Elesp students` perception on critical reading and writing 1 course.
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
ABSTRACT
Nora, Theresia Noviani. (2012). ELESP Students’ Perception on Critical Reading
and Writing 1 Course. Yogyakarta: English Language Education Study Program,
Sanata Dharma University.
Critical Reading and Writing 1 is the course which is applied since
2010/2011 academic year and is designed for the third semester students of
English Language Education Study Program (ELESP). In this course, reading and
writing skills are integrated and taught in the same class. Through this course, the
students are expected to respond critically to the passages given. Since reading
and writing skills are interrelated, it is suitable to integrate these two skills into
one class. However, the students had different opinions and points of view toward
the course.
There are two formulated problems in this research. They are: 1) What are
ELESP students’ perception on Critical Reading and Writing 1 course? and 2)
What do the students suggest to improve the implementation of Critical Reading
and Writing 1 course?
The research used survey as the research method. In gathering the data, the
researcher distributed the questionnaire to the fourth semester students of ELESP
in 2010/2011 academic year of Sanata Dharma University. Besides, the researcher
conducted an interview with the students to strengthen the data.
The results of the research showed that the majority of the students had
positive perception on the implementation of Critical Reading and Writing 1,
including the purpose, the class activities, and the materials given in the class.
However, some students felt that the class activities were boring because they did
monotonous activities in every meeting. Some of the students also felt that the
class activities were focused more on writing skill. To overcome the problems
which the students faced in the class, the researcher summarized the suggestions
from the students. For the class activities, the students suggested the lecturers to
add some games or interesting activities. Besides, the students suggested the
lecturers to balance the portion of reading and writing activities and not to focus
on one skill only. For the duration of the class, the students suggested ELESP to
separate the course in different day. Besides, they suggested the department to
have one lecturer in teaching Critical Reading and Writing 1.
Keywords: perception, integrated learning, Critical Reading and Writing 1
vii
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
ABSTRAK
Nora, Theresia Noviani. (2012). ELESP Students’ Perception on Critical Reading
and Writing 1 Course. Yogyakarta: Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris,
Universitas Sanata Dharma.
Critical Reading and Writing 1 merupakan mata kuliah baru di program
Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris. Mata kuliah ini mulai diterapkan pada
kurikulum 2010/2011 dan diberikan di semester 3. Critical Reading and Writing 1
merupakan sebuah mata kuliah yang menggabungkan keterampilan membaca dan
menulis. Melalui mata kuliah ini, mahasiswa diharapkan dapat mengasah
kemampuan merespon naskah dengan kritis dan mampu menuangkan ke dalam
tulisan. Selain itu, keterampilan membaca dan menulis merupakan keterampilan
yang saling berkaitan sehingga sesuai jika keterampilan tersebut digabungkan dan
diajarkan dalam satu mata kuliah. Namun, para mahasiswa memiliki pendapat dan
persepsi yang berbeda terhadap mata kuliah baru tersebut.
Berdasarkan latar belakang di atas, penulis merumuskan dua pertanyaan
dalam penelitian ini, yakni: 1) Bagaimana persepsi mahasiswa Pendidikan Bahasa
Inggris terhadap mata kuliah Critical Reading and Writing 1?,
2) Saran apa
yang diberikan mahasiswa untuk peningkatan mata kuliah Critical Reading and
Writing 1?
Penelitian ini menggunakan metode survey. Pengumpulan data dilakukan
dengan menyebarkan angket dan melakukan wawancara dengan mahasiswa
semester empat Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Universitas Sanata
Dharma, tahun akademik 2010/2011.
Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa sebagian besar mahasiswa
mempunyai persepsi positif terhadap mata kuliah Critical Reading and Writing 1.
Persepsi positif tersebut meliputi tujuan, kegiatan, dan materi yang diberikan di
kelas. Meskipun sebagian besar mahasiswa memiliki persepsi positif pada
kegiatan di kelas, beberapa mahasiswa menganggap kegiatan di kelas terasa
membosankan karena kegiatan yang sama setiap minggunya. Beberapa mahasiswa
juga merasa bahwa kegiatan di kelas lebih difokuskan pada keterampilan menulis.
Selain itu, sebagian besar mahasiswa memiki masalah terkait dengan durasi kelas.
Sebagian besar mahasiswa merasa kesulitan untuk menjaga konsentrasi di kelas
karena lamanya durasi pembelajaran (3,5 jam). Terkait dengan masalah di atas,
penulis merangkum saran-saran dari mahasiswa. Mereka menyarankan dosen
supaya memasukkan permainan atau kegiatan menarik lainnya untuk menjaga
konsentrasi siswa ketika pembelajaran di kelas. Selain itu, mereka menyarankan
supaya dosen agar menyeimbangkan porsi kegiatan di kelas untuk keterampilan
membaca dan menulis. Konsep pembelajaran integrasi atau penggabungan
berguna bagi mahasiswa, namun mereka merasa penerapannya belum maksimal.
Mahasiswa menyarankan pihak prodi agar membagi kelas menjadi dua kelas di
hari yang berbeda dan dengan satu dosen yang sama. Dosen pengajar yang
viii
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
ELESP STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION
ON CRITICAL READING AND WRITING 1 COURSE
A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree
in English Language Education
By
Theresia Noviani Nora
Student Number: 081214055
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM
DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION
FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY
YOGYAKARTA
20 12
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
ELESP STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION
ON CRITICAL READING AND WRITING 1 COURSE
A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree
in English Language Education
By
Theresia Noviani Nora
Student Number: 081214055
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM
DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION
FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY
YOGYAKARTA
20 12
i
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
ii
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
iii
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
There are no shortcuts to any place worth
going
Baverly Sills
I DEDICATE THIS THESIS TO:
My GOD, Jesus Christ, my parents, my family, my best friends,
and everyone who stays in my heart.
iv
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY
I honestly declare that this thesis, which I have written, does not contain the work
or parts of the work of other people, except those cited in the quotations and the
references, as a scientific paper should.
Yogyakarta, 6th December 2012
The Writer
Theresia Noviani Nora
081214055
v
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN
PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS
Yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini, saya mahasiswa Universitas Sanata Dharma:
Nama
: Theresia Noviani Nora
Nomor Mahasiswa
: 081214055
Demi pengembangan ilmu pengetahuan, saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan
Universitas Sanata Dharma karya ilmiah saya yang berjudul:
ELESP STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION ON CRITICAL READING
AND WRITING 1 COURSE
beserta perangkat yang diperlukan (bila ada). Dengan demikian saya
memberikan kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma hak untuk
menyimpan, mengalihkan dalam bentuk media lain, mengelolanya dalam bentuk
pangkalan data, mendistribusikan secara terbatas, dan mempublikasikannya di
Internet atau media lain untuk kepentingan akademis tanpa perlu meminta ijin dari
saya maupun memberikan royalti kepada saya selama tetap mencantumkan nama
saya sebagai penulis.
Demikian pernyataan ini yang saya buat dengan sebenarnya.
Dibuat di Yogyakarta
Pada tanggal: 6 Desember 2010
Yang menyatakan
Theresia Noviani Nora
vi
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
ABSTRACT
Nora, Theresia Noviani. (2012). ELESP Students’ Perception on Critical Reading
and Writing 1 Course. Yogyakarta: English Language Education Study Program,
Sanata Dharma University.
Critical Reading and Writing 1 is the course which is applied since
2010/2011 academic year and is designed for the third semester students of
English Language Education Study Program (ELESP). In this course, reading and
writing skills are integrated and taught in the same class. Through this course, the
students are expected to respond critically to the passages given. Since reading
and writing skills are interrelated, it is suitable to integrate these two skills into
one class. However, the students had different opinions and points of view toward
the course.
There are two formulated problems in this research. They are: 1) What are
ELESP students’ perception on Critical Reading and Writing 1 course? and 2)
What do the students suggest to improve the implementation of Critical Reading
and Writing 1 course?
The research used survey as the research method. In gathering the data, the
researcher distributed the questionnaire to the fourth semester students of ELESP
in 2010/2011 academic year of Sanata Dharma University. Besides, the researcher
conducted an interview with the students to strengthen the data.
The results of the research showed that the majority of the students had
positive perception on the implementation of Critical Reading and Writing 1,
including the purpose, the class activities, and the materials given in the class.
However, some students felt that the class activities were boring because they did
monotonous activities in every meeting. Some of the students also felt that the
class activities were focused more on writing skill. To overcome the problems
which the students faced in the class, the researcher summarized the suggestions
from the students. For the class activities, the students suggested the lecturers to
add some games or interesting activities. Besides, the students suggested the
lecturers to balance the portion of reading and writing activities and not to focus
on one skill only. For the duration of the class, the students suggested ELESP to
separate the course in different day. Besides, they suggested the department to
have one lecturer in teaching Critical Reading and Writing 1.
Keywords: perception, integrated learning, Critical Reading and Writing 1
vii
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
ABSTRAK
Nora, Theresia Noviani. (2012). ELESP Students’ Perception on Critical Reading
and Writing 1 Course. Yogyakarta: Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris,
Universitas Sanata Dharma.
Critical Reading and Writing 1 merupakan mata kuliah baru di program
Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris. Mata kuliah ini mulai diterapkan pada
kurikulum 2010/2011 dan diberikan di semester 3. Critical Reading and Writing 1
merupakan sebuah mata kuliah yang menggabungkan keterampilan membaca dan
menulis. Melalui mata kuliah ini, mahasiswa diharapkan dapat mengasah
kemampuan merespon naskah dengan kritis dan mampu menuangkan ke dalam
tulisan. Selain itu, keterampilan membaca dan menulis merupakan keterampilan
yang saling berkaitan sehingga sesuai jika keterampilan tersebut digabungkan dan
diajarkan dalam satu mata kuliah. Namun, para mahasiswa memiliki pendapat dan
persepsi yang berbeda terhadap mata kuliah baru tersebut.
