USING GROUP PROJECT TO IMPROVE STUDENTS INTERACTION.

(1)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACE ... i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ... ii

ABSTRACT ... iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS ... v

LIST OF TABLES ... viii

LIST OF PICTURES ... ix

LIST OF CHARTS ... x

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION OF THE RESEARCH ... 1

A. Background ... 1

B. Research Question ... 6

C. Aim of The Study ... 6

D. Scope of The Study ... 6

E. Significance ... 7

F. Clarification of Terms ... 7

G. Paper Organization ... 8

CHAPTER II THEORETICAL FOUNDATION ... 10

A. Classroom Interaction ... 10

1. Teacher-student interaction ... 12

2. Student-student interaction ... 12

(2)

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ... 30

A. Research Design ... 30

B. Participants ... 31

C. Data Collection ... 31

1. Observation ... 34

D. Research Procedures ... 35

E. Data Analysis ... 36

1. To what extent group project improves students’ interaction ... 36

2. The difficulties which 4A students face along the completion of group project ... 39 3. The strategies 4A students do to overcome their difficulties ... 40 CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ... 40

Findings ... 40

A. The Improvement of Students’ Interaction through Group Project ... 42 1. Teacher-student interaction ... 43

2. Student-student interaction ... 66 B. Students’ Difficulties In Doing Group Project 76 C. Students’ Ways to Overcome Their Difficulties 79

(3)

CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS ... 90

A. Conclusions ... 90

B. Suggestions for Further Research ... 92

BIBLIOGRAPHY ... 93

APPENDICES ... 96 APPENDIX I: Form of Students’ Interaction Checklist Sheet

APPENDIX II: Transcripts of Video Taping & Coding APPENDIX III: Students’ Talks Calculation

APPENDIX IV: Lesson Plan Applied by The Teacher APPENDIX V: Products of The Project

(4)

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 Functional Analysis of Children’s Classroom Talk

(FACCT)... 15

Table 3.1 Two Cycles of Treatments... 33

Table 3.2 Research Procedures ... 35

Table 3.3 Video Transcript Codes I ... 37

Table 3.4 Video Transcript Codes II ... 39

Table 3.5 Video Transcript Codes II ... 40 Table 4.1 The Increase of Students’ Talks-Teacher-student Interaction 44 Table 4.2 The Increase of Students’ Talks-Student-student Interaction 67

(5)

LIST OF PICTURES

(6)

LIST OF CHARTS

Chart 4.1 The Frequency of Asking permission to talk 46 Chart 4.2 The Frequency of Asking simple questions for information 48 Chart 4.3 The Frequency of Responding to a question or statement 50 Chart 4.4 The Frequency of Repeating what teacher had said 52 Chart 4.5 The Frequency of Finding out something 54 Chart 4.6 The Frequency of Expressing personal feelings and

emotions

Chart 4.7 The Frequency of Providing information 57 Chart 4.8 The Frequency of Expressing agreement or disagreement 60 Chart 4.9 The Frequency of Creating or revising students’ talks 62

Chart 4.10 The Frequency of Using fillers 63

Chart 4.11 The Frequency of Extending what teacher had said 65 Chart 4.12 The Frequency of Asking simple questions for information 69 Chart 4.13 The Frequency of Providing information 70 Chart 4.14 The Frequency of Expressing agreement or disagreement 72

Chart 4.15 The Frequency of Using fillers 73

Chart 4.16 The Frequency of Organizing work or learning processes or control behaviour

(7)

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION OF THE RESEARCH

This chapter presents the background of the study. This chapter also includes research questions, aims of the study, scope of the study, significance, clarification of terms and paper organization.

A. Background

English has been introduced in Indonesia since elementary school. Partly, it is because of the rapidly developing technology of the English speaking countries and the fact that there are 300 million native speakers of English and over 250 million of non-native speakers who use English in the world (Broughton et al., 1980). The second reason is that the assumption that younger learners have advantages in learning second language more successfully than adults (Saville-Troike, 2006). Hence, Indonesian primary students need to master speaking English.

To master speaking English, those students need to have an opportunity to use the language actively. Children can be active when they have the opportunities in practicing the language with others (Pinter, 2006). Other people, Vygotsky (1962) cited in Cameron (2001) stated, play important roles in helping children to learn, bringing objects and ideas to their attention, talking while playing and about playing,

(8)

reading stories, and asking questions. Children learn by interacting with other people through speaking. Therefore, interaction is essential for children in learning English.

