T1 112010801 Full text
SCIENCE TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS IN TEACHING SCIENCE USING
ENGLISH
A Comparative Study Towards Science Teachers
Between Two RSBI Schools in Salatiga and Semarang
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
Jaclyn Angelina Kaunang
112010801
ENGLISH DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE
SATYA WACANA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
SALATIGA
i
ii
iii
Science Teachers’ Perceptions in Teaching Science Using English
A Comparative Study Towards Science Teachers
Between two RSBI Schools in Salatiga and Semarang
Jaclyn A. Kaunang
English Department of Satya Wacana Christian University, Salatiga
Abstract
RSBI had became an education phenomenon with its on-going debate on its usefulness in
improving Indonesia’s teaching system. Some studies had shown that one of RSBI’s
deficiency lies in the teachers. It is believed that teachers are the key factor of whether or not
a teaching learning activity is successful. This study investigated the perceptions of science
teachers in two RSBI schools located in Semarang and Salatiga, and compared the difficulties
and strategies they applied. The purpose of this study was to find out whether there were any
difference or similarity in the perceptions, difficulties, and strategies which hopefully can
help improving the teaching learning activity in both schools. The participants of this study
were 6 science teachers, 3 from each school, who were all interviewed separatedly. The
participants were all Indonesians and had been teaching science for over 10 years. They were
all non native English speakers and had been teaching science using English for at least a
year or more. After the interview, the data collected were transcribed verbatim and analyzed
and they showed that there were no difference between the perception of science teachers in
those schools. This study also found out the difficulties the teachers’ faced and the strategies
they used to overcome them.
Keywords: RSBI, teachers’ perceptions, comparative studies.
Introduction
Most people would argue that bilingualism is the condition when people can speak
two different languages fluently; one is the first language and the other is foreign language.
According to Harding& Riley (1992) bilingual refers to the condition in which the speaker
can produce complete understandable phrases in the other language, while Hammers and
Blanc (2000) state a bilingual is a person who is able to speak and understand two languages
perfectly like the native speakers of the languages. The two experts’ ideas are roughly the
same. They both agree that a bilingual person can understand, use, and communicate with
4
more than one language, and not just speak two different languages fluently as the common
perception is. But then, if the purpose is just to be able to communicate with the people using
the language to get better job oppurtunities or to be able to exchange informations, then being
able to use (speak and/or write) and understand the language is enough (Baker, 2011). This is
where the Bilingual Education was born.
According to University of Michigan, bilingual education is any education system or
level which uses two languages as the medium of instruction. So if a school is presenting
their materials in two languages (e.g. an Indonesian school who is using English alongside
with Indonesian in its teaching and learning activities), then the school is performing a
Bilingual Education.The purpose of Bilingual Education is to make the students accustom to
the second language. According to Genesee (1984) cited in Genesee (2004), this is to utilize
the children’s ability to absorb second language easier at the early ages. So it is be regarded
more useful if the second language is being taught to children as the language will be
acquired more naturally.
A number of school inIndonesia also use the bilingual education system too, and since
English as an international language is very popular, most of educational institutions in
Indonesia put English in their curriculum and material development. Those schools are using
English as the medium of instructions because they believe that being fluent in English will
prepare their students to face the globalization era better. Then, the international standard
schools were born. These schools are the schools that are qualified using the SNP (Standar
Nasional Pendidikan) or the National Education Standard which refers to the standard of
education of members of Organization for Economic Coorporation and Development (OCD)
and/or the other countries that have many advantages in the educational field (Sofa, 2009
cited in Astika, 2009). At first, the international standard school system were being applied at
the private schools, then it was followed by public schools as the government decided to
make the international standard schools a program of the government’s education system
policy. Indonesian government released the Undang-undang RI No. 20 Tahun 2003 pasal 50
ayat (3) and Peraturan Pemerintah No. 19 tahun 2005 pasal 61 ayat (1) which basically say
that government and/or local government held at least one unit of education at all levels of
education to be developed to become an international education units. The approach which is
commonly known now as Rancangan Sekolah Bertaraf International (RSBI) or Sekolah
Bertaraf Internasional (SBI) or Internationally Standardized Schools is one of the government
programs to improve the quality of education in Indonesia (Rahmat, 2011). “RSBI/SBI is an
5
alternative implementation of policy improvements in the quality of education equated the
quality of human resources within the national context in global competition” (ibid, pp: 1).
This means that the creation of RSBI/SBI is simply to provide the nation a form of education
that will prepare its people to compete internationally. The RSBI/SBI is different from the
standard schools in their method, approaches, curriculum and materials, and most importantly
because the RSBI/SBI uses the English language to teach non English subjects, especially
science and math. The difference with International Schools is that RSBI/SBI are using
English as a foreign language, whereas students and teachers are not the native speakers of
English, while in the International Schools the students and teachers are mostly using English
as their first language. The difference between RSBI and SBI is that the RSBI (Rancangan
Sekolah Bertaraf Internasional) are not yet the Internationally Standardized Schools, they are
still in the planning stages. This means they are the schools that are being prepared to be an
Internationally Standardized Schools where the teaching learning activities are designed to
fulfill the needs and the qualification of an Internationally Standardized Schools and the
students and teachers are trained to get used to using English as the mediator of their teaching
learning activities. While SBI in the other hand, are the schools that have passed the planning
stages and being granted the predicate Internationally Standardized School (Rahmat, 2011).
Some people might argue that bilingual education and its implementation in Indonesia
is a failed project and just the government’s hasty decision to get the prestige, that in the field
bilingual education does not seem to reach any of its purposes (e.g: Hallet, 2005; Santoso,
2006). A leading newspaper in Indonesia, Harian Kompas, issued several articles following
the ongoing debate about the use of RSBI/SBI (Kompas, 2012). A few of prominent
educationists in Indonesia deny the usefulness of RSBI/SBI by giving a result of a
comparison evaluation done towards the quality of teachers and students of RSBI and the
ordinary schools.They reported that there are no significant difference between them, in fact,
in some levels the ordinary schools teachers and students show better results. However, in
Kompas’ coverage,the Ministry of Education and Culture of Indonesia argued that the flaws
found in the implementation of RSBI in Indonesia is something normal because it has just
been going on for 5 to 6 years and that they are optimistic that those problems will be solved
in 2 to 3 years from now. I do agree that bilingual education in Indonesia still has some
deficiencies such as the insufficient human resources, expensive tuition fees that most people
couldn’t afford, but as a newly implemented approach, bilingual education is supposed to
have flaws. Nothing is perfect / flawless when it is newly implemented. Bax (2010) in his
research for the British Council emphasizes the importance of not feverishly judge the RSBI
6
of being a failure, for he argues that this kind of “educational initiative” needs few years
before it can show the results (Bax, 2010: pp, 49). In line with this, many research has been
done to find out the problems and necessities of RSBI in order to provide techniques to fix
the problems. Some studies (Rahayuningtyas, 2009; Pebrioni, 2010; Setiawan, 2010) around
Salatiga, Central Java show that the teachers are not ready to use English as a medium of
instruction in teaching subject matters. Moreover, they also reported that teacher’s
competence in English seemed to be the biggest challenge. Even some teachers were lack in
English especially pronunciation.
A proficient teacher is very important in bilingual education, because the teacher will
surely affects students’ understanding and language skill development, because for learners,
the classroom is the main place where they frequently practice the target language. Teacher
talk is particularly important to language teaching (Cook, 2000). It is determined whether
learning in a classroom succeeds or not. Many scholars found teacher talk makes up around
70% of classroom language (e.g: Cook, 2000; Chaudron, 1988). This includes explanation
about the lesson, reinforcing of students’ participation in classroom activity, answering
students’ questions, etc. Even Stern (1983) believes that when a second or foreign language is
being taught in an environment that is not supportive for example, English that is being
taught in an Indonesian school whereas the surroundings of the students’ (both in school and
home) are using Indonesian, then the instructions will be the only access of the foreign
language into the students’ memory. The instructions means here is the teachers’ talks that
are being spoken in class.Therefore, it is very crucial to prepare the teachers well in order to
get an effective teaching learning absorption.
Unfortunately, the number of such proficient teachers is inadequate, as Nunan (2002)
pointed out that the lack of appropriate training for teachers has been a serious obstacle in
Asian Countries. According to the survey conducted by Astika, Wahyana, and Andreyana
(2008) about teachers’ self evaluation of ability and skills of English related to teaching
subjects bilingually, all of the respondents admitted that they had mastered their subjects but
most of them found teaching the subjects using English was a big challenge (Astika, 2009).
To teach science in English language, one must be able to communicate in English alongside
with his or her knowledge in science, which is rarely found in Indonesia. Many of the
teachers are seriously lacked in English skills, something which they cannot master instantly
for teaching purposes. They might be very much qualified in teaching science, but have no
7
experience in teaching science using the English language which in the end will affect the
transfer of their knowledge to their students effectively.
Teachers’ Perceptions and Comparative Studies
Teachers’ attitudes in teaching leads to the effectiveness of a teaching and learning
activities. Their perceptions and attitudes are important and have been studied overtime, and
lately underlies how to understand what triggers their actions (Richardson 1996, cited in
Brown, 2009). He believes that the perceptions is a psychological tool that determines a
person’s actions. In language teaching, the teachers’ perceptions are mentioned as the key of
students’ language development, it can improve the development, or decrease it (Vizconde,
2006). It means that what the teachers feel or how they react about their teaching will
determine the success of language teaching. That is why finding out the teachers’ perceptions
is necessary to determine their attitudes towards the fact that they have to teach science using
English which is not their first language. Similar to this, Rao and Narayana (1998) believe
that perception is very crucial in human’s behaviour, it is the mental device of people to
understand their environment. In their belief, behaviour comes after perception, hence,
perception is important in determining human’s behaviour. According to them, “perception is
the process whereby people select, organise, and interpret sensory stimulations into
meaningful information about their work environment.” (ibid., 1998; pp.329). Therefore, to
figure out their perception is important and can be useful in order to improve their quality of
teaching because by knowing their perceptions, we can determine what are their drawbacks
and find out the best solutions to fix the shortage.
