EMPOWERING STUDENTS THROUGH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENT.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Abstract ... i
Declaration ... ii
Approval ... iii
Preface ... v
Acknowledgement... vi
Table of Contents ... vii
List of Appendices ... ix
List of Tables ... x
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background ... 1
1.2 Research Questions ... 3
1.3 The Purpose of the Research ... 3
1.4 Significance of the Research ... 4
1.5 Clarification of the Terms ... 4
1.7.1 Empowerment ... 4
1.7.2 Assessment ... 5
1.6 Thesis Organization ... 5
CHAPTER II: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 2.1 Introduction ... 7
2.2 Assessment ... 7
2.3 Portfolio Assessment: What and Why? ... 11
2.4 Portfolio and Its Role in Curriculum ... 23
2.5 Empowerment ... 25
2.6 Portfolio and Empowerment ... 26
2.6.1 Social Empowerment ... 27
2.6.2 Cognitive Empowerment ... 30
2.6.3 Psychological Empowerment ... 36
2.7 Developing Portfolio Assessment ... 37
2.8 Related Research Findings ... 38
2.9 Summary ... 40
CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY OF THE RESEARCH 3.1 Introduction ... 41
3.2 Research Sites ... 41
3.4.1 Reasons for Choosing the Site ... 41
3.4.2 Participants ... 42
3.3 Design of the Research... 43
(2)
3.5.2 Phase of Data Collection ... 45
3.5.3 The Technique of Data Collection ... 46
3.6 Data Analysis ... 48
3.7 Summary ... 49
CHAPTER IV: DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS ... 50
4.1 Introduction ... 50
4.2 The Presentation of Data and Analysis ... 50
4.1.2 The Implementation of Portfolio Assessment in Classroom ... 50
4.1.2.1 Data from Observation ... 51
4.1.2.1 Data from Interviews ... 54
4.1.2.1 Data from Questionnaires ... 61
4.2.2 Portfolio Assessment Empowers Students Socially, Cognitively, and Psychologically ... 64
4.2.2.1 Social Empowerment ... 65
A. Data from Observation ... 66
B. Data from Questionnaire ... 67
4.2.2.2 Cognitive Empowerment ... 69
A. Data from Observation ... 69
B. Data from Questionnaire ... 70
4.2.2.3 Psychological Empowerment ... 71
A. Data from Observation ... 71
B. Data from Interview ... 71
C. Data from Questionnaire ... 72
4.3 Summary ... 73
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS 5.1 Conclusions ... 74
5.2 Suggestion and Recommendation ... 75
References ... 77
(3)
EMPOWERING STUDENTS THROUGH THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENT
(A Case Study of the Second-Grade Students of SMUN 8 Bandung)Submitted to fulfil a partial requirement for taking the examination of Master of Education Degree
A THESIS
By:
DIAN EKAWATI, S.PD 019598
SCHOOL OF POST GRADUATE STUDIES INDONESIA UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION
(4)
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Problem
It is undeniable that pedagogical program, in some contexts, cannot be separated from assessment since it helps both teachers and students sharpen their eyes towards ongoing process. Learning will take place if both teaching and assessment exist. Therefore, assessment plays an important part in teaching and learning process and may heavily influence the way pupil are taught and the kinds of activities they do (Brewster, et.al., 2003). It is also highly helpful in collecting information about students (Genesee & Upshur, 1996). Specifically, assessment itself is an integral part of language education reflecting both effective and ineffective language teaching (Oller, 1979 in Prapphal, 2001). For reason, assessment is extremely important to be developed because it has strong washback effect on practice in the classroom and plays a pivotal role in students’ future.
Over years, in most schools, the assessment system used to determine the progress toward degrees and capabilities was done in the form of paper-pencil tests in terms of scores, grades, and the completion of course. Including Indonesia, the general system of this assessment used in classroom practice is multiple-choice which is objective and standardized. This kind of system is regarded practical, efficient to administer and easy to score (McNamara, 1996;
(5)
input into this system. They are not empowered. McNamara (1996:14) adds that the students cannot exercise their productive skills since they only choose the best option of given items. In addition, multiple-choice tests are not authentic because they do not represent students activities typically perform in classrooms (Pierce & O’Malley, 1992). No wonder if Fajar (2002) believes that the weakness of the assessment system in Indonesia, in general, is lack of students’ empowerment of being dynamic and critical.
Recently, because of the insufficiency of multiple standardized test and scoring/grading system, there is growing interest among educators to find an alternative method of assessment fitting to the need of how to monitor actual progress of student’s performance and how to empower them through series of tasks by observing the students in ongoing process (e.g. their behaviour in the classroom) and collecting the students’ work (e.g. students’ journals) and portfolios known as alternative assessment (Hancock, 2004).
