THE TEACHING STRATEGY OF ENGLISH AS A FOREIGN LANGUAGE (EFL) LITERATURE CLASSROOM AT AN ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY.

(1)

CONTENTS Approval Page

Declaration

Acknowledgement Preface

Contents Abstract

CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background to the Study –1 1.2 Research Questions –3 1.3 Purpose of the Study –3

1.4 Significance of the Research –4 1.5 Scope of the Research –4 1.6 Defnition of Key Terms –5 1.7 Organization of the Thesis –7

CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 2.1 Teaching Strategies –9

2.1.1 Teaching Stages –10

2.1.1.1 Stage I: Pre-instructon –11

2.1.1.2 Stage II: Instruction –11

2.1.1.3 Stage III: Evaluation and Follow-up –12

2.1.2 Teaching Principles –13

(2)

2.2.1 Literature –15

2.2.2 Teaching Poetry –17

2.2.3 Teaching Prose –21

2.2.4 Teaching Drama –25

2.3 Problem in Literature Teaching –28

2.4 The Previous Research —30

CHAPTER III. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Research Site and Participants of the Study –38

3.2 Research Design –38

3.3 Data Collection Technique –40

3.3.1 Observation –40

3.3.2 Interview –40

3.3.3 Document Analysis –41

3.4 Data Analysis Technique –42

CHAPTER IV. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 4.1 Observation Data –44

4.1.1 Strategies of Teaching English Literature at an Islamic University –45

4.1.1.1 Respondents’ Academic Setting and Education Qualification –45

(3)

4.1.1.2 Pre-instruction –46

4.1.1.3 Instruction Stage –47

4.1.2 Difficulty in Literature Teaching –57

4.1.3 Solution to the Problems –62

4.2 Interview Data –65

4.2.1 Strategies of Teaching English Literature at an Islamic University –66

4.2.2 Difficulty in Literature Teaching –71

4.2.3 Solution to the Problem –73

CHAPTER V. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION 5.1 Conclusion –78

5.2 Suggestion and Implication –80

BIBLIOGRAPHY APPENDICES

(4)

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

This chapter consists of background to the study, research questions, purpose of the research, significance of the research, scope of the research, definition of key terms, and organization of the thesis.

1.1 Background to the Study

Literature has been a subject at schools in many countries and offered since primary education. In the context of Indonesia, literature teaching is often practiced along with language teaching, such as ethnic language, Indonesian, or English. Purves, Roger and Soter (1990) state that as a body of knowledge literature is considered important and keeps knowledge itself, practice and choice, which has complex interrelationship. Therefore, it is essential to discuss significance of literature in the process of literature teaching.

There are several reasons why literature should be taught and learnt. Macmillan (2004) says that literature has several functions. First, literature allows learners to live thousands of lives in a short time and gains experience from each of them. Second, literature is also considered to offer them insight, which they apply in their life. Such experience gives them insight and feeling for other people’s mind that will be perceived as humanistic effect because it relates to emotion rather than logic. Moreover, literature can give them some experience in spite of having limitation (Macmillan, 2004).

(5)

In Indonesia, as stated by Suyono (2005), the aim of language and literature teaching is that students are able to read, write, listen to, speak proficiently and love to do literary appreciation. This aim, however, has still not been achieved by students. In other words, they still have some problems to master literary competence. At an Islamic University, where this study was conducted, the literature teaching has still been unsuccessful to achieve the goal. In this matter, the weakness of literature teaching is caused by several problems faced not only by lecturers but also by students themselves. Commonly some problems have similarity as some previous research findings, which have been found in the literature teaching (Parkinson and Thomas, 2005; Fogal, 2009; Amer, 2006; Timuchin, 2008; Maryanah, 2007). However, others are different based on the lecturers and students’ specific problems of Islamic University of Bandung.

Based on the description above, this study attempts to explore or investigate the literature teaching occurring at Islamic University of Bandung covering aims of the literature teaching, materials given to learners, literature teaching technique and approach, and teaching literature evaluation. Also, it attempts to find out some problems, particularly in the teaching context of EFL literature in the research site. Although literature has been taught and learnt for years, there has been limited research concerning with the literature teaching, effectiveness of the study of literature, the appropriate materials with suitable techniques and approaches applied by the lecturers, and assessment to evaluate the literature teaching. By such reason, this research was conducted in the narrow context—the literature teaching at the research site

(6)

1.2 Research Questions

Issue being addressed is on lecturers’ strategies in the teaching of English literature at the English Literature Department of an Islamic University in Bandung. The writer expects to solve them through the following questions: 1. How is English literature taught at an Islamic University in Bandung?

