THE TEACHING OF FUNCTIONAL EXPRESSION FOR THE FIRST...

THE TEACHING OF FUNCTIONAL EXPRESSION

FOR THE FIRST GRADE STUDENTS

AT MTs PEMBANGUNAN UIN SYARIF HIDAYATULLAH

JAKARTA BASED ON KTSP SYLLABUS

A “Skripsi” Presented to the Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teachers’ Training

in a Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of S.Pd. (Bachelor of Art) in English Language Education

BY:

ELIS SITI MARIA ULFAH NIM: 203014001561

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH EDUCATION

FACULTY OF TARBIYAH AND TEACHERS’ TRAINING

SYARIF HIDAYATULLAH STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY

JAKARTA

2010

ABSTRACT SITI MARIA ULFAH, ELIS. 2010. Teaching Functional Expression for the

First Grade Students of MTs Pembangunan UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta Based on KTSP Syllabus, Skripsi, English Education Department, Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teachers’ Training, UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta. Advisor: Dra. Hidayati, M.Pd

Key words : Functional Expression, Syllabus

Functional expression is taught to the students in order they can interact and communicate in the daily life activities which covering giving and accepting information, saying thank you or saying greetings and saying something politeness.

This research is aimed in analyzing the teaching functional expression for

the first grade students of MTs Pembangunan UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta based on KTSP syllabus, it consist of (1) the instructional materials used by the English teacher in teaching functional expression at MTs Pembangunan UIN Jakarta, (2) the instructional activities conducted by the teacher in teaching functional expression at MTs Pembangunan UIN Jakarta, and (3) the evaluation used by the teacher in teaching functional expression at MTs Pembangunan UIN Jakarta.

The purpose of the research is to describe about the functional expression which is taught to the students at MTs Pembangunan UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta whether in line with the KTSP Syllabus or not. The subject includes the English teachers who taught the materials and the students of the first grade students of MTs Pembangunan UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta. This research is using descriptive evaluative method by using observation, questionnaire, and interview.

The findings of the research stated that the teaching functional expression

which is taught to the students same as the objectives of the KTSP Syllabus and the teacher has a good responsibility for her duty as a teacher.

i

ABSTRAK SITI MARIA ULFAH, ELIS. 2010. Pengajaran Functional Expression

Terhadap Siswa Kelas Satu MTs Pembangunan UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta berdasarkan sillabus KTSP, Skripsi, Jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Fakultas Ilmu Tarbiyah dan Keguaruan, UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta. Pembimbing: Dra. Hidayati, M.Pd

Kata Kunci : Functional Expression, Sillabus

Functional expression diajarkan kepada para siswa agar mereka mampu dan bisa berinteraksi dan berkomunikasi didalam aktivitas kehidupan mereka sehari-hari yang meliputi antara lain; cara memberikan dan menerima informasi, mengucapkan rasa terima kasih atau mengucapakan salam serta tegur sapa serta mampu mengucapkan sesuatu yang sopan kepada orang lain dalam kehidupan sehari-hari.

Penelitian in bertujuan untuk menganalisis pengajaran functional expression

bagi para siswa kelas satu MTs Pembanguan UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta berdasarakan pada sillabus KTSP, penelitian ini terdiri dari (1) materi ajar yang digunakan oleh guru bahasa inggris didalam mengajarkan functional expression di MTs Pembangunan UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta, (2) kegiatan belajar mengajar yang dialakukan oleh guru didalam mengajarkan functional expression di MTs Pembangunan UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta, dan (3) evaluasi yang digunakan oleh guru didalam mengajarkan functional expression di MTs Pembangunan UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta.

Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk mendeskripsikan atau memberikan gambaran mengenai functional expression yang diajarkan kepada para siswa MTs Pembangunan UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta apakah sudah sesuai dengan syllabus KTSP atau belum. Subyek dari penelitian ini adalah guru bahasa inggris yang mengajarkan materi functional expression dan juga siswa kelas satu MTs Pembangunan UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta. Penelitian in menggunakan metode deskriptif evaluative yang menggunakan observasi, pertanyaan-pertanyaan dan wawancara untuk mengumpulkan data-data skripsi ini.

Penemuan dari hasil penelitian ini menyatakan bahwa pengajaran

functional expression sudah sesuai dengan tujuan-tujuan syllabus KTSP dan guru bahasa inggrisnya pun memiliki rasa tanggung jawab yang besar terhadap tugasnya sebagai seorang guru.

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful. Praise be to Allah the

lord of the world who blessed us with so many amazement so the writer could

finished his “skripsi” well. Peace and blessing be upon to our prophet Muhammad

SAW, his families, his companions, and his followers.

This “skripsi” is presented to the English Department, the Faculty of

Tarbiyah and Teachers’ Training State Islamic University Syarif Hidayatullah

Jakarta as a partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Strata One

(S1). Many people have a lot of contributions for the writer in completing his

“Skripsi” for the requirement at Degree of Strata-1 (S1). In the process of writing

the “skripsi”, the writer got so many helps, motivations, and guidances from many

kinds of sides. Therefore, the writer would like to express her deepest gratitude to

her beloved parents Dayari Rustam and Uun Undariyah and all families who

always give prayer, motivation, love, faith and support for her, and also for her

husband Muhammad Luthfi Ubaidillah Jenar and my Daughter Faylasufia Hayula

who always help and give their motivations, love and support. The writer also

would like to express her thanks and great gratitude to his advisor Dra. Hidayati,

M.Pd. for her valuable help, guidance, corrections and suggestions for the writer

in finishing this “Skripsi”, therefore, give her virtues Allah. Amen.

Her gratitude also goes to a head of English Department, Drs. Syauki M.Pd

and Neneng Sunengsih, S.Pd. as the head and secretary of English Education

Department, and also for all lectures of English Education Department for their

encouragement and who have transfered their knowledge to her. And the same

respect also should be addressed to Prof. Dr. Dede Rosyada, M.A as the Dean of

Tarbiya and Teachers’ Training Faculty. And also for all the staffs and officers of

UIN Library, Tarbiya’s Library and UNIKA Atmajaya Library who have given

permission for using and lending their books in completing the references for this

“Skripsi”.

iii

Her thanks also expressed to her friends who cannot mentioned one by

one, May Allah gives the blessing to all his friends. And the last the writer expects

this “skripsi” can give the usefulness for many aspects especially for development

of scientific education system and become the inspiration for the people who read.