The studies about teacher’s perceptions have been conducted by many scholars (e.g:
Finley et al., 1982; Ferguson 2003; Handayani, 2011; Wirawanti; 2011). This is because they
strongly believe that teacher’s perception have a big impact in teaching learning activities.
Williams and Burden (1997) cited in Brown (2009) argue that teacher’s beliefs affect their
actions and automatically affect their actions in teaching too. They underline the importance
of teachers to find out what their beliefs are towards the language teaching. In line with this,
Ferguson (2003) points out that teachers’ perceptions shape the achievements of the teaching
and learning activities, because he thinks that children interact with the teachers a lot, thus
makes the teachers’ perceptions an important factor in children’s way of thinking. This is also
true in the teaching and learning activities. Teachers’ perceptions will affect their way of
teaching, therefore will affect the materials that their students receive. Gardner (2001)
8
proposes that the teacher must have the training, personality, characteristics, and ability to
teach the fundamentals of the language to the students. Not only that, teachers must
encourage students to learn the materials and most importantly, use them. Therefore, the
teachers’ perception towards a teaching approach is badly needed, this is to ensure that the
teachers will successfully transfer the essense of the lessons to their pupils and to avoid
misinformation of the materials from teachers to students.
Each people have different perception about something. Comparing the perceptions of
a few people can benefit as it will enrich our knowledge and will broaden our awareness
about a topic. Comparative studies is one of the most popular research method, it has been
used in educational fields since nineteenth century to “achieve various objectives” (Hantrais,
1995:1). By all means, comparing one case with another is a useful tool to gain more in-depth
touch about something. With knowing if there is any relationship between two cases towards
on a phenomenon, we can estimate the main problem of the phenomenon itself, henceforth
simplify our way to find the solution.
Several studies of teachers perceptions in conjunction with language teaching and
bilingual education have been conducted overtime. For example the study conducted by Shin
and Krashen (1996). They wanted to find out the teachers’ perceptions towards the bilingual
education, especially how they perceived the principles of bilingual education and how their
attitudes can support the bilingual programs. They found out that while the theory of
bilingual programs were strongly supported, the actual participation by students in bilingual
programs were hardly supported. Numerous participant admitted that they believe bilingual
education can bring good impact to the students and their absorption of lessons, but in the
case of applying bilingual education, ironically, they turned opposing it. Another goal of their
research was the factors that are influenced the perceptions of the teachers towards the
bilingual education, and based on their study, turns out that the principles of the bilingual
education were not the reason why they are opposing it, but it was solely because of other
considerations such as “concerns about job security, need for additional credentials, or
observation of misapplications of the principles” (Shin & Krashen, 1996: pp, 52). From this,
Shin & Krashen (1996) concluded that the reason why the teachers resisted bilingual
education was not because they didn’t agree of its principles, but because there are other
factors (mostly personal) that made them so. At last, they concluded that those teachers who
has additional education were more supported towards the bilingual programs.
9
Another study of teachers’ perceptions was conducted by Brown (2009) who
compared teachers’ and students’ perceptions about effective foreign language teaching. He
based his study on the theory of a few scholars (Horwitz, 1990; Kern, 1995; Schulz, 1996,
cited in Brown, 2009). He believes that if there are inequality between the expectations of
teachers and students, it can influence the satisfaction of the students which leads to the
damage of the study. Brown (2009) found out that there were differences in the expectations
of students and teachers concerning the approach that was being used in their classroom.
While the teachers prefered a more communicative classroom, the students seemed more
likely to choose the grammar-based approach. Brown (2009) then suggested the teachers to
be more coorporative in providing the students needs and actively try to find out what the
students wanted. He also suggested to constantly carry out a discussion in order to find best
solutions that could satisfy both parts.
A study of comparison towards science teachers’ perceptions however, were more
difficult to find. Nevertheless, a study carried out by Osman, Halim, and Meerah (2006) in
Malaysia came to the surface. This study was conducted in Malaysia towards 1,690
practicing secondary school science teachers. They wanted to know if other factors such as
gender, school location, and area of specialization affected the needs of those teachers in
improving their science instructions. The needs of English as the medium of instruction and
the use of multimedia technology is mostly selected, while updating teachers’ content
knowledge and technical skills were not badly needed. On the other hand, the respondents
admitted that they need help in planning and designing their science instructions, also in
improving their “pedagogic generic knowledge and skills” (Osman et al., 2006: pp, 73).
While in terms of the other factors that affects the needs of the science teachers, they found
out that the female teachers in rural areas were the ones who needs more training in all
dimensions. They argued that the teachers in the urban areas are more likely to receive and/or
exchange updated informations concerning science teaching for they are better equiped and
surrounded by conducive environment (Osman et al., 2006).
The review of literatures above have shown that the study of teachers’ perceptions
and comparison can help bring out solutions or at least suggestions in order to improve
teaching learning activities. Based on these reviews, I am triggered to make a study to
compare the perception of science teachers in two RSBI schools located in two different
cities’. Therefore, I have designed a research question to guide my research, as follows:
“What are the science teachers’ perceptions toward teaching science using English?”
10
My goals are to find out what are the teachers’ perceptions and how it affects the
teaching learning activities and students’ achievements. Hopefully this research can be a
reference in improving teaching learning activities of science in RSBI schools and can trigger
similar studies in other locations.
Methodology
Participants
I have limited the number of participants of this research to six (n=6) science teachers
consisting of three (n=3) science teachers from SMAN 1 Semarang, and three (n=3) science
teachers from SMAN 1 Salatiga. They were all appointed by the Deputy Headmasters of each
school, with the consideration of time availability and their willingness to be interviewed.
The participants from Semarang were two men and one woman, all three were within the
age range of 42 to 48 years old. All of them graduated from faculty of education, majored in
science, and had been teaching science for more than ten years when this study was being
conducted. They were Indonesians. One of them had been teaching science in English for
approximately two years, since he moved to SMAN 1 Semarang, while the other two
participants had been teaching science in English since the establishment of RSBI in their
school in 2008.
The age of the participants from Salatiga ranged from 37 to 58 years old, and they were
one man and two women. They had been teaching science for at least 12 years, and had been
teaching science in English since their school designated as one of the RSBI school. They
graduated from universities majoring in science. They were all Indonesians and English is a
foreign language to them.
Data Collection
The data of this research were collected by an individual interview towards the teachers.
The data were obtained within one week, from December 7th, 2012 to December 14th, 2012.
Each participants was interviewed separately, with time allocations approximately from 6 to
15 minutes per participant, whereas each participant was being asked 14 interview questions.
11
The interview questions were focused on three aspects; the perceptions of the teachers
towards teaching science using English, the use of English in their classrooms, and the
difficulties the teachers faced and their strategies to overcome those difficulties. The
interviews were conducted in their mother-tongue, in order to avoid miscommunication and
to ease the interview process. All interviews were tape-recorded, and later on being
transcribed verbatim for further analysis.
Data Analysis
The data transcription were conducted as soon as all the data were collected.
Thereafter, I summarized the interview results by the teachers’ location and their answer to
each questions to find out whether there were differences or similarities between the answers
from Semarang teachers and Salatiga teachers. After that, I grouped the answers into the three
focused aspects which were; the perceptions of the teachers towards teaching science using
English, the use of English in their classrooms, and the difficulties they faced and strategies
they use in their teaching of science using English. Then, I analyzed them with the support of
previous studies and relevant theories, and finally I made conclusions based on the findings
and analysis.
Findings and Discussions
The Perceptions of Science Teachers towards Teaching Science Using English
According to the findings, the perceptions of teaching science using English as the
medium of instructions by the teachers are quite different. When the new regulation of
teaching science using English implemented in their school, Salatiga teachers had different
response towards it. Participant A insisted her strong disapproval. In response to the question
about how she felt when she first heard about the program, she answered:
“Disagree. I think it’s not right, mbak. Because we are
Indonesians, ehh... it’s just confusing if we have to learn
using English. I think it can’t be applied. That’s all.”
Participant A, as translated by writer.
12
Her colleague, Participant B, showed not much of a concern towards this new regulation. He
admitted that he felt mediocre, yet then expressed his support by saying that according to
him, the new implemented system of teaching science using English could be done.
Meanwhile, Participant C, in response to the same question, expressed strong approval
towards this, although she still thought that it would not be maximal as shown in her
comments:
“Very supportive, yaa. But many problems occured in the
fields. It (the teaching science using English regulation) can
be implemented, yaa... although it won’t be optimal.”
Participant C, as translated by writer.
While the responses from Salatiga teachers were varied, Semarang teachers shared the same
opinion. They positively agreed with this new regulation. Their reasons were varied,
Participant 1 took teaching science using English as a challenge, Participant 2 tried to be
optimistic, and Participant 3 welcomed this system happily. Here are some of their
comments:
“Challenge. Yah, everything is...when... for me, my principle
is, I am happy when there’s challenge like that because there
is something new. I am like that... If before my English
maybe just yes/no... Because there’s that (the teaching
science using English regulation), I got to know yesterday
and I love you, like that...Hahahahaha...” Participant 1, as
translated by writer.
