Articles

An Investigation into Teacher’s Practice of Jigsaw Technique in Teaching Narrative for Eight Graders of SMPN 1 Menganti AISATURIDA, ANGGI; MUNIR, AHMAD
RETAIN Vol 1, No 3 (2013): Volume 1 edisi Yudisium
Publisher : RETAIN

Show Abstract | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

This study investigated the practice of Jigsaw technique in teaching English. It sought the answers to the following questions:  How did the teacher implement Jigsaw technique in teaching writing narrative text for students of SMP N 1 Menganti? What obstacles did the teacher face in implementation of Jigsaw technique in teaching writing narrative text for students of SMPN 1 Menganti? Has the implementation followed the procedures of Jigsaw suggested by Aronson et al (1978)? This study was limited to one teacher who used Jigsaw technique in teaching writing narrative text in SMPN 1 Menganti following the Jigsaw procedures suggested by Aronson et al (1978). Descriptive qualitative was used in this study. Through semi-structured observation and interview with one English teacher in SMP N 1 Menganti, the data were collected and analyzed qualitatively. It was found that the teacher followed eight of the ten procedures of Jigsaw. She did not give time to students to learn over their segment to become familiar with it and did not give quiz on the material at the end. The teacher also faced some obstacles, such as the use of Bahasa Indonesia by the students and seating arrangement in two groups (home group and expert group). Her voice was so low that it could not be heard by the students clearly. It is concluded that the teacher has modified Jigsaw in teaching writing narrative text suggested by Aronson et al (1978). Key words : Teacher’s practice, Jigsaw, Writing, Narrative       Abstrak   Penelitian ini menginvestigasi penerapan dari teknik Jigsaw dalam pengajaran Bahasa Inggris. Ini mencari jawaban dari pertanyaan: Bagaimana guru menerapkan teknik Jigsaw dalam mengajar writing narrative untuk siswa SMPN 1 Menganti? Apa kendala yang guru hadapi dalam penerapan teknik Jigsaw dalam pengajaran writing narrative untuk siswa SMPN 1 Menganti? Apakah penerapan dari teknik Jigsaw mengikuti prosedur dari Jigsaw yang disarankan oleh Aronson et al (1978)? Penelitian ini dibatasi pada satu guru yang menggunakan teknik Jigsaw untuk mengajar writing narrative untuk siswa SMPN 1 Menganti mengikuti prosedur dari Jigsaw yang disarankan oleh Aronson et al (1978). Kualitatif deskriptif digunakan dalam penelitian ini. Melalui observasi dan interview semi-studtured dengan satu guru Bahasa Inggris di SMPN N 1 Menganti, data diambil dan dianalisa  secara kualitatif. Ditemukan bahwa guru mengikuti delapan dari sepuluh Jigsaw prosedur. Guru tersebut tidak memeri waktu untuk mempelajari tugas bagian mereka agar llebih familiar dan tidak member kuis dari materi pada akhir pembelajaran. Guru tersebbut juga menghadapi beberapa kendala, seperti menggunakan Bahasa Indonesia dengan siswa dan penataan tempat duduk dalam dua grup (home group dan expert group). Suaranya begitu rendah sehingga tidak dapat didengar siswa dengan jelas. Ini disimpulkan bahwa guru telah memodifikasi teknik Jigsaw dalam mengajar writing narrative yang disarankan oleh Aronson et al (1978).   Kata Kunci: Praktek guru, Teknik Jigsaw, Menulis, Narrative
Error Analysis in the Use of Personal Pronouns Made by Eleventh Graders in Writing WIJAYANTO, ARU; MUNIR, AHMAD
RETAIN Vol 1, No 3 (2013): Volume 1 edisi Yudisium
Publisher : RETAIN

Show Abstract | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

Penelitian ini ditujukan untuk mengetahui jenis-jenis serta penyebab-penyebab kesalahan penggunaan personal pronouns oleh siswa kelas sebelas dalam sebuah karangan. Tigapuluh empat siswa kelas sebelas dari SMAN 11 Surabaya merupakan peserta dari penelitian ini. Pendekatan kualitatif digunakan dalam penelitian ini karena peneliti menganalisa dan menjelaskan kesalahan dalam penggunaan personal pronouns berdasarkan teori dari Dulay (1982) dan Richard (1974). Hasil dari penelitian ini yaitu bahwa sebagian besar jenis kesalahan yang dilakukan yaitu misformation. Kesalahan jenis ini sebagian besar disebabkan oleh incomplete application of rule. Mereka tidak dapat mengubah bentuk personal pronouns dalam penulisan karangan. Kata kunci: kesalahan, penulisan personal pronouns, kelas sebelas.   Abstract The study was aimed at finding the types and possible causes of the personal pronoun errors made by Eleventh graders in their composition.   Thirty four Eleventh graders of SMAN 11 Surabaya students were the participants of the study. Qualitative approach was used in  this study, the researcher analyzed and described the error of the use of personal pronouns based on the theory of Dulay (1982) and Richard (1974).The results of the study was that the most error found in the students’ writing was misformation error. The error of misformation was mostly due to incomplete application of rule. They were unable to use the changing form of personal pronouns in writing. Key words: errors, writing Personal pronouns, Eleventh graders.  
The Use of Simplified Debate to Teach Speaking in English Extracuricullar Class (EEC) in SMAN 1 BABAT MUNIR, MISBAKHUL; MUNIR, AHMAD
RETAIN Vol 1, No 3 (2013): Volume 1 edisi Yudisium
Publisher : RETAIN

Show Abstract | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

This study investigated about the technique that was used by the English teacher to teach speaking in English Extracurricular Class (EEC). It was aim to answer the following questions: How does the teacher apply Simplified Debate to teach speaking in English Extracurricular Class (EEC) in SMAN1 BABAT? What do the students learn when simplified debate is used? This study was limited to both the teacher and the students of EEC. So, qualitative case study was used in this research. The data were taken from the results of fieldnotes, semi-structured interview, and questionnaire. The data that were gotten were analyzed qualitatively. It was found that the implementation of Simplified Debate technique was done based on the Lustigova’s (2011) procedure, although the teacher missed some steps and also was modified by the teacher. From the implementation of Simplified Debate the students learned to speak in public, to speak fast, to create their own words, this technique could encourage the students to be active in the class.Key words: Speaking, debate, technique, English extracurricular class (EEC) AbstrakPenelitian ini menginvestigasi tentang jenis technique mengajar yang digunakan oleh guru untuk mengajar speaking ekstrakurikuler bahasa inggris. penelitian Ini di gunakan untuk mencari jawaban dari pertanyaan yang ada: Bagaimana guru menerapkan Simplified debate untuk mengajar speaking di ekstrakurikuler bahasa inggris di SMAN 1 BABAT? Apa yang murid-murid bisa pealjari ketika teknik ini di gunakan? Penelitian ini dibatasi pada guru dan murid dari EEC. Jadi qualitative case study adalah metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini. Data diambil dari hasil fieldnotes, interview semi-structured, dan questionnaire. Data yang didapat dianalisa secara kualitatif. Ditemukan bahwa penerapan teknik Simplified Debate ini di lakukan sesuai dengan procedure dari Lustigova (2011). Meskipun dalam penerapan ini guru tidak melaksanakan beberapa tahap dan juga karena tahap tahapanya sudah di modifikasi oleh guru. Dari penerapn teknik ini murid-murid belajar untuk berbicara di depan umum, untuk berbicara cepat, untuk merangkai kata mereka sendiri, teknik ini bisa mendorong murid-murid untuk aktif di dalam kelas.Kata-kata Kunci: speaking, debat, teknik, ekstrakurikuler bahasa inggris.
THE IMPLEMENTATION OF TEACHING SPEAKING USING DIALOGUE  READING TO THE TENTH GRADERS OCTAVIANY, BUNGA; MUNIR, AHMAD
RETAIN Vol 1, No 3 (2013): Volume 1 edisi Yudisium
Publisher : RETAIN

Show Abstract | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

This  study  is  conducted  to  find  out  the  teacher’s  reasons  for  using  dialogue  reading  in  teaching  speaking,  to describe the implementation of dialogue reading to the tenth graders, and to describe how successful the teaching is to  make them speak  through  non participant observation and teacher interview.  This study  used descriptive qualitative  without  any  statistical  calculation.  The  result  of  this  study  showed  that  the  teacher  used  dialogue reading in class to make them easier to speak because she knew that they always interact with people in their daily life  with dialogue. She  wanted them to think that speak in English is  not that  hard as they thought.  She wanted to increase her students’ confidence since they came from different cities and villages in Indonesia. The implementation of dialogue reading was held in two meetings which consists of three steps: beginning activity, main activity and last activity. The implementation of teaching speaking using dialogue reading was successful enough according to the teacher to make them speak.  The students  were able  pronounce the  words  well, their intonation got better and they became more confident in speaking English. Keywords: Teacher’s reasons, implementation, Dialogue-Reading, successful teaching. Abstrak Penelitian  ini  bertujuan  untuk  mengetahui  alasan  guru  dalam  menggunakan  dialogue  reading  untuk mengajar  bebicara,  untuk  mendeskripsikan  penerapan  dialogue  reading  pada  siswa  kelas  sepuluh,  dan seberapa  sukses  dialogue  reading  mambuat  siswa  berbicara  menurut  guru.  Penelitian  ini  menggunakan penelitian deskriptif qualitative tanpa ada perhitungan statistik.  Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa guru menggunakan dialogue reading di kelas supaya membuat siswa berbicara dengan mudah karna guru mengetahui  bahwa  mereka  selalu  berinteraksi  dengan  orang  di  dalan  kehidupan  mereka  sehari-hari menggunakan dialogue. Guru ingin membuat mereka berpendapat bahwa berbicara dalam bahasa inggris tidak  susah  seperti  yang  mereka  fikirkan.  Guru  pun  ingin  menambahkan  rasa  kepercayaan  diri  mereka  karna  mereka  datang  dari  kota  dan  desa  yang  berbeda  di  Indonesia.  Penerapan  dialogue  reading dilaksanakan  dalam  dua  pertemuan  yang  mana  terdiri  dari  tiga  langkah:  awal,  inti  dan  akhir  kegiatan. Penerapan  dialogue  reading  sukses  diterapkan,  siswa  dapat  mengungkapkan  kata  dalam  bahasa  Inggris dengan benar, intonasi mereka menjadi lebih baik dan mereka menjadi lebih percaya diri dalam berbicara bahasa Inggis. Kata Kunci: Alasan guru, penerapan, Dialogue-Reading, pengajaran yang sukses.  
The Native English-Speaker Teacher’s (NEST’s) Technique In Teaching Speaking At MAN Sooko Mojokerto AINUR ROFIK, MOHAMMAD; MUNIR, AHMAD
RETAIN Vol 1, No 3 (2013): Volume 1 edisi Yudisium
Publisher : RETAIN