Berdasarkan latar belakang di atas, penulis merumuskan dua pertanyaan
dalam penelitian ini, yakni: 1) Bagaimana persepsi mahasiswa Pendidikan Bahasa
Inggris terhadap mata kuliah Critical Reading and Writing 1?,
2) Saran apa
yang diberikan mahasiswa untuk peningkatan mata kuliah Critical Reading and
Writing 1?
Penelitian ini menggunakan metode survey. Pengumpulan data dilakukan
dengan menyebarkan angket dan melakukan wawancara dengan mahasiswa
semester empat Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Universitas Sanata
Dharma, tahun akademik 2010/2011.
Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa sebagian besar mahasiswa
mempunyai persepsi positif terhadap mata kuliah Critical Reading and Writing 1.
Persepsi positif tersebut meliputi tujuan, kegiatan, dan materi yang diberikan di
kelas. Meskipun sebagian besar mahasiswa memiliki persepsi positif pada
kegiatan di kelas, beberapa mahasiswa menganggap kegiatan di kelas terasa
membosankan karena kegiatan yang sama setiap minggunya. Beberapa mahasiswa
juga merasa bahwa kegiatan di kelas lebih difokuskan pada keterampilan menulis.
Selain itu, sebagian besar mahasiswa memiki masalah terkait dengan durasi kelas.
Sebagian besar mahasiswa merasa kesulitan untuk menjaga konsentrasi di kelas
karena lamanya durasi pembelajaran (3,5 jam). Terkait dengan masalah di atas,
penulis merangkum saran-saran dari mahasiswa. Mereka menyarankan dosen
supaya memasukkan permainan atau kegiatan menarik lainnya untuk menjaga
konsentrasi siswa ketika pembelajaran di kelas. Selain itu, mereka menyarankan
supaya dosen agar menyeimbangkan porsi kegiatan di kelas untuk keterampilan
membaca dan menulis. Konsep pembelajaran integrasi atau penggabungan
berguna bagi mahasiswa, namun mereka merasa penerapannya belum maksimal.
Mahasiswa menyarankan pihak prodi agar membagi kelas menjadi dua kelas di
hari yang berbeda dan dengan satu dosen yang sama. Dosen pengajar yang
viii
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
berbeda terkadang membingungkan mahasiswa karena konsep mengajarnya yang
berbeda pula.
Kata kunci: persepsi, pembelajaran integrasi, mata kuliah Critical Reading and
Writing 1
ix
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all, I want to thank Jesus Christ for His never ending blessing to
me so I could finish my thesis and for His love which accompanied me through all
the process.
My deepest gratitude goes to Made Frida Yulia, S.Pd., M.Pd., as my
thesis advisor, for her guidance, assistance, feedback, and her time from the
beginning until the end of the process in writing my thesis. I learned so many
things during the process.
I would also like to sincerely thank Patricia Angelina Lasut, S.Pd.,
M.Hum., as the lecturer of Critical Reading and Writing 2 for the opportunity
given to me to conduct the research in her classes. I would also like to thank the
2010 students of Critical Reading and Writing 2, especially class A and class
C, for their time and willingness to be my respondents.
I would like to deeply thank my beloved parents, Ricardus Antiokus and
Katarina Ketut Sukarmi, who always support and pray the best for me, for
being beside me whenever I was in hard time and need them. I will always try to
make them proud of me.
I would also like to thank my best friends and my family in Jogja, Nicho,
Ichad, Uwi, Etha, Eta Magno, Emil, Marsya, Desy, Hendrik, Wiwik, Yuni for
their encouragement and support as well, for making me laugh, comforting me
when I was sad, and taking care of me as a real family. I would also like to thank
my best friends in college, Ika, Lia, Deby, Tania, Vita, Ratna, and Ivon, who
gave me such wonderful times, memories, and togetherness in college. My
sincerely thanks go to Sr. Benedicte, CB and my sisters in Syantikara
dormitory, for being my second home in Jogja and giving me lots of experiences.
Last but not least, I would like to thank everyone for helping me in writing
m y t he s i s .
Theresia Noviani Nora
x
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE ……………………………………………………………………..i
APPROVAL PAGE ……………………………………………………………...ii
DEDICATION PAGE …………………………………………………………..iv
STATEMENT OF WORKS’ ORIGINALITY ………………………………….v
PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI ………………………………….vi
ABSTRACT ……………………………………………………………………vii
ABSTRAK ……………………………………………………………………...viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ……………………………………………………..x
TABLE OF CONTENTS ……………………………………………………….xi
LIST OF TABLES …………………………………………………………….xiv
LIST OF APPENDICES ……………………………………………………….xv
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………..1
A. Research Background ……………………………………………………1
B. Research Problems ….……………………………………………………3
C. Problem Limitation ………………………………………………………3
D. Research Objectives ……………………………………………………...4
E. Research Benefits ………………………………………………………...4
F. Definition of Terms ………………………………………………………5
xi
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
A. Theoretical Description …………………………………………………..8
1. Perception …………………………………………………………….8
2. Integrated Learning ………………………………………………….10
a. Definition of Integrated Learning ……………………………….10
b. Integrated Learning in Reading and Writing ……………………12
3. Critical Thinking …………………………………………………….14
B. Theoretical Framework ………………………………………………….15
CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY ……………………………………………..18
A. Research Method ………………………………………………………...18
B. Research Setting ………………………………………………………....20
C. Research Participants …………………………………………………....20
D. Instruments and Data Gathering Technique ……………………………..21
1. The Questionnaire …………………………………………………...21
2. The Interview ………………………………………………………..22
E. Data Analysis Technique ………………………………………………..23
1. Data from the Questionnaire .……………………………………......23
2. Data from the Interview …………………………………………......24
F. Research Procedure ……………………………………………………...25
xi i
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
CHAPTER IV: RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
A. ELESP Students’ Perception on Critical Reading and Writing 1 …….…27
1. Students’ Perception on the Purpose of CRW 1 …….………………27
2. Students’ Perception on the Activities of CRW 1 …….…………….32
a. Students’ Perception on the Pre-Activities in CRW 1 …….…….37
b. Students’ Perception on the Whilst Activities in CRW 1 …….....39
c. Students’ Perception on the Post-Activities in CRW 1 …….…...41
3. Students’ General Impressions of CRW 1 …………………………..43
B. Students’ Suggestions to Improve the Implementation of CRW 1 ……. 47
1. Students’ Suggestions Based on the Questionnaire …………………48
2. Students’ Suggestions Based on the Interview ……………………...49
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS ……………………..52
A. Conclusions …………………………………………………………….52
B. Suggestions …………………………………………………………….55
REFERENCES …………………………………………………………………57
APPENDICES ………………………………………………………………….59
xi i i
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
4.1 Table 4.1 Students’ Perception on the Purpose of CRW 1
28
4.2 The Results of Open-ended Questionnaire on the Purpose of CRW 1
30
4.3 Students’ Perception on the Activities of CRW 1
33
4.4 The Result of Open-ended Questionnaire on the Activities of CRW 1
35
4.5 Students’ Perception on the Pre-Activities of CRW 1
38
4.6 Students’ Perception on the Whilst Activities of CRW 1
41
4.7 Students’ Perception on the Post Activities of CRW 1
42
4.8 Students’ General Impression of CRW 1
44
4.9 The Result of Open-ended Questionnaire on the Difficulties Students
Faced in CRW 1
46
4.10 Students’ Suggestions Related to the Implementation of CRW 1
48
xi v
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Permission Letter
60
Appendix 2: The Questionnaire
61
Appendix 3: The Blueprint of the Questionnaire
63
Appendix 4: Students’ Final Scores of Closed-ended Questionnaire
65
Appendix 5: Classification of the Students’ Answers of the Open-ended
77
Questions
Appendix 6: The Blueprint of the Interview Protocol for Students
79
Appendix 7: Data Classification from the Interview
80
Appendix 8: The Transcript of the Interview
84
xv
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
This research is intended to reveal English Language Education Study
Program (ELESP) students’ perception on Critical Reading and Writing 1
course in the academic year of 2010/2011 in Sanata Dharma University. This
chapter consists of research background, research problem, problem
limitation, research objectives, research benefits, and definition of terms.
A. Research Background
In teaching English, teachers need an approach to make teachinglearning process more effective. There are many kinds of approach which can
be applied in teaching. One of them is integrated learning. Integrated learning
is an approach which enables teachers to integrate more than one skill which
are related to one another. Teachers might integrate receptive skills with
productive skills into one class. For example, teachers may integrate listening
with speaking or reading with writing.
There are some schools and universities which have applied integrated
learning. Sanata Dharma University is one of those which apply integrated
learning in the 2010/2011 new curriculum of the English Language Education
Study Program (ELESP). Some of the courses have been improved using
integrated learning. In the new curriculum, there are Critical Listening and
1
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
2
Speaking 1, Critical Listening and Speaking 2, Critical Reading and Writing 1,
and Critical Reading and Writing 2.
Critical Reading and Writing 1 is the continuation of the previous
courses, which are Basic Reading 2 and Paragraph Writing. This course is
designed for the third semester students of ELESP in Sanata Dharma
University. This course tries to integrate reading and writing skills into one
class. In this course, the students are given the opportunity to write responses
critically based on the texts given. After passing the course, the students are
expected to be able to think critically related to the text given and to respond
to it logically and reasonably.
