A study on microteaching students` ability in designing coherent learning objectives and learning activities.

(1)

ABSTRACT

Enjayani, Meita. 2012. A Study on Microteaching Students’ Ability in Designing Coherent Learning Objectives and Learning Activities. Yogyakarta: Sanata

Dharma University.

Having a good preparation before teaching is important. Teachers have to prepare a lesson plan before they teach. A good preparation can guarantee the achievement of learning objectives in class and the success of the teaching and learning process. Learning objectives would also be achieved if there were chances for students to experience classroom-learning activities that lead them to those learning objectives. Therefore, the researcher is interested in studying the design of learning objectives and learning activities.

This research intended to see the coherence of learning objectives and learning activities designed by microteaching students and to find out the problems that might occur. There were two research questions presented in this study: (1) Is there any coherence between learning objectives and learning activities designed by microteaching students of English Language Education Study Program? (2) What problems might occur in designing coherent learning objectives and learning activities?

To answer the research questions, the researcher conducted document analysis on seven microteaching students’ lesson plans from different classes. The data would be analyzed both qualitatively and quantitatively. The qualitative data would be obtained from the lesson plans and the interview. Then, the quantitative data would be obtained from the checklist used to assess the lesson plans.

From the analysis, the researcher found out that there were 5 out of 7 lesson plans or 71.42% showed the coherent learning objectives and learning activities. However, dealing with the second formulation of research question, the researcher still found some problems which could be categorized into the formulation of learning objectives and the design of learning activities. The formulation of learning objectives (1) did not cover the three domains 71.42% (2) did not fulfill the criteria of clearly stated learning objectives 57.14% (3) did not derive from the competence standard 28.57%. The design of learning activities (1) gave unclear instruction 57.14% (2) did not fulfill the congruence principle 42.85% (3) did not fulfill the organization principle 42.85% (4) did not fulfill the variety principle 28.57% (5) did not fulfill the higher level of thinking principle 28.57%.

Most of the lesson plans showed coherent learning objectives and learning activities since the learning activities designed met at least the terminal objectives. The main problem that influenced the failure of designing coherent learning objectives and learning activities was the absence of supporting learning activities. The learning activities designed did not achieve the same level as what is expected in the learning objectives.

(2)

vii ABSTRAK

Enjayani, Meita. 2012. A Study on Microteaching Students’ Ability in Designing Coherent Learning objectives and learning activities. Yogyakarta: Universitas Sanata Dharma.

Memiliki persiapan yang baik sebelum mengajar itu penting. Guru harus menyiapkan rencana pelaksanaan pembelajaran (RPP) sebelum mengajar. Persiapan yang baik menjamin tercapainya tujuan dan kesuksesan proses pembelajaran di kelas. Tujuan pembelajaran akan tercapai apabila siswa diberikan kesempatan untuk mengikuti aktivitas pembelajaran yang mengarahkan mereka pada tujuan pembelajaran itu sendiri. Oleh karena itu, peneliti bermaksud mempelajari rumusan tujuan pembelajaran dan rancangan kegiatan pembelajaran.

Penelitian ini bertujuan melihat kesesuaian antara tujuan pembelajaran dan kegiatan pembelajaran yang dirancang oleh mahasiswa kelas Pengajaran Mikro dan untuk menemukan masalah yang muncul. Rumusan masalah dalam penelitian ini adalah: (1) apakah ada kesesuaian antara tujuan pembelajaran dan kegiatan pembelajaran yang dirancang mahasiswa kelas Pengajaran Mikro Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris? (2) masalah apa yang muncul dalam merancang tujuan pembelajaran dan kegiatan pembelajaran yang sesuai?

Untuk menyelesaikan masalah, peneliti menganalis tujuh RPP dari mahasiswa kelas Pengajaran Mikro yang berbeda. Data akan dianalisis secara kualitatif dan kuantitatif. Data kualitatif diperoleh dari RPP dan wawancara. Data kuantitatif diperoleh dari checklist yang digunakan untuk menilai RPP.

Dari hasil analisis, peneliti menemukan bahwa 5 dari 7 RPP atau 71.4% menunjukkan kesesuaian antara tujuan pembelajaran dan kegiatan pembelajaran. Di sisi lain, berhubungan dengan rumusan masalah yang kedua, peneliti menemukan beberapa masalah yang dapat dikelompokkan berdasarkan perumusan tujuan pembelajaran dan rancangan kegiatan pembelajaran. Rumusan tujuan pembelajaran (1) tidak mencakup tiga ranah 71.42% (2) tidak memenuhi kriteria rumusan tujuan pembelajaran yang jelas 57, 14% (3) tidak sesuai dengan standar kompetensi 28,57%. Kemudian, rancangan kegiatan pembelajaran (1) memberi instruksi yang tidak jelas 51,14% (2) tidak memenuhi prinsip kesesuaian 42.85% (3) tidak memenuhi prinsip organisasi 42,85% (4) tidak memenuhi prinsip keberagaman 28,57% (5) tidak memenuhi prinsip berpikir kompleks 28, 57%.

Sebagian besar RPP menunjukkan kesesuaian antara tujuan pembelajaran dan kegiatan pembelajaran karena kegiatan pembelajaran yang dirancang telah memenuhi setidaknya tujuan pembelajaran utama. Masalah utama yang mempengaruhi kegagalan dalam merancang kegiatan pembelajaran yang sesuai dengan tujuan pembelajaran adalah tidak adanya kegiatan pembelajaran yang mendukung. Kegiatan pembelajaran yang dirancang tidak mencapai tingkat yang sama seperti apa yang diharapkan pada tujuan pembelajaran.

(3)

A STUDY ON MICROTEACHING STUDENTS

’

ABILITY IN

DESIGNING COHERENT LEARNING OBJECTIVES AND

LEARNING ACTIVITIES

A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree

in English Language Education

By Meita Enjayani

081214139

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION

FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

YOGYAKARTA 2012

(4)

A STUDY ON MICROTEACHING STUDENTS’ ABILITY IN

DESIGNING COHERENT LEARNING OBJECTIVES AND

LEARNING ACTIVITIES

A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree

in English Language Education

By Meita Enjayani

081214139

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION

FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

YOGYAKARTA 2012

(5)

(6)

(7)

“Be of good cheer. Do not think of today's failures, but of the success that may

come tomorrow. You have set yourselves a difficult task, but you will succeed if

you persevere; and you will find a joy in overcoming obstacles. Remember, no

effort that we make to attain something beautiful is ever lost.”

Helen Keller

I dedicate this thesis to my beloved parents,

my lovely brothers and sister,

(8)

(9)

ABSTRACT

Enjayani, Meita. 2012. A Study on Microteaching Students’ Ability in Designing Coherent Learning Objectives and Learning Activities. Yogyakarta: Sanata

Dharma University.

(10)

vii ABSTRAK

Enjayani, Meita. 2012. A Study on Microteaching Students’ Ability in Designing Coherent Learning objectives and learning activities. Yogyakarta: Universitas Sanata Dharma.

(11)

(12)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express my deepest gratitude for Jesus Christ for health and His blessing so that I can finish my thesis.

I also express my sincere appreciation for my sponsor, V. Triprihatmini, S.Pd., M.Hum., M.A., who guided me in the process of writing this thesis by giving feedback and suggestions. Then, my next appreciation goes to microteaching lecturers, Ag. Hardi Prasetyo, S.Pd., M.A., Caecilia Tutyandari, S.Pd., M.Pd., Carla Sih Prabandari, S.Pd., M.Hum., Made Frida Yulia, S.Pd., M.Pd., Christina Kristiyani, S.Pd., M.Pd., V. Triprihatmini, S.Pd., M.Hum., M.A., and Gregorius Punto Aji S.Pd., M.Hum., for giving me opportunities to conduct research on their students’ work. I would also thank those who became the participants of my study by permitting me to access their lesson plans and giving the information that I needed.