Show Abstract | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

    This study investigated the technique that was used by NEST English-Speaker Teacher (NEST) in teaching speaking. It sought the answer to the following questions: What is the technique that is used by the NEST in teaching English speaking? What are students’ opinions about NEST’s technique in teaching English speaking? What are the students’ attitudes towards the NEST’s technique? What does the Non-NEST learn from the NEST’s technique? This study was limited to one NEST and in one class which NEST would teach speaking skill to the students. So, qualitative case study was the research method. The data were taken from the results of fieldnotes, semi-structured interview, and questionnaire. The data were analyzed qualitatively. It was found that when NEST taught at the class XI-IPA1 at MAN Sooko Mojokerto, NEST used 1-minute speech as the technique. In this technique, the students were asked to make a story based on their own experience. Before giving speech about 1 minute in front of the class, the students were asked to make an otline based on what they were going to talk. Almost all of the students felt more motivated because the technique that was used by NEST was enjoyable and not boring. The students’ attitudes towards the technique were also positive. They listened and followed seriously. From the technique that was used, non-NEST could learn lot of things, such as the strategy in learning, the way on how to make the students more motivated to learn English, and the enthusiasm of NEST in preparing all of it. Key words: Native English-Speaker Teacher (NEST), technique, teaching speaking       Abstrak   Penelitian ini menginvestigasi jenis technique mengajar yang digunakan oleh NEST English-Speaker Teacher (NEST) dalam teaching speaking. Ini mencari jawaban dari pertanyaan: Apa technique yang digunakan oleh NEST dalam mengajar speaking? Apa pendapat siswa tentang technique yang digunakan oleh NEST? Bagaimana sikap siswa terhadap technique yang digunakan oleh NEST? Apa saja yang bisa dipelajari oleh non-NEST dari NEST? Penelitian ini dibatasi pada satu guru NEST dan pada satu kelas saja yang akan diajar speaking oleh NEST. Jadi qualitative case study adalah metode penelitiannya. Data diambil dari hasil fieldnotes, interview semi-structured, dan questionnaire. Data dianalisa secara kualitatif. Ditemukan bahwa saat mengajar di kelas XI IPA1 MAN Sooko Mojokerto, NEST menggunakan technique 1-minute speech. Dalam technique tersebut, siswa diminta untuk membuat cerita tentang pengalamannya sendiri. Sebelum memberikan speech sekitar 1 menit di depan kelas, siswa diminta untuk membuat outline tentang apa yang akan dibicarakan. Hampir seluruh siswa merasa lebih termotivasi karena technique yang digunakan oleh NEST menyenangkan dan tidak membosankan. Sikap siswa terhadap technique tersebut juga sangat positif. Mereka mendengarkan dan mengikuti dengan seksama. Dari technique yang telah digunakan, non NEST bisa mempelajari banyak hal, sperti strategi dalam pembelajaran, cara untuk membuat siswa lebih termotivasi dalam belajar bahasa Inggris, dan antusiasme NEST dalam mempersiapkan semuanya. Kata Kunci: Guru asli bahasa Inggris, teknik, mengajar berbicara  
The Implementation of Group Discussion in Teaching Speaking to The Tenth Grade Students of SMA Negeri 4 Surabaya WITYA MEUARTA, BAGUS; MUNIR, AHMAD
RETAIN Vol 1, No 3 (2013): Volume 1 edisi Yudisium
Publisher : RETAIN

Show Abstract | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

This study investigated how the implementation of Group Discussion in teaching Speaking in lights of the theories of group discussion. It sought the answers to the following questions:  How does the teacher implement Group Discussion in her English lesson? What are the teacher’s reasons in using group discussion to teach speaking?. This study was limited to one teacher who used Group Discussion in teaching speaking in SMA Negeri 4 Surabaya. This study used descriptive qualitative as a research method. The data were taken from the results of field notes, and semi-structured interview. The data that were gotten were analyzed qualitatively. It was found that when the teacher used Group Discussion to teach Speaking at the class X-3 at SMA Negeri 4 Surabaya, her implementation was not similar with the theories of Group Discussion. The teacher added an activity in the implementation, but the students was quite active in the class. According to the teacher statement, group discussion is a good method, because it gives students some cognitive points. The teacher  used narrative text as a topic of the discussion, the topic was not suitable to teach speaking. In conclusion, the implementation of group discussion in tenth grade students of Senior High School of SMAN 4 Surabaya was not similar with the theories of group discussion, but it still effective to develop students speaking ability.   Key words : Speaking, Teaching Speaking, Group Discussion       Abstrak Penelitian ini menginvestigasi bagaimana penerapan Group Discussion dalam mengajar speaking berkaitan dengan teori dari Group Discussion. Penelitian ini digunakan untuk menjawab pertanyaan berikut ini :  Bagaimana gutu menerapkan Griup Discussion pada kegiatan mengajar bahasa inggris? Apa saja alasan guru menggunakan Gropu Discussion untuk mengajar speaking?. Penelitian ini dibatasi pada seorang guru yang menggunakan Group Discussion untuk mengajar speaking di SMA Negeri 4 Surabaya. Penelitian ini menggunakan deskriptif kualitatif sebagai metode penelitian. Data penelitian diambil dari hasil fieldnotes dan semi structured interview. Data yang sudah diperoleh akan dianalisis secara kualitatif. Ditemukan bahwa  ketika guru menerapkan Group Discussion untuk mengajar speaking di kelas X3 SMA Negeri 4 Surabaya tidak sesuai dengan teori penerapan group discussion. Guru menambahkan kegiatan tambahan dalam penerapan Group Discussion, tetapi para murid cukup aktif ketika belajar di kelas. Berdasarkan keterangan dari Guru, Group Discussion itu metode yang bagus, karena memberi poin kognitif kepada siswa. Dalam penerapannya guru menggunakan narrative text sebagai topic untuk Group Discussion, topik tersebut tidak cocok untuk digunakan mengajar speaking. Disimpulkan bahwa penerapan Group Discussion pada kelas sepuluh di SMA Negeri 4 Surabaya tidak sesuai dengan teori dari Group Discussion, tetapi Group Discussion masih cukup efektiv untuk mengembangkn kemampuan speaking siswa.
Applicability of Self Questioning Strategy in Comprehending Narrative Text TRY WICAKSONO, RICZA; MUNIR, AHMAD
RETAIN Vol 2, No 1 (2014): Volume 2 no 1 2014
Publisher : RETAIN