Alternative assessment, according to Hancock (1994), is an ongoing process involving students and teacher in making judgments about the students’ progress in classroom using non-conventional strategies. There are various kinds of alternative assessment; however, the paper will only focus on portfolio as it greatly helps educators to monitor and determine the progress of the students.
Another concern is that portfolios are typically seen as source of teacher and students empowerment because control over assessment linked most closely to instruction (Graves, 1983 in Pierce & O’Malley, 1992; Musthafa, 1996;
(6)
students since it makes intuitive sense to involve students in decisions about which pieces of their work to assess, and to assure that feedback from teacher is provided (Hancock, 1994). Thus, portfolio offers interactive activity between them.
Regarding to the important impacts of portfolios on students’ learning, this study is trying to discover (1) the implementation of portfolio assessment in classroom and (2) how the implementation of portfolio assessment empowers students socially, cognitively, and psychologically in their learning process.
1.2 Research Questions
To focus more on the investigation, based on the background, the research will lie on the research questions stated as follows.
1) How is portfolio assessment carried out in classroom setting?
2) How can portfolios empower the students socially, cognitively, and psychologically in their learning process?
1.3 The Purpose of the Research
The research seeks to accomplish the following objectives that are related to research questions:
1) to investigate how portfolio assessment is carried out in classroom setting. 2) to explore how portfolios can empower the students socially, cognitively, and
(7)
1.4 Significance of the Research
The research, hopefully, is expected to give the information for other educators who would like to implement portfolio assessment and to see the students’ empowerment through the assessment. Comparing and contrasting to seek strengths and weaknesses of the implementation may also be found in this research which is very useful for schools to conduct the assessment.
This research is also dedicated to invite other researchers who are interested in portfolios to find or conduct further investigation on the issue in this field of study. Finally, it may offer new insight in assessment as an effort to have effective English teaching and learning process.
1.5 Clarification of the Terms
The following terms are provided in order to understand the case presented in this paper.
1.5.1 Empowerment
The term of empowerment refers to the development of knowledge, skills and abilities in the learners to enable them to control and develop their own learning (Harvey, 2004). Referring to this definition, the meaning of empowerment in this research is more focusing on the growth of process of the students in gaining control over their learning and decision that affected them. The students’ empowerment here is divided into three that interconnectedly affects their learning along with their social, cognitive, and psychological development.
(8)
1.5.2 Assessment
Testing and assessment are different in some contexts. Tests are seen as the results of students’ progress (Hancock, 1994). He further calls testing as ‘achievement learning’ resulted from the students’ learning. In contrast to testing, assessment is viewed as the process which interactively occurs done by teachers and students in monitoring the performance of students.
1.6 Thesis Organization
The organization of the thesis will be in five chapters. Chapter one contains the background of the study, the rationale for the research, followed by research questions, purpose, general approach, and its significance to the research. In addition, the chapter also presents some clarifications of the terms and thesis organization.
Chapter two highlights the detailed theories and frameworks of portfolio assessment including some views of the experts, the history, the implementation or the process of portfolios which are conducted in classroom setting, its evaluation, the role of portfolio in the current curriculum, and the connection between portfolio assessment and students’ empowerment. This chapter also reveals how to establish an effective portfolio assessment, issues and some related research findings.
Chapter three emphasizes on the methodology of the research elaborating data collection, research design, the procedure of the research, research sites, the
(9)
role of the researcher, the phases of gathering data collection, and some instruments used in the research.
Chapter four deals with the discussion of data analysis which is obtained from the field, exploration of questionnaires, interviews, and observation used in the investigation, and some findings which come up in the process of investigation.
The last chapter, that is chapter five, conveys the overview of the findings consisting some conclusions, suggestions, and recommendations for the improvement of portfolio assessment.
(10)
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY OF THE RESEARCH
3.1 Introduction
The following explanation will mainly reflect the general plan of research investigation. It is also intimately related to the scientific phase of how the investigation answers the research problem. The detail is as follows:
3.2 Research Site
This study has single setting—which is called single-site study (Maxwell, 1986:64)—that is SMUN 8 Bandung which has six parallel classes with different teacher for each three-class. Only three classes with one similar teacher were chosen. The details of the respondents will be in the following explanation. The second-grade students were chosen because of school management’s decision. Pre-pilot study was done in June 2, 2004. The researcher visited the school to get permission from the headmaster, and got in touch with the respondents—students and teachers.