Children need to interact both with their teacher and their classmates. Through interacting with their teacher and classmates, students would possibly get feedbacks. Feedbacks are essential in learning because it lets students know what has been learned and what has not yet been understood and it also possibly gives students motivation (Wragg, 2001). However, many Indonesian teachers tend to give feedbacks in discouraging way such as pointing out mistakes in front of the classroom. Therefore, when students interact with their teacher, many Indonesian students are afraid or shy to say words in English. When students speak in front of the class, they have a feeling of being judged by their teacher. Therefore, because many Indonesian teachers tend to give feedback in discouraging way, feedbacks need to be delivered in supportive ways.

In terms of supportive ways, Moon (2005) stated that there are three support types teachers can provide to their students which are language, techniques/resources, and children themselves. Teachers should adjust their language to children’s level of language. Teachers also should give appropriate techniques which support children to be confident in speaking English. One of the techniques is grouping which is related with the third support that is children themselves. Children can support each other in groups through three ways: (1) by watching other children, (2) by listening to and

(9)

getting help from other children, and (3) by practising with other children (Moon, 2005). Therefore, working in small groups is a way to make children be more confident in speaking English.

Grouping is a technique that I apply in my teaching context. My students love working in groups. They enjoy working on task given based on the lesson topic for that day. They interact with their groupmates to solve the task. Unfortunately, the daily tasks do not give long-term context for students to interact continually. In order to make them to do so, the students should be given a long term project which is now suggested by the proponents of Project Based Learning. Through project, the students are encouraged to search information outside classroom. The information later will be used to exchange knowledge inside classroom. Therefore, Project Based Learning makes the learning processes become meaningful and students’ interaction last continually.

Project Based Learning (PBL) is a learning strategy which let students exchange information continually along a project. It is the instructional strategy of empowering learners to pursue content knowledge on their own and demonstrate their new understandings through a variety of presentation modes (Stripling et al, 2009). This strategy can be used as one of the effective ways in increasing students’ interaction because the students will interact continually to complete a project.

(10)

PBL involves a group of learners taking on an issue close to their hearts, developing a response, and presenting the results to a wider audience (Wrigley, 1998). This makes PBL bring some advantages. The first advantage of PBL is that it gives freedom for students to choose what project they want to make as long as it is related with topics in the curriculum (Thomas, 2000). It surely engages students more in their learning. The second advantage is that it involves lot of interaction in groups. Interacting in groups reduces students’ anxiety in speaking English because they will not be afraid of being judged by others (Brown, 2001). The third advantage is that it increases students’ achievement through student-driven investigation (Thomas, 2000).

A study by Gaer (1998) to a population of Southeast Asian Lao, Hmong, Mien, and Lahu refugees, who had been in beginning-level ESOL classes, showed that PBL involves lot of students’ interaction. Through a project of storytelling, the students had to discuss together on how they would deliver their local folktales to the middle school students. By holding meetings, the students finally could deliver their local folktales to the middle school students successfully.

PBL has not only successfully increased students’ interaction in the adult classroom context, it also has successfully increased students interaction in children classroom context. Another study by Tinker & Papert (1989) as cited in Blumenfeld et al., (1991) has given opportunity to students to share their results with wider audiences. The study used National Geographic Society’s KidsNet network to provide the

(11)

opportunity for upper elementary students to gather local data on the pH of rain water. Through the use of the network, students could discuss their findings with scientists and share their results with other students in other location.

The studies above indicate that group project provides both the context and the condition students need to interact using English confidently. Even though the study in children classroom (Tinker & Papert, 1989 as cited in Blumenfeld et al., 1991) was not done on the field of language learning, the students involved in the study were interacting using English. Brown (2001) states that as learners get absorbed in purposeful projects, both receptive and productive language is used meaningfully. Through group project, students will interact with their groupmates and teacher while making a project. Finally, they will present their project confidently in front of the audience which can be their parents, teachers, or their classmates. By doing so, students’ speaking skill will also improve as they practice it gradually along the completion of project.