Show Abstract | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

Applicability of Self Questioning Strategy in Comprehending Narrative Text Ricza Try Wicaksono English Education Faculty of Languages and Arts State University of Surabaya ricza.wicaksono@gmail.com Ahmad Munir S.Pd., M.Ed., Ph.D. English Department Faculty of Languages and Arts State University of Surabaya munstkip@yahoo.com  Abstrak Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengujicobakan self questioning strategy dalam memahami teks naratif, khususnya untuk pelajar bahasa Inggris di Indonesia. Penelitian ini menjawab beberapa pertanyaan: (1) Dapatkah self questioning strategy digunakan untuk pelajar bahasa Inggris di Indonesia dalam memahami teks naratif? (2) Dengan mengubah pertanyaan menjadi symbol, apakah modifikasi dari self questioning strategy menambah frekuensi siswa dalam membuat pertanyaan? Penelitian ini telah membuktikan bahwa self questioning strategy dapat diterapkan pada pelajar bahasa Inggris di Indonesia. Peenelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa keuntungan – keuntungan dari self questioning strategy muncul dalam penerapannya. Simbol sebagai pengganti penulisan pertanyaan terbukti secara statistik mampu menambah frekuensi pertanyaan siswa. Cara ini mampu menghemat waktu siswa dalam penggunaan self questioning strategy. Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test menunjukkan bahwa frekuensi pertanyaan meningkat secara signifikan setelah penerapan modifikasi tersebut (p < .05). Besarnya efek dari tes tersebut adalah .71 (z = -3.201), dimana angka tersebut menunjukkan efek yang besar. Kesimpulan dalam penelitian ini adalah self questioning strategy dapat digunakan oleh pelajar bahasa Inggris di Indonesia. Modifikasi self questioning strategy dengan mengganti pertanyaan menjadi symbol terbukti efektif dalam menambah frekuensi pertanyaan siswa selama penerapan strategi tersebut berlangsung. Kata Kunci: pemahaman membaca,  teks naratif, metakognitif, strategi metakognitif, self questioning strategy   Abstract This study is designed to describe the applicability of self-questioning strategy in comprehending narrative text, especially for EFL students in Indonesia. This study composes some questions: (1) Can Self Questioning Strategy be applied on Indonesian students to comprehend narrative texts? And (2) Does the modification of the self questioning strategy by substitute the questions into symbols help the students generate more questions? This study has proved that the self questioning strategy is able to be applied toward the EFL students, especially in Indonesia. The study shows the benefits of the self questioning strategy which was appeared during the treatment. Symbols, as the substitution of questions writing, were proven statistically can help the students increase their question generation. Symbols helps the students save their time while using self questioning strategy by transforming the questions into symbols, so the students do not need to write down all of their questions toward the story of narrative text. This modification statistically increased the frequency of question generation. Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test shows that the data was statistically significant (p <.05). The effect size of the test is 0.71 (z = -3.201), which indicates a large effect size. The study concludes that self questioning strategy is able to be applied to Indonesian EFL students. The appropriate modification that can be used in applying self questioning strategy is question symbolizing which helps the students generate more questions. Keywords: reading comprehension, narrative text, metacognitive, metacognitive strategy, self questioning strategy         INTRODUCTION There are kinds of text in English. They are descriptive, narrative, and so on. One of them is narrative. Narrative is aimed to tell stories which are about a person or a group of people overcoming problems, show how people react and experiences, explore social and cultural value, and entertain an audience (Feez & Joyce, 2000). Learn narrative is important. Garvie (1990) states the story may help to relate the item of learning, which is meaningful, interesting, and motivating. He also explains that the function of the story is as an external motivation to encourage willingness to study and the use of the story as the learning facilitator. Within those statements, students will be encouraged by narrative story because it is motivating and interesting for them. Tierney (2005) states that learning to read is not only learning to recognize words; it is also learning to make sense of texts. Less proficient learners do not recognize the purpose of reading and tend to focus on word-byword reading rather than reading for meaning (DiVesta, Hayward, & Orlando, 1979). When they fail to comprehend the test, poor readers are not as flexible as good readers in utilizing different strategies to solve the problem (Garner, 1980). According to O’Malley & Chamot’s classification of learning strategies (1990), reading strategies were divided into three categories in cognitive psychology concept as follows: (1) Cognitive strategies, (2) Metacognitive strategies, and  (3) Social and affective strategies. Metacognition has an important role in reading comprehension. Good readers automatically employ metacognitive strategies to focus their attention, to derive meaning, and to make adjustments when something goes wrong (Pressley, Borkowski, and Schneider, 1987). Harris et al. (1988) also states that readers who have higher metacognitive skills are able to check for confusion or inconsistency, undertake a corrective strategy, such as rereading, relating different parts of the passage to one another, look for topic sentences or summary paragraphs, and relating the current information to their past knowledge. Teacher should teach metacognitive strategies to help students plan, control, and evaluate their learning (Thamraksa, 2005). Thamraksa also states that students with this skill will be aware of their own thinking as they perform a task and can use this awareness to control what they are doing. One of effective metacognitive strategies that teacher can use is self-questioning strategy. Self-questioning strategies is conducted when students use questions to check their own knowledge as they are learning (Darling-Hammond, Austin, Cheung, and Martin, 2003). Some researchers studied self questioning strategies. Shang and Chang-Chien (2010) conducted the research and found that self questioning is useful to enhance students’ reading comprehension because it helps students pay attention to the content of the text. It also activates their prior knowledge. King (1994) stated that when using self questioning strategy, questions designed to access learners’ prior knowledge are more effective in enhancing reading comprehension because students’ prior knowledge is to be activated. Dunlap (2007) also conducted the same research and found that the strategy was successful with the students, especially those who are struggling with second language acquisition. Those two previous studies have different subjects of study. Shang and Chang-Chien held their study with students who are freshmen majoring in English at I-Shou University, ranging from 18 to 20 years of age. However, Dunlap had different kind of participant. He included nineteen students varying in age from seven to nine years of age in a regular second grade. With these varying participants, their language use and nations, this strategy may also vary in result. Indonesian EFL students’ characteristics tend to passive, compliant, and unreflective learners (Exley; 2005). According to Pikkert and Foster (1996), they report that in Central Java Indonesian National teachers are required to present a critical evaluation of ideas for students to memorise. Their study also compares the critical thinking skills of third year Indonesian university students in Central Java with those of American secondary school and university students. They found that the Indonesian students’ scores were low. Another example is Beh (1997). Beh’s study (1997) reported that ELT in Indonesia has been unsuccessful for a number of reasons despite the introduction of a new English curriculum and the provision of in-service training for the Indonesian National teachers of English. She concludes that eighty-five per cent of the students’ spoken and written English proficiency is ‘less than good’. To increase the activeness of the students while reading, this study tried to apply the self questioning strategy. Another Shang and Chang-Chien (2010) study finding, there is a positive relationship between generating higher order questions and reading comprehension via self-questioning strategy use. It means that the more questions which are generated, the learners’ comprehension about the text is better. From those researches, this study wanted to find out whether the self questioning strategy can be applied to the EFL students of Indonesian. With the Indonesian EFL students’ characters, which are passive and unreflective, can the students apply this strategy to help them comprehending a text, especially in narrative text? This study also tested the modification of the Self-Questioning Strategy by substituting the questions into symbols whether it helps the students generate more questions or not. METHOD This study used experimental model. This study held two experiments. The experiments of this study were conducted qualitatively and quantitatively. The reason on doing experimental qualitative research was because this study tested the applicability Self Questioning Strategy on comprehending narrative texts toward EFL students in Indonesia. The experimental quantitative one was used to find out whether the modification; by transforming questions into symbols, is effective or not in increasing the students’ question frequency. This study needed a group of students and then gave the treatment to them. This study held the treatment twice. The first meeting needed to reveal the applicability of the strategy toward the students. While, the second meeting needed to apply the modification that helps the students generated more questions by transform the questions and answer into symbols. Subjects of the study were IX grader students of Al Falah Junior High School, which was consist of 20 female students (homogenous class). This class; IX-6, was chosen because the class was the superior class. The researcher gave treatment on the first meeting using conventional Self Questioning Strategy which the students need to write down all the questions that they ask include their prediction for each question. The next meeting was conducted to apply solution of a problem which came out as the result of the first meeting’s evaluation. This is what the research call as modification to the original procedure of self questioning strategy. Data were collected when the researcher was getting involved in the process of teaching and learning. There were two data collection instrument; observation and documentation. The observation result would be in the form of field notes. This study also used documentation in the form of the students’ exercise. The data in the form of field notes, and students’ work was analyzed qualitatively. In addition to qualitative analysis a quantitative analysis was conducted to measure the number of the students’ questions before and after the modification on the strategy. The benefits which were aroused became the indicator which exposed the applicability of self questioning strategy. The difference in the number of question between before and after the modification of the strategy was also calculated. APPLICABILITY OF SELF QUESTIONING STRATEGY On the first meeting, the researcher explained about Self Questioning Strategy, both its definition and implementation on narrative text. The students looked understand to the explanations. They were interested to the strategy after they became conscious to the advantages of using self questioning strategy. After giving the introduction of self questioning strategy, the researcher gave the students exercise to apply the strategy that they had learned. The exercise was simple; they had to read a narrative text and write down everything they need to know about the text. The text was titled “The Sweeper”. The researcher gave the students 10 minutes to do the exercise. While the students did their exercise, the researcher observed the students’ attitude. The researcher found that the students had no problem during the exercise. The students’ attitude showed there was no rejecting action toward the strategy. The students had done the exercise perfectly as the explanation which had been given by the researcher before. There were 85 questions generated from all students. The most frequent question which was made by the students was “What” question and “Which” question were the rarest asked questions. Almost all the student asked this question, “Who is the sweeper?”. They predicted the same thing; a wolf, some say a fox. It shows that the students used their prior knowledge on creating the prediction. The students seemed familiar with the word “sweeper” on a certain character. The students, probably, connected this “sweeper” with “Sweeper” character on kids’ show titled “Dora the Explorer”. 3 of 6 predictions from Student number 13 did not have any answer at all as the result of her reading. It indicated that student number 13 paid more attention to the text. Overall, the first meeting ran well. The strategy was applied as well as expected. The benefits of self questioning strategy were shown up. It seemed that the strategy could be applied at the moment. For the second meeting, the strategy was modified. The students were sked to do the exercise. The text of the exercise was titled “Momotaro”. The researcher explained the modification and then gave the students exercise. As like as the previous meeting, the students did not showed any rejection or obstacles to do the exercise. The researcher also counted the questions which were made by the students. The sum of questions which were generated on the second meeting was 121 questions. As like the first meeting exercise, the most frequent question which was generated was “What” and the rarest question was the same, “Which” question. Student number 1 was asking “Which one would be defeated in the fight between Momotaro and the Pirates?”. She predicted that the pirates would be defeated and she was correct. It seemed that she probably knows that the main character commonly always wins the fight. It means that student number 1 predict the answer according to her experiences. Another example is student number 14. Most of her prediction was true (4 of 6 questions). She read the text thoroughly to find out whether her predictions were true or not. In short, she was paying more attention to the text. Even the strategy was modified; the result of the application of this strategy was also the same as the first meeting. The benefits of self questioning strategy were also shown up. It indicated that the strategy could be applied on the class, considering the benefits of the self questioning strategy which were appeared on the students’ exercise.   MODIFICATION OF SELF QUESTIONING STRATEGY During the implementation of self questioning strategy, the students looked struggling in writing the questions. Their number of questions they had asked was small because they short of time. It indicated that using conventional self questioning strategy is time consuming. The students’ time wasted while they write the questions. To make the questions writing shorter, the researcher planned to convert the questions into symbols. With symbols, the students would ease to note their questions without writing any questions. The researcher believes that symbols would reduce the time consumption while the students ask themselves on comprehending narrative text. This treatment purposed to reveal the effectiveness of symbols use in questioning strategy, as the modification of the strategy Ranks     N Mean Rank Sum of Ranks Second Meeting Questions Frequency - First Meeting Questions Frequency Negative Ranks 2a 4.75 9.50 Positive Ranks 15b 9.57 143.50 Ties 3c     Total 20     a. Second Meeting Questions Frequency < First Meeting Questions Frequency b. Second Meeting Questions Frequency > First Meeting Questions Frequency c. Second Meeting Questions Frequency = First Meeting Questions Frequency By inputting the data, the application counted it according to the formula of Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test to see whether the difference between the before and after is significant or not. The result of the data compare is on the table below. From the table above, the result shows that there were 2 students who failed increase their question frequency on the second meeting exercise. But, mostly, the students’ question were increased (Positive Ranks = 15). Still, there were students who got ties on their question frequency both on before and after the treatment (Ties = 3). Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test shows that the data was statistically significant (p <.05). The effect size of the test is 0.71 (z = -3.201), which indicating a large effect size. In conclusion, the implementation of the modification showed magnificent result. The questions which were generated statistically increased. Using Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test, the difference of comparing before and after the modification was statistically significant. The modification was proved effectively helped the students generated more questions on self questioning strategy, which would increase the students comprehension.   DISCUSSION This study tries to analyze the findings during the research which was conducted in Al Falah Junior High School, especially the IX-6 grader. The first analysis is about the applicability of self questioning strategy toward Indonesian EFL students. Result of this study found that this strategy can be applied to Indonesian EFL students. It can be seen from the benefits which occurred during the treatment. Self questioning strategy let the students pay more attention to the text to improve reading comprehension (Chang, 1994). Students become active readers and independent thinkers by generating questions to understand the text. As the study found on student number 13 first exercise, she had her prediction far from the answer. However, her prediction was logic and make sense. She defined her answer by paying more attention to the story, so that she knew that her answer was wrong or maybe did not appear on the story. Even the strategy was modified; the students still focused their attention to the text. For instance, Student number 14’s exercise. She generated questions and predicted them. Most of her prediction was true (4 of 6 questions). She read the text thoroughly to find out whether her predictions were true or not. She was paying more attention to the text. In short, self questioned strategy which was applied toward Indonesian EFL students let the students pay more attention to the text. Another finding on this study supports a claim which proposed by Singer and Donlan (1982) who said that students can activate their prior knowledge through self questioning strategy which can enhance reading comprehension. Student number 5’s first exercise shows that self questioning strategy activates the student’s prior knowledge. On the second exercise, when the strategy was modified, student number 1 predicted that the pirates would be defeated and she was correct. It seemed that she probably knows that the main character commonly always wins the fight. It means that student number 1 predict the answer according to her experiences. She used her prior knowledge on writing her prediction. This finding is proving that self questioning strategy can activate the students’ prior knowledge. Those findings are the benefits of applying self questioning strategy. These findings indicate that self questioning strategy obviously can be applied toward Indonesian EFL students, since the benefits of self questioning strategy have appeared during the research. However, the strategy was time consuming even it is possible to be applied. It was the reason on doing modification of this strategy. Second analysis is about the modification of the strategy. The modification of the strategy is needed because this strategy reveals its obstacle on the first meeting of the research. The obstacle that appeared during the first meeting was that the strategy was that the strategy was time consuming. Using symbols to substitute the questions was an effective modification. Using Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test, the difference of comparing before and after the modification was statistically significant. The modification was proved effectively helped the students generated more questions on self questioning strategy, which would increase the students comprehension. It is in line with Shang and Chang-Chien (2010) study’s finding which found that there is a positive relationship between generating higher order questions and reading comprehension via self-questioning strategy use. It means that the more questions which are generated, the learners’ comprehension about the text is better. Another impact of this symbol use is that the students can be an active reader without paying attention in writing question. They can note their question even without writing any word but symbol. And the most important effect is the students can comprehend the text by asking more questions in time limitation. The symbols shorten their questions writing. All in all, self questioning strategy is another effective strategy that can be used toward the Indonesian students. It will be more effective if the strategy apply its modification in question writing, so the students will not get any hinder while comprehending a text, especially on a narrative story. CONCLUSION The students did the strategy as like as the researcher explanation without showing any rejection. The students also did not get problem while using the strategy. The benefits of self questioning appeared during the research. It indicates that self questioning strategy can be applied toward Indonesian EFL students However, this strategy was time consuming. Using symbols to substitute the quesitons helps the students increase their questions frequency. It helps the students save their time while using self questioning strategy by transforming the questions into symbols, so the students do not need to write down all of their questions toward the story of narrative text. SUGGESTIONS Since the self questioning strategy helps the students to comprehend narrative text, it is better for the students to apply the strategy to help them increase their score in reading comprehension. It is also useful for students to understand a story when they read a novel or book, so they will understand about the story for free time. Teachers better to teach their students about this strategy to help their students comprehend some text to help the students increase their score. Future researcher may conduct different modification, so the strategy will be more effective to be applied toward the Indonesian EFL students. They also may conduct the same research toward the students who has low proficiency level.   REFERENCES Anderson, N. J. (2002). The Role Of Metacognition in Second/Foreign Language Teaching and Learning. ERIC Digest. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics Beh, Y. (1997). Current Research in Southeast Asia. RELC Journal, 28(1), 175-179. Brown, H. Douglas. (2001). Teaching by Principle. New York: Pearson Education. Cohen, D.A. (1996). Second Language Learning and Use Strategies: Clarifying The Issues. Minneapolis. Darling-Hammond, L., Austin K., Cheung M., and Martin, D. (2003) Thinking about Thinking: Metacognition. Stanford University Press Davey, B., and McBride, S. (1986a). Effects of question-generation training on reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(4), 256-262. DiVesta, F. J., Hayward, K. G., & Orlando, V. P.(1979). Developmental trends in monitoring for comprehension. Child Development, 50, p. 97-105. Dunlap, J. A. (2007). The Effects of Self Questioning on Comprehension of Expository Text and Development of Content Writing with Second Grade Students. Wichita Exley, Beryl (2005) Learner Characteristics of ‘Asian’ EFL Students: Exceptions to the ‘Norm’. In Young, Janelle, Eds. Proceedings Pleasure Passion Provocation. Joint National Conference AATE & ALEA 2005, pages 1-16, Gold Coast, Australia. Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving In Resnick, L. B., The Nature of Intelligence, 12, 231-235. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Garner, R.(1980). Monitoring of understanding: An investigation of good and poor readers awareness of induced miscomprehension of text. Journal of Reading Behavior, 12, 55-64. Garvie, Edie. (1990). Story as Vehicle: Teaching English to Young Children. Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters, Ltd. Grabe, W. (1991). Current developments in second language reading research. TESOL Quarterly, 25(3), 375-406. Harris, K., Graham, S., and Freeman, S. (1988). Effects of strategy training on metamemory among learning disabled students. Exceptional Children, 54, p. 332-338. Joyce, Helen de Silva and Feez, Susan. (2000). Creative writing skills. Albert Park, Victoria: Phoenix Education. King, A. (1994). Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom: Effects of teaching children how to question and how to explain. American Educational Research Journal, 31(2), 338-368. O’Malley, J. M., Chamot, A. U., Stewner-Manzanares, G., Russo, R., & Kupper, L. (1985). Learning strategy applications with students of English as a second language. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 285-296 Pressley, M., Borkowski, J.G., and Schneider, W. (1989). Good information processing: What is it and what education can do to promote it? International Journal of Educational Research, 13. 857-867. Pikkert, J. J. J. & Foster, L. (1996). Critical Thinking Skills Among Third Year Indonesian English Students. RELC Journal, 27(2), 56-64. Rose, Dale S., Parks, Michaela, Androes, Karel, Mc Mahon, & Susan, D. (2000). Improving Elementary Studnts Reading Comprehension With Drama Techniques. Journal of Educational Research Shang, Hui-Fang and Chang-Chien, I-Ju. (2010). The Effect of Self-Questioning Strategy on EFL Learners’ Reading Comprehension Development. The International Journal of Learning. I-Shou, Taiwan. Singer, H., and Donlan, D. (1982). Active comprehension: Problem-solving schema with question generation for comprehension of complex short stories. Reading Research Quarterly, 17, 166-186. Thamraksa, Chutima. (2005). Metacognition: A Key to Success for EFL Learners. Bangkok. Bangkok University. Tierney, J. E. (Ed.). (2005). Reading strategies and practices (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.  
FOCUS ON FORM IN 2013 JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL CURRICULUM FIRDAYANI ARIZA, WINDYA; MUNIR, AHMAD
RETAIN Vol 2, No 2 (2014): Volume 2 No 2 2014
Publisher : RETAIN