3.2.1 Reasons for Choosing the Site
As mentioned earlier, the research was conducted in SMUN 8 Bandung which lies on Jl. Solontongan No.3, Bandung. The decision of taking this school falls into three reasons, they are:
(11)
1. SMUN 8 Bandung is a popular and one of favourite schools in Bandung so that every student who wants to be admitted in this school should compete with each other to meet the school’s passing grade. It is not surprisingly if the students here were good achievers in their previous junior high school.
2. The school is one of ‘Model Schools’ that always becomes pilot project of new program issued by either local or central government, including portfolio assessment. This was expected to enable the researcher to gain data needed in this research.
3. The second grade classroom was chosen because the school started to implement portfolio assessment in the year of 2003-2004 and it was assumed that the investigation will not disturb the teaching-learning process.
3.2.2 Participants
Participants of this study can be classified into three categories, they are: 1. Students
It has been mentioned before that the students involved were the second graders who were being taught by the respondent’s teacher. They are 120 students which were divided into three classes—2 IPA 1, 2 IPA 3, and 2 IPA 4, with 40 students in each class. In Preliminary research, the students were from 2 IPA 3 consisting of 40 students. In
(12)
criterion-based selection, that is, the strategy in which particular settings, persons, or events, are selected deliberately in order to provide important information that can’t be gotten from other choices (Maxwell, 1996). Therefore, this study took 30 second-grade students of XI IPA 4.
2. Teachers
There were two English teachers getting involved in the research. Teacher #1 was as a respondent to fill in teacher’s questionnaire in preliminary study. She really helped in revising teacher’s questionnaire in the next step of investigation. Teacher #2 was the real respondent for the implementation of portfolio assessment.
3.3 Design of the Research
Since the research is not really depending upon the numbers or statistics for the data, the method used is qualitative in nature. The study is a case study for it presents a detailed account of phenomenon under study (Merriam, 1991:27)—to see the process by monitoring: describing the context and population of the study, discovering the extent to which program has been implemented, providing immediate feedback of a formative type and by discovering or confirming the process by which the program had the effect that it did (ibid:31). In other words, the study is to describe the implementation of portfolio assessment in the classroom and its empowerment to the students without conducting any changes
(13)
In addition, in order to get intended data, emic perspectives were used in which participant’s viewpoints were considered as the main data source (Maxwell, 1996).
3.4 The Researcher’s Role
The researcher is a key instrument in the research. It is supported by Bogdan & Biklen (1992:29) claiming that data are collected and all materials are reviewed in their entirety by the researcher’s insight being the key instrument for analysis. Merriam (1988:19) adds that the researcher in qualitative study is the primary instrument for data collection and analysis, the researcher acted as the non-participant observer whose activity were sitting, observing the process of portfolio assessment without any involvement with the process.
3.5 Data Collection
The explanation of data collection will be seen from the procedure of the research and the phases of data collection.
3.5.1 Procedure of the Research
The investigation took three months in seven classroom visits in order to have gaining entry or establishing rapport. The researcher got acquainted to research site and respondents (Alwasilah, 2002:144), distribute the questionnaires, do interviews, and conduct observations.
(14)
The research conducts three-way study. The first is pre-pilot study which performed school permission, respondents’ acquaintance through students and teachers and research site’s observation.
Purposed by gaining in depth-data through valid and reliable instruments, the second study, that is preliminary study or pilot project, was done which is useful in having revision of the questionnaire.
The last step is to analyze the data collection based on the current instruments spread into three classes which involves 120 respondents in order to determine recurring patterns of portfolio assessment implemented in school setting and its empowerment as perceived by the students.
3.5.2 Phases of Data Collection
As has been mentioned previously, this study did three phases of the inquiry: pre-pilot, preliminary (pilot), and main study. The first step was Pre-pilot study that was done in June 2, 2004. The researcher came to the school to get permission from the headmaster, got in touch with the respondents in order to have gaining a whole picture of the setting.
The second step was pilot study or preliminary study. It was an important phase to have reliable and validity of the instruments in order to obtained in-depth and focused questions. The questionnaire consisting 25 questions and were analyzed whether the students’ response and answer address the research’s intention. This is indeed a starting point of the questionnaire revision.
(15)
The last part is the main study. The revised questionnaire consisting 40 questions was spread to 120 second-grade students. Interviews, videotaping, sample of portfolio collection were gathered in doing the observation. All in all, there were 10 visits within three-month investigation.
3.5.3 The Techniques of Data Collection
Moreover, the research data was taken from various sources and analytic interpretative procedures to findings or conclusions (Strauss and Corbin, 1990 in Wirza (2004:58). Qualitative methods were selected to generate data collection such as questionnaire, interviews, and observation including videotaping, photo-taking, and doing fieldnotes. In addition to these, students’ work and scores were also used to support the data analysis. The following explanation provides the selected method of the investigation.