2. What difficulty (if any) do the lecturers face in the teaching of English literature?

3. How do the lecturers solve the problems?

1.3 Purpose of the Research

The writer has curiosity about the English literature lecturers’ strategy in the teaching of English literature and is eager to present a study on the teaching methodology. To be clearer, objective of the study consists of main objective and specific objective.

The main objective of this research is to explore methods of teaching English literature conducted by the lecturers at the English Literature Department of an Islamic University in Bandung. Meanwhile, the specific objectives are: 1. to investigate or explore the teaching of English literature at an Islamic

University in Bandung,

2. to identify problems faced by the lecturers in the teaching of English literature, and

(7)

1.4 Significance of the Research

By conducting this research, it has some significance for the academic world. The most significant is that such a study can give positive input to both English literature lecturers at the English Literature Department in learning and teaching activity and the writer self. Given those inputs, it is expected that they are increasingly aware of their weaknesses in teaching-learning process, so that they eventually are able to enhance or improve technique and method of teaching the English literature. That is why the writer really looks forward that this research is so significant and useful to improvement of the matters related to the teaching methodology that is paid less attention during this time. Latter on, in perspective of education practice, such a research may give benefit in the framework of improvement of literature teaching in the classroom. In addition, it is also expected that this research is useful for the English literature learners to improve their writing and reading proficiency because indirectly the lecturers still portray an important role of how learning-teaching activity may harvest success, either for the lecturers or for the students.

1.5 Scope of the Research

This research restricts itself on methodological problems around teaching of English literature. The problem is expanded toward broader ways in perspective of applied linguistics. Nevertheless, it still focuses more on practice of teaching the literature in the classrooms, in which the lecturers may interact with the students in the teaching-learning activity. This study focuses more on all domain of the teaching methodology, especially teaching EFL literature in the context of

(8)

Indonesia. That is why this research is concern with the lecturers’ strategies of the English literature teaching in the classrooms. Furthermore, the research problem is limited on practices of teaching the English literature conducted by six literature lecturers. And this study finally discusses up broader things in terms of literary teaching methodology.

1.6 Definition of Key Terms 1. Methodology:

- the study of the practices and procedures used in teaching, and the principles and beliefs that underlie them (Richards et al, 1992:228) - pedagogical practices in general (including theoretical underpinnings

and related research). Whatever considerations are involved in “how to teach” are methodological (Brown, 2001:15)

2. Approach:

- the set of correlative assumptions dealing with the nature of language, learning and teaching (Anthony, 1972)

- the theoretical foundation upon which any systematic method is based (Paulston & Bruder, 1976)

3. Method:

- refering to the procedures of language teaching, to an “overall plan for the orderly presentation of language material, no part of which contradicts, and all of which is based upon, the selected approach (Paulston &Bruder, 1976).

(9)

- an overall plan for systematic presentation of language based upon a selected approach (Anthony, 1976)

4. Technique:

- the actual classroom behavior of the specific strategies which the lecturers select to achieve their objectives (Paulston &Bruder, 1976) - the specific activities manifested in the classroom that were consistent

with a method and therefore were in harmony with an approach as well (Anthony, 1976)

5. Teaching:

- the simulation, guidance, direction and encouragement of learning (Burton inWahab, 2007)

- teaching is an art, not a science—you must throw your heart into it, realize that it cannot all be done by formulas, or you will spoil your work, and your pupils, and yourself (Hihget, 1977).

6. Strategy:

- patterns of teacher behavior that are recurrent, applicable to various subject matters, characteristics of more than one teacher, and relevant to learning (Ebel, 1975:1)

- ... a repertoire of teaching skills and behavior in a word, strategies ...(Gilstrap & Martin)

7. Literature:

- literature must be an analysis of experience and a synthesis of the findings into a unity" (West).

(10)

- perhaps something is literary because the text is the kind of writing we like to read; it’s a highly valued kind of writing. In this case, anything can be literature, and anything can stop being literature. The important implication is that we don’t get to decide what is literature because our parents, lecturers, exams, textbooks, etc. define that for us. We are trained to value the kind of writing that they value. This doesn’t mean that we are empty vessels with no ability to think for ourselves. However, our “personal” values and criteria are not personal, but social. These social institutions provide us with a range of possibilities, and social values are notoriously difficult to change (Eagleton).