The researcher chooses Critical Reading and Writing 1 because some
students generally become confused in the class. Based on the informal
interview with several students, there were some reasons why they became
confused. According to the students, the time allocation for reading and
writing activities were not equal. Basically, Critical Reading and Writing 1
tried to combine Extensive Reading 1 with Short Essay Writing 1. However,
writing activities took more parts compared to reading activities in the class.
Besides, the students were confused by the material and the order of the
activities in the class. Usually, the students would have simple writing practice
as the pre-activity. The students would describe the pictures which were
shown by slides in the PowerPoint presentation and write the simple
description based on the pictures. Besides, the students could also write
something based on the simple topic given by the lecturer. Then, they had the
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
3
presentation as the reading section. In the last part, the students were assigned
to write certain topics related to the syllabus. In addition, the course took four
credits which bored the students in the class.
Critical Reading and Writing 1 is newly implemented for the
2010/2011 ELESP students. Since this course is newly implemented for the
students, the researcher would like to know students’ perception on this
course. Besides, the researcher intended to find out students’ suggestions to
improve the implementation of this course.
B. Research Problems
This study would like to address two questions.
1. What is English Language Education Study Program (ELESP) students’
perception on Critical Reading and Writing 1 course?
2. What do the students suggest improving the implementation of Critical
Reading and Writing 1 course?
C. Problem Limitation
The researcher limits the scope of the research to the Critical Reading
and Writing 1 course. The subject of the research is the fourth semester
students of 2010/2011 ELESP in Sanata Dharma University. The researcher
focuses the research on two problems. The first problem deals with the
students’ perception on Critical Reading and Writing 1 course. The second
one is the students’ suggestions to improve the implementation of Critical
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
4
Reading and Writing 1 course. The researcher will conduct a survey as the
method of the research. The questionnaire will be distributed to the ELESP
students in the 2010/2011 academic year to gather the data. There are four
parallel classes in Critical Reading and Writing 1, namely class A, B, C, and D
with two different lecturers. Class A and C are chosen as the sample of the
research because the students had experienced the course in the third semester.
Besides, all the students in those classes are from 2010/2011 academic year.
Those two classes are considered as the representative to provide the data for
the research.
D. Research Objectives
Based on the problems formulated in the previous part, there are two
objectives of this research. They are:
1. To see students’ perception on Critical Reading and Writing 1 course in
the 2010/2011 academic year.
2. To find out what should be improved in Critical Reading and Writing 1
course.
E. Research Benefits
This research would give some benefits to the lecturers and Sanata
Dharma University, especially ELESP. Besides, the researcher expects the
findings may contribute to the education development in the future.
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
5
1. Lecturers of CRW 1
This research aimed to give some information related to the students’
perception on Critical Reading and Writing 1 course. By knowing students’
perception on that course, the lecturers will obtain the feedback about the
implementation of the course. Moreover, the lecturers will know what should
be improved in order to make the course more effective for the students.
2. English Language Education Study Program
This research would give some contributions to Sanata Dharma
University, especially for English Language Education Study Program. Since
Critical Reading and Writing 1 course is taken into new curriculum, the study
program should know about the implementation of the course. Conducting the
research, the study program would have the data based on students’ opinion
about the implementation of that course. Besides, the study program would
improve the implementation of the course considering students’ suggestions
related to the course.
F. Definition of Terms
There are some definitions of terms which will help the readers to
know some terms related to the research.
1. Perception
There are some definitions of perception. Altman, Valensi, & Hodgetts
(1985) define perception as “the way stimuli are selected and grouped by a
person so that they can be meaningfully interpreted” (p. 85). Another
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
6
definition comes from Stephen P. Robbins. Perception is “a process by which
individual organize and interpret their sensory impressions in order to give
meaning to their environment” (Robbins, 2001: 135). In this research,
perception deals with ELESP students’ feelings, opinions, and responses on
the implementation of Critical Reading and Writing 1 course in Sanata
Dharma University.
2. Critical Reading and Writing 1
Based on Panduan Akademik Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa
Inggris (2011), Critical Reading and Writing 1 course is designed to give
students more practice to write responses critically based on the given texts or
passages (p. 37). This course is the integration of reading and writing skills
and the activities as well. Through this course, the students are trained to apply
logical principles, careful standard of evidence, and reasoning to the analysis
and discussion of claims, beliefs, and issues. Critical Reading and Writing 1 is
designed for the third semester students of ELESP. Students may take this
course if they have passed Basic Reading 1, Basic Reading 2, Basic Writing,
and Paragraph Writing. In this research, Critical Reading and Writing 1 is the
integration of reading and writing activities into one class. The basic idea of
Critical Reading and Writing 1 course is the combination between Extensive
Reading 1 and Short Essay Writing 1. The lecturers try to integrate the
activities in Extensive Reading 1 and in Short Essay Writing 1 into one class.
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
7
3. English Language Education Study Program (ELESP)
English Language Education Study Program is the study program in
Sanata Dharma University. This study program is in the faculty of Teachers
Training and Education. English Language Education Study Program tries to
prepare the students to become an English teacher. In this research, the
researcher would like to observe one of the courses in ELESP new curriculum,
which is Critical Reading and Writing 1. The subjects of this research are the
fourth semester of ELESP students in the 2010/2011 academic year.
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
This chapter discusses the theories related to the study. There are two
elements in this chapter: theoretical description and theoretical framework.
Theoretical description discusses some theories related to the study, while
theoretical framework relates the theories to the study.
A. Theoretical Description
The theoretical description mostly discusses students’ perception,
integrated learning, and critical thinking.
1. Perception
Perception can be defined as “a process by which individuals organize and
interpret their sensory impressions in order to give meaning to their environment”
(Robbins, 2001: 135). According to Altman et al. (1985), “perception is the way
stimuli are selected and grouped by a person so that they can be meaningfully
interpreted” (p. 85). Kreitner and Kinicki (2008) see perception as the process of
how someone understands and interprets the environment surrounds him/her using
cognitive process.
a. Factors Influencing Perception
Someone’s perception can be influenced by some factors. Altman et al.
(1985) state that there are four important factors in influencing someone’s
8
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
9
perception. Those factors are the selection of stimuli, the organization of stimuli,
the situation, and the person’s self concept (p. 86).
1) Selection of Stimuli
From all the information or stimuli surround people, they will focus on
small numbers of stimuli. This process is called selection. People will only catch
the information which is important and memorable to them. This process also
answers the reason of how students perceive things differently. Each person will
select specific cues or filters the stimuli, and this selection may be different one
another. Karen Huffman, Mark Vernoy, and Judith Vernoy (2002) define selection
of stimuli as the process of selecting the important information.
2) Organization of Stimuli
After the information has been selected, the information must be arranged
so that it will become meaningful. This arrangement will help students to interpret
the information. As Altman et al. (1985: 87) state “the mind tries to bring order
out of the chaotic onslaught of sensory data by selecting certain items and putting
them together in a meaningful way that is based on experience.”
3) The Situation
The situation will influence someone’s perspective and relate it with
his/her past experience. By seeing the situation accurately, he/she knows what
he/she should do related to the situation itself (Altman et al., 1985). From the
statement above, it is clear that students will use their experiences to face the
situation in which they face in the future. From their experiences, they will know
what they should do if they face the same situation in the future.
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
10
4) Self-Concept
The last factor which influences perception is self-concept. Self-concept is
the way a person sees him/herself. For example, if a person conceptualizes
him/herself as being confident, it will stimulate him/her to be a confident person.
“Self-concept is important because person’s mental picture will determine much
of what he/she perceives and does.” (Altman et al., 1985: 90).
2. Integrated Learning
In this section, the researcher provides the definition of integrated learning
and the rationale of integrating reading and writing skills.
a. Definition of Integrated Learning
Over the years, educational development has changed. This change affects
the educational curriculum. Educational practitioners try to find a new approach to
improve the quality of education. One of the approaches is integrated learning. St.
Mary School, Thailand is one of schools which applied the concept of integration.
Kingfa Sintoovongse, Chantana Klomjit, Julamas Jansrisukot,
Raweewan
Khamsom, Rewadee Lasa, Chadaporn Rukhacet, Supawadee Tipayaraj write a
journal titled “Integrated learning Approach at a School in the Northeast of
Thailand” which reviews the implementation of the integrated learning approach
in St. Mary School. They reveal the concept of integrated itself. According to
Sintoovongse et al., integrated learning refers to the implementation how the
discrete disciplines of subject are interrelated to bring effective learning for
students. Further, they explain that the integration should be followed by its
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
11
philosophy, principles, aims, and approach. The philosophy focuses on how to
make the learning becomes meaningful and related to students’ real life. The aims
of integration are relating the subjects to be more comprehensive, not teaching the
subjects separately, and involving students in direct, purposeful, and meaningful
learning. Then, students will be provided various approaches and activities. These
activities are arranged to bring a whole and connected across the interrelated
subjects. The activities can bring the experience of both working individually and
group. (Sintoovongse et al., 2011)
As written on the journal, St. Mary School followed six stages for the
development of the integrated unit. They are identifying the topic, determining the
learning objectives, identifying and analyzing the content and sub-content,
constructing the lesson or unit plan. After those stages are completed, the teachers
may apply the unit. The last stage is assessing and evaluating the unit. In each
stage, teachers from different subjects which are interrelated should work together
by unifying their concepts related to the subjects matter.
There are several definitions of integrated learning. The first definition
comes from Humphreys. He states that in integrated study, students can explore
knowledge broadly in various subjects which are integrated (Humphreys, Post,
and Ellis as cited in Lake 2003: 189). He sees the connection between two
different subjects. He believes that art, science, social, and language have the
connection and it will bring learning experience if those subjects are integrated.
