THE TEACHING OF LITERATURE USING READER-RESPONSE APPROACH (A CASE STUDY OF THE THIRD GRADE STUDENTS OF ONE PRIVATE UNIVERSITY IN SUMEDANG).
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Approval Page……………………………………………………………
i
Board of Examiners……………………………………………………..
ii
Declaration ………………………………………………………………
iii
Aknowledgments…………………………………………………………
iv
Preface……………………………………………………………………
v
Abstract
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the study……………………………………………
1
1.2. Research Aims…………………………………………………….
2
1.3. Research Questions …………………………………………………
3
1.4. Significance of the Study……….…………………………………..
3
1.5. Organization of Thesis………………………………………………
4
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1. The Importance of Literature…………………………………………
5
2.2. Reader-Response Approach ………………………………………….
7
2.3. The Teaching of Literature …………………………………………
10
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
3.1. Research Site and Participant of the Study… ………………….
18
3.2. Research Design …………………………………………………..
20
3.3. Data Collection Technique……………………………………. .
20
3.4. Data Analysis……………………………………………………
24
CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
4.1. Data Taken from Document Analysis…………………………………. 26
4.1.1. The Portrait of the Teaching of Literature…………………………… 27
4.1.2. Problems in the Teaching of Literature ……………………………
30
4.1.3. Some Possible Ways to Overcome the Problems ………………….
33
4.2. Data Taken from Observation…………………………………………
36
4.2.1. The Portrait of the Teaching of Literature …………………………
36
4.2.2. Problems in the Teaching of Literature …………………………..
47
4.2.3. Solutions to the Problems ………………………………………..
49
4.3. Data Taken from Interview …………………………………………… 52
A. Data Taken from Interview to the lecturer……………………………… 53
4.3.1. The Portrait of the Teaching of Literature ………………………. .
54
4.3.2. Problems in the Teaching of Literature ……………………….. ..
57
4.3.3. Some Possible Ways top Solve the Problems.…………………….
62
B. Data Taken from Interview to the Students…………………………..
63
4.3.1. The Portrait of the Teaching of Literature ………………………. .
4.3.2. Problems in the Teaching of Literature ……………………….. ..
63
63
4.3.3. Some Possible Ways to Solve the Problems..……………………… 70
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1. Conclusions………………………………………………………….
75
5.2. Recommendations……………………………………………………
77
REFERENCES
APPENDICES
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background of research
Literature has been a subject at schools in many countries, and it has been
offered since primary to tertiary education particularly in ESL/EFL learning. In
Indonesia context, literature is also included in the subject of language like ethnic
language, Indonesian, or English. According to Purves, Rogers and Soter (1990)
literature as a body of knowledge, is considered important and it keeps knowledge
itself, practice and choice, which has complex interrelationships. Therefore, in order
to explain this interrelationship, it is essential to discuss the importance of literature
in process of the teaching of literature.
There are several reasons why literature should be taught and learnt. Macmillan
(2004) says literature has several functions. First, literature allows learners to live
thousand of lives in a short time, and gains little experience from each of them.
Second, literature is also considered to offer them insights, which they apply to life.
This gives them insights and feelings into other people’s minds that will be perceived
as being more human, because it relates to emotions rather than logic. The last,
literature can give them some experiences, although it will be limited.
To do this, in Indonesia, as stated by Suyono (2005), the aim of language and
literature teaching at schools is students can read, write, listen, speak proficiently, and
love to do literary appreciation. However, this aim is still not achieved by students
1
which they face some problems. Like in one private university in Sumedang, where
the study was conducted, the teaching of literature still has been unsuccessfully to
obtain that aims above. To some extents, the weakness of the teaching of literature
was caused by several problems which faced not only by lecturer himself, but also by
students themselves. Commonly some problems have similarities as some previous
research findings, which have been found in the teaching of literature using readerresponse technique. However, other differ which were based on lecturer and students’
problems of one private university, in Sumedang.
Based on description above, the study attempted to investigate the teaching of
literature, which covered the aim of teaching literature, materials given to learners,
teaching literature techniques and approach, and assessment of teaching literature.
The study also attempted to find out some problems, particularly in the teaching of
literature in EFL context, especially in the research site.
Although literature has been taught and learnt for years, there has been limited
research concerning the teaching of literature, the effectiveness of the study of
literature, the appropriate materials with suitable techniques and approaches applied
by the teachers/the lecturers, and assessment to evaluate the teaching of literature.
1.2
Research Aims
Based on the background above, this study aimed:
2
(1)
To investigate the teaching of literature conducted at one private university in
Sumedang, particularly in terms of the teaching process, materials and
assessment.
(2)
To identify the problems (if any) faced by both lecturer and students.
(3)
To find out how the lecturer and students solve the problems.
1.3. Research Questions
In line with the purpose of the study, this study attempted to address the
following research questions.
(1)
How is the teaching of literature using reader-response at one private university
in Sumedang, conducted?
(2)
What problems (if any) do lecturer and students face in the teaching of literature
using reader-response approach?
(3) How do lecturer and students solve the problems?
1.4. Significance of the study
This study significantly attempted to (1) investigate teaching literature at one
private university in Sumedang using reader-response approach; (2) identify the
problems (if any) faced by both lecturer and students during teaching and learning
literature process; (3) find out solutions of problems.
Then the results of this study may become essential information and source in the
teaching of literature in the research site particularly, and in other context generally.
3
The results of the study, which will also be concerned with the problems, are expected
to be a basis for policy-makers to make a policy in the development of the teaching of
literature.
Besides, the results of the study are also expected as an analysis of the
implementation of literature curriculum and its syllabi for the literature subjects, such
as ‘Introduction to literature’, ‘Poetry’, ‘Prose’ and ‘Drama’ reflected in the classroom
activities, whether or not those subjects have attained the objectives of literature
teaching.
Hopefully the results of the study are also expected to allow lecturer and students’
awareness of the importance of literature, and develop them to love literature for
further researches and investigations. The institution of research site and staff are also
expected to understand and pay more attention to students’ needs, interests and
intentions in developing literature.
