

ABSTRACT
Setyono. 2016. Integrating Character Education into English Teaching through
the Implementation of Cooperative Learning: A Case of Class 3 A of SDN

Sendang Mulyo 04 Kota Semarang. A Thesis. English Language
Education, Graduate Program, State University of Semarang. First
Advisor: Dr. Issy Yuliasri, M. Pd, Second Advisor: Drs. Ahmad Sofwan,
Ph.D.
Key words: Character Education, English Teaching, Cooperative Learning
The newest issue which come is the Curriculum of 2013. The major point
of the national curriculum changes emphasizes on the elementary school
curriculum. It assumed that elementary school is the basic school environment for
children to develop their social interactions by providing just basic intellectual
knowledge and more emphasizing the activity to promote characters. Teaching
English for elementary school recently then also gains its momentum to reform.
Integrating character education into teaching English requires smart strategy as
presenting values-based atmosphere inside and outside classroom, which allow
students to move to increasingly higher levels of moral development. One of the
recent approaches to foster students‟ positive character is Cooperative Learning
(CL).
This research is conducted to measure the effectiveness of CL techniques
to foster students‟ academic achievement and promote their positive characters in
learning English at SDN Sendang Mulyo 04, Semarang. As it is done in English
classroom context, there are two kinds of students‟ achievements which are

measured, they are English academic achievement and positive characters. It
employs Time-Sample Experimental Design, as the research design. It is argued as
the suitable research design in observing personal growth since this kind of
student‟s development requires numerous continuesly observations of the sample
individually, within the same group of samples (Cohen, 2007: 284; Tuckman,
1978: 141).
The sample population was students in Class 3 A of the 2013 academic
year. It had 23 students. As it is suggested in the research design, the observations
were done in 2 cycles and each cycle contained 2 phases; first phase was
controled activities and the second phase was experimental activities. The
controlled activities were taught in the traditional method of Grammar Translation
and Audio-Lingual approach. The first experimental activities were taught in
Cooperative Learning techniques of Paraphrase Passport and Think-Pair-Share,
and the second ones were Round Robin Brainstorming and Three-Step Interview.
The findings of this study suggested that Cooperative Learning helped the
elementary school students to enhance oral and written communicative
competence as well as their characters development slightly significant.

v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Praise to God, the Compassionate, the Merciful. I wish to express my gratitude to
Allah for His blessing and inspiration leading me to finish this study.
I would like to deliver my sincerest gratitude to Dr.Issy Yuliasri, M. Pd. as
my first advisor, who has patiently and kindly given valuable and continuous
guidance, advice, as well as encouragement in making and completing this thesis.
In addition, my honest respect is addressed to Drs. Ahmad Sofwan, Ph.D as my
second advisor, who has carefully read the paper for its improvement and has
encouraged me to finish it.
My admiration goes to all lecturers of the English Language Education of
Graduate of Semarang State University (UNNES) for all the guidance and lectures
during my study. My gratitude also goes to the headmaster of SDN Sendang
Mulyo 04 Semarang and the third graders in the academic year 2013/2014 who
helped me complete the research. Furthermore, I would say my gratefulness to
Mr. Rosyidi, S.Pd. who gave me chances to observe his activity and provide me
some information about materials supporting the thesis.
My endless love and thankfulness are addressed to my beloved wife, Sri
Wahyuni and to my daughter, Andra SS and son, Pramudya FDA. Also, I would
say more thanks to all of my friends in Super English „11 for their help and

support.

vi

Finally. 1 hope that this

thesis w ill significantly contribute tor the

development of the teaching and learning English as Medium of lnstrucuon and
further study.

Semarang,

Januarv 2016

Servono

SR~ 0204511028

VII

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
ABSTRACT .....................................................................................................

v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ...............................................................................

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................

viii

LIST OF TABLES ...........................................................................................

xiii

LIST OF FIGURES .........................................................................................

xiv

LIST OF APPENDICES ................................................................................. xvii

CHAPTER
1.

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................

1

1.1

Background of the Study ..................................................................

1

1.2

Reason for Choosing the Topic .........................................................