1.7 Organization of the Thesis

This thesis is organized into five chapters. Chapter one is introduction, describes background of the study, the research questions, purpose of the research, scope of the research, definition of key terms, and organization of the thesis. Chapter two reviews the literature around the teaching methodology, especially teaching of English literature genres. Theoretically it talks about teaching of English literature as second or foreign language—how the teaching of literature is developed in the developing country. Chapter three is the research methodology. It depicts methods on how this research is conducted—in terms of research design, research site, data collection technique, data analysis technique, and population and sample. Chapter four is discussion and findings. It analyzes and discusses the research data by purpose to answer the research questions untill

(11)

the research findings can be got. The last chapter, chapter five, is conclusion and suggestion. It makes up an extract of discussion on the research data, and suggestion provides concessions to develop the next research.

(12)

CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY

This chapter elaborates ways of collecting data at the research site through observation, interview, and documentary review. These techniques are quite appropriate with the qualitative study to gain essential information relevant with the topic. The starting point for this section considers the research site and participant of the study, data collection techniques and data analysis techniques.

3.1 Research Site and Participants of the Study

This research is conducted at the English Literature Department of Adab and Humanities Faculty of Sunan Gunung Djati State Islamic University. Participants of the research are seven lecturers of the English Literature Department of Adab and Humanities Faculty. They teach the literature genres. Two of the seven lecturers graduated from the Master Program (one person graduating from Indonesia University of Education and another one from State University of Malang, whereas the rest is still graduate of the strata one. All of them acts as informants—respondents giving any information on reserach data so needed by the researcher. All of the participants are the researcher’s colleague.

3.2 Research Design

This study is an exploratory research—investigating the literature teaching strategies conducted by the lecturers in the classroom. The method applied in this research is descriptive qualitative. Such method is concerned with providing the

(13)

description of phenomena that occur naturally without the intervention of an experiment or an artificially contrived treatment (Seliger, 1989:116). In other words, the descriptive method describes the processes in a research by depicting the data extracted from some of the supporting resources. The approach in qualitative method in this research is developed in pursuance of research data collected in the research setting.

Next, this study discusses the literature teaching strategies—all the behavior of the lecturers when teaching of the literature genres in the classroom was conducted. In this case, the study focuses more on the teaching strategies implemented by the lecturers in the classrooms.

Population of this research is seven lecturers that teach English literature at Adab and Humanities faculty. Overall characteristics of the population got attention and interest as to obtain accurate data. subject and object, in this case, getting involved in conducting the research were understood as deep as possible in research implementation, so that anything supporting answer of the research question was absolutely be considered to make the research findings grounded. Furthermore, sampling technique was operated at non-probability sampling—in short, it is surfeited sampling or so-called cencus, it is a technique of determining sample if all member of population is used to be sample (Sugiyono, 2007:124). Such a sampling technique is based on a reason that sum of population members is relatively little—or less than thirty persons. In this matter, there are only seven lecturers teaching English literature at the English Literature Department.

(14)

3.3. Data Collection Technique

This section clarifies the data collection techniques applied in this study. The research data, in this case, were collected through:

3.3.1 Observation

The observation done in this research is non participant observation. It means that the observer just sat and paid attention on how the lecturer teaches English literature. The observation was conducted during two months: from October to November in 2010. This step was done by firstly attending the lecturing conducted by the lecturer. Secondly, the researcher, in the classroom, sat on the chair paying attention on how the lecturer taught the students the literature genre (poetry). Thirdly, during in the classroom, all activity of teaching-learning on the poetry from the beginning to the end was noted and also understood as the primary research data by which the research questions could be solved. This observation was conducted to some lecturers teaching the literature genres. Next, field notes as a result of direct observation in the classrooms were considered as primary data to process in the data analysis.

3.3.2 Interview

This interview was done to seven respondents by proposing a number of questions to them. It was conducted as an instrument for collecting the data and aimed at gaining the information missed in the observation and checking the consistency between what the respondents had done in the classroom (during the observation) and what they had said, and to construct

(15)

more valid data gained from the respondents (see Alwasilah, 2003). The semi-structured interview was done in order to make the respondents free to respond or answer all questions the research proposed. The respondents whom the researcher interviewed are seven lecturers: DN, HA, N, LA, PP, DP and PSF. They were selected based on their involvement and their role as the lecturers of the English literature. The data resulted in the interview are secondary data, function to make the observation data completed.

