STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION ON THE USE OF ENGLISH AS A MEDIUM OF INSTRUCTION: A Case Study at One of Public Senior High Schools in Tanjungpandan Belitung.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
APPROVAL ……….. i
BOARD OF EXAMINERS ……… ii
DECLARATION ……….. iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... iv
ABSTRACT ……… v
TABLE OF CONTENTS ….……….. vi
LIST OF TABLES ………. viii
LIST OF APPENDICES ……… x
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background ..………. 1
1.2 Research Questions ………....………. 4
1.3 The Purposes of the Research ………... 4
1.4 The Scope of the Research ……..…..……… 4
1.5 The Significance of the Research .……… 5
CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Introduction ……….. 6
2.2 The Importance of Using English As a Medium of Instruction ……….. 6
2.3 The Criticisms of Using English only in EFL Context ………. 9
2.4 The Concept of Perception………… ……… 11
2.5 The Aspect and Process of Perception ……….. 13
2.6 The Role of Context in Perception ……… 15
2.7 The Factors that can Influence Someone’s Perception ………. 16
CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY 3.1 Introduction ……….. 18
3.2 Research Design ……….. 18
3.3 Setting ………. 19
3.4 Participants ………... 20
3.5 Data Collection ………. 21
3.5.1 Interview ………... 21
3.5.2 Students’ Journal ……….. 23
(2)
as a Medium of Instruction (Group 1) ……….. 31
4.1.1.2 Students’ Perception on the Use of English as a Medium of Instruction (Group 2) ………... 42
4.1.2 The Influence of Using English as a Medium of Interaction Based on Students’ Interview Results ………. 51
4.1.2.1 The Influence of Using English as a Medium of Instruction to Classroom Interaction (Group 1) …………. 52
4.1.2.2 The Influence of Using English as a Medium of Instruction to Classroom Interaction (Group 2) …………. 60
4.1.2.3 Classroom Interaction Based on Teachers’ Interview Results ……….………. 67
4.2. Data from Student’ Journal ……… 71
4.2.1 Students’ Perception on the Use of English as a Medium of Instruction (Group 1) ……….………….. 72
4.2.2 Students’ Perception on the Use of English as a Medium of Instruction (Group 2) ..………. 78
4.3 Data from Classroom Observation ……….. 83
4.3.1 The Classroom Interaction of Group 1 ……….. 83
4.3.2 The Classroom Interaction of Group 2 ……….. 91
4.4 The Integrative Data Presentation ………. 97
4.4.1 Students’ Perception on the Use of English as a Medium of Instruction ……… 98
4.4.2 The Influence of the Use of English as a Medium of Instruction to the Classroom Interaction ………..………. 102
4.4.3 Synthesis of Perception and Interaction ………..………. 107
CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS 5.1 Conclusions ………. 109
5.2 Suggestions ………. 111
BIBLIOGRAPHY ……….. 113
APPENDICES………. 118
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1 The Students Total Number in Each Class ……… 20Table 4.1 The Language Used by the Teachers as a Medium of Instruction … 29 Table 4.2 The Language Used by the Teachers as a Medium of Instruction Based on Students’ Interviews and Classroom Observations Data… 30 Table 4.3 Students’ Perception on the Use of English as a Medium of Instruction Based on Interview Results (Group 1) ……… 40
Table 4.4 Students’ Perception on Each Aspect Based on Interview Results (Group 1)……… 41
Table 4.5 Students’ Perception on the Use of English as a Medium of Instruction Based on Interview Results (Group 2)……… 43
Table 4.6 Students’ Perception on Each Aspect Based on Interview Results (Group 2)………. 44
(3)
of Interaction to the Classroom Interaction
Based on Interview Results of Group 1 ……….. 53 Table 4.8 The Influence of the Use of English as a Medium of
Interaction to the Classroom Interaction Based on
Classroom Observation in Group 1 ………. 58 Table 4.9 The Influence of the Use of English as a Medium of
Interaction to the Classroom Interaction Based on
Interview Results of Group 2 ……….. 61 Table 4.10 The Influence of the Use of English as a Medium of
Interaction to the Classroom Interaction Based on
Classroom Observation in Group 2 ……….. 65 Table 4.11 The Number of English Extra Lesson Taken
by Students in Each Group ……….. 68 Table 4.12 Students’ Perception Categories Based on
Students’ Journal Analysis of Group 1 ……… 78 Table 4.13 Students’ Perception Categories Based on
Students’ Journal Analysis of Group 2 ………. 82 Table 4.14 The Language Used by the English Teacher During
Classroom Observation (Group 1) ……… 84 Table 4.15 The Language Used by the English Teacher During
Classroom Observation (Group 2) ……… 88 Table 4.16 The Students’ Perception on the Use of English
as a Medium of Instruction Based on Interview
and Journal Analyses Result ……… 94 Table 4.17 The Students’ Perception on the Use of English
as a Medium of Instruction Results in Accordance
with the Aspects of Perception ……… 95 Table 4.18 Classroom Interaction of Students who have Positive
Perception on the Use of English as a Medium of Instruction …… 97 Table 4.19 Classroom Interaction of Students who have Positive
(4)
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A Pertanyaan-Pertanyaan untuk Siswa ….……… 118
Appendix B Pertanyaan-Pertanyaan untuk Siswa ….……… 122
Appendix C Format of Journal Writing ……… 124
Appendix D Classroom Observation Sheet ……….. 125
Appendix E The Language Used by English Teachers as a Medium Of Instruction in the Classroom Based on Students’ Interview Results ………. 127
Appendix F The Students’ Perception Based on Students’ Interview Results (Group 1) ………. 129