6

1.3

Research Problems ............................................................................

9

1.4

Objectives of the Study .....................................................................

10

1.5

Significances of the Study .................................................................

11

1.6

Limitation of the Problems ...............................................................

12

1.7

Outline of the Thesis .........................................................................

13

2.

REVIEW OF RELATED LITURATURES ..................................

12

2.1

Review of Previous Studies ...............................................................

12

2.2

Theoretical Reviews...........................................................................

17

2.1.1

General Theory of Elementary School Education ............................

17

2.2.1.1 Education and Goals of Education.....................................................

17
viii

2.2.2

General Outlook of Indonesian Elementary School Curriculum .......

20

2.2.3

Legal Framework of School Curriculum ...........................................

22

2.2.4

Basic Framework of Curriculum and Competency ...........................

23

2.2.5

Teaching and Learning English at Elementary School ......................

25

2.2.5.1 Communicative Competence Approach ............................................

25

2.2.6

Theories in Teaching English for Young Learners ............................

28

2.2.7

Current Issues in English Teaching and Learning in Indonesian
Elementary School .............................................................................

33

English Curriculum of Elementary School .......................................

35

2.2.8.1 Skills .................................................................................................

35

2.2.9

Character Education ..........................................................................

36

2.2.10

Scope of Character Education ...........................................................

37

2.2.11

Values and Character ........................................................................

39

2.2.12

Students‟ Positive Characters of Primary School in Indonesia ........

41

2.2.13

Defining Character Education ...........................................................

44

2.2.14

Philosophical Bases of Character Education ....................................

45

2.2.15

Legal Bases of Character Education in Indonesia ............................

47

2.2.16

Developing Students‟ Positive Character .........................................

50

2.2.16.1 Macro Level Context, Social Context of Character Education .........

51

2.2.16.2 Micro Level Context, Social Context of Character Education .........

53

2.2.17

Cooperative Learning ........................................................................

55

2.2.17.1 General Concept of Cooperative Learning Method ..........................

56

2.2.18

60

2.2.8

The Theories Supporting Cooperative Learning Method .................

ix

2.2.19

The Elements of Cooperative Learning and Values Carried Out .....

62

2.2.20

Cooperative Learning Techniques ....................................................

65

2.2.21

The Significance of Cooperative Learning Methods to Foster
Students‟ Academic Achievements ..................................................

2.2.22

67

The Significance of Cooperative Learning Methods to Foster
Students‟ Characters .........................................................................

68

2.3

Theoretical Framework .....................................................................

69

3.

METHOD OF INVESTIGATION .................................................

72

3.1

Research Design ................................................................................

73

3.2

Population and Samples ....................................................................

79

3.3

Variables ...........................................................................................

80

3.4

Hypothesis .........................................................................................

85

3.5

Instruments ........................................................................................

86

3.5.1

Tests ..................................................................................................

86

3.5.2

Observations .....................................................................................

87

3.6

Type of Data .....................................................................................

87

3.7

Method of Collecting Data ................................................................

87

3.7.1

Tests ..................................................................................................

85

3.7.1.1 Pre-tests (Phase of Traditional Learning Method/Phase A and C) ...

88

3.7.1.2 Pre-tests (Phase of Traditional Learning Method/Phase A and C) ...

89

3.7.2

Observation .......................................................................................

91

3.8

Method of Analyzing Data ................................................................

93

x

4.

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION .....................................................

95

4.1

Findings .............................................................................................

95

4.1.1

The Significance of Cooperative Learning Method in Developing
Students‟ English Competence .........................................................