“Ya alhamdulilah, what is it... if it me, I feel... I happen to
like English, so... Let’s try that (teaching science using
English). We’re optimistic... We try to give... what...try to
learn, lah... like that.” Participant 2, as translated by writer.
Teachers in Semarang had shown positive attitude towards teaching science using English.
Their responses were showing their intention of improving their knowledge and their
teaching by utilizing this regulation properly. The amount and quality of teacher trainings can
be one of the factors that influence teacher’s motivation in teaching, as proven in Gibbs and
Coffey (2004). Teachers who had trainings will be more confident in teaching, hence
increases their motivation in teaching.Salatiga teachers admitted they only had a small
amount of trainings before being sent to teach science in English, while Semarang teachers
received continuously rich trainings and courses.
“Yes, more confident. Because of the trainings. The school
sent us to be trained. We had attended several courses over
13
the years. First was at LIA, eh... no no...opo jenenge (what’s
the name?)... The one located in UNIKA, it was twice and
then at LIA, at LIA was 4 times. And the last one was at
STAMFORD. The course models were various... We had like
conversations, and then TOEFL and TOEIC preparations, and
then there were syllabus comparing, and reading, and many
more...” Participant 1, as translated by writer.
Participant 1 had a very positive view about teaching science using English and he related it
to the trainings he had which made him more confident. This is proven by his answer when
he was being asked about his feelings when he was first appointed to teach science using
English. Participant 1 admitted he felt happy when he taught science in English for the very
first time. His comment was as follow:
“I was happy. Yes, I enjoyed it. Because... eh... when I teach
[in] English, I didn’t teach for the whole of it, just what I was
capable of. Yes, but sometimes, you know... our tenses...
hehehe... The important thing is, the students understand us,
that’s all... We just, enjoy it...” Participant 1, as translated by
writer.
However, despite of their supports of this program and regardless of the amount of teacher
training they attended before, when being asked about their feelings when they first taught
science using English, the other participants responded variously. Participant A, C and 2 gave
similar answers. They did not feel confident, and felt that there were still too many
constraints. One interesting comment came from Participant 2:
“Teaching [science] in English, what I felt, maybe because it
was a long time ago, ya. I mean we spoke English tuh when
we were still in college maybe. [...................] So, now we try,
ya. That’s it. We try... so because we didn’t use it for a long
time, the tongue felt rigid, gitu yah... and then, we were
worried too, because our pronunciation also automatically,
because rarely used, it’s not very fluent, ya.. Needs more
practice, a lot of practice, gitu... But, [I] had felt nervous also,
because we felt that kids nowadays, yahh... especially in
English, a lot of them are already fluent, so at first we told
them, we learn together...” Participant 2, as translated by
writer.
Those anxious feelings that those teachers felt apparently did not agree with what their
colleagues felt. The other two participants admitted they felt unremarkably flat, which means
no special or extraordinary feeling; they did not show anxiety or eagerness.
14
According to Gardner (2001), teachers’ perceptions affect their teaching practices,
whereas in these findings, although some of the participants positively agreed towards
teaching science using English, all of them still preferedteaching their subject using
Indonesian. Participants from Salatiga argued that using Indonesian would make it easier for
the students because the Ujian Nasional or the National Examination uses Indonesian.
Participant B even went more assertive by included the Sumpah Pemuda, or the Youth
Pledge, which is the foundation of the national awakening which led to the independence of
Indonesia. He reasoned:
“I prefer Indonesian, mbak. Because Bahasa Indonesia is the
national language, kan. There is SumpahPemuda loh mbak.
Sumpah Pemuda is sacred, kan mbak.” Participant B, as
translated by writer.
Basically he meant that Indonesian people had admitted the Indonesian language as our one
and only national language, and considering the Youth Pledge is sacred, Indonesian people
could not just ignore it and change the education system’s language into a foreign language.
This argument is in line with Tilaar’s (2012) comment which stated that the concept of RSBI
was contradictory with the culture of Indonesia. While the Salatiga teachers were firmly
prefered Indonesian, the Semarang teachers, despite their desire to use Indonesian as the
medium of instruction in their teaching, realized the needs of habituated their students with
English. Teachers in Semarang apparently were in favor of Charlton and Andras’ (2005)
belief that there is a need of a common language to accommodate the communications of
education globally and that common language is English. The Semarang teachers were fully
aware that the need of exchanging information in order to improve knowledge should be
supported with good communication skills, which refered to mastery of a global language,
which is English, and they strongly believed that being fluent in English would smoothen
their students’ path in absorbing knowledge from developed countries, as Participant 2
commented:
“Yes, maybe like that but we enjoy it because there is this
awareness from the heart because it is the demand yahh... We
can’t... Can’t not following the needs of the era ya... Because
in the era of globalization, despite our own desires, although
our aged had past 50, we still have to learn, and learn
[English]... Because the requirement of teaching in RSBI is
like that...” Participant 2, as translated by writer.
15
She firmly believed that in order to compete globally, learning the global language was
inevitably necessary. Thus, for the sake of their students, they prefered teaching in English,
although they all agreed that in explaining the concept or giving the formula they still used
Indonesian, and then they translated them to English. While in presenting theories and terms
they used English and then translated in Indonesia whenever they felt necessary. The code
switching and code mixing technique played an important role in their teaching and learning
activity.
The Use of English in Their Classroom
On the contrary, although aware of the important role of English in the globalization
era, the teachers seemed to emphasize more in the understanding of the concepts, not the
language. This is proven by the amount of English they involved in class. In Salatiga, when
being asked about the amount of English they used when they first teaching science in
English, the answer varied. Participant A admitted that she used English only at the beginning
and the end of the lesson, and also when she checked students’ absence. Participant B
claimed he had mixed English and Indonesian in his teaching, but still used Indonesian to
present important points, while Participant C admitted she used 50-60% of English in her
class because she believed teaching using English need an optimal preparation, and it took a
lot of time, as she commented below:
“50-60% at most.Because teaching learning activity using
English needs an optimal preparation, when we are required
to achieve the completion of the materials.”Participant C, as
translated by writer.
Semarang teachers, however, answered differently regarding the use of English in teaching
science for the first time. Participant 1 agreed with the Japanese science teaching system
which was 80-20, whereas 80% of the teaching used the mother tongue, while the other 20%
used English. His comments were as follow:
“In science sometimes we have to...eh...give English.
Because in this era of globalization [we] usually... but the
portion maybe I think, I tend to agree with... in Japan they
implemented (in their teaching learning activities) English for
just 20% while the 80% (in their mother tongue)... like now, I
also use 80% our Indonesian language mixed with boso jowo
(Javanese language), and the 20% ya English. So English
16
probably just the physics terms gitu yah......” Participant 1, as
translated by writer.
Participant 1 applied the 80-20 theory he explained before in his classroom, while participant
2 tried to apply what she called the “on-off” method. She tried to use all English and
translated into Indonesian if she thought her students were still confused, as she admitted in
these comments below:
“Ya.. We did on-off yaa..we try teaching learning activity in
English, we were full English also, if my students still
confuse, still seem so confuse, we [turn] it (the English) off,
and cover again in Indonesian” Participant 2, as translated by
writer.
While her colleague, Participant 3, admitted to use not more than 50% of English in his
classroom. He argued that in explaining physics concept was more understandable with
mother tongue. This argument was being proven by several studies about how the use of
mother-tongue in bilingual education could improve the teaching learning effectiveness(e.g:
Cummins, 2000; Shin and Krashen, 1996.)
Furthermore, after a few years of teaching science using English, all Salatiga teachers
admitted their non-improvement. All participants regretfully confessed that they were still not
confident, and still used Indonesian mostly, just like the first time they used English in their
teaching. On the other hand, after some time teaching science using English, Participant 1
and 2 both agreed they had grown more confident and used English more in their teaching
compared to the first time they taught, while Participant 3 still wasnot satisfied enough with
his teaching and thought it needed to be improved. Later on, when being asked whether or not
their teaching could be developed, all participants directly responded with their agreement.
Participant 3 wanted to improve the multimedia, practices and materials so that his students
could understand his lessons easily. While Participant 1 wanted to improve his English, as he
stated below:
“Ohh..Yes, of course it can [be developed]... especially in
English. I want to, in the future, I want to... when I teach and
give formula, I can perform them in English...” Participant 1,
as translated by writer.
Regarding their students’ understanding, participants’ answers differed. Participant A,
1, and 2 declared that their students could understand better if teachers used Indonesian as the
medium of instruction, and this statement was supported by the follow up questions about the
17
test scores. These teachers admitted that the tests they presented were bilingual and obviously
the results of the Indonesian tests were better than the English ones:
“Yes, of course they understand, because I use Indonesian. In
exams I use English and Indonesian. Of course there are
differences between those two. The Indonesian test results
were better than the English ones.” Participant A, as
translated by writer.
“In tests I use 50% English and 50% Indonesian. So for
example there are 10 questions, 5 are in English, and 5 are in
Indonesian. The English test scores in average…jeblok (very
bad). So yes, the English test score are lower than the
Indonesian.” Participant 1, as translated by writer.
Participant C, on the other hand, believed her students understood because she did not use
100% English while teaching, and claimed that her students understood her teaching better
when she used Indonesian as the medium of instructions. Nonetheless, the tests, although
were given in 30% English, no difference occurred between the Indonesian scores and
English scores:
“Yes, mbak. The kids understand, because I didn’t use 100%
English. I think they understand better when I use Indonesian
when explaining [subject matter] to them. We [give] 30% of
the questions in English. No difference, mbak.Almost the
same. No difference.” Participant C, as translated by writer.