Show Abstract | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

FOCUS ON FORM IN 2013 JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL CURRICULUM Windya Firdayani Ariza English Education, Faculty of Languages and Arts, State University of Surabaya Win_dya_chub2y@yahoo.com Ahmad Munir English Education, Faculty of Languages and Art, State University of Surabaya Munstkip@yahoo.com Abstrak Kurikulum 2013 adalah kurikulum yang saat ini dilaksanakan di Indonesia. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menggambarkan fokus guru dalam mengajar tata bahasa apakah itu berfokus pada bentuk atau makna dan menggambarkan perasaan siswa dalam belajar tata bahasa apakah mereka merasa belajar atau tidak. Penelitian ini adalah kualitatif. Para peserta penelitian ini adalah seorang guru bahasa Inggris dan siswa kelas pertama SMPN 1 Gresik. Dua instrumen yang digunakan untuk mengumpulkan data yaitu: observasi dalam bentuk rekaman video guru dan kegiatan siswa di kelas dan merekam video dari diskusi kelompok. Ini digunakan untuk merekam cara guru dalam menggabungkan tata bahasa pada kurikulum 2013 dan kegiatan siswa. Rekaman video dari diskusi kelompok digunakan untuk merekam perasaan siswa. Ditemukan bahwa guru fokus pada bentuk. Dia menekankan pada aturan tata bahasa. Ditemukan pula  bahwa siswa merasa  belajar tata bahasa oleh guru. Kesimpulannya, guru menerapkan focus pada bentuk di kurikulum 2013. Itu terjadi di kelas dimana peneliti mengamat, bahwa guru menjelaskan materi yang lebih jelas kepada siswa berdasarkan konstruk bahasa dan aturan tata bahasa. Kesimpulan lain adalah bahwa guru tidak mengikuti aturan kurikulum 2013.  Pada 2013 kurikulum adalah fokus pada makna. Kata Kunci: Fokus pada bentuk, tata bahasa, kurikulum 2013 Abstract The 2013 curriculum is the current curriculum that was implemented in Indonesia. This study focused its goal to describe the teacher’s focus in teaching grammar whether it focuses on form or on meaning and describe the students’ feeling in learning grammar whether they experienced or not. This study was qualitative. The participants of this study were an English teacher and the first graders of SMPN 1 Gresik. Two instruments were used to collect data namely: Observation in the form of video recording of teacher and students’ activities in classroom and video recording of focused group discussion. It used to record the teacher’s way in incorporating grammar in 2013 curriculum and the students’ activities. Video recording of focused group discussion used to record the feeling of students. It was found that teacher focused on form. She concerned on grammatical rule. It was also found that the student experienced to learn grammar by the teacher. In conclusion, the teacher interpreted grammar in 2013 curriculum by focusing on form. It happened in the classroom which the researcher observed, that the teacher explained the materials more clearly to the students based on the construct of language and grammatical rule. Another conclusion is that the teacher did not follow the rule of 2013 curriculum. In 2013 curriculum is focus on meaning.. Keywords: Focus on Form, grammar, 2013 curriculum         INTRODUCTION  2013 Curriculum is the current curriculum that is released on July 13th 2013 by the government in Indonesia. This curriculum is a continuation of KBK (Kurikulum Berbasis Kompetensi) that was released at 2004 that cover attitude, knowledge and skill competence integrated. 2013 curriculum has four Kompetensi Inti. Kompetensi Inti is applicable to all the subjects. It is as the bond of all students’ competencies that are produced in each subject. The contents are the same between English and other subjects, but the differences are on the Kompetensi Dasar for each Kompetensi Inti. For English, especially grammar the point in Kompetensi Dasar is in the third. It is Memahami fungsi social, struktur teks dan unsur kebahasaan (Kemendikbud, 2013a). It means that the students have to achieve those three things to make them competence in English. According to curriculum 2006, there are three important aspects considered when people think of language. They are context, text and language. The purpose of social function is the reason why we speak or write in the context. Organization structure of the text or generic structure is the text organization or text arrangement. Language features or lexical that is such things as the grammar vocabulary and connectors that we use. Social function, organization structure and language feature above are associated with Genre Based Approach. Genre Based Approach is recommended approach that is based on curriculum. Genre Based Approach is used to conduct the classroom activity. According to Yan (2005), this approach has become popular since the 1980s along with the notion that students writers could benefit from studying different types of written text. In Genre Based Approach, teaching and learning focuses on the understanding and production of selected genres of texts  (Lin, 2006). Learning around texts genres has been increasingly influential in main stream ELT in a number of situations, including primary, secondary, tertiary, professional and community teaching context involving native speaker of English as well as ESL and EFL learners. It shows that Genre Based Approach is powerful response to the deficit of process models (Gao, 2007). Genre Based Approach starts with the whole text as the unit in focus, rather than the sentence. The focus on the whole implies that there is higher level of order and patterning in language than just in sentence-grammar at the level of discourse organization and meta-patterning of grammatical features.                 In Indonesia, according to curriculum 2006 Genre Based Approach is conducted in two cycles; they are spoken and written cycle. It is because at the end of spoken cycles, students are expected to be able to produce monologue in the same of genre that they are learning. Similarly, at the end of written cycle every students must be able to produce written text of genre that they are learning (Astaman, 2010). For instance, if the genre is narrative, at the end of written cycle every student must be able to write a narrative text or to tell a narrative story. It is also strengthened by Callaghan(1988), that genre is should be classified to be two aspects. First, genre is classified as spoken genre and the second genre is classified as written genre. It means that genre as spoken has the reason as language is said to be functional, because its organization quite fundamentally reveals the purpose for which any natural language came. Meanwhile genre as written has reason as language is to be understood as text, any meaningful passage of language that serves some social purpose. Grammar commonly taught based on focus on form and focus on meaning. Focus on form means the students have to aware on grammatical form of the language. According to Long (1997) Focus on form is a method for composing sentence based on the right pattern. It promotes the acquisition of specific language form such as grammar and the meaning of words in the meaning-based second language activity. Doughty & Williams (1999) state that state that a focus on the form (FonF) of the language consists of drawing the learners attention to the linguistic features of the language. Thus, a focus on form approach would allow for the second language (L2) learners to concentrate on the grammatical rules and construct of the language. For example, a student is given a text in the L2. He or she would focus on form if they were asked to analyze the text in terms of how it represents the rules of the language. Other reason, she wants to develop the language knowledge and language acquisition. This condition proves the theory from Long & Robinson (1999) that focus on form as an occasional shift of attention to linguistic code features by the teacher and/or one or more students triggered by perceived problems with comprehension or production. He also states that Focus on form is a basis of Interaction Hypothesis and it emphases the importance of interaction between learners and other speakers in order to develop their language knowledge. It has to depend on the structure. Focus on meaning would be concerned with getting L2 learner to concentrate solely on understanding the message being conveyed. Focus on meaning means emphasize on the meaning of a language. It is limited to focus on meaning with no attention paid to form at all. It means that it excludes attention to the formal elements of the language (Doughty & Williams, 1999). Thus, focus on meaning would be concerned with getting the L2 learners to concentrate solely on understanding the message being conveyed. It does not allow for any attention whatsoever to the linguistic code of the L2. According to Kemendikbud (2013b), the scientific approach include the finding of meaning, organization and structure of an idea or ideas, so that the student learners gradually learn how to organize and conduct research. Scientific approach emphasizes students ability in discovering knowledge based on experiential learning, laws, principles and generalizations, so it provides an opportunity for the development of higher order thinking skills. Thus students more empowered learners as a subject of study that should play an active role in hunting down the information from the various sources of learning, and teacher educators more as an organizer and facilitator of learning. As a result, grammar should be taught by focusing on meaning. In the 2013 curriculum, the teaching learning process uses scientific approach which has activities such as observing, questioning, experimenting, associating and communicating. It has connection with Genre Based Approach. The materials in 2013 curriculum use Genre Based Approach as a learning focus through understanding of the social function, the text structure elements - linguistic elements based on the level of difficulty, from the simple to the complex. Text structure refers to the ways that authors organize information in text. It can be descriptive text, narrative text and etc. linguistic elements can be defined as grammatical rule or structure. Grammar here is in the stage of modeling of text. It is included in Based Approach in activity to do presentation and practice activities relating to the grammatical feature of the text. It can be concluded that scientific approach and genre based approach interrelated each other to implement teaching learning process in 2013 curriculum. In 2013 curriculum, people are curious about how the teacher implement grammar teaching in classroom. It is the current curriculum, so people have not understood yet how the rule and the system of the curriculum, whether those are the same or not. So, teacher faces burden to determine when and how grammar will be taught. As there as has been no study on this problem, this study attempts to fill in this gap. It was aimed to investigate and to discover how teacher incorporates grammar in following 2013 Curriculum. Based on the background of the study above, the questions of the problem are formulated as follows: Is this incorporation considered focus on form or focus on meaning? Through this kind of incorporation, do the students feel that they have learned English grammar?     METHODS In this research, qualitative design was used for some reasons. First, researcher wanted to describe the research with words than numbers.  The researcher wanted to know how the teacher interpreted grammar in 2013 curriculum whether it was focus on form or focus on meaning. The researcher also wanted to investigate the feeling of the students, they experienced to learn grammar or not. The subjects of the research were an English teacher and the first graders of SMPN 1 Gresik. There are six English teachers there. The researcher observed one of them and the teacher that the researcher observed was a female teacher. She was chosen as the reason she teaches in the first grade that implement 2013 curriculum. There, there are eight classes of the first grade. The class that the researcher was observed were G and H class. Each class consist of thirty three students. These subjects were chosen under the consideration that the researcher followed the schedule of the teacher and the materials that were she taught. There was no certain choice of class. The most important was the first graders. In SMPN 1 Gresik, 2013 curriculum is now implemented and the teacher has been trained in facing 2013 curriculum. Therefore, the teacher and the first graders were chosen. The material that was observed was descriptive text about things around. The students had to describe things in the picture. They are instructed to make sentences with the correct grammatical construction. For example, they had to know about introductory ‘there’, present tense and present continuous tense. The teacher did not explain generic structure of descriptive text, but she concerned on making sentences based on grammatical rule. The first data was the teacher and student’s action in the classroom. It was done by using video recording that recorded what the teacher and the students did in the classroom. It recorded teacher and student’s activities, what materials that the teacher taught and how the teacher’s way in teaching grammar to the students whether it is focused on meaning or focused on form. It was held on November, 18, 25 and 27 2013 in SMPN 1 Gresik. The video was taken during an hour. After taking video recording, the data was analysed by transcribing it into the words. The second data were the student’s experience in the classroom whether they feel learned grammar or not. The data was collected by doing focused group discussion. It was taken use video recording. The duration was not more than two minutes. Focused group discussion here means that the researcher divided the students into group. There were thirty students in the classroom. The researcher divided them into four groups and each group consist of eight students. The member of group was taken randomly, which is male and female students were mixed. After dividing groups, the researcher began to ask some questions. The questions were semi structured. There were three questions as a foundation, and there were some complement questions to develop the information from the students. The questions are: (1) Kalian tau apa itu grammar? (2) Selama ini sudah belajar grammar? (3) Grammar apa saja? (4) Menurut kalian grammar itu susah atau gampang? (5) Diterangkan langsung atau diterangkan jika kalian ada kesalahan?           