4.1.2

96

The Comparison between Traditional and Cooperative Learning
Method in Developing Students‟ English Competence .................... 110

4.1.3

The Effectiveness of Cooperative Learning Method in Fostering
Students‟ Positive Characters ........................................................... 113

4.1.4

The Comparison between Traditional and Cooperative Learning
Method in Term of Their Significance in Developing Students‟
Positive Characters ............................................................................ 150

4.2

Discussion ......................................................................................... 154

4.2.1

The Effectiveness of Cooperative Learning Method in Developing
Students‟ English Competence ......................................................... 154

4.2.2

The Comparison between the Two Strategies in Terms of Their
Effectiveness in Developing Students‟ English Competence ........... 157

4.2.3

The Significance of Cooperative Learning Method in Developing
Students‟ Positive Characters ........................................................... 158

4.2.4

Comparison between the Two Strategies in Terms of Their
Significance in Fostering Students‟ Positive Characters .................. 161

5 CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS ................................................. 165
5.1 Conclusions ............................................................................................... 165
5.2 Suggestions ............................................................................................... 167

xi

REFERENCES ............................................................................................... 169
APPENDICES ................................................................................................ 174

xii

LIST OF TABLES
Table

Page

2.1

Scaffolding of Children‟s Learning......................................................

2.2

Substansi Nilai/Karakter pada SKLSD/MI/SDLB*/Paket A (Values

32

in Standard Learning Outcomes of Indonesian Elementary School) ...

41

2.3

Character Taxonomy ............................................................................

42

2.4

The Differences between Cooperative Learning and Group Learning

58

3.1

Variable of English Competence..........................................................

84

3.2

Variable of Character Development.....................................................

85

3.3

Instrument for Character Observation ..................................................

92

4.1

Pearson Correlation Coeficient of Inter-rater Reliability .....................

97

4.2

Writing and Speaking Tasksof Traditional Method (Phase
„A‟)Statistics.........................................................................................

98

4.3

Writing and Speaking Tasks of C-L Method (Phase „B‟) Statistics ... 100

4.4

Writing and Speaking Tasks of Traditional Method (Phase„C‟)
Statistics ............................................................................................... 102

4.5

Writing and Speaking Tasks of C-L Method (Phase D) Statistics ...... 104

4.6

Paired Samples Statistics of the First Cycle (Phases A and B) ............ 105

4.7

Paired Samples Correlations of the First Cycle (Phase A and B) ........ 106

4.8

Paired Samples Test of the First Cycle (Phase A and B) ..................... 107

4.9

Paired Samples Statistics of the Second Cycle (Phase C and D) ......... 108

4.10

Paired Samples Correlations of the Second Cycle (Phase C and D) .... 109

4.11

Paired Samples Test of the Second Cycle (Phase „C‟ and „D‟) ........... 109

4.12

Paired Samples Statistics...................................................................... 111

4.13

Paired Samples Correlations ................................................................ 112

4.14

Paired Samples Test ............................................................................. 112

4.15.a Intrapersonal 1 data .............................................................................. 116
4.15.b Intrapersonal 1- Traditional Method (Phase „A‟) Statistics ................. 117
xiii

4.16.a Intrapersonal 2 data .............................................................................. 117
4.16.b Intrapersonal 2- Traditional Method (Phase A) Statistics .................... 118
4.17.a Intrapersonal 3 data .............................................................................. 119
4.17.b Intrapersonal 3-Traditional Method (Phase „A‟) Statistics .................. 119
4.18.a Interpersonal 1 data .............................................................................. 120
4.18.b Interpersonal 1-Traditional Method (Phase A) Statistics ..................... 121
4.19.a Interpersonal 2 data .............................................................................. 122
4.19.b Interpersonal 2- Traditional Method (Phase „A‟) Statistics ................. 122
4.20

Character /Total Scores-Traditional Method (Phase „A‟) Statistics..... 123

4.21.a Intrapersonal 1 data .............................................................................. 126
4.21.b Intrapersonal 1 C-L Method (Phase B) Statistics ................................ 126
4.22.a Intrapersonal 2 data .............................................................................. 127
4.22.b Intrapersonal 2 C-L Method (Phase „B‟) Statistics ............................ 127
4.23.a Intrapersonal 3 data .............................................................................. 128
4.23.b Intrapersonal 3 C-L Method (Phase „B‟) Statistics ............................. 129
4.24.a Interpersonal 1 data .............................................................................. 130
4.24.b Interpersonal 1 C-L Method (Phase „B‟) Statistics ............................ 130
4.25.a Interpersonal 2 data .............................................................................. 131
4.25.b Interpersonal 2 C-L Method (Phase „B‟) Statistics .............................. 131
4.26

