Collaborative learning to improve students` critical thinking skills in critical reading and writing II class of English Language Education Sanata Dharma University.

(1)

vii ABSTRACT

Baskoro, Andreas Rahardjo Adi. (2015). Collaborative Learning to Improve Students’ Critical Thinking Skills in Critical Reading and Writing II Class of English Language Education Sanata Dharma University. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University.

The demand from the society for the scholars to contribute in many aspects of human life and the enormous amount of available information in this globalization era are the reason for universities to improve students’ quality. This situation leads higher education to improve essential skills for their students: critical thinking skills. English Language Education Sanata Dharma University has realized the concern and answers the situation by holding a course to improve

students’ critical thinking skills: Critical Reading and Writing II. However, improving critical thinking skills was found difficult in Critical Reading and Writing II.

The research was conducted to implement collaborative learning to

improve students’ critical thinking skills in Critical Reading and Writing II Class

of English Language Education Sanata Dharma University. The research problem was formulated into two research questions: how is collaborative learning method

implemented to improve students’ critical thinking skills in CRW II? What are the

difficulties for the students to improve critical thinking skills in CRW II?

The research was designed as a classroom action research. The participants were 19 students of CRW II Class B Semester 4 English Language Education Sanata Dharma University. The research was conducted in two cycles with the implementation of peer involvement, peer assessment, and peer feedback as the collaborative learning strategies. Observation, writing test, and questionnaire were employed in the data gathering. The data analysis was qualitative data analysis in form of narrative discourse and descriptive statistics.

From the result, it was found that the implementation of collaborative learning method gave students opportunity to improve students’ critical thinking

skills in CRW II, which was indicated by students’ general attitudes of critical thinking, suspended judgements, high participation, and the significant change

percentages of students’ scores on argumentative essay (17% change percentage on final mean score).

Keywords: Collaborative learning, critical thinking skills, classroom action research

(2)

viii ABSTRAK

Tuntutan masyarakat yang sangat tinggi terhadap para sarjana untuk berkontribusi dalam berbagai aspek masyarakat dan informasi yang sangat luas di era globalisasi merupakan alasan mengapa perguruan tinggi perlu meningkatkan kualitas mahasiswa. Situasi tersebut menyebabkan perlunya perguruan tinggi meningkatkan kemampuan yang esensial bagi para mahasiswa: daya berpikir kritis. Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Sanata Dharma menjawab kebutuhan tersebut dengan menyelenggarakan sebuah mata kuliah: Critical Reading and Writing II. Meski demikian, peningkatan daya berpikir kritis masih menjadi hal yang sulit dalam mata kuliah tersebut.

Penelitian ini dilaksanakan untuk mengimplementasikan pembelajaran kolaboratif untuk meningkatkan daya berpikir kritis mahasiswa dalam mata kuliah Critical Reading and Writing II Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Sanata Dharma. Pokok permasalahan dirumuskan dalam dua pertanyaan: bagaimana metode pembelajaran kolaboratif diimplementasikan untuk meningkatkan daya berpikir kritis mahasiswa di kelas CRW II? Apa kesulitan mahasiswa dalam meningkatkan daya berpikir kritis di kelas CRW II?

Penelitian ini dirancang sebagai penelitian tindakan kelas. Para partisipan merupakan 19 mahasiswa CRW II kelas B semester 4 Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Sanata Dharma. Penelitian dilaksanakan dalam dua siklus dengan mengimplementasikan tutor sebaya, assessment sebaya, dan umpan balik sebaya sebagai strategi pembelajaran kolaboratif. Observasi, tes menulis, dan kuesioner digunakan dalam proses pengumpulan data. Data analisis menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif dalam bentuk diskursi naratif dan statistika deskriptif.

Berdasarkan hasil penelitian, telah ditemukan bahwa implementasi metode pembelajaran kolaboratif memberi kesempatan kepada mahasiswa untuk meningkatkan daya berpikir kritis di kelas CRW II; hal ini diindikasi dengan sikap berpikir kritis mahasiswa, penilaian kritis, partisipasi yang tinggi, dan persentase perubahan yang signifikan dari skor essai argumentatif mahasiswa (17% peningkatan rata-rata nilai akhir).

Kata kunci: Collaborative learning, critical thinking skills, classroom action research

(3)

COLLABORATIVE LEARNING

TO IMPROVE

STUDENTS’

CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS

IN CRITICAL READING AND WRITING II CLASS

OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

A

SARJANA PENDIDIKAN

THESIS

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

in English Language Education

Andreas Rahardjo Adi Baskoro Student Number: 121214146

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA

(4)

(5)

(6)

“I need to believe, that something extraordinary is possible.” (Alicia Nash, A Beautiful Mind)

This thesis is dedicated to the eager young minds, who dedicate their life for others.

(7)

(8)

(9)

vii ABSTRACT

Baskoro, Andreas Rahardjo Adi. (2015). Collaborative Learning to Improve

Students’ Critical Thinking Skills in Critical Reading and Writing II Class of English Language Education Sanata Dharma University. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University.

The research was conducted to implement collaborative learning to improve students’ critical thinking skills in Critical Reading and Writing II Class of English Language Education Sanata Dharma University. The research problem was formulated into two research questions: how is collaborative learning method implemented to improve students’ critical thinking skills in CRW II? What are the difficulties for the students to improve critical thinking skills in CRW II?

From the result, it was found that the implementation of collaborative learning method gave students opportunity to improve students’ critical thinking skills in CRW II, which was indicated by students’ general attitudes of critical thinking, suspended judgements, high participation, and the significant change percentages of students’ scores on argumentative essay (17% change percentage on final mean score).

Keywords: Collaborative learning, critical thinking skills, classroom action research

(10)

viii ABSTRAK

Baskoro, Andreas Rahardjo Adi. (2015). Collaborative Learning to Improve

Students’ Critical Thinking Skills in Critical Reading and Writing II Class of English Language Education Sanata Dharma University. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University.

Kata kunci: Collaborative learning, critical thinking skills, classroom action research

(11)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would express my deepest gratitude to the Lord Almighty God, for without His blessing this thesis would not have been completely done. I am very grateful that with His blessing, I could enjoy my struggle and reap a lot of values along the process until this thesis was done.

My next gratitude is addressed to Drs. Pius Nurwidasa Prihatin, M.Ed., Ed.D., who has given me lots of critiques and advices in completing my thesis. I am very grateful to have him as my thesis advisor; for me, he is very experienced in managing details on thesis, which he gives and shares to his students. I was helped with the detailed feedback from him, which helped me dealing with practical things, even the smallest ones, which actually held important roles in completing my thesis.

I also addressed my gratitude to Priyatno Ardi, S.Pd., M.Hum. as the lecturer of Critical Reading and Writing II, who gave me the opportunity to conduct my research in his class. He also gave me many advices during the research, which helped me completing my thesis. Last but not least, I addressed my gratitude to all people who helped me with many things during the research. My deepest gratitude for you, who have helped me completing this thesis and my study in this university.

May this thesis be useful to the eager young minds, who never stop learning and dedicate their life to others.