I would also like to express my greatest gratitude for my beloved family: Bapak, Ibu, mas Agus, mas Doni, Risa, mbak Nita and mbak Widy for the support and motivation that encourage me to finish my thesis as soon as possible.

I owe much to my friends, Andre, Ayuk, Anisa, Yeni, Dita, Rean and all PBI students of 2008 academic year who always support and make me laugh in this hard time doing my thesis. Not to forget, my great thankfulness goes to my friends in “kost idjoe”, mbak Ria, Usie, Hita, mbak Dwi, mbak Novi, Ita.

Finally, my deepest thanks go to all who have helped me in finishing my thesis.

(13)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

TITLE PAGE... i

APPROVAL PAGE ... ii

DEDICATION PAGE... iv

STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY ... v

ABSTRACT ... vi

ABSTRAK ... vii

LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI ... viii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... ix

TABLE OF CONTENTS ... x

LIST OF APENDICES ... xii

CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION A. Research Background ... 1

B. Problem Formulation ... 3

C. Problem Limitation ... 4

D. Research Objectives ... 5

E. Research Benefits ... 5

F. Definition of Terms ... 6

CHAPTER II. LITERATURE REVIEW A. Theoretical Description ... 9

1. Lesson Planning in Language Teaching ... 9

2. Learning Objectives in Lesson Planning ... 10

3. Learning Activities in Lesson Planning ... 13

4. The Relation between Learning Objectives and Learning Activities ... 17

5. Writing Skill... 18

(14)

xi CHAPTER III. METHODOLOGY

A. Research Methods ... 24

B. Research Setting... 25

C. Research Participants ... 25

D. Research Insteruments... 27

E. Data Gathering Technique ... 28

F. Data Analysis Technique ... 29

G. Research Procedure ... 31

CHAPTER IV. RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION A. General Description of Microteaching Students’ Lesson Plans ... 33

B. The Formulation of the Learning Objectives ... 34

C. The Design of the Learning Activites ... 47

D. The Application of Six Principles Proposed By Pasch et al. (1991) in Designing the Learning Activities ... 54

E. The Coherence of the Learning Activities and the Learning Objectives ... 71

F. Problems that might occur in the Design of Learning objectives and learning activities ... 75

CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS A. Conclusions ... 81

B. Suggestions ... 82

REFERENCES ... 85

(15)

xii

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix Page

1. Surat Permohonan Ijin Penelitian ... 87

(16)

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

There will be six important sections to discuss in this chapter. They are the research background, problem formulations, problem limitation, research objectives, research benefits, and definition of terms.

A. Research Background

Nowadays, English is taught from kindergarten to high school. However, the researcher is curious why Senior High School students still have poor ability in English even after they have learned English for many years. The researcher thinks that one of the possible reasons is because of bad teaching preparation among teachers. The ability of the students should be good if the teachers had a good preparation or idea. Teachers’ teaching preparation can be seen from the lesson plan. Therefore, the researcher is interested in observing lesson plans of microteaching students.

As future teachers, students of the English Language Education Study Program Sanata Dharma University are prepared to master all aspects of teaching such as designing lesson plans and materials, classroom management, and the way of delivering the material during their study. All of those aspects are important in order to achieve successful teaching. The students will get the chance to implement all of those aspects in one of the subjects that is called microteaching. It is offered for sixth semester students.

(17)

The first step taken by microteaching students before doing the teaching performance is designing a lesson plan. The lesson plan becomes the foundation of the teaching since it is a plan of the learning process in class. It will be the guidelines for the teacher on how or what to do, to control the way the learning activities run.

Designing a lesson plans is not easy. In fact, it is still a challenging task for some students. Most of them even do not know what kind of things should be written there, including the arrangement. Moreover, there are many things to consider since a lesson plan consists of some points. As written in Permendiknas no 41 year 2007 on Standar Proses, a lesson plan covers the subject description, competence standard, basic competence, indicator, learning objectives, material, time allotment, teaching method, learning activities, assessment, and learning source. These become important parts which relate to one another. For example, the standard competence and basic competence will be the foundation in determining the learning objective. Then, the objective will be the foundation in determining the learning activities, so on and so forth.

Here, the researcher discusses the learning objectives which determine the design of the learning activities. As Kemp (1977) said, “Objectives indicate the type and extent of activities that are required for successfully carrying out the learning” (p. 34). Learning objectives are the focus and will be the target of the teaching and learning process. It can be achieved by providing the supporting learning activities for students so that they experience the learning process which leads them to the learning outcomes.

(18)

Microteaching students should think carefully before determining the learning activities. Burden & Byrd (1999) recommend three sequences of learning activities which are introductory activities, developmental activities, and closing activities. The learning activities written in the lesson plan should be clear and in a good order so that the material can be delivered well and easily. Besides, the important thing to be considered is that the learning activities should be based on the learning objectives.

By the fact that designing coherent learning objectives and learning activities is important, the researcher wants to know whether there is coherence between learning objectives and learning activities designed by microteaching students of the English Language Education Study Program. It is important since the students are expected to be professional teachers who are successful in teaching after they graduate later. The coherence can be seen from some criteria. They are related to the formulation of learning objectives and the design of supporting learning activities.

B. Problem Formulations

In relation to the topic of the study, the problems of the research can be formulated as follows:

1. Is there any coherence between learning objectives and learning activities designed by microteaching students of the English Language Education Study Program?

(19)

2. What problems might occur in designing coherent learning objectives and learning activities?

C. Problem Limitation

The designs of lesson plans are varied based on the skill focus which is going to be taught. It can be listening, speaking, reading or writing. In this study, the lesson plans analyzed are those that focus on writing skill. The researcher experienced that producing a piece of writing is not easy. There are some sequences to face, such as getting the idea, pre-writing, revising, re-writing and proofreading. From the first sequence, which is finding the idea, it is not easy. Even after the researcher gets the idea, the researcher should consider the vocabulary, grammar or organization to put the idea into a good writing. Because of those phenomena, writing teacher should be careful in choosing the kinds of classroom activities to help the students develop their writing skills. It is obvious that becoming a writing teacher is a big challenge. That is the reason why the researcher chose the lesson plans which focus on writing skill as the data.

There are some parts in a lesson plan which are all important and related to each other. Dealing with the objectives of this study, the focus will be only on the objectives and learning activities written in a lesson plan. The researcher is going to study the coherence of both.

This research will use document analysis on seven lesson plans written by seven students of the English Language Education Study Program Sanata Dharma

(20)

University year 2009 as the participants from different microteaching class. The students have written and implemented them in their microteaching class.

D. Research Objectives

Based on the problem formulations, the objectives of conducting this study are listed as follows:

1. To see whether there is coherence between learning objectives and learning activities designed by microteaching students of the English Language Education Study Program.

2. To know some problems that might occur in designing coherent learning objectives and learning activities.

E. Research Benefits

By conducting research on the coherence of learning objectives and learning activities designed by microteaching students, it is expected to provide contributions for:

1. Students

This research is expected to provide feedback or to evaluate microteaching students of the English Language Education Study Program Sanata Dharma University in designing coherent learning objectives and learning activities. By understanding the importance of it, they are expected to improve their ability in designing those two. Hopefully, they can think more critically about what kind of learning activities are appropriate in order to achieve the learning objectives.

(21)

2. Lecturers

This research gives description for the lecturers on microteaching students’ ability in designing coherent learning objectives and learning activities. If the result is that microteaching students have not designed coherent learning activities, the lecturers can improve their teaching technique and create new methods in teaching designing lesson plan.