Character /Total Scores C-L Method (Phase B) Statistics .................. 132

4.27.a Intrapersonal 1 data .............................................................................. 133
4.27.b Intrapersonal 1- Traditional Method (Phase „C‟) Statistics ................. 134
4.28.a Intrapersonal 2 data .............................................................................. 134
4.28.b Intrapersonal 2- Traditional Method (Phase „C‟) Statistics ................. 135
4.29.a Intrapersonal 3 data .............................................................................. 135
4.29.b Intrapersonal 3- Traditional Method (Phase A) Statistics .................... 136
4.30.a Interpersonal 1 data .............................................................................. 137
4.30.b Interpersonal 1- Traditional Method (Phase „C‟) Statistics ................. 138
4.31.a Interpersonal 2 data .............................................................................. 138
4.31.b Interpersonal 2- Traditional Method (Phase C) Statistics .................... 139
4.32

Character /Total Scores- Traditional Method (Phase „C‟) Statistics .... 139
xiv

4.33.a Intrapersonal 1 data .............................................................................. 141
4.33.b Intrapersonal 1 C-L Method (Phase „D‟) Statistics ............................. 141
4.34.a Intrapersonal 2 data .............................................................................. 142
4.34.b Intrapersonal 2 C-L Method (Phase „D‟) Statistics ............................ 142
4.35.a Intrapersonal 3 data .............................................................................. 143
4.35.b Intrapersonal 3 C-L Method (Phase „D‟) Statistics ............................. 143
4.36.a Interpersonal 1 data .............................................................................. 144
4.36.b Interpersonal 1 C-L Method (Phase „D‟) Statistics ............................ 145
4.37.a Interpersonal 2 data .............................................................................. 145
4.37.b Interpersonal 2 C-L Method (Phase „D‟) Statistics............................... 146
4.38

Character /Total Scores C-L Method (Phase „D‟) Statistics ............... 146

4.39

Character Paired Samples Statistics of the First Cycle ........................ 147

4.40

Character Paired Samples Correlations of the First Cycle (Phase„A‟
and „B‟) ................................................................................................ 148

4.41

Character Paired Samples Statistics of the Second Cycle (Phase„C‟
and „D‟) ................................................................................................ 149

4.42

Total Character Paired Samples Statistics............................................ 151

4.43

Total Character Paired Samples Correlations .................................... 151

4.44

Total Character Paired Samples Correlations Test .............................. 152

xv

LIST OF FIGURES

Figures

Page

2.1 Diagram of Linguistic Competence Continuum ........................................

27

2.2 Four Aspects of Character..........................................................................

40

2.3 Macro Level Developmental Process of Character Education ..................

51

2.4 Micro Level Developmental Process of Character Education ...................

53

2.5 Learning Pyramid .......................................................................................

56

2.6 Theoretical Framework ..............................................................................

71

3.1 Equivalent Time-Sample Design / ABAB Design .....................................

75

4.1 English Competence Chart......................................................................... 113
4.2 Character Development Chart .................................................................... 153

xvi

LIST OF APPENDICES

Page
Writing skills ....................................................................................................

174

Traditional method activities............................................................................

174

Lembar pengamatan akademik siswa SDN Sendangmulyo IV Semarang ......

175

Scoring Rubric of writing task .........................................................................

177

Speaking skill (traditional method) ..................................................................

178

Traditional method activities............................................................................

178

Lembar pengamatan akademik siswa SDN Sendangmulyo IV Semarang ......

179

Scoring Rubric of oral task ..............................................................................

181

Rencana kegiatan pembelajaran mata pelajaran bahasa Inggris Kelas 3 A .....

183

First cycle observations ....................................................................................

202

Second cycle observations ...............................................................................

203

Statistical Analysis ...........................................................................................

204

T-Test ...............................................................................................................