As indicated by the aforementioned studies, completing a project can also increase students’ speaking skill. This study therefore aims at implementing Project Based Learning to increase students’ interaction. This study entitled Using Group Project to

Improve Students’ Interaction, is expected to discover how group project can improve students’ interaction.

(12)

B. Research Questions

This study investigates the following questions:

1. To what extent does group project improve 4A students’ interaction?

2. What are the difficulties that 4A students face along the completion of group project?

3. What strategies 4A students do to overcome the difficulties?

C. Aims of Study

The aim of the study is:

1. to discover to what extent group project improves 4A students’ interaction,

2. to discover the difficulties which 4A students face along the completion of group project

3. to discover the strategies 4A students do to overcome the difficulties.

D. Scope of the Study

This study focuses on to what extent group project improves 4A students’ interaction, what difficulties which 4A students face along the completion of group project, and what strategies 4A students do to overcome the difficulties. This study focuses on 4A

(13)

students’ interaction both with their teacher and classmates using English when they are doing their project inside the classroom. This study finds out the implementation of group project to improve 4A students’ interaction.

E. Significance

This study is expected to give the description of the implementation of group project in improving 4A students’ interaction. Hopefully, this study will help English teachers to be able to provide appropriate strategies to improve students’ interaction.

F. Clarification of Terms

1. Group project is defined as a project which is made by group of students in form of product or presentation (Jones, Rasmussen, & Moffitt, 1997; Thomas, Mergendoller, & Michaelson, 1999 as cited in Thomas, 2000).

2. Student interaction is defined as interaction occuring between student and teacher and between student and student inside the classroom using English.

(14)

G. Paper Organization

This paper will be presented into five chapters, as follow: CHAPTER I : INTRODUCTION

In this chapter, the paper will elaborate the background of the study. It will discuss how Indonesian students having problem in speaking English because of lack of interaction. The description of the problem will emphasize the benefits of using group project to improve students’ interaction.

CHAPTER II : THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

This chapter will discuss some theories related to classroom interaction for young learners and related theories to classroom interaction, group work, and project based learning.

CHAPTER III : RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter will give clear discussion of how the study will be conducted and analyzed. It clarifies why the study needs to use two cycles of treatments. The data analysis also will be briefly explained.

(15)

CHAPTER IV : FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter will discuss the findings of the study and will analyze those findings in discussion clearly. It will portray how group project improves 4A students’ interaction, the difficulties which 4A students face along the completion of group project, and the strategies 4A students do to overcome the difficulties.

CHAPTER V : CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS

This chapter will present the conclusion and several suggestions of the study based on the analysis in chapter four. The conclusion states the answer to the research questions about the teacher’s strategy used under study employ. Several suggestions to improve teachers’ strategies in improving their students’ interaction will be stated.

(16)

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The aim of this study was to analyze students’ interaction of 4th graders in an

elementary school in northern Bandung. For this reason, this chapter presents the research method and procedures used by the writer. This chapter includes research design, participants of the research, data collection, and data analysis.

A. Research Design

This research employs action research method. Action research is a systematic study to improve educational practice by groups of participants by means of their own practical actions and by means of their own reflection upon the effects of those actions (Ebbutt, 1985 as cited in Hopkins, 2008). The goal of action research is to understand what is happening in our school or classroom and to determine what might improve things in that context (Sagor, 1992).

(17)

B. Participants

Classroom action research is conducted by teacher researchers to gather information about the ways that their particular school operates, how they teach, and how well their students learn (Mills, 2003 as cited in Hopkins, 2008). Therefore, classroom action research does not involve population and sample, but it involves specific classroom.

This study was conducted in 4th grade class of an elementary school in Northern Bandung which consists of 30 students. Most of the students were hesitant in interacting using English because they were not confident and not interested at all to speak English. They were used to kind of class in which the teachers played dominant role in the interactions and the students were given less roles.

C. Data Collection

In gathering the data, this study used two cycles of treatments adapting from action research model of Kemmis & Taggart (1988) as cited in O’Brien (1998) which can be seen in the following picture:

(18)

Picture 3.1

Action Research Model (Kemmis & Taggart, 1988 as cited in O’Brien, 1998)

The two cycles of treatments which were applied in this study can be accessed in the following table.