Appendix G The Students’ Perception Based on Students’ Interview Results (Group 2) ………. 131
Appendix H The Students’ Statements about the Influence of the Use of English as a Medium of Instruction to the Classroom Interaction Based on Students’ Interview (Group 1) ……… 133
Appendix I The Students’ Statements about the Influence of the Use of English as a Medium of Instruction to the Classroom Interaction Based on Students’ Interview (Group 2) ……… 136
Appendix J Students’ Perception on the Use of English as a Medium of Instruction Based on Journal Writing (Group 1)……….. 139
Appendix K Students’ Perception on the Use of English as a Medium of Instruction Based on Journal Writing (Group 2)……….. 143
Appendix L Classroom Observation Notes (Group 1) ………. 147
Appendix M Classroom Observation Notes (Group 2) ………. 153
Appendix N The Interview with the Teacher of Group 1 ………. 158
(5)
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Background
The teaching and learning of English in Indonesia has been the center of attention among researchers because of the burning issues, such as the lack of English exposure, that require solutions. One of the problems is lack of English exposure in the society. English has been taught as a foreign language subject in any educational levels in Indonesia. Musthafa (2005: 2) mentions that in learning Indonesian language and regional languages, Indonesian students are exposed naturally to the language since it is used in their social environment. The problem appears when they learn English because of the low intensity of exposure of it in society. This argument is in accordance with what Hariyanto (1997: 111) said that some students are successful in speaking English when they are still going to school. Then, when they have graduated, the ability soon vanishes as they hardly get exposures to English. Dubin and Olsbtain (1987: 30) say that in a natural setting, teachers usually are native speakers or near-native speakers of the language and can cope with various
(6)
decision-use the target language as much as possible. In this case, classroom is an appropriate place for them to use the target language. The lack of English exposure for students can be minimized since they are actively involved in the process of teaching and learning in the classroom.
In relation to the use of English in the classroom, Nunan (1999: 87) says that students in foreign language classrooms are rarely encouraged to make use of their language skills in the real world. The only practice they have is in class. This, of course, is not surprising in foreign language contexts in which opportunities to use the language is limited. His statement indicates that teacher, as a language model, should expose English as much as possible. Therefore, the students have a great opportunity to imitate and mime (see Broughton, et al.: 1980) and finally they can produce English as the target language being taught in a classroom.
The above statement is related to what Brown (1980: 61) says that teachers might do well to be as deliberate, but meaningful, in his communication with students as the parent is to the child, since input is as important to the ESL/EFL learner as it is to the first language learner. Moreover, that input should also foster meaningful communication. Furthermore, Harmer (2002: 67) also explains that when teachers use their voice to produce language, it means that they have modeled the language. This thing is a basic and important teaching skill that may influence students’ ability and achievement in English.
In accordance with all the arguments above, a big question on students’ perception then appears. Although the teachers of English produce the target
(7)
language in classrooms a lot, it means nothing if the students have negative perception on it. As Brown (1984: 9) mentions that a strategy used by a teacher in teaching will build students’ perception on the subject, strategy and the teacher. Related to Brown argument, Harmer (2002: 128) writes that students generally respect teachers who show their knowledge of the subject. A teacher who uses English as a medium of instruction while teaching English shows that he or she is professional and has a good knowledge in the subject being taught. Meanwhile, Richards et al. (1992: 268-269) describe that perception is the recognition and understanding of events, objects, and stimuli by sense (sight, hearing, tough, etc.). Moreover, Baron (1995: 90) mentions that perception is the process through selecting, organizing, and interpreting input from our sensory receptors.
Finally, in implementing their knowledge to their students, teachers have their own style. Based on the informal interview with the headmaster of one public senior high school and some students there, it was concluded that some teachers tended to use English as a medium of instruction while others used Indonesian.
Based on the above explanation, this study were concerned with the students’ perception on the use of English as a medium of instruction used by the English teachers in the classrooms and its influences to the classroom interaction.
(8)
1.2 Research Questions
In line with the above background, this research attempts to address the following question:
a. What are the students’ perceptions on the use of English as a medium of instruction by their teacher in the classroom?
b. Does the use of English as a medium of instruction influence the classroom interactions?