212

xvii

1

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study
Teaching English and English teachers in Indonesia today meet

serious

challenges in educating elementary school students. Instead of providing youth
with basic academic knowledge and skills, they also have responsibility to
promote character development. This issue arose when the Minister of Education
of Indonesia stated the changes of the recent curriculum. Eventhough basically the
development of intellectual acquisition and the promotion of positive behavior
have become the main teachers‟ tasks from time to time, teachers of elementary
schools still have such constraints to implement those goals of education.
There are three important issues in the Indonesian educational system at
the end of 2012. The first is the issue of the banning of English learning for
elementary school, the second is the moratorium of International Standard School
program, and the third is the issue of the educational curriculum changes. The first
and second issues relate to merely English teachers especially those who teach
elementary school students, while the last issue deals with all teachers including
English teachers at every school level.
The issue of banning English teaching at elementary schools was stated by
numerous mass media in 2012 (Tempo, 28 Sept. 2012; Liputan 6.com, 14 Nov.
2012; Surabaya Post, 2 Des. 2012). It was stated that English will be no longer a
subject taught in elementary schools because it was as part of a curriculum
overhaul that will come into effect next year. The omission of Engllish aims to
1

2

provide proper time for students to master the Indonesian language first before
studying foreign languages. However, the Education Ministry finally announced
that there will be no banning of English language lessons. Furthermore, he said
that from early on, there was never any mandatory English class at elementary
level. English at the elementary school level is a local content.
The moratorium of the International Standard School (ISS or RSBI)
programs was declared on Tuesday, 8 January 2013 by the Constitutional Court
(MK). The national program of International Standard School was introduced in
2007 by the Indonesian Education Ministry (The Jakarta Globe.com, 23 Oct.
2012). For its realization, the Article 50 of the Education System Law stipulated
that every regency or city should have at least one ISS school. By the time its
running, ISS program gained protest from the public. Finally Mahfud, M.D., the
chief of the Constitutional Court, said that the implementation of RSBI had
violated the principle of education for all and created social gaps among students.
Furthermore, the court ruled that all schools in Indonesia have to adopt one
national standard. According to the court, international-standard school (RSBI)
discriminated against reguler students. The court also said that ISS, where classes
use English as the main language of instruction, dissuaded students from using
their mother language that is Bahasa Indonesia.
The newest issue is the development of curriculum; school-based
curriculum into 2013 curriculum. The major point of the national curriculum
changes emphasizes on the elementary school curriculum. The change is
generated due to the Indonesian system wish for elementary education; that is to

3

develop children‟s sense of wonder and curiosity and encourage critical thinking
and creativity. It is argued that elementary school is the basic school environment
for children to develop their social interactions by providing just basic intellectual
knowledge and more emphasizing the activity to promote characters. Thus, it
should not burden them with too many sets of cognitive subjects, rather than uses
the time available to integrate teaching according to various topics. For example
when students learn English, they are at the same time being exposed to
knowledge of the world around them and of their social and physical environment,
a broad understanding of selected periods in history, moral ideas, and an
awareness of their own potential.
Teaching English for elementary schools recently then gains its
momentum to reform. The traditional teaching and learning will be no more to be
their favourite concern to realize the new curriculum challenges. Traditional
language teaching refers to the teacher-centered method in which many
ingredients of Grammar-Translation Method and Audio-Lingual Method are used
in the teaching and learning. Teaching has traditionally concentrated on making
students aware of certain aspect of language without providing practice. Students‟
competences are seen in terms of their ability to understand linguistic knowledge
cognitively rather than their communicative competence.
In teacher-centered, students taught by traditional teaching methods
receive majority cognitive knowledge. This approach generates majority lecturing,
reading, and visualizing methods of teaching. According to Learning Pyramid
theory proposed by Professor Tim Brighouse at the University of Keele adopted