A. Observation
The observation is done through three activities: conducting videotaping, writing fieldnotes, and collecting other document such as photograph and sample of students’ work. The detail explanation is as follows:
1. Videotaping
Videotaping was used to facilitate the inquiry with unanticipated data that the researcher could see or not in the observation. It provides the actual teaching process where portfolio assessment took place. It also showed what is going on in the classroom including the attitude of both teacher and
(16)
2. Fieldnotes
Fieldnotes are the written account of what the researcher hears, sees, experiences, and thinks in the course of collecting and reflecting on the data in a qualitative study (Bogdan & Biklen, 1992:107). In line with this, the fieldnotes were conducted as an attempt of reflection of researcher felt, saw, and thought in the time of the observation.
3. Other supporting data
Taking a photograph and keeping student’s work on writing are available in order to check and recheck the data.
B. Interviews
There were formal and informal interviews selected for following-up the respondent’s answer in questionnaire and for gaining further information about the matter. Both teacher and students were interviewed for purposive questions so that they varied each other in number of questions and time. In addition, the interview can be a valuable way (the only way, for events that took place in the past or ones to which researcher cannot gain observational access) of gaining a description of actions and events (Maxwell, 1996:76). C. Questionnaire
The last instrument used for data collection is questionnaire. Questionnaire was built up from ended and closed questions. The open-ended question is dedicated for the answer that will help to determine the length any fullness of responses the research obtains (Oppenheim, 1966:41)
(17)
order to focus on the inquiry. The questionnaires were distributed to both teachers and students as the participants of the research.
3.6 Data Analysis
To get better insight and closer involvement of the data collection, the data was analyzed by a triangulation method as Denzin in Maxwell (1996:74) points out:
Triangulation is collecting information from a diverse range of individuals and settings, using a variety of methods.
This study was also used the methods as follows:
1. Coding and categorizing. These ways were used to search through the data (from questionnaire) for regularities and patterns as well as for topic the study covers and then write down words and phrases to represent these topics and patterns (Bogdan & Biklen, 1992:166). 2. Doing recursive checking. By rechecking the other data gathered such
as interview, fieldnotes and observation, and literature references, the data was analyzed to interpret the phenomenon of portfolio assessment happened in school setting.
All analysis was observed and thought based on participants’ perceptions. That is why emic perspectives—the "insider's" or "native's" interpretation of or "reasons" for his or her customs/beliefs about what things mean to them as members of a process—are used in this research.
(18)
3.7 Summary
In doing research, certain procedures are done in order to have right path on investigation. Therefore, expected and better findings will be gained through determining design and procedures, choosing research sites and participants, deciding the role of researcher, selecting instruments, and deciding analysis of the data.
(19)
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
This section provides an overview of the investigation leading to the conclusion, offers some suggestions, and recommendation for English teaching and learning especially in assessment.
5.1 Conclusions
Having gone through the data analysis and deep investigation on the research, the researcher tries to highlight the conclusion of the main issue presented in previous chapter. The conclusion is summarized as follows:
1. The teacher follows the certain steps of conducting portfolios in classroom use, promotes interaction and involvement of the students on assessment, provides chances for student to exercise their mind to achieve metacognitive skills to gain critical thinking skills, and facilitates interaction with parents. In short, the teacher brings a theory into practice in her classroom.
2. The implementation portfolio in classroom provides opportunity for the students to work collaboratively with peers and teachers, to negotiate in establishing the criteria which they want to attain, to keep records of their progress over period of time in particular place.
3. Portfolio assessment empowers students socially, cognitively, and psychologically since it promotes: students’ involvement in assessment,
(20)
student about learning, student ownership of and responsibility for their own learning, excitement about learning, students’ ability to think critically about school work, collaborative and sharing classroom.
5.2 Suggestions and Recommendations
Having deep understanding on the implementation of portfolio assessment in classroom, several suggestions and recommendations are raised as follows: 1. Teachers should provide wide range of opportunities and possibility of
learning by facilitating interaction among parties that involved in the assessment. Parents’, school principal’s, students’ and others’ involvement, who are interested in portfolio, should be given available access (i.e. web on internet) to see and evaluate the students’ progress and improvement.
2. Teacher should keep informed about new assessment and alternatives of doing it in order to update the way of implementing the assessment.
3. To develop empowerment, students should actively ask for input from peers and parents regularly, which can be done whether inside or outside classroom. 4. Parents, by their initiatives, should often come to the school to participate,
involve, and get informed the growth of their children’s learning.