Jakarta, 2010

The Writer

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ENDORSEMENT SHEET ............................................................................... i

ABSTRACT IN ENGLISH .............................................................................. ii

ABSTRAK DALAM BAHASA INDONESIA ................................................ iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ............................................................................... iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................. vi

LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................ viii

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ...................................................................... 1

A. Background of the Study ........................................................ 1

B. Statement of the Problem ....................................................... 5

C. Objective of the Study ............................................................ 5

D. Significance of the Study ........................................................ 6

E. Scope and Limitation of the Study ......................................... 6

F. Definition of Key Terms ......................................................... 7

CHAPTER II THEORITICAL FRAMEWORK ........................................... 8

A. Teaching English at Islamic Junior High School/MTs ........... 8

B. Objectives of Teaching English at Islamic Junior High School

Based on KTSP ....................................................................... 10

C. Instructional Material for MTs Recommended by the

D. Latest English Syllabus (School-Level Curriculum or

KTSP) ..................................................................................... 11

E. Curriculum, Syllabus, and Material ........................................ 14

F. Instructional Activities Conducted at MTs/SMP .................... 16

G. Evaluation ............................................................................... 16

H. Functional Expression ............................................................ 18

v

CHAPTER III RESEARCH DESIGN ............................................................ 21

A. Place and Time of the Study ................................................... 21

B. Research Design ..................................................................... 22

C. Subject of the Study ................................................................ 22

D. Research Instrument ............................................................... 22

E. Data and Source Data ............................................................. 23

F. Technique of Collecting Data ................................................. 23

G. Techniques of Data Analysis .................................................. 24

CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS ................... 26

A. The Instructional Materials Used by the English Teacher

in Teaching Functional Expression ......................................... 26

B. The Instructional Activities Conducted by the Teacher

in Teaching Functional Expression at MTs Pembangunan

UIN Jakarta ............................................................................. 34

C. The Evaluation Used by the Teacher in Teaching

Functional Expression at MTs Pembangunan UIN

Jakarta (Question number 6,7,8,9,10) ..................................... 39

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION .................................... 43

A. Conclusion .............................................................................. 43

B. Suggestion .............................................................................. 44

BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................. 45

APPENDICES ................................................................................................... 47

vi

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

Table 2.1. : Standard Competencies and Basic Competencies ........................... 12

Table 2.2. : Functional Expression and Its utterances ......................................... 19

Table 3.1. : Criteria of test result percentage ...................................................... 25 Table 4.1. : The data about the core English textbook………………………… 27 Table 4.2. : The data about another references used to support English textbook ……………………………………………………………………... 27 Table 4.3. : The data about Functional Expression …………………………… 28

Table 4.4. : The data about Students’ Understanding of the Materials are taught above by the Teacher in the Classroom …...……………….. 31

Table 4.5. : The data about Language which is used by the English Teacher during Teaching Materials in the Classroom ……………………... 32 Table4.6. : The data gained from teachers’ questionnaires about instructional material ……………………………………………... 33 Table 4.7. : Instructional Activities …………………………………………… 34 Table 4.8. : the frequency and percentage of the instructional activities ……... 37 Table 4.9. : The data of evaluation calculation which is given in the end of the

meeting of the teaching-learning activities ………………………... 39 Table 4.10 : The data calculation of the evaluation (daily exercises) in the end of the teaching-learning process ……………………………... 39 Table 4.11: The data of calculation for the kinds of evaluation are given to the students by the teacher ……………………………………... 40 Table 4.12 The data of forms of evaluation which are given to the students in their exercises ……………………………………... 41 Table 4.13: The data information of whether the teacher told the students about evaluation which will be conducted ………………………... 41

vii

viii

APPENDICES

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

This chapter discusses and presents background of the study, statement of

the problems, objectives of the study, significances of the study, scope and

limitation of the study, and definition of the key terms.

A. Background of the Study

The national education aims at developing the quality of Indonesians who

believe The Almighty God, have good character, skill and knowledge, stable

personality and responsibility for society and nation. To attain the objective of the

national education stated above, the government as well as the society has been

conduct the national education which has been formulated both in the form of

formal institution beginning from the elementary up to the university levels and

also in non-formal education.

The availability of means of communication facilitates the people to

communicate so that the need of communication was growing very rapidly. It

needs a certain languages as a lingua franca to communicate with other people in

the different languages and countries in the world. One of the Lingua Franca is

English and it is the most widely used language all over the world. Besides it use

as medium of developing relationship with other nations, English is also used to

absorb and develop science, technology, economy and culture.

1

2

Because of that, communication needs understanding. The understanding

of communication can be got by functional expression. Functional expression is

something that we do or say which is intended to give you an advantage in an

argument; a clever debating gambit. These questions are often on opening gambit,

the thing you say first for negotiation.1

Considering that how important English is for the progress of our country,

the government by the issuance of the degree of the minister education and culture

No. 096 of 1967, has stipulated that English become the first foreign language that

should be taught formally to all Indonesian students, starting from Junior High

School (including MTs) up to the university levels. The objective of English

teaching-learning in Indonesia as demanded by the decree is the mastery of

various language skills covering reading, listening, writing, and speaking2.

In Indonesia, English is considered as a foreign language because it is

taught as a school subject. It is not used as the medium of instruction and it is not

widely used by people in the country. English is taught to the students of the

Junior High School or Islamic Junior High School (MTs is used for the next term),

and Senior High School or Islamic Senior High School (MA) with the hope that

SMA graduation will be able at least to be able to read English textbooks. But

unfortunately, the fact has not met the people. In reality, the result of National

Examination (UN is used for the next term) score about teaching English is still

unsatisfactory (Kompas, 21 Mei 2004). The empirical score of UN 2004 showed

that some Senior High School and Junior High School students were gained below

the average of National Graduation of Standard Score (skor Standar Kelulusan

Nasional). The department of national education had administered UN for the

second time for the score had failures or lost in the first event as the wiser solution

for this condition.

1 Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English, (Longman: Pearson Education Limited,

2002), p.662. 2 Ketetapan Mentri Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Republik Indonesia No.096 Tahun 1967

tentang Pengajaran Bahasa Inggris di Indonesia

3

Curriculum always changes as the students’ need also change from time to

time in accordance with the changing of the science and technology. Therefore, to

meet the students’ needs, the 1994 curriculum had been replaced by 2004

competency-based curriculum. The approach used in the previous is called the

communicative approach; unfortunately the minister of education doesn’t give the

issuance of decree to be formally used at the school levels but still limited use for

schools that choosen as pilot project.

Moreover, the standard commutation of national education (BSNP is used

for the next term) is strived to improve this curriculum into the better one. The

syllabus of its curriculum is developed further by curriculum designer so it is

called “School-Level Curriculum” or the famous one is 2006 Content Standard

Curriculum (standar isi kurikulum).

In conducting teaching-learning process, the teachers must follow the 2006

content standard syllabus. Since, it contains program and materials for teaching-

learning process, that it is important for the teacher to follow it. The basic learning

of the schools must be developed by each school in advance to fulfill the contents

standard of National Educational Standard Board (for the next term the word

BSNP is used) as legitimately drawn by the Decree of National Education

Minister No. 22 year 2006:

“The content standard for Junior and Senior high school level, comprise the minimal material and minimum competence level to reach and also the minimal graduated competency for certain kind and level of education.” 3

As the information stated above, Contents Standards is that the minimal

material and minimal level competency is to fulfill the minimal graduate

competency at the certain levels and kinds of education units. From the Contents

Standards stated above, the main objective of the English teaching at school is to

enable students to communicate in English. The four language skills (listening,

speaking, reading, and writing) are taught at school, while language components

3 Mansur Muslich, KTSP (Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan) Dasar Pemahaman dan

Pengembangan, (Jakarta: PT Bumi Aksara, 2007), p. 9.