4

by

Liang (2002) that those methods of teaching provide very low students‟

retention on the learning material as well as the effects aimed in promoting the
characters. The pedagogical implication of the pyramid is that teachers should
coordinate and facilitate the learning activities so that students are encouraged to
do the task by themselves, individually as well as collaboratively.
Integrating character education into teaching English requires smart
strategy as presenting values-based atmosphere inside and outside classroom,
which allow students to move to increasingly higher levels of moral development
by using value stimuli. Those stimuli include self-reflection, learning through
games and stories, as well as content lessons (Shea, 2003). In addition to the use
of stimuli as media or games for naturalizing character education, learning
methods may also be something urgent to carry the students‟ positive character
attributes (Gillies, 2003: 19). The appropriate method enables students to achieve
not only the content of the study; it develops values structured during the learning
process in the same time.
One of the recent approaches to foster students‟ positive character is
Cooperative Learning (CL). Cooperative learning is an approach of teaching and
learning which has the characteristics of „student-centered‟. Students are the
active agents of learning process while teacher acts as their facilitator.

This

method is assumed significantly to increase academic learning as well as character
of personal growth (Sharan, 1999: 227).
Being a relatively new method in Indonesia, Cooperative Learning is not
widely implemented yet. State Elementary School (SDN) Sendang Mulyo 04

5

Semarang is one of the primary educational institutions which applies this method
for its teaching learning process. It was built in 2006 and announced with the
name of “SDNBI Kota Semarang” and with the status of International Standard
School. By the moratorium of the International Standard School program, SDNBI
of Semarang has stopped its status and received all consequences including to
state as a regular national elementary school on January 2013. Therefore, in April
2013 its name was changed to be SDN Sendang Mulyo 04 Kota Semarang.
Teachers‟ recognition of this school toward Cooperative Learning techniques and
their ability to implement them lead me to conduct the reseach in this institution.
This research was conducted to measure the effectiveness of CL
techniques to foster students‟ academic achievement and promote their positive
characters in learning English at SDN Sendang Mulyo 04 Kota Semarang. As it
was done in English classroom context, there were two kinds of students‟
achievements which were measured, they were English academic achievement
and positive characters. Thus, the research undertaken for this thesis intended to
explore firstly, on how the implementation of CL techniques improves the
students‟ academic achievement of English; and secondly, on how the
implementation of CL techniques promotes the students‟ positive characters. It
employed Time-Sample Experimental Design, as the research design.TimeSample Experimental Design is argued as the suitable research design in
observing this issue of personal growth since this kind of student‟s development
requires numerous continuesly observations of the sample individually, within the
same group of samples (Cohen, 2007: 284; Tuckman, 1978: 141). It argues that

6

True Experimental Research Design may succeed to measure the significance of
Cooperative Learning in fostering

students‟ English language acquisition.

However, to draw a clear understanding toward the significance of the students‟
development in terms of their positive characters requires a quite longitudinal
observation, and being psychical factor, moral development cannot be compared
across students because it meets very high on its validity threat due to the variety
of their social, economic, and psychical background. Therefore, Equivalent TimeSample Quasy Experimental Design would be sensible as it provides the
characteristics of the tempted procedure. In emphasizing its validity, Tuckman
(1978:140) argued that this design succeed in providing a check on the differential
over time by comparing their interaction between the two methods applied in four
measurements activities, thus selection factors are controlled by using the same
students in both conditions, in short, this design requires the samples as their own
controls.

1.2 Reasons for Choosing the Topic
It notices that the outcome of educational process would be persons who have
high intelligence and character behaviors. However, the issue of anti-character is
becoming a big priority in this country. The anti-social behaviors described in
Indonesian media as corruption issues, youth violence, illegal logging, and
terrorism dominating our daily concerns are parts of the facts. “ The character
education implemented in religion, civics, and ethics lessons of the previous
Indonesian education approach has proved no significant inferences in improving
students positive character attributes” (Buchori, 2007). In line with the above