1.5. Organization of Thesis
This thesis is actually organized into five chapters namely:
1.5.1. Chapter I is introduction which covers: background of research; research
aims; research questions; significance of the study; and organization of thesis.
1.5.2. Chapter II mentions relevant review of literature.
1.5.2. Chapter III describes methodology of the study.
1.5.3. Chapter IV elaborates findings of the study and discussion.
1.5.4. Chapter V explains conclusions and recommendations.
4
5
6
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
This chapter elaborates ways of collecting data from the field through
documentary review, observation, and interview. These techniques are quite
appropriate with this case study to gain essential information relevant to the topic.
The starting point for this section is considering research site and participant of the
study, research design, data collection techniques, and data analysis.
3.1 Research site and participant of the study
This study was conducted at one private university in Sumedang, which is
located on Jalan Angkrek Situ No. 19 Sumedang. Actually, this institution has two
level degrees like diploma and graduate degree. In diploma degree, literature is given
only two credits in the subject ‘Introduction to English Literature’. Meanwhile in
graduate degree, literature is given eight credits, offered in the subjects ‘Introduction
to English Literature’, ‘Drama’, ‘Poetry’, and ‘Prose’.
Furthermore, for conducting teaching and learning process, the institution only
has two rooms and a simple language laboratory. In addition, its small library was
joined together with other institutions which provides uncompleted books and
references. Furthermore, the number of students is 150 as a whole, from first year to
forth year students.
18
There were some considerations and reasons why the researcher selected one of
private university in Sumedang, as the research site of the study. This institution is a
place where the researcher teaches English and literature. The results of the study are
expected to help to the policy which will allow for the improvement of the teaching
of literature in this institution including models of the teaching of literature, materials,
and assessment.
In terms of participant, this study only took two groups of participants. The first
group contained one class namely the third years students who were studying
literature course, namely the subject ‘Introduction to English Literature’ in the fifth
semester. This class consisted of twenty-five students who were talk-active compared
with other levels. It was their first experience in learning literature.
Meanwhile the second group included a lecturer who taught literature in the
subject ‘Introduction to English Literature, and three students selected based on their
level achievements: higher, middle, and lower achievement, as suggested by the
lecturer. It was considered that they represented other participant concerning their
knowledge and ability on each level. In addition, limited time and tools became
important aspects to concern. The lecturer and the students
selected as the
respondents, were interviewed to check out their consistency between what had been
done in the classroom, with what they said in interview.
19
3.2 Research Design
This study used a qualitative research design particularly a case study. This
qualitative research design was considered appropriate in the study, because it
allowed the researcher to explore more about the teaching of
literature and its
problem and solution. Further, this study paid attention to what lecturer and students
do in the teaching of literature to be documented and analyzed, which relevant to the
characteristics of a case study, as stated by Creswell. (1994, p. 2) and Burn (1994. p.
314).
This case study was divided in two steps, namely major study through longpersistent observation and minor study through interview and document analysis.
Observation was administered through long term observation, starting at September
29th to December 19th 2006. Then interview was held twice on January 8th and 9th
2007, that purposed to complete and to check the consistency to what has been found
in observation. Meanwhile, documents analysis was analyzed after observation and
interview.
3.3 Data Collection techniques
This part clarifies data collection techniques applied in this study, such as:
documents analysis, observation and interviews.
3.3.1 Documents analysis
The document analysis in this study were the syllabus of the subject
“Introduction to English Literature” in the curriculum of one private university in
20
Sumedang 2005, the revised-version, and the students’ tasks. This document analysis
is considered important in this study, as Merriam suggests, that documentary material
could be as data which did not much differ from using interviews or observation.
(1988, p. 115).
This document analysis aimed to find whether or not there was a consistency
between the syllabus demand and its implementation. In analyzing the syllabus and
students’ tasks, the researcher tried to identify the content of the syllabus, its
weaknesses and strength. Meanwhile students’ tasks was analyzed to identify the
content of the teaching of literature and its problems. This document analysis
answered the research question number: 1), i.e. “How is the teaching of literature
using reader-response at one private university in Sumedang conducted?” 2) What
problems (if any) do the lecturer and students face in the teaching of literature using
reader-response approach?”
3.3.2 Observation
Applying observation here meant, to portray what actually the lecturer and
students did in the teaching of literature activity more accurately. This observation
was functioning as a continuation of preliminary study which had been conducted for
more than three months since September 29th to December 19th 2006. In this
observation, the researcher’s role was as the observer-as-participant which mainly
concerned on what the lecturer and the students did in the classroom, and helped to
apply reader-response approach.
21
Then, during observation, the teaching of literature activity always started at ten
o’clock, sometimes undertaken on Tuesday and Friday in one of other school’s room,
because the rooms were full by the first and the second year students at ten o’ clock,
so the institution borrowed one from another institution. The teaching of literature
activity usually was conducted for 100 minutes for two credits. It was divided into
three sections namely: first section usually for opening the lecture, second section for
discussion and doing activities, and the last for closing the lecture.
Next, during observation, the researcher wrote what the lecturer and students
said, and sometimes she did something to help the implementation of reader-response
approach, since the opening to end of the lecture (Van Lier. 1988). To attain the
inquiry, filed notes, audio-recorder, and camera constituted useful instrument, so that
the researcher could gain the data both verbal and non-verbal communications easily,
that might appear during the process of teaching and learning literature. During
observation, the researcher also sometimes helped to teach literature when the
lecturer came late in order to gain essential information appropriate with readerresponse model.
This observation also answered the research question number: 1), i.e. “How is
the teaching of literature using reader-response at one private university in Sumedang
conducted?” 2) What problems (if any) do the lecturer and students face in the
teaching of literature using reader-response approach?” and 3) “How do lecturer and
students solve the problems?”
22
3.3.3 Interview
Interview was taken as instrument for collecting data which aimed to gain the
information missed in observation and to check the consistency between what the
respondents had done during observation with what they had said, and to construct
more valid data gain from the respondent (Alwasilah. 2003). Semi-structured
interview was a kind of interview taken by the researcher to give freedom to the
participant in responding to the questions themselves. This interview was indicated to
four people, including: a lecture of the subject ‘Introduction to English Literature’
named Mr. UP, and three students ‘NN’, ‘RAG’, ‘DH’, selected based on their
involvement and their level achievement in teaching and learning literature process as
the lecturer’ s recommendation.