4

such as structure, vocabulary, pronunciation, and spelling are presented in

integration with these skills. The order of the presentation in each lesson at school

always starts the development of listening and speaking skills, followed by

reading and writing skills. These materials are designed to cover the components

of communicative competence, i.e. linguistic competence (e.g. grammar in

Language Notes), sociocultural competence (e.g. language gambits or functional

expression in Language Notes), discourse competence (e.g. practice of speaking

and writing) and strategic competence (e.g. practice of conversation).

As stated in the 2004 competency-based curriculum and 2006 content

standard syllabus, the objective of teaching at MTs is that by the end of their

study, the students are expected to master the four language skills with the

emphasize on reading skill through selected themes which is based on the level of

their competence and interest, the level of vocabulary mastery (1000 words) and

the appropriate grammar. Thus, the language components such as, grammar,

vocabulary, pronunciation, and spelling can be taught integrated to support the

development of those four skills, but not for the shake of mastery of those

components.

Madrasah Tsanawiyah is an Islamic Junior High School which belongs to

the primary education. It is under the administration of the religion espartment.

Basically the curriculum applied in it as same as in SLTP, except that the

curriculum applied in MTs is added with Islamic education programs. Thus, the

curriculum applied with the Islamic additional such as, Qur’an Hadits, Akidah

Akhlaq, Fiqih, Islamic Cultural History, and Arabic.

Many factors that affect the success and failure of teaching English, those

factors are related to linguistic and non-linguistic areas. Some of the factors which

can be attributed to the unsatisfactory condition are the English system which is

different from Indonesia, such as, phonology, morphology and syntax.

Meanwhile, Sadtono, 1995 says that for non-linguistic factors, that is external

5

factors to the name of the language being taught, such as teacher, student,

material, method and environment.

With the above reasons, this “Skripsi” is focused on the teaching

functional expression for the first grade students of MTs Pembangunan UIN

Jakarta based on KTSP Syllabus.

B. Statement of the Problems

In line with background of the study mentioned above, the writer conduct

a study concerning the basis of carrying out research, giving clearer way in the

research implementation, and obtaining the intended result of teaching functional

expression for the first grade students of MTs PEMBANGUNAN UIN Jakarta

based on KTSP Syllabus. Through the main question “How is the teaching OF

functional expression for the first grade students of MTs Pembangunan UIN

Jakarta?” this main question can be formulated into specific question as follows:

1. How are instructional materials used by the English teacher in teaching

functional expression?

2. How are the instructional activities conducted by the English teacher of

MTs Pembangunan UIN Jakarta in teaching functional expression?

3. How is the evaluation conducted by the English teacher of MTs

Pembanguan in teaching functional expression?

C. Objectives of the Study

In line with the statement of the problems stated above, this study tries to

describe and evaluate the implementation of teaching functional expression at

MTs Pembangunan UIN Jakarta based on syllabus content (KTSP). The

objectives of study are:

6

1. To describe the instructional materials used by the English teacher in

teaching functional expression at MTs Pembangunan UIN Jakarta.

2. To describe the instructional activities conducted by the teacher in

teaching functional expression at MTs Pembangunan UIN Jakarta.

3. To describe the evaluation used by the teacher in teaching functional

expression at MTs Pembangunan UIN Jakarta.

D. Significance of the Study

The findings (results) of this study can provide the information about the

condition of teaching English at MTs Pembangunan UIN Jakarta especially in

teaching functional expression for the first grade students of MTs Pembangunan

UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta based on KTSP syllabus. It is expected that those

findings can contribute to the two groups of people, namely; (a) the English

teacher, for the English teacher this findings can contribute in improving her

teaching quality varied materials of functional expression and used many kinds of

media, and (b) further researcher, this study is expected to give new knowledge

for further researcher in doing the better research of teaching-learning process.

Besides, the results of this study are hoped as a basic data for the

researchers who are interest in some field more deeply problems to be discussed

in her English teaching functional expression activities at MTs Pembangunan UIN

Jakarta.

E. Scope and Limitation of the Study

This “skripsi” focuses on first grade of MTs Pembangunan UIN Jakarta at

the event semester 2008/2009 academic year, and to make a description of this

“skripsi” deeper and the problems will be limited into: (a) the instructional

materials used by the English teacher in teaching functional expression, (b) the

instructional activities conducted by the English teacher of MTs Pembangunan

UIN Jakarta in teaching functional expression, and (c) the evaluation conducted

by the English teacher of MTs Pembangunan UIN Jakarta in teaching functional

expression.

7

F. Definition of Key Terms

Based on the problems and the objectives stated above and for the shake of

clarification and to avoid ambiguity of some terms in this study, they need to be

defined.

1. Functional Expression : Something that we do or say which is

intended to give you an advantage in an

argument; a clever debating gambit. These

questions are often on opening gambit, the

thing you say first for negotiation.4

2. Syllabus : A plan that states exactly what students at

a school or collage should learn in a particular

subject.

4 Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English, (Longman: Pearson Education Limited,

2002), p.662.

CHAPTER II

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

In order to have a clear description of the problem under the study of

teaching functional expression for the grade students of MTs Pembangunan UIN

Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta based on KTSP syllabus, this chapter presents and

discusses the theoretical framework, which consists of: teaching English at

Islamic Junior High School (MTs), objective of teaching English at Islamic junior

high school based on KTSP, instructional material for MTs recommended by the

latest English syllabus, syllabus, curriculum, and material, instructional activities

at MTs, evaluation, and functional expression.

A. The Teaching of English at Islamic Junior High School/MTs

Madrasah Tsanawiyah means Islamic Junior High School which is under

the administration of the attans Religious Department. English has been taught at

secondary levels because English has a central role in students’ intellectual, social,

and emotional propagation in teaching-learning process. English is as a

compulsory subject at MTs which helps students to know about themselves and

8

9

cultures, the English instructional material which is suggested in the syllabus can

be developed by the teachers themselves. They have own right to select and use

one textbook or more, which they consider appropriate for the students.

Realizing how important English is for the progress of our country, the

government, by the issuance of the Decree of the Minister of Educational and

Culture No.096 of 1967, has stipulated that English becomes the first foreign

language that should be taught formally to all Indonesian students, starting from

Junior High School to college or universities level. The objective of teaching-

learning of English in Indonesia as demanded by the decree is the mastery of

various language skills covering reading, listening, writing, and speaking.1

Human is individual and social creatures that needs the education. The

need of education has been one of the human rights because it is a process of

changing attitude by means of learning and training. It is also a main point in

developing human thinking which is collaterally with society. In line with this

statement, Undang – Undang RI no.20 Chapter II Section 3, 2003

Pendidikan nasional berfungsi mengembangkan kemampuan dan membentuk watak serta peradaban bangsa yang bermartabat dalam rangka mencerdaskan kehidupan bangsa, bertujuan untuk berkembangnya potensi peserta didik agar menjadi manusia yang beriman dan bertaqwa kepada Tuhan Yang Maha Esa yang berakhlak mulia, sehat, berilmu, cakap, kreatif mandiri dan menjadi warga negara yang demokratis dan bertanggung jawab.2

Based on the Undang – Undang RI tentang sistem Pendidikan Nasional,

learning process is success if it raises the purpose that is stated. As a dominant

component, teacher is demanded to master material and have an ability to transfer

the knowledge to the students.