7

statement, (Mayyadah, 2009) in her thesis, interrogates “the students‟ character
produced by the previous educational programs noticed that rude bullying,
internet pornography, sex abuse, students colossal fighting occurs in the daily
lives. Ironically, it is clear that those anti-social behaviors oppose to the education
goals of Indonesian Law No. 20, Year 2003, passage 3 which notices that the
implementation of the educational philosophy through curriculum, teachinglearning approach, and its methods is crucial to achieve the national education
aims.
Concerning to the anti-social behaviors reported by nowadays media, it
comes to the judgment of character education demanding. Indonesian government
has effort to catch this momentum to emphasize the national educational
curriculum on students‟ character building. It realizes through the current issue of
the national curriculum changes. Wachidah in national seminar of Semarang State
University on December 2012 explained the government‟s statement to counter
the media issues on the banning of English subject course at elementary school.
She argued that the implementation of character education in Indonesia is
necessary. In addition, she, as a member of national team of educational
curriculum developer (Puskurbuk) stated that the issue of the difficulty of
assessing values is not the reason to neglect character education. Being an
important national goal of education stated by Indonesian Law, all educational
stakeholders, including teachers, have to do something at first to reach it, in the
same time they have to find the solution to overcome the obstacles found.

8

The importance of character education in school is not merely becoming
our concern as Indonesian; it is also being a hot issue in almost all around the
world. In the United States for example, Narvaez and Lapsley (2009) mentioned
that in the last several years three top education periodicals have stressed the
importance of character, ethics, and spirituality in education. It is in line with
Stanford Mc Donnell statement cited by Mars Media (2008):
“We have a crisis of character all across America….School shootings,
academic cheating, bullying, youth violence, gangs, vandalism, drug
abuse, sexual misconduct. Well-publicized heinous and malevolent
events have incited a collective hue and cry for attention to the plight
of our youth and the deterioration of society”
In the consideration of the U.S. public demand, character education movements
gained their momentum in 1990s. President Clinton, in his State of the Union
address, challenged all school to teach character education. Laura Bush, during a
conference on Character and Community in 2002, announced that 5 states and 34
school districts had received a big amount funds in grant to work with
communities to help schools in providing lesson plan that promote high moral
character (Mars Media, edition July 1, 2008).
In supporting the public demands of character education, many social and
educational researchers have conducted researches. Majority of the previous
studies have indicated that educational processes have to consider both physic and
spiritual development of the students (Doak, 2009; White, 2010). Some of the
researchers have emphasized the study on character education through the
implementation ethical educational models with argumentation that character
education is a part of the teachers‟ crafts (Narvaez-Lapsley, 2009).

9

Noticing to the above issues, it is suggested that research focusing on
fostering students‟ positive characters is urgently required, as this aspect is a
target of the new Indonesian educational curriculum and basis of the
establishment of the Indonesian good governance for the future. As such, this
paper responds to the call of researches done previously, which suggested that
study of character education in primary school would be beneficial.

1.3 Research Problems
By taking the title of: Integrating Character Education into English Teaching
through the Implementation of Coopeartive Learning: A Case of Class 3 A of SDN
Sendang Mulyo 04, Kota Semarang, this thesis attempts to explore three major
variables. The independent variable of this thesis is the use of Cooperative
Learning Techniques. Relating to this variable, this thesis explains the theories
supporting the term relates to its definition and characteristics, the purpose of
Cooperative Learning, the syntax of the techniques. Furthermore, it is important to
identify the appropriate Cooperative Learning techniques for the elementary
school curriculum due to its function to generate English lesson in order to
develop both students‟ English competence and characters.
Moreover, there are two dependent variables in this research, they are the
students‟

development

of

English

linguistic

competence

and

students‟

development of positive characters. Aiming to find the description of the students‟
achievement toward their competence in English through the implementation of
Cooperative Learning techniques, this research generates post tests only of
collecting the data for the samples „after the treatments’. However to gain the

10

desirable description on how the students foster their positive characters through
the implementation of Cooperative Learning techniques, the detail students‟
behavioral observations are urgently employed „during the treatments’.
In explaining the significance of the implementation of CL techniques to
develop students‟ English competence and their characters, it needs to compare
this technique to the commonly method used in the elementary school. Traditional
Teaching Methods such as Grammar-Translation Method, Audio-lingual method,
and lecturing method then are used as the control variable in the research. Thus,
to observe the significance of the Traditional Methods in developing students‟
English competence and characters is also required.
Related to the above background and identification, thus the statements of
the problems in this thesis are as follows:
1) How significant is CL techniques to develop students‟ English competence?
2) Which one is more significant between the Traditional Learning Method and
Cooperative Learning Method to develope students‟ English competence?
3) How significant is CL techniques to foster students‟ positive characters?
4) Which one is more significant between the Traditional Learning Method and
Cooperative Learning Method to develop students‟ positive characters?