Next, the interviewed was administered in the researcher’s room, so that the respondents could answer all of the proposed questions and feel safe. It had been conducted twice, namely on 8th September 2010 at ten o’ clock to the lecturer, DN and on 9th September 2010 to the three respondents: PP, DP, and PSF at one o’ clock p.m. Each respondent spent more than an hour in the process of interviewing. The researcher, during the interview, provided the tape-recorder to record what they said in terms of the literature teaching strategies.

The information or data that had been gained through the interview are expected to be more accurate—they become in-depth information (see Alwasilah, 2002:154), so that such data are more credible in perspective of validity and reliability. However, interviewing activity was surely relied on the interview guide.

3.3.3 Document Analysis

The research data, collected from documentation, were obtained from the academic archieves of the English Literature Department. The

(16)

documents dealing with the curriculum, syllabus, lesson units, and lecturers’notes (during in the classroom) were evidence for developing of the data analysis. Such data adpoted from documents are natural because they emerged in the context and at the same time explain the context itself (see Guba & Lincoln, 1981). Also, this document analysis is considered as an important thing in this study, as Marriam (1988:115) suggests that the documentary material could be be as data which did not much differ from using interviews or observation.

This document analysis is aimed at finding whether or not there was consistence between the syllabus demand and implementation of the literature teaching. The content of the syllabi, in the syllabus analysis, was identified. In other words, it was learnt to see the strength and weakness of the syllabi. This document analysis helped reinforce the data collected through the interview and observation. In addition, the data were also gained from the visual images—they are in the shape of photographs, art objects, film, computer softwares (if any), and the like. This activity of data collection was surely conducted by taking pictures or photograph, or anything relating to visualization to the research object and subject.

3.4 Data Analysis Technique

After the data were collected through the three techniques above, they were analyzed through some steps. First, the data taken from the direct observation were encoded. In other words, the data were given characteristics or labeled—so called coding, which was intended to see whether or not they are representative

(17)

data. Second, the data, after the coding, were identified by purpose to yield the authentic or primary data, so that the problem-solution was accurately found. Third, the identified data were categorized into the central themes, as suggested by Van Lier (1988) relevant to the research questions. And the fourth, the observation data were interpreted by the researcher, then its result was attached on the theory of literature teaching.

Fifth, the interview data was transcribed to see what the respondents said. Then, they were encoded and labeled to make them be easy to understand. Sixth, the data were classified into some patterns or the central themes, so that what the respondents said could be easily compared with the theory says. And the last the data were interpreted based on the researcher’s knowledge-base and were correlated with the theory of literature teaching constructed in chapter two.

Next, the data taken from the document were considered as a secondary data. However, they were checked and at the same time analyzed through selecting the academic archives in terms of the literature genres teaching, such as the syllabus of poetry, prose, drama, and the like. They, after that, were also interpreted as to see combination between what the respondent had done in the classrooms and what the syllabi demand. In actuality there is no “right way” to analyze the data (see Cresswell, 1994, Tesch, 1990).

Concluding Remark

This chapter has presented the research methodology applied in this study. It has elaborated the ways the researcher did in the techniques of data collection and analysis.

(18)

(19)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

5.1 Conclusion

The data collected from the both direct observation and interview indicate that the English literature teaching at the research site is partly relevant with the the literature teaching theory proposed by Moody (1971), Taba (2005), Beach and Marshall (1991), Leslie Stratta (in Endaswara, 2005), and Badazewski (2002). Nevertheless, the practice of literature teaching conducted by the lecturers has not been able to accomodate the existing theory around the literature teaching. It means that the lecturers only implement conventional ways of teaching procedure, not overall the phases they conducted. Concerning the materials given to the students, the lecturers still refer to teaching orientation than learning one. In the other words, the literature teaching approach, model, methods are still expocitory or information model, not touching the students-centered learning. In this case, the lecturer still applied the limited and ineffecient techniques—the method is still restricted to the lecturing, not empowering the students’ capability.

In terms of the problems in the literature teaching, the six problems of the literature teaching proposed by Thomas and Parkinson (2005) are proven—those problems are found in the observation and interview data. They are odd and difficult language, imbalance between four integrated skills, imbalance between the lecturers’ knowledge and the students’ one, lack of the functional authenticity, and no sequencing and no staging posts. The other problems are limited resources for the students and the institution.