(12)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

TITLE PAGE i

APPROVAL PAGES ii

DEDICATION PAGE iv

STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY v

PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI vi

ABSTRACT vii

ABSTRAK viii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ix

TABLE OF CONTENTS x

LIST OF TABLES xiv

LIST OF FIGURES xv

LIST OF CHARTS xvi

LIST OF APPENDICES xvii

CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION 1

A. Research Background 1

B. Research Problems 5

C. Problem Limitation 6

D. Research Objectives 6

E. Research Benefits 6

(13)

CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 9

A. Theoretical Description 9

1. Defining Critical Thinking in Reading and Writing 9 2. Collaborative Learning Method to Improve Critical Thinking

Skills in Writing Argumentative Essay 14 a. Constructivism Approach as The Basis of Collaborative

Learning Method 15

b. The Benefits of Collaborative Learning Method to Improve Students’ Critical Thinking Skills 16 c. Techniques in Collaborative Learning Method to

Improve Students’ Critical Thinking Skills 17

1) Peer Involvement 18

2) Peer Assessment 20

3) Peer Feedback 22

B. Theoretical Framework 24

CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 28

A. Research Method 28

B. Research Setting 31

C. Research Participants / Subjects 32

D. Research Instruments and Data Gathering Technique 33

1. Observation 33

2. Writing test 34

(14)

xii

E. Data Analysis Technique 36

1. Qualitative Data Analysis 37

2. Descriptive Statistics 37

F. Research Procedure 41

CHAPTER IV. RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 42

A. The Implementation of Collaborative Learning Method to Improve Students’ Critical Thinking Skills in Critical Reading and Writing II Class B Semester 4 English Language Education

Sanata Dharma University 42

1. Preliminary Study 43

2. Cycle 1 45

a. Planning 45

b. Action 47

c. Observation 50

d. Reflection 55

3. Cycle 2 58

a. Planning 58

b. Action 59

c. Observation 61

d. Reflection 66

B. Lesson Learned of Collaborative Learning Method to Improve Critical Thinking Skills in Critical Reading and Writing II Class

(15)

xiii

B Semester 4 English Language Education Sanata Dharma

University 74

CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 76

A. Conclusions 76

B. Recommendations 78

REFERENCES 80

(16)

xiv

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1. Bloom revised taxonomy table by Anderson et al. 11

2. Research schedule 32

3. Tabulation of mean scores and percentage differences 40

4. Research timeline 41

5. Students' scores and change percentage in cycle 1 54 6. Students' scores and change percentage in cycle 2 64 7. Students' scores and change percentage from cycle 1 to cycle 2 66

(17)

LIST OF FIGURES

Figures Page

1. Kemmis’s model of the action research 29

2. Formula of total mean score 38

(18)

xvi

LIST OF CHARTS

Charts Page

1. Scoring rubric result in cycle 1 53

(19)

xvii

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendices Page

A. Research Instruments 83

1. Observation Sheet Cycle 1 Meeting 1 84

2. Observation Sheet Cycle 1 Meeting 2 87

3. Observation Sheet Cycle 2 90

4. Questionnaire 93

5. Scoring Rubric Small Group Schematic 94

6. Scoring Rubric Pair Schematic 95

B. Lesson Plan and Teaching Material 96

(20)

1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

This chapter gives the introduction of the research. The research background explains the issues on higher education contributions to society, globalization era, and critical thinking, which are considered as the background of the research. This chapter also formulates the research problems and the problem limitation, determines the research objectives, explains the research benefits, and describes specific terms on the research.

A. Research Background

People nowadays have become a learning society. People are facing lots of problems in many aspects: poverty, economical crisis, increasing demands of business and industry, global warming, and many other problems to be solved.

This situation gives certain effects to higher education. Apps (1988) mentions that learning society demands higher education to be an integral part of the society in order to make applied solutions to solve the problems and make a better society. As Apps (1988) states:

Society expects colleges and universities to serve business and industry. And communities often turn to colleges and universities for help with local problems, ranging from economic development to training courses for local officials (p.1).

(21)

Within the situation, it is not enough for higher education only to conduct research and produce scholarships. Society demands higher quality of scholars in order to serve and contribute to the society. Therefore, universities need to improve their students’ quality by improving not only their knowledge, but also their way of thinking.

The demand from the society for the scholars to contribute in many aspects of human life is not the only reason for universities to improve students’ quality, particularly their way of thinking which affect the way they work and contribute to the society in the future. The enormous amount of available information in this globalization era is also considered as a concern. Meyers (1986) states, “The amount of information available through computers and the media seems to have outstripped people’s abilities to process and use information” (p.1). The enormous amount of information also exceeds people’s ability to think critically upon the information (Meyers, 1986). This situation leads higher education to improve essential skills for their students: critical thinking skills.

Slavin (2012) defines critical thinking as “the ability to make rational decisions about what to do or what to believe” (p.242). Critical thinking is also defined as suspended judgement or healthy scepticism (Dewey, 1982). In language learning context, critical thinking is defined as being healthy sceptical in assessing claims and arguments in a text, whether the claims are supported by valid relevant evidences and logical justifications, and building strong claims and arguments with valid-relevant evidences and logical justifications to convince sceptical people (Wallace and Wray, 2011).

(22)

English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University has realized the need of critical thinking skills for their students. In order to improve their students’ knowledge and their critical thinking skills on the four language skills (listening, speaking, reading, and writing), ELESP makes four courses which focus on that concern (each course contains two language skills, a pair of perceptive and productive): Critical Listening and Speaking I (CLS I) in semester 3, Critical Listening and Speaking II (CLS II) in semester 4, Critical Reading and Writing I (CRW I) in semester 3, and Critical Reading and Writing II (CRW II) in semester 4. According to Panduan Akademik Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Sanata Dharma (2012), “Critical Reading and Writing 1 is designed to give students practice to write responses critically based on the given texts or passages” (p.47), while Critical Listening and Speaking is described as follow,

On completing the course, the students will be able to employ strategic skills, to comprehend intermediate extended discourse such as news reports, narratives, expository passages; paraphrase, take notes and summarize intermediate extended discourse such as news reports, narratives, and expository passages. Afterwards, the students will be able to give oral critical response and reflection based on the given topics in the form of short individual/group presentation (p.47).

To improve students’ critical thinking skills has become the main goal of both CLS and CRW. Learning activities are conducted by the lecturers to improve students’ critical thinking skills in those classes.

The students of CRW II still had some difficulties in improving their critical thinking skills in the classroom. Based on the preliminary study of this

(23)

research, the students still had difficulties in getting more perspective in reading and criticizing a text, which was indicated by similar arguments stated by the students during the classroom discussion. They also needed opportunities to have arguments with their peers in more organized discussions to practice building critical arguments, evaluating other people’s arguments, and to improve their critical thinking skills; it was indicated by the lack of organized discussion for the students to have better arguments with their peers in the classroom. The students had to answer the demands of critical reading and critical writing; in critical reading, students have to identify the claims and arguments of a text and be healthy sceptical in evaluating the claims and arguments by considering the underlying values and assessing the sources and evidences. In critical writing, students have to build strong arguments with valid-relevant evidences and logical structured text in order to convince the readers with the claims and arguments (Wallace and Wray, 2011). These demands and students’ difficulties had to be answered to help the students improve their critical thinking skills.

The researcher tried to implement collaborative learning as a solution to help students improve critical thinking skills in CRW II. Collaborative learning is an instructional learning method which allows students at various performance levels to work together in small groups to reach a common goal in their learning. Students are responsible for one another’s learning, so that they can reach successful learning together by helping each other in their learning process (Gokhale, 1995).

(24)

The basis of collaborative learning method is constructivism; knowledge is constructed, and transformed by students (Dooly, 2008). Vygotsky’s socio -cultural theory is the cornerstone of it, with Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) as the main core which explains that learners can achieve higher intellectual level and enhance their critical thinking skills by doing collaborative learning rather than individual learning (Gokhale, 1995). Collaborative learning is also important for the students to learn how to contribute to the society. Slavin (2012) states:

In the 21st century, teamwork and the ability to solve problems and learn in groups are increasingly important in the world of work, and every student should know how to work productively with others (p.235).

This research was a Classroom Action Research. According to Kemmis and McTaggart (1988), Classroom Action Research is a dynamic and reflective cycle which consists of four essential processes: planning, action, observation, and reflection. Classroom Action Research was chosen as the research design in order to answer students’ difficulties in improving critical thinking skills which became an immediate concern in Critical Reading and Writing II class.