By knowing the microteaching students’ problems in designing coherent learning objectives and learning activities, the lecturers are expected to find better solution to help the students solve the problems.

3. Other researchers

This research can help and develop further research on designing similar topics about the coherent learning objectives and learning activities.

F. Definition of Terms

There are some terms which are often used in this study. In order to avoid misunderstanding, the researcher is going to define the terms as follows:

1. Microteaching

Purnomo, Rismiati, Domi & Rohandi (2008) state that in microteaching class, the students are expected to master the basic teaching competence and implement a certain approach of teaching method. In this study, microteaching is one of the courses in the English Language Education Study Program Sanata Dharma University. This course belongs to a compulsory course and is offered in semester six.

(22)

2. Coherent

In a piece of writing, there is one principle that is called coherent principle. It means that every sentence in a paragraph should support the idea. As Langan (1996) said, “All the supporting ideas and sentences in a paper must be organized so that they cohere, or stick together” (p.104).

This study is going to see the coherence of learning objectives and learning activities. Coherence here means that the learning activities should be designed to reach the purpose of learning that is formulated in the learning objectives. Learning activities might be varied. However, it should be well organized, set in a logical order, and meet at least one of the learning objectives.

3. Learning Activities

Harmer (2001) states that learning activities are the main body of the lesson plan in which the procedure of teaching process is listed together with the time taken for each activity (p. 315). In this study, the learning activities refer to the learning activity as one of the components of lesson plan designed by microteaching students of the English Education Study Program Sanata Dharma University. Here, the researcher will use the list of activities written by the students in their lesson plans as the main data.

4. Learning Objectives

According to Kemp (1977), “A learning objective is a precise statement that answers the question, “What does the student have to do in order to show that he or she has learned what you want the students to learn” (p. 28). It means that learning objective has something to do with the target of learning. Davies (1976)

(23)

also says, “An objective implies direction and goal, cause and effect, process and product” (p. 104).

As written in Permendiknas no 41 year 2007 on Standar Proses, a learning objective describes the process and expected achievement of students learning based on the basic competence. Then, an indicator is observable behavior to indicate the achievement of basic competence. From those two sentences, it is obvious that both learning objective and indicator are related to the target of learning. Therefore, learning objectives and indicators are interchangeable.

In this study, learning objectives refer to the learning objectives listed in the lesson plan designed by microteaching students of the English Language Education Study Program Sanata Dharma University. The researcher uses these as the main data. These learning objectives are derived from the basic competence and will be the main data of this research. However, these learning objectives can be exchanged with indicators.

(24)

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

In this chapter, the researcher presents the theoretical description and the theoretical framework. Theoretical description presents some theories which support the study conducted. Theoretical framework presents the logical concept on the use of the theories to answer the problem formulation.

A. Theoretical Description

1. Lesson Planning in Language Teaching

According to McNeil & Wiles (1990), “Lesson plan is a teaching outline of the important points of a lesson for a single class period, arranged in the order in which they are to be presented” (p. 59). From the definition of lesson plan given, it is obviously known that a lesson plan is important to design before the teachers teach in class. They have to plan all of the things related to the teaching and learning process first and write it in the lesson plan. It will be the guidance for the teacher in delivering the lesson, what they have to do is just implementing the designed plan.

Burden & Byrd (1999) present the reason why designing a lesson plan is important:

The goal of planning is to ensure student learning. Planning therefore, helps create, arrange, and organize instructional events to enable that learning to occur. Planning helps arrange appropriate flow and sequence of instructional events and also manage time and events (p. 19).

(25)

A lesson plan give the teacher guidelines about things to do in the class; it includes the sequence of learning activities and the time allocated for each activity. In other words, the teacher will have a sense of direction in teaching the students. The lesson plan is also important to guide the learning process to the goal or the objectives of learning. Without the planning, the objectives will be difficult to achieve since there is no rule to control the learning process in class.

As written in Permendiknas no 41 year 2007 on Standar Proses, there are some elements which should be written in the formal lesson plan. They are subject description, competence standard, basic competence, indicator, learning objectives, material, time allotment, teaching method, learning activities, assessment, and learning source. All of those elements should be designed in coherence, showing the logical relation to one another.

2. Learning Objectives in Lesson Planning

One important part that should be written in a lesson plan is the learning objectives. Burden & Byrd (1999) explain that learning objectives are statements of what is hoped from the learning process. In other words, learning objectives are the goal or the direction which is expected to be achieved through the learning process. There will be some instructions during the learning process. Therefore, after the instructions have been done, the students are expected to meet the learning objectives. If the learning objectives can be achieved, we may say that the teaching and learning process succeed (p.30).

Burden & Byrd (1999) explain that there are three reasons why the teacher should consider the learning objectives before designing the other important parts

(26)

of a lesson plan. The first reason is that because learning objectives become the focus of learning process. It is related to the things should be achieved by the students. The second one is that objectives help teacher in determining the task or assignment in class by specified the general goals. The last reason is that objectives assist the teacher in designing the test or evaluate the students’ mastery. The evaluation should be designed so that it can measure the students’ achievement whether it has met the expected goal or not (p.65).

There are three ways of stating objectives as what Burden & Byrd (1999) have described. The first one is called action statement. It is stated in terms of what the student is expected to know or to do using the action verb. The second one is called condition statements. The condition includes the material given to the students, time limits, and the location for the performances. The third objectives statement is criterion statement. It stated the standard in which the students’ successful completion of the objective is measured. It refers to the standard to determine whether the students’ performance is acceptable (pp.66-67).

Similar to the previous ways of stating the objectives, Pasch, Langer, Gardner, Starko, & Moody (1991) give the easy way to remember the important points in writing the learning objectives in form of A, B, C, D mnemonic aid. A stands for the audience, B stands for behavior, C stands for conditions statement and D stands for degree statement (p.70). In short, we may conclude that in writing the objectives, we start by stating who are the students, followed by what the students should do, then stating the requirement which the students are

(27)

expected to do, and finally to the criteria or standard to measure the students’ achievement.

Bloom (1987) explains that learning objectives can be written in three learning domains. The first one is the cognitive domain. It is related to those objectives which deal with the recall or recognition of knowledge and the development of intellectual skills. The second learning domain is affective domain which is related to the emotional dimension of the learning process. It includes the objectives which describe changes in interest, attitudes, and values, and the development of appreciations and adequate adjustment. The last one is the psychomotor domain. It is closely related to the physical behavior (p. 7).

In line with Bloom taxonomy, Kemp (1977) writes the verbs that are often used for each level of cognitive domain. It can be seen in Table 2.1.

Level of Cognitive Domain

Verb

1. Knowledge Arrange, define, duplicate, label, list, memorize, name, order, recognize, relate, recall, repeat, reproduce

2. Comprehension Classify, describe, discuss, explain, express, identify, indicate, locate, recognize, report, restate, review, select, tell, translate

3. Application Apply, choose, demonstrate, dramatize, employ, illustrate, interpret, operate, practice, schedule, sketch, solve, use

4. Analysis Analyze, appraise, calculate, categorize, compare, contrast, criticize, diagram, differentiate, discriminate, distinguish, examine, experiment, inventory, question, test

5. Synthesis Arrange, assemble, collect, compose, construct, create, design, formulate, manage, organize, plan, prepare, propose, set up, write

6. Evaluation Appraise, argue, assess, attach, choose, compare, defend, estimate, judge, predict, rate, score, select, support, value, evaluate

(28)

According to Brown (2001), there are two kinds of learning objectives. The first one is terminal objective. It is the final outcomes that will be measured after completing the class activities. The second one is enabling learning objectives. It is only learning objectives which actually support or lead the students to the terminal objectives (p.150).