Then the interview was administered in the researcher’s room, so that the
respondents would reply more comfortably and feel secure. It had been conducted
twice, namely on 8th January 2007 at ten o’clock to the lecturer, Mr. UP, and on 9th
January 2007 to three respondents, NN, RAG and DH at one o’clock p.m. Each
respondent spent less than an hour after they followed the lecture. During the
interview, the researcher provided tape-recorder to record and transcribe what the
respondent said.
This interview data was intended to answer the research question number 1),
i.e. “How is the teaching of literature using reader-response at one private university
in Sumedang conducted?” 2) “What problems (if any) do the lecturer and students
23
face in the teaching of literature using reader-response approach?” and 3) “How do
lecturer and students solve the problems?”
3.4 Data Analysis
As Cresswell (1994, p. 153. in Tesch, 1990) asked since there is no “right way”
for analyzing data, the data gained in the study were analyzed eclectically. What the
researcher did in analyzing data, will be discussed in the following steps.
Data taken from documents analysis was analyzed by collecting the syllabus
and students’ tasks, then, they were identified to find the content and its problems.
Furthermore, data from observation was analyzed in steps: first, the data were
categories into central themes, as suggested by Van Lier (1988) relevant to the
research question. Second, the data were analyzed to answer the research questions.
Similarly the data from interview were analyzed in steps. First of all, the researcher
transcribed all the data from the recording. Second, the researcher categorized the
data into central themes (Kuale. 1996), relevant to the research questions.
Third, the researcher presented the interview data in a condensed version of
interview data. Fourth, the researcher tried to interpret the data, comparing what the
participants said with what the theory says, as presented in chapter II, particularly to
do with the teaching of literature, as suggested by the reader-response theory,
problems and solutions for the problems.
24
Concluding remark
This chapter has presented the research methodology applied in this study. It
has elaborated the way the researcher did and presented data obtained in this study.
25
26
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
After discussion of findings in chapter four, finally this thesis comes to the last
part, that is, conclusions and recommendations. The conclusions, in line with the
research questions will be to do with three aspects, namely: 1) “How is the teaching
of literature using reader-response at one private university in Sumedang
conducted?”; 2) “What problems (if any) do
lecturer and students face in the
teaching of literature using reader-response?”; and 3) “How do lecturer and students
solve the problems?” Moreover, the recommendations will also deal with aspects to
be proposed to the institution as the research site as for further research.
A. Conclusions
Data obtained from all sources indicate that the teaching of literature used
reader-response approach in the research site was, to some extents relevant to the
theory of reader-response theory as suggested by Rosenblatt (1976), and other
supporting theory like Purves, Soter, and Rogers (1990). This is particularly to do
with the role of the lecturer in applying the principles of reader-response approach to
invite students’ response. However, concerning the materials given to the students,
the lecturer still refers to the teaching orientation than learning orientation which he
selected all materials to invite students’ response. Then, dealing with the techniques
75
of inviting students’ response, the lecturer still applied limited and inefficient
techniques, which he preferred to implement discussion technique almost in the
whole meetings.
In terms of the problems, this study finds out that some problems in the teaching
of literature using reader-response approach, support the findings of the previous
research of the teaching of literature, especially that underpinned the theory of readerresponse. Some difficulties faced by the teacher were, namely: teaching-based
orientation than learning-based orientation which is lack of efficient techniques;
neglects out-bond learning; and lack of identifying students’ interest and needs.
Moreover, from the perspective of the students, the difficulties were to do with: lack
of practice of extended writing; low reading habit of literary work; lack of capacity to
interpret literary work; neglect students’ creativity; and need ample time to explore
initial response to text.
Finally, regarding the solutions to the problems emerged, some activities that
the lecturer did also to some extent found relevant with the findings from previous
researches. They were: growing motivation of reading literary work; identifying
students’ interest and needs; thinking aloud; and employing talking and writing
strategies. However, there are some solutions still ignored by the lecturer, like
embarking out-bound learning; giving guidance to write; and triggering students’
creativity in various activities.
76
B.
Some Recommendations
First, in the syllabus it is stated that the aim of the teaching literature is only to
give knowledge and comprehension about English literary work to students. This is
inconsistent with the suggestion of Purves, Soter and Rogers (1990). The teaching of
literature should promote individuality, understanding and culture. Therefore, the
policy maker of the institution should construct an appropriate literature curriculum,
in order to expand both the lecturer and the students’ knowledge and experience.
Second, concerning the problems of the teaching literature using readerresponse, the institution should provide appropriate and comfortable facilities
including classroom, teaching tools, books and other sources, so that both the lecturer
and the students are easier to access information. Then it should be constructed an
obligation to read literary works, for those who become students in this institution.
The obligation of reading literary works is classified into three levels of reading from
simple literary works to complex ones. Then categorization of reading level should
consist of elementary, intermediate, and advanced reading, which is relevant with the
amount of literary works for each level, that could be managed appropriately. This
solution coincide with Ismail’s research finding (1999).
Finally, further research should be conducted in other context and levels of
education to appreciate literary work, so that students would have good
communication of English in both spoken and written form. Therefore, the teaching
of English in the research site should focus on the development and improvement of
77
students’ English. It also suggested that the principles of reader-response approach to
the teaching of literature should be applied more comprehensibly, to enable students
to develop their imaginative capacity, which of great importance in other context and
levels of teaching.
78
79
REFERENCES
Akhmadi, Muksin. 1989. Strategi Belajar-Mengajar: Keterampilan Berbahasa dan
Apresiasi Sastra. Malang: YA3.
Alwasilah, A.C. 2000. Perspektif Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris di Indonesia dalam
Konteks Persaingan Global. Bandung: Andira.
------------------- 2006. Pengajaran Berbasis Sastra. Pikiran Rakyat. Edisi Rabu 7
Desember.
