THE INSTRUCTIONAL PROCESS OF TEACHING SPEAKING TO BILINGUAL STUDENTS AT SMP AL-AZHAR.

(1)

THE INSTRUCTIONAL PROCESS OF TEACHING SPEAKING

TO BILINGUAL STUDENTS AT SMP AL-AZHAR MEDAN

A Thesis

Submitted to the English Applied Linguistics Study Program in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Magister Humaniora

By:

Raisa Siska Tanjung

Registration Number: 8126111029

ENGLISH APPLIED LINGUISTICS STUDY PROGRAM

POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL

STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN

MEDAN

(2)

THE INSTRUCTIONAL PROCESS OF TEACHING SPEAKING

TO BILINGUAL STUDENTS AT SMP AL-AZHAR MEDAN

A Thesis

Submitted to the English Applied Linguistics Study Program in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Magister Humaniora

By:

Raisa Siska Tanjung

Registration Number: 8126111029

ENGLISH APPLIED LINGUISTICS STUDY PROGRAM

POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL

STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN

MEDAN

(3)

(4)

(5)

ABSTRACT

Tanjung, R. S. Registration Number: 08216111029. The Instructional Process of Teaching Speaking to Bilingual Students at SMP Al-Azhar Medan. A Thesis: English Applied Linguistics Study Program. Postgraduate School, State University of Medan. 2014.

The objectives of this study was to describe the instructional process of teaching speaking to bilingual students at Junior High School (Sekolah Menengah Pertama: SMP) Al-Azhar Medan. The research was designed by applying naturalistic qualitative inquiry. The data sources were taken from key informants and supporting informants, the key informant was English teacher at SMP Al-Azhar and supporting informants were other English teachers and students. The data were obtained by implementing participant observation and interview. The participant observation was held to investigate the instructional process. Furthermore, the interview was conducted to collect the information on the reasons why such process was conducted in the instructional process of teaching speaking to bilingual students which refers to the perfective view of language teaching. The analyses of this research were by applying Bogdan & Biklen (1992) approach. The findings show that there were four steps of the instructional process of teaching speaking namely Analysis, Preparation, Implementation, and Evaluation or Assessment. Analysis was conducted to identify the process which was done by teacher about what to be learned and to whom the lesson was taught. The preparation is the setting up process in creating the strategies to teach speaking; which happened directly or in the planning of the lesson plan. Implementation is the main process in practicing speaking which applies the strategies or method. Evaluation or assessment is the feedback from the teacher all or parts of materials which had been studied. Based on the interviews and observations it was found that the instructional process of teaching speaking which had been done by the teacher refers to the interactional view because the teacher taught speaking based on the student’s interaction directly in a real context. These research finding tend to ADDIE’s (2003) model. The development and designing includes the preparation, and evaluation that can be used as the assessment. Based on the result of the study, conclusions, implications and suggestions are directed to English teacher in modifying, designing and implementing instructional process of teaching speaking and to get recent methods in improving the teaching of speaking to bilingual students.

(6)

ABSTRAK

Tanjung, R. S. Instruksional Proses Pengajaran Berbicara kepada Siswa Bilingual di SMP Al-Azhar Medan. Tesis: Program Studi Terapan Linguistik Bahasa Inggris, Sekolah Pascasarjana, Universitas Negeri Medan. 2014.

Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk mendeskripsikan proses pembelajaran mengajar berbicara kepada siswa bilingual di SMP Al-Azhar Medan. Penelitian ini dirancang dengan penelitian kualitatif naturalistik. Sumber data diambil dari informan kunci dan informan pendukung, informan kunci adalah guru bahasa Inggris di SMP Al-Azhar dan informan pendukung adalah Guru bahasa Inggris lainnya dan siswa di SMP Al-Azhar Medan. Data diperoleh dengan menerapkan observasi dan wawancara. Observas diadakan untuk menyelidiki proses pembelajaran. Selain itu, wawancara ini dilakukan untuk mendapatkan informasi yang mendalam pada alasan mengapa proses tersebut dilakukan dalam proses pembelajaran mengajar berbicara kepada siswa bilingual yang merujuk pada persfektif pandangan pengajaran bahasa. Analisis dari penelitian ini adalah dengan menerapkan pendekatan Bogdan & Biklen. Temuan ini menunjukkan bahwa ada empat langkah dari proses pembelajaran pengajaran berbicara kepada siswa bilingual yaitu Analisis (Analysis), Persiapan (preparation), Pelaksanaan (Implementation) dan Evaluasi atau Penilaian (Evaluation or Assesment). Analisis adalah proses identifikasi yang dilakukan oleh guru tentang apa yang harus dipelajari dan kepada siapa pelajaran tersebut dipelajari. Persiapan adalah proses persiapan dalam menciptakan strategi untuk mengajarkan Berbicara (Speaking), ini dapat terjadi secara langsung atau dalam Rancangan Pelaksanaan Pembelajaran (RPP). Pelaksanaan adalah proses utama dalam melatih berbicara yang menggunakan strategi atau metode. Evaluasi atau penilaian adalah umpan balik dari guru dalam menilai semua atau sebahagian dari materi yang telah dipelajari. Berdasarkan interview dan observasi ditemukan bahwa instruksional proses pengajaran berbicara yang telah dilakukan oleh guru merujuk pada pandangan interactional karena guru tersebut mengajar Speaking berdasarkan interaksi siswa-siswa secara langsung pada konteks yang nyata.Temuan penelitian ini memunculkan temuan dimana teori sebelumnya cenderung pada Model ADDIE. Pengembangan (Depelovement) dan perancangan (Designing) mencakup persiapan (Preparation), dan evaluasi dapat disebut sebagai penilaian (Assesment). Berdasarkan hasil studi, kesimpulan, implikasi dan saran diarahkan kepada guru bahasa inggris dalam memodifikasi, merancang dan menerapkan proses pembelajaran pengajaran speaking dan untuk mendapatkan metode dan strategi terbaru dalam meningkatkan pengajaran speaking kepada siswa bilingual.

(7)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

In the name of Allah, the most gracious and the most merciful to whom she would like to express her sincere gratitude. Praise to Allah, Allah the almighty, who has given her blessings health, strength and patience in the process of completing this thesis, so that she can finish her thesis as partial fulfillment of the requirement and purpose graduation degree of magister Humaniora.

This thesis would not also have been possible without the help of a great many people. First, in particular, the writer would like to express her gratitude to Prof. Hj. Tina Mariany Arifin, M.A., P. hD., who has gives her every bits suggestions and corrections especially with her close supervisions until this thesis is in its present form, second Dr. Didik Santoso, M. Pd., for the generous assistance, guidance, advice, and precious time they spent on supervising and guiding her.

Third, the writer would also like to express her gratitude to Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning, M. Pd., the Head of English Applied Linguistics Program, Dr. Sri Minda Murni, M.Sc. as the secretary and Farid who have assisted her in the administration process required during the process of completing this study program. Special thanks to all lecturers of the English Applied Linguistics Program, State University of Medan who have delivered their valuable knowledge to her.

Thanks are due to her reviewers and examiners, Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning, M.Pd., Dr. Zainuddin, M.Hum., and Dr. Eddy Setia, M.Ed., TESP for the valuable inputs to be inserted in this thesis.

She would also very much like to express her gratitude to all the informants at SMP Al-Azhar Medan who have generously given their time, chance, and supplied her

(8)

with information for analyses of this study , particularly to Arihta Saragih, S.Pd., the English teacher and to the Headmaster, Drs. H. Agustono, M.A.

Finally, this piece of academic work is dedicated to her love and sincerest gratitude to her husband, Acil Muhammad, S.Si., her parents, H.Yusri Tanjung and Hj Darwilis, his brothers, and sister for their sincere and most reliable comfort, their love and support. And also for all her friends in A1 and A2 class to their cares and advices to the writer.

May Allah Bless us!

Medan, Agustus, 2014 The writer,

Raisa Siska Tanjung

(9)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ABSTRACT ...i

ACKNOLADGEMENT ...iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ...iv

LIST OF TABLES ...vii

LIST OF FIGURES ...viii

LIST OF APPENDICES ...ix

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ...xi

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ... 1

1.1 The Background of the Study ... 1

1.2 The Problems of the Study ... 5

1.3 The Objectives of the Study ... 6

1.4 The Scope of the Study ... 6

1.5 The Significance of the Study ... 7

CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF LITERATURE ... 8

2.1 The Instructional Process ... 8

2.2 Kinds of Instructional Process ... 10

2.2.1 ADDIE’s (2003) Model ... 11

2.2.1.1 Analysis ... 11

2.2.1.2 Design ... 11

(10)