After collecting the data, the analysis of the data was carried out. The first data was from teacher and students’ action. The teacher’s way of teaching was identified in this study. It was described in the form of transcribes of observation recording. The thing that will be underline was when she incorporates grammar in the class based on 2013 curriculum. To make the process of identification was easier, the area of shows the teacher incorporates grammar was underlined. First, describing. Here, was describe about what teacher did in the classroom, classified what she did into focus on form and or focus on meaning and described the learners did in the classroom when teacher were explaining the material. Second, analyzing and interpreting. The teacher did in the classroom will be analyzed and interpreted here. Besides, it was also include what the learners experienced in the classroom when the lesson was running. Last, is drawing conclusion. It focuses on teacher’s focus of teaching. Whether focus on for and or focus meaning. Whether or not the learners feel learnt. The second data was student’s feeling of experienced in learning grammar or not. The students’ feeling of learned grammar data which were obtained from focused group discussion were analyzed by some procedures. First, transcribing the video recording. It was from the verbation of the students. In other words, it was from students’ utterances when answer the researcher’s question. Second, is coding the data. Here, the researcher coded the data from the transcription. The thing that was underlined was the student’s answer about their feeling in learning grammar whether they feel learned or not. Last, is interpreting the data. The students’ utterances that shown the student’s feeling were interpreted and those are combined with the result of observation.     RESULTS AND DISCUSSION It was found that the teacher interpret teaching grammar in the focus on form. These are the examples of sentences that shows focus on form: “Jadi kalau misalnya eraser, window, book, and other we can call the noun”.   “So, in this chapter and meeting we will learn about noun, adjective and verbs”.   “So, bagaimana cara bertanya, mendeskripsikan benda itu yang akan kita pelajari. Misalnya, Feli I see you have new watch”.   “Ok. Umbrella. I have my colorful umbrella. Satu lagi. I love my pink bag. It has beautiful garden. Bisa dilihat disini bagaimana mendeskripsikan things, bagaimana menempatkan adjective”.   “Structurenya masih salah ini. Yang benar adalah I love my full color shoes”.   “There are many children in a playground. Ok? And there are many people in the market, but in my house there is one person. Ok ya? Paham?”.   From three times observations, the teacher was consistent in focused on form. Focus on form means that the students have to aware on grammatical form of the language. It can be as like composing sentences based on the right pattern. It was proven in the explanation above that the teacher gave more explanations about the pattern of present continuous tense, composing sentence based on the right structure about subject, plural and singular, verb and also noun and introductory there. The teacher gave some example of pattern and structure of some grammar to the students. She repeated several times about what she wanted to explain until she thought that the students understand the materials. It also can be seen from the teacher’s activities in the classroom that she walked around the class to check students’ works and explained something that the students did not understand. It showed that the teacher wanted to make students comprehend the pattern based on the grammatical rule. In other word, the teacher interprets grammar teaching by focusing on form. It is found that what the teacher did in the classroom showed that she was interpreting grammar in classroom by focusing on form. It is proven in the result of observation that the teacher teaches grammar by giving the grammatical rule that contains the structure and pattern to compose a sentence. She explained the grammatical rule to the students. The teacher applied it in the classroom maybe as the reason she wants to make the students focus on grammatical rule that can make them compose the sentences in the right pattern. It is in line with the theory of Long (1997) that Focus on form is a method for composing sentence based on the right pattern. It promotes the acquisition of specific language form such as grammar and the meaning of words in the meaning-based second language activity. Doughty & Williams (1999) state that a focus on the form (FonF) of the language consists of drawing the learners attention to the linguistic features of the language. Thus, a focus on form approach would allow for the second language (L2) learners to concentrate on the grammatical rules and construct of the language. For example, a student is given a text in the L2. He or she would focus on form if they were asked to analyze the text in terms of how it represents the rules of the language. Other reason, she wants to develop the language knowledge and language acquisition. This condition proves the theory from Long & Robinson (1999) that focus on form as an occasional shift of attention to linguistic code features by the teacher and/or one or more students triggered by perceived problems with comprehension or production. He also states that Focus on form is a basis of Interaction Hypothesis and it emphases the importance of interaction between learners and other speakers in order to develop their language knowledge. In the classroom, the students feel something about what they got. For getting the information about what they feel about what they learnt, the researcher make focused group discussion. In the classroom, there are thirty three students. The researcher divided the students into four groups. Each group consists of about eight students. The members of groups were taken randomly. Male and female students were mixed. It depends on the students itself. After dividing groups, the writer began to ask some questions. The questions were semi structured. There were three questions as a foundation, but there were some complement questions to develop the information from the students. The conversation did not take long time. It was not more than two minutes length. The questions are: (1) Kalian tau apa itu grammar? (2) Selama ini sudah belajar grammar? (3) Grammar apa saja? (4) Menurut kalian grammar itu susah atau gampang? (5) Diterangkan langsung atau diterangkan jika kalian ada kesalahan?. From focused group discussion, it can be concluded that not all of students understand what grammar is. From four groups, two groups showed that the members did not know the meaning of grammar and two groups showed that the members know the meaning of it. It is proven in the answer of the second group “Grammar itu apa bu? ak taunya gamer”. The answer of the fourth group is “Pernah denger grammar, tapi gak tau artinya itu apa”. It showed that they have not understood the meaning of grammar. When researcher asked the second question, which is “Selama ini sudah belajar grammar?” the result showed that almost all of students experienced it. They also said that during this semester, they have been taught grammar by the teacher. It is proven in the discussions. “Jadi pernah diajarkan grammar sama Bu Shofa?” “pernah” “Waktu ngajarnya itu Bu shofa langsung diterangkan di depan papan tulis atau berdasarkan kalian baca-baca buku?” “Langsung diterangkan di papan tulis”. But in the third group, there are different answers from members. Some members said that they have been taught grammar, and some members said that they have not been taught grammar yet by the teacher. When the researcher asked what kind of grammar that they have received in this semester, the result showed that during this semester they got some grammar explanations from the teacher. The first group said that they have been taught adjective, pronoun and verb. The second group said that they have been taught Irregular verb. The third group said that they have been taught present tense and continuous tense. The last group feel be taught subject, verb and object. So, it can be concluded that they have been received simple present tense and present continuous tense. After receiving those kinds of materials, they concluded that grammar is easy. It is proven in the result of discussion that each group felt grammar is easy to be learnt. “Menurut kalian, grammar itu gampang apa susah?” The first group said “Gampang”. The second group goup said “Lumayan gampang”. The third group said “Alhamdulillah gampang. The last group said “gampang-gampang susah”. So, it can be concluded that they feel easy to learn grammar and there is no difficulties to received materials. It was also found from focused group discussion that the students feel learned grammar during this semester. The result showed that almost all of students experienced it. They also said that during this semester, they have been taught grammar by the teacher. It is proven in the discussions. “Jadi pernah diajarkan grammar sama Bu Shofa?” “pernah”   The result is in line with the theory of Sinclair (2000)’s statement that grammar is easy to understand. He also affirms that grammar is superficially easy to observe. Collins et.al (2009) argue that grammar can be easy and difficult. It depends on input that is received by students. In summary, the result showed that teacher interpreted grammar teaching by focusing on form. It can be seen from the teacher activities in the classroom when the lesson was running. The teacher explained it clearly and concerned on grammatical rule. Long (1991) strengthens this condition by stating that focus on form concern on structures, notions and lexical items where language is treated primarily as an object to be studied and practiced. By seeing the teacher’s activities, it showed that students experienced learned grammar by the teacher. It also can be seen from focused group discussion result.   CONCLUSIONS           Based on results and discussion, it can be concluded that the teacher interpreted grammar in 2013 curriculum by focusing on form. Focus on form means the students have to aware on grammatical form of the language. It happened in the classroom which the researcher observed, that the teacher explained the materials more clearly to the students based on the construct of language and grammatical rule. She demanded the students to acquired grammar naturally attention on the specific language. It is based on the theory of Long (1991) that it refers the traditional teaching that concern on structures, notions, and lexical items where language is treated primarily as an object to be studied and practiced. The teacher implemented focus on form in grammar teaching probably as a reason she wanted to make her students can compose the sentences with the right pattern. Besides, by interpreting focus on form she expected that her students can develop language knowledge and language acquisition.                 Another conclusion is that the teacher did not follow the rule of 2013 curriculum. In 2013 curriculum, the approach of teaching learning process is Communicative Language Teaching. Communicative language teaching is an approach to language teaching that emphasize interaction as both the means and the ultimate goal of study. It can be focus on form or focus on meaning. But in 2013 curriculum, it is focus on meaning.   REFERENCES   Astaman, A. (2010). An analysis of Teaching Writing through Genre Based Approach at SMAN 10 Pekan baru. Menulis bersama Aswir. Retrieved from http://menulisbersamaaswir.blogspot.com/2010/03/analysis-of-teaching-writing-trough.html Callaghan, M. a. J. R. (1988). Teaching Factual Writing a Genre Based Approach, Report on the DSP Literacy Project Metropolitan East Region, NSW Departement of EDucation. Sydney: Metropolitan East disadvantage school program. Collins, L., Trofimovich, P., White, J., Cardoso, W., & Horst, M. (2009). Some Input on the Easy/difficult Grammar Question: An Empirical Study. The Modern Language Journal, 93(3), 336-353. Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1999). Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gao, J. (2007). Teaching Writing in Chinese Universities: Finding an Electric Approach Asian EFL Journal, 20. Kemendikbud. (2013a). Kompetensi Dasar: Kementrian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan. Kemendikbud. (2013b). Pembelajaran Berbasis Kompetensi Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Inggris Melalui Pendekatan Saintifik. Lin, B. (2006). Genre Based Teaching and Principle in EFL: The Case University Writing Course. Asian EFL Journal 8(3), 226-248. Long. (1997). Focus on form in Task Based Language Teaching. The Mac Graw Hill Companies. Long, M. H. (1991). Focus on form: A Design Features in Language Teaching. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Long, M. H., & Robinson, P. (1999). Focus on Form: Theory, Research and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Yan, G. (2005). A Process Genre Model for Teaching Writing (Vol. 43): English Teaching Forum.    
A STUDY OF TEACHER’S REACTION TO THE STUDENT’S RESPONSES IN TERM OF INITIATING TALK IN THE SPEAKING CLASS AT THE JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL ALIF FUJIYANTI, NORISMA; MUNIR, AHMAD
RETAIN Vol 2, No 2 (2014): Volume 2 No 2 2014
Publisher : RETAIN