All of those reviews of the learning objectives theory are presented based on some consideration. The definition of learning objectives is presented first in order to give the same perception to the reader about that. Another one, the importance of determining the learning objectives are also presented here to emphasize to the microteaching students that the objectives they will write in the lesson plan are important. It also shows the importance of conducting this study. This study is conducted to see the ability of microteaching students in designing coherent learning objectives and learning activities. Therefore, it is important to present the way of stating the objective which later will help the researcher in analyzing the objectives written by micro teaching students in their lesson plan.

3. Learning Activities in Lesson Planning

After the learning objectives have been defined, the plan for designing the learning activities is on firm ground. Gagne (1977) describes some analysis on the learning objectives that should be conducted first to create the proper learning activities. The activity of analyzing the learning objectives is called task analysis which requires three steps. The first one is called information-processing analysis. If the objective is stated in human performance, we can analyze the steps required in order to achieve that performance as the learning activities. The second one is

(29)

task classification. It is proposed by the taxonomy of Bloom which divides human task into three domains as stated in the previous paragraph. They are cognitive, affective and psychomotor domain. Cognitive domain covers the knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, evaluation. Affective domain covers receiving, responding, valuing, organization, characterization. In psychomotor domain, skill of movement with certain form guides into some purposeful outcome. The last task analysis is called learning task analysis. It reveals the prerequisite learning in which the students will recall their knowledge (pp. 116-130).

In a different way, Pasch et al. (1991) explains six principles that may be better to implement when designing the learning activities.

a. Congruence Principle

This principle teaches us to make sure that there should be a match among objectives, activities and evaluation. It means that we have to select the activities which later can lead the students to meet the objectives of the learning and to test whether the objectives have been achieved. It is closely related to the research conducted in which the researcher is curious with the learning activities designed in the lesson plan by microteaching students of the English Language Education Study Program Sanata Dharma University whether it is coherent with the learning objectives or not (Pasch et al., 1991, p. 115).

b. Organization and clarity principle

It will be easier for the students to acquire the knowledge if the material is delivered in a good organization. The teacher should make the organization of the

(30)

information obvious to students so that the students know how one activity relates to another. Stating directly the relation of the activities will help students focus on the relevant information (Pasch et al., 1991, p. 117).

c. Variety Principle

We have to consider the different students’ learning needs and styles in selecting kinds of activity. Therefore, it is better to plan various activities which later can attract each learner and hold her or his attention throughout the lesson so that the learning objectives can be achieved (Pasch et al., 1991, p. 119).

d. Active Processing Principle

This principle teaches the teacher to design learning activities which can help the students to make the new information more meaningful. This principle covers two things. The first one is called linkage to prior knowledge. Here, the teachers should make sure that the students understand the new information by relating the topic to the previous knowledge in the long-term memory or something the students already know. The second one is active involvement. It means that the learning activities should encourage the students’ participation. That is why teacher should include various activities which enable students to be more active. If they were actively participating in class, they would find it easier to remember the material than those who are passive (Pasch et al., 1991, p. 120). e. Experience Based Learning Principle

The teacher should select the learning activities which are close to real life. As cited from Dale (1963) who introduces the idea of the experience level called “cone of experience”. It includes learning by doing which covers direct purposeful

(31)

experiences, contrived experiences, and dramatized experiences. Another one is learning through observation which covers demonstration, study trips, exhibits, educational television, motion pictures, recordings, radio, and pictures. The last one is learning through abstraction which covers visual and verbal symbols (Pasch et al., 1991, p. 121).

f. Higher level thinking principle

The selection of the learning activities should encourage the higher level thinking in all students. The students are expected to use more information rather than directly recall it. This can be done by placing the students to analyze the causes, effects, motivations, problem solving and decision making in real or simulated situations (Pasch et al., 1991, p. 125).

After we know the principle of designing learning activities, we may start to think about the activities. Burden & Byrd (1999) recommend three sequences of learning activities which are introductory activities, developmental activities, closing activities. Introductory activities are designed to capture students’ attention, motivate and lead them in learning objectives. That is the reason why in this activity, the teacher should tell what the students will learn, how the lesson is related to the previous one and the learning objectives which are expected. The second activity is developmental activities which is the main part of the learning process. Here, the teacher can use many instructional strategies such as lectures, questions, practice, group discussion, problem solving. Teacher should vary the instructional strategies to fulfill the students’ different learning styles and vary the class activities. The important thing that should be considered is that the

(32)

instructional strategies selected must help the students achieve the instructional objectives of the lesson. We should also concern with the students characteristics in selecting the instructional strategies. The last learning activity is closing activities in which the teacher will summarize the lesson’s content (p. 63).

As previously stated, this study is mainly conducted to see the coherence of learning objectives and learning activities listed on microteaching students’ lesson plan. Therefore, it is important to review some related theories which later become the guidance for the researcher to analyze the data. The researcher presents the theory on how to design learning activities after doing the task analyzes of the learning objective. It is done to fulfill one of the principles of designing learning activities, which is congruence principle.

4. The Relation between Learning Objectives and Learning Activities

Burden & Byrd (1999) state that “After carefully selecting the precise performance objectives in different levels of the learning domain, you need to select strategies and learning activities that will help students achieve those objectives” (p.32). It means that the first thing to do was defining the learning objectives. These learning objectives will be the foundation of designing the learning activities.

The teacher should be careful in selecting the class activities since these should be appropriate in order to meet the learning objectives. Each of the learning objectives should appear in the learning activities designed. The learning activities should provide the opportunities for the students to practice at the expected levels of learning. If the learning activities are designed without

(33)

considering the objectives, the goals of learning will not succeed and the teaching and learning process will be considered as a failure. That is the reason why we have to consider the learning objectives when designing the learning activities. As stated by Kemp (1977), “Successful learning is more likely when objectives are clearly stated for students and when learning activities are carefully sequenced in relation to those objectives.”

All of those theories present the relation between learning objectives and learning activities. It shows and emphasizes that designing coherent learning objectives and learning activities is very important in the teaching and learning process. That is why the ability of microteaching students to design coherent learning objectives and learning activities is important to see. As the objectives of this study, knowing the microteaching students ability will give benefit for both the lecturer and the students to know how or what to behave and find the solution for that.

5. Writing Skill

Writing is a productive skill which requires a complex process to produce a piece of writing. Raimes (1983, p. 6-11) describes what the writers have to deal with in the following figure.

(34)

Figure 2.2 writing feature

In every single class, the teacher may emphasize only on some of the features. For example, in one meeting the teacher may only focus on teaching about the organization of a certain text or others.

Students’ writing skill will improve through the process of doing the activities or assignment given in class. Therefore, microteaching students should be able to design and sequence the learning activities to reach the desired learning outcomes. Writing performance that is proposed by Brown (2004, pp. 220-234) might help the students to determine the appropriate assessment in class. There are four types of writing performance, which are:

a. Imitative

This writing performance let the students to attain the basic task of writing letters, words, punctuation, and brief sentences. Here, the students are trying to master the mechanics of writing. This writing performance covers:

(35)

1) Tasks in writing letters, words and punctuation

The assignments can be so varied, such as copying, listening close selection task, picture cued tasks, form completion tasks or converting number and abbreviations to words.

2) Spelling task and detecting phoneme-grapheme correspondences.