Beach. In Press. The Creative Development of Reading: Using Autobiographical
Experiences to Interpret Literature. Cited in Farrel & Squire. 1990.
Transactions with Literature. The United States of America: The National
Council of All English Teachers.
-------- In Marshall. 1987. In Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature.
The United States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.
Bleich, D. 1986. Gender Interest in Reading and Language. In E. Flynn & P.
Schweickart (Eds), Gender and Reading. 13-38. Baltimore: Johns Hopkin Press.
Brunner. 1986. Cited in Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The
United States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.
Burn, R. 1994. Introduction to Research Methods. Second edition. Australia:
Longman Australia Pty Ltd.
Christie, Frances. 2005. Language Education in the Primary Years. Australia:
University of New South Wales Press Ltd.
Cresswell, J.W. 1994. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among
Five Traditions: London: SAGE Publication.
Ericson, B.O. 1984. A descriptive Study of the Individual and Group responses of
three 10th grade readers to two short story and two textbook selections. Cited
in Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The United States of
America: The National Council of All English Teachers
Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The United States of America:
The National Council of All English Teachers.
79
Flynn, Elizabeth. 1986. Gender and Reading. In Elizabeth Flynn, and Patrocinio
Schweickart, eds. Gender and Reading. Baltimore: Johns Hopkin Press. In
Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The United States of
America: The National Council of All English Teachers.
Freeman & Freeman. Between Words: Access to Second Language Acquisition.
Heinemann: Portsmouth, NH.
Hade, D. 1988. Children, Stories, and Narrative Transformations. Research in the
Teaching of English 2: 310-26. In Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with
Literature. The United States of America: The National Council of All English
Teachers.
Harmer, J. 2000. The Practice of English Teaching. England: Longman.
Heathcote. 1980. Cited in Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The
United States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.
Hook. 1978. In Saxby, M. & Hoogstad, V. 1991. Teaching Literature to Adolescents.
Australia: National Library Australia.
Horatius (65-8 SM). Cited in Akhmadi, Muksin. 1989. Strategi Belajar-Mengajar:
Keterampilan Berbahasa dan Apresiasi Sastra. Malang: YA3.
Hudson, W.H. 1964. in Frederich, T.J. 1986. Teaching Poetry. Jakarta: Depdikbud.
Ismail, Taufik. 1999. Pengajaran Sastra yang Efektif dan Efisien. Yogyakarta: Balai
Bahasa.
Isaeni. N. 2004. Literature in An EFL Classroom. At the English Department of UPI
Badung. Unpublished Thesis. PPS UPI Bandung.
Rudi, R.I. 2004. Literature Instruction in EFL Classroom. At the English
Deparrtment of UPI Bandung. Unpublished Thesis. PPS UPI Bandung.
Jacobsen, M. 1982. Looking for Literary Space: The Willing Suspension of Disbelief
Revisited. Cited in Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The
United States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.
Kuale. 1996. In Emi Emilia’s paper.
Lumm, A. 1986. In Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with literature. The United
States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.
80
Lytle. 1982. In Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The United
States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.
Marshall. 1987. The Effects of Writing on Students’ Understanding of Literary Texts.
Cited in Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The United States
of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.
McConnel, M. 1983. The Effect of Literature Exposure and Writing Practice on the
Original Narrative Writing of Second-grade Children. Cited in Farrel & Squire.
1990. Transactions with Literature. The United States of America: The
National Council of All English Teachers.
McKay. In Frederich T.J. 1986. Teaching Poetry. Jakarta: Depdikbud.
Mcmillan, J.H. & Schumacher, S. 2004. Research in Education: A Conceptual
Introduction. Fifth Edition. The United States: Afddison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Merriam.1988. In Rudi, R.I. 2004. Literature Instruction in EFL Classroom. At the
English Deparrtment of UPI Bandung. Unpublished Thesis. PPS UPI Bandung.
Newkirk, T. 1984. Looking for Trouble: A Way to Unmask Our Reading. Cited in
Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The United States of
America: The National Council of All English Teachers.
Probst, R.E. 1987. Transactional Theory in the Teaching of Literature. ERIC Digest.
Purve, S.C & Soter, A.Q. & Rogers, T. 1990. How Porcupines Makes Love II.
Teaching a Response-Centered Curriculum. Porsmouth, NH: Heineman.
Rani, S.A. & Sugiarti, E. 1991. Ikhtisar Roman Sastra Indonesia. Bandung: Pustaka
Jaya.
Richard, J.C.001. Curriculum Development in Language Teaching. United Kingdom:
Cambridge University Press.
Rogers.T. 1987. In Purve, S.C & Soter, A.Q. & Rogers, T. 1990. How Porcupines
Makes Love II. Teaching a Response-Centered Curriculum. Porsmouth, NH:
Heineman.
Rosenblatt, Louise. 1976. Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The
United States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.
------------------------ 1978. The Reader, The Text, The Poem. The Transactional
Theory of the Literary Work. The United States of America: Southern Illinois
University Press.
81
Rusyana, Y. 2005. In Apresiasi Sastra di Sekolah Dasar. Buletin Pusat Perbukuan,
volume II, Januari-Juni 005. ISSN 1411-5476. Jakarta: Depdiknas.
Sardjono, Partini. 1992. Pengantar Pengkajian Sastra. Bandung: Pustaka Jaya.
Saxby, M. & Hoogstad, V. 1991. Teaching Literature to Adolescents. Australia:
National Library Australia.
Showalter, E. 2003. In Karin Dienst. 003. Showalter Inspires Conversation about
Teaching Literature. February 17. Vol.9.No. 16. Princeton Buletin.
Suyono. 1980. Pendekatan Keterampilan Proses dalam Pengajaran Sastra di SMA:
Sebuah Kajian Selintas. Malang: HISKI.
Van Lier. 1988. In Emi Emilia’ s paper.
Whardhani, I.G.K. 1981. Cited in Akhmadi Muksin. 1989. Strategi BelajarMengajar: Keterampilan Berbahasa dan Apresiasi Sastra. Malang: YA3.
Widarmanto, T. 2003. In Gerbang. Majalah Pendidikan. Edisi 4 th III Oktober 2003,
ISSN: 1412-0577.