Meanwhile, Participant B and 3 cohesively stated that their students’ problem was not the
language, but the concept. Their statements were supported by the test scores of the students.
“When it comes to language they are already understand,
mbak. The physics concepts ituloh.. About the language,
they’ve already understand, if not, they can find a dictionary,
kan? Tests are in 60% Indonesian and 40% English, and the
results are not much different...” Participant B, as translated
by writer.
“The problem is not the language. The students’ language is
okay. They are smart. The problem is the physics concepts.
Because for example, at the Semesta School, there’s a student
from America, speaks fluent English, but the physics
[comprehension] is still low... My students’ exams are in
50% English and 50% Indonesian, the language does not
affect their achievement. The problem is not the language.”
Participant 3, as translated by writer.
18
Difficulties and Strategies
Analysis in the difficulties in teaching science using English showed that there were
three most common problems they faced, which were; the students’ complexity, the
explanation of the concept, and the references. The students’ varied backgrounds sometimes
caused confusions in teaching learning activities and progress. Some students who were
familiar with learning using English (came from bilingual schools or had interacted with
English since early ages), were easier to follow the lessons, but some were not as such, thus
made them difficult in learning.
“Students’ complexity is various. There are some of them
who are already good in English, then no problem. But there
it is possible even in RSBI schools, students with poor
English. Sometimes we’re a little troubled with that...”
Participant 2, as translated by writer.
Participant 2, 3, and C agreed that their difficulty lied in the references. They usually troubled
in finding materials, and additional resources, as shown in the comment below:
“The reference book... We got our reference books from
abroad and their words are so physically, I mean... very
physics, so sometimes when students, anu...English
Indonesian, I mean...We’re step by step...but sometimes there
are confusing sentences...” Participant 2, as translated by
writer.
She meant that in using the reference book sometimes there were confusing words, like the
science term, which could not be translated verbatim. This made them confused,because
words or terms in the reference books were not like ordinary words and sometimes the
meaning was different with the ones in the dictionary.
Another difficulty according to Participant 1, A, and B was in explaining the concept. In
Indonesian alone, explaining physics concept was hard, not to mention have to explain it in
English. Participant 1 commented as shown below:
“The important thing about physics is the concept. And after
that, giving the formula. In the matter of definition, it is
easy... but when we explain the concept and then give the
formula, in English, this is what worried me. I’m affraid the
students’ will miss it” Participant 1, as translated by writer.
Their biggest worry was that their students misunderstood the concept they were trying to
explain because of the bad English. Arranging sentences, technical physics terms, and their
19
worries of misconceptions burdened them. Choosing words were the trouble that all subjects
shared, they did not feel confident; therefore they feel difficult in arranging sentences. They
were also afraid that students would ask questions that they could not answer.
In order to solve these problems, all participants agreed that they used the help of
multimedia, as Coleman and Pimentel (2011) suggested. Participant 2 explained her method
of using LCD in teaching was very helpful in supporting the students’ understanding, as her
comments below:
“It turned out the use of LCD helps a lot in my teaching. So
we took external sources, but with the sentences shown on
screen made us more confident. So we can learn about it
before teaching, and then we presented it to the students, and
students seem more understand with the use of LCD.”
Participant 2, as translated by writer.
Teachers could prepare the materials in interesting ways before the class, hence making
explanation easier to be understood. The terms delivery was also easier, this way students
could directly read the spelling of the terms and could avoid misconception of a word’s
meaning due to teacher’s mispronunciation. This method also could be used to overcome
another obstacle they were often found while teaching, which was the explanation of the
concept. While Participant 1 considered explaining the concept in English and then had to
explained about the same thing in Indonesian wasted a lot of time, with presenting the
concept in English on LCD, cut half of the time allocation he needed if he had to explain
without LCD. Also, the fear of losing words in front of the class which had become the
number one concern alongside with the fear of mispronunciation could also be avoided with
power points and references shown on the LCD for the whole class to see. As an addition,
Participant 2 revealed that she always reminded her students that her English is not perfect
too and that she is open for any correction or addition from her students. As for the references
problem, the participants admitted that this problem could be prevented by the use of physics
dictionary and internet usage.
20
Conclusion
The result of the study had shown that there were no difference between Semarang
and Salatiga science teachers’ perception towards teaching science in English, although
Semarang teachers seemed to show more positive attitude, while Salatiga teachers were more
uncertain about it. Some of the Salatiga teachers were supportive towards teaching science
using English, although still uncertain about the effectiveness of it in their students’
achievement, while their colleague was firmly disapproved. Newman and Way (2009)
believe that teachers’ perception can potentially affect the students understanding of subject
matters, which the teachers’ with positive attitudes can help motivate students and labor more
efforts in finding ways of making their teaching more effective. Yet, according to this study,
despite their perceptions of the teachers, whether it is positive or negative, apparently they
were all agreed that they still prefer teaching in Indonesian than in English, although
Semarang teachers later on admitted their awareness of the globalization era and the
important role of English in the mentioned era, therefore disregarded their language
preferance and choose English anyway. Nevertheless, despite of their language preference,
the amount of English they used in class were practically high. Most of the teachers used
English from 20-60% in their teaching, except for one participant who only used English in
the greetings and checking attendance. In class, they used English-Indonesian language
mixing and translating technique. Over the years, Semarang teachers admitted their progress,
they grew more confident and used English more in their classroom, although one of them
admitted his dissatisfaction and his needs of improvement, while Salatiga teachers confessed
that they were not improving. One of the factor that influenced their support towards this
system was the teacher trainings which the Semarang teachers admitted had increased their
confidence, hence made them viewed the system better. However, this study also showed that
there were no difference between the students’ achievement, in Semarang or in Salatiga.
Some teachers admitted that their students’ scores in English were lower than the Indonesian
ones, while the other teachers stated that there were no difference whatsoever.
As for the difficulties, apparently teachers in Semarang and Salatiga faced similar
difficulties. The students’ complexity, the explanation of the concept, and the references were
the problems all participants shared. According to Darling-Hammond (2000), a well-prepared
teacher will be more likely to succeed and have more confidence in teaching than the less21
prepared or not prepared teachers. All participants apparently were in favor of this statement
as they admitted that since they were appointed to teach science in English, they spent more
time in preparing their teaching. The use of multimedia and dictionary were commonly
chosen by the participants to overcome the problems mentioned before.
At the end,all Semarang participants reiterated that their view toward teaching using
English was very positive as they considered their teaching could be improved by improving
their English. In the future they expected more teaching materials and practices which could
help them to understand in English. They were also looking forward for more innovations in
teaching science, because all of them agreed to see innovations and changes as challenges
which lead to a better teaching. While Salatiga teachers, although not very fond of this
system of teaching science using English, evidently still made efforts to succeed in their
teaching. Hence answered the research question of this study as purposed earlier.
Finally, I believe that the perceptions of the teachers can affect the teachers’
motivations and the students’ achievements, which confirms the suggestions of the previous
scholars (e.g: Ferguson, 2003; Newman and Way, 2009; Vizconde, 2006). By knowing the
perception and what triggers it, we can determine what is lacking and make attempts to
rectify it. Nevertheless, finding out the perceptions of the teachers is just a small step in the
attempt to make the teaching learning activities in RSBI schools more effective, and since
this study is limited only on a small number of teachers and conducted only in two cities, I
encourage further research of this topic to be conducted, for example study about the use of
teacher training in increasing the teachers’ confidence as mentioned before.
22
References
Akuntono, I. (2012, March 6). Kemendikbud keukeuh RSBI mencerdaskan bangsa.Harian
Kompas.
Retrieved
June
2012
from
http://edukasi.kompas.com/read/2012/03/06/13425070/Kemdikbud.Keukeuh.RSBI.Men
cerdaskan.Bangsa
Astika, G. (2009). Model kelas bilingual di sekolah bertaraf internasional: Sebuah pemikiran
konseptual. Retrieved August 2012 from http://gurupembaharu.com/home/model-kelasbilingual-di-sekolah-bertaraf-internasional-sebuah-pemikiran-konseptual/
Baker, C. (2011). Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism 5th edition. USA:
McNaughton
&
Gunn
Ltd.
Retrieved
August
2012
from
http://www.google.co.id/books?hl=en&lr=&id=fEt5VKBIMSsC&oi=fnd&pg=PR6&dq=bilin
gual+education&ots=iEQnIlnTFR&sig=rrfFKd3FNIemDhZ93ddXuxUhts&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=bilingual%20education&f=false
Bax, S. (2010). Researching English bilingual education in Thailand, Indonesia, and South
Korea. The British Council.
Brown, A. V. (2009). Students’ and teachers’ perceptions of effective foreign language
teaching: A comparison of ideals. The Modern Language Journal, 2009; pp. 46-50.
Charlton BG.,&Andras P. (2006). Globalization in scienceeducation: An inevitable and
beneficialbrend. Medical Hypotheses66; 869-873
Chaudron, C. (1988). Second language classrooms: Research on teaching and learning.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Coleman, D. & Pimentel, S. (2011). Publisher’s criteria for the common core state standards
in English language art and literacy, Grades 3-12.
Cook, V. (2000). Second language learning and language teaching (2nd Ed.). Beijing:
Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Crystal, D. (2003). English as a global language. London: Cambridge University Press.
Retrieved
August
2012
from
http://www.sprachshop.com/sixcms/media.php/811/english_as_a_grobal_lang_sample_
ch.pdf
Cummins, J. (2000). Language,power, and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire.
Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). How teacher education ma
ENGLISH
A Comparative Study Towards Science Teachers
Between Two RSBI Schools in Salatiga and Semarang
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
Jaclyn Angelina Kaunang
112010801
ENGLISH DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE
SATYA WACANA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
SALATIGA
i
ii
iii
Science Teachers’ Perceptions in Teaching Science Using English
A Comparative Study Towards Science Teachers
Between two RSBI Schools in Salatiga and Semarang
Jaclyn A. Kaunang
English Department of Satya Wacana Christian University, Salatiga
Abstract
RSBI had became an education phenomenon with its on-going debate on its usefulness in
improving Indonesia’s teaching system. Some studies had shown that one of RSBI’s
deficiency lies in the teachers. It is believed that teachers are the key factor of whether or not
a teaching learning activity is successful. This study investigated the perceptions of science
teachers in two RSBI schools located in Semarang and Salatiga, and compared the difficulties
and strategies they applied. The purpose of this study was to find out whether there were any
difference or similarity in the perceptions, difficulties, and strategies which hopefully can
help improving the teaching learning activity in both schools. The participants of this study
were 6 science teachers, 3 from each school, who were all interviewed separatedly. The
participants were all Indonesians and had been teaching science for over 10 years. They were
all non native English speakers and had been teaching science using English for at least a
year or more. After the interview, the data collected were transcribed verbatim and analyzed
and they showed that there were no difference between the perception of science teachers in
those schools. This study also found out the difficulties the teachers’ faced and the strategies
they used to overcome them.
Keywords: RSBI, teachers’ perceptions, comparative studies.
Introduction
Most people would argue that bilingualism is the condition when people can speak
two different languages fluently; one is the first language and the other is foreign language.
According to Harding& Riley (1992) bilingual refers to the condition in which the speaker
can produce complete understandable phrases in the other language, while Hammers and
Blanc (2000) state a bilingual is a person who is able to speak and understand two languages
perfectly like the native speakers of the languages. The two experts’ ideas are roughly the
same. They both agree that a bilingual person can understand, use, and communicate with
4
more than one language, and not just speak two different languages fluently as the common
perception is. But then, if the purpose is just to be able to communicate with the people using
the language to get better job oppurtunities or to be able to exchange informations, then being
able to use (speak and/or write) and understand the language is enough (Baker, 2011). This is
where the Bilingual Education was born.
According to University of Michigan, bilingual education is any education system or
level which uses two languages as the medium of instruction. So if a school is presenting
their materials in two languages (e.g. an Indonesian school who is using English alongside
with Indonesian in its teaching and learning activities), then the school is performing a
Bilingual Education.The purpose of Bilingual Education is to make the students accustom to
the second language. According to Genesee (1984) cited in Genesee (2004), this is to utilize
the children’s ability to absorb second language easier at the early ages. So it is be regarded
more useful if the second language is being taught to children as the language will be
acquired more naturally.
A number of school inIndonesia also use the bilingual education system too, and since
English as an international language is very popular, most of educational institutions in
Indonesia put English in their curriculum and material development. Those schools are using
English as the medium of instructions because they believe that being fluent in English will
prepare their students to face the globalization era better. Then, the international standard
schools were born. These schools are the schools that are qualified using the SNP (Standar
Nasional Pendidikan) or the National Education Standard which refers to the standard of
education of members of Organization for Economic Coorporation and Development (OCD)
and/or the other countries that have many advantages in the educational field (Sofa, 2009
cited in Astika, 2009). At first, the international standard school system were being applied at
the private schools, then it was followed by public schools as the government decided to
make the international standard schools a program of the government’s education system
policy. Indonesian government released the Undang-undang RI No. 20 Tahun 2003 pasal 50
ayat (3) and Peraturan Pemerintah No. 19 tahun 2005 pasal 61 ayat (1) which basically say
that government and/or local government held at least one unit of education at all levels of
education to be developed to become an international education units. The approach which is
commonly known now as Rancangan Sekolah Bertaraf International (RSBI) or Sekolah
Bertaraf Internasional (SBI) or Internationally Standardized Schools is one of the government
programs to improve the quality of education in Indonesia (Rahmat, 2011). “RSBI/SBI is an
5
alternative implementation of policy improvements in the quality of education equated the
quality of human resources within the national context in global competition” (ibid, pp: 1).
This means that the creation of RSBI/SBI is simply to provide the nation a form of education
that will prepare its people to compete internationally. The RSBI/SBI is different from the
standard schools in their method, approaches, curriculum and materials, and most importantly
because the RSBI/SBI uses the English language to teach non English subjects, especially
science and math. The difference with International Schools is that RSBI/SBI are using
English as a foreign language, whereas students and teachers are not the native speakers of
English, while in the International Schools the students and teachers are mostly using English
as their first language. The difference between RSBI and SBI is that the RSBI (Rancangan
Sekolah Bertaraf Internasional) are not yet the Internationally Standardized Schools, they are
still in the planning stages. This means they are the schools that are being prepared to be an
Internationally Standardized Schools where the teaching learning activities are designed to
fulfill the needs and the qualification of an Internationally Standardized Schools and the
students and teachers are trained to get used to using English as the mediator of their teaching
learning activities. While SBI in the other hand, are the schools that have passed the planning
stages and being granted the predicate Internationally Standardized School (Rahmat, 2011).
Some people might argue that bilingual education and its implementation in Indonesia
is a failed project and just the government’s hasty decision to get the prestige, that in the field
bilingual education does not seem to reach any of its purposes (e.g: Hallet, 2005; Santoso,
2006). A leading newspaper in Indonesia, Harian Kompas, issued several articles following
the ongoing debate about the use of RSBI/SBI (Kompas, 2012). A few of prominent
educationists in Indonesia deny the usefulness of RSBI/SBI by giving a result of a
comparison evaluation done towards the quality of teachers and students of RSBI and the
ordinary schools.They reported that there are no significant difference between them, in fact,
in some levels the ordinary schools teachers and students show better results. However, in
Kompas’ coverage,the Ministry of Education and Culture of Indonesia argued that the flaws
found in the implementation of RSBI in Indonesia is something normal because it has just
been going on for 5 to 6 years and that they are optimistic that those problems will be solved
in 2 to 3 years from now. I do agree that bilingual education in Indonesia still has some
deficiencies such as the insufficient human resources, expensive tuition fees that most people
couldn’t afford, but as a newly implemented approach, bilingual education is supposed to
have flaws. Nothing is perfect / flawless when it is newly implemented. Bax (2010) in his
research for the British Council emphasizes the importance of not feverishly judge the RSBI
6
of being a failure, for he argues that this kind of “educational initiative” needs few years
before it can show the results (Bax, 2010: pp, 49). In line with this, many research has been
done to find out the problems and necessities of RSBI in order to provide techniques to fix
the problems. Some studies (Rahayuningtyas, 2009; Pebrioni, 2010; Setiawan, 2010) around
Salatiga, Central Java show that the teachers are not ready to use English as a medium of
instruction in teaching subject matters. Moreover, they also reported that teacher’s
competence in English seemed to be the biggest challenge. Even some teachers were lack in
English especially pronunciation.
A proficient teacher is very important in bilingual education, because the teacher will
surely affects students’ understanding and language skill development, because for learners,
the classroom is the main place where they frequently practice the target language. Teacher
talk is particularly important to language teaching (Cook, 2000). It is determined whether
learning in a classroom succeeds or not. Many scholars found teacher talk makes up around
70% of classroom language (e.g: Cook, 2000; Chaudron, 1988). This includes explanation
about the lesson, reinforcing of students’ participation in classroom activity, answering
students’ questions, etc. Even Stern (1983) believes that when a second or foreign language is
being taught in an environment that is not supportive for example, English that is being
taught in an Indonesian school whereas the surroundings of the students’ (both in school and
home) are using Indonesian, then the instructions will be the only access of the foreign
language into the students’ memory. The instructions means here is the teachers’ talks that
are being spoken in class.Therefore, it is very crucial to prepare the teachers well in order to
get an effective teaching learning absorption.
Unfortunately, the number of such proficient teachers is inadequate, as Nunan (2002)
pointed out that the lack of appropriate training for teachers has been a serious obstacle in
Asian Countries. According to the survey conducted by Astika, Wahyana, and Andreyana
(2008) about teachers’ self evaluation of ability and skills of English related to teaching
subjects bilingually, all of the respondents admitted that they had mastered their subjects but
most of them found teaching the subjects using English was a big challenge (Astika, 2009).
To teach science in English language, one must be able to communicate in English alongside
with his or her knowledge in science, which is rarely found in Indonesia. Many of the
teachers are seriously lacked in English skills, something which they cannot master instantly
for teaching purposes. They might be very much qualified in teaching science, but have no
7
experience in teaching science using the English language which in the end will affect the
transfer of their knowledge to their students effectively.
Teachers’ Perceptions and Comparative Studies
Teachers’ attitudes in teaching leads to the effectiveness of a teaching and learning
activities. Their perceptions and attitudes are important and have been studied overtime, and
lately underlies how to understand what triggers their actions (Richardson 1996, cited in
Brown, 2009). He believes that the perceptions is a psychological tool that determines a
person’s actions. In language teaching, the teachers’ perceptions are mentioned as the key of
students’ language development, it can improve the development, or decrease it (Vizconde,
2006). It means that what the teachers feel or how they react about their teaching will
determine the success of language teaching. That is why finding out the teachers’ perceptions
is necessary to determine their attitudes towards the fact that they have to teach science using
English which is not their first language. Similar to this, Rao and Narayana (1998) believe
that perception is very crucial in human’s behaviour, it is the mental device of people to
understand their environment. In their belief, behaviour comes after perception, hence,
perception is important in determining human’s behaviour. According to them, “perception is
the process whereby people select, organise, and interpret sensory stimulations into
meaningful information about their work environment.” (ibid., 1998; pp.329). Therefore, to
figure out their perception is important and can be useful in order to improve their quality of
teaching because by knowing their perceptions, we can determine what are their drawbacks
and find out the best solutions to fix the shortage.
