STUDENTS’ RESPONSES TO ENGLISH LEARNING AT SMP MAITREYAWIRA BATAM

Oey Anton

doi:10.24036/komposisi.v19i1.7974

STUDENTS’ RESPONSES TO ENGLISH LEARNING AT SMP MAITREYAWIRA BATAM

Oey Anton⁽¹⁾,
(1) Universal University

Indonesia

Corresponding Author
Copyright (c) 2018 Komposisi: Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa, Sastra, dan Seni

DOI : https://doi.org/10.24036/komposisi.v19i1.7974

Full Text:

Language : en

Abstract

The research objectives are to explore and describe students’ responses to English learning at SMP Maitreyawira Batam, and to make the relations of substantive theory based students’ responses. This research approach is naturalistic by using open questionnaires. The results show some students feel fun, joyful, enjoying, easier, and have self-encouragement in English learning. Some students feel unenthusiastic, bored, get unknowing purpose, and have the complexity in English learning. Researcher also finds nine substantive theories from four grand categorizations show students’ positive responses; namely (1) Understanding English learning causes students feel fun and joyful, (2) Too many English tasks given affect to students’ obstacles, (3) Being able to communicate with foreigners is a need for students, (4) Less practicing makes the complexity in English learning for students, (5) Presenting material (2013 curriculum) makes some students feel easier, (6) The repeating materials affect students feeling bored, (7) More practicing makes students enjoy English, (8) Unknowing the purpose of English learning cause students feel unenthusiastic and bored, and (9) Noisy classroom give students more difficulties in English learning.

Keyword: student response, English learning, substantive theory

RESPONS SISWA DALAM PEMBELAJARAN BAHASA INGGRIS DI SMP MAITREYAWIRA BATAM

Abstrak

Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk mengeksplorasi dan mendeskripsikan respon siswa terhadap pembelajaran bahasa Inggris di SMP Maitreyawira Batam, dan untuk membuat hubungan antara respon teori berbasis teori substantif. Pendekatan penelitian ini bersifat naturalistik dengan menggunakan kuesioner terbuka. Hasilnya menunjukkan beberapa siswa merasa senang, gembira, menikmati, lebih mudah, dan memiliki dorongan diri dalam belajar bahasa Inggris. Beberapa siswa merasa tidak antusias, bosan, tidak sadar, dan memiliki kompleksitas dalam belajar bahasa Inggris. Peneliti juga menemukan sembilan teori substantif dari empat kategorisasi utama yang menunjukkan tanggapan positif siswa; yaitu (1) Memahami pembelajaran bahasa Inggris menyebabkan siswa merasa senang dan gembira, (2) Terlalu banyak tugas bahasa Inggris yang diberikan pada hambatan siswa, (3) Mampu berkomunikasi dengan orang asing adalah kebutuhan siswa, (4) Kurang berlatih membuat kompleksitas dalam pembelajaran bahasa Inggris untuk siswa, (5) Penyajian materi (kurikulum 2013) membuat beberapa siswa merasa lebih mudah, (6) Materi yang berulang-ulang mengakibatkan siswa merasa bosan, (7) Lebih banyak praktik membuat siswa dapat menikmati bahasa Inggris, (8) Tanpa mengetahui tujuan dari pembelajaran bahasa Inggris menyebabkan siswa merasa tidak antusias dan bosan, dan (9) Kelas yang bising memberi siswa lebih banyak kesulitan dalam belajar bahasa Inggris.

Kata kunci: respon siswa, pembelajaran Bahasa Inggris, teori substantif

References

Applebee, A. N. (1989). The child’s concept of story: Ages two to seventeen. University Of Chicago Press.

B. Kumaradavadivelu. (2003). Understanding language teaching. Brain and Language (Vol. 86). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-934X(02)00591-6

Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W. M., Patrick, H. P., Krajik, J., & Soloway, E. (1997). Teaching for understanding. International handbook of teachers and teaching, (January), 819–878.

Caine, R. N., & Caine, G. (1994). Making connections: Teaching and the human brain. Addison-Wesley.

Cash, C. S. (1993). Building condition and student achievement and behavior. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, 158-158 . https://doi.org/10.16953/deusbed.74839

Cherubini, L., & Hodson, J. (2008). Ontario Ministry of Education Policy and Aboriginal Learners’ Epistemologies: A Fundamental Disconnect. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, (79), 1–33.

Chubb, J. E., & Moe, T. M. (1991). Politics, markets and America’s Schools. British Journal of Sociology of Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142569910120306

Clay, T., & Breslow, L. (2007). Why students don’t attend class. MIT Faculty Newsletter, 22(4), 6–7. Retrieved from http://web.mit.edu/fnl

Cole, R. W. (2008). Educating everybody’s children: We know what works—and what doesn’t. in educating everybody’s children: Diverse teaching strategies for diverse learners, 2nd Edition (pp. 1–40).

Dainton, S. (2004). Personalised learning. Forum, 46(2), 56–58. https://doi.org/10.2304/forum.2004.46.2.4

Derewianka, B. (2009). Using appraisal theory to track interpersonal development in adolesent academic writing. In Advances in Language and Education (pp. 142–165).

Entwistle, N., & Tait, H. (1990). Approaches to learning, evaluations of teaching, and preferences for contrasting academic environments. Higher Education, 19(2), 169–194. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00137106

Felicia, P. (2009). Digital games in schools: A handbook for teachers. European Schoolnet’s Games in Schools, 44.

Flower, L. (1996). Negotiating the meaning of difference. Written Communication, 13(1), 44–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088396013001004

Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfield, A. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In Handbook of reading research, Vol. III (Vol. III, pp. 403–422). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016627907001

Hart, J. (2012). Academic language for English language learners and struggling readers: How to help students across content areas. TESOL Quarterly, 46(2), 420–422. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.28

House, J. (2006). Text and context in translation. Journal of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2005.06.021

Jordan, A., Glenn, C., & McGhie-Richmond, D. (2010). The Supporting Effective Teaching (SET) project: The relationship of inclusive teaching practices to teachers’ beliefs about disability and ability, and about their roles as teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(2), 259–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.03.005

Lorenzo Galés, M. N., & Piquer Vives, I. (2013). Report and evaluation of the development of CLIL Programmes in Catalonia Introduction: from Catalan immersion to foreign language CLIL. Temps d’Educació, 45, 143–180.

Mahardhani, A. J. (2015). Kepemimpinan ideal kepala sekolah. Jurnal Dimensi Pendidikan Dan Pembelajaran, 3(2), 1–4.

Newmark, P. (1988). A textbook of translation. Text. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004

Rendón, L. I. (1994). Validating culturally diverse students: Toward a new model of learning and student development. Innovative Higher Education, 19(1), 33–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01191156

Said, K., Kurniawan, A., & Anton, O. (2018). Development of media-based learning using android mobile learning. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology, 96(3).

Shernoff, D. J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2009). Flow in schools: Cultivating engaged learners and optimal learning environments. Handbook of Positive Psychology in Schools, (November 2015), 131–145. https://doi.org/10.2307/1423345

Struyven, K., Dochy, F., & Janssens, S. (2010). “Teach as you preach”: The effects of student-centred versus lecture-based teaching on student teachers’ approaches to teaching. European Journal of Teacher Education, 33(1), 43–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619760903457818

Unesco. (2014). Practical tips for teaching large classes embracing diversity: Toolkit for creating inclusive, learning-friendly environments specialized booklet 2 A Teacher‛s Guide.

Willis, J. (2007). The neuroscience of joyful education supporting good teaching practices with neuroscience. Educational Leadership, 64, 1–4.