By seeing these connections, Shoemaker as cited in Lake (2003) defines an
integrated learning as
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
12
…education that is organized in such a way that it cuts across subjectmatter lines, bringing together various aspects of the curriculum into
meaningful association to focus upon broad areas of study. It views
learning and teaching in a holistic way and reflects the real world, which is
interactive. (2003, p. 190).
According to Sintoovongse et al. (2011) the purpose of integrated learning
is to bring learning experience to the students. In integrated learning, students will
focus on testing and practice. It means that in integrated learning, students will be
given more exercises and practices related to the materials. These exercises will
help students to comprehend the material and student’s experiences as the learning
process. They define concepts of integrated learning approach as the interrelated
subjects. Besides, integrated learning involves students in direct, meaningful, and
purposeful learning. Therefore, integrated learning should be student-centered, not
teacher-centered. The learning process will focus on students’ need. The teachers’
role is that to facilitate students in the learning process.
b. Integrated Learning in Reading and Writing
In integrated learning, teachers may integrate more than one subject or
discipline as in elementary school. At the higher level, integrated learning can be
implemented at university scope. At this level, lecturers may integrate two skills
which are related to each other, as in reading and writing skills. Giesen (2001)
writes a journal titled “Activities for Integrating Reading and Writing in the
Language Classroom.” The journal proposes suitable activities for integrating
reading and writing skills into one class. Besides, Giesen explains briefly the
connection between reading-writing and discussed how the integration of those
two skills enhances learning. Reading and writing skills are chosen to be taught
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
13
together into one class based on some considerations. Giesen reveals that “the
connections between reading and writing are multifaceted. The most obvious
connection is that both skills depend on the written forms of language for
communication.” (Giesen, 2001: 5). Carson, 1993 Church, 1997 and Spack 1998b
as cited in Giesen (2001) state that reading and writing skills are interdependent
and relate to each other. “Reading, as well as writing, as seen as an active,
constructive process” (Barnett, 1998, Church, 1998, Reid, 1993, Spack, 1998b,
Zamel, 1992 as cited in Giesen, 2001: 5).
Writing activities motivate students to read more on the topics discussed.
By writing, teachers will know students’ understanding of what they have read.
Writing can be seen as media for students to organize their thoughts and ideas on
a passage. On the other hand, students cannot become good writers without being
engaged in reading. In reading, students will be introduced vocabularies and
meanings, sentence structure, and rhetorical structures of English writing.
Through this knowledge, students will have enough capability in writing (Reid,
1993).
Since reading and writing are closely linked and mutually reinforce each
other, those two skills will be more effective if they are integrated into one class.
By integrating these two skills, students will have deep understanding in reading
and writing. Besides, students will have more opportunity to practice through the
activities in the classroom. As Carson et al., as cited in Giesen (2001) said that the
integration of reading and writing helps students to become better readers, writers,
and thinkers.
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
14
3. Critical Thinking
According to Scriven & Paul (2011), critical thinking is the way of
thinking about particular object, problem, or idea through the process of
conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating the
information. They add that critical thinking has two components. The first thing is
that the information gathered is processed actively and skillfully. The second
thing is that critical thinking can be seen as a habit by using those processes as
guidance to become a critical thinker. Elder (2007) defines critical thinking as the
highest level of students’ quality in thinking which need self-guided and selfdisciplined of students (2007). Being critical in this context means how students
use their thoughts deeply, reflect on it, and react to it. Glaser (1941) adds that
critical thinking involves three things. They are the students’ attitude in facing the
problem based on their experiences, the students’ knowledge to gather
information logically and reasonably, and the students’ skills to think critically.
Based on Pearson Education (2011), there are four steps in the critical thinking
process. They are:
a. Summarize
In this step, students will try to recall and restate the main point of the
information. However, students are not expected to add their opinion. Students
will only summarize the information they obtain and add nothing.
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
15
b. Analyze
After summarizing, students break down the material into its component
parts. Those parts will help students to find how those parts relate to each other.
By seeing the relations, students may have the opinion on the information.
c. Synthesize
In this step, students will connect what they have summarized and
analyzed to their own experience. Students’ experiences are important to help
students in synthesizing the idea. It will stimulate students to think critically.
d. Evaluate
In this last step, students can make a judgment on the material or on
information given. However, this judgment cannot be made without three
previous steps. Through summary, analysis, and synthesis, students are expected
to have the good and critical judgment related to the idea.
B. Theoretical Framework
This research focuses on students’ perception on Critical Reading and
Writing 1 course. There are some theories related to this research. They are
students’ perception, integrated learning and critical thinking. Those theories
above will give more explanation about the research. In this theoretical
framework, the researcher tries to relate those theories to the research.
Critical Reading and Writing 1 course is applied in the 2010/2011 ELESP
curriculum. In this course, the lecturers combine the reading and writing activities
into one class. By combining the activities, the students will have more
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
16
opportunity to practice in those two subjects. As Sintoovongse at al., state that
integrated learning will lead to the meaningful and purposeful learning to the
students (2011). By this integration, the students are expected to see the
connection between reading and writing and are expected to have critical thinking.
Critical thinking can be seen as a new way of thinking where students do
not see the problem on the surface only. Indeed, critical thinking will lead students
to see the problem beyond the surface (Scriven & Paul, 2001). Students will
respond, react, and make judgment based on logical and reasonable opinion
(Elder, 2007).
In order to make students think critically, lecturers will give more
exercises and assignments as the learning experiences. The experiences are not
only about the exercises given in the class but also the class activities and the
implementation of the course. These experiences are important for students to
reflect on those experiences. Altman at al., state the factors of influencing
someone’s perception are selection of stimuli, organization of stimuli, situation,
and self-concept (1985). These factors explain the reason why the students
perceive the implementation of Critical Reading and Writing 1 course differently.
In addition, the success of the learning process depends on the students’
perception toward the course. As Altman et al. (1985) stated that the way students
perceive something will influence their behavioral responses. If the students
respond to the course positively, the students will be motivated to follow the
teaching-learning activities. On the other hand, if the students respond to the
course negatively, the students are not motivated to follow the lesson. These
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
17
positive responses will influence the success of Critical Reading and Writing 1
course.
This research focuses on how the students perceived the implementation of
Critical Reading and Writing 1 course. The implementation is including the
purpose, the class activities, the materials given in the class, and the students’
impressions toward the course. Based on those theories discussed, the researcher
constructs the instruments which refer to those aspects to know the students’
perception on Critical Reading and Writing 1.
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
In this chapter, the researcher discusses the methodology in conducting
the research. This chapter consists of research method, research setting,
research participants, instruments and data gathering technique, data analysis
technique, and research procedure.
A. Research Method
The researcher applied survey research to answer two research
questions which had been stated in the research problem. D. Ary, L.C. Jacobs,
and A. Razavieh (2002) define that “survey is a research technique in which
data are gathered by asking questions of a group or individuals called
respondents.” Since the researcher intended to know the perception of ELESP
students on Critical Reading and Writing 1 course in the 2010/2011 academic
year, the survey research was conducted. According to Fraenkel & Wallen
(2008), “the major purpose of survey is to describe the characteristics of a
population” (p. 390).
Survey research was applied to answer the research questions based on
some characteristics. Fraenkel & Wallen (2008) mention three major
characteristics of survey research. First, information is obtained to describe
some aspects or characteristics such as opinions of certain group. Second,
18
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
19
information is gathered by asking questions to the members of that group.
Third, information is collected from sample of population (p. 390).
Reviewing the characteristics above, survey was appropriate to be
applied to answer the research questions. In this research, the researcher would
like to know students’ opinions and perceptions on Critical Reading and
Writing 1 course. Besides, the information was gathered by asking questions
to the sample of population, which were the students of ELESP in the
academic year of 2010/2011.
There were two research questions in this research. The first research
question was intended to know ELESP students’ perception on Critical
Reading and Writing 1 course in the academic year of 2010/2011 in Sanata
Dharma University. The second research question was intended to find out
students’ suggestions to improve the implementation of Critical Reading and
Writing 1 course. To answer those research questions above, the researcher
used questionnaire and personal interview as the instruments of the research.
The questionnaire was distributed to the 2010/2011 ELESP students
who had passed Critical Reading and Writing 1. This questionnaire was
consisted of closed-ended and open-ended part. From the closed-ended part,
the researcher calculated and presented the data using Likert Scale in the form
of percentage. From the open-ended part, the researcher presented the data in
the form of essays. Besides questionnaire, the researcher used personal
interview to strengthen the data obtained. By conducting the interview, the
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
20
researcher would obtain deeper answers and understanding on Critical
Reading and Writing I course from the respondents.
B. Research Setting
This research was conducted in Sanata Dharma University. The
subjects of this research were the fourth semester students of ELESP in the
academic year of 2010/2011. The questionnaire was distributed on May 25,
2012. After distributing the questionnaire, the researcher conducted an
interview to strengthen the data. The interview was done in two days. The first
day was on June 13, 2012 and the second day was on June 14, 2012.
C. Research Participants
The subjects of this research were the fourth semester students of
ELESP in the 2010/2011 academic year. Fourth semester students were
chosen as the subject of this research because the students had passed Critical
Reading and Writing 1 in the third semester. Hence, fourth semester students
were considered that they had experience the course. Having experiences in
Critical Reading and Writing 1, the fourth semester students of ELESP could
share their perception toward the course. In this research, the questionnaire
was distributed to the students of Critical Reading and Writing 2 in the
2010/2011 academic year in Sanata Dharma University. The students were
asked to answer the questions in the questionnaire.
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
21
There were four parallel classes in Critical Reading and Writing 2.