Wilson, R.R. 1976. Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The United
States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.
82
1
Approval Page……………………………………………………………
i
Board of Examiners……………………………………………………..
ii
Declaration ………………………………………………………………
iii
Aknowledgments…………………………………………………………
iv
Preface……………………………………………………………………
v
Abstract
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the study……………………………………………
1
1.2. Research Aims…………………………………………………….
2
1.3. Research Questions …………………………………………………
3
1.4. Significance of the Study……….…………………………………..
3
1.5. Organization of Thesis………………………………………………
4
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1. The Importance of Literature…………………………………………
5
2.2. Reader-Response Approach ………………………………………….
7
2.3. The Teaching of Literature …………………………………………
10
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
3.1. Research Site and Participant of the Study… ………………….
18
3.2. Research Design …………………………………………………..
20
3.3. Data Collection Technique……………………………………. .
20
3.4. Data Analysis……………………………………………………
24
CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
4.1. Data Taken from Document Analysis…………………………………. 26
4.1.1. The Portrait of the Teaching of Literature…………………………… 27
4.1.2. Problems in the Teaching of Literature ……………………………
30
4.1.3. Some Possible Ways to Overcome the Problems ………………….
33
4.2. Data Taken from Observation…………………………………………
36
4.2.1. The Portrait of the Teaching of Literature …………………………
36
4.2.2. Problems in the Teaching of Literature …………………………..
47
4.2.3. Solutions to the Problems ………………………………………..
49
4.3. Data Taken from Interview …………………………………………… 52
A. Data Taken from Interview to the lecturer……………………………… 53
4.3.1. The Portrait of the Teaching of Literature ………………………. .
54
4.3.2. Problems in the Teaching of Literature ……………………….. ..
57
4.3.3. Some Possible Ways top Solve the Problems.…………………….
62
B. Data Taken from Interview to the Students…………………………..
63
4.3.1. The Portrait of the Teaching of Literature ………………………. .
4.3.2. Problems in the Teaching of Literature ……………………….. ..
63
63
4.3.3. Some Possible Ways to Solve the Problems..……………………… 70
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1. Conclusions………………………………………………………….
75
5.2. Recommendations……………………………………………………
77
REFERENCES
APPENDICES
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background of research
Literature has been a subject at schools in many countries, and it has been
offered since primary to tertiary education particularly in ESL/EFL learning. In
Indonesia context, literature is also included in the subject of language like ethnic
language, Indonesian, or English. According to Purves, Rogers and Soter (1990)
literature as a body of knowledge, is considered important and it keeps knowledge
itself, practice and choice, which has complex interrelationships. Therefore, in order
to explain this interrelationship, it is essential to discuss the importance of literature
in process of the teaching of literature.
There are several reasons why literature should be taught and learnt. Macmillan
(2004) says literature has several functions. First, literature allows learners to live
thousand of lives in a short time, and gains little experience from each of them.
Second, literature is also considered to offer them insights, which they apply to life.
This gives them insights and feelings into other people’s minds that will be perceived
as being more human, because it relates to emotions rather than logic. The last,
literature can give them some experiences, although it will be limited.
To do this, in Indonesia, as stated by Suyono (2005), the aim of language and
literature teaching at schools is students can read, write, listen, speak proficiently, and
love to do literary appreciation. However, this aim is still not achieved by students
1
which they face some problems. Like in one private university in Sumedang, where
the study was conducted, the teaching of literature still has been unsuccessfully to
obtain that aims above. To some extents, the weakness of the teaching of literature
was caused by several problems which faced not only by lecturer himself, but also by
students themselves. Commonly some problems have similarities as some previous
research findings, which have been found in the teaching of literature using readerresponse technique. However, other differ which were based on lecturer and students’
problems of one private university, in Sumedang.
Based on description above, the study attempted to investigate the teaching of
literature, which covered the aim of teaching literature, materials given to learners,
teaching literature techniques and approach, and assessment of teaching literature.
The study also attempted to find out some problems, particularly in the teaching of
literature in EFL context, especially in the research site.
Although literature has been taught and learnt for years, there has been limited
research concerning the teaching of literature, the effectiveness of the study of
literature, the appropriate materials with suitable techniques and approaches applied
by the teachers/the lecturers, and assessment to evaluate the teaching of literature.
1.2
Research Aims
Based on the background above, this study aimed:
2
(1)
To investigate the teaching of literature conducted at one private university in
Sumedang, particularly in terms of the teaching process, materials and
assessment.
(2)
To identify the problems (if any) faced by both lecturer and students.
(3)
To find out how the lecturer and students solve the problems.
1.3. Research Questions
In line with the purpose of the study, this study attempted to address the
following research questions.
(1)
How is the teaching of literature using reader-response at one private university
in Sumedang, conducted?
(2)
What problems (if any) do lecturer and students face in the teaching of literature
using reader-response approach?
(3) How do lecturer and students solve the problems?
1.4. Significance of the study
This study significantly attempted to (1) investigate teaching literature at one
private university in Sumedang using reader-response approach; (2) identify the
problems (if any) faced by both lecturer and students during teaching and learning
literature process; (3) find out solutions of problems.
Then the results of this study may become essential information and source in the
teaching of literature in the research site particularly, and in other context generally.
3
The results of the study, which will also be concerned with the problems, are expected
to be a basis for policy-makers to make a policy in the development of the teaching of
literature.
Besides, the results of the study are also expected as an analysis of the
implementation of literature curriculum and its syllabi for the literature subjects, such
as ‘Introduction to literature’, ‘Poetry’, ‘Prose’ and ‘Drama’ reflected in the classroom
activities, whether or not those subjects have attained the objectives of literature
teaching.
Hopefully the results of the study are also expected to allow lecturer and students’
awareness of the importance of literature, and develop them to love literature for
further researches and investigations. The institution of research site and staff are also
expected to understand and pay more attention to students’ needs, interests and
intentions in developing literature.
1.5. Organization of Thesis
This thesis is actually organized into five chapters namely:
1.5.1. Chapter I is introduction which covers: background of research; research
aims; research questions; significance of the study; and organization of thesis.