The studies about teacher’s perceptions have been conducted by many scholars (e.g:
Finley et al., 1982; Ferguson 2003; Handayani, 2011; Wirawanti; 2011). This is because they
strongly believe that teacher’s perception have a big impact in teaching learning activities.
Williams and Burden (1997) cited in Brown (2009) argue that teacher’s beliefs affect their
actions and automatically affect their actions in teaching too. They underline the importance
of teachers to find out what their beliefs are towards the language teaching. In line with this,
Ferguson (2003) points out that teachers’ perceptions shape the achievements of the teaching
and learning activities, because he thinks that children interact with the teachers a lot, thus
makes the teachers’ perceptions an important factor in children’s way of thinking. This is also
true in the teaching and learning activities. Teachers’ perceptions will affect their way of
teaching, therefore will affect the materials that their students receive. Gardner (2001)
8
proposes that the teacher must have the training, personality, characteristics, and ability to
teach the fundamentals of the language to the students. Not only that, teachers must
encourage students to learn the materials and most importantly, use them. Therefore, the
teachers’ perception towards a teaching approach is badly needed, this is to ensure that the
teachers will successfully transfer the essense of the lessons to their pupils and to avoid
misinformation of the materials from teachers to students.
Each people have different perception about something. Comparing the perceptions of
a few people can benefit as it will enrich our knowledge and will broaden our awareness
about a topic. Comparative studies is one of the most popular research method, it has been
used in educational fields since nineteenth century to “achieve various objectives” (Hantrais,
1995:1). By all means, comparing one case with another is a useful tool to gain more in-depth
touch about something. With knowing if there is any relationship between two cases towards
on a phenomenon, we can estimate the main problem of the phenomenon itself, henceforth
simplify our way to find the solution.
Several studies of teachers perceptions in conjunction with language teaching and
bilingual education have been conducted overtime. For example the study conducted by Shin
and Krashen (1996). They wanted to find out the teachers’ perceptions towards the bilingual
education, especially how they perceived the principles of bilingual education and how their
attitudes can support the bilingual programs. They found out that while the theory of
bilingual programs were strongly supported, the actual participation by students in bilingual
programs were hardly supported. Numerous participant admitted that they believe bilingual
education can bring good impact to the students and their absorption of lessons, but in the
case of applying bilingual education, ironically, they turned opposing it. Another goal of their
research was the factors that are influenced the perceptions of the teachers towards the
bilingual education, and based on their study, turns out that the principles of the bilingual
education were not the reason why they are opposing it, but it was solely because of other
considerations such as “concerns about job security, need for additional credentials, or
observation of misapplications of the principles” (Shin & Krashen, 1996: pp, 52). From this,
Shin & Krashen (1996) concluded that the reason why the teachers resisted bilingual
education was not because they didn’t agree of its principles, but because there are other
factors (mostly personal) that made them so. At last, they concluded that those teachers who
has additional education were more supported towards the bilingual programs.
9
Another study of teachers’ perceptions was conducted by Brown (2009) who
compared teachers’ and students’ perceptions about effective foreign language teaching. He
based his study on the theory of a few scholars (Horwitz, 1990; Kern, 1995; Schulz, 1996,
cited in Brown, 2009). He believes that if there are inequality between the expectations of
teachers and students, it can influence the satisfaction of the students which leads to the
damage of the study. Brown (2009) found out that there were differences in the expectations
of students and teachers concerning the approach that was being used in their classroom.
While the teachers prefered a more communicative classroom, the students seemed more
likely to choose the grammar-based approach. Brown (2009) then suggested the teachers to
be more coorporative in providing the students needs and actively try to find out what the
students wanted. He also suggested to constantly carry out a discussion in order to find best
solutions that could satisfy both parts.
A study of comparison towards science teachers’ perceptions however, were more
difficult to find. Nevertheless, a study carried out by Osman, Halim, and Meerah (2006) in
Malaysia came to the surface. This study was conducted in Malaysia towards 1,690
practicing secondary school science teachers. They wanted to know if other factors such as
gender, school location, and area of specialization affected the needs of those teachers in
improving their science instructions. The needs of English as the medium of instruction and
the use of multimedia technology is mostly selected, while updating teachers’ content
knowledge and technical skills were not badly needed. On the other hand, the respondents
admitted that they need help in planning and designing their science instructions, also in
improving their “pedagogic generic knowledge and skills” (Osman et al., 2006: pp, 73).
While in terms of the other factors that affects the needs of the science teachers, they found
out that the female teachers in rural areas were the ones who needs more training in all
dimensions. They argued that the teachers in the urban areas are more likely to receive and/or
exchange updated informations concerning science teaching for they are better equiped and
surrounded by conducive environment (Osman et al., 2006).
The review of literatures above have shown that the study of teachers’ perceptions
and comparison can help bring out solutions or at least suggestions in order to improve
teaching learning activities. Based on these reviews, I am triggered to make a study to
compare the perception of science teachers in two RSBI schools located in two different
cities’. Therefore, I have designed a research question to guide my research, as follows:
“What are the science teachers’ perceptions toward teaching science using English?”
10
My goals are to find out what are the teachers’ perceptions and how it affects the
teaching learning activities and students’ achievements. Hopefully this research can be a
reference in improving teaching learning activities of science in RSBI schools and can trigger
similar studies in other locations.
Methodology
Participants
I have limited the number of participants of this research to six (n=6) science teachers
consisting of three (n=3) science teachers from SMAN 1 Semarang, and three (n=3) science
teachers from SMAN 1 Salatiga. They were all appointed by the Deputy Headmasters of each
school, with the consideration of time availability and their willingness to be interviewed.
The participants from Semarang were two men and one woman, all three were within the
age range of 42 to 48 years old. All of them graduated from faculty of education, majored in
science, and had been teaching science for more than ten years when this study was being
conducted. They were Indonesians. One of them had been teaching science in English for
approximately two years, since he moved to SMAN 1 Semarang, while the other two
participants had been teaching science in English since the establishment of RSBI in their
school in 2008.
The age of the participants from Salatiga ranged from 37 to 58 years old, and they were
one man and two women. They had been teaching science for at least 12 years, and had been
teaching science in English since their school designated as one of the RSBI school. They
graduated from universities majoring in science. They were all Indonesians and English is a
foreign language to them.
Data Collection
The data of this research were collected by an individual interview towards the teachers.
The data were obtained within one week, from December 7th, 2012 to December 14th, 2012.
Each participants was interviewed separately, with time allocations approximately from 6 to
15 minutes per participant, whereas each participant was being asked 14 interview questions.
11
The interview questions were focused on three aspects; the perceptions of the teachers
towards teaching science using English, the use of English in their classrooms, and the
difficulties the teachers faced and their strategies to overcome those difficulties. The
interviews were conducted in their mother-tongue, in order to avoid miscommunication and
to ease the interview process. All interviews were tape-recorded, and later on being
transcribed verbatim for further analysis.
Data Analysis
The data transcription were conducted as soon as all the data were collected.
Thereafter, I summarized the interview results by the teachers’ location and their answer to
each questions to find out whether there were differences or similarities between the answers
from Semarang teachers and Salatiga teachers. After that, I grouped the answers into the three
focused aspects which were; the perceptions of the teachers towards teaching science using
English, the use of English in their classrooms, and the difficulties they faced and strategies
they use in their teaching of science using English. Then, I analyzed them with the support of
previous studies and relevant theories, and finally I made conclusions based on the findings
and analysis.
Findings and Discussions
The Perceptions of Science Teachers towards Teaching Science Using English
According to the findings, the perceptions of teaching science using English as the
medium of instructions by the teachers are quite different. When the new regulation of
teaching science using English implemented in their school, Salatiga teachers had different
response towards it. Participant A insisted her strong disapproval. In response to the question
about how she felt when she first heard about the program, she answered:
“Disagree. I think it’s not right, mbak. Because we are
Indonesians, ehh... it’s just confusing if we have to learn
using English. I think it can’t be applied. That’s all.”
Participant A, as translated by writer.
12
Her colleague, Participant B, showed not much of a concern towards this new regulation. He
admitted that he felt mediocre, yet then expressed his support by saying that according to
him, the new implemented system of teaching science using English could be done.
Meanwhile, Participant C, in response to the same question, expressed strong approval
towards this, although she still thought that it would not be maximal as shown in her
comments:
“Very supportive, yaa. But many problems occured in the
fields. It (the teaching science using English regulation) can
be implemented, yaa... although it won’t be optimal.”
Participant C, as translated by writer.
While the responses from Salatiga teachers were varied, Semarang teachers shared the same
opinion. They positively agreed with this new regulation. Their reasons were varied,
Participant 1 took teaching science using English as a challenge, Participant 2 tried to be
optimistic, and Participant 3 welcomed this system happily. Here are some of their
comments:
“Challenge. Yah, everything is...when... for me, my principle
is, I am happy when there’s challenge like that because there
is something new. I am like that... If before my English
maybe just yes/no... Because there’s that (the teaching
science using English regulation), I got to know yesterday
and I love you, like that...Hahahahaha...” Participant 1, as
translated by writer.