They are class A, B, C, and D. Each class consisted of approximately 45
students. The researcher took two parallel classes of Critic
ABSTRACT
Nora, Theresia Noviani. (2012). ELESP Students’ Perception on Critical Reading
and Writing 1 Course. Yogyakarta: English Language Education Study Program,
Sanata Dharma University.
Critical Reading and Writing 1 is the course which is applied since
2010/2011 academic year and is designed for the third semester students of
English Language Education Study Program (ELESP). In this course, reading and
writing skills are integrated and taught in the same class. Through this course, the
students are expected to respond critically to the passages given. Since reading
and writing skills are interrelated, it is suitable to integrate these two skills into
one class. However, the students had different opinions and points of view toward
the course.
There are two formulated problems in this research. They are: 1) What are
ELESP students’ perception on Critical Reading and Writing 1 course? and 2)
What do the students suggest to improve the implementation of Critical Reading
and Writing 1 course?
The research used survey as the research method. In gathering the data, the
researcher distributed the questionnaire to the fourth semester students of ELESP
in 2010/2011 academic year of Sanata Dharma University. Besides, the researcher
conducted an interview with the students to strengthen the data.
The results of the research showed that the majority of the students had
positive perception on the implementation of Critical Reading and Writing 1,
including the purpose, the class activities, and the materials given in the class.
However, some students felt that the class activities were boring because they did
monotonous activities in every meeting. Some of the students also felt that the
class activities were focused more on writing skill. To overcome the problems
which the students faced in the class, the researcher summarized the suggestions
from the students. For the class activities, the students suggested the lecturers to
add some games or interesting activities. Besides, the students suggested the
lecturers to balance the portion of reading and writing activities and not to focus
on one skill only. For the duration of the class, the students suggested ELESP to
separate the course in different day. Besides, they suggested the department to
have one lecturer in teaching Critical Reading and Writing 1.
Keywords: perception, integrated learning, Critical Reading and Writing 1
vii
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
ABSTRAK
Nora, Theresia Noviani. (2012). ELESP Students’ Perception on Critical Reading
and Writing 1 Course. Yogyakarta: Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris,
Universitas Sanata Dharma.
Critical Reading and Writing 1 merupakan mata kuliah baru di program
Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris. Mata kuliah ini mulai diterapkan pada
kurikulum 2010/2011 dan diberikan di semester 3. Critical Reading and Writing 1
merupakan sebuah mata kuliah yang menggabungkan keterampilan membaca dan
menulis. Melalui mata kuliah ini, mahasiswa diharapkan dapat mengasah
kemampuan merespon naskah dengan kritis dan mampu menuangkan ke dalam
tulisan. Selain itu, keterampilan membaca dan menulis merupakan keterampilan
yang saling berkaitan sehingga sesuai jika keterampilan tersebut digabungkan dan
diajarkan dalam satu mata kuliah. Namun, para mahasiswa memiliki pendapat dan
persepsi yang berbeda terhadap mata kuliah baru tersebut.
Berdasarkan latar belakang di atas, penulis merumuskan dua pertanyaan
dalam penelitian ini, yakni: 1) Bagaimana persepsi mahasiswa Pendidikan Bahasa
Inggris terhadap mata kuliah Critical Reading and Writing 1?,
2) Saran apa
yang diberikan mahasiswa untuk peningkatan mata kuliah Critical Reading and
Writing 1?
Penelitian ini menggunakan metode survey. Pengumpulan data dilakukan
dengan menyebarkan angket dan melakukan wawancara dengan mahasiswa
semester empat Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Universitas Sanata
Dharma, tahun akademik 2010/2011.
Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa sebagian besar mahasiswa
mempunyai persepsi positif terhadap mata kuliah Critical Reading and Writing 1.
Persepsi positif tersebut meliputi tujuan, kegiatan, dan materi yang diberikan di
kelas. Meskipun sebagian besar mahasiswa memiliki persepsi positif pada
kegiatan di kelas, beberapa mahasiswa menganggap kegiatan di kelas terasa
membosankan karena kegiatan yang sama setiap minggunya. Beberapa mahasiswa
juga merasa bahwa kegiatan di kelas lebih difokuskan pada keterampilan menulis.
Selain itu, sebagian besar mahasiswa memiki masalah terkait dengan durasi kelas.
Sebagian besar mahasiswa merasa kesulitan untuk menjaga konsentrasi di kelas
karena lamanya durasi pembelajaran (3,5 jam). Terkait dengan masalah di atas,
penulis merangkum saran-saran dari mahasiswa. Mereka menyarankan dosen
supaya memasukkan permainan atau kegiatan menarik lainnya untuk menjaga
konsentrasi siswa ketika pembelajaran di kelas. Selain itu, mereka menyarankan
supaya dosen agar menyeimbangkan porsi kegiatan di kelas untuk keterampilan
membaca dan menulis. Konsep pembelajaran integrasi atau penggabungan
berguna bagi mahasiswa, namun mereka merasa penerapannya belum maksimal.
Mahasiswa menyarankan pihak prodi agar membagi kelas menjadi dua kelas di
hari yang berbeda dan dengan satu dosen yang sama. Dosen pengajar yang
viii
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
ELESP STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION
ON CRITICAL READING AND WRITING 1 COURSE
A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree
in English Language Education
By
Theresia Noviani Nora
Student Number: 081214055
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM
DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION
FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY
YOGYAKARTA
20 12
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
ELESP STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION
ON CRITICAL READING AND WRITING 1 COURSE
A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree
in English Language Education
By
Theresia Noviani Nora
Student Number: 081214055
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM
DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION
FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY
YOGYAKARTA
20 12
i
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
ii
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
iii
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
There are no shortcuts to any place worth
going
Baverly Sills
I DEDICATE THIS THESIS TO:
My GOD, Jesus Christ, my parents, my family, my best friends,
and everyone who stays in my heart.
iv
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY
I honestly declare that this thesis, which I have written, does not contain the work
or parts of the work of other people, except those cited in the quotations and the
references, as a scientific paper should.
Yogyakarta, 6th December 2012
The Writer
Theresia Noviani Nora
081214055
v
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN
PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS
Yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini, saya mahasiswa Universitas Sanata Dharma:
Nama
: Theresia Noviani Nora
Nomor Mahasiswa
: 081214055
Demi pengembangan ilmu pengetahuan, saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan
Universitas Sanata Dharma karya ilmiah saya yang berjudul:
ELESP STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION ON CRITICAL READING
AND WRITING 1 COURSE
beserta perangkat yang diperlukan (bila ada). Dengan demikian saya
memberikan kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma hak untuk
menyimpan, mengalihkan dalam bentuk media lain, mengelolanya dalam bentuk
pangkalan data, mendistribusikan secara terbatas, dan mempublikasikannya di
Internet atau media lain untuk kepentingan akademis tanpa perlu meminta ijin dari
saya maupun memberikan royalti kepada saya selama tetap mencantumkan nama
saya sebagai penulis.
Demikian pernyataan ini yang saya buat dengan sebenarnya.
Dibuat di Yogyakarta
Pada tanggal: 6 Desember 2010
Yang menyatakan
Theresia Noviani Nora
vi
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
ABSTRACT
Nora, Theresia Noviani. (2012). ELESP Students’ Perception on Critical Reading
and Writing 1 Course. Yogyakarta: English Language Education Study Program,
Sanata Dharma University.
Critical Reading and Writing 1 is the course which is applied since
2010/2011 academic year and is designed for the third semester students of
English Language Education Study Program (ELESP). In this course, reading and
writing skills are integrated and taught in the same class. Through this course, the
students are expected to respond critically to the passages given. Since reading
and writing skills are interrelated, it is suitable to integrate these two skills into
one class. However, the students had different opinions and points of view toward
the course.
There are two formulated problems in this research. They are: 1) What are
ELESP students’ perception on Critical Reading and Writing 1 course? and 2)
What do the students suggest to improve the implementation of Critical Reading
and Writing 1 course?
The research used survey as the research method. In gathering the data, the
researcher distributed the questionnaire to the fourth semester students of ELESP
in 2010/2011 academic year of Sanata Dharma University. Besides, the researcher
conducted an interview with the students to strengthen the data.
The results of the research showed that the majority of the students had
positive perception on the implementation of Critical Reading and Writing 1,
including the purpose, the class activities, and the materials given in the class.
However, some students felt that the class activities were boring because they did
monotonous activities in every meeting. Some of the students also felt that the
class activities were focused more on writing skill. To overcome the problems
which the students faced in the class, the researcher summarized the suggestions
from the students. For the class activities, the students suggested the lecturers to
add some games or interesting activities. Besides, the students suggested the
lecturers to balance the portion of reading and writing activities and not to focus
on one skill only. For the duration of the class, the students suggested ELESP to
separate the course in different day. Besides, they suggested the department to
have one lecturer in teaching Critical Reading and Writing 1.
Keywords: perception, integrated learning, Critical Reading and Writing 1
vii
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
ABSTRAK
Nora, Theresia Noviani. (2012). ELESP Students’ Perception on Critical Reading
and Writing 1 Course. Yogyakarta: Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris,
Universitas Sanata Dharma.
Critical Reading and Writing 1 merupakan mata kuliah baru di program
Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris. Mata kuliah ini mulai diterapkan pada
kurikulum 2010/2011 dan diberikan di semester 3. Critical Reading and Writing 1
merupakan sebuah mata kuliah yang menggabungkan keterampilan membaca dan
menulis. Melalui mata kuliah ini, mahasiswa diharapkan dapat mengasah
kemampuan merespon naskah dengan kritis dan mampu menuangkan ke dalam
tulisan. Selain itu, keterampilan membaca dan menulis merupakan keterampilan
yang saling berkaitan sehingga sesuai jika keterampilan tersebut digabungkan dan
diajarkan dalam satu mata kuliah. Namun, para mahasiswa memiliki pendapat dan
persepsi yang berbeda terhadap mata kuliah baru tersebut.