1.3
The Purposes of the Research
In accordance with the research questions above, the purposes of this research are:
a. to investigate the students’ perceptions on the use of English as a medium of instruction by their teacher in the classroom.
b. to identify whether the use of English as a medium of instruction influence classroom interaction.
1.4
The Scope of the Research
Related to the research questions and the purposes of them, this study was supposed to find out the students’ perception on the use of English as a medium of instruction by their teacher in the classroom, and the influences of using English as a medium of instruction to classroom interactions.
(9)
1.5
The Significance of the Research
The findings of this thesis are expected to be able to:
1. Share good inputs to English teachers about the students’ perception on the use of English as a medium of instruction while teaching English in the classroom run and its influences to the classroom interaction.
2. Contribute valuable information to local government, especially in Tanjungpandan Belitung, to improve the English teachers’ ability by giving them many chances to continue their study to higher educational institutions.
3. Give some additional information to anyone who is interested in investigating the same area of study.
(10)
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
3.1
Introduction
Some theories related to this research, including the importance of using English, criticism of using English only in EFL contexts, the concept of perception, the aspects and process of perception, the role of context in perception, and the factor that can influence someone’s perception, have been discussed in chapter two. This chapter will provide five main sections related to methodology of the research. Research design will be presented first, and then followed by setting, participants, data collection, and data analysis. Each section will be discussed in detail below.
3.2
Research Design
In relation to its nature, purposes and research questions, this research employed descriptive research design, embracing characteristics of a case study. A case study had been chosen for several reasons. First, the result of this study would not be attempted to generalize beyond the case (Stake, cited in Silverman, 2005). Then, the study was only focused on investigating the students’ perception on using English as a medium of instruction and its influence to classroom interaction at one public senior high school in Tanjungpandan Belitung. Second, this study employed “multiple source of evidence-converging from the same set of issues, which
(11)
constitutes the important aspect of a case study (Yin, 2003: 85). He also mentions that multiple data gatherings also intent to augment the construct validity of the study (Yin, 2003; Merriam, 1998; Travers, 2001).
The descriptive method was used to describe the data found during the research and then tabulated. This method seems suitable to present the fact found during the study and to interpret of how the facts related to the problem under investigation (read Gay, 1987). Nasir (1983) states that the characteristics of descriptive method are focused on the concentration how to solve the actual problems. The collected data of the research will be concluded in percentage. Then, the data will be analyzed and discussed in detail in order to answer the research questions.
3.3
Setting
The research was done at one public senior high school in Tanjungpandan Belitung at the academic year 2006-2007. There were two main reasons why this school was chosen. First, there are 13 high schools in Tanjungpandan. The school where the research was done is a favorite one. As a favorite school, the teachers’ approaches in teaching and learning process usually become models for teachers of
(12)
research was done from March 7 to March 27, 2007. The research has been done successfully as expected.
3.4
Participants
The participants of this research were the English teachers and the eleventh year students of science program of a public school in Tanjungpandan Belitung. To focus the research, purposive sampling was done. Purposive sampling allows us to choose a case because it illustrates some feature or process in which we are interesting (Silverman, 2005). 11 IPA 1 and 11 1PA 2 classes were taken as the samples. The detail information about the students’ number of these classes is presented in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1
The Students Total Number in Each Class
No Class Male Female Total 1 11 IPA 1 18 20 38 2 11 IPA 2 19 19 38
There are 76 students in the two classes and all of them were taken as the participants of this study. These classes had been chosen based on my informal interviewed with the headmaster and five students from each class. They mentioned that these two classes had different English teachers and different characteristic in teaching English. The teacher who teached 11 IPA 1 used English as a medium of
(13)
instruction dominantly during teaching English in the classroom, while the teacher who teached 11 IPA 2 tended to use Indonesian. The result of the informal interviews was also supported by the result on classroom observations.
3.5
Data Collection
Since the study employed a descriptive research design that used multiple technique of data collection, collecting data were done not only at the end of each session, but also in an ongoing way (Fraenkle and Wallen, 2000: 505). Interview, students’ journal and classroom observation were used in collecting the data of this research. Each technique will be mentioned in this session.
3.5.1 Interview
Interviews on the students were used as the one of the sources of data. Richards, et al. (1992: 189) mention that interview is a direct conversation between an investigator and an individual or group of individuals in order to gather information. Merriam (1998: 69) says that qualitative data consist of direct quotations from respondents about their experiences, opinions, feelings, and knowledge through interviews. Furthermore, Genesee (1996) mentions that by doing an interview, a
(14)
problems being investigated. Based on those theories, the leading interviews form was used to collect the data. According to Ridwan (2002: 29), leading interview is a kind of interview that the questions are given to respondents based on list of questions prepared by the researcher. The interviews (leading interviews) were done to get in-depth information from respondents.