B. Research Problem

According to the research background, there are two research problems to be answered through this research:

1. How is collaborative learning method implemented to improve students’ critical thinking skills in CRW II?

2. What are the difficulties for the students to improve critical thinking skills in CRW II?

(25)

C. Problem Limitation

The researcher put problem limitation on students’ process and difficulties in improving critical thinking skills in CRW II. Research scope was limited in students’ writing on argumentative essay. Problems were limited in students’ difficulties in analyzing, evaluating, and synthesizing argumentative essay and how students improved their critical thinking skills through collaborative learning method in CRW II.

D. Research Objectives

The research had four objectives. The first objective was to find out the students’ difficulties in improving critical thinking skills in analyzing, evaluating, and synthesizing argumentative essay in CRW II. The second objective was to find a solution for the difficulties by implementing collaborative learning method in CRW II. The third objective was to help students and lecturers improve their knowledge and improve critical thinking skills in their learning process in CRW II. The last objective was to complete the thesis as a part of prerequisites for the researcher to graduate from ELESP Sanata Dharma University.

E. Research Benefits

The research will give benefits for students and lecturer in CRW II and the researcher. The given benefits are listed as follows:

1. Students can solve their difficulties to improve their critical thinking skills by helping each other through collaborative learning method and to get better writing skills in writing argumentative essay in CRW II.

(26)

2. Lecturer can find an effective way to solve students’ difficulties and to help students improve their critical thinking skills through collaborative learning method in CRW II.

3. The researcher can deepen his knowledge on English Language teaching and education, particularly on Critical Reading and Writing, critical thinking, and collaborative learning.

F. Definition of Terms

Below is the definition of terms related to the research:

1. Critical thinking skills: Critical thinking is defined as being healthy sceptical in assessing claims and arguments in a text, whether the claims are supported by valid-relevant evidences and logical justifications, and building strong claims and arguments with valid-relevant evidences and logical justifications to convince sceptical readers in language learning context, particularly in reading and writing (Wallace and Wray, 2011). 2. Collaborative learning: Collaborative learning is an instructional learning

method which allows students at various performance levels to work together in small groups to reach a common goal in their learning. Students are responsible for one another’s learning, so that they can reach successful learning together by helping each other in their learning process (Gokhale, 1995). The basis is constructivism; knowledge is constructed, and transformed by students (Dooly, 2008). Vygotsky’s socio-cultural theory is the cornerstone of it, with Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) as the main core which explains that learners can achieve higher intellectual level

(27)

and enhance their critical thinking skills by doing collaborative learning rather than individual learning (Gokhale, 1995).

3. CRW II: CRW II stands for Critical Reading and Writing II. This class is held in semester four ELESP Sanata Dharma University after CRW in semester three. This class aims to improve students reading and writing skills together with critical thinking skills to bring students reading and writing to the next level.

(28)

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

This chapter explains the underlying theories of the research. In the theoretical description, all major relevant theories related to the research are deliberated. In the theoretical framework, all major relevant theories on the research are summarized and synthesized in order to solve the research problems.

A. Theoretical Description

In this part, all major relevant theories on the research are deliberated. The researcher limits the theories into two parts: defining critical thinking in reading and writing, and collaborative learning method to improve critical thinking skills in writing argumentative essay. Further explanations are listed as follows:

1. Defining Critical Thinking in Reading and Writing

Critical thinking has been defined in various ways across different studies. It attracts experts and philosophers to define it in many particular ways, especially in education. In western culture, critical thinking has been closely identified in a traditional way as discipline of logic (Meyers, 1986). Logic is considered as an important element in critical thinking, that even “Students who have difficulty in demonstrating critical thinking abilities are often told to take courses in logic to remedy their deficiencies” (Meyers, 1986, p.3).

(29)

Critical thinking is also defined as general problem solving skills. There are five problem solving steps which are considered in critical thinking skills according to Meyers (1986): “(1) recognizing and defining the problem, (2) gathering information, (3) forming tentative conclusions, (4) testing conclusions, and (5) evaluating and making decisions” (p.4). However, “The identification of critical thinking with problem solving also assumes that critical thinking always begins with a problem and ends with a solution” (Meyers, 1986, p.5). It is realized that critical thinking does not always deal with providing a solution for a problem. It mostly deals with evaluating claims and arguments with suspended judgement/healthy scepticism (Dewey, 1982) and building strong claims and arguments with valid-relevant evidences and logical justifications to convince sceptical people (Wallace and Wray, 2011).

Healthy scepticism is considered as an important element in critical thinking. It deals with evaluating and questioning claims and arguments in critical thinking. It also occurs in three general attitudes in critical thinking by Meyers (1986): raising questions, temporary suspension of one’s judgements, and enjoyment of mysteries and complexities. These attitudes reflect a critical thinker with healthy scepticism as the guidance.

Critical thinking is also considered as an educational goal. The definition of critical thinking skills as educational goals can be found in Bloom revised taxonomy. Bloom revised taxonomy is a revised edition of the original Bloom Taxonomy of educational objectives. According to Anderson et al. (Eds., 2001), the revised taxonomy includes two dimensions of educational objectives: cognitive

(30)

process dimension and knowledge dimension. The two dimensions represent the main educational objectives which are mainly classified as cognitive process as the learning activity and knowledge as the subject matter. The cognitive process dimension consists of six levels of cognitive processes: remembering, understanding, applying, analysing, evaluating, and creating. The knowledge dimension consists of four types of knowledge: factual knowledge, conceptual knowledge, procedural knowledge, and meta-cognitive knowledge. According to Bloom revised taxonomy by Anderson et al. (2001), critical thinking skills refer to the last three levels of the cognitive process dimension: analyzing, evaluating, and creating claims and arguments.

Table 1: Bloom Revised Taxonomy Table by Anderson et al. (Eds., 2001, p.28)

The Knowledge Dimension

The Cognitive Process Dimension 1. Remember 2. Understand 3. Apply 4. Analyze 5. Evaluate 6. Create A. Factual Knowledge B. Conceptual Knowledge C. Procedural Knowledge D. Metacognitive Knowledge

In language learning context particularly in reading and writing, critical thinking is defined from two different perspectives: reader’s perspective and writer’s perspective. From reader’s perspective, critical thinking is defined as being healthy sceptical in assessing claims and arguments in a text, whether the

(31)

claims are supported by valid-relevant evidences and logical justifications or not (Wallace and Wray, 2011). A critical reader must be a sceptical person who evaluates claims and argument in a text. Therefore, suspension on the writer’s judgement is urgently needed to be a critical reader. Scepticism becomes an important thing in this perspective.

From writer’s perspective, critical thinking is defined as the ability to build strong claims and arguments with valid-relevant evidences and logical justifications to convince sceptical people (Wallace and Wray, 2011). A critical writer must be careful in making claims and arguments in their writing. Deep analysis must be conducted by a critical writer on a certain issue before he or she synthesizes and builds a claim and argument on it. Valid-relevant evidences are also important to support claims and arguments with logical justifications. In the end, the main goal of critical thinking in this perspective is to convince sceptical people through a critical writing with strong and logical claims and arguments supported by valid-relevant evidences.

Written assignment, particularly the term paper assignment, encourages critical thinking and offers potential for demonstrating critical thinking abilities by students (Meyers, 1986). The writing product of the paper assignment is academic writing in form of argumentative essay. Argumentative essay gives students opportunity to improve their critical thinking skills as a writer by building strong arguments and justifiable claim with valid, adequate and relevant evidences and justifications. It also gives students opportunity as a reader to be sceptical in a positive way by assessing other students’ arguments whether the arguments are

(32)

justifiable claim with valid, adequate and relevant evidences and justifications (Wallace and Wray, 2011).