It can be done through some kind of assignments such as spelling test, picture-cued tasks, multiple-choice techniques or matching phonetic symbols (Brown, 2004, pp. 221-225).

b. Intensive (controlled)

This writing performance considers the context and the meaning of a writing product. The example of the assignments are dictation, grammatical transformation tasks, picture-cued task, vocabulary assessment task, ordering task, short answer and sentence completion task (Brown, 2004, pp. 225-231).

c. Responsive

In this level of writing performance, the students have mastered the sentence grammar. It emphasizes more on the context and meaning. The assessment task involved connecting sentences into a paragraph and creating a logically connected sequence of two or more paragraphs. In doing that, it is possible for the students to use their creativity. The appropriate genres of text in this writing performance are short reports, responses to the reading of an article or story, summaries of articles or stories, brief narrative or description, and interpretation of graph, table and chart. The examples of the assignments are

(36)

paraphrasing, guided question and answer, paragraph construction task and strategic option (Brown, 2004, pp. 231-237).

d. Extensive

It used to be called as free writing. This writing performance focuses on achieving a purpose, organizing and developing ideas logically, and drafting to achieve the final product. It takes all the principle of responsive writing. However, the genre of text is the longer one, such as essays, papers, project reports or theses. It implies the successful management of all the process and strategies of writing for all-purpose. The assessments are the same as the one in the responsive writing (Brown, 2004, pp. 231-237).

Brown (2004, p.221) explains that for the imitative and intensive writing performance, it would implement the micro skills, such as:

a. Produce graphemes and orthographic patterns of English b. Produce writing at an efficient rate of speed

c. Produce an acceptable core of words and use appropriate word order patterns d. Use acceptable grammatical system

e. Express a particular meaning in different grammatical form f. Use cohesive devices in written discourse

Then, for the responsive and extensive writing performance, it would implement the macro skills, such as:

a. Use the rhetorical forms and conventions of written discourse

b. Appropriately accomplish the communicative functions of written text according to form and purpose

(37)

c. Convey links and connections between events

d. Distinguish between literal and implied meanings when writing

e. Correctly convey culturally specific references in the context of the written text

f. Develop and use a battery of writing strategies

B. Theoretical Framework

This study is mainly about document analysis on microteaching students’ lesson plans. Therefore, it is necessary to review some literature theories concerning on lesson planning in language learning which includes the definition, the importance and the elements of lesson plan. Besides, the study is conducted to see the coherence of the learning activities and the learning objectives. Therefore, it is also important to get deeper understanding on learning objectives, learning activities and the relation of both. It is also important to present some theory concerning on writing skills to help the researcher check the effectiveness of the activities designed.

A lesson plan is important for the teacher for many reasons as being stated by many experts. There are many parts of a lesson plan which are related to each other and are important. In this study, the researcher is going to focus on the coherence of learning objectives and learning activities designed by microteaching students on their lesson plans. Therefore, the theory presents about the learning objectives and learning activities becomes the main foundation for the researcher to answer the research questions.

(38)

To answer the first research question, the researcher uses the theory dealing with the formulation of learning objectives, such as Bloom taxonomy (1964) and theory of clearly stated learning objectives by Pasch et al. (1991). Another theory used is the six principles of designing learning activities proposed by Pasch et al. (1991). All of those theories help the researcher to determine the coherence of learning objectives and learning activities designed by microteaching students.

To answer the second research question, the researcher needs to study the lesson plan more deeply. The second research question deals with problems that occurred in the design of coherent learning objectives and learning activities. The researcher would use the same theories, namely the theory of Bloom taxonomy (1964), theory of clearly stated learning objectives by Pasch et al. (1991) and theory of six principles in designing learning activities proposed by Pasch et al. (1991). Those theories would be used as the foundation to make the checklist. It would be used to see the details of lesson plans and to find the problems which might occur.

(39)

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

In this chapter, the researcher presents the methodology to conduct this research. It covers the research method, research participants, research instruments, data gathering technique, data analysis technique, and research procedure.

A. Research Method

This study is conducted to find the answer to two formulated problems. The first one is to see whether there is coherence between learning objectives and learning activities designed by microteaching students of the English Language Education Study Program. The second one is to see the problems that might occur in the design of coherent learning objectives and learning activities. For the objectives of the study, the researcher conducted a document analysis on microteaching students’ lesson plans which were designed before they had their teaching practice in class in order to answer those problem formulations. According to Best (1977), “Document analysis deals with the systematic examination of current records or document as sources of data” (p.129). In this study, the kind of document which was going to be analyzed, was microteaching students’ lesson plans.

The result of this research would be in form of descriptive explanation since it was qualitative research. It means that the researcher analyzed the document and made the interpretation of it. As stated by Ary, Jacobs, & Razavieh

(40)

(2002), “the goal of qualitative research is to get a description and to gain depth understanding of some groups or some phenomena” (p.25). In this study, the description would be about the ability of microteaching students of the English Language Education Study Program Sanata Dharma University, as the group represented, in designing coherent learning objectives and learning activities.

To determine the number of lesson plans that had coherent learning objectives and learning activities and to see the percentage of the problems that occurred in the design of coherent learning objectives and learning activities, the researcher should employ quantitative research. It deals with numeric data. According to Ary, Jacobs, & Razavieh (2002),” quantitative research uses objective measurement and statistical analysis of numeric data to understand and explain phenomena. In this study, the quantitative data is derived from the quantification of the assessment result toward the lesson plans.

B. Research Setting

This study was conducted in Sanata Dharma University in February until April 2012. It was in accordance with the availability of microteaching class which was offered in the even semester.

C. Research Participants

There were seven participants from seven microteaching classes in this research. One student would represent each class. They were sixth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma

(41)

University of the academic year 2009. This number of participants would be the representative of microteaching students’ ability in designing coherent learning objectives and learning activities. As what Ary, Jacobs, & Razavieh (2002) explained that qualitative research tried to obtain sample of observations which believed to be sufficient to provide data and understanding on what the researcher was going to study. In other words, the result of the research conducted would be the representative of the group (p.428).

Microteaching students were required to design a lesson plan first before implementing the teaching practice in microteaching class. In this study, the participants involved should be the one who designed lesson plan for the aim of teaching writing skills. There were around four of five students who did that for each class. For two classes, the researcher got the lesson plans from the lecturers. For other classes, the researcher got the lesson plans directly from the students. The lesson plan that presented the most complete elements and clear instructions would be the main data of this research and be the representative of each class.

There were other considerations for choosing the participants. Microteaching students had taken some compulsory courses such as Instructional Design course, Language Learning Assessment course, and also Curriculum Material and Development course in the previous semester which became their models in designing a good lesson plan before they came to the microteaching class. In other words, they have already gained and understood the theory or principle of designing a lesson plan. The next consideration was that sixth semester students were also prepared to face Program Pengalaman Lapangan in

(42)

the following semester. It was important for them to be able to design the coherent learning objectives and learning activities so that later they would be successful in teaching their students.

D. Research Instruments

To collect the data and find the answer to the formulated problems, the researcher used three research instruments as follows:

1. Participants’ lesson plans

These were the main materials which the researcher was going to analyze in order to answer the problem formulations. The lesson plans needed were the one that aimed at teaching writing skills. The researcher would focus mainly on the learning objectives and learning activities written in the lesson plan. The coherence of those two would be the result of the study. This instrument would provide the qualitative data.

2. Checklist

According to Mertler (2009), the content of checklist is list of characteristics the researcher wants to investigate. It enables the researcher to indicate simply whether the characteristics listed are presented or not. In this study, checklist was used to find the percentage of the problems that occurred in the design of coherent learning objectives and learning activities. The content of the checklist was depending on the problems that occurred. This instrument would provide the quantitative data.

(43)

After the lesson plan was analyzed, the researcher conducted an interview. According to Best (1981), interview is just like oral questionnaire. However, by conducting the interview the interviewer could clarify the questions if there was misinterpretation and clarify the verbal information given by the interviewee (p. 165). In this study, the aim of conducting the interview was to confirm the researcher’s understanding about the lesson plan with the participant as the writer. Therefore, the interview questions depended on what information the researcher wanted to know more, dealing with the design of learning activities and the formulation of the objectives. All of the questions delivered were open ended. The result would be recorded by note taking and using recorder. This instrument would provide the qualitative data.