2.2.1.4 Implementation ... 12

2.2.1.5 Evaluation ... 12

2.2.2 Dick and Carey’s (2001) Model ... 13

2.2.3 Kemp’s (1987) Instructional Design Model ... 15

2.3 The Teaching of Speaking ... 17

2.3.1 The Nature of Speaking ... 17

2.3.2 The Teaching of Speaking English ... 19

2.3.2 .1 Mechanics ... 21

2.3.2.2 Functions ... 22

2.3.2.3 Social and cultural rules and norms ... 22

2.3.3 The Role of The Teacher ... 23

2.3.3.1 Prompter ... 23

2.3.3.2 Participant ... 23

2.3.3.3 Observer... 24

2.3.4 The Role of The Students in The Instructional Process of Teaching Speaking... 24

2.4 The Instructional Process in Teaching Speaking ... 26

2.4.1 Setting up ... 26

2.4.2 Speaking Practice ... 27

2.4.3 Feedback ... 27

2.5 The Reasons of Choosing The Instructional Process ... 28

2.5.1 The Structural View ... 28

2.5.2 The Functional View ... 28

(11)

2.6 Bilingual and Bilingualism ... 31

2.6.1 Bilingual School ... 32

2.6.2 Bilingual Class ... 32

2.6.3 Bilingual Students ... 33

2.7 The Instructional Process of Teaching English to Bilingual Students ... 35

2.7.1 Analysis ... 35

2.7.2 Preparation ... 35

2.7.3 Implementation ... 36

2.7.4 Evaluation ... 36

2.7.5 Revision ... 37

2.8 Relevant Studies ... 38

CHAPTER III: RESEARCH METHOD ... 43

3.1 Research Design ... 44

3.2 Research Setting ... 44

33. Data and Data Resources ... 44

3.4 Technique of Data Collection ... 45

3.4.1 Observation ... 45

3.4.2 Interview ... 46

3.4.3 Documentation ... 46

3.5 Technique of Data Analysis ... 47

(12)

CHAPTER IV: DATA ANALYSIS, FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ... 50

4.1 Data Analysis ... 50

4.2 The Instructional process ... 54

4.2.1 The Analysis ... 54

4.2.2 The Preparation ... 60

4.2.3 The Implementation ... 63

4.2.4 Evaluation / Assessment ... 67

4.2 Findings ... 74

4.3 Discussion ... 77

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS ... 81

5.1 Conclusions ... 81

5.2 Suggestions ... 83

REFERENCES ... 84

(13)

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

4.1 : Observation Sheet ... 50

4.2 : The teacher Activities ... 51

4.3 : The Conclusion of The Four Instructional Process ... 70

4.4 : The Differences and The Similarities among Theories and

Findings ... 77

(14)

LIST OF FIGURES

Figures Page

2.1 : ADDIE’s (2003) Model ... 13

2.2 : Dick and Carey‘s (2001) System Approach Model. ... 15

2.3 : Kemp’s (1987) Instructional Design Model ... 17

(15)

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix Page

I : Observation Guide (English Teacher) ... 89

II : Interview Guide (English Teacher). ... 90

III : Interview Guide (Students) ... 91

IV : Interview Guide (Other English Teachers) ... 92

V : Observation Sheet (Observation I) ... 93

VI : Observation Sheet (Observation II). ... 99

VII : Observation Sheet (Observation III) ... 107

VIII : Interview Sheet (English Teacher) ... 111

IX : Interview Sheet (Student 1) ... 113

X : Interview Sheet (Student 2) ... 116

XI : Interview Sheet (Student 3) ... 117

XII : Interview Sheet (Student 4) ... 118

XIII : Interview Sheet (Student 5) ... 119

XIV : Interview Sheet Other English Teachers (Teacher 1) ... 120

XV : Interview Sheet Other English Teachers (Teacher 2) ... 122

(16)

XVII : Interview Sheet Other English Teachers (Teacher 4) ... 127

XVIII : Interview Sheet Other English Teachers (Teacher 5) ... 129

XIX : Data Reduction ... 132

XX : The Documentation (Lesson Plan) ... 143

(17)

LIST OF ABBREVATIONS

EFL : English as Foreign Language Teaching

CTL : Contextual Teaching Learning

ISS : International Standard School

USAID : United State Agency for International Development

ID : Instructional Design

ICC : Intercultural Communicative Competence

NNES : Non Native English Speaking

IP : Interactional Process

Obs : Observation

Intv : Interview

Doc : Document

Coding of Indonesian Version

CMP : The way in opening the lesson (Cara Membuka Pelajaran)

CMnyP : The way in preparing the lesson (Cara Menyiapkan Pelajaran)

CMSp : The way in teaching speaking (Cara Mengajar Speaking)

CMnP : The way in assessing the lesson (Cara Menilai Pembelajaran)

Obs : Observations

Intv : Interviews

(18)

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

The teaching of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) has long become a necessity which should be taught in the Indonesian education system. English as a compulsory subject is taught for three years at Junior High Schools (Sekolah Menengah Pertama: SMP) and for another three years at Senior High Schools (Sekolah Menengah Atas: SMA) (Lauder, 2008). English also has been taught in Elementary Schools as an elective subject since the implementation of the 1994 Curriculum. It seems that the development of English language teaching in Indonesia touches the recent English curriculum objectives, Educational Unit Level Curriculum (Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan: KTSP) curriculum in 2008 and 2013 which consider English as the national curriculum for Junior High and Senior High Schools.