There are several criteria of a text in critical writing, particularly an argumentative essay. The criteria are used as the product indicators of students’ critical thinking skills in their critical writing in form of argumentative essay as their learning product. Below are five criteria summarized from the book Critical Thinking, Reading, and Writing: A Brief Guide to Argument by Barnet and Bedau (2011) and the book Critical Reading and Writing for Postgraduates by Wallace and Wray (2011):

1. Arguable arguments

The essay has sharp-arguable thesis statement which is supported by acceptable arguments, significant counter arguments and counter evidences. 2. Relevant evidences

The arguments are supported by relevant, appropriate, and convincing evidences with persuasive material and statistical data (if possible).

3. Particular target audience

The essay is aimed at a particular audience: neutral, sympathetic, or hostile audience on the topic. A good argumentative essay is able to persuade neutrals to support the claim, reaffirms the sympathetic pros on their stand on the topic, or able to change the hostile cons to support the claim. A good argumentative essay also uses appropriate language to appropriate audience.

(33)

4. Effective logical organization

The essay has a logical structure, coherent sequence of arguments from each paragraph which support the thesis statement, effective introductory and concluding paragraph.

5. Reliable sources

Reliable sources (books, journals, especially websites; websites reliability must be carefully considered) are used to support the argumentative essay; all quotes, summaries, and citations are well written and credited; all borrowed words and ideas are credited.

2. Collaborative Learning Method to Improve Critical Thinking Skills in Writing Argumentative Essay

It is important for students to improve critical thinking skills nowadays. There are many ways to improve critical thinking skills. One learning method which is found effective to improve critical thinking skills is collaborative learning.

Collaborative learning is an instructional learning method which allows students at various performance levels to work together in small groups to reach a common goal in their learning. Students are responsible for one another’s learning, so that they can reach successful learning together by helping each other in their learning process (Gokhale, 1995).

(34)

a. Constructivism Approach as The Basis of Collaborative Learning Method

Collaborative learning is a learning method which is based on particular approach as its basis. The basis of collaborative learning method is constructivism; knowledge is constructed, and transformed by students (Dooly, 2008). According to Bruning, Schraw, Norby, and Ronning (2004):

Constructivism is a psychological and philosophical perspective contending that individuals form or construct much of what they learn and understand. (as cited in Schunk, 2008, p. 235).

It is a learning theory which states that a person constructs most of his knowledge by himself. Constructivism states that knowledge is constructed by people based on their interactions with environment or situation. Therefore, human becomes an active learner who constructs their knowledge through the interaction between situation, social context, and their own being.

Collaborative learning is supported by Vygotsky’s theory of Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). It is a socio-cultural theory that has become the cornerstone of constructivist movements. According to Tudge and Scrimsher (2003), Vygotsky’s socio-cultural theory is a constructivist theory that emphasizes the social environment as a facilitator of development and learning (as cited in Schunk, 2008, p. 242). Social environment is deeply considered in Vygotsky’s theory; it helps learners to be critical in their learning process. Social interactions in social environment help learners to coordinate three factors (interpersonal (social), cultural-historical, and individual factors) to build a critical learning process and achieve higher knowledge together with their partners (Schunk, 2008).

(35)

It can be seen obviously in students’ learning experiences in the class; students often find learning much easier by doing some group discussions together with their friends. Vygotsky (1978) called it as Zone of Proximal Development, which is defined as:

The distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers” (p. 86) (as cited in Schunk, 2008, p. 245).

There are some important elements in forming collaborative learning. According to Slavin (1989), there must be group goals and individual accountability to form an effective collaborative learning (as cited in Gokhale, 1995). It is the group’s task to make sure that all members get a good understanding in their learning, while each group member has to explain the learning materials to their friends as they are responsible on it. According to Webb (1985), research has consistently found that those who give and receive elaborated explanations will gain most in their learning process (as cited in Gokhale, 1995). b. The Benefits of Collaborative Learning Method to Improve Students’

Critical Thinking Skills

Collaborative learning gives lots of benefits in learning process. There have been lots of researches on collaborative learning. The important benefit from collaborative learning is that it helps students to improve their critical thinking skills. Meyers (1986) states:

Students will develop good critical thinking skills only by being challenged to practice critical and analytical thinking in the context of all the different subjects they study (p.5).

(36)

The opportunity to practice critical and analytical thinking, which is stated by Meyers, is available in collaborative learning. Dooly (2008) states that students are encouraged to think critically by engaging in discussions and taking responsibility for their learning, which could possibly occur in collaborative learning. Meyers (1986) also states that to promote critical thinking in the classroom, students have to create their own mental structures for critical thinking; this is closely related to constructivist theory and Vygotsky’s ZPD which support collaborative learning. Divergent perspectives and free discussions are also important elements to encourage students to think critically in the classroom (Slavin, 2012), and those elements are supported in collaborative learning.

Collaborative learning involves learners’ engagement in collaborative learning process together with other learners, and the engagement involves lots of idea and perspectives among them. Each learner has different cognitive level and background knowledge, and it opens possibilities for them to learn beyond their own limitation. We can see it from Vygotsky’s theory of Zone of Proximal Development, which explains that learners can achieve higher intellectual level and enhance their critical thinking skills by doing collaborative learning rather than individual learning (Gokhale, 1995).

c. Techniques in Collaborative Learning Method to Improve Students’ Critical Thinking Skills

There are many techniques from collaborative learning method in education, particularly in language learning. Three techniques from collaborative learning method were used in this research: peer involvement (Gaies, 1985), peer

(37)

assessment (Brown, 2004), and peer feedback (Gaies, 1985). These three techniques were chosen and implemented in the lesson plan to respond the result of the preliminary study of the research (further explanation on the significance of these techniques in answering the result of the preliminary study will be explained in chapter four). Below are the explanations of each technique:

1) Peer Involvement

Peer involvement is a technique in collaborative language learning. According to Gaies (1985):

Peer involvement is the use of learners as models, sources of information, and interactants for each other in such a way that learners assume roles and responsibilities normally taken by a formally trained teacher (p.2).

The classical method of teacher centred learning is oppositely applied with an active interaction between the students as peer tutors to one another. It is not the teacher who holds the main role in the class; it is the students instead. They do discussions and give feedback to one another in their learning process. Here, the teacher plays his role only as an instructor and a supervisor; he gives general instructions to the students about what they have to do and let the students engaged in their learning process by doing peer involvement, while the teacher is supervising their learning process.

There are several patterns of peer involvement in language learning. They are mainly classified into two different categories: same level and cross level. The researcher used the same level pattern in the research. Same level pattern includes intra class tutoring, where learners come from the same class; they are in the same level of learning (Gaies, 1985). In intra class tutoring, the activities are conducted

(38)

inside the class. There are two options available in intra class tutoring which are used in this research:

1. Pair work

In pair work, students work as peer tutors in pair. It gives students opportunities to have intensive work and discussions with their pair (Gaies, 1985). They also have intensive opportunity to give peer feedback with their pair, which will help them to give and receive good quality feedback on their work.

2. Small group work

In small group work, students work as peer tutors in small group (Gaies, 1985). The advantage of small group work is students will get more perspectives, which is not available in pair work. However, the quality of the feedback might not be as good as in pair work, since the intensiveness in small group work is lower than pair work.