5. School principal takes the initiatives to facilitate the process with good facilities and available budget
For further research, since this research has no initial research to explore the previous condition before portfolio assessment was implemented, it would be
(21)
investigate further about it. Hopefully, the weaknesses of the study can be minimized and the findings will be reached more optimally.
(22)
REFERENCES
Alwasilah, A. Chaedar. 2002. ”Penilaian Portfolio, Mengapa Tidak?”. Pikiran
Rakyat. Saturday, May 11. Bandung: PT. Pikiran Rakyat.
___________________. 2002. Pokoknya Kualitatif: Dasar-dasar Merancang
dan Melakukan Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung:P ustaka Jaya.
Ashcroft, L. 1987. Defusing "Empowering": The What and the Why. Language
Arts, 64. Page 142-156. http://web.uconn.edu/asp/Accelerated_Schools.
Accessed June 4, 2006.
Belanoff, Pat and Marcia Dickson, eds. 1991. Portfolio: Process and Product. Portsmouth: Heinemann.
Bergeim, Holly 1999. “Empowerment”. Wikipedia. Tracy Simmons, editor. Mexico. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empowerment. accessed January 17, 2007.
Black, et al. 1994. New Direction in Portfolio Assessment. Portsmouth: Heinemann.
Bogdan, R.C. and Biklen, S.K. 1992. Qualitative Research for Education: An
Introduction to Theory and Methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Boomer, G. 1982. “Turning on the Learning Power: Introductory notes”. In G. Boomer (Ed.), Negotiating the Curriculum: A Teacher-Student
Partnership (pp. 2-7). NSW, Australia: Ashton Scholastic
Brewster, Jean and Gail Ellis and Denis Girard. 2003. The Primary English
Teacher’s Guide. Edinburgh: Pearson Education Limited.
Brown, H. Douglas. 1994. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to
Language Pedagogy. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Regents.
Brunson, D. A., & Vogt, J. V. 1996. “Empowering Our Students and Ourselves: A Liberal Democratic Approach to the Communication Classroom”.
Communication Education, 45 (January), 73-83.
(23)
Departemen Pendidikan Nasional. 2004. Kurikulum 2004: Naskah Akademik
Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Asing. Jakarta: Depdiknas.
www.puskur.net/download/naskahakademik/naskahakademikbasing/babiv .doc. accessed January 17, 2007.
Epstein, Andrew. 2004. Synapse Learning Design. Available at http://www.teachervision.fen.com/lesson-plans/lesson-203153.html, accessed on February 24, 2005.
Fajar, Arnie. 2002. Portfolio dalam Pelajaran IPS. Bandung: Rosdakarya. Genesee, Fred and John A.Upshur. 1996. “Portfolios and Conferences”.
Classroom-Based Evaluation in Second Language Education. Jack
Richards, ed. USA: Cambridge.
Hamied, Fuad Abdul. 2002. “The Language Teaching Profession: TEFLIN ‘Odyssey’ towards the Era of Regional Autonomy and of Globalization”.
50th TEFLIN Conference. Surabaya: Widya Mandala Surabaya Catholic
University
Hancock, Charles R. 1994. “Alternative Assessment and Second Language Study: What and Why”?. ERIC Digest. ED376695. Washington: ERIC Clearinghouse.
Harvey, L. 1994. Analitic Quality Glossary. Quality Research International http://www.qualityresearchinternational.com/glossary/empowerment.htm, accesses on December 8, 2006.
Herbert, Elizabeth. A. 1998. Lessons Learned About Student Portfolios. Phi Delta
Kappa International. http://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/kheb9804.htm. accessed
January 31, 2007.
Herman, Aschbacher, and Winters. 1992.
http://intranet.cps.k12.il.us/Assessments/Ideas_and_Rubrics/Intro_Scoring /Intro_P1/intro_p1.html, accessed July 14, 2004.
Howart, Pattrick. 2006. Increasing Student Interaction.
http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/think/speak/interaction.shtml, accessed on December 3, 2006.
Livingston, Jennifer A. 1997. Metacognition: An Overview.
(24)
Jones, E. A. & Ratcliff, G. 1993. Critical Tthinking Skills for College Students. National Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, and Assessment, University Park, PA. (Eric Document Reproduction Services No. ED 358 772) http://www.utc.edu/Teaching-Resource-Center/Fac_Dev.html, accessed on August 24, 2006.
Kemp, Judy and Debby Toperoff. 1998. Guidelines for Portfolio Assessment. http://www.anglit.net/main/portfolio/default.html, accessed on July 14, 2003.