Berdasarkan latar belakang di atas, penulis merumuskan dua pertanyaan
dalam penelitian ini, yakni: 1) Bagaimana persepsi mahasiswa Pendidikan Bahasa
Inggris terhadap mata kuliah Critical Reading and Writing 1?,
2) Saran apa
yang diberikan mahasiswa untuk peningkatan mata kuliah Critical Reading and
Writing 1?
Penelitian ini menggunakan metode survey. Pengumpulan data dilakukan
dengan menyebarkan angket dan melakukan wawancara dengan mahasiswa
semester empat Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Universitas Sanata
Dharma, tahun akademik 2010/2011.
Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa sebagian besar mahasiswa
mempunyai persepsi positif terhadap mata kuliah Critical Reading and Writing 1.
Persepsi positif tersebut meliputi tujuan, kegiatan, dan materi yang diberikan di
kelas. Meskipun sebagian besar mahasiswa memiliki persepsi positif pada
kegiatan di kelas, beberapa mahasiswa menganggap kegiatan di kelas terasa
membosankan karena kegiatan yang sama setiap minggunya. Beberapa mahasiswa
juga merasa bahwa kegiatan di kelas lebih difokuskan pada keterampilan menulis.
Selain itu, sebagian besar mahasiswa memiki masalah terkait dengan durasi kelas.
Sebagian besar mahasiswa merasa kesulitan untuk menjaga konsentrasi di kelas
karena lamanya durasi pembelajaran (3,5 jam). Terkait dengan masalah di atas,
penulis merangkum saran-saran dari mahasiswa. Mereka menyarankan dosen
supaya memasukkan permainan atau kegiatan menarik lainnya untuk menjaga
konsentrasi siswa ketika pembelajaran di kelas. Selain itu, mereka menyarankan
supaya dosen agar menyeimbangkan porsi kegiatan di kelas untuk keterampilan
membaca dan menulis. Konsep pembelajaran integrasi atau penggabungan
berguna bagi mahasiswa, namun mereka merasa penerapannya belum maksimal.
Mahasiswa menyarankan pihak prodi agar membagi kelas menjadi dua kelas di
hari yang berbeda dan dengan satu dosen yang sama. Dosen pengajar yang
viii
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
berbeda terkadang membingungkan mahasiswa karena konsep mengajarnya yang
berbeda pula.
Kata kunci: persepsi, pembelajaran integrasi, mata kuliah Critical Reading and
Writing 1
ix
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all, I want to thank Jesus Christ for His never ending blessing to
me so I could finish my thesis and for His love which accompanied me through all
the process.
My deepest gratitude goes to Made Frida Yulia, S.Pd., M.Pd., as my
thesis advisor, for her guidance, assistance, feedback, and her time from the
beginning until the end of the process in writing my thesis. I learned so many
things during the process.
I would also like to sincerely thank Patricia Angelina Lasut, S.Pd.,
M.Hum., as the lecturer of Critical Reading and Writing 2 for the opportunity
given to me to conduct the research in her classes. I would also like to thank the
2010 students of Critical Reading and Writing 2, especially class A and class
C, for their time and willingness to be my respondents.
I would like to deeply thank my beloved parents, Ricardus Antiokus and
Katarina Ketut Sukarmi, who always support and pray the best for me, for
being beside me whenever I was in hard time and need them. I will always try to
make them proud of me.
I would also like to thank my best friends and my family in Jogja, Nicho,
Ichad, Uwi, Etha, Eta Magno, Emil, Marsya, Desy, Hendrik, Wiwik, Yuni for
their encouragement and support as well, for making me laugh, comforting me
when I was sad, and taking care of me as a real family. I would also like to thank
my best friends in college, Ika, Lia, Deby, Tania, Vita, Ratna, and Ivon, who
gave me such wonderful times, memories, and togetherness in college. My
sincerely thanks go to Sr. Benedicte, CB and my sisters in Syantikara
dormitory, for being my second home in Jogja and giving me lots of experiences.
Last but not least, I would like to thank everyone for helping me in writing
m y t he s i s .
Theresia Noviani Nora
x
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE ……………………………………………………………………..i
APPROVAL PAGE ……………………………………………………………...ii
DEDICATION PAGE …………………………………………………………..iv
STATEMENT OF WORKS’ ORIGINALITY ………………………………….v
PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI ………………………………….vi
ABSTRACT ……………………………………………………………………vii
ABSTRAK ……………………………………………………………………...viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ……………………………………………………..x
TABLE OF CONTENTS ……………………………………………………….xi
LIST OF TABLES …………………………………………………………….xiv
LIST OF APPENDICES ……………………………………………………….xv
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………..1
A. Research Background ……………………………………………………1
B. Research Problems ….……………………………………………………3
C. Problem Limitation ………………………………………………………3
D. Research Objectives ……………………………………………………...4
E. Research Benefits ………………………………………………………...4
F. Definition of Terms ………………………………………………………5
xi
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
A. Theoretical Description …………………………………………………..8
1. Perception …………………………………………………………….8
2. Integrated Learning ………………………………………………….10
a. Definition of Integrated Learning ……………………………….10
b. Integrated Learning in Reading and Writing ……………………12
3. Critical Thinking …………………………………………………….14
B. Theoretical Framework ………………………………………………….15
CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY ……………………………………………..18
A. Research Method ………………………………………………………...18
B. Research Setting ………………………………………………………....20
C. Research Participants …………………………………………………....20
D. Instruments and Data Gathering Technique ……………………………..21
1. The Questionnaire …………………………………………………...21
2. The Interview ………………………………………………………..22
E. Data Analysis Technique ………………………………………………..23
1. Data from the Questionnaire .……………………………………......23
2. Data from the Interview …………………………………………......24
F. Research Procedure ……………………………………………………...25
xi i
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
CHAPTER IV: RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
A. ELESP Students’ Perception on Critical Reading and Writing 1 …….…27
1. Students’ Perception on the Purpose of CRW 1 …….………………27
2. Students’ Perception on the Activities of CRW 1 …….…………….32
a. Students’ Perception on the Pre-Activities in CRW 1 …….…….37
b. Students’ Perception on the Whilst Activities in CRW 1 …….....39
c. Students’ Perception on the Post-Activities in CRW 1 …….…...41
3. Students’ General Impressions of CRW 1 …………………………..43
B. Students’ Suggestions to Improve the Implementation of CRW 1 ……. 47
1. Students’ Suggestions Based on the Questionnaire …………………48
2. Students’ Suggestions Based on the Interview ……………………...49
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS ……………………..52
A. Conclusions …………………………………………………………….52
B. Suggestions …………………………………………………………….55
REFERENCES …………………………………………………………………57
APPENDICES ………………………………………………………………….59
xi i i
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
4.1 Table 4.1 Students’ Perception on the Purpose of CRW 1
28
4.2 The Results of Open-ended Questionnaire on the Purpose of CRW 1
30
4.3 Students’ Perception on the Activities of CRW 1
33
4.4 The Result of Open-ended Questionnaire on the Activities of CRW 1
35
4.5 Students’ Perception on the Pre-Activities of CRW 1
38
4.6 Students’ Perception on the Whilst Activities of CRW 1
41
4.7 Students’ Perception on the Post Activities of CRW 1
42
4.8 Students’ General Impression of CRW 1
44
4.9 The Result of Open-ended Questionnaire on the Difficulties Students
Faced in CRW 1
46
4.10 Students’ Suggestions Related to the Implementation of CRW 1
48
xi v
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Permission Letter
60
Appendix 2: The Questionnaire
61
Appendix 3: The Blueprint of the Questionnaire
63
Appendix 4: Students’ Final Scores of Closed-ended Questionnaire
65
Appendix 5: Classification of the Students’ Answers of the Open-ended
77
Questions
Appendix 6: The Blueprint of the Interview Protocol for Students
79
Appendix 7: Data Classification from the Interview
80
Appendix 8: The Transcript of the Interview
84
xv
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
This research is intended to reveal English Language Education Study
Program (ELESP) students’ perception on Critical Reading and Writing 1
course in the academic year of 2010/2011 in Sanata Dharma University. This
chapter consists of research background, research problem, problem
limitation, research objectives, research benefits, and definition of terms.
A. Research Background
In teaching English, teachers need an approach to make teachinglearning process more effective. There are many kinds of approach which can
be applied in teaching. One of them is integrated learning. Integrated learning
is an approach which enables teachers to integrate more than one skill which
are related to one another. Teachers might integrate receptive skills with
productive skills into one class. For example, teachers may integrate listening
with speaking or reading with writing.
There are some schools and universities which have applied integrated
learning. Sanata Dharma University is one of those which apply integrated
learning in the 2010/2011 new curriculum of the English Language Education
Study Program (ELESP). Some of the courses have been improved using
integrated learning. In the new curriculum, there are Critical Listening and
1
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
2
Speaking 1, Critical Listening and Speaking 2, Critical Reading and Writing 1,
and Critical Reading and Writing 2.
Critical Reading and Writing 1 is the continuation of the previous
courses, which are Basic Reading 2 and Paragraph Writing. This course is
designed for the third semester students of ELESP in Sanata Dharma
University. This course tries to integrate reading and writing skills into one
class. In this course, the students are given the opportunity to write responses
critically based on the texts given. After passing the course, the students are
expected to be able to think critically related to the text given and to respond
to it logically and reasonably.