1.5.2. Chapter II mentions relevant review of literature.
1.5.2. Chapter III describes methodology of the study.
1.5.3. Chapter IV elaborates findings of the study and discussion.
1.5.4. Chapter V explains conclusions and recommendations.
4
5
6
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
This chapter elaborates ways of collecting data from the field through
documentary review, observation, and interview. These techniques are quite
appropriate with this case study to gain essential information relevant to the topic.
The starting point for this section is considering research site and participant of the
study, research design, data collection techniques, and data analysis.
3.1 Research site and participant of the study
This study was conducted at one private university in Sumedang, which is
located on Jalan Angkrek Situ No. 19 Sumedang. Actually, this institution has two
level degrees like diploma and graduate degree. In diploma degree, literature is given
only two credits in the subject ‘Introduction to English Literature’. Meanwhile in
graduate degree, literature is given eight credits, offered in the subjects ‘Introduction
to English Literature’, ‘Drama’, ‘Poetry’, and ‘Prose’.
Furthermore, for conducting teaching and learning process, the institution only
has two rooms and a simple language laboratory. In addition, its small library was
joined together with other institutions which provides uncompleted books and
references. Furthermore, the number of students is 150 as a whole, from first year to
forth year students.
18
There were some considerations and reasons why the researcher selected one of
private university in Sumedang, as the research site of the study. This institution is a
place where the researcher teaches English and literature. The results of the study are
expected to help to the policy which will allow for the improvement of the teaching
of literature in this institution including models of the teaching of literature, materials,
and assessment.
In terms of participant, this study only took two groups of participants. The first
group contained one class namely the third years students who were studying
literature course, namely the subject ‘Introduction to English Literature’ in the fifth
semester. This class consisted of twenty-five students who were talk-active compared
with other levels. It was their first experience in learning literature.
Meanwhile the second group included a lecturer who taught literature in the
subject ‘Introduction to English Literature, and three students selected based on their
level achievements: higher, middle, and lower achievement, as suggested by the
lecturer. It was considered that they represented other participant concerning their
knowledge and ability on each level. In addition, limited time and tools became
important aspects to concern. The lecturer and the students
selected as the
respondents, were interviewed to check out their consistency between what had been
done in the classroom, with what they said in interview.
19
3.2 Research Design
This study used a qualitative research design particularly a case study. This
qualitative research design was considered appropriate in the study, because it
allowed the researcher to explore more about the teaching of
literature and its
problem and solution. Further, this study paid attention to what lecturer and students
do in the teaching of literature to be documented and analyzed, which relevant to the
characteristics of a case study, as stated by Creswell. (1994, p. 2) and Burn (1994. p.
314).
This case study was divided in two steps, namely major study through longpersistent observation and minor study through interview and document analysis.
Observation was administered through long term observation, starting at September
29th to December 19th 2006. Then interview was held twice on January 8th and 9th
2007, that purposed to complete and to check the consistency to what has been found
in observation. Meanwhile, documents analysis was analyzed after observation and
interview.
3.3 Data Collection techniques
This part clarifies data collection techniques applied in this study, such as:
documents analysis, observation and interviews.
3.3.1 Documents analysis
The document analysis in this study were the syllabus of the subject
“Introduction to English Literature” in the curriculum of one private university in
20
Sumedang 2005, the revised-version, and the students’ tasks. This document analysis
is considered important in this study, as Merriam suggests, that documentary material
could be as data which did not much differ from using interviews or observation.
(1988, p. 115).
This document analysis aimed to find whether or not there was a consistency
between the syllabus demand and its implementation. In analyzing the syllabus and
students’ tasks, the researcher tried to identify the content of the syllabus, its
weaknesses and strength. Meanwhile students’ tasks was analyzed to identify the
content of the teaching of literature and its problems. This document analysis
answered the research question number: 1), i.e. “How is the teaching of literature
using reader-response at one private university in Sumedang conducted?” 2) What
problems (if any) do the lecturer and students face in the teaching of literature using
reader-response approach?”
3.3.2 Observation
Applying observation here meant, to portray what actually the lecturer and
students did in the teaching of literature activity more accurately. This observation
was functioning as a continuation of preliminary study which had been conducted for
more than three months since September 29th to December 19th 2006. In this
observation, the researcher’s role was as the observer-as-participant which mainly
concerned on what the lecturer and the students did in the classroom, and helped to
apply reader-response approach.
21
Then, during observation, the teaching of literature activity always started at ten
o’clock, sometimes undertaken on Tuesday and Friday in one of other school’s room,
because the rooms were full by the first and the second year students at ten o’ clock,
so the institution borrowed one from another institution. The teaching of literature
activity usually was conducted for 100 minutes for two credits. It was divided into
three sections namely: first section usually for opening the lecture, second section for
discussion and doing activities, and the last for closing the lecture.
Next, during observation, the researcher wrote what the lecturer and students
said, and sometimes she did something to help the implementation of reader-response
approach, since the opening to end of the lecture (Van Lier. 1988). To attain the
inquiry, filed notes, audio-recorder, and camera constituted useful instrument, so that
the researcher could gain the data both verbal and non-verbal communications easily,
that might appear during the process of teaching and learning literature. During
observation, the researcher also sometimes helped to teach literature when the
lecturer came late in order to gain essential information appropriate with readerresponse model.
This observation also answered the research question number: 1), i.e. “How is
the teaching of literature using reader-response at one private university in Sumedang
conducted?” 2) What problems (if any) do the lecturer and students face in the
teaching of literature using reader-response approach?” and 3) “How do lecturer and
students solve the problems?”
22
3.3.3 Interview
Interview was taken as instrument for collecting data which aimed to gain the
information missed in observation and to check the consistency between what the
respondents had done during observation with what they had said, and to construct
more valid data gain from the respondent (Alwasilah. 2003). Semi-structured
interview was a kind of interview taken by the researcher to give freedom to the
participant in responding to the questions themselves. This interview was indicated to
four people, including: a lecture of the subject ‘Introduction to English Literature’
named Mr. UP, and three students ‘NN’, ‘RAG’, ‘DH’, selected based on their
involvement and their level achievement in teaching and learning literature process as
the lecturer’ s recommendation.