E. Data Gathering Technique

The data gathered in this study was microteaching students’ lesson plan. In microteaching class, the students would have two chances to practice their teaching practice. It meant that the students were also required to make two lesson plans as their guidance before they practice their teaching.

In order to answer the research questions, the researcher would use the first lesson plan which was designed by the students for their first teaching practice. The consideration was that the students still remembered the theory of designing a lesson plan which they learned in the previous semester so that the lesson plan designed was expected to be better. To limit the study, the researcher would use the lesson plans which were designed to teach writing skills.

(44)

To obtain the data, the researcher asked permission from the microteaching lecturer first to conduct document analysis on students’ lesson plans. Then, the researcher would collect the students’ lesson plans. After obtaining the data of the research, the researcher would read carefully the lesson plans to see the whole teaching planning. Since this study was mainly to see the coherence of learning objectives and learning activities designed by the students, the researcher would pay attention more on those two aspects.

F. Data Analysis Technique

The researcher would see the detailed activities one by one and then classified them based on the list of the learning objectives. Here, the researcher tried to think and interpret the goal of each activity first. Then, the researcher would again look back to the learning objectives to see whether that activity met one of the objectives listed or not. To confirm the result of the analysis, the researcher would conduct the interview.

According to Kemp (1977), “there is no formula for matching activities to objectives” (p.56). It was because different situations would require different needs. Therefore, the researcher would determine the coherence of both based on the researcher’s observation which later would be confirmed trough the interview.

To answer the first research question, the researcher would see the formulation of learning objectives first; whether it had been derived from the basic competence and had fulfilled the criteria of clearly learning objective proposed by Pasch et al. (1991). Then, the design of learning activities would be

(45)

seen whether it had applied the principles of designing learning activities as proposed by Pasch et al. (1991). The researcher also used the theory of Bloom Taxonomy which would help the researcher identify the students’ performance which should be reflected later in students learning activities.

After analyzing the formulation of learning objectives and the design of learning activities, the researcher would come to the conclusion about the coherence of learning objectives and learning activities. If all of the learning objectives formulated have been reflected both the performance behavior and the level of learning in the design of learning activities, it meant that the student has designed coherent learning objectives and learning activities. In contrast, if there was learning objective which were not reflected in the design of learning activities, it meant that microteaching students failed to design coherent learning objectives and learning activities.

To answer the second research question, the researcher would study deeper the formulation of learning objectives and the design of learning activities written in lesson plans. The researcher used the checklist to determine the problems found in every lesson plan. The lesson plan would be analyzed whether it has fulfilled every criterion or not. If the lesson plan did not fulfill the criteria written in the checklist, it would be considered that the lesson plan was in trouble. Then, total number of every problem would be counted in percentage using the formulation as follows:

(46)

a: number of lesson plans which did not fulfill the criterion b: total number of lesson plans

G. Research Procedure

In order to achieve the objectives of this study, the researcher needed to follow some steps.

1. Reviewing related literature

The researcher tried to find some books which were related to the study being conducted in order to get deeper understanding on the role of lesson planning, especially learning objectives and learning activities.

2. Asking permission from microteaching lecturer

The researcher asked for permission from the microteaching lecturer to know the possibility of doing a document analysis research on students’ lesson plan in his/her class.

3. Collecting the data

The researcher also asked for permission from the microteaching students academic year 2009 of the English Language Education Study Program Sanata Dharma University who designed lesson plan for the aim of teaching writing skill to conduct research from their document, which was lesson plan. Then, the researcher started to collect the lesson plan from them.

(47)

After the data have been gathered, the researcher would analyze the data by classifying the learning activities based on the objectives. The researcher made a table to list the objectives and put the activities where they belonged. 5. Interview

The researcher conducted an interview to make a confirmation about the analysis.

6. Interpret the result

From the analysis of the data and the interview conducted, the researcher tried to interpret the result of the learning activities design whether it was coherent to the learning objectives or not.

(48)

CHAPTER IV

RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter presents the findings of the research questions. It deals with the coherence of learning objectives and learning activities designed by microteaching students and the lesson plans occurred in that design.

A. General Description of Microteaching Students’ Lesson Plans

All of the lesson plans focused on teaching writing skills. The topics were varied, such as recount, narrative, and procedure. Here, writing performance used by the participants was in the responsive category. Most of them often focused on the generic structure and the process of producing a piece of writing. As written by Brown (2004), in the responsive category, the writer should consider more on the context and meaning. How the writer could connect sentences to create a paragraph and how they create logically sequence of paragraphs into writing product. In this category, the writer should have mastered the sentence-level grammar before performing the responsive writing.

As the criteria of designing assessment proposed by Brown (2004), responsive writing performance required the macro skills. The macro skills could be applied in the design of learning activities. In the lesson plans, the researcher found that microteaching students had designed the activities in which the students would experience the process of acquiring the generic structure and language feature of a text. Here, the macro skill implemented was dealing with the communicative functions, especially the function itself and the form. It also

(49)

conveyed the connection between events. Some designs of learning activities also developed the writing strategy through providing the feedback.

B. The Formulation of the Learning Objectives

Bloom (1964) has classified learning objectives in three domains which were cognitive, affective, and psychomotor. In designing a lesson plan, it was important to formulate learning objectives in all learning domains. The formulation of learning objectives should also be stated clearly. Pasch et al. (1991) had proposed the criteria of clearly stated learning objective in form of ABCD mnemonic aid. It explained that learning objectives should present the audience, the behavior, the condition and the degree of learning.

The data of this research were obtained from seven microteaching students year 2009. The researcher studied their lesson plans, especially the objectives listed and the learning activities designed to see the coherence of both. For further explanation, the researcher presented the discussion of each student’s lesson plan.

1. Lesson Plan 1

The competence standard of this lesson plan was “mengungkapkan makna dalam teks tulis fungsional pendek dan esei sederhana berbentuk recount,

narrative, dan procedure dalam konteks kehidupan sehari-hari.” Then, the basic

competence was “mengungkapkan makna dan langkah-langkah retorika secara akurat, lancar dan berterima dengan menggunakan ragam bahasa tulis dalam

(50)

From the competence standard and basic competence, the participant formulated seven learning objectives. The researcher found that the participant had classified the learning objectives into three domains which were cognitive, affective and psychomotor. In the cognitive domain, the participant had formulated one learning objective as the product of learning and two learning objectives as the process of learning. In the affective domain, the participant had formulated three learning objectives. Then, one learning objective was formulated from psychomotor domain

The formulation of learning objective as the product in cognitive domain was “diberikan waktu 10 menit, siswa mampu menulis teks recount sederhana berdasarkan pengalaman yang pernah dialami dengan baik.” This learning

objective was clearly stated since siswa as the audience, menulis teks recount

sederhana as the behavior, pengalaman yang pernah dialami as the condition and

dengan baik as the degree were presented there. It required the students to be able

to write recount text based on their experience in ten minutes. In Bloom Taxonomy, this learning objective was in the high level of thinking. Writing was included in the category of synthesis which was in the fifth level.

The first learning objective as the process in the cognitive domain was “diberikan beberapa paragraph acak, siswa mampu menyusun paragraf-paragraf acak yang diberikan guru menjadi sebuah cerita recount dengan urutan yang

benar.” It presented siswa as the audience, menyusun paragraf-paragraf acak

yang diberikan guru as the behavior, menjadi sebuah cerita recount as the

(51)

students were required to arrange jumble paragraphs. Arrange was included in the category of knowledge, which was in the first level of the taxonomy. Then, the participant wrote “diberikan sebuah cerita recount, siswa mampu menentukan

generic structure dari cerita recount yang disusun dengan benar” as the second formulation of learning objectives. It had also fulfilled the criteria of clearly stated learning objective since it presented the audience which was siswa, the behavior which was menentukan generic structure dari cerita recount yang disusun, the condition which was diberikan sebuah cerita recount and the degree which was

dengan benar. This learning objective required the students to determine the

generic structure of recount text paragraphs. Determine also means identify. This learning objective was in the second level of taxonomy, which was comprehension.