“Ya alhamdulilah, what is it... if it me, I feel... I happen to
like English, so... Let’s try that (teaching science using
English). We’re optimistic... We try to give... what...try to
learn, lah... like that.” Participant 2, as translated by writer.
Teachers in Semarang had shown positive attitude towards teaching science using English.
Their responses were showing their intention of improving their knowledge and their
teaching by utilizing this regulation properly. The amount and quality of teacher trainings can
be one of the factors that influence teacher’s motivation in teaching, as proven in Gibbs and
Coffey (2004). Teachers who had trainings will be more confident in teaching, hence
increases their motivation in teaching.Salatiga teachers admitted they only had a small
amount of trainings before being sent to teach science in English, while Semarang teachers
received continuously rich trainings and courses.
“Yes, more confident. Because of the trainings. The school
sent us to be trained. We had attended several courses over
13
the years. First was at LIA, eh... no no...opo jenenge (what’s
the name?)... The one located in UNIKA, it was twice and
then at LIA, at LIA was 4 times. And the last one was at
STAMFORD. The course models were various... We had like
conversations, and then TOEFL and TOEIC preparations, and
then there were syllabus comparing, and reading, and many
more...” Participant 1, as translated by writer.
Participant 1 had a very positive view about teaching science using English and he related it
to the trainings he had which made him more confident. This is proven by his answer when
he was being asked about his feelings when he was first appointed to teach science using
English. Participant 1 admitted he felt happy when he taught science in English for the very
first time. His comment was as follow:
“I was happy. Yes, I enjoyed it. Because... eh... when I teach
[in] English, I didn’t teach for the whole of it, just what I was
capable of. Yes, but sometimes, you know... our tenses...
hehehe... The important thing is, the students understand us,
that’s all... We just, enjoy it...” Participant 1, as translated by
writer.
However, despite of their supports of this program and regardless of the amount of teacher
training they attended before, when being asked about their feelings when they first taught
science using English, the other participants responded variously. Participant A, C and 2 gave
similar answers. They did not feel confident, and felt that there were still too many
constraints. One interesting comment came from Participant 2:
“Teaching [science] in English, what I felt, maybe because it
was a long time ago, ya. I mean we spoke English tuh when
we were still in college maybe. [...................] So, now we try,
ya. That’s it. We try... so because we didn’t use it for a long
time, the tongue felt rigid, gitu yah... and then, we were
worried too, because our pronunciation also automatically,
because rarely used, it’s not very fluent, ya.. Needs more
practice, a lot of practice, gitu... But, [I] had felt nervous also,
because we felt that kids nowadays, yahh... especially in
English, a lot of them are already fluent, so at first we told
them, we learn together...” Participant 2, as translated by
writer.
Those anxious feelings that those teachers felt apparently did not agree with what their
colleagues felt. The other two participants admitted they felt unremarkably flat, which means
no special or extraordinary feeling; they did not show anxiety or eagerness.
14
According to Gardner (2001), teachers’ perceptions affect their teaching practices,
whereas in these findings, although some of the participants positively agreed towards
teaching science using English, all of them still preferedteaching their subject using
Indonesian. Participants from Salatiga argued that using Indonesian would make it easier for
the students because the Ujian Nasional or the National Examination uses Indonesian.
Participant B even went more assertive by included the Sumpah Pemuda, or the Youth
Pledge, which is the foundation of the national awakening which led to the independence of
Indonesia. He reasoned:
“I prefer Indonesian, mbak. Because Bahasa Indonesia is the
national language, kan. There is SumpahPemuda loh mbak.
Sumpah Pemuda is sacred, kan mbak.” Participant B, as
translated by writer.
Basically he meant that Indonesian people had admitted the Indonesian language as our one
and only national language, and considering the Youth Pledge is sacred, Indonesian people
could not just ignore it and change the education system’s language into a foreign language.
This argument is in line with Tilaar’s (2012) comment which stated that the concept of RSBI
was contradictory with the culture of Indonesia. While the Salatiga teachers were firmly
prefered Indonesian, the Semarang teachers, despite their desire to use Indonesian as the
medium of instruction in their teaching, realized the needs of habituated their students with
English. Teachers in Semarang apparently were in favor of Charlton and Andras’ (2005)
belief that there is a need of a common language to accommodate the communications of
education globally and that common language is English. The Semarang teachers were fully
aware that the need of exchanging information in order to improve knowledge should be
supported with good communication skills, which refered to mastery of a global language,
which is English, and they strongly believed that being fluent in English would smoothen
their students’ path in absorbing knowledge from developed countries, as Participant 2
commented:
“Yes, maybe like that but we enjoy it because there is this
awareness from the heart because it is the demand yahh... We
can’t... Can’t not following the needs of the era ya... Because
in the era of globalization, despite our own desires, although
our aged had past 50, we still have to learn, and learn
[English]... Because the requirement of teaching in RSBI is
like that...” Participant 2, as translated by writer.
15
She firmly believed that in order to compete globally, learning the global language was
inevitably necessary. Thus, for the sake of their students, they prefered teaching in English,
although they all agreed that in explaining the concept or giving the formula they still used
Indonesian, and then they translated them to English. While in presenting theories and terms
they used English and then translated in Indonesia whenever they felt necessary. The code
switching and code mixing technique played an important role in their teaching and learning
activity.
The Use of English in Their Classroom
On the contrary, although aware of the important role of English in the globalization
era, the teachers seemed to emphasize more in the understanding of the concepts, not the
language. This is proven by the amount of English they involved in class. In Salatiga, when
being asked about the amount of English they used when they first teaching science in
English, the answer varied. Participant A admitted that she used English only at the beginning
and the end of the lesson, and also when she checked students’ absence. Participant B
claimed he had mixed English and Indonesian in his teaching, but still used Indonesian to
present important points, while Participant C admitted she used 50-60% of English in her
class because she believed teaching using English need an optimal preparation, and it took a
lot of time, as she commented below:
“50-60% at most.Because teaching learning activity using
English needs an optimal preparation, when we are required
to achieve the completion of the materials.”Participant C, as
translated by writer.
Semarang teachers, however, answered differently regarding the use of English in teaching
science for the first time. Participant 1 agreed with the Japanese science teaching system
which was 80-20, whereas 80% of the teaching used the mother tongue, while the other 20%
used English. His comments were as follow:
“In science sometimes we have to...eh...give English.
Because in this era of globalization [we] usually... but the
portion maybe I think, I tend to agree with... in Japan they
implemented (in their teaching learning activities) English for
just 20% while the 80% (in their mother tongue)... like now, I
also use 80% our Indonesian language mixed with boso jowo
(Javanese language), and the 20% ya English. So English
16
probably just the physics terms gitu yah......” Participant 1, as
translated by writer.
Participant 1 applied the 80-20 theory he explained before in his classroom, while participant
2 tried to apply what she called the “on-off” method. She tried to use all English and
translated into Indonesian if she thought her students were still confused, as she admitted in
these comments below:
“Ya.. We did on-off yaa..we try teaching learning activity in
English, we were full English also, if my students still
confuse, still seem so confuse, we [turn] it (the English) off,
and cover again in Indonesian” Participant 2, as translated by
writer.
While her colleague, Participant 3, admitted to use not more than 50% of English in his
classroom. He argued that in explaining physics concept was more understandable with
mother tongue. This argument was being proven by several studies about how the use of
mother-tongue in bilingual education could improve the teaching learning effectiveness(e.g:
Cummins, 2000; Shin and Krashen, 1996.)
Furthermore, after a few years of teaching science using English, all Salatiga teachers
admitted their non-improvement. All participants regretfully confessed that they were still not
confident, and still used Indonesian mostly, just like the first time they used English in their
teaching. On the other hand, after some time teaching science using English, Participant 1
and 2 both agreed they had grown more confident and used English more in their teaching
compared to the first time they taught, while Participant 3 still wasnot satisfied enough with
his teaching and thought it needed to be improved. Later on, when being asked whether or not
their teaching could be developed, all participants directly responded with their agreement.
Participant 3 wanted to improve the multimedia, practices and materials so that his students
could understand his lessons easily. While Participant 1 wanted to improve his English, as he
stated below:
“Ohh..Yes, of course it can [be developed]... especially in
English. I want to, in the future, I want to... when I teach and
give formula, I can perform them in English...” Participant 1,
as translated by writer.
Regarding their students’ understanding, participants’ answers differed. Participant A,
1, and 2 declared that their students could understand better if teachers used Indonesian as the
medium of instruction, and this statement was supported by the follow up questions about the
17
test scores. These teachers admitted that the tests they presented were bilingual and obviously
the results of the Indonesian tests were better than the English ones:
“Yes, of course they understand, because I use Indonesian. In
exams I use English and Indonesian. Of course there are
differences between those two. The Indonesian test results
were better than the English ones.” Participant A, as
translated by writer.
“In tests I use 50% English and 50% Indonesian. So for
example there are 10 questions, 5 are in English, and 5 are in
Indonesian. The English test scores in average…jeblok (very
bad). So yes, the English test score are lower than the
Indonesian.” Participant 1, as translated by writer.
Participant C, on the other hand, believed her students understood because she did not use
100% English while teaching, and claimed that her students understood her teaching better
when she used Indonesian as the medium of instructions. Nonetheless, the tests, although
were given in 30% English, no difference occurred between the Indonesian scores and
English scores:
“Yes, mbak. The kids understand, because I didn’t use 100%
English. I think they understand better when I use Indonesian
when explaining [subject matter] to them. We [give] 30% of
the questions in English. No difference, mbak.Almost the
same. No difference.” Participant C, as translated by writer.