The researcher chooses Critical Reading and Writing 1 because some
students generally become confused in the class. Based on the informal
interview with several students, there were some reasons why they became
confused. According to the students, the time allocation for reading and
writing activities were not equal. Basically, Critical Reading and Writing 1
tried to combine Extensive Reading 1 with Short Essay Writing 1. However,
writing activities took more parts compared to reading activities in the class.
Besides, the students were confused by the material and the order of the
activities in the class. Usually, the students would have simple writing practice
as the pre-activity. The students would describe the pictures which were
shown by slides in the PowerPoint presentation and write the simple
description based on the pictures. Besides, the students could also write
something based on the simple topic given by the lecturer. Then, they had the
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
3
presentation as the reading section. In the last part, the students were assigned
to write certain topics related to the syllabus. In addition, the course took four
credits which bored the students in the class.
Critical Reading and Writing 1 is newly implemented for the
2010/2011 ELESP students. Since this course is newly implemented for the
students, the researcher would like to know students’ perception on this
course. Besides, the researcher intended to find out students’ suggestions to
improve the implementation of this course.
B. Research Problems
This study would like to address two questions.
1. What is English Language Education Study Program (ELESP) students’
perception on Critical Reading and Writing 1 course?
2. What do the students suggest improving the implementation of Critical
Reading and Writing 1 course?
C. Problem Limitation
The researcher limits the scope of the research to the Critical Reading
and Writing 1 course. The subject of the research is the fourth semester
students of 2010/2011 ELESP in Sanata Dharma University. The researcher
focuses the research on two problems. The first problem deals with the
students’ perception on Critical Reading and Writing 1 course. The second
one is the students’ suggestions to improve the implementation of Critical
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
4
Reading and Writing 1 course. The researcher will conduct a survey as the
method of the research. The questionnaire will be distributed to the ELESP
students in the 2010/2011 academic year to gather the data. There are four
parallel classes in Critical Reading and Writing 1, namely class A, B, C, and D
with two different lecturers. Class A and C are chosen as the sample of the
research because the students had experienced the course in the third semester.
Besides, all the students in those classes are from 2010/2011 academic year.
Those two classes are considered as the representative to provide the data for
the research.
D. Research Objectives
Based on the problems formulated in the previous part, there are two
objectives of this research. They are:
1. To see students’ perception on Critical Reading and Writing 1 course in
the 2010/2011 academic year.
2. To find out what should be improved in Critical Reading and Writing 1
course.
E. Research Benefits
This research would give some benefits to the lecturers and Sanata
Dharma University, especially ELESP. Besides, the researcher expects the
findings may contribute to the education development in the future.
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
5
1. Lecturers of CRW 1
This research aimed to give some information related to the students’
perception on Critical Reading and Writing 1 course. By knowing students’
perception on that course, the lecturers will obtain the feedback about the
implementation of the course. Moreover, the lecturers will know what should
be improved in order to make the course more effective for the students.
2. English Language Education Study Program
This research would give some contributions to Sanata Dharma
University, especially for English Language Education Study Program. Since
Critical Reading and Writing 1 course is taken into new curriculum, the study
program should know about the implementation of the course. Conducting the
research, the study program would have the data based on students’ opinion
about the implementation of that course. Besides, the study program would
improve the implementation of the course considering students’ suggestions
related to the course.
F. Definition of Terms
There are some definitions of terms which will help the readers to
know some terms related to the research.
1. Perception
There are some definitions of perception. Altman, Valensi, & Hodgetts
(1985) define perception as “the way stimuli are selected and grouped by a
person so that they can be meaningfully interpreted” (p. 85). Another
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
6
definition comes from Stephen P. Robbins. Perception is “a process by which
individual organize and interpret their sensory impressions in order to give
meaning to their environment” (Robbins, 2001: 135). In this research,
perception deals with ELESP students’ feelings, opinions, and responses on
the implementation of Critical Reading and Writing 1 course in Sanata
Dharma University.
2. Critical Reading and Writing 1
Based on Panduan Akademik Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa
Inggris (2011), Critical Reading and Writing 1 course is designed to give
students more practice to write responses critically based on the given texts or
passages (p. 37). This course is the integration of reading and writing skills
and the activities as well. Through this course, the students are trained to apply
logical principles, careful standard of evidence, and reasoning to the analysis
and discussion of claims, beliefs, and issues. Critical Reading and Writing 1 is
designed for the third semester students of ELESP. Students may take this
course if they have passed Basic Reading 1, Basic Reading 2, Basic Writing,
and Paragraph Writing. In this research, Critical Reading and Writing 1 is the
integration of reading and writing activities into one class. The basic idea of
Critical Reading and Writing 1 course is the combination between Extensive
Reading 1 and Short Essay Writing 1. The lecturers try to integrate the
activities in Extensive Reading 1 and in Short Essay Writing 1 into one class.
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
7
3. English Language Education Study Program (ELESP)
English Language Education Study Program is the study program in
Sanata Dharma University. This study program is in the faculty of Teachers
Training and Education. English Language Education Study Program tries to
prepare the students to become an English teacher. In this research, the
researcher would like to observe one of the courses in ELESP new curriculum,
which is Critical Reading and Writing 1. The subjects of this research are the
fourth semester of ELESP students in the 2010/2011 academic year.
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
This chapter discusses the theories related to the study. There are two
elements in this chapter: theoretical description and theoretical framework.
Theoretical description discusses some theories related to the study, while
theoretical framework relates the theories to the study.
A. Theoretical Description
The theoretical description mostly discusses students’ perception,
integrated learning, and critical thinking.
1. Perception
Perception can be defined as “a process by which individuals organize and
interpret their sensory impressions in order to give meaning to their environment”
(Robbins, 2001: 135). According to Altman et al. (1985), “perception is the way
stimuli are selected and grouped by a person so that they can be meaningfully
interpreted” (p. 85). Kreitner and Kinicki (2008) see perception as the process of
how someone understands and interprets the environment surrounds him/her using
cognitive process.
a. Factors Influencing Perception
Someone’s perception can be influenced by some factors. Altman et al.
(1985) state that there are four important factors in influencing someone’s
8
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
9
perception. Those factors are the selection of stimuli, the organization of stimuli,
the situation, and the person’s self concept (p. 86).
1) Selection of Stimuli
From all the information or stimuli surround people, they will focus on
small numbers of stimuli. This process is called selection. People will only catch
the information which is important and memorable to them. This process also
answers the reason of how students perceive things differently. Each person will
select specific cues or filters the stimuli, and this selection may be different one
another. Karen Huffman, Mark Vernoy, and Judith Vernoy (2002) define selection
of stimuli as the process of selecting the important information.
2) Organization of Stimuli
After the information has been selected, the information must be arranged
so that it will become meaningful. This arrangement will help students to interpret
the information. As Altman et al. (1985: 87) state “the mind tries to bring order
out of the chaotic onslaught of sensory data by selecting certain items and putting
them together in a meaningful way that is based on experience.”
3) The Situation
The situation will influence someone’s perspective and relate it with
his/her past experience. By seeing the situation accurately, he/she knows what
he/she should do related to the situation itself (Altman et al., 1985). From the
statement above, it is clear that students will use their experiences to face the
situation in which they face in the future. From their experiences, they will know
what they should do if they face the same situation in the future.
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
10
4) Self-Concept
The last factor which influences perception is self-concept. Self-concept is
the way a person sees him/herself. For example, if a person conceptualizes
him/herself as being confident, it will stimulate him/her to be a confident person.
“Self-concept is important because person’s mental picture will determine much
of what he/she perceives and does.” (Altman et al., 1985: 90).
2. Integrated Learning
In this section, the researcher provides the definition of integrated learning
and the rationale of integrating reading and writing skills.
a. Definition of Integrated Learning
Over the years, educational development has changed. This change affects
the educational curriculum. Educational practitioners try to find a new approach to
improve the quality of education. One of the approaches is integrated learning. St.
Mary School, Thailand is one of schools which applied the concept of integration.
Kingfa Sintoovongse, Chantana Klomjit, Julamas Jansrisukot,
Raweewan
Khamsom, Rewadee Lasa, Chadaporn Rukhacet, Supawadee Tipayaraj write a
journal titled “Integrated learning Approach at a School in the Northeast of
Thailand” which reviews the implementation of the integrated learning approach
in St. Mary School. They reveal the concept of integrated itself. According to
Sintoovongse et al., integrated learning refers to the implementation how the
discrete disciplines of subject are interrelated to bring effective learning for
students. Further, they explain that the integration should be followed by its
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
11
philosophy, principles, aims, and approach. The philosophy focuses on how to
make the learning becomes meaningful and related to students’ real life. The aims
of integration are relating the subjects to be more comprehensive, not teaching the
subjects separately, and involving students in direct, purposeful, and meaningful
learning. Then, students will be provided various approaches and activities. These
activities are arranged to bring a whole and connected across the interrelated
subjects. The activities can bring the experience of both working individually and
group. (Sintoovongse et al., 2011)
As written on the journal, St. Mary School followed six stages for the
development of the integrated unit. They are identifying the topic, determining the
learning objectives, identifying and analyzing the content and sub-content,
constructing the lesson or unit plan. After those stages are completed, the teachers
may apply the unit. The last stage is assessing and evaluating the unit. In each
stage, teachers from different subjects which are interrelated should work together
by unifying their concepts related to the subjects matter.
There are several definitions of integrated learning. The first definition
comes from Humphreys. He states that in integrated study, students can explore
knowledge broadly in various subjects which are integrated (Humphreys, Post,
and Ellis as cited in Lake 2003: 189). He sees the connection between two
different subjects. He believes that art, science, social, and language have the
connection and it will bring learning experience if those subjects are integrated.