In the affective domain, the participant formulated three learning

objectives. They are (1) “diberikan kesempatan untuk mendengarkan penjelasan guru, siswa mampu menghargai guru saat memberikan penjelasan dengan

seksama”, (2)“diberikan kesempatan untuk mengerjakan soal secara berkelompok, siswa mampu bekerja dengan anggota kelompoknya dengan baik”, and (3) “diberikan kesempatan untuk menanggapi tulisan siswa lain, siswa mampu memberikan tanggapan terhadap terhadap tulisan siswa lain dengan

seksama.” It meant that the students were required to respect their teacher, to cooperate with their friends and to respond to their friends’ writing. All of those learning objectives presented the audience, behavior, condition and degree of learning. The audience was siswa. Then, the behavior was different for each

(52)

learning objective. It were menghargai guru saat memberikan penjelasan for the first one, bekerja dengan anggota kelompoknya for the second one and

memberikan tanggapan terhadap terhadap tulisan siswa lain for the third

formulation of learning objective. The condition of learning was also different for each of the learning objective. They are diberikan kesempatan untuk

mendengarkan penjelasan guru, diberikan kesempatan untuk mengerjakan soal

secara berkelompok and diberikan kesempatan untuk menanggapi tulisan siswa

lain for the first, second, and third learning objectives. For the degree, the

participant wrote dengan seksama for the first and third learning objectives, and

dengan baik for the second one. Therefore, the learning objective formulated in

the affective domain had fulfilled the criteria of clearly stated learning objective. The last learning objective was in the psychomotor domain. The formulation “diberikan waktu 15 menit untuk menulis, siswa mampu menulis teks

recount secara sistematis” was clearly stated. It presented siswa as the audience, menulis teks recount as the behavior, diberikan waktu 15 menit untuk menulis as

the condition, and secara sistematis as the degree. It meant that the students should be able to write a recount text systematically. This learning objective was also included in the cognitive domain. It was clear since writing required bodily movement as what should be as psychomotor domain and level of thinking as what should be as cognitive domain. However, the formulation of this learning objective was not appropriate with learning objective formulated in the cognitive domain. Those two learning objectives required the students to be able to write recount text. However, the condition of time given was different. In the cognitive

(53)

domain, the participant wrote diberikan waktu 10 menit when in the psychomotor domain, the participant wrote diberikan waktu 15 menit. It would be a problem since a lesson plan should help the teacher to manage the time. This case could create misunderstanding for those who applied this lesson plan. When the researcher confirmed about this case, the participant directly laughed and said that the condition of time given should be 10 minutes.

2. Lesson plan 2

The competence standard was “mengungkapkan makna dalam teks tulis fungsional pendek dan esei sederhana berbentuk recount, narrative, dan procedure

dalam konteks kehidupan sehari-hari.” The basic competence was “mengungkapkan makna dan langkah-langkah retorika secara akurat, lancar dan berterima dengan menggunakan ragam bahasa tulis dalam konteks kehidupan

sehari-hari dalam teks berbentuk: procedure”.

The participant formulated three learning objectives based on the competence standard and basic competence. All of them were included in both cognitive and psychomotor domain. The first learning objective was “diberikan sebuah teks cohntoh berbentuk procedure, siswa mampu mengidentifikasi generic

structure yang terdapat pada teks tersebut”. The second learning objective was

“diberikan sebuah teks contoh berbentuk procedure, siswa mampu mengidentifikasi fitur bahasa yang terdapat pada teks tersebut”. The last one was “diberikan sebuah teks contoh berbentuk procedure, siswa mampu menulis sebuah teks baru berbentuk procedure”. Those three learning objectives did not fulfill the criteria of clearly stated learning objectives since the degree was not presented

(54)

there. It only presented the audience, behavior and condition of learning. The audience was siswa for all of those three learning objectives. The behavior was different for each learning objective. They were mengidentifikasi generic structure

yang terdapat pada teks, mengidentifikasi fitur bahasa yang terdapat pada teks,

menulis sebuah teks baru berbentuk procedure for the first, second and third

learning objectives. For the condition of learning, the participant wrote diberikan

sebuah teks contoh berbentuk procedure for all the three learning objectives.

From the behavior presented, the first and second learning objectives required the students to identify. Identify was included in the level of comprehension so that it was in the second level of taxonomy. Then, the last learning objective required the students to write. In Bloom Taxonomy, this learning objective was in the high level of thinking. Writing was included in the category of synthesis which was in the level 5.

3. Lesson plan 3

The competence standard of this lesson plan was “mengungkapkan makna dalam teks tulis fungsional pendek dan esei sederhana berbentuk recount,

narrative, dan procedure dalam konteks kehidupan sehari-hari”. Then, the basic

competence was “mengungkapkan makna dan langkah-langkah retorika secara akurat, lancar dan berterima dengan menggunakan ragam bahasa tulis dalam

konteks kehidupan sehari-hari dalam teks berbentuk: recount”.

From that competence standard and basic competence, the participants formulated two learning objectives. The first one was “after the meeting, students are able to complete a mind map based on the clues given correctly”. Then, the

(1)

5. Lesson Plan 5 Learning Objectives Cognitive:

1. Students are able to identify the function of recount text.

2. Students are able to identify the generic structure of recount text. 3. Students are able to mention the topic of recount text.

4. Students are able to use the language feature.

5. Students are able to make a text based on certain picture which is provided using recount text.

Affective

1. Students are able to mention the certain values of the recount text. 2. Students are able to respond their teacher’s explanation.

3. Students are able to cooperate in pairs. Psycomotoric

1. Students are able to make a recount text in good order. Learning Activites

Pre – Activity

1. Greeting & Pray

2. Teacher provides opening question about students’ activity in the weekend 3. Teacher explain the recount text

4. Teacher answers students’ answer Whilst Activity

1. Teacher gives a worksheet 1 (find a lose paragraph) in a group of 4

2. Teacher asks students to explain the generic structure of their story in worksheet 1

3. Teacher provides some pictures, asks each student to choose 1 picture as their recount topic’s writing

4. Teacher gives a worksheet 2 (recount prepare sheet), asks students to fill it 5. Teacher asks students to write the flow writing based on their recount

prepare sheet

6. Teacher asks students to work in pairs, switch their work to their partner, gives assessment sheet & asks students to assess their partner work

7. Teacher asks students to write a value based on their writing Post Activity

1. Teacher & students summarize the materials that have learned 2. Teacher gives a reflection based on students’ writing

(2)

Activities and Learning Objectives Learning Objectives

1. The learning objectives cover the three domains (cognitive, affective, psychomotor)

√ 2. The learning objectives fulfilled the

criteria of clearly stated learning objectives proposed by Pasch et al. (1991).

The participant did not write the condition and degree of learning.