Teaching English in junior high school has a purpose that is by the end of

their study, the students are expected to master two competence, that are actional

1 Ketetapan Mentri Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Republik Indonesia No.096 Tahun 1967

tentang Pengajaran Bahasa Inggris di Indonesia. 2 UU RI Tahun 2003 tentang Pendidikan Nasional, page.6

10

competence which is divided into productive skills (speaking and writing) and

receptive skills (listening and reading) and linguistic competence (grammar,

vocabulary, pronunciation and spelling).3

English subject is aimed to develop those skills in order students to able to

communicate in positive literacy covering performative, functional, informational,

and epistemic. In performative, people be able to read, write, listen, and speak

with the symbols are used. In functional, a person be able to use the language to

fulfill their life needs, such as reading newspapers, etc. In informational, people

are able to access the knowledge by using language skills. Whereas, in epistemic,

people able to use the knowledge in the target language4 by using English.

Besides, teaching English in Islamic Junior High School is proposed to

implant the awareness about the importance of English language as a vital

medium of transfer of knowledge that has a role to widen science, implant

positive thinking to foreign people and help the students in doing cross cultural

activities.

In teaching learning English, an evaluation has an important role in teaching

learning activities. It is an integral part of the instructional program. Through

evaluation, teachers are able to find out the effectiveness or the failure of a

method and also students achievement in mastering the lesson.

B. Objectives of Teaching English at Islamic Junior High School Based on

KTSP

Based on the latest curriculum that is KTSP (School – Level Curriculum),

English subject at MTs/SMP is intended to the students to have a skill of (a)

communicate spoken and written to get a functional literacy level, (b) to enhance

3 Depdiknas, Kurikulum 2004, Standar Kompetensi Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Inggris

SMP/MTs, (Jakarta; Depdiknas, 2003) 4 Anonymous, Standar Isi dan Standar kompetensi Lulusan untuk Satuan Pendidikan

Sekolah Menengah Pertama (SMP) / Madrasah Tsanawiyah (MTs) Beserta Peraturan Pelaksanaannya (Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan Nasional Republik Indonesia No. 22, 23, dan 24 Tahun 2006), Jakarta, Departemen Pendidikan Nasional. Unpublished.

11

nation competition in global society, and (c) developing of students’

understanding between language and culture.5

English learning at MTs is aimed at the students in order to get functional

level, that is to communicate spoken and written to settle about the life’s

problems. Furthermore, according to the 1994 Curriculum, the objective of Junior

High School / Islamic Junior High School is to give the skills in order to develop

the knowledge and skills are gotten from basic school to improve students’ life as

a member of society and citizen of a country with improvement level to prepare

following the secondary education.6

According to the School-Level Curriculum -KTSP- (for the next term the

word KTSP is used) English subject at MTs is intended to the students to have a

skill of (a) speaking communication and written to get a functional literacy level,

(b) to enhance nation competition in global society, and (c) developing students’

understanding between language and culture.7

The curricular objectives of English in MTs/SMP are specified into the

instructional objectives of seventh grade, eighth grade and ninth grade. The

objectives for each year are more specified into objectives of four skills, where

these skills objectives stated on competences standard and basic competences.

C. Instructional Material for MTs Recommended by the Latest English Syllabus (School-Level Curriculum / KTSP).

Competences standard and basic competences can be formulated with the

main material. This formulation is called as English Instructional Material which

5 Anonymous, Standar Isi dan Standar kompetensi Lulusan untuk Satuan Pendidikan

Sekolah Menengah Pertama (SMP) / Madrasah Tsanawiyah (MTs) Beserta Peraturan Pelaksanaannya (Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan Nasional Republik Indonesia No. 22, 23, dan 24 Tahun 2006), Jakarta, Departemen Pendidikan Nasional. Unpublished.

6 Drs. Harsono Tjokrosujoso, M.Pd. Kurrikulum 1994 dan Pengembangan Materi Bahasa Inggris SLTP dan SMU, (Malang: Institute Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan Malang, 1996), p. 28.

7 Anonymous, Standar Isi …

12

are divided into some themes. The themes are taught by the English teachers who

are some competencies which are related with the material itself, such as listening,

speaking, reading and writing. The materials are prepared by the teachers who

should be in line with the Standard Competencies and Basic Competencies for

each semester based on the School-Level Curriculum-KTSP- in the following

table:

Table 2.1: Standard Competencies and Basic Competencies

Standard Competencies Basic Competencies

Listening

1. Comprehend the meaning of simple transactional and interpersonal conversation in order to interact with the surrounding

1.1. Response the meaning of simple transaccional (to get things done) and interpersonal conversation accurately, fluently, and effectively in term of : Asking And giving help, asking and giving thing, asking and giving fact

1.2. Response the meaning of simple transactional (sosializing) and interpersonal conversation accurately, fluently, and effectively in term of: asking and giving pinion. Asking like and dislike. Asking clarificasion and interpersonal response.

2. Comprehend the meaning of functional oral text, short descriptive and procedure monologue for interact with the surrounding

Speaking 3. Express the meaning of simple

transactional and interpersonal

2.1. Response the meaning of short functional oral text accurately, fluently, and effectively in order to interact with the surrounding.

2.2. Response the meaning of short accurate, easy, and recive for interacsion with surrounding in the teks descriptive and procedure.

3.1 Response the meaning of simple transaccional (to get things done) and interpersonal conversation

13

conversation in order for interacting with the surrounding.

accurately, fluently, and effectively in term of : Asking and giving help, asking and giving thing, asking and giving fact

3.2. Response the meaning of simple transactional (sosializing) and interpersonal conversation accurately, fluently, and effectively in term of: asking and giving pinion. Asking like and dislike. Asking clarificasion and interpersonal response.

3. Express the meaning of functional oral text and short monologue descriptively in order for interacting with the surrounding.

3.1. Express the meaning of simple functional oral text by using oral language manner accurately, fluently, and effectively in order to interact with the surrounding

4.2. Express the meaning of short monologue by using oral language manner accurately, fluently, and effectively in order to interact with the surrounding

Reading 4. Comprehend the meaning of

functional written text and short essay in order to interact with the surrounding

Writing 5. Express the meaning of functional

written text and short essay in order to interact with the surrounding.

5.1. Read clearly the meaning of functional text and essay with the utterance, pressure, and intonation effectively related to the surrounding

5.2. Response the meaning of short functional written text accurately, fluently, and effectively related to the surrounding.

5.1. Express the meaning of short functional written text by using kinds of written text accurately, fluently, and effectively in order to interact with the surrounding.