Then the interview was administered in the researcher’s room, so that the
respondents would reply more comfortably and feel secure. It had been conducted
twice, namely on 8th January 2007 at ten o’clock to the lecturer, Mr. UP, and on 9th
January 2007 to three respondents, NN, RAG and DH at one o’clock p.m. Each
respondent spent less than an hour after they followed the lecture. During the
interview, the researcher provided tape-recorder to record and transcribe what the
respondent said.
This interview data was intended to answer the research question number 1),
i.e. “How is the teaching of literature using reader-response at one private university
in Sumedang conducted?” 2) “What problems (if any) do the lecturer and students
23
face in the teaching of literature using reader-response approach?” and 3) “How do
lecturer and students solve the problems?”
3.4 Data Analysis
As Cresswell (1994, p. 153. in Tesch, 1990) asked since there is no “right way”
for analyzing data, the data gained in the study were analyzed eclectically. What the
researcher did in analyzing data, will be discussed in the following steps.
Data taken from documents analysis was analyzed by collecting the syllabus
and students’ tasks, then, they were identified to find the content and its problems.
Furthermore, data from observation was analyzed in steps: first, the data were
categories into central themes, as suggested by Van Lier (1988) relevant to the
research question. Second, the data were analyzed to answer the research questions.
Similarly the data from interview were analyzed in steps. First of all, the researcher
transcribed all the data from the recording. Second, the researcher categorized the
data into central themes (Kuale. 1996), relevant to the research questions.
Third, the researcher presented the interview data in a condensed version of
interview data. Fourth, the researcher tried to interpret the data, comparing what the
participants said with what the theory says, as presented in chapter II, particularly to
do with the teaching of literature, as suggested by the reader-response theory,
problems and solutions for the problems.
24
Concluding remark
This chapter has presented the research methodology applied in this study. It
has elaborated the way the researcher did and presented data obtained in this study.
25
26
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
After discussion of findings in chapter four, finally this thesis comes to the last
part, that is, conclusions and recommendations. The conclusions, in line with the
research questions will be to do with three aspects, namely: 1) “How is the teaching
of literature using reader-response at one private university in Sumedang
conducted?”; 2) “What problems (if any) do
lecturer and students face in the
teaching of literature using reader-response?”; and 3) “How do lecturer and students
solve the problems?” Moreover, the recommendations will also deal with aspects to
be proposed to the institution as the research site as for further research.
A. Conclusions
Data obtained from all sources indicate that the teaching of literature used
reader-response approach in the research site was, to some extents relevant to the
theory of reader-response theory as suggested by Rosenblatt (1976), and other
supporting theory like Purves, Soter, and Rogers (1990). This is particularly to do
with the role of the lecturer in applying the principles of reader-response approach to
invite students’ response. However, concerning the materials given to the students,
the lecturer still refers to the teaching orientation than learning orientation which he
selected all materials to invite students’ response. Then, dealing with the techniques
75
of inviting students’ response, the lecturer still applied limited and inefficient
techniques, which he preferred to implement discussion technique almost in the
whole meetings.
In terms of the problems, this study finds out that some problems in the teaching
of literature using reader-response approach, support the findings of the previous
research of the teaching of literature, especially that underpinned the theory of readerresponse. Some difficulties faced by the teacher were, namely: teaching-based
orientation than learning-based orientation which is lack of efficient techniques;
neglects out-bond learning; and lack of identifying students’ interest and needs.
Moreover, from the perspective of the students, the difficulties were to do with: lack
of practice of extended writing; low reading habit of literary work; lack of capacity to
interpret literary work; neglect students’ creativity; and need ample time to explore
initial response to text.
Finally, regarding the solutions to the problems emerged, some activities that
the lecturer did also to some extent found relevant with the findings from previous
researches. They were: growing motivation of reading literary work; identifying
students’ interest and needs; thinking aloud; and employing talking and writing
strategies. However, there are some solutions still ignored by the lecturer, like
embarking out-bound learning; giving guidance to write; and triggering students’
creativity in various activities.
76
B.
Some Recommendations
First, in the syllabus it is stated that the aim of the teaching literature is only to
give knowledge and comprehension about English literary work to students. This is
inconsistent with the suggestion of Purves, Soter and Rogers (1990). The teaching of
literature should promote individuality, understanding and culture. Therefore, the
policy maker of the institution should construct an appropriate literature curriculum,
in order to expand both the lecturer and the students’ knowledge and experience.
Second, concerning the problems of the teaching literature using readerresponse, the institution should provide appropriate and comfortable facilities
including classroom, teaching tools, books and other sources, so that both the lecturer
and the students are easier to access information. Then it should be constructed an
obligation to read literary works, for those who become students in this institution.
The obligation of reading literary works is classified into three levels of reading from
simple literary works to complex ones. Then categorization of reading level should
consist of elementary, intermediate, and advanced reading, which is relevant with the
amount of literary works for each level, that could be managed appropriately. This
solution coincide with Ismail’s research finding (1999).
Finally, further research should be conducted in other context and levels of
education to appreciate literary work, so that students would have good
communication of English in both spoken and written form. Therefore, the teaching
of English in the research site should focus on the development and improvement of
77
students’ English. It also suggested that the principles of reader-response approach to
the teaching of literature should be applied more comprehensibly, to enable students
to develop their imaginative capacity, which of great importance in other context and
levels of teaching.
78
79
REFERENCES
Akhmadi, Muksin. 1989. Strategi Belajar-Mengajar: Keterampilan Berbahasa dan
Apresiasi Sastra. Malang: YA3.
Alwasilah, A.C. 2000. Perspektif Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris di Indonesia dalam
Konteks Persaingan Global. Bandung: Andira.
------------------- 2006. Pengajaran Berbasis Sastra. Pikiran Rakyat. Edisi Rabu 7
Desember.
Beach. In Press. The Creative Development of Reading: Using Autobiographical
Experiences to Interpret Literature. Cited in Farrel & Squire. 1990.