Show Abstract | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

A STUDY OF TEACHER’S REACTION TO THE STUDENT’S RESPONSES IN TERM OF INITIATING TALK IN THE SPEAKING CLASS AT THE JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL   NORISMA ALIF FUJIYANTI English Education, Language and Art Faculty, State University of Surabaya hazuke.fuji@yahoo.com   AHMAD MUNIR  English Education, Language and Art Faculty, State University of Surabaya munstkip@yahoo.com   Abstrak   Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian deskriptif kualitatif tentang reaksi guru yang berfokus pada reaksi guru terhadap respon siswa dan fitur konstruksi atau obstruksi bahasa guru. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mendeskripsikan reaksi guru terhadap respon siswa dan mengklasifikasikannya ke dalam 14 fitur bahasa guru  berdasarkan Walsh (2006). Subyek penelitian ini adalah guru bahasa Inggris perempuan dan siswa kelas tujuh dari SMP  At- Taqwa Surabaya. Data utama diambil dari pengamatan. Rekaman audio dan wawancara digunakan untuk mengumpulkan data. Berdasarkan transkripsi, peneliti menganalisis interaksi bagaimana guru bereaksi terhadap respon siswa-siswa. Peneliti mengklasifikasikan reaksi – reaksi lisan guru tersebut ke dalam 14 fitur bahasa guru berdasarkan Walsh (2006) dan menemukan fitur yang membangun dan menghambat siswa untuk berbicara. Studi ini menemukan bahwa guru bereaksi terhadap respon siswa baik secara verbal maupun non-verbal. Guru menggunakan gerak tubuh, ekspresi wajah, kontak mata dan bahasa tubuh ketika melakukan reaksi non-verbal. Reaksi verbal guru dilakukan saat mengucapkan tanggapan guru. Ucapan guru tersebut diklasifikasikan ke dalam 14 fitur bahasa guru. Guru hanya menggunakan tujuh fitur bahasa guru dari empat belas, antara lain: Scaffolding, Referential Question, Extended Wait-Time, Extended Teacher Turn, Teacher Echo, Confirmation Checks, and Teacher Interruption. Dari tujuh fitur tersebut, satu - satunya fitur yang menghalangi siswa untuk berbicara yaitu Extended Wait-Time. Referential Question, Extended Teacher Turn dan Confirmation Checks membangun siswa untuk berbicara. Sedangkan sisanya, Scaffolding , Extended Teacher Turn dan Teacher Echo dapat membangun dan menghalangi siswa untuk berbicara. Dengan demikian dapat disimpulkan bahwa guru melakukan reaksi baik verbal dan non-verbal guru selama pelajaran. Guru hanya menggunakan tujuh fitur bahasa guru dari empat belas. Dari tujuh fitur, hanya Extended Wait-Time yang menghalangi siswa untuk pembicaraan. Sedangkan enam dari mereka dapat membangun dan menghalangi siswa untuk berbicara. Keywords : Classroom Interaction, Teacher Talk, Teacher Reaction, Features of Teacher Talk Abstract   This is a descriptive qualitative study, which focused on the teacher’s reaction to the students’ responses and the construction or obstruction features of teacher talk. This study is aimed to describe the teacher’s reaction to the students’ responses and classified the verbal teacher’s reactions into 14 features of teacher talk based on Walsh (2006). The subjects of this research are a female English teacher and seventh graders of a Junior High School, At-Taqwa Surabaya. The main data was taken from the observation. The researcher used audio recording and interview to collect the data. The data were transcribed and analyzed qualitatively through certain steps then. The researcher classifies the verbal teacher’s reaction into 14 features of teacher talk based on Walsh (2006) and finds out the features which construct and obstruct the students to talk. This study found that the teacher conducted both verbal and non-verbal teacher’s reaction. The teacher used gestures, facial expression, eye contact and body language when conducting non-verbal teacher’s reaction. The verbal teacher’s reactions are conducted by uttering the teacher’s responses. Those teacher utterances are classified into 14 features of teacher talk then. The teacher used only seven features of teacher talk out of fourteen. They were Scaffolding, Referential Question, Extended Wait-Time, Extended Teacher Turn, Teacher Echo, Confirmation Checks, and Teacher Interruption. From those seven features, only Extended Wait-Time which obstructed the students to talk. Referential Question, Teacher Interruption, and Confirmation Checks constructed the students to talk. While, Scaffolding, Extended Teacher Turn and Teacher Echo constructed and obstructed the students to talk. It can be concluded that the teacher conducts both verbal and non-verbal teacher’s reaction during the lesson. From those seven features of teacher talk used, only Extended Wait Time, which obstructs the student to talk. While the other six features, both construct and obstruct the students to talk. Keywords : Classroom Interaction, Teacher Talk, Teacher Reaction, Features of Teacher Talk   INTRODUCTION Teachers need an extra ability to teach English for Junior High School students since they are included in to young learners’ classification. Cameron (2001) defined young learners as those who are less than 14 years old. Unlike adult, young learners are generally conscript into language classes. They often have no obvious reason for learning English. Furthermore, young learners do not always have well developed literacy skills to support their learning English. They are not able to read or write in their own language. They often learn slowly and forget quickly since they are still developing cognitively, linguistically, socially, emotionally and physically. Musthafa (2010:123) mentioned that there are three reasons why teaching young learners becomes quite difficult. The first reason is the limited function in social interaction. The second reason is the short time in teaching English as a local content. The third reason is about teaching English for young learner needs to prepare good ability and good training for the teacher. The teachers need to be competence and confidence in practicing the language target, which is English. Besides, they must be active and creative in demonstrating the language accurately, clearly, fluently in order to scaffold the students in speaking English. The exposure toward English affects the successful of learning English.  Hammer (2000:24) stated that, the language learners will be success if they are exposed to language, motivated to learn, and have opportunity to use the language they are learning. Hammer’s statement implies that to get the students succeed in learning English, the teacher should build the students’ exposure to English and give the students opportunities in using English. The teacher has to construct the students become active in the class. However, making the students active in speaking class becomes quite difficult. Most of them have much opinion, yet, they may feel unconfident even shy to speak up in English. Whereas, in the speaking class, the more practice is needed. Therefore, teachers should understand what languages would be more efficient to initiate talk and construct the students in participating and practicing English as the language target in order to create an environment in which the students feel more confident to speak English during the learning process. In a foreign language classroom, in this case an English class, the amount of student talk is expected to be higher than the teacher talk, especially in a speaking class. Walsh (2006) stated that all about language teachers use in order to control, organize, and motivate the class which cause interaction between teacher and students called teacher talk. The success of conducting teacher talk depends on the teacher’s strategies for managing interaction in the classroom. Some teachers give a change for the students to contribute and participate in learning process. According to Bailey (2003: 54 – 56), one of the four principles of teaching speaking is that the teacher should provide opportunities for the students to talk and limit his own talk. However, some teachers deny the students to participate in learning process. They obstruct the students when they seek to involve the lesson. Whereas, the high amount of student talk in the English classroom expands the students’ exposure toward English. Walsh (2002) examined the ways in which teachers construct or obstruct learner participation in classroom interaction, through their choice of language. Construction meant “increasing learning potential” which can be done through activities like, Direct Error Correction, Content Feedback, Checking for Confirmation, Extended Wait Time, and Scaffolding. Obstruction meant “reducing learning potential” which can be done through Turn Completion, Teacher Echo, and Teacher Interruptions. According to Walsh (2006) investigation about the 14 features of teacher talk that can construct and obstruct the students’ participating. The researcher wants to know whether the Walsh’s construction or obstruction of teacher talk are also be applied in Indonesia School contexts or not. This study outlines two research questions, “How does the teacher react to the students’ responses in order to initiate talk in the speaking class?” and “Which features of Teacher Talk do construct and obstruct the students to talk?” A point to be noted is that the way the teacher reacts to the students’ responses. The researcher makes detail about the description of teacher talk in the term of teacher’s reaction. The verbal teacher’s reactions are classified into 14 features of teacher talk based on Walsh (2006).  METHODS This is descriptive qualitative study. The researcher describes the phenomenon happened which has no deal with number. McMillan (1992) explained that a qualitative research stresses on a phenomenological model or focuses on understanding and meaning which has no deal with number. The subjects of the study are a female English teacher and the seventh graders of Junior High School (SMP At-Taqwa Surabaya). The students consist of 38 students, 20 male and 18 female. While the teacher graduated from Surabaya State University in 2010. She has been teaching for 3 years: in MTs Miftahul Huda Pasuruan for a year and At- Taqwa for two years. The main data was taken through the observation. Audio recording and interview were used to collect the data. The data were then transcribed qualitatively. The researcher classified the verbal teacher’s reaction into 14 features of teacher talk based on Walsh (2006) and found out the features of teacher talk that construct and obstruct the students to talk. The researcher used tables to analyze the data. The tables contain of the analysis of teacher’s reaction, teacher talk and the result of interview between the researcher and the students. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION Interaction has an important relation with communication; if there is no interaction, there cannot be communication (Thomas, 1987:4). Hence, interaction between the teacher and the student during the teaching learning process is needed, especially at the speaking class. There are four principles which need to be applied in teaching speaking (Bailey, 2003: 54 -56). One of them is the teacher should provide opportunities for students to talk and limit the teacher talk. This principle informs that the teacher should not dominate the talk and give the students more opportunity to talk. Rivers (1983:67) stated that to develop communication skill in a foreign language, the students must have continual practice in communicating. The teacher has to respond them back by giving reaction. The teacher’s reaction consists of verbal reaction, which is spoken and non-verbal reaction, which is unspoken such as gesture, touch, eye contact, hand coding, facial expression, body language and so on. The teacher’s utterances are included in the verbal teacher’s reaction. Those utterances can be classified into 14 features of teacher talk based on Walsh (2006). The researcher found that the teacher used seven features of teacher talk out of fourteen. From those seven features, only Extended Wait-Time which obstructed the student to talk. Referential Question, Teacher Interruption, and Confirmation Checks constructed the student to talk. While, Scaffolding, Extended Teacher Turn, Teacher Echo both constructed and obstructed the student talk. Walsh (2002) examined that construction can be done through activities like, Direct Error Correction, Content Feedback, Checking for Confirmation, Extended Wait Time and Scaffolding. While, obstruction can be done through Turn Completion, Teacher Echo, Teacher Interruptions. The first feature used was Scaffolding. This feature is divided into three categories, they are Reformulation Scaffolding, Extension Scaffolding, and Modeling Scaffolding. The researcher found those categories during the observation. The first feature, Reformulation Scaffolding, shows how the teacher reformulated the student’s utterance in order to make something clearer, for example: Extract 1: S6     : Why the cloth not not…ehm, you know? S9     : Yes, yes,, because usually indie clothing is like that and then they sell like, like  jacket and, and, any other cloth but, but I can’t I can’t search it, search it.. T       : Search to get the picture? S9     : Yes  T      : So, you mean that actually you sell many kind of cloths but, but, that is only the picture.   Extract 1 shows the Reformulation Scaffolding used when the teacher repharaprased the student’s answer which was unclear. A student asked to her friend, then her friend answered it, however, the answer was unclear. The teacher repeated student’s answer by repharaprased it using her own words. According to the observation, this category constructs the students to talk. The second category is Extension Scaffolding. It showed when the teacher extended the the student’s contribution, for example: Extract 2: S8 : Eighty. T  : Eighty. Eighty percent. Okay, sit with your group please. One, two, three..   