All 38 students from each class were interviewed (leading interviews form) to investigate their perceptions on the use of English as a medium of instruction used by their English teacher and the influences of using English as a medium of instruction to the interaction in the classroom. The questions are provided in appendix A.
The questions were categorized into nine categories; students’ background, preferences, anticipate, hope, defense mechanisms, students’ needs, teachers’ professionalism, others’ influence, and context, in order to find the answer of the two research questions. To investigate the teachers’ point of view about the influence of the use of English as a medium of instruction in the classroom, they were interviewed by using the same type of interview (leading interview). The detail questions are in appendix B.
To get the validity of the interview questions, they were tried out to 10 students, who were not taken as the samples of the research, from the same school. This activity was also done to the interview questions that were given to the teachers. The pilot teacher was the respondents’ peer teacher. After analyzed the result of the try out, the complete interview questions were rearranged and used to interview the students and teachers who were included as the respondents of the research.
(15)
3.5.2 Students’ Writing Journal
To complete the data from interviews and observation, students’ journals were used as another instrument in this study. Genesee et al. (1996: 34) mention that journal has a number of important benefits. First, each student can write anything about his or her learning experiences. Second, students can openly express feeling about their teachers, classmates, and classroom activities. Third, writing a journal gives students opportunities to express themselves personally about their interests, goals, and desires using the second or foreign language. Based on those three benefits mentioned, the researcher concluded that writing journal is an appropriate technique to collect research data. As it was done to the interview questions, the guided questions that were used in journal writing were also tried out. These questions were given to other students from the same class level who were not taken as the respondents of this research. This activity was done to get the validity of the instrument. Then, the results from the try out were analyzed and developed to get the complete one.
In writing the journal, students were asked to write their own expression and opinion about the teaching and learning process that had been done by them at the end of one teaching and learning session. The researcher only asked each student to
(16)
the research. The detail information about the students’ journal instruction sheet is provided in appendix C.
3.5.3 Classroom Observation
Interviews are a primary source of data in qualitative research, and so are observations (Merriam, 1998; Silverman, 2005). Nunan (1989: 76) states that if we want to find out about classroom it is very important for us to do direct observation. He also says that if a researcher want to enrich his or her understanding about teaching and learning language, he or she needs to spend time looking in classroom. Since this research is trying to investigate the phenomenon of the use of English as a medium of instruction in the classroom, then doing classroom observation is appropriate.
In doing this research, observation were conducted for four meetings for each classroom. Each meeting was 90 minutes. Classroom observation were used to observe the tacit understanding and also see directly the interaction process between the English teachers and the students during teaching and learning process in the classroom (Alwasilah, 2003: 155). Merriam (1998: 69) adds that detailed descriptions of respondents’ activities, behaviors and actions will be recorded in observation.
To do an accurate classroom observation, the classroom interaction observation form developed by Allwright (1988: 54) was used. There are four advantages of using this observation form. First, the data collected is a
(17)
comprehensible one. The researcher can write all activities in a classroom, including verbal and nonverbal ones. By doing this, he or she can take tacit behavior of respondent. Second, teachers and students’ behavior in the classroom can be analyzed and used as a vital feedback for them. Third, using this classroom- interaction observation form is quite simple. The researcher may record teaching and learning activities by using recording tools, and then he or she can analyze them after the activities run. Fourth, the researcher can give the teachers or students questions related to the activities done in the classroom. These four advantages became the basic reasons why classroom interaction observation form develop by Allwright was chosen as the tool to analyze students perception on the use of English as a medium of instruction and its influences to the classroom interaction. The detail about this classroom-interaction observation form is provided in appendix D.
The notes of what was said by both the teacher and the students in the interactive setting (Yin, 2003: 92) were taken. To support the notes during observation, any words produced by the teachers and their interaction with their students while teaching and learning process run in the classroom was taken by using tape recorder. To get comprehensive data of classroom interaction, the writer asked his friend to record by using a camera.
(18)
3.6
Data Analysis
Data analyses in this study were conducted over the course of the research program and after the research program. Ongoing data analyses and interpretations were based on data mainly from observation. Furthermore, the data that were analyzed in the conclusion of the research were those obtained interviews and students’ writing journal.
The data from the interviews were transcribed and subsequently categorized and interpreted to answer the research questions. During the transcription stage, students’ names were replaced with symbols. The transcriptions in the first stage interview were confirmed to the participants to make sure that they were exactly what they said and meant. Kvale (1996: 161) mentions that this step aimed to give the participants an opportunity to reply whether they really meant what the researcher transcribed. Furthermore, to use the research time efficiently, the transcriptions of the second stage interview were not be sent back to the participant.
All interview data were analyzed in steps. The first one is to put interview questions into their categories. Then the data from the interviews were subsequently presented in a condensed body of information and interpretation (see Yin, 2003; Travers, 2001; Merriam, 1998). Finally, the data about students’ perceptions on the used of English as a medium of instruction were categories into positive and negative perception.