In the 2013 curriculum of SMP, English subject is the basic competence which students should achieve is written as the first basic competence from the last main competence about the implementation of knowledge into a real context. As an example, the content of the basic competence in Grade VIII which is: arranging oral text to speak and response to expression of asking attention, checking a comprehending, praising and asking permission with a correct grammatical sentence and adequate context. From this statement, the Indonesian

(19)

government emphasizes English subject is not only studied as theory but also it should be applied in a real context.

The necessity of mastery English make schools should produce qualified graduates to face the global competitions and challenges. Those have made the Indonesian government to implement a bilingual program, and this program has been implemented around five years since 2008. Even though it is not taught since January 8th 2013, the bilingual programs are still needed to be maintained in schools and some bilingual schools are given the official approval to conduct such program. As stated by Idris (2013), that the International Standard School must complete the program which has been running since the beginning until the end of the school year. Although the International Standard School has been stopped, the programs which are running, is needed to be maintained such as Information Technology (IT) -based learning, learning bilingual, and the relationship with the educational institutions aboard. Those needs should be completed until the end of the school year. Moreover bilingual program can be included into the program which implements one of the contents in the 2013 curriculum which is the implementation of English into real contexts.

Teaching speaking in bilingual class mostly relates to teach English as a second language, because bilingual class also uses English as a language used in the classroom. Kayi (2010) states that speaking is a crucial part of a second language learning and teaching. Despite its importance, for many years, teaching speaking has been undervalued and English language teachers have continued to

(20)

teach speaking just as a repetition of drills or memorization of dialogues. Thalal (2010) states that there are many cases in which students’ expectations do not match with the reality of learning performance showing that their English proficiency is still low and they do not have significant English ability after many years of study. Moreover, students of foreign language education programs are considered successful if they can communicate effectively in the language (Riggenback & Lazaraton, in Budiati 1991). So in this case speaking ability is a crucial problem for students especially in bilingual class.

In reality, based on an observation at SMP Al-Azhar Medan, there are still very limited numbers of bilingual students who are able to communicate in English actively. Based on the data from the English teacher there are 25 % of bilingual students who are not able to speaking English effectively. And also based on the observation of the instructional process of teaching speaking in bilingual classroom, the teacher instructed the student to make the dialogue, memorize the dialogue and presenting it in front of the class.

Ahmad (2013) in his post graduate E-Journal of Undiksha, he states that the change in the curriculum is not followed by an appropriate socialization and teacher training accordingly, and so the results thus far do not match the expectations. The teachers are still teaching with the biggest emphasis on grammar, and some of them teach without paying attention to a proper instruction. Such as in speaking skill, the students are instructed to memorize the dialogues, the emphasis on fluency in the beginning is not directly followed by accuracy into

(21)

real situation. Actually every teacher has a reason and believes in the teaching of students, what is called by instructional process.

The instructional process leads the students to achieve the lesson which is taught by teachers. It can be seen from the approaches and methods in teaching. Based on Petrone’s view (2011) the instructional process starts with the definition of what the learners should know and finishes with the evaluation of what the learners actually know. Basically the teacher has to decide what to teach, and how to teach, i.e. the teacher has to choose the skills and methods of her/his teaching activity.

Bilingual program at SMP Al-Azhar has been running for eight years, this program emphasizes on the use of English as a language used in the classroom in bilingual class, moreover English has become the main focuses in this school, many activities which have been done at SMP Al-Azhar in improving English namely English Debate, Story Telling, Spelling Bee, and Teaching from Native speakers, etc.

SMP Al-Azhar Medan still implements bilingual program which is in line with the national curriculum. The instructional process of teaching speaking class is needs to be observed because the bilingual students who can only speak English effectively are very limited.

In connection with the instructional process of teaching speaking to bilingual students, the researcher is very much interested in describing how

(22)

English is taught at SMP of Al Azhar Medan especially in speaking skill. Besides, teacher and students need to have a higher standard of teaching - learning process inside the classrooms particularly speaking skill.