Kreisberg, S. 1992. Transforming Power: Domination, Empowerment, and
Education. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Maxwell, Joseph A. 1996. Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive
Approach. California: Sage.
McNamara, Tim. 2000. Language Testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Merriam, Sharan B. 1988. Case Study Research in Education: A Qualitative
Approach. San Francisco: Jorsey-Bass.
Musthafa, Bachrudin. 1996. Assessment Strategies for Optimal Literacy. EDRS 403 300.
Nation, Paul. 1989. “Group Work and Language Learning”. English Teaching
Forum. April 1989. Volume XXVI p. 20-24.
Oppenheim, A.N. 1966. Questionnaire Design and Attitude Measurement. London: Heinemann.
Pierce, Loraine Valdez and J Michael O’Malley. 1992. Performance and Portfolio
Assessment for Language Minority Students.
http://ss.uno.edu./SS/WebPages/PortfolioAsses.html, accessed on February 19, 2003.
Patsula, Peter J. 1999. Applying Learning Theories to Online Instructional
Design. Seoul.
http://www.patsula.com/usefo/webbasedlearning/tutorial1/learning theories full version.html#vygotsky, accessed on February 19, 2003. Patten, Peggy. 1992. “Developing Social Skills”. The National Network for
Children Care: Day Care Centre Connections. Urbana Campaign:
University of Illinois Cooperative Extension Service. http://www.nncc.org/Guidance/dc14_develop.social.skill.html
(25)
Prapphal, Kanchana. 2001. “Roles, Values, and Challenges of Language Testing”. Journal of Southeast Asian Education. Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 362-372. Bangkok: SEAMEO.
Sewell, et al. 2003. The Use of Portfolio Assessment in Evaluation. http://ag.arizona.edu /fcs/cyfernet/cyfar/Portfo~3.htm, accessed August 15, 2005.
Strategic Teaching and Reading Project Guidebook. 1995. Revised Edition. North
Central Regional Educational Laboratory.
http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/students/learning/lr1metp.htm. Accessed January 14, 2007.
Strohm, S. M., & Baukus, R. A. 1995. “Strategies for Fostering Critical Thinking Skills”. Journalism and Mass Communication Educator, 50 (1), 55-62. http://www.utc.edu/Teaching-Resource-Center/Fac_Dev.html, accessed on August 24, 2006.
Suderadjat, Hari. 2003. Pendidikan Berbasis Luas (BBE) yang Berorientasi pada
Kecakapan Hidup (Life Skill). Bandung: Cipta Cekas Grafika.
Sullivan, Anna M. 2002. Pursuit of Goals in Partnerships: Empowerment in
Practice.
http://web.uconn.edu/asp/Accelerated_Schools_+Plus/files/student
empowerment/Pursuit of Goals in Partnerships-Empowerment in Practice-Sullivan Anna.doc, accessed on December 2, 2006.
Sweet, David. 1993. “Student Portfolios: Classroom Use”. Education Research
Consumer Guide. 8th edition.
http://www.ed.gov/pubs/OR/ConsumerGuides/classuse.html. Accessed on June 5, 2003.
Tierney, et al. 1991. Portfolio Assessment in the Reading-Writing Classroom. Norwood: Christopher-Gordon Publishers.
Upbin, Bruce. 1999. ”Instant Feedback In The Classroom”. Forbes Magazine. March 22, 1999.
http://kancrn.kckps.k12.ks.us/Harmon/breighm/rubrics.html, accessed August, 28. 2006.
Wade, C. 1995. “Using Writing to Develop and Assess Critical Thinking”.
Teaching of Psychology, 22(1), 24-28.
(26)
Walker, Grayson H. 1997. Critical Thinking. Chattanooga: The University of Tennessee. http://www.utc.edu/Teaching-Resource-Center/critical.htm. Last modified November 9, 1999. Accessed January 13, 2007.
Weir, J. Cyril. 1990. Communicative Language Testing. UK: Prentice Hall. Wikipedia Encyclopedia. 2006. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assessment.
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Last modified 03:08, 24 January 2007. accessed December 18, 2006.
Windsor, Pamela J.T. 2003. A Guide to the Development of Professional
Portfolios in the Faculty of Education.
http://www.edu.uleth.ca/fe/ppd/contents.html, accessed on Febuary 27, 2003.
Wirza, Yanti. 2004. Social Interaction in EFL Classroom. Unpublished thesis. Bandung: UPI.