(19)
The data from students’ journal were used to investigate their direct expression of their feeling about teaching and learning process, their opinion about the teacher’s teaching performance, including the language he or she used. All the collected data from these journals were categorized based on the purposes of the research. Students’ feelings and opinions, which were reflected to the journals, then selected to be tabulated, based on its categories. Finally, these data were analyzed to support the finding in interviews and classroom observations.
Data from classroom observation were analyzed to find out the influences of the use of English as a medium of interaction to the classroom interactions. The finding data were also used to support the data from interview and students’ journal writing that investigate the students’ perception on the use of English as a medium of instruction. The data collected from the classroom observation were coded in the observational sheets. Then, information found during the observation were analyzed and interpreted in order to find the answers of research questions.
A data source triangulation (Alwasilah, 2003; Yin, 2003) which is usually used in case study, then made, to make a contrast and comparison off all the data obtained from different sources, i.e. documentary reviews, classroom observation, journal, questionnaires, and interviews. In this research, there were three sources;
(20)
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
5.1
Conclusions
This study was supposed to find out the students’ perception on the use of English as a medium of instruction by their teacher in the classroom, and the influences of using English as a medium of instruction to classroom interactions. From the results and findings in previous chapter, several conclusions can be drawn.
First, regarding students’ perception on the use of English as a medium of instruction, most students from both groups have positive perception. Based on data from students’ interview, 35 out of 38 (92.10%) students had positive perception. This data was supported by the journal data. The result was the same in that 35 out of 38 (92.10%) students had positive perception on the use of English as a medium of instruction. It indicated that only 3 students or 7.89% students in this group had negative perception. In-group 2, 32 out of 38 (84.21%) students had positive perception. The rest of it or 6 students (15.78%) had negative perception. The data from students’ journal showed that 32 out of 36 (two students were absent) or 88.88% students had positive perception on the use of English as a medium of instruction. Meanwhile, 4 students or 11.11% of them had negative perception.
Second, concerning the influences of the use of English to the classroom interaction, actually, both groups of students felt the same influences. The differences
(21)
occurred, because the language used as a medium of instruction in both groups was greatly different. The teacher in group1 used English dominantly. Meanwhile the English teacher in-group 2 used Indonesian dominantly as a medium of instruction in the classroom. This difference reflected to the classroom interactions.
Based on the classroom observation results, in-group 1, most students were active, serious, and enjoyable during teaching and learning process in the classroom. They also have highly appreciative to the teacher. This data was supported by findings from students’ interview that 35 out of 38 (92.10%) students felt positive influences on the use of English as a medium of instruction to the classroom interaction. Only 3 out of 38 (7.89%) students felt the negative influence. The data above was also in accordance with the results from teacher’s interview. She said that most of the students in her class were active and serious. They also appreciated her very much.
In-group 2, based on the data from classroom observation, the students were tended to be inactive, not serious, and not enjoyable during the teaching and learning process. They also have low appreciation to their English teacher. The English teacher interview result was also supported these data. Based on the interview result, he said that most students in his class were inactive and not serious in teaching
(22)
(84.21%) students would feel positive influences and 6 out of 38 (15.78%) students would feel negative influences.
Based on the conclusion above, the researcher can say two important things. First, although one may assume that the use of Indonesian will enhance the comprehension of the material, the result of the research shows a different fact: the students who study English in the class where English is used dominantly have better comprehension then the students who study in the class that Indonesian is used dominantly. It occurs because the use of Indonesian may decrease the challenge for students in studying English. As a result, they underestimate the English subject and the teachers, which may influence their comprehension on the material being studied. Second, knowing and fulfilling the students’ needs are very important for the teachers while teaching in the classroom. Challenges and opportunities to use English in the classroom are parts of the students’ needs. These may influence the classroom interaction and finally the students’ comprehension.
5.2
Suggestions
From the conclusions above, there are some suggestions that are noted. First, for the next study, it will be better if the study can be conducted with longer time in order to give contribution in another context. This study only took four times classroom observations in each class. Others phenomenon could be found if the classroom observations were done more than four meetings. In relation to the number
(23)
of classes involved in this study, it would be good if the class used as the samples were more than two. Therefore, the finding could be more various.
Second, related to the English teachers, it will be good for them to use English as a medium of instruction, because students need to be exposed to the target language as much as possible. By doing so, both the teachers and the students may practice their English in the classroom effectively.
Third, the teachers who have low English ability must improve it gradually. As teachers, they are models. To become good models, they should have good English competence and performance.
Fourth, the students need to study English well. They should not improve their English based on their teaching and learning time in the classroom only. They should study by themselves or with their group work. They can take an English extra lesson in order to accelerate their English improvement.
(24)
Bibliography
Alwasilah, A. C. (2003). Pokoknya Kualitatif. Jakarta: Pustaka Jaya. Allford, D. (1999). ‘Translation in the Communicative Classroom.’