Extract 2 shows that Extension Scaffolding occurred when the teacher extended the student’s answer. The student answered “eighty”, however, the teacher extended it by saying “Eighty percent”. This category obstructs the students to talk. The last category, modeling scaffolding, used to correct a student’s contribution by giving a model. According to the observation, this category obstructs the students to talk. Extract 3: S9  : Ustadzah, the event will start at 5 until 7 pm. What is the English of ‘akan diadakan’? T    : Will be held. S9 : Held, okay. T : held, h-e-l-d (the teacher pronouns and spells it)   Extract 3 shows the modeling scaffolding was used by the teacher when a student asked her the English of ‘akan diadakan’. The teacher answered it and modeled it by pronouncing that word. According to Flanders (1970), Scaffolding is included in the fourth category of indirect teacher talk. It provided how the teacher shows his or her agreement toward what the students are saying or doing by rephrasing the student’s idea. It is in the line with Nunan’s (1989) statements that the idea given by the student must be re-paraphrased or spoken differently. The second feature of teacher talk found was referential question. This feature is used to gain the students’ opinion by giving questions in which the teacher does not know the answer. This feature constructs the students to talk since it lets the students to deliver their own thought. Extract 4: S6     : What does it for? T       : What do you think? S6     : Ehm, I think for what turn to get.   Extract 4 shows the referential question used by the teacher. It showed when a student asked the teacher, and then the teacher answered it by giving the student a question “what do you think”. This question included referential question since it could gain the student ideas. It is important for the teacher to give some questions to the students in order to gain their opinion. Cazden (2001) stated that in classroom interaction, students are involved in two kinds of talks: 1). Talk with experts (teacher), usually the pattern is I-R-E (teacher question, student’s response and teacher evaluation); 2). Talk among peers. Therefore, it was important for teacher to give some questions in order to initiate talk which caused the students’ responses. The teacher used referential question to gain the students to deliver their opinion, their ideas and their thought. The third feature found was Extended Wait-Time. This feature used when the teacher gives the students sufficient time to respond or formulate the responses. According to the observation, this feature obstructs the student to talk. Extract 5: T : You’re welcome. Okay, girls, I give you time five minutes. I’m sorry, because Nabila uses my laptop, so you have to prepare with your laptop. Or one laptop, the other in the flashdisk, but you can use your friend’s laptop.   The teacher asked the students to present their presentation in front of the class. However, they had not finished their presentation. Thus, the teacher gave five minutes more for the students to finish their presentation. Giving the students several times to respond or formulate on response is needed. The students are people who learn something. They need sufficient time in their learning process. Therefore, the teacher gave several times for students to answer a question given or finish their work. She gave sufficient times to the student to finish preparing their presentation. The fourth feature found was Extended Teacher-Turn. It is a feature, which gives the teacher time to deliver her contributions for more than one clause. The teacher needs time to explain the lesson. She used more than one clause while explaining the materials. Moreover, this feature could be used to command the students. This feature could construct the students to talk; yet, it could obstruct the students to talk sometimes. Extract 6:                 T       : Okay, other question? Salma gets one point, do you want to keep it as yours or your group? If for your group please write down there 50. S6     : No no no. sorry friends. T       : Okay, no other questions? No? S6     : Why the date is 7?   From the Extract 6, it shows that the teacher used more than one clause. The teacher invited the students to ask some questions related to their friend’s presentation. In addition, she also commanded a student to write down the point she got because giving a question to her friend. However, this feature obstructs the student to talk, for example: Extract 7:         T       : Okay, prepare it well and finish your work and the one who is finish, you can give me the file. Prepare for your presentation ya, for your presentation girl.   Extract 7 shows that the teacher spoke more than one sentence. However, there was no verbal response from the students. The teacher only commanded the students to prepare their presentations well and finish it. She also asked the student who has finished giving her file to the teacher.  The fifth feature found was teacher echo. It shows the repetition of the teacher’s and the students’ utterance that is spoken by the teacher. Those repetitions were used to strengthen the contribution, which has given by the teacher or the student. Extract 8: (1)  S4  : Lidya, T    : Lidya, okay. Ksenia with?   (2)     S3   : Ninety. T      : Ninety, okay, what about you, Michel?   Those two dialogues above were the examples of teacher echo, which were found when the researcher conducted the observation. Both of them showed that the teacher repeated the student’s utterances before giving response to the student. In the first dialogue, the student said “Lidya”, and then the teacher repeated it by saying “Lidya” too before giving her next response, which was “okay. Ksenia with?”. In the line with the first dialogue, the teacher also repeated the student’s utterances by saying what the student has said. The student said “ninety” and the teacher repeated it. She said “ninety” first before giving her next response, which was “okay. What about you, Michell?”. According to Cullen (2002), repetition as a teaching strategy can be evident in both types of moves. Repetition is known as a teacher "echo." It can be used to acknowledge, confirm, question, or express surprise at a students contribution while ensuring that all listeners have heard it. Cullen (1998) redefines repetition, formerly a feature of non-communicative teacher talk, as communicative within a classroom context for its pedagogic function. According to the observation, Teacher Echo could both construct and obstruct the students to talk. The sixth feature found was confirmation checks feature. This feature was concerned on the way teacher making sure that she understood the student’s contribution. Based on the observation, this feature could both construct and obstruct the students to talk. Extract 9: S9     : Yes, yes,, because usually indie clothing is like that and then they sell like, like  jacket and, and, any other cloth but, but I can’t I can’t search it, search it.. T       : Search to get the picture? S9     : Yes   Extract 9 was the example confirmation check found by the teacher when conducting the observation. The conversation above shows that the teacher made sure that she had understood what the student have said. The way the student delivered her opinion was around the buss. Therefore, the teacher paraphrased the student’s sentences using her own words. The teacher just checked that her thought was same with the students thought. The last feature of teacher talk found was teacher interruptions. It used to avoid chaos. The researcher found that the teacher interrupted the student’s contribution, whereas, her utterance was not finished. In the line with the previous feature, this feature also could both construct and obstruct the student to talk. Extract 10: S7 : Ustadzah, my memory card is full of virus ustadzah,, T    : Oh, like that? S7 : The file is gone. T    : Oh, really? S7 : Yes. T    : And you don’t have the copy of it? S7 : Ehm, no, T    : Really? S7 : He’em. If tomorrow, I … T    : Try to finish it now. Okay? S7  : Okay.   Extract 10 shows that the teacher interrupted the student utterance. The student told to the teacher that her memory card was full of virus and she did not have its copy. It seemed that the student would bargain the teacher to collect her works tomorrow. However, the teacher interrupted her utterances, which had not finished yet. The teacher asked her to finish the work now. There were five features of teacher talk, which the teacher has not used. They were direct repair, display question, content feedback, form-focused feedback, and seeking clarification. However, these features should be used also to react the students’ responses. Direct repair is used to correct the wrong students’ contribution directly. For example, when the student’s answers are wrong; the teacher should correct it directly so that they do not let the students to make a mistake. Moreover, it is important for the teacher to react the students’ contribution by giving some feedback. Walsh (2006) divided feedback into two kinds, namely, content feedback and form-focused feedback. Content feedback is a feedback, which concerns on the message rather than the words used. The form-focused is a feedback, which concerns on the words used. In addition, seeking clarification can also be used to react to the students’ responses too. It is included how the teacher asks students to clarify something that they have said. Display question also can be used to check the students’ comprehension by giving question related to the lesson. Furthermore, the teacher also gave unspoken reaction using gestures, facial expression, eye contact and body language. She used the non-verbal teacher’s reaction to strengthen her verbal reaction. Gesture showed when she used her hand while she explained and gave directions to the students. There were three gestures conducted, hand pointing, hand coding, and clapping.  The researcher divides hand coding into three kinds, namely counting, raising hand and explaining. The teacher used clapping as a reward for the student. Another non-verbal teachers reaction used are facial expression. The teacher showed two facial expressions which were smiling and laughing. Besides, the teacher always showed eyes contact when interacting with the student. She did not avoid it. In a line with the teacher, the students also did eyes contact when they asked, answered and talked with the teacher. Furthermore, the teacher also conducted body language when she was teaching. Body language is included to the nonverbal reaction too. She moved at one side to the other side of the class the students when she was teaching. She did not stay in one place only. In summary, the teacher used seven features of teacher talk out of fourteen. They were scaffolding, referential question, extended wait-time, extended teacher turn, teacher echo, confirmation checks, and teacher interruption. From those seven features, the only feature, which obstructed the student to talk was Extended wait-time. Three of them which constructed the student to talk were Referential Question, Teacher Interruption, and Confirmation Checks, whereas the rest, Scaffolding, Extended Teacher Turn, Teacher Echo and could both construct and obstruct the student talk. Moreover, both the teacher and the students spoke in English during the teaching and learning process.     CONCLUSION From thorough elaboration and discussion upon the data on the fourth chapter, it could be concluded that the teacher reacted the students’ responses both verbally and non-verbally. The verbal reactions could be classified into 14 features of teacher talk, yet, these teacher utterances could be classified into seven features only; they were Scaffolding, Referential Question, Extended Wait-Time, Extended Teacher Turn, Teacher Echo, Confirmation Checks, and Teacher Interruption. From those seven features, the only feature, which obstructed the student to talk was Extended Wait-Time. Three of them which constructed the student to talk were Referential Question, Teacher Interruption, and Confirmation Checks, whereas the rest, Scaffolding, Extended Teacher Turn, Teacher Echo and could both construct and obstruct the student talk. Moreover, the teacher conducted the non-verbal reaction by using gestures, facial expression, eye contact and body language.   REFERENCES   Bailey, K. M. 2003. Speaking. In David Nunan (ED). Practical English Language Teaching. New York: McGraw Hill Cameron, L. 2001.Teaching languages to young learners. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press   Cazden, C. B. 2001. Classroom discourse: the language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth: Heinemann   Cullen, R. 1998. Teacher talk and the classroom context. ELT Journal, 52 (3), 179-187   Cullen, R. 2002. Supportive teacher talk: the importance of the f-move. ELT Journal, 56 (2), 117-127   Flanders, N. A. 1970. Analyzing Teacher Behavior. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Harmer, J. 2000. The Practice of English Language Teaching. London: Longman McMillan, J. H. 1992. Educational Research: Fundamentals for The consumer. New York: Harper Collins Publisher   Musthafa, B. 2010. Teaching English to Young Learners in Indonesia. Educationist, 10, 120-125   Nunan, D. 1989. Understanding Language Classroom: A Guide for Teacher Initiated Action. UK: Prentice Hall Rivers, W. M. 1983. Speaking in Many Tounges: Essay in Foreign Language Teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press   Thomas, A.M. 1987. Interactice Language Teaching. New York: Oxford University Press   Walsh, S. 2002. Construction or obstruction: teacher talk and learner involvement in the EFL classroom. Language Teaching Research, 61 (1), 3-23   Walsh, S. 2006. Investigating Classroom Discourse. New York: Routledge      
PROBLEMS IN UNDERSTANDING IDIOMATIC EXPRESSIONS BY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS OKTA UTAMI, ROSYITA; MUNIR, AHMAD
RETAIN Vol 2, No 2 (2014): Volume 2 No 2 2014
Publisher : RETAIN