(19)

Table 3.1

Two Cycles of Treatments

No Step Description

1 Planning Planning was conducted to plan and design treatments which will be conducted in the classroom. The planning resulted in lesson plan for each treatment (See Appendix 3.2).

2 Treatments Treatments were conducted to supply the students with the necessary English materials for their projects such as adjective, plural and singular, etc. There were two treatments for each cycle. Each treatment focused on English material needed by the students to present their project based on the assessment questions. To see clearly each treatment in the cycles, see Appendix 3.2.

2 Assessments Assessments were held for finding out students’ interaction improvement progress inside the classroom. The students were asked to discuss in groups of a picture of tourism object and public place in Bandung and to describe it orally.

The questions asked are: 1) What is this place?

2) What can you see in this place? 3) What can you do in this place?

The questions were asked to each group of students. Each group of students should discuss together to answer the questions. While the students were discussing the answer, the teacher checked on

students’ interaction inside the groups using Students’ Interaction Checklist Sheet (See Appendix 3.1)

4 Reflection Reflection was conducted to reflect on what has been achieved through previous treatment and what should be done in the next treatment in order to

(20)

1. Observation

Observation was held to find the improvement of students’ interaction progress inside the classroom. The observation employed two instruments which are Students’

Interaction Checklist Sheet (see Appendix 3.1) and videotaping. The students’ interaction checklist sheet is adapted from Class Progress Chart and Class Observation Record Sheet by Sophie Ionnaou-Georgiou and Pavlos Pavlou (2003)

and The Functional Analysis of Children’s Classroom Talk (FACCT) by Kumpulainen and Wray (2002). The Students’ Interaction Checklist Sheet includes several types of students’ talkswhich can describe students’ interaction based on how often students apply certain speaking strategies (frequency).

Videotaping was employed to gather the main data of the study. Creswell (1994) states that recording audiovisual materials, in this case, videotaping, has some advantages. First, researchers could share directly their research experiences. Second, as supported by Fraenkel and Wallen (1990) videotaping could be replayed for several times in order to check and correct the data. By using videotaping, researcher could assure their data validity. Third, the video could be used in the next relevant research. The videotaping was conducted during the teaching-learning process. Eight sessions videos were videotaped and were carefully transcribed. The

transcriptions were coded to collect data related to students’ interaction, students’ difficulties, and students’ strategies in handling the problems.

(21)

D. Research Procedures

In conducting the study, there were several steps as the following table shows: Table 3.2

Research Procedures

No Steps Time Description

1 Identifying problem of the students by conducting preliminary observation and informed interview with the classroom teacher.

Week 1-2 (February, 14th-21th)

The problem is the lack of students’ interaction

inside the classroom.

2 Designing project Week 3-6 (February, 28th- March, 20th)

The project is called “30 Days Around

Bandung”. The project requires students to make a mock-up of tourism object and a mock-up of public place in Bandung. At last, they would present their mock-ups in front of audiences including parents, teachers, and invited foreigners at the end semester school celebration. The purpose of this project is to get students explore and introduce their own city, Bandung, to others, especially foreigners.

3 Designing instrument Week 7-9 (March, 27th-April, 10th)

The instrument used is Students’ Interaction

Checklist Sheet (See Appendix 3.1)

4 Videotaping eight sessions of learning processess including two meetings of introduction of the project,

two meetings of

treatments and two meetings of assessments.

Week 10-14 (May, 1st-31st)

The videotaping was held for eight sessions. There was only one month to conduct the project therefore there were only two cycles. It is because the school authority gave limited time and there was demand from school authority that the products should be displayed in the school celebration of end semester.

5 Transcribing video Week 15-19 (June 1st-30th)

The coding process occured along transcribing. 6 Comparing cycle 1 and

cycle 2

Week 20-25 (July 1st-31st)

The frequency of each students’ talk was counted

and compared. 7 Analyzing video to find

the pattern of students’

interaction to find to what extend PBL improves

students’ interaction

Week 25-29 (August 1st-31st)

The video was analyzed using The Functional

Analysis of Children’s Classroom Talk (FACCT)

by Kumpulainen and Wray (2002).

8 Presenting the result of the study.

Week 29-31

(September, 1st-16th)

(22)

E. Data Analysis

The data taken from students’ interaction checklist sheet and videotaping were transcribed and coded. Coding would be applied based on the type of students’ talks.