(27)
Jeffrey S. Kupperman http://www2.eou.edu/~kdahl/emicdef.html
Emic and Etic
Using peer- and self-assessment in the undergraduate classroom
http://lsn.curtin.edu.au/eac2006/abstracts/allen.html Last modified November 16, 2006 ev an ass confere 2-6 enhancg ss learning
(1)
REFERENCES
Alwasilah, A. Chaedar. 2002. ”Penilaian Portfolio, Mengapa Tidak?”. Pikiran Rakyat. Saturday, May 11. Bandung: PT. Pikiran Rakyat.
___________________. 2002. Pokoknya Kualitatif: Dasar-dasar Merancang dan Melakukan Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung:P ustaka Jaya.
Ashcroft, L. 1987. Defusing "Empowering": The What and the Why. Language Arts, 64. Page 142-156. http://web.uconn.edu/asp/Accelerated_Schools. Accessed June 4, 2006.
Belanoff, Pat and Marcia Dickson, eds. 1991. Portfolio: Process and Product. Portsmouth: Heinemann.
Bergeim, Holly 1999. “Empowerment”. Wikipedia. Tracy Simmons, editor. Mexico. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empowerment. accessed January 17, 2007.
Black, et al. 1994. New Direction in Portfolio Assessment. Portsmouth: Heinemann.
Bogdan, R.C. and Biklen, S.K. 1992. Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction to Theory and Methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Boomer, G. 1982. “Turning on the Learning Power: Introductory notes”. In G. Boomer (Ed.), Negotiating the Curriculum: A Teacher-Student Partnership (pp. 2-7). NSW, Australia: Ashton Scholastic
Brewster, Jean and Gail Ellis and Denis Girard. 2003. The Primary English Teacher’s Guide. Edinburgh: Pearson Education Limited.
Brown, H. Douglas. 1994. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Regents.
Brunson, D. A., & Vogt, J. V. 1996. “Empowering Our Students and Ourselves: A Liberal Democratic Approach to the Communication Classroom”. Communication Education, 45 (January), 73-83.
(2)
Departemen Pendidikan Nasional. 2004. Kurikulum 2004: Naskah Akademik Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Asing. Jakarta: Depdiknas. www.puskur.net/download/naskahakademik/naskahakademikbasing/babiv .doc. accessed January 17, 2007.
Epstein, Andrew. 2004. Synapse Learning Design. Available at http://www.teachervision.fen.com/lesson-plans/lesson-203153.html, accessed on February 24, 2005.
Fajar, Arnie. 2002. Portfolio dalam Pelajaran IPS. Bandung: Rosdakarya. Genesee, Fred and John A.Upshur. 1996. “Portfolios and Conferences”.
Classroom-Based Evaluation in Second Language Education. Jack Richards, ed. USA: Cambridge.
Hamied, Fuad Abdul. 2002. “The Language Teaching Profession: TEFLIN ‘Odyssey’ towards the Era of Regional Autonomy and of Globalization”. 50th TEFLIN Conference. Surabaya: Widya Mandala Surabaya Catholic University
Hancock, Charles R. 1994. “Alternative Assessment and Second Language Study: What and Why”?. ERIC Digest. ED376695. Washington: ERIC Clearinghouse.
Harvey, L. 1994. Analitic Quality Glossary. Quality Research International http://www.qualityresearchinternational.com/glossary/empowerment.htm, accesses on December 8, 2006.
Herbert, Elizabeth. A. 1998. Lessons Learned About Student Portfolios. Phi Delta
Kappa International. http://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/kheb9804.htm. accessed January 31, 2007.
Herman, Aschbacher, and Winters. 1992.
http://intranet.cps.k12.il.us/Assessments/Ideas_and_Rubrics/Intro_Scoring /Intro_P1/intro_p1.html, accessed July 14, 2004.
Howart, Pattrick. 2006. Increasing Student Interaction. http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/think/speak/interaction.shtml, accessed on December 3, 2006.
Livingston, Jennifer A. 1997. Metacognition: An Overview. http://www.gse.buffalo.edu/fas/shuell/CEP564/Metacog.htm
(3)
Jones, E. A. & Ratcliff, G. 1993. Critical Tthinking Skills for College Students. National Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, and Assessment, University Park, PA. (Eric Document Reproduction Services No. ED 358 772) http://www.utc.edu/Teaching-Resource-Center/Fac_Dev.html, accessed on August 24, 2006.
Kemp, Judy and Debby Toperoff. 1998. Guidelines for Portfolio Assessment. http://www.anglit.net/main/portfolio/default.html, accessed on July 14, 2003.
Kreisberg, S. 1992. Transforming Power: Domination, Empowerment, and Education. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Maxwell, Joseph A. 1996. Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach. California: Sage.