By seeing these connections, Shoemaker as cited in Lake (2003) defines an
integrated learning as
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
12
…education that is organized in such a way that it cuts across subjectmatter lines, bringing together various aspects of the curriculum into
meaningful association to focus upon broad areas of study. It views
learning and teaching in a holistic way and reflects the real world, which is
interactive. (2003, p. 190).
According to Sintoovongse et al. (2011) the purpose of integrated learning
is to bring learning experience to the students. In integrated learning, students will
focus on testing and practice. It means that in integrated learning, students will be
given more exercises and practices related to the materials. These exercises will
help students to comprehend the material and student’s experiences as the learning
process. They define concepts of integrated learning approach as the interrelated
subjects. Besides, integrated learning involves students in direct, meaningful, and
purposeful learning. Therefore, integrated learning should be student-centered, not
teacher-centered. The learning process will focus on students’ need. The teachers’
role is that to facilitate students in the learning process.
b. Integrated Learning in Reading and Writing
In integrated learning, teachers may integrate more than one subject or
discipline as in elementary school. At the higher level, integrated learning can be
implemented at university scope. At this level, lecturers may integrate two skills
which are related to each other, as in reading and writing skills. Giesen (2001)
writes a journal titled “Activities for Integrating Reading and Writing in the
Language Classroom.” The journal proposes suitable activities for integrating
reading and writing skills into one class. Besides, Giesen explains briefly the
connection between reading-writing and discussed how the integration of those
two skills enhances learning. Reading and writing skills are chosen to be taught
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
13
together into one class based on some considerations. Giesen reveals that “the
connections between reading and writing are multifaceted. The most obvious
connection is that both skills depend on the written forms of language for
communication.” (Giesen, 2001: 5). Carson, 1993 Church, 1997 and Spack 1998b
as cited in Giesen (2001) state that reading and writing skills are interdependent
and relate to each other. “Reading, as well as writing, as seen as an active,
constructive process” (Barnett, 1998, Church, 1998, Reid, 1993, Spack, 1998b,
Zamel, 1992 as cited in Giesen, 2001: 5).
Writing activities motivate students to read more on the topics discussed.
By writing, teachers will know students’ understanding of what they have read.
Writing can be seen as media for students to organize their thoughts and ideas on
a passage. On the other hand, students cannot become good writers without being
engaged in reading. In reading, students will be introduced vocabularies and
meanings, sentence structure, and rhetorical structures of English writing.
Through this knowledge, students will have enough capability in writing (Reid,
1993).
Since reading and writing are closely linked and mutually reinforce each
other, those two skills will be more effective if they are integrated into one class.
By integrating these two skills, students will have deep understanding in reading
and writing. Besides, students will have more opportunity to practice through the
activities in the classroom. As Carson et al., as cited in Giesen (2001) said that the
integration of reading and writing helps students to become better readers, writers,
and thinkers.
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
14
3. Critical Thinking
According to Scriven & Paul (2011), critical thinking is the way of
thinking about particular object, problem, or idea through the process of
conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating the
information. They add that critical thinking has two components. The first thing is
that the information gathered is processed actively and skillfully. The second
thing is that critical thinking can be seen as a habit by using those processes as
guidance to become a critical thinker. Elder (2007) defines critical thinking as the
highest level of students’ quality in thinking which need self-guided and selfdisciplined of students (2007). Being critical in this context means how students
use their thoughts deeply, reflect on it, and react to it. Glaser (1941) adds that
critical thinking involves three things. They are the students’ attitude in facing the
problem based on their experiences, the students’ knowledge to gather
information logically and reasonably, and the students’ skills to think critically.
Based on Pearson Education (2011), there are four steps in the critical thinking
process. They are:
a. Summarize
In this step, students will try to recall and restate the main point of the
information. However, students are not expected to add their opinion. Students
will only summarize the information they obtain and add nothing.
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
15
b. Analyze
After summarizing, students break down the material into its component
parts. Those parts will help students to find how those parts relate to each other.
By seeing the relations, students may have the opinion on the information.
c. Synthesize
In this step, students will connect what they have summarized and
analyzed to their own experience. Students’ experiences are important to help
students in synthesizing the idea. It will stimulate students to think critically.
d. Evaluate
In this last step, students can make a judgment on the material or on
information given. However, this judgment cannot be made without three
previous steps. Through summary, analysis, and synthesis, students are expected
to have the good and critical judgment related to the idea.
B. Theoretical Framework
This research focuses on students’ perception on Critical Reading and
Writing 1 course. There are some theories related to this research. They are
students’ perception, integrated learning and critical thinking. Those theories
above will give more explanation about the research. In this theoretical
framework, the researcher tries to relate those theories to the research.
Critical Reading and Writing 1 course is applied in the 2010/2011 ELESP
curriculum. In this course, the lecturers combine the reading and writing activities
into one class. By combining the activities, the students will have more
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
16
opportunity to practice in those two subjects. As Sintoovongse at al., state that
integrated learning will lead to the meaningful and purposeful learning to the
students (2011). By this integration, the students are expected to see the
connection between reading and writing and are expected to have critical thinking.
Critical thinking can be seen as a new way of thinking where students do
not see the problem on the surface only. Indeed, critical thinking will lead students
to see the problem beyond the surface (Scriven & Paul, 2001). Students will
respond, react, and make judgment based on logical and reasonable opinion
(Elder, 2007).
In order to make students think critically, lecturers will give more
exercises and assignments as the learning experiences. The experiences are not
only about the exercises given in the class but also the class activities and the
implementation of the course. These experiences are important for students to
reflect on those experiences. Altman at al., state the factors of influencing
someone’s perception are selection of stimuli, organization of stimuli, situation,
and self-concept (1985). These factors explain the reason why the students
perceive the implementation of Critical Reading and Writing 1 course differently.
In addition, the success of the learning process depends on the students’
perception toward the course. As Altman et al. (1985) stated that the way students
perceive something will influence their behavioral responses. If the students
respond to the course positively, the students will be motivated to follow the
teaching-learning activities. On the other hand, if the students respond to the
course negatively, the students are not motivated to follow the lesson. These
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
17
positive responses will influence the success of Critical Reading and Writing 1
course.
This research focuses on how the students perceived the implementation of
Critical Reading and Writing 1 course. The implementation is including the
purpose, the class activities, the materials given in the class, and the students’
impressions toward the course. Based on those theories discussed, the researcher
constructs the instruments which refer to those aspects to know the students’
perception on Critical Reading and Writing 1.
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
In this chapter, the researcher discusses the methodology in conducting
the research. This chapter consists of research method, research setting,
research participants, instruments and data gathering technique, data analysis
technique, and research procedure.
A. Research Method
The researcher applied survey research to answer two research
questions which had been stated in the research problem. D. Ary, L.C. Jacobs,
and A. Razavieh (2002) define that “survey is a research technique in which
data are gathered by asking questions of a group or individuals called
respondents.” Since the researcher intended to know the perception of ELESP
students on Critical Reading and Writing 1 course in the 2010/2011 academic
year, the survey research was conducted. According to Fraenkel & Wallen
(2008), “the major purpose of survey is to describe the characteristics of a
population” (p. 390).
Survey research was applied to answer the research questions based on
some characteristics. Fraenkel & Wallen (2008) mention three major
characteristics of survey research. First, information is obtained to describe
some aspects or characteristics such as opinions of certain group. Second,
18
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
19
information is gathered by asking questions to the members of that group.
Third, information is collected from sample of population (p. 390).
Reviewing the characteristics above, survey was appropriate to be
applied to answer the research questions. In this research, the researcher would
like to know students’ opinions and perceptions on Critical Reading and
Writing 1 course. Besides, the information was gathered by asking questions
to the sample of population, which were the students of ELESP in the
academic year of 2010/2011.
There were two research questions in this research. The first research
question was intended to know ELESP students’ perception on Critical
Reading and Writing 1 course in the academic year of 2010/2011 in Sanata
Dharma University. The second research question was intended to find out
students’ suggestions to improve the implementation of Critical Reading and
Writing 1 course. To answer those research questions above, the researcher
used questionnaire and personal interview as the instruments of the research.
The questionnaire was distributed to the 2010/2011 ELESP students
who had passed Critical Reading and Writing 1. This questionnaire was
consisted of closed-ended and open-ended part. From the closed-ended part,
the researcher calculated and presented the data using Likert Scale in the form
of percentage. From the open-ended part, the researcher presented the data in
the form of essays. Besides questionnaire, the researcher used personal
interview to strengthen the data obtained. By conducting the interview, the
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
20
researcher would obtain deeper answers and understanding on Critical
Reading and Writing I course from the respondents.
B. Research Setting
This research was conducted in Sanata Dharma University. The
subjects of this research were the fourth semester students of ELESP in the
academic year of 2010/2011. The questionnaire was distributed on May 25,
2012. After distributing the questionnaire, the researcher conducted an
interview to strengthen the data. The interview was done in two days. The first
day was on June 13, 2012 and the second day was on June 14, 2012.
C. Research Participants
The subjects of this research were the fourth semester students of
ELESP in the 2010/2011 academic year. Fourth semester students were
chosen as the subject of this research because the students had passed Critical
Reading and Writing 1 in the third semester. Hence, fourth semester students
were considered that they had experience the course. Having experiences in
Critical Reading and Writing 1, the fourth semester students of ELESP could
share their perception toward the course. In this research, the questionnaire
was distributed to the students of Critical Reading and Writing 2 in the
2010/2011 academic year in Sanata Dharma University. The students were
asked to answer the questions in the questionnaire.
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
21
There were four parallel classes in Critical Reading and Writing 2.
They are class A, B, C, and D. Each class consisted of approximately 45
students. The researcher took two parallel classes of Critic