Adapted from SMP/MTs English Syllabus 20068.


14

Based on the Standard Competencies and Basic Competencies in the table

2.1 above, the materials will be given to the students further more meaningful, if

they are available with the students’ needs, interests, and for their future.

D. Curriculum, Syllabus, and Material

Instructional materials are partially related to syllabus while syllabus and

curriculum are two different but closely related matters. Their close relation in the

reasons why the two are sometimes used synonymously by some expert the

present context. Materials are an important component within the curriculum they

are used to achieve the instructional objectives which have been formulated.

The term “curriculum” has many different definitions, as state in the

Constitution of 1945 No. 20 of 2003 about National Educational System in

section 1, verse 19:

“Kurrikulum adalah seperangkat rencana dan pengaturan mengenai tujuan, isi, dan bahan pelajaran serta cara yang digunakan sebagai pedoman penyelenggaraan kegiatan pembelajaran untuk mencapai tujuan pendidikan tertentu.” 9

The word curriculum is used interchangeable with syllabus. A syllabus is a

plan which a teacher translates into activities in the classroom. It is part of a

curriculum excluding the element of curriculum evaluation (Huda, 1999)10. This

definition is in line with that of Robertson (in Yalden, 1987)11 that the curriculum

includes the goals, objectives, content, processes, resources and means of

evolution of all learning experiences planned for pupils both in and out of the

school and community through classroom instruction and related programs, and

he defines syllabus as a statement of the plan for any part of the curriculum,

excluding the element of curriculum evaluation itself. Thus the main distinction

9 Masnur Muslich, KTSP (Kurikulum … p. 1.

10 Nuril Huda, Language Learning and Teaching; Issues and Trends, (IKIP Malang,1999), P.32

11 Janice Yalden, The Communicative Syllabus: Evolution, Design and Implementation, (London: Prentice Hall International, 1987), p. 40.

15

between a syllabus and a curriculum is that a syllabus is part of a curriculum

excluding the element of curriculum evaluation.

Moreover, Huda stated that a syllabus is a plan which a teacher translates

into activities in the classroom. It is a part of a curriculum excluding the element

of curriculum evaluation.12 To operate the curriculum, it has to be developed into

course unit syllabus. Besides, to conduct the syllabus well is needed materials,

because the materials have an important role to make a syllabus better and better.

Therefore, the instructional materials used for teaching-learning process must be

carefully selected. The teachers must know what the students’ needs to learn, the

materials are going to give available and to fulfill of the Content Standards. The

materials are going to give to the students have to make students comfortable and

interested in teaching-learning process. According to Richards and Rodgers

(1986),13 a particular design for an instructional system may imply a particular set

of roles for materials in support of the syllabus and the teachers and learners. The

role of instructional materials within a functional/communicative methodology

might be specified in the following terms:

1. Materials will focus on the communicative abilities of interpretation,

expression, and negotiation.

2. Materials will focus on understandable, relevant, and interesting

exchanges information, rather than on the presentation of grammatical

form.

3. Materials will involve different kinds of text and different media, which

the learners can use to develop their competence through variety of

different activities and tasks.

12 Nuril Huda, Language Learning and Teaching “Issues and Trends”, (Malang: IKIP Malang Publisher, 1999), p. 107.

13 Jack C. Richards and Theodores S. Rodgers, Approaches … p. 25.

16

E. Instructional Activities Conducted at MTs/SMP

There are three kinds of strategies. Those are used commonly in the

physical classroom when the teacher teaches the students, they are: a). Pre-

activities, b). Whilst activities, and c). Post activities.

a) Pre – Activities

In the pre-activities, the teacher starts the teaching-learning process by

greetings, such as; good morning, how are you today?, etc. Besides it, she check

the students’ attendance list to check who does not come to the class, before he

went to review the materials she gives the students some motivations in learning

English, after that she reviews the lesson before and asks them to show up their

text books or workbook.

b) Whilst Activities

In the whilst activities, the teacher has three kinds of classification which

are conducted in the classroom, such as; presenting the materials, learning

methodology, and using media during presenting material and the description of

giving other materials, such as; functional expression, grammar, pronunciation,

etc.

c) post – activities.

The last activities done by the teacher is post activities. The teacher

concluded the material, to review the materials given, to confirm about the next

materials and asked the students’ understanding of materials given by the teacher,

gives them clearly assignment which is correlated with the materials given.

F. Evaluation

Evaluation is a systematic process of information collecting about

numbers, verbal description, analysis, and information interpretation to give

decision for range of products (Masnur, 2007; 79). Muslich stated the concept

about evaluation (class evaluation) as follows:

“Proses pengumpulan dan penggunaan informasi oleh guru untuk pemberian keputusan terhadap hasil belajar siswa berdasarkan tahapan

17

kemajuan belajarnya sehingga didapatkan potret/profil kemampuan siswa dengan kompetensi yang ditetapkan dalam kurikulum.”14

Furthermore, Gronlund, 1985 (in Wilmar Tinambunan, 1988:2) suggests

that evaluation is the systematic process of collecting, analyzing and interpreting

information to determine the extent to which pupils are achieving instructional

objectives.15 There are two kinds of evaluations that usually used in the school,

namely summative (final achievement tests) and formative evaluation (progress

achievement tests). 16

Final achievement is intended to measure students’ skills, after they have

just finished all subject matter. It is usually administered at the end of a course of

study. Summative test is given periodically to determine at a particular point in

time what students know and do not know. Summative assessment at the

district/classroom level is an accountability measure that is generally used as part

of the grading process. This evaluation given per six months terms, by looking at

the final achievement tests result, teachers will get information how well their

students have reached instructional objectives determined in particular term or

periode.

The second form of achievement test (formative test) is progress

achievement tests. Nowadays, the equal term for formative evaluation is well

known as block examination (ujian blok). The progress achievement tests are

administered regularly during a study to find out how well students have mastered

the subject matter, which have just been taught. In this sense, formative

assessment informs both teachers and students about student understanding at a

point when timely adjustments can be made. These adjustments help to ensure

students achieve targeted standards-based learning goals within a set time frame.

Progress achievement tests are intended to monitor learning progress during the

instruction and to provide continuous feedback to both pupil and teacher

14 Mansur Muslich, KTSP (Kurikulum … p. 78. 15 Wilmar Tinambunan, Evaluation of Students Achievement, (Depdikbud, Ditjend,

1988), p. 2. 16 Arthur Hughes, Testing for… p. 10

18

concerning learning successes and failures. It is used for example at the end of a

unit in the course book or after lesson designed to teach one particular point. The

result of this test will provide to students information about how well they have

learnt a particular material and will give the students immediate feedback. If their

learning has been successful, which is indicated by good mark from a result of

test, they are likely to take the next learning task with fresh and great enthusiasm.

The evaluation which is done by teacher in teaching – learning is aimed

for three aspects, such as a) students, b) teacher and c) headmaster. (a) for the

students, these evaluations as a final result of their studying in order to know

about their skills in understanding the materials, (b) for the teachers, it as a

consideration of the students’ development in their learning process to increase

students’ learning improvement processes, and the last is (c) for the headmaster,

the result of these evaluations as a consideration for him in order to know whether

he has to increase the school qualities and the students’ skill qualities or not.