McNamara, Tim. 2000. Language Testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Merriam, Sharan B. 1988. Case Study Research in Education: A Qualitative
Approach. San Francisco: Jorsey-Bass.
Musthafa, Bachrudin. 1996. Assessment Strategies for Optimal Literacy. EDRS 403 300.
Nation, Paul. 1989. “Group Work and Language Learning”. English Teaching Forum. April 1989. Volume XXVI p. 20-24.
Oppenheim, A.N. 1966. Questionnaire Design and Attitude Measurement. London: Heinemann.
Pierce, Loraine Valdez and J Michael O’Malley. 1992. Performance and Portfolio
Assessment for Language Minority Students.
http://ss.uno.edu./SS/WebPages/PortfolioAsses.html, accessed on February 19, 2003.
Patsula, Peter J. 1999. Applying Learning Theories to Online Instructional
Design. Seoul.
http://www.patsula.com/usefo/webbasedlearning/tutorial1/learning theories full version.html#vygotsky, accessed on February 19, 2003. Patten, Peggy. 1992. “Developing Social Skills”. The National Network for
Children Care: Day Care Centre Connections. Urbana Campaign: University of Illinois Cooperative Extension Service.
(4)
Prapphal, Kanchana. 2001. “Roles, Values, and Challenges of Language Testing”. Journal of Southeast Asian Education. Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 362-372. Bangkok: SEAMEO.
Sewell, et al. 2003. The Use of Portfolio Assessment in Evaluation. http://ag.arizona.edu /fcs/cyfernet/cyfar/Portfo~3.htm, accessed August 15, 2005.
Strategic Teaching and Reading Project Guidebook. 1995. Revised Edition. North
Central Regional Educational Laboratory.
http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/students/learning/lr1metp.htm. Accessed January 14, 2007.
Strohm, S. M., & Baukus, R. A. 1995. “Strategies for Fostering Critical Thinking Skills”. Journalism and Mass Communication Educator, 50 (1), 55-62. http://www.utc.edu/Teaching-Resource-Center/Fac_Dev.html, accessed on August 24, 2006.
Suderadjat, Hari. 2003. Pendidikan Berbasis Luas (BBE) yang Berorientasi pada Kecakapan Hidup (Life Skill). Bandung: Cipta Cekas Grafika.
Sullivan, Anna M. 2002. Pursuit of Goals in Partnerships: Empowerment in Practice.
http://web.uconn.edu/asp/Accelerated_Schools_+Plus/files/student
empowerment/Pursuit of Goals in Partnerships-Empowerment in Practice-Sullivan Anna.doc, accessed on December 2, 2006.
Sweet, David. 1993. “Student Portfolios: Classroom Use”. Education Research Consumer Guide. 8th edition.
http://www.ed.gov/pubs/OR/ConsumerGuides/classuse.html. Accessed on June 5, 2003.
Tierney, et al. 1991. Portfolio Assessment in the Reading-Writing Classroom. Norwood: Christopher-Gordon Publishers.
Upbin, Bruce. 1999. ”Instant Feedback In The Classroom”. Forbes Magazine. March 22, 1999.
http://kancrn.kckps.k12.ks.us/Harmon/breighm/rubrics.html, accessed August, 28. 2006.
Wade, C. 1995. “Using Writing to Develop and Assess Critical Thinking”. Teaching of Psychology, 22(1), 24-28. http://www.utc.edu/Teaching-Resource-Center/Fac_Dev.html, accessed on August 24, 2006.
(5)
Walker, Grayson H. 1997. Critical Thinking. Chattanooga: The University of Tennessee. http://www.utc.edu/Teaching-Resource-Center/critical.htm. Last modified November 9, 1999. Accessed January 13, 2007.
Weir, J. Cyril. 1990. Communicative Language Testing. UK: Prentice Hall. Wikipedia Encyclopedia. 2006. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assessment.
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Last modified 03:08, 24 January 2007. accessed December 18, 2006.
Windsor, Pamela J.T. 2003. A Guide to the Development of Professional
Portfolios in the Faculty of Education.
http://www.edu.uleth.ca/fe/ppd/contents.html, accessed on Febuary 27, 2003.
Wirza, Yanti. 2004. Social Interaction in EFL Classroom. Unpublished thesis. Bandung: UPI.
(6)
Jeffrey S. Kupperman http://www2.eou.edu/~kdahl/emicdef.html
Emic and Etic
Using peer- and self-assessment in the undergraduate classroom
http://lsn.curtin.edu.au/eac2006/abstracts/allen.html Last modified November 16, 2006 ev an ass confere 2-6 enhancg ss learning