Show Abstract | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

PROBLEMS IN UNDERSTANDING IDIOMATIC EXPRESSIONS BY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS Rosyita Okta Utami English Department, Languages and Arts Faculty, State University of Surabaya Rosyitaitak@ymail.com Ahmad Munir English Department, Languages and Arts Faculty, State University of Surabaya Munstkip@yahoo.com Abstrak Idiom berhubungan dengan ungkapan idiomatik yang sebagian besar sering digunakan dalam bahasa sehari-hari. Tapi ironisnya, sebagian besar siswa mengalami kesulitan dalam memahami arti ungkapan-ungkapan idiomatik. Terkait dengan hal tersebut di atas, penulis tertarik untuk mempelajari masalah dalam memahaminya. Peneliti menggunakan penelitian kuantitatif dengan subjek pengamatan siswa kelas XII SMA Negeri 1 Cerme yang meliputi XII Ipa-1, 3 dan 5. Teknik pengumpulan data yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah skor tes dan respon dari kuesioner yang dianalisis menggunakan SPSS. Berdasarkan hasil tes, penulis menemukan bahwa siswa mendapat kesulitan dalam memahami idiom pada jenis verba phrasal dan penggabungan kata kerja. Di sisi lain, konteks mempunyai hasil yang berbeda dalam membantu siswa memprediksi makna ungkapan-ungkapan idiomatic. Ada 3 konteks yang berbeda di dalam tes, dan hasilnya menunjukkan bahwa TMC mempunyai t-value yang lebih tinggi dibandingkan dengan lainnya, itu berarti TMC mempunyai peran yang baik dalam membantu murid-murid dalam mengeksplorasi makna yang ada. Akhirnya, diharapkan bahwa penyelesaian penelitian ini akan berguna untuk guru bahasa Inggris dan peneliti lain. Kata kunci: masalah, ungkapan-ungkapan idiomatik, konteks, siswa SMA.   Abstract Idioms which is related to idiomatic expressions have a great extent use in everyday language. But ironically, most students get difficulty in understanding the meaning of idiomatic expressions. Related to the above matters, the writer was interested in studying the problems in understanding it. The researcher used quantitative research in doing her study with the subject of the research third graders of SMA Negeri 1 Cerme which include XII-Ipa 1, 3 and 5. The data collection technique used for this research were test score and questionnaire responses which was analyzed using SPSS. Based on the test result, she found that the students got difficulty in understanding idioms in phrasal verbs and incorporating verbs type. There were three different contexts of the test, and the result showed that TMC has higher t-value which means TMC has a good assistance to help students in exploring the meaning. Furthermore, context has crucial role in determining the meaning which helps and assists students to explore the meaning of idiomatic expressions. Finally, it is expected that the result of this study will be useful for English teachers and other researchers. Keywords: problem, idiomatic expressions, context, Senior High School Students.           INTRODUCTION One of the important aspects in English is idiom. Idioms are frequently used in a wide variety of situations. Cooper (1998) states that idioms are so frequently used in spoken and written language that they require special attention in language teaching. ‘An idiom is an expression whose overall figurative meaning cannot be derived from the meaning of its parts’ (Marlies, 1995; p. 283). Moreover, according to Langasher (1968: 79), “an idiom is a kind of complex lexical item. It is a phrase whose meaning cannot be predicted from the meanngs of the morphemes it comprises”. This definitions showed two basic characteristics of the idiom. First, is that idiom is a complex lexical item, second is that meaning cannot be inferred from it parts. In other words, the meaning of the idiomatic expressions is not the sum of the words taken individually. Since idiom is a part of language, it should also be taught along with learning English. In a second language learning classroom, complete idiomatic teaching will not usually be offered and required; however, all learners must be prepared to meet the challenge of idioms which occurs frequently in spoken and written English (Irujo, 1986b).  That is why, it is very important for students to master idiomatic expressions. However, the fact showed that idiomatic expressions always cause a lot of problems to learners. According to Cooper (1999), idiomatic expressions understanding study presents a special language problem for all language learners because the figurative meaning is unpredictable. Students usually find the difficulties in recognizing an expression as idiomatic or not, and then understanding its exact meaning. This showed that idiomatic expressions carry a sense that makes the comprehension of an idiom is difficult. In other words, the meaning of an idiom cannot be deduced from the meaning of its constituent parts. The main problem for students is recognizing an idiom and understanding it at once. According to Cooper (1999), “idiom study presents a special language problem for all language learners because the figurative meaning is unpredictable.The result of another study stated that mastering idioms and the ability to use them in the written and the spoken discourse is considered as a sign towards proficiency.” The researcher finds many colleagues who have discussed about problem in understanding idiomatic expressions. The first researcher is Winis (2013) who focused the study on “Investigating the Difficulties Faced in Understanding, and Strategies Used in Processing, English Idioms by the Libyan Students”. The subject of her study was university Libyan students. Then, the second researcher is Meryem (2010) who conducted an observational study entitled “Problems of Idioms in Translation”. From her observation, she thought that students of English really find considerable difficulties in guessing the appropriate meaning of idiomatic expressions. Subjects of her study were children. Those previous studies above proved that students face the difficulties in understanding idiomatic expressions. Those researchers did an observational study to analyze the problem. But the thing that is differentiated here is  the subject. So, in this case what makes the two previous studies and this study different is that the researcher uses test and questionnaire for senior high school students. This means that the difference is the subjects that is combination of Indonesian students that makes it more interesting and meaningful. That is why the researcher wants to know further about problem faced by senior high school students in this study. Moreover, it was  noticed that there is not much research done in this respect. In the analysis of the students’ performance, in this study the researcher shall be looking for the specific problems students would have in understanding idioms correctly, how the context of the test would assist them in exploring the meaning of idiomatic expressions. For all the above and taking into consideration of the great importance of idiom, the researcher is interested to examine the type of difficulty for senior high school students in understanding the idiomatic expressions. It is accepted that students have different diffculties in different context. It means that they will use their own knowledge which is suitable for them to convey the word meaning. By knowing their problem in understanding idiomatic expressions, hopefully they can solve their problem especially when they face unfamiliar idiomatic expressions in English lessons. From this present study, it is expected that students will be more aware about themselves. Therefore, a study of problems in understanding idiomatic expressions was conducted in SMAN 1 Cerme with the subjects were three classes of third grader. This study is expected to remind teacher about the importance of caring the students’ difficulties through understanding idiomatic expressions and also to give contribution to know about students experience in understanding idiomatic expressions. Hence, this study was intended to find out what kind of idiomatic expressions which is difficult to understand and also to investigate the role of the context in assisting the students to explore the meaning of idiomatic expressions.   METHODS The research design of this research was quantitative. The aims of this research was to find the students problem in understanding idiomatic expressions and to know which kind of idiomatic expressions that they do not understand. Moreover, quantitative research emphasizes on numbers, measurements, deductive logic, controls and experiments (McMillan, 1998: 9). The participant of this research are the students of the third grader who study in SMA Negeri 1 Cerme. The researcher chose the third grade based on purposive sampling. The setting of this study was at SMAN 1 Cerme. The school was chosen because of some considerations. First, SMAN 1 Cerme is a good school in Kabupaten Gresik. Thus, the students who are in the third grade are pupils from various Junior High Schools in Gresik with different degree of mastering English lesson and they have been taught English in first and second grade. The researcher only chose three classes include XII-Ipa 1, XII-Ipa 3 and XII-Ipa 5. The student respondents were considered to represent the understanding of idiomatic expressions of Senior High School students in SMA Negeri 1 Cerme. The data of this research was scoring of idiomatic expressions test which was divided into 3 different contexts; Translation Test (TT) with no context, Test-Multiple Choice (TMC) and Test-Blank Filling (TBF). The data was also taken from students’ responses to questionnaire which was divided in 10 statements. The test have been tried out before the researcher conduct the test in school. In that test, they should read the given text and then answer the questions in the form of determining the meaning of 60 idiomatic expressions words. The test contained of some reading passages which contained of 60 numbers of idiomatic expressions target. In doing this research, the researcher did a content validity process which means that the content of the data are valid if it is suitable with the instruments. The result of reliability statistics showed that all values in inter-item correlations are positive, indicate that the items are measuring the same underlying characteristic. The cronbach’s alpha value is .789 which suggests an acceptable internal consistency reliability. Questionaire is used to get students’ viewpoints and experience in understanding idiomatic expressions.However, every statement in the questionaire, ran from: strongly disagree, disagree, I don’t know, agree and strongly agree. Meanwhile, the reasearcher analyzed the test score by seeing the correlation between them using Paired Samples T-Test in SPSS and also analyzed the test score using descriptive statistics. According to Pallant (2010), a paired-samples t-test (also referred to as repeated measures) is used when the researcher has only one group of people (or companies, or machines etc). and collect data from them on two different occasions or under two different conditions. In descriptive statistics, the researcher saw which idioms have the lowest mean from the test score. Moreover, ANOVA was also used to analyze the data to measure the performance of every class. However, the score of the test was used to answer the first, second and third research questions. The result of the questionaire was analyzed using descriptive statistic which showed the mean of every statement from the questionaire to answer research question number three.   RESULTS AND DISCUSSION                 The result shows that many students have difficulties in thedecoding (Non-Identifiable) type of idioms. The findings explained kind of idiomatic expressions which are most difficult to understand and the result data have been ranked from the lowest into the highest mean from the test score. There are 3 points in the first finding. It was found that the lowest mean in Translation Test (TT) score was test number 6 (mean=.14) with idiom “make up”. In other word, idiom of “make up” was type of phrasal verbs idiom. Next point presented that the lowest mean in Test-Multiple Choice (TMC) score was test number 6 (mean=.38) with idiom “make up”. In other word, idiom of “make up” was type of phrasal verbs idiom. Last point showed that the lowest mean in Test-Blank Filling (TBF) score was test number 18 (mean=.07) with idiom “sleep on”. In other word, idiom of “sleep on” was type of phrasal verbs idiom. From the explanation above, it can be concluded that students got phrasal verb idioms as the most difficult type of idioms. However, first finding was related to the type of idioms, each student has different mind in choosing the correct answer of the test. Majority of students get difficulties in answer the idioms in type of phrasal verbs. Makkai (1996: 3) stated that the type of idioms could be classified into lexemic and sememic which includephrasal compounds, incorporating verbs, pseudo-idioms, proverbs and familiar quotations with the most difficulties in phrasal verbs. The next explanation shows different kind of idioms which was stated on the test and also the different types of idioms which was difficult for students to answer it as follows; Lexemic idioms which include phrasal verbs on the test were “make up”, “calls on”, “sleep on”, “give up”, closed up”, “dress up”, catch up”, and “put off”. In the incorporating verbs which was stated on the test were “got away” and “take turns”. Besides that, the type of proverbs is “keep an eye on” and the type of familiar quotation is “in time”. However, half of students in every class got difficulties in answering those types of phrasal verbs idioms. So, the finding was in line with Makkai (1996: 3). Besides that, the researcher also found the role of context to assist the students in exploring the meaning of idiomatic expressions. It can be seen by analyzing it using SPSS in the form of paired samples t-test on Translation Test (TT), Test-Multiple Choice (TMC) and also Test-Blank Filling (TBF). First pair are TT and TMC, there is a statistically significant different in test scores from Translation Test (TT) (M= 61.06, SD= 21.153) with Test- Multiple Choice (TMC) (M= 74.17, SD = 18.876), t (89) = -7.897, p< .0005 (two-tailed). The confidence interval is 95%, ranging from -15.410 to -9.812. The t-value (in this case, -7.89) and the degrees of freedom (df=89), as the Mean difference in the two scores was -13.11, with a 95 per cent confidence interval stretching from a Lower bound of -16.410 to an Upper bound of -9.812. The (p) value is .000, it means that this value is substantially smaller than specified alpha value of .05. Therefore, it can be concluded that there is a significant difference in the Fear of Statistics Test scores. Moreover, in Translation Test with Test-Multiple Choice, the t-value showed (-7.897) which means the score of Test-Multiple Choice is higher than Translation Test. Second pair are TT and TBF, there is a statistically significant different in test scores from Translation Test (TT) (M= 61.06, SD= 21.153) with Test-Blank Filling (TBF) (M= 48.72, SD = 22.418), t (89) = 5.017, p< .0005 (two-tailed). The confidence interval is 95%, ranging from 21.254 to 29.635. The t-value (in this case, 5.01) and the degrees of freedom (df=89), as the Mean difference in the two scores was 12.33, with a 95 per cent confidence interval stretching from a Lower bound of 7.449 to an Upper bound of 17.218. The (p) value is .000, it means that this value is substantially smaller than specified alpha value of .05. Therefore, it can be concluded that there is a significant difference in the Fear of Statistics Test scores. Moreover, in Translation Test with Test-Blank Filling that showed the t-value is (5.017) which means the score of Translation Test is higher than Test-Blank Filling. Third pair are TMC and TBF, there is a statistically significant different in test scores from Test-Multiple Choice (TMC) (M= 48.72, SD= 22.418) with Test-Blank Filling (TBF) (M= 48.72, SD = 22.418), t(89) = 12.064, p<. 0005 (two-tailed). The confidence interval is 95%, ranging from 21.254 to 29.535. The t-value (in this case, 12.06) and the degrees of freedom (df=89), as the Mean difference in the two scores was 25.44, with a 95 per cent confidence interval stretching from a Lower bound of 21.25 to an Upper bound of 29.63. The (p) value is .000, it means that this value is substantially smaller than specified alpha value of .05. Therefore, it can be conclude that there is a significant difference in the Fear of Statistics Test scores. Moreover, in Test-Multiple Choice with Test-Blank Filling showed the t-value is (12.064) which means the score of Test-Multiple Choice is higher than Test-Blank Filling. Based on the all explanation above, it can be conclude that different context has different result, and it made sense that context played a crucial role in understanding idiomatic expressions. As a result, it was same that the skills used to process and understand language in context are thought to be important for the development of idiom understanding (Levorato & Cacciari, 1995). Furthermore, t-value on the test is different in the use of the different types of context. The first pair is Translation Test with Test-Multiple Choice, the t-value showed (-7.897) which means that the score of Test-Multiple Choice is higher than Translation Test. Besides that, the second pair is Translation Test with Test-Blank Filling that showed the t-value is (5.017) which means the score of Translation Test is higher than Test-Blank Filling. Moreover, the last pair is Test-Multiple Choice with Test-Blank Filling that showed the t-value is (12.064) which means the score of Test-Multiple Choice is higher than Test-Blank Filling. It can be conclude that using the context of Test-Multiple Choice (TMC) is the best way in determining the meaning of idiomatic expressions because the t-value is the highest from Translation Test (TT) and Test-Blank Filling (TBF). It can be concluded that TMC is the easier type of test that can be used to predict the meaning of idiomatic expressions. It also means that the context of TMC (Test Multiple Choice) has a good assistance in helping the students to explore the meaning of idiomatic expressions. Furthermore, past research has shown that L2 learners use context to interpret idioms and are more successful to interpret idioms in context than in isolation (Cooper 1998; Ishida 2008b; Liontas 2002).   CONCLUSIONS This study is concerned with investigating the problems of understanding idioms from and into English. Two conclusions can be drawn, first result shows that students of senior high school really find considerable difficulties in guessing the appropriate meaning of idiomatic expressions. This is mainly due to the fact that idioms are colorful and has different types in which the meaning is not obvious from the meaning of the constituent words. The type that they get difficult is in phrasal verbs. Second, context has an important role in facilitating the figurative interpretation of idiomatic expressions, and hence, providing correct answers. Because idioms have strong conventional meaning associated, it is possible that context plays much role in helping the students to guess the meaning. At the same time, context plays a crucial role in getting the students to understand the use of an idiomatic expressions. There are 3 different contexts of the test used in this study, and the result shows that the context of TMC (Test-Multiple Choice) is the most successful type of context which assist the students to determine the meaning of idiomatic expressions. TT (Translation Test) and TBF (Test-Blank Filling) have t-value which is under TMC. So, it has been proved that context has crucial role in assisting students to understand the idiomatic expressions. REFERENCES Cooper, Thomas. 1998. Teaching Idioms. Foreign language annals, 31(2), 255-266. Cooper, Thomas. 1999. Processing of Idioms by L2 Learners of English. TESOL Quartsly, 33(2), 233-262. Irujo, S. 1986b. A piece of cake: learning and teaching idioms. ELT Journal, PP.236-237. Langasher, W.R. 1968. Language and Its Structure: Some Fundamental Linguistic Concepts. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World Inc. Levorato, M. C. 1993. The Acquisition of Idioms and the Development of Figurative Competence. In C. Cacciari and P. Tabossi (eds.), Idioms: Processing, Structure, and Interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 101-128. Makkai, A. 1996. Idiom Structure in English. The Hague: Mouton. Marlies, E.C. 1995. You Don’t Die Immediately When You Kick an Empty Bucket: A Processing View on Semantic and Syntactic Characteristics of idioms. McMillan, James H. 1992. Educational Research: Fundamentals for the Consumer. Haper Collins Publishers. Meryem, Mezmas. 2010. Problems of Idioms in Translation. Journal of English Language. 7(2), 16-18. Montouri University-Constantie. Pallant, Julie. 2010. SPSS Survival Manual: A Step by Step Guide to Data Analysis Using SPSS (4th edn). Australia: McGraw-Hill. Winis, Noura. 2013. Investigating the Difficulties Faced in understanding, and Strategies Used in Processing, English Idioms by the Libyan Students. International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies vol: 7, Issue: 2, 69-90. University of Sebya, Libyan.