Therefore, it is very interesting to examine how the English teacher conducts the instructional process of teaching speaking in bilingual classes. Furthermore Volya (2009) states that, a professional teacher should have an adequate theory of teaching speaking. As the focus of teaching speaking, it is important to observe the process in teaching the oral production of the bilingual students, considering that this program uses English as their language of instruction, and how the instructional process of the teacher is done by the teaching of speaking to bilingual students at SMP Al-Azhar Medan. The researcher will discover the answers of those questions in this study.

1.2 The Problems of the Study

Based on the background described in the previous section, the problems are formulated as follows:

1) What instructional process is implemented in the teaching of speaking to bilingual students at SMP Al-Azhar Medan?

2) How does the instructional process of speaking to bilingual students occur?

3) Why does the instructional process of teaching speaking to bilingual students occur the way it does?

(23)

1.3 The Objectives of the Study

Based on the problems of the study, the objectives of the study are to:

1) discover the instructional process of teaching speaking to bilingual students at SMP Al-Azhar Medan.

2) determine how the instructional process of teaching speaking to bilingual at SMP Al-Azhar Medan is, and

3) determine the reasons why the instructional process of teaching speaking occurred the way it does.

1.4 The Scope of the Study

The instructional process can cover a large scope but referring to the problems of the research, this study is focused on the investigation of the implementation of the theory used in the instructional process of teaching speaking which is applied to bilingual students. The teaching of speaking should cover the achievement as stated in the national curriculum. This is also concerned with the analysis on how the instructional process of teaching speaking occurs in bilingual classroom, and why the teacher applies them in teaching speaking to bilingual classes as they do.

(24)

1.5 The Significance of the Study

The findings of this study are expected to be useful:

1.5.1 Theoretically

A contribution for those who want to enrich their knowledge on the instructional process, develop or implement the theory on the instructional process of speaking to bilingual students and to discover how the theory is put into practice for the development of teaching itself.

1.5.2 Practically

1. This research is expected to be able to add the knowledge of English teacher in managing the teaching speaking to bilingual students.

2. To help the English teacher gets recent methods and strategies in improving the teaching of speaking especially in modifying, designing and implementing the teaching of speaking to bilingual students.

3. To the Headmaster in deciding a teaching - learning methods and strategies to English teachers in the instructional process of teaching speaking.

4. Students in understanding the steps of learning how to speak in order to be active in studying speaking.

5. Other researchers to get the information of the instructional process of teaching speaking, the recourses of the instructional process of English, hence as the reference in conducting other studies with different population and schools.

(25)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

5.1 Conclusions

After analyzing the instructional process the researcher presents the conclusion of the instructional process of teaching speaking used by teacher in SMP Al Azhar Medan consists of four steps which are Analysis, Preparation, Implementation and Evaluation.

This instructional process of teaching speaking to bilingual students at SMP Al-Azhar Medan tend to implement the using of the ADDIE model, which is Analysis; this is setting process which was happened when the teacher gave an apperception and in the opening and in the main activity this process was made in

order to recognize the students’ ability and identifying the goal of the lesson,

Design and Development are the processes of preparation the lesson plan, having recognizing the students and identify the objectives of the study, teacher matched the lesson plan with the situation of the class. Implementation is the teacher’s actions which included the strategies and methods were applied by teacher to do speaking practice. The last process is evaluation, this process is feed back of the teaching, it included role pay, make dialogue or drama in form of the task or homework. Teacher used of this evaluation is not always in the end of the meeting, but in the end of the whole materials of the lesson. So it can be said that the instructional process of teaching speaking tend to use ADDIE model.

(26)

The choice why the teachers implement that kind of speaking instructional process in bilingual class are; 1) the program of school was decided that lesson plan should be there in the beginning of the academic year, so the teacher should do the analyze in the time of instructional process happened. 2) The bilingual students are choosing students who have the basic ability generally in English so, the teacher did not get difficulty in matching lesson plan to the students’ ability. 3) The English teacher improved the teaching ability namely Forum of Teachers’ Subject (Musyawarah Guru Mata Pelajaran: MGMP).So, the English teacher in SMP Al-Azhar mostly has the same way in the instructional process. 4) This school implements the CTL method which teach based on the students’ context and condition. The strategies in the implementation process was applied by teacher are always asking and answer, role play and storytelling. These strategies and method were found by Harmer (2013) and they were very useful for speaking activities. The teacher emphasize that teaching bilingual should be reality condition, in order to practice them and make it as a habit in speaking English. So, students showed interaction with their friend. So, it can be concluded that the teacher had the tendency to the interactional view which showed teaching speaking directly in real context based on the interaction between the speaker and listener.