G. Functional Expression

English subject is aimed to develop those skills in order students to able to

communicate in positive literacy covering performative, functional, informational,

and epistemic.17 As stated in latest syllabus (KTSP) that there is a material which

is used in the daily activities, it is functional or called functional expression in

other hand named language gambit.

According to Longman Dictionary, functional expression is something that

you do or say which is intended to give you an advantage in an argument; a clever

debating gambit. These questions are often on opening gambit, the thing you say

first for negotiation.18 In functional, a person able to use the language to fulfill

their life needs, such as reading newspapers, etc.

17 Anonymous, Standar Isi ... 18 Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English, (Longman: Pearson Education Limited,

2002), p.662.

19

Functional expression is taught to the students in order they can interact

and communicate in the daily life activities which covering giving and accepting

information, saying thank you or saying greetings and saying something

politeness. Functional expressions have a wide range of pragmatic functions: they

may be used to initiate discourse (“say”), change direction of discourse (“on the

other hand…”), interrupt (“wait a minute!”), hesitate (“well…) and so on.

Although they vary in function, they are defined and characterized by their

stereotyped formulation and their predictable use to accomplish a particular

speech act. Sometimes there is nothing grammatically wrong with the utterances

of functional expression; it does not belong to the restricted group of expression

one may use to interrupt.19

There were some functional expressions taught in the seventh grade of

junior high school, they are:

Table 2.2.:

Functional Expression and Its utterances

Functional Expression

Utterances

Response the meaning of simple transactional (to get things done) and interpersonal conversation accurately, fluently, and effectively in term of : asking n giving help

A: “can you help me?” B: “sure, I m ready!”

Response the meaning of simple transactional (to get things done) and interpersonal conversation accurately, fluently, and effectively in term of : asking n giving thing

A: “May I borrow your pen?” B: “sure, here you are!”

19 Foreign Language Annals, October 1987/volume 20, p. 393 – 394.

20

Response the meaning of simple transactional (to get things done) and interpersonal conversation accurately, fluently, and effectively in term of : asking n giving fact

A: “where is it? B: it’s there..

A: Did you come here yesterday?

B: I came here yesterday Response the meaning of simple transactional (to get things done) and interpersonal conversation accurately, fluently, and effectively in term of : asking n giving opinión

A: what do you think of this? B: Not bad

Response the meaning of simple transactional (to get things done) and interpersonal conversation accurately, fluently, and effectively in term of : like n dislike

A: Do you like beef? B: yes, I like! A: Do you like red shirt? B: no, I dislike!

Response the meaning of simple transactional (to get things done) and interpersonal conversation accurately, fluently, and effectively in term of : asking clarification

A: Are You sure? B: Well, It’s like this…

Response the meaning of simple transactional (to get things done) and interpersonal conversation accurately, fluently, and effectively in term of : interpersonal

A: I met her B: I Did you? C: It’s huge, you know D: Is it? E: You are new, aren’t you? F: I am

Adapted from SMP/MTs English Syllabus 2006.20

From the table 2.2 previously about the functional expression and its

utterances showed that the functional expressions mentioned previously must be

taught in physical classroom atmosphere.


CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents and discusses about place and time of the study,

research design, subject of the study, research instrument, data and source data,

techniques of collecting data, and techniques of data analysis.

A. Place and Time of the Study

The writer did this research at MTs Pembangunan UIN Jakarta. She

conducted this research at the school about three months; they are from

December, 17th 2008 up to February, 13th 2009.

B. Research Design

The design of this study is descriptive evaluative about teaching functional

expression for the first grade students of MTs Pembangunan UIN Syarif

Hidayatullah Jakarta based on KTSP syllabus. This study is aimed at describing

and evaluating about the using and understanding of functional expression in daily

life activities.

21

22

The Descriptive study is designed to obtain the current status of

phenomena and is directed toward determining the nature of situation as it exists

at the time of study that is in MTs Pembangunan UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta.

It is called evaluative because it tries to evaluate objectively about the using

functional expression at the first grade students of MTs Pembangunan UIN Syarif

Hidayatullah Jakarta based on KTSP syllabus. The evaluation is conducted by

way of analyzing the students’ responses from the questionnaire given about

teaching-learning functional expression.

C. Subject of the study

The object of this study is MTs Pembangunan UIN Syarif Hidayatullah

Jakarta at Jl. Ibnu Taimia IV Kompleks UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Ciputat. The

subject includes the English teachers and the students of the first grade of MTs

Pembangunan UIN. There were 240 students who studied in the first grade of this

school which were divided into seven classes namely 7A until 7G.

There were two English teachers who taught at the first grade of MTs

Pembangunan UIN, they are Ms. Wiwin Witri, S.Pd and Ms. Prastya Aghawaty,

S.Pd. who teaches class 7A until 7G.

Here the writer took the sample only two classes from the total of

population. This sampling was based on the English teacher discussed who held

the class 7A until 7G. The technique of sampling used is simple random sampling.

It caused the population that the writer observed is homogeny.

D. Research Instrument

In this research the writer used three instruments which are used for

gathered the data that he needs, they are; observation, questionnaires, and

interview to complete the data needed for this study.

23

E. Data and Source Data

The data of this study were three types; (a) the data about instructional

materials used by the English teacher in teaching functional expression at MTs

Pembangunan UIN Jakarta, (b) the data about instructional activities by the

teacher in teaching functional expression at MTs Pembangunan UIN Jakarta, and

(c) the data about evaluation by the teacher in teaching functional expression at

MTs Pembangunan UIN Jakarta.

The data about the instructional materials used by the English teacher in

teaching functional expression at MTs Pembangunan UIN Jakarta were derived

from observation and questionnaire to answer the first research question, the data

about the instructional activities by the teacher in teaching functional expression

at MTs Pembangunan UIN Jakarta took through observation, interview, and

questionnaire to answer the second question of the research question, the data

about the evaluation by the teacher in teaching functional expression at MTs

Pembangunan UIN Jakarta were derived from the questionnaire.

F. Technique of Collecting Data

There were three techniques of collecting data applied in this study; they

are observation, questionnaire, and interview.

1. Observation

This observation is the main technique in collecting the data of teaching

materials and instructional activities were used in the classroom. In this case, the

research acted as an observer who observed the teaching and learning activities.

2. Questionnaires

The questionnaires are classified into two kinds; they are (a) the

questionnaire for the English teacher and (b) the questionnaire for the students.

24

The questionnaire for the English teacher and the students was conducted

to get the data about the teaching materials and instructional activities were used

in the classroom.

3. Interview

This technique was used to supplement to complete the data and this

technique was gained from three elements of the statement of the problems. They

are; (a) the data about instructional materials used by the English teacher in

teaching functional expression at MTs Pembangunan UIN Jakarta, (b) the data

about instructional activities by the teacher in teaching functional expression at

MTs Pembangunan UIN Jakarta, and (c) the data about evaluation by the teacher

in teaching functional expression at MTs Pembangunan UIN Jakarta.