In Pachler, N. (1999). (ed) Teaching Modern Foreign Languages
At Advanced Level. London: Routledge.
Allwright, D. (1988). Observation in the Language Classroom. London: Longman. Bamburg, J. D. (2000) Raising Expectations to Improve Student Learning.
http://greece.k12.ny.us/kr/Elearning/expectations1/2000/htm. Accessed on 10th October, 2006.
Baron, R. A. (1995). Psychology. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Broughton, G. (1980). Teaching English as a Foreign Language. Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd.
Brown, H. D. (1980). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching.
New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by Principles. An Interactive Approach to Language
Pedagogy. New York: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Brown, G. (1984). Microteaching. London: J.W. Arrowsmith Ltd, Bristol. Butler, Y. G. (2003). Korean elementary school teachers’ concerns towards
current English teaching practice: Competencies that they think they
“have” and “don’t’ have.
http://www.hiceducation.org/Edu_Proceedings/Pdf. Accessed on 10th October, 2006.
Cummins, J. and Swain, M. (1996). Bilingualism in Education: Aspects of theory,
research and practice. London: Longman.
Deckert, G. (2006). ‘The Communicative Approach: Addressing Frequent Failure.’
In English Teaching Forum on line. Vol 24.
http://www.exchanges.state.gov/forum/2006.html. Accessed on 20th September, 2006.
(25)
Dubin, F., and Olsbtain, E. (1987). Course Design; Developing Programs
and Materials for Language Learning. London: Cambridge
University Press.
Emilia, E. (2005). A Critical Genre-Based Approach to Teaching Academic
Writing in a Tertiary EFL Context in Indonesia. Unpublished Research
Melbourne: The University of Melbourne.
Fraenkle, J.R., and Wallen, N.E. (2000). How to Design and Evaluate
Research in Education. 4th edition. Boston: Mcgraw Hill.
Feldman, R. S. (1995). Elements of Psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc. Gazda, G. M., Frank, S. Asbury, Fred, J. Balzer, William, C. Childrs,
Richard, P. Walters. 1984. Development: A Manual for Educators
Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
Gazda, G. M., Frank, S. Asbury, Fred, J. Balzer, William, C. Childrs, Richard,P. Walters. (1984). Development: A Manual for Educators.
Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
Garner, W. R. (1969).’To Perceive is to know.’ , in Voices of Modern
Psychology: a collection of reading for introduction psychology .Aronson E.
(ed.). Philippines: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc.
Genesee, F. and John Upshur. (1996). Classroom-Based Evaluation in Second
Language Education. London : Cambridge University Press.
Gay, L. (1987). Educational Research (Competencies for Analysis and Education).
New York: Merrill Publishing Company.
Harianto, S. (1997). ‘Achieving a good communicative performance with
better grammatical mastery using bridge technique.’ In Sadtono, E. (1997). (Ed). The Development of TEFL in Indonesia. Malang: IKIP Malang.
(26)
Hybels, S. and Richard L. Weaver (2004). Self, Perception, and
Communication. http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/html
Accessed on 5th November, 2006.
Inamullah, M. (2005). Patterns of Classroom Interaction at Different Educational Levels in the Light of Flander’s Interaction Analysis.
http://eprints.hec.gov.pk/99/02/49.htm. Accessed on 9th February, 2007.
Jordaan, W. J., Jordaan, J. J., and Nieuwoudt, J. M. (1979). General Psychology: A Psychobiological Approach.
New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.
Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research
Interviewing. London: Sage Publications, Inc.
Matlin W. M. (2003). Cognition. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Musthafa, B. (2005). English for Young Learners (EYL). Unpublished
Module. Bandung: PPs UPI.
Merriam, S. (1998). Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in
Education. Revised and Expanded from: Case Study Research in
Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Meyers S. L., and Neal E. Grossen. (1974). Behaviour Research: theory,
procedure, and design. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman and Company.
Moore, A. (1999). Teaching Multicultured Students: Culturism and Anti-Culturism
In School Classroom. California: Mayfield Publishing Company.
Mussen P. (1973). Psychology: An Introduction. Toronto: D.C. Health and Company. Mussen, P., and Mark R. Rosenzweig. (1973). Psychology: An Introduction.
Toronto: D.C. Health and Company.
Nasir, M. (1983). Metode Penelitian. Jakarta: Ghalia Indonesia. Nunan, D. (1989). Understanding Language Classroom: A Guide
for Teacher-Initiated Action. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Ltd.
Nunan, D. (1999). Second language Teaching & Learning. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publisher.
(27)
Nunan, D. (1988). The Learner-Centered Curriculum. Boston: London: Cambridge University Press.
Quinn, N. V. (1985). Applying Psychology. Singapore: McGraw-Hill Book Co. Richards, J. C., John Platt, Heidi Platt. (1992). Dictionary of Language
Teaching & Applied Linguistics. London: Longman Group UK
Limited.