(27)

5.2 Suggestions

In relation to the conclusions, some suggestions are presented as follows:

1. To other researcher, since this study did not involve all aspects of interactional process of teaching speaking to bilingual students, it is expected that other researchers can develop this research in other school. 2. It is expected that the teacher and the headmaster to cooperate in

designing the instructional process, especially the English teacher to modify the instructional process of teaching speaking to bilingual students in order to encourage the teachers’ teaching strategies.

3. It is also suggested to other students of English Applied Linguistics Study Program:

a. to study and apply the instructional process which has not been used in teaching speaking.

b. to consider the responsibility of linguists and thus the scope of discussion for Students of English Applied Linguistics Study Program. Students of Applied Linguistic should explore and investigate some other phenomena of the instructional process of teaching speaking.

(28)

REFERENCES

Ahmad, Seken, K. Artini, L. P. 2013. A Study on Strategies for Teaching Speaking and Reading Comprehension Skills.e-Journal Program Pascasarjana Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha. English Education Study Program (Volume 1 Tahun 2013).

Anthony, E. M. 1963. Approach, Method, and Technique. el-Journal (2): 63– 43. doi:10.1093/elt/XVII.2.63. Accessed on January 20th 2014.

Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., & Sorensen, C. 2010Introduction to Research in Education. Eighth h Edition. USA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

Astika, G. 2009. Model Kelas Bilingual di Sekolah Bertaraf Internasional: Sebuah Pemikiran Konseptual. Guru Pembaharu.com: Forum komunikasi, interaksi, dan kolaborasi pendidik. Accessed on January11th 2014

Baker,C. 2000. A Parents’ and Teachers’ Guide to Bilingualism. second edition. Clevedon : Multilingual Matters

Bell, D. 2003. "Method and Postmethod: Are They Really So

Incompatible?". TESOL Quarterly 37 (2): 315–328. Accessed on February 7th 2012.

Bogdan, R. C. & Biklen, S. K. 1992. Qualitative Research for Education. Second edition. USA : Allyn and Bacon.

Brown, H.D. 2002.Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Paedagogy. USA :Hall International, Ltd.

Budiati, U. & Cahyono, B. Y. 2006. The Teaching of EFL Speaking in The Indonesian Context: The State of The Art. Arts and Languages’ Paper presented in Malang on Agustus, (Tahun 34, No.2)

Burkart, G.S. 1998.Material for this section was drawn from “Spoken language:

What it is and how to teach it” by Grace Stovall Burkart, in Modules for the

professional preparation of teaching assistants in foreign languages. Washington DC: Center for Applied Linguistics. Accessed on 10th November 2013.

Celis, C.2009. Teaching Process. Article: Mediawiki. Accessed on January 25th 2014.

Chin, N. B & Wigglesworth, G. 2007. Bilingualism: An advanced resource book. USA: Routledge.

(29)

Cohen, A. D. 1976. The case for partial or total immersion education. In A. Simões, Jr. (Ed.), The bilingual child/El niñobilingüe (65–89).e-book. New York: Academic Press. Accessed on November 19th 2013.

Cohen, L. &Manion, L. 1994. Research Methods in Education(fourth edition). E-book, http://research-srttu.wikispaces.com. London: Routledge.

B. S. N. 2006. Pedoman Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan untuk Sekolah Menengah Atas Tahun 2006. Jakarta: Depeartemen Pendidikan Nasional Republik Indonesia.

Denzin, N.K., & Lincoln, Y.S. 1994. Handbook of Qualitative Research. e-book. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publication. Accessed on February 5th 2014.

Dharma, S. 2007. Sekolah Bertaraf Internasional: Quo Vadiz?.e-Journal. Accessed on November 19th 2013.

Dick W., Carey L & Carey J. O., 2001. The Systematic Design ofInstruction, (7th Edition), Allyn & Bacon: Boston.

Driscoll, M. P. (2000). Psychology of learning for instruction. 2nd ed. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon: Florida. E-book. Accessed on February 15th 2014.

Ferguson, G. 2006. Language Planning and Education. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Ginting, F. 2013. The Implementation of Bilingualism the Implementation of Bilingual Education Programs At Junior High Schools. Unpublished M.Hum Thesis, English Applied Linguistics Study Program, Medan: State University of Medan.