G. Technique of Data Analysis

The raw data obtained through documentations and interviews were

analyzed in some ways as shown bellows:

1. Data from Observation

The data from observation was conducted by the researcher to make her

easier in reporting the research report, this data analyze about the instructional

materials used by the English teacher in teaching functional expression at MTs

Pembangunan UIN Jakarta and instructional activities by the teacher in teaching

functional expression at MTs Pembangunan UIN Jakarta. This data was analyzed

to answer the 1st and 2nd research questions.

2. Data from Questionnaires

This data has two types, from the teacher and the students. The data from

the teacher’s questionnaire was used to check whether the teaching functional

expression was applied in the physical classroom activities or it was neglected.

Besides, the questionnaire from the students is to recheck to the teacher’s

25

responses in line with the students’ faced in teaching and learning activities.

Therefore, the questionnaires were concluded that used to answer the 1st, 2nd, and

3rd research questions.

To find out these data, the researcher used the descriptive analysis

technique (percentage) which is described in the table percentage using formula:

P: nf x 100%

P: Percentage

f: Frequency

n: Number/amount

It is used to see how many percent of the students’ understanding about

functional expression. In addition, the writer also compares the percentage with

the criteria adopted from Arikunto’s opinion as table 3.1 stated in the next page.1

Table 3.1. Criteria of test result percentage

76 – 100 % 56 – 75 % 40 – 55 % < 40 %

= Good = Sufficient = Less good = Bad

3. Data from Interview

The data gained from interview used to confirm the data collected by the technique previously. These data made the researcher more convinced what the English teacher had done and stated. If there were any differences, the researcher asks the English teacher for clarification and the result of interview was used as the appropriate data.

1 Suharsimi Arikunto, Prosedur Penelitian, Jakarta: Rineka Cipta, 1992, p. 313

CHAPTER IV

RESEARCH FINDING AND DISCUSSION

This chapter is used to answer all of the research questions for this study.

They are; the instructional materials used by the English teacher in teaching

functional expression, the instructional activities conducted by the teacher in

teaching functional expression, and the evaluation used by the teacher in teaching

functional expression.

A. The Instructional Materials Used by the English Teacher in Teaching


The writer tried to analyze the instructional materials by conducting some

researches such as by giving questionnaire to the students and the teacher about

the instructional materials which is taught in the classroom and also by conducting

observation in the physical classroom activities during the teaching functional

expression. Therefore, the writer tried to give explanation about her research as

follow:

The writer used the formula; P: nf x 100% to find out about the materials

which is taught in classroom, from the data gained the writer could give

explanation about the materials as follow;

26

27

Table 4.1: The data about the core English textbook (Question

number 1)

(Respondents: 35 Students)

No Question and option F %

1. Apakah anda mempunyai buku teks bahasa inggris

a. Ya

b. Tidak

35

0

100%

0%

Based on the table above, it can be concluded that all of the students have

the English textbook, it can be seen from the percentage of the result calculation

who answered yes as much as 100%, it is meant that all of the students have it,

and it can be seen also from the observation which is conducted by the writer in

the classroom that the students have the English textbook.

Table 4.2: The data about another references used to support English textbook

(Question number 2)



1. Selain buku teks bahasa Inggris, apakah anda

mempunyai buku bahasa inggris yang lainnya?

a. Ya

b. Tidak

19

16

54.2%

47.7%

Based on the table above, it can be concluded that beside the core English

textbook that is used in the teaching learning process, some students also have

another references to support the main textbook in order to explore their

knowledge in comprehending the materials. There are 54.2% students who have

another references to support their main textbook, and there are 47.7% students

who have not another references.

28

Table 4.3: The data about Functional Expression (Question number 3)



3. Materi manakah yang lebih dominan diajarkan oleh

Bapak / Ibu guru dalam pengajaran bahasa Inggris

dikelas kepada anda?

a. Genres (jenis teks)

Descriptive text

a. Ya

b. Tidak

Procedure text

a. Ya

b. Tidak

18

17

10

25

51.4%

48.7%

28.57%

71.42%

It can seen from the table above about descriptive text, most of the student

given their answer Yes (51.4%) and the students who answer No only about 48.

7%, it’s meant that descriptive text is not purely taught to all of the students. And

the calculation about procedures text, most of the student given their answer Yes

(28.57%) and the students who answer No only about 71.42%, it’s meant that

procedure text is not purely taught to all of the students, meanwhile most of the

students answered No.

29





b. Functional expression

Asking and giving help

a. Ya

b. Tidak

Asking and giving thing

a. Ya

b. Tidak

Asking and giving fact

a. Ya

b. Tidak

Asking and giving opinion

a. Ya

b. Tidak

Like and dislike

a. Ya

b. Tidak

Asking clarification

a. Ya

b. Tidak

Interpersonal (Is it?, Do you?, Aren’t

You?)

a. Ya

b. Tidak

35

0

32

3

15

20

26

9

16

19

19

16

16

19

100%

0%

91.42%

8.57%

42.85%

54.14%

74.28%

25.7%

45.71%

54.2%

54.28%

45.71%

45.71%

54.28%

30

It can seen from the table above about functional expression, the

calculation of the data about asking and giving help, all of the students given their

answer Yes (100%) and no one students who answer No (0%), it’s meant that the

functional expression of asking and giving help is purely taught to all of the

students in the classroom.

From the calculation asking and giving thing, most of the students given

their answer Yes (91.42%) and only 8.57% who answered No, it is meant that the

functional expression of asking and giving thing is almost purely taught to all of

the students in the classroom.

From the calculation asking and giving fact, most of the students given

their answer Yes (42.85%) and only 57.14% who answered No, it is meant that the

functional expression of asking and giving fact is almost not purely taught to all of

the students in the classroom.

From the calculation asking and giving opinion , is taught to the students

mostly in the classroom, it can be seen from the percentage data above that

74.28% the students gave the answer Yes, and only 25.7% who gave answer No.

So, the students knew about the functional expression which would like to use in

their daily activities.

From the calculation of the data about like and dislike , most of the

students given their answer Yes (47.7%) and only 54.2% who answered No, it is

meant that the functional expression of like and dislike is almost not purely taught

to all of the students in the classroom.

From the calculation of the data about asking clarification, most of the

student given their answer Yes (54.28%) and the students who answer No only

about 45.71%, it’s meant that asking clarification is not purely taught to all of the

students.

And the calculation of the data about Interpersonal above, most of the

students given their answer Yes (45.71%) and only 54.28% who answered No, it

is meant that the functional expression of interpersonal is almost not purely

taught to all of the students in the classroom.

31





c. Grammar

a. Ya

b. Tidak

27

8

77.1%

22.8%

Based on the data above, it can be concluded that grammar is taught to the

students mostly in the classroom, it can be seen from the percentage data above

that 77.1% the students gave the answer Yes, and only 22.8% who gave answer

No. So, the students knew about the grammar which would like to use in their

daily activities.