Peer involvement is beneficial for language learners. Since language is basically used for communication, peer involvement gives learners opportunities to practice their language skills by communicating each other in such a real situation. It also increases students’ motivation, sense of self direction, higher intelligence level, and critical thinking skills. It breaks the limitation of teacher centred learning where learners have limited opportunities to use and improve their skills, which often leads learners to frustration, spoon-feeding, and negative dependence with the teacher (Gaies, 1985). Particularly in improving critical thinking skills, peer involvement gives the opportunity for the students to have

(39)

discussions and arguments with their peers. Dooly (2008) states that students are encouraged to think critically by engaging in discussions and taking responsibility for their learning, and the opportunities are available in peer involvement which involves the students in discussions in the learning process. Peer involvement also gives divergent perspectives which help the students in evaluating their arguments and building strong arguments on it. Divergent perspectives and free discussions are important elements to encourage students to think critically in the classroom (Slavin, 2012), and those elements are supported in peer involvement.

2) Peer Assessment

Peer assessment is a part of learner-centred and collaborative education, where the students are given the opportunity to do the language learning assessment themselves. It is derived from self assessment where students monitor their own learning process and performance as a successful learner. Brown (2004) states:

Most successful learners extend the learning of process well beyond the classroom and the presence of teacher or tutor, autonomously mastering the art of self assessment. Where peers are available to render assessments, the advantage of such additional input is obvious (p.270).

There are two principles in peer assessment: the principle of autonomy and the principle of cooperative learning. The principle of autonomy stands on students’ abilities and autonomy as an independent learner. The abilities refer to setting one’s own learning goals, pursuing the goals without the presence of an external prod, and independently monitoring that pursuit (Brown, 2004). The principle of cooperative learning is where the students do peer-assessment

(40)

collaboratively with the benefits of collaborative learning. The advantages of collaborative learning are often neglected in teaching-learning process; peer assessment is one of many options of techniques and procedures in learner-centred collaborative learning which bring the advantages of collaborative learning to the learners (Brown, 2004).

There are five types of peer assessment: assessment of a specific performance, indirect assessment of general competence, meta-cognitive assessment for setting goals, socio-affective assessment, and student-generated test (Brown, 2004). The research uses assessment of a specific performance in assessing students’ writing performance. Students assess each other on written performance by using a scoring rubric which is very suitable to use in performance assessment. Slavin (2012) states, “Performance assessments are typically scored according to rubrics that specify in advance the type of performance that is expected for each activity” (p.433). Peer editing is also conducted by students in peer assessment to give feedback to their peers.

Peer assessment gives students opportunity to practice critical and analytical thinking to improve their critical thinking skills. Meyers (1986) states:

Students will develop good critical thinking skills only by being challenged to practice critical and analytical thinking in the context of all the different subjects they study (p.5).

Students can practice analytical thinking by assessing their peers, particularly in analyzing their peers’ critical writing which help them to improve their critical thinking. Peer assessment also brings the advantages of collaborative

(41)

learning to the learners (Brown, 2004), which helps them to improve their critical thinking skills.

3) Peer Feedback

Peer feedback is a technique in collaborative learning method where the learners are responsible in giving feedback to each other. The feedback is given to signal the errors and provide the correct form to their peers in their learning process (Gaies, 1985). Peer feedback has a practical benefit which holds a very crucial factor in students’ learning process: students’ opportunity to receive immediate feedback. Peer feedback allows students to give and receive feedback immediately at the “precious moment”, which is when the students’ motivation is high. Students can also get feedback simultaneously in the class, which is not possible to be provided by one teacher in a single time. Peer feedback also helps students to learn more by giving feedback to each other. (Gaies, 1985)

One option of peer feedback is student-initiated correction and editing. Student-initiated correction and editing gives students opportunity to work in pairs or small groups, exchange and compare their papers, and have discussion on their papers. Feedback is given to each other in the discussion while teacher may circulate among the students to monitor the discussion. (Gaies, 1985)

There are three advantages from student-initiated correction and editing. The first advantage is students are going to have profitable discussions which give them opportunity to have arguments and get critical feedback from it. The second advantage is by having arguments in the discussion students will get positive reinforcement in their understanding on the topic and their understanding on the

(42)

errors they have made. The third advantage is students are given opportunity to sharpen their proofreading skills in correcting their peers’ papers. (Gaies, 1985)

Another effective way to improve students’ critical thinking skills is by employing written assignment. Written assignment, particularly the term paper assignment, encourages critical thinking and offers potential for demonstrating critical thinking abilities by students (Meyers, 1986). The writing product of the paper assignment in this research was academic writing in form of argumentative essay. Argumentative essay was chosen because it gives students opportunity to improve their critical thinking skills as a writer by building strong arguments and justifiable claim with valid, adequate and relevant evidences and justifications. It also gives students opportunity as a reader to be sceptical in a positive way by assessing other students’ arguments whether the arguments are justifiable claim with valid, adequate and relevant evidences and justifications (Wallace and Wray, 2011). In this research, collaborative learning method and written assignment in form of argumentative essay were employed to improve students’ critical thinking skills in CRW II.

The three techniques from collaborative learning method were implemented in the research to improve students’ critical thinking skills. The indicator was behavioural indicator in form of students’ participation, which represents three general attitudes in critical thinking by Meyers (1986): raising questions, temporary suspension of one’s judgements, and enjoyment of mysteries and complexities. These attitudes reflect a critical thinker with healthy scepticism

(43)

as the guidance and are represented in the intensity of the students’ participation in the discussion during the class.

B. Theoretical Framework

There were two research questions to be answered through this research. The two research questions were answered by implementing the theories which have been described in theoretical description. The first research question was about the implementation of collaborative learning to improve students’ critical thinking skills in CRW II. The theories which were implemented to answer this research question were theories on critical thinking and collaborative learning.

Bloom revised taxonomy was used in composing the lesson plan. Critical thinking as an educational goal was used to set critical thinking skills as a goal in teaching-learning activities in the classroom. According to Bloom revised taxonomy by Anderson et al. (2001), critical thinking skills refer to the last three levels of the cognitive process dimension: analyzing, evaluating, and creating claims and arguments. The learning objectives for the students were on these three cognitive process dimensions.

Collaborative learning was used to structure the students learning activities in the classroom. As stated before, collaborative learning gives certain benefits for students to improve their critical thinking skills. Meyers (1986) states:

Students will develop good critical thinking skills only by being challenged to practice critical and analytical thinking in the context of all the different subjects they study” (p.5)

(44)

The opportunity to practice critical and analytical thinking was available in collaborative learning which allows students to get involved actively through discussions.

Three techniques from collaborative learning method were implemented in structuring students’ learning activities in the classroom: peer involvement, peer assessment, and peer feedback. In the implementation of peer involvement, two different types of peer involvement were used in the cycles of the action research. Intra-class tutoring in small group work was used in the cycle 1. In small group work, students work as peer tutors in small group (Gaies, 1985). The advantage of small group work is students will get more perspectives, which is not available in pair work. However, the quality of the feedback might not be as good as in pair work, since the intensiveness in small group work is lower than pair work. Intra-class tutoring in pair work was used in cycle 2. In pair work, students work as peer tutors in pair. It gives students opportunities to have intensive work and discussions with their pair (Gaies, 1985). They also have intensive opportunity to give peer feedback with their pair, which will help them to give and receive good quality feedback on their work.

Peer assessment was implemented during the classroom. The students do peer-assessment by assessing each other’s critical writing in form of argumentative essay. The type of peer assessment used was assessment of a specific performance to assess students’ writing performance (Brown, 2004). Students assess each other on written performance by using a scoring rubric which is very suitable to use in performance assessment (Slavin, 2012). In cycle 1,

(45)

students were given opportunities to do peer assessment in small group. In cycle 2, students were given opportunities to do peer assessment in pair. The scoring rubric was made based on the criteria of critical writing summarized from the book Critical Thinking, Reading, and Writing: A Brief Guide to Argument by Barnet and Bedau (2011) and the book Critical Reading and Writing for Postgraduates by Wallace and Wray (2011). Cycle 1 used small group schematic scoring rubric, while cycle 2 used pair work schematic scoring rubric.