Goldenberg, C. 1991.Instructional Conversations and Their Classroom Application. Educational Practice Reports 2, e-Journal, Santa Cruz: Center for Research on Education, Diversity and Excellence. Accessed on February 15th 2014.

Gunarsa, D, S. 1990. Psikologi perkembangan, Gunung Mulia Fact-Finding Visit to Indonesia. Jakarta: British Council.

Graham, H. 2011. Exploring English Language Teaching: Language in Action. London, New York: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-58415-9. Accessed on 24 January 2014.

Hadley, A. O. 1993.Teaching Language. 2ndEdition, USA: Heinle and Heinle Publishers.

(30)

Hadjar,I. 1996. Dasar-Dasar Metodologi Penelitian Kuantatif Dalam Pendidikan. Jakarta: GrafindoPersada.

Harmer, J. 2001.The Practice of English Language Teaching. Essex, U.K.: Longman

_________. 2004. How to teach English. Malaysia: Longman.

Hannum, W. H. 2005. Instructional systems development: A thirty year retrospective. Educational Technology, 45(4), 5-21.

Harun, C. A. 2008. Proses Pembelajaran Bahasa Inggris di Sekolah Dasar Negeri (Studi Deskriptif di Kecamatan Cileunyi – Kabupaten Bandung), Unpublished Journal, Universitas Pendidikan Indonsia: Bandung

Idris, N. S. 2000. Ragam Media dalam Pembelajaran BIPA dalam Prosiding KIPBIBA III. Bandung: CV Andira.

Islami, A 2012.Improving Students’ Speaking Competence By Using Teaching Aids. Journal: ORBITH Vol. 8 No. 1 March: 38-43:Demak.

Jacob, E. 1998. Clarifying qualitative research: A focus on traditions. e- Journal.

Educational researcher, 17(1), 16-24.Accessed on November 2nd 2013. Johnson, K& Johnson, H, Eds. 1999. "Approach". Encyclopedic Dictionary of

Applied Linguistics: A Handbook for Language Teaching. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. ISBN 978-0-631-22767-0. Accessed on January 20th2014.

Kayi, H. 2006. Teaching Speaking: Activities to Promote Speaking in a Second Language. The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. XII, No. 11: Nevada USA. iteslj.org/Techniques/Kayi-TeachingSpeaking.html. Accessed on November 2nd2013.

Kumaravadivelu, B. 2006. Understanding Language Teaching. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum. ISBN 978-0-8058-5176-2. Accessed on January22nd 2014.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Cuba, E. G. 1985. Naturalistic Inquiry. California: Sage Publication. E –books, Accessed on January 22nd 2014.

Malihah, N. 2011. The Effectiveness of Speaking Instruction Through Task-Based Language Teaching. e-Journal. English Education Department, University of Salatiga. journalregister.stainsalatiga.ac.id. Accessed on January 22nd 2014.

Martinez, D. A. V. 2012. Describing Two Teachers’ Instructional Design For Language Teaching And Its Relation To Colombian Standards for Learning English. E-Journal, Instructional Design and English Learning

(31)

Standards. Faculty of Fine Arts And Humanities BA, English Language Technological University. Pereira. repositorio.utp.edu.co. Accessed on January 24th2014.

Milles, M. B & Huberman, A. M. 1984. Qualitative Data Analysis. A Sourcebook of New Methods. California: Saga Publication, Inc.

Nunan, D. 1989. Designing tasks for the communicative classroom.e-book. Cambridge University Press. Accessed on February 1st 2013.

_________. 2002. Practical English Language Teaching. NY:McGraw-Hill. Park, Y 2010 Instructional Design Implications for Non-native English Speaking

Graduate Students: Perceptions on Intercultural Communicative Competences and Instructional Design Strategies for Socially Engaged Learning.Doctor Philosophy Dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University: Virginia. Accessed on February 15th 2014.

Patel, M. F &Jain P.M. 2008. English Language Teaching(Methods, Tools & Techniques). Canada : Sunrise Publishers & Distributors.

Petrone, M. M., Bruni, F., Cofrancesco, P., &Caldirola, E. 2011. Instructional

Process and Digital Resources. e-Journal.

file:///C:/Users/Eepc/Downloads/Full%20Paper%20COFRANCESCO.pdf Accessed on February 15th 2014.

Pitoy, S. P. 2012. Information and Language for Effective Communication. TEFLIN Journal, Volume 23, No.1. Philippines: Camarines Norte State College. journal.teflin.org. Accessed on February 1st 2013.

Richards, J. C. 2002. Context of Language Teaching. USA: Cambridge University.