(20)

The solutions to the problems are also found in the observation and inetrview data. There are thirteen solutions or ways to overcome the difficulty in the literature teaching. Finally, regarding to the solutions, some activities to solve the problems are conducted by the lecturer below:

a. Inviting the students to read the literary works that are easily understood; b. Continuously motivating the students to study hard;

c. The students are given many assignments in order to learn at home; d. Making the students aware that the learning is crucial;

e. Providing the learning facilities for them; f. Assigning them take-home assignment;

g. Directing the students to think critically and logically;

h. Attempting to discuss the students’ problem with the lecturers;

i. Inviting the students to discuss the learning materials at outdoor or outbound place;

j. Conducting conference with the students; discussing with our colleages to share experience;

k. Conducting discussion with the colleagues to share experience of the literature teaching;

l. Asking the students to discuss, exchange the book, novel, poems, or plays; and

(21)

5.2 Suggestion and Implication

First of all, it is stated that the aims of literature teaching is just to transfer knowledge and comprehension about English literary works to the students. Actually this is inconsistent with the theory of the literature teaching proposed by Moody, Taba, Beach and Marshall, Leslie Stratta, and Badazweski (2002). The literature teaching should promote individuality, understanding, the cultural values. Therefore, the policy maker of the institution should construct an appropriate literature curriculum in order to expand both the lecturers and the students’ knowledge and experience.

Secondly, concerning the problems of literature teaching in its application and implementation, the institution is greatly expected to provide satisfying and comprtable facilities, including sufficient classrooms, teaching-learning media, books, the other sources, so that the both lecturers and the students are easier to access any informations, especailly about academic informations. Next, obligation to read the literary works should be pressed on either the lecturers or the students. This obligation should be obeyed by the students in order that they can love the literature. The reading activity should be begun from simple literary works to the complex ones.

Further research should eventually be conducted in the other context and levels of education by purpose to appreciate the literary works, so that the students would have good communication in English, either spoken or written form. Likewise, the teaching of English in the research site should focus more on the development and the improvement of the students’ skills of English. It is also

(22)

suggested that the principles of literature teaching strategies should be applied more comprehensively to anable the students to develop their imaginative capacity. Hence, the literary appreciation at any educational institution will be able to get its outcomes, especially for the students themselves.

(23)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Agathocleous, Tanya and Dean, Ann C. 2003. Teaching Literature. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Akhmadi, Muksin. 1989. Strategi Belajar-Mengajar: Keterampilan Berbahasa dan Apresiasi Sastra. Malang: YA3.

Alwasilah, Chaedar. 2000. Perspektif Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris di Indonesia dalam Konteks Persaingan Global. Bandung: Andira.

...2006. Pengajaran Berbasis Sastra. Pikiran Rakyat. Edisi Rabu 7 Desember.

...2002. Pokonya Kualitatif: Dasar-dasar merancang Penelitian Kualitatif. Jakarta: Gramedia.

Bain, Carl E., et al., 1973, The Norton Introduction to Literature, W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., U.S.A.

Beach. In press. The creative Development of Reading: using autobiographical Experiences to Interpret literature. Cited in farel. 1990. Transaction with Literature. U.S.A.

Beach and Marshall. 1991. Teaching Literature in the Secondary School. London: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Brumfit C.J. 1983. Teaching Literature Overseas: Language-Based Approach. Oxford: Pergamon Press in Association with the British Council.

………….1991. Assessment in the Teaching of Literature. London: Modern English Publications in Association with the British Council.

Chamber, Ellie and Gregory Marshall. 2006. Teaching and Learning English Literature. London: SAGE Publications.

Cresswell, J.W. 1994. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Tradition. London: SAGE Publication.

Cox, Carole. 1999. Teaching Language Arts. The United States of America: Allyn and Bacon

(24)

Daniels, Harvey and Steineke, Nancy. 2004. Mini-lessons for Literature Circles. Portsmouth: Heinemann.

Dawson. Catherine. 2009. Introduction to Research Methods. U.K.: Howtobooks, Inc.

Dawson, Darelyn and Fitzgerald, Lee. Literature Circles: Reading in Action. Australia: Center for Information Studies.

Dominowski, Roger L. 2002. Teaching Undergraduates. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Eaglestone, Robert. 2003. Doing English: A Guide for Literature Students. London and New York: Routledge.

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

Endraswara, Suwardi. 2005. Metode dan Teori Pengajaran Sastra. Yogyakarta: Buana Pustaka.

Farrel and Squire. 1990. Transaction with Literature. The United States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.

Furqon and Emilia, Emi. 2010. Penelitian Kuantitatif dan Kualitatif (Beberapa Isu Kritis). Bandung: Sekolah Pascasarjana UPI.

Gamble, Nikki and Yates, Sally. 2002. Exploring Children Literature: Teaching the Language and Reading of Fiction. London: PCP.