Alwasilah (2000) states that coding helps researchers in several ways: (1) it helps the researchers to make phenomenon identification, (2) it helps the researchers to count the frequent of phenomenon existing and (3) it helps the researchers to arrange the categorizations and sub-categorization of the inventions.

Based on the research question, the data analysis would be taken from to what extent group project improves students’ interaction, what difficulties which 4A students face along the completion of group project, and what strategies 4A students do to overcome the difficulties.

1. To what extent group project improves students’ interaction

To what extent group project improves students’ interaction was identified by analyzing the transcripts from videotaping. The video transcripts were coded based on types of students’ talks.

(23)

Table 3.3

Video Transcript Codes I

Students’ Interaction Categorization Main Sub-cat.1 Sub-cat.2 Sub- cat.3

Teacher-Student T

 Initiate communication with teacher T1

a. Ask permission to talk T1a

b. Asks simple questions T1b

i. For information T1bi

ii. For approval T1ba

 Respond to a question or statement T2

 Repeat what teacher had been said T3

 Demonstrate a phenomenon or an experiment T4

 Find out something T5

 Express personal experiences T6

 Express personal feelings and emotions T7

 Provide information T8

 Express agreement or disagreement T9

 Give reason to support students’ ideas T10

 Provide ideas or suggestions T11

 Create or revise students’ talks T12

 Use fillers T13

(24)

 Extend what teacher had been said T16

Student-Student S

 Initiate communication with students S1

a. Asks simple questions S1a

i. For information S1ai

ii. For approval S1aa

 Respond to a question or statement S2

 Repeat what student had been said S3

 Demonstrate a phenomenon or an experiment S4

 Find out something S5

 Express personal experiences S6

 Express personal feelings and emotions S7

 Provide information S8

 Express agreement or disagreement S9

 Give reason to support students’ ideas S10

 Provide ideas or suggestions S11

 Create or revise students’ talks S12

 Use fillers S13

 Express imaginative situations S14

 Volunteers contributions to group S15

(25)

2. The difficulties which 4A students face along the completion of group project The difficulties which 4A students face along the completion of group project were identified by analyzing the transcripts from videotaping. The video transcripts were coded based on types of students’ talks.

Table 3.4

Video Transcript Codes II

Students’ Interaction Categorization

Main

Sub-cat.1

Sub-cat.2

Sub- cat.3

Teacher-Student T

 Express personal experiences T6

 Express personal feelings and emotions T7

 Express agreement or disagreement T9

 Create or revise students’ talks T12

 Use fillers T13

Student-Student S

 Express personal experiences S6

 Express personal feelings and emotions S7

 Express agreement or disagreement S9

 Create or revise students’ talks S12

(26)

3. The strategies 4A students do to overcome their difficulties

The strategies which 4A students do to overcome their difficulties were identified by analyzing the transcripts from videotaping. The video transcripts were coded based on types of students’ talks.

Table 3.5

Video Transcript Codes III

Students’ Interaction

Categorization

Main

Sub-cat.1

Sub-cat.2

Sub- cat.3

Teacher-Student T

 Initiate communication with teacher T1

a. Ask permission to talk T1a

b.Asks simple questions T1b

i. For information T1ai

ii. For approval T1aa

 Express agreement or disagreement T9

 Create or revise students’ talks T12

 Use fillers T13

Student-Student S

 Express agreement or disagreement S9

(27)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

This chapter presents the conclusions of the study and suggestion for further researcher that study the same topic. At first, this chapter presents conclusions of the study related the theories used. In addition, this chapter presents suggestion for further researchers who are interested in doing study that is in the same field, the use of group project to improve students’ interaction.

A. Conclusions

Students’ interaction is essential because interaction is the natural way of people to

learn (Hiltz, 1994 as cited in Maatta et al., 2012). Through interaction, students will exchange meanings not only with their teacher but also with their peers (Brown,

2001). Therefore, students’ interaction is needed to be sustained and improved.

To improve students’ interaction, Project Based Learning (PBL) can be one of the excellent ways. In regard to this matter, the researcher implemented group project to

improve her students’ interaction in way that the students become more confident in

interacting using English both with their teacher and their peers.