Transactions with Literature. The United States of America: The National
Council of All English Teachers.
-------- In Marshall. 1987. In Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature.
The United States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.
Bleich, D. 1986. Gender Interest in Reading and Language. In E. Flynn & P.
Schweickart (Eds), Gender and Reading. 13-38. Baltimore: Johns Hopkin Press.
Brunner. 1986. Cited in Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The
United States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.
Burn, R. 1994. Introduction to Research Methods. Second edition. Australia:
Longman Australia Pty Ltd.
Christie, Frances. 2005. Language Education in the Primary Years. Australia:
University of New South Wales Press Ltd.
Cresswell, J.W. 1994. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among
Five Traditions: London: SAGE Publication.
Ericson, B.O. 1984. A descriptive Study of the Individual and Group responses of
three 10th grade readers to two short story and two textbook selections. Cited
in Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The United States of
America: The National Council of All English Teachers
Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The United States of America:
The National Council of All English Teachers.
79
Flynn, Elizabeth. 1986. Gender and Reading. In Elizabeth Flynn, and Patrocinio
Schweickart, eds. Gender and Reading. Baltimore: Johns Hopkin Press. In
Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The United States of
America: The National Council of All English Teachers.
Freeman & Freeman. Between Words: Access to Second Language Acquisition.
Heinemann: Portsmouth, NH.
Hade, D. 1988. Children, Stories, and Narrative Transformations. Research in the
Teaching of English 2: 310-26. In Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with
Literature. The United States of America: The National Council of All English
Teachers.
Harmer, J. 2000. The Practice of English Teaching. England: Longman.
Heathcote. 1980. Cited in Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The
United States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.
Hook. 1978. In Saxby, M. & Hoogstad, V. 1991. Teaching Literature to Adolescents.
Australia: National Library Australia.
Horatius (65-8 SM). Cited in Akhmadi, Muksin. 1989. Strategi Belajar-Mengajar:
Keterampilan Berbahasa dan Apresiasi Sastra. Malang: YA3.
Hudson, W.H. 1964. in Frederich, T.J. 1986. Teaching Poetry. Jakarta: Depdikbud.
Ismail, Taufik. 1999. Pengajaran Sastra yang Efektif dan Efisien. Yogyakarta: Balai
Bahasa.
Isaeni. N. 2004. Literature in An EFL Classroom. At the English Department of UPI
Badung. Unpublished Thesis. PPS UPI Bandung.
Rudi, R.I. 2004. Literature Instruction in EFL Classroom. At the English
Deparrtment of UPI Bandung. Unpublished Thesis. PPS UPI Bandung.
Jacobsen, M. 1982. Looking for Literary Space: The Willing Suspension of Disbelief
Revisited. Cited in Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The
United States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.
Kuale. 1996. In Emi Emilia’s paper.
Lumm, A. 1986. In Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with literature. The United
States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.
80
Lytle. 1982. In Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The United
States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.
Marshall. 1987. The Effects of Writing on Students’ Understanding of Literary Texts.
Cited in Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The United States
of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.
McConnel, M. 1983. The Effect of Literature Exposure and Writing Practice on the
Original Narrative Writing of Second-grade Children. Cited in Farrel & Squire.
1990. Transactions with Literature. The United States of America: The
National Council of All English Teachers.
McKay. In Frederich T.J. 1986. Teaching Poetry. Jakarta: Depdikbud.
Mcmillan, J.H. & Schumacher, S. 2004. Research in Education: A Conceptual
Introduction. Fifth Edition. The United States: Afddison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Merriam.1988. In Rudi, R.I. 2004. Literature Instruction in EFL Classroom. At the
English Deparrtment of UPI Bandung. Unpublished Thesis. PPS UPI Bandung.
Newkirk, T. 1984. Looking for Trouble: A Way to Unmask Our Reading. Cited in
Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The United States of
America: The National Council of All English Teachers.
Probst, R.E. 1987. Transactional Theory in the Teaching of Literature. ERIC Digest.
Purve, S.C & Soter, A.Q. & Rogers, T. 1990. How Porcupines Makes Love II.
Teaching a Response-Centered Curriculum. Porsmouth, NH: Heineman.
Rani, S.A. & Sugiarti, E. 1991. Ikhtisar Roman Sastra Indonesia. Bandung: Pustaka
Jaya.
Richard, J.C.001. Curriculum Development in Language Teaching. United Kingdom:
Cambridge University Press.
Rogers.T. 1987. In Purve, S.C & Soter, A.Q. & Rogers, T. 1990. How Porcupines
Makes Love II. Teaching a Response-Centered Curriculum. Porsmouth, NH:
Heineman.
Rosenblatt, Louise. 1976. Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The
United States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.
------------------------ 1978. The Reader, The Text, The Poem. The Transactional
Theory of the Literary Work. The United States of America: Southern Illinois
University Press.
81
Rusyana, Y. 2005. In Apresiasi Sastra di Sekolah Dasar. Buletin Pusat Perbukuan,
volume II, Januari-Juni 005. ISSN 1411-5476. Jakarta: Depdiknas.
Sardjono, Partini. 1992. Pengantar Pengkajian Sastra. Bandung: Pustaka Jaya.
Saxby, M. & Hoogstad, V. 1991. Teaching Literature to Adolescents. Australia:
National Library Australia.
Showalter, E. 2003. In Karin Dienst. 003. Showalter Inspires Conversation about
Teaching Literature. February 17. Vol.9.No. 16. Princeton Buletin.
Suyono. 1980. Pendekatan Keterampilan Proses dalam Pengajaran Sastra di SMA:
Sebuah Kajian Selintas. Malang: HISKI.
Van Lier. 1988. In Emi Emilia’ s paper.
Whardhani, I.G.K. 1981. Cited in Akhmadi Muksin. 1989. Strategi BelajarMengajar: Keterampilan Berbahasa dan Apresiasi Sastra. Malang: YA3.
Widarmanto, T. 2003. In Gerbang. Majalah Pendidikan. Edisi 4 th III Oktober 2003,
ISSN: 1412-0577.
Wilson, R.R. 1976. Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The United
States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.
82
1