Meanwhile, Participant B and 3 cohesively stated that their students’ problem was not the
language, but the concept. Their statements were supported by the test scores of the students.
“When it comes to language they are already understand,
mbak. The physics concepts ituloh.. About the language,
they’ve already understand, if not, they can find a dictionary,
kan? Tests are in 60% Indonesian and 40% English, and the
results are not much different...” Participant B, as translated
by writer.
“The problem is not the language. The students’ language is
okay. They are smart. The problem is the physics concepts.
Because for example, at the Semesta School, there’s a student
from America, speaks fluent English, but the physics
[comprehension] is still low... My students’ exams are in
50% English and 50% Indonesian, the language does not
affect their achievement. The problem is not the language.”
Participant 3, as translated by writer.
18
Difficulties and Strategies
Analysis in the difficulties in teaching science using English showed that there were
three most common problems they faced, which were; the students’ complexity, the
explanation of the concept, and the references. The students’ varied backgrounds sometimes
caused confusions in teaching learning activities and progress. Some students who were
familiar with learning using English (came from bilingual schools or had interacted with
English since early ages), were easier to follow the lessons, but some were not as such, thus
made them difficult in learning.
“Students’ complexity is various. There are some of them
who are already good in English, then no problem. But there
it is possible even in RSBI schools, students with poor
English. Sometimes we’re a little troubled with that...”
Participant 2, as translated by writer.
Participant 2, 3, and C agreed that their difficulty lied in the references. They usually troubled
in finding materials, and additional resources, as shown in the comment below:
“The reference book... We got our reference books from
abroad and their words are so physically, I mean... very
physics, so sometimes when students, anu...English
Indonesian, I mean...We’re step by step...but sometimes there
are confusing sentences...” Participant 2, as translated by
writer.
She meant that in using the reference book sometimes there were confusing words, like the
science term, which could not be translated verbatim. This made them confused,because
words or terms in the reference books were not like ordinary words and sometimes the
meaning was different with the ones in the dictionary.
Another difficulty according to Participant 1, A, and B was in explaining the concept. In
Indonesian alone, explaining physics concept was hard, not to mention have to explain it in
English. Participant 1 commented as shown below:
“The important thing about physics is the concept. And after
that, giving the formula. In the matter of definition, it is
easy... but when we explain the concept and then give the
formula, in English, this is what worried me. I’m affraid the
students’ will miss it” Participant 1, as translated by writer.
Their biggest worry was that their students misunderstood the concept they were trying to
explain because of the bad English. Arranging sentences, technical physics terms, and their
19
worries of misconceptions burdened them. Choosing words were the trouble that all subjects
shared, they did not feel confident; therefore they feel difficult in arranging sentences. They
were also afraid that students would ask questions that they could not answer.
In order to solve these problems, all participants agreed that they used the help of
multimedia, as Coleman and Pimentel (2011) suggested. Participant 2 explained her method
of using LCD in teaching was very helpful in supporting the students’ understanding, as her
comments below:
“It turned out the use of LCD helps a lot in my teaching. So
we took external sources, but with the sentences shown on
screen made us more confident. So we can learn about it
before teaching, and then we presented it to the students, and
students seem more understand with the use of LCD.”
Participant 2, as translated by writer.
Teachers could prepare the materials in interesting ways before the class, hence making
explanation easier to be understood. The terms delivery was also easier, this way students
could directly read the spelling of the terms and could avoid misconception of a word’s
meaning due to teacher’s mispronunciation. This method also could be used to overcome
another obstacle they were often found while teaching, which was the explanation of the
concept. While Participant 1 considered explaining the concept in English and then had to
explained about the same thing in Indonesian wasted a lot of time, with presenting the
concept in English on LCD, cut half of the time allocation he needed if he had to explain
without LCD. Also, the fear of losing words in front of the class which had become the
number one concern alongside with the fear of mispronunciation could also be avoided with
power points and references shown on the LCD for the whole class to see. As an addition,
Participant 2 revealed that she always reminded her students that her English is not perfect
too and that she is open for any correction or addition from her students. As for the references
problem, the participants admitted that this problem could be prevented by the use of physics
dictionary and internet usage.
20
Conclusion
The result of the study had shown that there were no difference between Semarang
and Salatiga science teachers’ perception towards teaching science in English, although
Semarang teachers seemed to show more positive attitude, while Salatiga teachers were more
uncertain about it. Some of the Salatiga teachers were supportive towards teaching science
using English, although still uncertain about the effectiveness of it in their students’
achievement, while their colleague was firmly disapproved. Newman and Way (2009)
believe that teachers’ perception can potentially affect the students understanding of subject
matters, which the teachers’ with positive attitudes can help motivate students and labor more
efforts in finding ways of making their teaching more effective. Yet, according to this study,
despite their perceptions of the teachers, whether it is positive or negative, apparently they
were all agreed that they still prefer teaching in Indonesian than in English, although
Semarang teachers later on admitted their awareness of the globalization era and the
important role of English in the mentioned era, therefore disregarded their language
preferance and choose English anyway. Nevertheless, despite of their language preference,
the amount of English they used in class were practically high. Most of the teachers used
English from 20-60% in their teaching, except for one participant who only used English in
the greetings and checking attendance. In class, they used English-Indonesian language
mixing and translating technique. Over the years, Semarang teachers admitted their progress,
they grew more confident and used English more in their classroom, although one of them
admitted his dissatisfaction and his needs of improvement, while Salatiga teachers confessed
that they were not improving. One of the factor that influenced their support towards this
system was the teacher trainings which the Semarang teachers admitted had increased their
confidence, hence made them viewed the system better. However, this study also showed that
there were no difference between the students’ achievement, in Semarang or in Salatiga.
Some teachers admitted that their students’ scores in English were lower than the Indonesian
ones, while the other teachers stated that there were no difference whatsoever.
As for the difficulties, apparently teachers in Semarang and Salatiga faced similar
difficulties. The students’ complexity, the explanation of the concept, and the references were
the problems all participants shared. According to Darling-Hammond (2000), a well-prepared
teacher will be more likely to succeed and have more confidence in teaching than the less21
prepared or not prepared teachers. All participants apparently were in favor of this statement
as they admitted that since they were appointed to teach science in English, they spent more
time in preparing their teaching. The use of multimedia and dictionary were commonly
chosen by the participants to overcome the problems mentioned before.
At the end,all Semarang participants reiterated that their view toward teaching using
English was very positive as they considered their teaching could be improved by improving
their English. In the future they expected more teaching materials and practices which could
help them to understand in English. They were also looking forward for more innovations in
teaching science, because all of them agreed to see innovations and changes as challenges
which lead to a better teaching. While Salatiga teachers, although not very fond of this
system of teaching science using English, evidently still made efforts to succeed in their
teaching. Hence answered the research question of this study as purposed earlier.
Finally, I believe that the perceptions of the teachers can affect the teachers’
motivations and the students’ achievements, which confirms the suggestions of the previous
scholars (e.g: Ferguson, 2003; Newman and Way, 2009; Vizconde, 2006). By knowing the
perception and what triggers it, we can determine what is lacking and make attempts to
rectify it. Nevertheless, finding out the perceptions of the teachers is just a small step in the
attempt to make the teaching learning activities in RSBI schools more effective, and since
this study is limited only on a small number of teachers and conducted only in two cities, I
encourage further research of this topic to be conducted, for example study about the use of
teacher training in increasing the teachers’ confidence as mentioned before.
22
References
Akuntono, I. (2012, March 6). Kemendikbud keukeuh RSBI mencerdaskan bangsa.Harian
Kompas.
Retrieved
June
2012
from
http://edukasi.kompas.com/read/2012/03/06/13425070/Kemdikbud.Keukeuh.RSBI.Men
cerdaskan.Bangsa
Astika, G. (2009). Model kelas bilingual di sekolah bertaraf internasional: Sebuah pemikiran
konseptual. Retrieved August 2012 from http://gurupembaharu.com/home/model-kelasbilingual-di-sekolah-bertaraf-internasional-sebuah-pemikiran-konseptual/
Baker, C. (2011). Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism 5th edition. USA:
McNaughton
&
Gunn
Ltd.
Retrieved
August
2012
from
http://www.google.co.id/books?hl=en&lr=&id=fEt5VKBIMSsC&oi=fnd&pg=PR6&dq=bilin
gual+education&ots=iEQnIlnTFR&sig=rrfFKd3FNIemDhZ93ddXuxUhts&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=bilingual%20education&f=false
Bax, S. (2010). Researching English bilingual education in Thailand, Indonesia, and South
Korea. The British Council.
Brown, A. V. (2009). Students’ and teachers’ perceptions of effective foreign language
teaching: A comparison of ideals. The Modern Language Journal, 2009; pp. 46-50.
Charlton BG.,&Andras P. (2006). Globalization in scienceeducation: An inevitable and
beneficialbrend. Medical Hypotheses66; 869-873
Chaudron, C. (1988). Second language classrooms: Research on teaching and learning.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Coleman, D. & Pimentel, S. (2011). Publisher’s criteria for the common core state standards
in English language art and literacy, Grades 3-12.
Cook, V. (2000). Second language learning and language teaching (2nd Ed.). Beijing:
Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Crystal, D. (2003). English as a global language. London: Cambridge University Press.
Retrieved
August
2012
from
http://www.sprachshop.com/sixcms/media.php/811/english_as_a_grobal_lang_sample_
ch.pdf
Cummins, J. (2000). Language,power, and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire.
Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). How teacher education ma