Hakes, Belinda. 2008. When Critical Thinking Met English Literature. Oxford: Howtobooks.

Harmer, J. 2000. The Practice of English Teaching. England: Longman.

Howes, Alan B. 2005. Teaching Literature to Adolescents. London: Scott, Foresman and Company.

Ismail, Taufik. 1999. Pengajaran Sastra yang Efektif dan Efesien. Yogyakarta: Balai Bahasa.

Joyce, Bruce and Weil, Marshall. 2000. Models of Teaching. U.S.A: Pearson Education Company.

(25)

Lang and Evans. 2006. Models, Strategies, and Methods for Effective Teaching. New York: Pearson Education, Ltd.

Littlewood, William T. 2003. Literature in the School Foreign Language Course. Hongkong: Oxford University Press.

Loban, et al. 2005. Teaching Language and Literature. New York: Brace and World, Inc.

Lubis, Mochtar, 1997, Sastra dan Tekniknya. Jakarta: Yayasan Obor Indonesia.

Marsh, Nicholas. 2002. How to Begin Studying English Literature. New York: Palgrave.

Marshall and Rossman. 2006. Designing Qualitative Research. London: SAGE Publications.

Maryanah, Imas. 2007. The Teaching of Literature Using Reader-Respond Approach. Unpublished Thesis. SPS UPI Bandung.

Mckay, Sandra. 2009. Teaching of Literature with Special Reference to Developing Countries. London: Longman.

Moody, H.L.B., 1979. The Teaching of Literature. London: Longman Group, Ltd. Musthafa, Bachrudin. 2008. Teori dan Praktek Sastra dalam Penelitian dan

Pengajaran. Jakarta: New Concept English Education Centre in Collaboration with Indonesia University of Education.

Parkinson and Thomas. 2004. Teaching Literature in a Second Language. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Paulston and Bruder. 1976. Teaching English as a Second Language: Technique and Procedures. Canada: Little, Brown and Company, Ltd.

Picken, Jonathan D. 2007. Literature, Metaphor, and the Foreign Language Learner. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Rodger, Alex. 2008. Teaching Literature Overseas. New York: Pergamon Press. Rodreguez and Badaczewski. 2006. A Guide Book for Teaching Literature.

Boston-London Sidney: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.

Rosenblatt, Louise. 1990. Transaction with Literature. The United States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.

(26)

Russell Reaske, Christopher, 1966, How to Analyze Poetry, Monarch Press, U.S.A.

Saxby, M. and Hoogstad. 1991. Teaching Literature to Adolescents. Australia: National Library Australia.

Sudjana, Nana. 2009. Dasar-dasar Proses Belajar-Mengajar. Bandung: Sinar Baru Algensindo.

Seliger, Herbert, 1989, Second Language Research Method, Oxford University Press, New York.

Selden, Raman, 1996, A Reader’s Guide to Contemporary Literary Theory (Transl. Dr. Rachmat Djoko Pradopo), Gadjah Mada University Press, Yogyakarta.

Sayuti, Suminto. 1985. Puisi dan Pengajarannya. Semarang: IKIP Semarang Press.

Smith, Frank. 1985. Essays into Literacy: Selected Papers and Some Afterthoughts. London: Portsmouth Heinaemann Educational Books. Segers, Rien T. 2000. Evaluasi Teks Sastra (Transl. Prof. Dr. Suminto A. Sayuti).

Yogyakarta: Adicita Karya Nusa.

Selden, Raman, 1989, Literary Theory: Practice and Pedagogy, Kentucky University Press, Great Britain.

Sumara, Dennis J. 2008. Why Reading Literature in School Still Matters: Imagination, Interpretation, Insight. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Wahab, Abdul Azis. 2007. Metode dan Model-model Mengajar. Bandung: Alfabeta.

Walshe R.D. 1983. Teaching Literature. Australia: Primary English Teaching Association and English Teachers’ Assosiation of N.S.W.

Wardani, IGK. 1981. Pengajaran Sastra. Makalah Penlok Tahap II PPPG, Depdikbud.

Woolf, Judith. 2005. Writing about Literature. London and New York: Routledge. Young, Tory. 2008. Studying English Literature. New York: Cambridge

(27)

http://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=1352&bih=538&q=l

ecturers%27+strategyinteachingEFLLiterature+PDF

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EFLliterature

http://www.kalipedia.com/kalipediamedia/literature http://www.frieze.com/org/frieze/literature

http://www.academi.edu.amazonaws.com/32469/literatura