1.4 Objectives of the Study
Associating with the statement of the problem, the objectives of this study are:
1) To describe the effectiveness of CL techniques in developing students‟
English competence.

11

2) To explain the strategy which is more significant in terms of their
effectiveness in developing students‟ English competence.
3) To describe the significant of CL techniques in fostering students‟ positive
characters.
4) To explain the strategy which is more significant in fostering students‟
positive characters.

1.5 Significance of the Study
Given the identified goals in this topic, this research might have the potential to
provide better theoretical and practical understanding of how the third „A‟
graders‟ teacher of SDN Sendang Mulyo 04, Kota Semarang generates character
education for his students. Although this research was in a very limited scope of
samples, this may become a slightly practical design of how to naturalize
character education, especially in primary education level.
The output of the study would be significant in supporting the theory of
Cooperative Learning Approach due to the experts judgement of its effectiveness
to improve students‟ language acquisition as well as to develop their positive
characters (Kagan and Kagan: 2000). Furthermore, it might be significant to
provide a valuable input for educational science in terms of knowledge of
practical strategy to integrate character education through the implementation of
Cooperative Learning Techniques at elementary schools as it is recommended by
the newest curriculum. Moreover, it would provide prospective evidence of the
development of Character Education in Indonesian history of elementary School.
This thesis also provides a potential gaps for other researchers to observe the other

12

aspects of Cooperative Learning implementation in terms of the correlation
between student‟s character development and his/her academic achievement at the
elementary school context.
This thesis‟ outcomes and processes might bring numerous advantages for
the selected teacher, the samples of students, I myself as the researcher, my
collegues as collaborative researchers, SDN Sendang Mulyo 04 Kota Semarang
as the institution where this research took place, in terms of the significance
findings, the valuable knowledge, as well as the worthful experiences during the
process.
The output of the study might be beneficial for the given teacher and the
collaborative researchers to be the worthful experiences and practical knowledge
for both how to conduct research and to integrate character education in the real
classroom practices. It also may be beneficial for teachers of SDN Sendang Mulyo
04 Kota Semarang and primary school teachers in general to be the guidance to
foster students‟ positive characters through the implementation of Cooperative
Learning Techniques.
Students might have advantages for this activity in terms of their
experiences in order to choose their demanding learning process. Furthermore, the
expectant impact of the Cooperative Learning Techniques enables students of
SDN Sendang Mulyo 04 Kota Semarang to gain the true educational goals.

1.6 Limitation of the Problems
The students‟ achievement toward English which was observed in this research
was the basic English competence as stated in the elementary school curriculum.

13

At the same idea, their development of the positive character was also relied on
the values stated in the elementary school curriculum.
As this paper observes this phenomena at elementary school students for
limited time observation, thus I prefer to employ small scope of values, they are
those which relate to the Cooperative Learning elements. However, the other
values that appear during the observation process will also be taken into
account.The observations were done by field research in a single classroom of the
third „A‟ grader students of SDN Sendang Mulyo 04 Kota Semarang academic
year of 2012-2013. It had been conducted within March to June 2013.

1.7 Outline of the Thesis
The thesis is organized into five chapters consisting of chapter one to chapter five.
The fisrt chapter is introduction containing of background of the study, reasons for
choosing the topic, research problems, objectives of the study, signifinaces of the
study, limitation of the problems, and outline of the thesis. Chapter 2. Review of
related literature consists of review of previous studies, theoretical reviews, and
theoretical framework. Chapter 3. Method of investigation encompases research
design, population and samples, variables, hypothesis, instruments, type of data,
method of collecting data, and method of analyzing data. Chapter 4. Findings and
discussions presents research findings and discussions. The last is chapter 5
delivers the conclusions and suggestions.