Richards, C. J., and Rodgers, S. T. (1986). Approaches and Methods in
Language Teaching: A Description and analysis. London: Cambridge
University Press. (TPR).
Ridwan. (2002). Variabel-variabel Penelitian. Bandung: Alfabeta Bandung. Rock, I. (1975). An Introduction to Perception. New York. Macmillan
Publishing Co., Inc.
Silverman, D. (2005). Doing Qualitative Research. A practical Handbook.
2nd edition.London: Sage Publications, Inc.
Schaetzel, K. and Chan Ho. (2006). ‘Tutorials: A Way of Building
Community in the Classroom.’ In English Teaching Forum on line. Vol. 41. http://www.exchanges.state.gov/forum/2006.html.
Accessed on 4th December 2006.
Slameto. (2003). Belajar dan Faktor yang Mempengaruhinya.
4th edition. Jakarta: Bina Aksara.
Sobur, A. (2003). Psikologi Umum. Bandung: CV. Pustaka Setia.
Soemantry, W. (1998). Psikologi Pendidikan:Landasan Kerja Pemimpin Pendidikan.
Jakarta: Pt. Rineka Cipta.
Tang, J. (2002). “Using L1 in the English Classroom.” English Teaching Forum, 12, 2: 39-41.
(28)
Tiangco, J. A. N. (2005). Using Contemporary Psychological Perspectives In Re-Understanding Taiwanese EFL Development: Observation and Implications for Tertiary Education.
http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/march 2005,index.php. Accessed on February 2006.
Wagner, V. K. (2003). Defense Mechanism.
http://psychology.About. Com/mbiogage/2003/htm. Accessed on 7th February, 2007.
William, C. S. Jr. (2003). “Using L1 in the English Classroom.” English Teaching Forum, 24, 2: 35-37.
Yin, R. K.(2003). Case Study Research; Design and Methods. 3rd edition.
(1)
of classes involved in this study, it would be good if the class used as the samples were more than two. Therefore, the finding could be more various.
Second, related to the English teachers, it will be good for them to use English as a medium of instruction, because students need to be exposed to the target language as much as possible. By doing so, both the teachers and the students may practice their English in the classroom effectively.
Third, the teachers who have low English ability must improve it gradually. As teachers, they are models. To become good models, they should have good English competence and performance.
Fourth, the students need to study English well. They should not improve their English based on their teaching and learning time in the classroom only. They should study by themselves or with their group work. They can take an English extra lesson in order to accelerate their English improvement.
(2)
Bibliography
Alwasilah, A. C. (2003). Pokoknya Kualitatif. Jakarta: Pustaka Jaya. Allford, D. (1999). ‘Translation in the Communicative Classroom.’
In Pachler, N. (1999). (ed) Teaching Modern Foreign Languages At Advanced Level. London: Routledge.
Allwright, D. (1988). Observation in the Language Classroom. London: Longman. Bamburg, J. D. (2000) Raising Expectations to Improve Student Learning.
http://greece.k12.ny.us/kr/Elearning/expectations1/2000/htm. Accessed on 10th October, 2006.
Baron, R. A. (1995). Psychology. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Broughton, G. (1980). Teaching English as a Foreign Language. Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd.
Brown, H. D. (1980). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching.
New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by Principles. An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. New York: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Brown, G. (1984). Microteaching. London: J.W. Arrowsmith Ltd, Bristol. Butler, Y. G. (2003). Korean elementary school teachers’ concerns towards
current English teaching practice: Competencies that they think they “have” and “don’t’ have.
http://www.hiceducation.org/Edu_Proceedings/Pdf. Accessed on 10th October, 2006.
Cummins, J. and Swain, M. (1996). Bilingualism in Education: Aspects of theory, research and practice. London: Longman.
Deckert, G. (2006). ‘The Communicative Approach: Addressing Frequent Failure.’ In English Teaching Forum on line. Vol 24.
http://www.exchanges.state.gov/forum/2006.html. Accessed on 20th September, 2006.
(3)
Dubin, F., and Olsbtain, E. (1987). Course Design; Developing Programs and Materials for Language Learning. London: Cambridge University Press.
Emilia, E. (2005). A Critical Genre-Based Approach to Teaching Academic Writing in a Tertiary EFL Context in Indonesia. Unpublished Research Melbourne: The University of Melbourne.
Fraenkle, J.R., and Wallen, N.E. (2000). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education. 4th edition. Boston: Mcgraw Hill.
Feldman, R. S. (1995). Elements of Psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc. Gazda, G. M., Frank, S. Asbury, Fred, J. Balzer, William, C. Childrs,
Richard, P. Walters. 1984. Development: A Manual for Educators
Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
Gazda, G. M., Frank, S. Asbury, Fred, J. Balzer, William, C. Childrs, Richard,P. Walters. (1984). Development: A Manual for Educators.
Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
Garner, W. R. (1969).’To Perceive is to know.’ , in Voices of Modern
Psychology: a collection of reading for introduction psychology .Aronson E. (ed.). Philippines: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc.
Genesee, F. and John Upshur. (1996). Classroom-Based Evaluation in Second Language Education. London : Cambridge University Press.
Gay, L. (1987). Educational Research (Competencies for Analysis and Education).
New York: Merrill Publishing Company.
Harianto, S. (1997). ‘Achieving a good communicative performance with
better grammatical mastery using bridge technique.’ In Sadtono, E. (1997). (Ed). The Development of TEFL in Indonesia. Malang: IKIP Malang.
Hall, E. (1983). Psychology Today: An Introduction. New York: Random House. Harmer, J. (2002). The Practice of English Language Teaching. Malaysia: Longman. Hornby. A. S. (1995). Oxford Advanced Learners’s Dictionary
of Current English. Toronto: Oxford University Press.
Huda, N. (1999). Language Learning and Teaching: Issues and Trends.
(4)
Hybels, S. and Richard L. Weaver (2004). Self, Perception, and Communication. http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/html Accessed on 5th November, 2006.
Inamullah, M. (2005). Patterns of Classroom Interaction at Different Educational Levels in the Light of Flander’s Interaction Analysis.
http://eprints.hec.gov.pk/99/02/49.htm. Accessed on 9th February, 2007.
Jordaan, W. J., Jordaan, J. J., and Nieuwoudt, J. M. (1979). General Psychology: A Psychobiological Approach.
New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.
Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing. London: Sage Publications, Inc.
Matlin W. M. (2003). Cognition. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Musthafa, B. (2005). English for Young Learners (EYL). Unpublished
Module. Bandung: PPs UPI.
Merriam, S. (1998). Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education. Revised and Expanded from: Case Study Research in Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Meyers S. L., and Neal E. Grossen. (1974). Behaviour Research: theory, procedure, and design. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman and Company.
Moore, A. (1999). Teaching Multicultured Students: Culturism and Anti-Culturism In School Classroom. California: Mayfield Publishing Company.
Mussen P. (1973). Psychology: An Introduction. Toronto: D.C. Health and Company. Mussen, P., and Mark R. Rosenzweig. (1973). Psychology: An Introduction.
Toronto: D.C. Health and Company.
Nasir, M. (1983). Metode Penelitian. Jakarta: Ghalia Indonesia. Nunan, D. (1989). Understanding Language Classroom: A Guide
for Teacher-Initiated Action. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Ltd.
Nunan, D. (1999). Second language Teaching & Learning. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publisher.
(5)
Nunan, D. (1988). The Learner-Centered Curriculum. Boston: London: Cambridge University Press.
Quinn, N. V. (1985). Applying Psychology. Singapore: McGraw-Hill Book Co. Richards, J. C., John Platt, Heidi Platt. (1992). Dictionary of Language
Teaching & Applied Linguistics. London: Longman Group UK Limited.
Richards, C. J., and Rodgers, S. T. (1986). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching: A Description and analysis. London: Cambridge University Press. (TPR).
Ridwan. (2002). Variabel-variabel Penelitian. Bandung: Alfabeta Bandung. Rock, I. (1975). An Introduction to Perception. New York. Macmillan
Publishing Co., Inc.
Silverman, D. (2005). Doing Qualitative Research. A practical Handbook.
2nd edition.London: Sage Publications, Inc.
Schaetzel, K. and Chan Ho. (2006). ‘Tutorials: A Way of Building
Community in the Classroom.’ In English Teaching Forum on line. Vol. 41. http://www.exchanges.state.gov/forum/2006.html.
Accessed on 4th December 2006.
Slameto. (2003). Belajar dan Faktor yang Mempengaruhinya.
4th edition. Jakarta: Bina Aksara.
Sobur, A. (2003). Psikologi Umum. Bandung: CV. Pustaka Setia.
Soemantry, W. (1998). Psikologi Pendidikan:Landasan Kerja Pemimpin Pendidikan.
Jakarta: Pt. Rineka Cipta.
Tang, J. (2002). “Using L1 in the English Classroom.” English Teaching Forum, 12, 2: 39-41.
Travers. M. (2001). Qualitative Research Through Case Studies.
(6)
Tiangco, J. A. N. (2005). Using Contemporary Psychological Perspectives In Re-Understanding Taiwanese EFL Development: Observation and Implications for Tertiary Education.
http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/march 2005,index.php. Accessed on February 2006.
Wagner, V. K. (2003). Defense Mechanism.
http://psychology.About. Com/mbiogage/2003/htm. Accessed on 7th February, 2007.
William, C. S. Jr. (2003). “Using L1 in the English Classroom.” English Teaching Forum, 24, 2: 35-37.
Yin, R. K.(2003). Case Study Research; Design and Methods. 3rd edition.