(28)

-group project has improved students’ interaction in a way that the students had become more confident in initiating interaction with their teacher and responding to what teacher had said and that the students also had become more responsive towards

teacher’s talks. In students-student interaction, group project has improved students’

interaction in a way that the students became more active in groups’ discussion by asking and providing information and also in groups’ works by organizing their contributions and works.

This study found that there are some difficulties that students faced along the group project. The difficulties are students’ limitation in speaking English and students’ lack of organizational skill.

This study found that to overcome their difficulties, the students did two strategies. The first strategy is asking the teacher vocabulary needed to know and the second strategy is discussing with the teacher to organize students’ groups.

(29)

B. Suggestions for Further Research

Pick the appropriate project. With regard to this, those are the suggestions for further study:

1. Students’ interest should be considered in designing the project. It is hoped that

the students will be more engaged if they can pick their own project based on their interest. Still, teacher needs to give choices so the project will not be out from the curriculum.

2. Place or media to store the project product should be considered. It is hoped that students’ project product can be kept well so it will not be broken or lost.

(30)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alwasilah, A. C. (2000). Pokoknya Kualitatif: Dasar-dasar Merancang dan Melakukan Penelitian Kualitatif. Jakarta: Pustaka Jaya.

Bell, S. (2010). Project-Based Learning for the 21st Century: Skills for the Future. The Clearing House, 39-43.

Blumenfeld, P. C. et al. (1991). Motivating Project-Based Learning: Sustaining the Doing, Supporting the Learning. Educational Psychologist, 369-388. Broughton, G. et al. (1980). Teaching English as a Foreign Language. New York:

Routledge.

Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy, 2th edition. San Fransisco: Longman.

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

Capraro, R. M., & Slough, S. W. (2009). Project-Based Learning: An Intergrated Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Approach. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

Creswell, J. (1994). Research Design: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. California: Sage Publications.

Fraenkel, J., & Wallen, E. (1990). How to Design and Evaluate Research Education. United States of America: McGraw-Hill.

Frey, N. et al. (2009). Productive Group Work: How to Engage Students, Build Teamwork, and Promote Understanding. United States of America: ASCD.

(31)

Gaer, S. (1998). Less Teaching and More Learning. Retrieved at January 10, 2012, from National Center for the Study of Adult Learning & Literacy website: http://ncsall.net/index.html@id=385.html

Georgiou, S. I., & Pavlou, P. (2003). Assessing Young Learners. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hopkins, D. (2008). A Teacher's Guide to Classroom Research, 4th Edition. Berkshire: Open University Press.

Kumpulainen, K., & Wray, D. (2002). Classroom Interaction and Social learning: From theory to practice. New York: RoutledgeFalmer.

Maata, E. et al. (2012). Triggers of Students' Efficacious Interaction in Collaborative Learning Situations. Small Group Research, 497-522.

Moon, J. (2005). Children Learning English. Thailand: Macmillan Publishers Limited.

O'Brien, R. (1998). An Overview of the Methodological Approach of Action Research. Retrieved at October 17, 2012, from Web Networks: http://www.web.ca/robrien/papers/arfinal.html

Pinter, A. (2006). Teaching Young Language Learners. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Sagor, R. (1992). How to Conduct Collaborative Action Research. United States of America: ASCD.

Saville-Troike, M. (2006). Introducing second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

(32)

Stripling, B. et al. (2009). Overview of Project-Based Learning. In J. L. Klein, et al., Project-Based Learning: Inspiring Middle School Students to Engage in Deep and Active Learning (p. 8-9). New York: NYC Department of Education. Suherdi, D. (2009). Classroom Discourse Analysis: A Systemic Approach. Bandung:

Celtics Press.

Thomas, J. W. (2000). A Review of Research on Project-Based Learning. Retrieved at February 2, 2012, from Buck Institute for Education website:

http//bie.org/research/study/review_of_project_based_learning_2000.html Thompson, K. J., & Beak, J. (2007). The Leadership Book: Enhancing the

Theory-Practice Connection Through Project-Based Learning. Journal of Management Education, 278.

Wragg, E. (2001). Assessment and Learning in the Primary School. London: RoutledgeFalmer.

Wrigley, H. S. (1998). Knowledge in Action: The Promise of Project-Based Learning . Retrieved at October 17, 2012, from National Center for the Study of Adult Learning & Literacy website: http:// ncsall.net/index.html@id=384.html