3. The learning objectives derived from the competence standard

√ Learning activities

1. Clear instructions of the learning activities

√ 2. The design of learning activities

fulfills the congruence principle

√ 3. The design of learning activities

fulfills the organization principle

√ 4. The design of learning activities

fulfills the variety principle

√ 5. The design of learning activities

fulfills the active processing principle

√ 6. The design of learning activities

fulfills the experienced based learning principle

√ 7. The design of learning activities

fulfill the higher level of thinking principle

√ √: the presence of the criteria

(3)

6. Lesson Plan 6 Learning Objectives

1. Siswa menghasilkan sebuah teks berbentuk recount

2. Diberikan sebuah teks berisi recount, siswa mampu mengidentifikasi struktur umum dari sebuah teks berbentuk recount

3. Diberikan sebuah teks berisi recount, siswa mampu mengidentifikasi fitur bahasadari sebuah teks berbentuk recount

Learning Activities Kegiatan awal:

1. Siswa menjawab sapaan guru 2. Siswa menjawab pertanyaan guru

How’s your day? Kegiatan inti:

1. Siswa mengidentifikasi struktur umum dan fitur bahasa dari sebuah teks berbentuk recount yang diberikan guru (Aktivitas 1)

2. Siswa menghasilkan sebuah teks berbentuk recount (Aktivitas 2) Kegiatan penutup

1. Siswa menjawab pertanyaan berkaitan dengan teks berbentuk recount What have we learnt about recount text?

No The Coherence of Learning Activities and Learning Objectives

Comment Learning Objectives

1. The learning objectives cover the three domains (cognitive, affective, psychomotor)

The participant did not write learning objectives in affective domain

2. The learning objectives fulfilled the criteria of clearly stated learning objectives proposed by Pasch et al. (1991).

The participant did not write the condition and degree of learning

3. The learning objectives derived from the competence standard

√ Learning activities

1. Clear instructions of the learning activities

The participant did not write some activities done in class in the lesson plan

2. The design of learning activities fulfills the congruence principle

√ 3. The design of learning activities

fulfills the organization principle

The participant did not design any warming up activities to lead and help the students focus to the learning material

(4)

fulfills the variety principle

5. The design of learning activities fulfills the active processing principle

√ 6.

The design of learning activities fulfills the experienced based learning principle

√ 7. The design of learning activities

fulfill the higher level of thinking principle

√ √: the presence of the criteria

(5)

7. Lesson Plan 7 Learning objectives

1. Diberikan contoh dan materi siswa mampu membuat teks procedure dengan mekanisme yang benar.

Learning activities Pendahuluan :

1. Guru menyapa siswa, lalu memberi pertanyaan warming up : Have you ever drunk a glass of chocolate milk?

Do you know the steps how to make a glass of chocolate milk? Kegiatan Inti :

1. Guru menjelaskan procedure text menggunakan PowerPoint.

2. Guru menanyakan pertanyaan yang berkaitan dengan procedure text. 3. Guru memberikan handout “contoh procedure text”.

4. Guru membagi siswa menjadi 3 kelompok.

5. Guru membagikan realia dan meminta siswa untuk menuliskan imperatives sentence pada kertas yang telah disediakan.

6. Guru meminta siswa untuk membuat procedure text sederhana dalam kelompok berdasarkan realia yang sudah ditentukan.

7. Guru memberikan feedback. Penutup :

1. Guru mereview kegiatan yang telah dilakukan selama pertemuan.

2. Guru memberikan pekerjaan rumah untuk mencari contoh otentik procedure text.

No The Coherence of Learning Activities and Learning Objectives

Comment Learning Objectives

1. The learning objectives cover the three domains (cognitive, affective, psychomotor)

The participant did not formulate learning objective in affective domain

2. The learning objectives fulfilled the criteria of clearly stated learning objectives proposed by Pasch et al. (1991).

√

3. The learning objectives derived from the competence standard

√ Learning activities

1. Clear instructions of the learning activities

√ 2. The design of learning activities

fulfills the congruence principle

√ 3. The design of learning activities

fulfills the organization principle

(6)

fulfills the variety principle

5. The design of learning activities fulfills the active processing principle

√ 6. The design of learning activities

fulfills the experienced based learning principle

√ 7. The design of learning activities

fulfill the higher level of thinking principle

√ √: the presence of the criteria

A study on microteaching students` ability in designing coherent learning objectives and learning activities.

A STUDY ON MICROTEACHING STUDENTS

’

ABILITY IN

DESIGNING COHERENT LEARNING OBJECTIVES AND

LEARNING ACTIVITIES

A STUDY ON MICROTEACHING STUDENTS’ ABILITY IN

DESIGNING COHERENT LEARNING OBJECTIVES AND

LEARNING ACTIVITIES

“Be of good cheer. Do not think of today's failures, but of the success that may

come tomorrow. You have set yourselves a difficult task, but you will succeed if

you persevere; and you will find a joy in overcoming obstacles. Remember, no

effort that we make to attain something beautiful is ever lost.”

Parts

Dokumen yang terkait

Improving Students' Ability in Using Conditional Sentence Type 2 Through Contextual Teaching and Learning

The Effectiveness of Collaborative Learning in Improving Students’ Abililty in Reading Descriptive Text (A Pre-Experimental Study of the Seventh Grade Students of SMP Pelita Harapan, South Jakarta).

A Framework On Collaborative Learning Activities To Actively Engage Students In Learning Management System.

DESIGNING TEACHING LEARNING ACTIVITIES FOR WRITING SPOOF TEXT BASED ON STUDENTS PROBLEM.

THE EFFECT OF CONTETUAL TEACHING AND LEARNING ON STUDENTS’ ABILITY IN LEARNING ENGLISH.

The use of video materials in grade IX students learning activities of SMP Pangudi Luhur Sedayu : a study on students perceptions.

The mastery of microteaching class students in formulating learning objectives in lesson plans.

A STUDY ON " USING COOPERATIVE LEARNING TO IMPROVE THE SPEAKING ABILITY OF SMP STUDENTS IN EXTRA· CURRICULAR"

STUDENTS’ LEARNING STRATEGIES AND ABILITY IN WRITING: A STUDY AT XI IPA MAN GERUNG IN ACADEMIC YEAR 20172018

A study on microteaching students` ability in designing coherent learning objectives and learning activities - USD Repository

Dukungan

Links

A study on microteaching students` ability in designing coherent learning objectives and learning activities.

A STUDY ON MICROTEACHING STUDENTS

’

ABILITY IN

DESIGNING COHERENT LEARNING OBJECTIVES AND

LEARNING ACTIVITIES

A STUDY ON MICROTEACHING STUDENTS’ ABILITY IN

DESIGNING COHERENT LEARNING OBJECTIVES AND

LEARNING ACTIVITIES

“Be of good cheer. Do not think of today's failures, but of the success that may

come tomorrow. You have set yourselves a difficult task, but you will succeed if

you persevere; and you will find a joy in overcoming obstacles. Remember, no

effort that we make to attain something beautiful is ever lost.”

Parts

Dokumen yang terkait

Improving Students' Ability in Using Conditional Sentence Type 2 Through Contextual Teaching and Learning

The Effectiveness of Collaborative Learning in Improving Students’ Abililty in Reading Descriptive Text (A Pre-Experimental Study of the Seventh Grade Students of SMP Pelita Harapan, South Jakarta).

A Framework On Collaborative Learning Activities To Actively Engage Students In Learning Management System.

DESIGNING TEACHING LEARNING ACTIVITIES FOR WRITING SPOOF TEXT BASED ON STUDENTS PROBLEM.

THE EFFECT OF CONTETUAL TEACHING AND LEARNING ON STUDENTS’ ABILITY IN LEARNING ENGLISH.

The use of video materials in grade IX students learning activities of SMP Pangudi Luhur Sedayu : a study on students perceptions.

The mastery of microteaching class students in formulating learning objectives in lesson plans.

A STUDY ON " USING COOPERATIVE LEARNING TO IMPROVE THE SPEAKING ABILITY OF SMP STUDENTS IN EXTRA· CURRICULAR"

STUDENTS’ LEARNING STRATEGIES AND ABILITY IN WRITING: A STUDY AT XI IPA MAN GERUNG IN ACADEMIC YEAR 20172018

A study on microteaching students` ability in designing coherent learning objectives and learning activities - USD Repository

Dokumen yang Anda mencari sudah siap untuk unduhkan