Peer feedback was implemented during the process of peer assessment. The feedback is given to signal the errors and provide the correct form to their peers in their learning process (Gaies, 1985). The type of peer feedback was student-initiated correction and editing which gives students opportunity to work in pairs or small groups, exchange and compare their papers, and have discussion on their papers. Feedback is given to each other in the discussion while teacher may circulate among the students to monitor the discussion (Gaies, 1985). In cycle 1, students were giving peer feedback to each other in small groups. In cycle 2, students were giving peer feedback to each other in pairs.

There were two main indicators to measure the improvement of the students’ critical thinking skills: behavioural indicators and product indicators of critical thinking. The behavioural indicators of critical thinking were used to identify the improvement of the students’ critical thinking skills during the learning process. The behavioural indicators were determined in students’ participation during the discussion. The intensity of the students’ participation represents three general attitudes in critical thinking (Meyers, 1986): raising

(46)

questions, temporary suspension of one’s judgements, and enjoyment of mysteries and complexities. The product indicators of critical thinking were used to measure the improvement of the students’ critical thinking skills in their critical writing in form of argumentative essay as the product of their learning process. The product indicators were determined in the criteria of critical writing summarized from the book Critical Thinking, Reading, and Writing: A Brief Guide to Argument by Barnet and Bedau (2011) and the book Critical Reading and Writing for Postgraduates by Wallace and Wray (2011): arguable arguments, relevant evidences, particular target audience, effective logical organization, and reliable sources.

The second research question was about students’ difficulties in improving critical thinking skills in CRW II. The theories which were implemented to answer the second research question were theories on critical thinking, particularly on critical reading and writing. The criteria of critical writing (Barnet and Bedau, 2011; Wallace and Wray, 2011) were used to reflect students’ difficulties in improving critical thinking skills in CRW II, particularly the difficulties in reaching the five criteria in writing the argumentative essay: building arguable arguments, using relevant evidences, aiming particular target audience, structuring effective logical organization, and choosing reliable sources.

(47)

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter explains the research methodology. The research method, the setting, the participants, the instruments, the data gathering technique, the data analysis technique, and the procedure of the research are deliberated in details in this chapter.

A. Research Method

This research was a Classroom Action Research. According to Burns (1999), Classroom Action Research is a research which commonly uses qualitative research as its method to answer concrete and practical issues of immediate concern by observing and recording events and behaviour in the classroom. It is neither categorized in qualitative research nor quantitative research. Although its status as a research methodology is often seen as fragile because of the strong claims on it as a process to enhance reflective practice and professional development, Classroom Action Research is still considered as a research methodology by lots of teaching and learning practitioners because it requires systematic data collection and analysis (Burns, 1999).

According to Kemmis and McTaggart (1988), Classroom Action Research is a dynamic and reflective cycle which consists of four essential processes: planning, action, observation, and reflection. Those processes are spiralling in a

(48)

cycle which involves Classroom Action Research practitioners and the participants to:

develop a plan of critically informed action to improve what is already happening, act to implement the plan, observe the effects of the critically informed action in the context in which it occurs, and reflect on these effects as the basis for further planning, subsequent critically informed action and so on, through a succession of stages (Kemmis and McTaggart, 1988, p.10, as cited in Burns, 1999).

Figure 1: Kemmis’ model of the action research

According to Burns (1999), there are four characteristics of Classroom Action Research (p.30):

1. Action research is contextual, small-scale and localised – it identifies and investigates problems within a specific situation

2. It is evaluative and reflective as it aims to bring about change and improvement in practice

(49)

3. It is participatory as it provides for collaborative investigation by teams of colleagues, practitioners, and researchers

4. Changes in practice are based on the collection of information or data which provides the impetus of change

Classroom Action Research was chosen as the research design in order to answer students’ difficulties in improving critical thinking skills which becomes an immediate concern in Critical Reading and Writing II class. Collaborative Learning method was applied by the lecturer in order to find an appropriate and effective way for the students to improve their critical thinking skills in Critical Reading and Writing II.

During the research, the researcher played the role as a collaborator to the lecturer. Based on the agreement with the lecturer of CRW II which was made before conducting the research, the researcher became an observer instead of teaching in the classroom since the responsibility of students’ academic study in the university belongs to the lecturer, and the researcher was not supposed to take the responsibility. The researcher collaborated with the lecturer during the research in the cycles and each step of the Classroom Action Research: planning, action, observation, and reflection. Therefore, the Classroom Action Research was specifically categorized as Collaborative Action Research. The Collaborative Action Research also gave certain benefits to the research, as Burns (1999) states:

Collaborative action research processes strengthen the opportunities for the results of research on practice to be fed back into educational systems in a more substantial and critical way (p.13).

(50)

B. Research Setting

The research was conducted in two cycles. The first cycle consisted of two meetings and the second cycle consisted of one meeting. This research was held in English Language Education Study Program Sanata Dharma University. The class was Critical Reading and Writing II. The researcher became an observer in the class without doing any intervention in order to get an authentic and natural data to be analyzed. Discussion on the lesson plan by the researcher and the lecturer was done a week before the cycles were started. The research was conducted in March and April 2016.

The first cycle was conducted on March 23rd 2016 and March 30th 2016. The researcher tried to analyze students’ progress and difficulties in improving their critical thinking skills by doing observation on students’ activities in the classroom and analyzing students’ score based on their peer assessment. Having observed students’ activities, analyzed and compared students’ score from the first meeting and the second meeting in the first cycle, the researcher found the students’ progress and difficulties in improving their critical thinking skills. Based on the data, the researcher made the second cycle and discussed the lesson plan with the lecturer. The second cycle was conducted on April 1st 2016. Below is the detail of the research schedule:

(51)

Table 2: Research Schedule

Cycle Meeting Day/Date Time Materials Activities

Wednesday /March 23rd

07.00 – 09.00 a.m.

Argumentative essay

Group discussion, peer assessment and peer

feedback on students’ essay

in small groups 2

Wednesday /March 30th

07.00 – 09.00 a.m.

Argumentative essay

2 3

Friday/ April 1st

11.00 a.m. – 01.00 p.m.

Argumentative essay

Discussion, peer assessment and peer

feedback on students’ essay

in pairs

C. Research Participants / Subjects

The participants were twenty seven (27) PBI students class B batch 2014 in Critical Reading and Writing II class, the lecturer, and three observers including the researcher as an observer. The qualifications of the observers were: (1) semester 8 students of English Language Education Study Program Sanata Dharma University and (2) those who had taken Micro Teaching and Research Methodology. The qualifications were determined by the researcher based on the capability on conducting classroom observation, and semester 8 students have been taught the theories on conducting classroom observation in Research Methodology and have practiced the theories in Micro Teaching. Nineteen (19) students participated in the research consistently by submitting the result of their peer assessment in each meeting from cycle one up to cycle two.

(52)

D. Research Instruments and Data Gathering Technique

The researcher used three techniques to help the researcher collect the data during the research. The techniques were observation, writing test, and questionnaire. Observation was used to record teaching-learning activities in the classroom, as Burns (1999) states that Classroom Action Research is done by observing and recording events and behaviour in the classroom. Writing test was used to measure students’ progress in improving critical thinking skills in writing argumentative essay. Scoring rubric was made by the researcher to help the students in doing peer assessment on their argumentative essay. The criteria in the scoring rubric were considered as a standard to measure students’ progress and the indicators in improving their critical thinking skills. Questionnaire was employed to find the data on students’ difficulties in improving critical thinking skills. The questionnaire consisted of open ended questions. Below are the instruments and the data gathering techniques in details:

1. Observation

Observation was employed in cycle 1 and cycle 2 to record teaching-learning activities in the classroom. Burns (1999) states, “It (observation) enables researchers to document and reflect systematically upon classroom interactions and events, as they actually occur rather than as we think they occur” (p.80). The observation type was direct and non-participant observation. The researcher watched and recorded the teaching and learning activities in the classroom without personal involvement in the classroom. The purpose was to remain distant and make no contact with the subjects of the research to get natural behaviour in the

(53)

classroom (Burns, 1999). Observation sheet (see Appendix A) was employed as the instrument in doing the observation. The observation sheet consisted of three columns: teaching-learning activities (based on the lesson plan), lecturer and students’ attitude and response, and evaluation from the observer; the observers wrote the events in the lecturer and students’ response and attitude column, and the evaluation in the evaluation column. There were three observers in the research including the researcher. The teaching and learning activities were recorded using a digital camera.