Richards, J.C. & Theodore, S. R. 2007. Approaches and methods in language teaching: A description and analysis. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

Ricards, J. C &Renandya. Willy A, 2002. Methodology in Language Teaching; An Anthology of Current Practice. USA: Cambridge University.

Rieken, E, 1993. Teaching Language in Context. Boston: Heinle&Heinle Publiser.

Reigeluth, C. M. 1999. Instructional Theory and Technology for the New Paradigm of Education. e-Journal. Mahwah, RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia. Número 32: Indiana University. Accessed on November 11th 2013.

(32)

Riggenbach, H., &Lazaraton, A. (1991). Promoting oral skills. Teaching English as a second or foreign language, 125-136.e-Journal. http://tesol.aua.am/tq_digital/TQ_DIGIT/Vol_21_2.pdf#page=64.

Accessed on November 17th 2013.

Rustaman, N. 2007. Ilmu dan Aplikasi Pendidikan.E.book, Bandung: PT. Imperial Bhakti Utama. Accessed on February 1st2014.

Ryder, M. 2012.Instructional Design Models and Methods.An article from www.instructionaldesigncentral.com/htm/IDC_instructionaldesignmodels. html. University of Colorado. Accessed on February 2th 2013.

Gagn’e, R. 1985. The Condition of Learning. An article from

www.instructionaldesign.org/theories/conditions-learning.html. New York. Accessed on February 5th 2013.

Schmidt, R. 2001. Cognition and Second Language Instruction, Attention In P. Robinson (Ed.),pp. 3-32. e-Journal, Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press. Accessed on November 11th 2013.

Shenton, K. A. 2004. Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for Information 22 (2004) 63–75 63. IOS Press.

Takakuwa, M. 2000. What’s wrong with the concept of cognitive development in studies of bilingualism. Accessed on 20th December on http//: www.questia.com

Thalal, M. 2010. New Insight into Teaching of English Language to Indonesian Students. E-Journal, Seminar Paper in Jakarta. Accessed on November 11th2013.

Volya, D. 2009. Students’ Speaking Strategies and Teachers’ Teaching Speaking Strategies at Senior High Schools in Kerinci District. e-Journal. Accessed on December 10th 2013.

Wei, L 2000 (ed.) The Bilingualism Reader. E–Journal, Academia.Edu(1st edition) London: Routledge. Accessed on December 10th 2013.

http://www.macmillandictionary.com. Definition of process. British Dictionary. Accessed on December7th 2013.

http://www.instructionaldesigncentral.com/htm/IDC_instructionaldesignmodels.ht m Accessed on February 1st 2013.

(1)

5.2 Suggestions

In relation to the conclusions, some suggestions are presented as follows:

3. It is also suggested to other students of English Applied Linguistics Study Program:

a. to study and apply the instructional process which has not been used in teaching speaking.

(2)

REFERENCES

Anthony, E. M. 1963. Approach, Method, and Technique. el-Journal (2): 63– 43. doi:10.1093/elt/XVII.2.63. Accessed on January 20th 2014.

Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., & Sorensen, C. 2010Introduction to Research in Education. Eighth h Edition. USA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

Baker,C. 2000. A Parents’ and Teachers’ Guide to Bilingualism. second edition. Clevedon : Multilingual Matters

Bell, D. 2003. "Method and Postmethod: Are They Really So Incompatible?". TESOL Quarterly 37 (2): 315–328. Accessed on February 7th 2012.

Bogdan, R. C. & Biklen, S. K. 1992. Qualitative Research for Education. Second edition. USA : Allyn and Bacon.

Brown, H.D. 2002.Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Paedagogy. USA :Hall International, Ltd.

Budiati, U. & Cahyono, B. Y. 2006. The Teaching of EFL Speaking in The Indonesian Context: The State of The Art. Arts and Languages’ Paper presented in Malang on Agustus, (Tahun 34, No.2)

Burkart, G.S. 1998.Material for this section was drawn from “Spoken language: What it is and how to teach it” by Grace Stovall Burkart, in Modules for the professional preparation of teaching assistants in foreign languages. Washington DC: Center for Applied Linguistics. Accessed on 10th November 2013.

Celis, C.2009. Teaching Process. Article: Mediawiki. Accessed on January 25th 2014.

Chin, N. B & Wigglesworth, G. 2007. Bilingualism: An advanced resource book. USA: Routledge.

(3)

Cohen, A. D. 1976. The case for partial or total immersion education. In A. Simões, Jr. (Ed.), The bilingual child/El niñobilingüe (65–89).e-book. New York: Academic Press. Accessed on November 19th 2013.