2. Writing Test

Writing test was employed in cycle 1 and cycle 2 to assess students’ process and progress in improving critical thinking skills. The type of writing performance was extensive writing. Brown (2004) states that the focus of extensive writing are:

...on achieving a purpose, organizing and developing ideas logically, using details to support or illustrate ideas, demonstrating syntactic and lexical variety, and in many cases, engaging in the process of multiple drafts to achieve a final product (p.220).

The writing product was academic writing in form of argumentative essay. Argumentative essay was chosen because it gives students opportunity to improve their critical thinking skills as a writer by building strong arguments and justifiable claim with valid, adequate and relevant evidences and justifications. It also gives students opportunity as a reader (in doing peer assessment) to be sceptical in a positive way by assessing other students’ arguments whether the arguments are justifiable claim with valid, adequate and relevant evidences and justifications

(54)

(Wallace and Wray, 2011). It gave an opportunity for the researcher to assess students’ critical thinking skills by assessing the quality of students’ argumentative essay.

The quality standard and criteria of students’ argumentative essay writing was determined in the scoring rubric, which was employed as an instrument to measure students’ critical thinking skills. As a performance assessment, the most suitable instrument in writing test is scoring rubric. “Performance assessments are typically scored according to rubrics that specify in advance the type of performance that is expected for each activity” (Slavin, 2012, p.433). The scoring rubric was presented as a form of analytic scoring. The criteria of critical writing were mentioned in the scoring rubric to be scored; the criteria were arguable arguments, relevant evidences, particular target audience, effective logical organization, and reliable sources. Analytic scoring will help the students to recognize their weaknesses and their strengths (Brown, 2004). The criteria of critical writing were determined by summarizing the elements of critical writing from the book “Critical Thinking, Reading, and Writing: A Brief Guide to Argument” by Barnet and Bedau (2011) and from the book “Critical Reading and Writing for Postgraduates” by Wallace and Wray (2011), which can be seen in the scoring rubric (see Appendix A). The scoring rubric was used by the students in peer assessment.

3. Questionnaire

Questionnaire was employed in the end of the research (after cycle 2 was conducted) to gather data related to students’ difficulties and the use of

(1)

113

On the whole, while writing

argumentative thesis statements, be sure to have a debatable topic, state your claim and stance as strongly as possible and make the reader understand that your aim is to persuade rather than only to inform.

1. ________ Censorship is the best way of controlling the minds of the citizens.

2. ________ Newspapers should not identify victims of sexual assault without their consent.

3. ________Parents control their children‟s TV viewing habits in three ways.

4. ________ In war journalism, it is never appropriate to show on the news how acountry‟s soldiers suffer in combat.

5. ________ The only way to receive high ratings for a TV series is to cast attractive actors or actresses.

ARG.

INF.

ARG.

COUNTER-ARGUMENTS

Every controversial issue has two sides.

Once you can support your position with research, you need to explore what others think.

SUPPORT THE THESIS

Support your thesis with three reasons.

Write down each of the three main reasons that support your belief on a separate piece of paper.

These are your arguments.

PREPARING YOUR

ARGUMENTS

Look at the three main reasons for your opinion.

What objections would others have to each of your reasons?

Write these down under each of your reasons. Now you have three arguments and three counter-arguments.

ANSWERING

COUNTER-ARGUMENTS

Write your answers down under the counter-arguments.

Now you have the raw material for each paragraph of the argumentative essay.

INTRODUCTORY

PARAGRAPH

The first sentence is a general statement, designed to attract the reader’s attention.

 Second and perhaps third sentences narrow the idea down to your specific idea. The last sentence in the introduction

must be your thesis.

INTRODUCTION

Think of the introduction as having a funnel shape:

General statement (hook) Specific information

(2)

114 BUILDING BODY

PARAGRAPHS

The first topic sentence of the first paragraph will be the first reason that supports your position.

You may even wish to begin the sentence with the word firstto focus the reader’s attention on its importance.

FIRST BODY

PARAGRAPH

Write a topic sentence and three details that support the reason you believe what you believe.

Repeat the process until you have threeparagraphs with

threedifferent reasons and

threedetails to support that reason.

BUILDING

PARAGRAPHS

The final sentence in each paragraph should sum up and make a transition to the main idea of the next paragraph.

Concluding Paragraph

• Indicate in the conclusion that you have

shown the thesis statement to be true. • Has a powerful ending often relating to the

introduction.

• Do not include any new information in a conclusion.

Sample Essay - Introduction

ADVERTISING MANIPULATES VIEWERS

In the simplest form, advertising can be defined as a kind of message or message transmission that is designed to promote a product, service, or an idea. Today this basic marketing strategy has become a natural part of our daily life. Considering that the $ 20 billion spent on advertisements in 1979 had drastically risen to $120 billion in 1999 and that in the course of a lifetime, one will see about three years worth of advertisements on television and approximately 3,000 ads per day, a person may easily acknowledge the impact of advertising (DiChiara, 2008).

Nonetheless, as Touzard (2008) explains, advertising, which originally intended to be a source of information for people on the availability of products, “has developed into an industry that shapes people‟s identity” (p. 2). Coming in various forms –in print, audio, or visual form –

advertisements not only bombard audience with their messages, but they also sell the ideas of who we are and what we should do or be.

Thus, advertisements are harmful for the society owing to their disruptive influence.

Thesis statement

authority’s

opinion

definition

(3)

115 Sample Essay

–

Pro Paragraph

3 First of all, advertisements destroy societal balance as they draw on gender stereotypes.

4 Frequently advertisements make use of archetypes and myths for the sake of making the message striking and memorable. Thus, it is a common practice to represent women as decorative objects at home who are submissive to men. Studies have identified that in advertising women are less often used in work representations compared with men (as cited in Jacobson & Mazur, 2007, p. 217). In the advertisements of house appliances, especially, women are typically equated with housewives and mothers. Even when women are portrayed in professional environments, they are often in subordinate positions, receiving instructions. Hence, professional women are reduced to order-takers. Men, on the other hand, are commonly associated with power, leadership, and efficiency. It is especially in car advertisements that these features are paired with masculinity. Also, professional men are shown in powerful and influential positions, giving orders. It is mostly men who solve the problems, lead a company or pursue professional goals.This double standard in the illustration of genders not only reveals the mainstream view but also affirms it because when consumers buy the advertised products, one indirectly approves of the advertisements, and therefore contributes to keeping and reproducing certain representations.Hence, advertisements destroy the possibility of a society where both genders are equal.

Back to the

thesis

statement and

original

argument

Supporting

techniques

(example,

explanation,

authority’s

opinion)

Sample Essay

–

Pro Paragraph 2

Secondly, advertisements present unattainable body images both for men and women, and thus create an insecure society.

Everywhere advertisements tell the audience what it means to be a desirable man or woman, just as directly as the advertisement that claims, “Image is everything”. For a man, the message is: You need to be athletic. It seems that whether a man is twenty or forty, whether he has brown or silver hair, an athletic body is

indispensable for a strong, powerful, and confident man. The opposite is a caricature, just like the poor man, the anti-Mr. Muscle in the detergent advertisement. For a woman, too, the message is parallel: You need to be beautiful and skinny. Women are constantly exposed to gorgeous looking women who have the perfect hair or skin, and a body like that of a model. Although all these images are simple illusions, created by skillful makeup artists, photographers, or photo re-touchers who work on these meticulously, women unfortunately ignore this and delve into endless self-scrutiny. As Susan Brownmiller states, a woman is “forced to concentrate on the minutiae of her bodily parts, [and consequently she] is never free of self-consciousness. She is never quite satisfied, and never secure, for desperate, unending absorption in the drive for perfect appearance” (as cited in Jacobson & Mazur, 2007, p. 213). Due to this lack of self-satisfaction, today 25 per cent of women are dieting and another 50 per cent has recently started or quitted a diet (Jacobson & Mazur, 2007, p. 214). Some women take even more dangerous steps to be like the women they see in advertisements. They develop an eating disorder such as anorexia or bulimia. It is quite striking that today approximately one in five women have an eating disorder (p. 214). Hence, advertisements perpetuate disappointment as well as dissatisfaction in both genders.

Another

argument which

is parallel to the

thesis statement

Examples,

explanations,

authority’s

opinions,

statistics to

clarify the topic

sentence

(4)

116 Sample Essay - Conclusion

All in all

,

attempts trying to justify the benignity of

advertisements are destined to being feeble

because advertisements cause apparent harms on

public. These written, audio or visual messages

reinstate stereotypes and consequently annihilate

gender equality. They also portray impossible body

images for men and women, which eventually

manipulates the public and shakes self-esteem.

Finally, advertisements exploit the future

generations for their own end and cause

irreversible impairment on their health and

psychology

.

Bernhardt (n.d

, p. 3) remarks that “the monster of

advertisement... is a sort of octopus with

innumerable tentacles. It throws out to right and

left, in front and behind its clammy arms, and

gathers in, through its thousand little suckers, all

the gossip and slander and praise afloat, to spit out

again at the public.”

Therefore, we need to save ourselves from the evil

tentacles of this monster and learn to make our own

free choices, before it is too late.

Linker signalling

the conclusion

+

summary of the

main points

Authority’s

opinion

(5)

117

APPENDIX C

(6)

118

NO. STUDENT NUMBER CRITERIA TOTAL SCORE (C.1-1) TOTAL SCORE (C.1-2) TOTAL SCORE (C.2) FINAL SCORE (C.1-1) FINAL SCORE (C.1-2) FINAL SCORE (C.2) Arg. (C.1-1) Arg. (C.1-2) Arg. (C.2) Ev. (C.1-1) Ev. (C.1-2) Ev. (C.2) T.A. (C.1-1) T.A. (C.1-2) T.A. (C.2) Org. (C.1-1) Org. (C.1-2) Org. (C.2) Sour. (C.1-1) Sour. (C.1-2) Sour. (C.2)

1 141214032 2,50 3,00 2,00 3,00 3,00 2,00 3,00 3,00 3,00 2,50 3,00 3,00 1,00 1,00 2,00 12,00 13,00 12,00 _60,00 _65,00 _60,00 2 141214033 2,50 2,50 2,00 2,50 2,50 2,00 2,50 2,00 3,00 2,50 3,00 2,50 1,50 2,50 3,00 11,50 12,50 12,50 _57,50 _62,50 _62,50 3 141214036 3,00 3,00 4,00 3,00 2,50 4,00 3,00 3,00 4,00 3,50 3,50 3,00 1,00 3,00 4,00 13,50 15,00 19,00 _67,50 _75,00 _95,00 4 141214037 3,00 3,00 3,00 3,50 3,33 2,00 2,50 3,00 4,00 3,00 3,00 2,00 2,50 3,67 4,00 14,50 16,00 15,00 _72,50 _80,00 _75,00 5 141214038 3,00 4,00 4,00 3,00 4,00 4,00 3,00 4,00 4,00 3,00 4,00 4,00 2,00 4,00 4,00 14,00 20,00 20,00 _70,00 _100,00 _100,00 6 141214041 3,00 3,00 2,00 3,00 3,00 3,00 3,00 3,00 3,00 3,00 3,00 2,00 1,00 3,00 3,00 13,00 15,00 13,00 65,00 75,00 65,00 7 141214043 3,00 3,00 3,00 3,00 3,00 3,00 2,50 3,00 4,00 3,00 3,00 4,00 1,00 3,00 3,00 12,50 15,00 17,00 62,50 75,00 85,00 8 141214044 3,00 4,00 4,00 3,00 4,00 3,00 3,00 4,00 4,00 3,00 4,00 4,00 2,00 4,00 3,00 14,00 20,00 18,00 70,00 100,00 90,00 9 141214045 3,00 3,00 4,00 3,00 3,50 3,00 3,00 3,00 4,00 3,00 3,00 4,00 3,00 4,00 4,00 15,00 16,50 19,00 _75,00 _82,50 _95,00 10 141214046 3,00 4,00 4,00 3,00 4,00 4,00 3,00 4,00 4,00 4,00 4,00 4,00 3,00 4,00 4,00 16,00 20,00 20,00 _80,00 _100,00 _100,00 11 141214047 3,00 3,00 3,00 2,00 1,50 2,00 4,00 3,00 4,00 1,00 3,00 2,00 3,00 1,50 2,00 13,00 12,00 13,00 _65,00 _60,00 _65,00 12 141214050 3,00 4,00 4,00 3,00 4,00 4,00 3,50 3,50 4,00 3,00 4,00 4,00 2,00 4,00 4,00 14,50 19,50 20,00 _72,50 _97,50 _100,00 13 141214051 3,00 3,50 4,00 1,00 1,50 3,00 4,00 4,00 4,00 4,00 4,00 3,00 1,00 2,00 3,00 13,00 15,00 17,00 _65,00 _75,00 _85,00 14 141214052 2,00 3,00 2,00 3,00 3,50 4,00 3,00 3,50 3,00 1,50 3,00 3,00 1,00 3,50 3,00 10,50 16,50 15,00 52,50 82,50 75,00 15 141214053 3,00 3,50 3,00 3,00 4,00 4,00 3,00 3,50 3,00 2,00 3,00 3,00 1,00 3,50 3,00 12,00 17,50 16,00 60,00 87,50 80,00 16 141214054 3,00 3,00 4,00 4,00 4,00 4,00 4,00 4,00 3,00 4,00 4,00 4,00 4,00 4,00 4,00 19,00 19,00 19,00 95,00 95,00 95,00 17 141214057 1,75 2,33 4,00 2,00 3,67 3,00 3,50 2,33 4,00 1,50 2,33 4,00 1,50 3,00 3,00 10,25 13,67 18,00 _51,25 _68,33 _90,00 18 141214058 3,00 3,00 4,00 2,50 3,00 4,00 3,00 3,50 4,00 2,00 2,50 2,00 2,50 3,00 4,00 13,00 15,00 18,00 _65,00 _75,00 _90,00 19 141214060 2,50 3,00 4,00 3,00 3,33 4,00 4,00 3,33 4,00 3,00 3,33 4,00 2,00 2,00 3,00 14,50 15,00 19,00 _72,50 _75,00 _95,00

MEAN SCORE 2,80 3,20 3,37 2,82 3,23 3,26 3,18 3,30 3,68 2,76 3,30 3,24 1,89 3,09 3,32 13,46 16,11 16,87 67,30 80,57 84,34

Arg. : Arguments Ev. : Evidences T.A. : Target Audience Org. : Organization Sour. : Sources C.1-1 : Cycle 1 meeting 1 C.1-2 : Cycle 1 meeting 2 C.2 : Cycle 2