Table 4.4: The data about Students’ Understanding of the Materials

are Taught above by the Teacher in the Classroom (Question number 4)



4. Apakah anda memahami materi diatas yang

dijelaskan Bapak/Ibu guru anda?

a. Ya

b. Tidak

33

2

94.28%

5.7%

From the result of calculation above, it can be summarized that the

students can understand the materials given by the teacher, it can be shown from

their choice which given the answer Yes with the percentage 94,28%, and few of

them given the answer No with the percentage 5,7%.

32

Table 4.5: The data about Language which is used by the English Teacher

during Teaching Materials in the Classroom (Question number 5)



1. Bahasa pengantar apakah yang Bapak/Ibu guru anda

sering gunakan selama menyampaikan materi

pelajaran?

a. Ya

b. Tidak

35

0

100%

0%

The language that is used by the teacher in teaching-learning activities is

English, it can be seen from the table above, the writer can be concluded that the

teacher used English while teaching materials in the classroom, because all of the

students given or chosen Yes as their answer with the percentage 100%, and 0%

who answer No.

After knowing the answer of result all students to the questionnaires,

hence following writer of describe the answer of teacher to questionnaires which

the writer have give.

33

Table 4.6: The data gained from teachers’ questionnaires about instructional material

(Question number 1- 5)

No Instructional Material (Functional Expression)

Teacher 1 Teacher 2

1.

2.

3.

4.

5

Core English textbook

Another references used to support English textbook


1. Genres - Descriptive text - Procedures text

2. Functional expression - Asking and giving help - Asking and giving thing - Asking and giving fact - Asking and giving opinion - Like and dislike

- Asking clarification - Interpersonal (Is it?, Do you?,

Aren’t You?) 3. Grammar

The Students’ Understanding of the Materials are Taught above by the Teacher in the Classroom

The Language which is used by the

-

-

-

-

34

English Teacher during Teaching Materials in the Classroom

Table 4.5 above shown us the result questionnaires teachers’ about

instructional materials used by English teacher in teaching functional expression,

The English text book used at MTs Pembangunan UIN consisted of one books,

namely Joyful published by aneka Ilmu 2007, and the according to teacher’s

answer it can be concluded that the functional expression almost purely taught to

all of the students in the classroom.

Besides giving the questionnaires to teachers and students, the writer also

perform an interview with all English teacher about Instructional material Used by

the English Teacher in Teaching Functional Expression, and the result is as

follows. Base on interview and observation result, known that the teacher taught

functional expression.

B. The Instructional Activities Conducted by the Teacher in Teaching Functional Expression at MTs Pembangunan UIN Jakarta Teaching activities, used in teaching functional expression from the

observations, it is found that the three strategies.(see table 4.6 )

Table 4.7: Instructional Activities

35

No

Deskriptor

Ya

Tidak

AWAL PELAJARAN (PRE – ACTIVITIES) 1. Memiliki persiapan mengajar yang matang (lesson plan dan

media)

2. Memberikan motivasi untuk belajar Functional Expression

3. Meriview materi terdahulu dan menghubungkannya dengan materi baru yang akan diajarkan

KEGIATAN INTI (WHILST ACTIVITIES)

A. Penyajian Materi Pelajaran4. Menjelaskan materi sesuai dengan tingkat pemahaman dan

kemampuan siswa

5. Menguasai bahasa ajar dengan baik

6. Menggunakan sumber belajar yang bervariasi dan ontentik

7. Menciptakan suasana yang menyenangkan

8. Menunjukkan ketertarikan pada pelajaran yang diajarkan

9. Pemebelajaran sesuai dengan lesson planning

10. Menggunakan bahasa Inggris formal dan bergramatical baik

11. Menyertai seluruh tindakannya dengan bahasa Inggris selama proses pembelajaran

12. Jenis bahan Functional expression sesuai dengan tingkat

36

literasi SMP

13. Berbicara dengan jelas

A. Strategi Pembelajaran 14. Functional expression diajarkan secara integrated dengan

skill yang lain

15. Mengajarkan Asking and Giving help

16. Mengajarkan Asking and Giving Thing

17. Mengajarkan Asking and Giving Fact

18. Mengajarkan Asking and Giving opinion

19. Mengajarkan Like and Dislike 20. Mengajarkan asking clarification

21. Mengajarkan Interpersonal

22. Murid-murid aktif (tidak takut mencoba an bertanya)

23. Memberikan kesempatan bertanya

24. Memberikan feedback dengan baik

25. Memberikan waktu cukup untuk praktek dari pada teori

26. Murid –murid memperaktekan functional expression

B. Menggunakan Alat (Media) Pembelajaran

27. Menggunakan media yang bermacam-macam

28. Sesuai dengan materi pelajaran

POST ACTIVITIES 29. Menyimpulkan materi pelajaran

37

30. Memberitahukan materi pelajaran untuk pertemuan

berikutnya

31. Memberikan tes

32. Mengecek hasil kerja siswa

33. Tes yang diberikan sesuai dengan materi

Total 24 9

Score: Yes : 1 No : 0 Base on the table above, the writer is going to make more detail tabulation in percentages about instructional activities. (see table 4.6)

Table 4.8: the frequency and percentage of the instructional activities

The option Frequency Score Sum

Yes 24 24 24

No 9 0 0

Total 33 24

P = 24 / 33 x 100% =72.7%

From the result of analysis above, the writer conclude that the value of cheek list 72.7% , base on the criteria adopted from Suharsimi Arikunto’s,it mean that the teacher of the first grade of MTs Pembangunan UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta has a sufficient implementation teaching learning process.

There are three kinds of strategies those are used commonly in the

physical classroom when the teacher teaches the students, they are:

a. Pre – Activitues

In the pre-activities, the teacher started the teaching-learning process by

greetings in common greetings such as; good morning, how are you today?.

38

Besides it, he check the students’ attendance list to check who did not come to the

class, he review the lesson which is given in the last meeting.

b. Whilst Activities

In the whilst activities, the teacher has three kinds of classification which

are conducted in the classroom, such as; presenting the materials, learning

methodology, and using media during presenting material and the description of

using pictures and guided questions in teaching writing.

In presenting materials, the teacher always conducts some activities, they

are:

• Explain the materials based on the students’ skills, creating the enjoyment

situation, and the learning process based on the lesson plan

• Using English while teaching materials in the classroom

• Explaining the materials clearly

In learning methodology, the teacher always conducts some activities, they

are:

• Functional Expression are taught integrated with another subjects

• Using questions and answers techniques

• Giving a good feedback, and giving a long time to practice the materials

given

• The students practice the functional expression in front of the class with

their partner

39

In Using Media during presenting material and the description of using

pictures and guided questions in teaching writing, the teacher always conducts

some activities, they are:

• The teacher uses the appropriate media with the theme or the topic

• He uses the varieties media

c. post – activities.

The last activities done by the teacher is post activities. The teacher

concluded the material, inform the students about the next materials, giving the

test to the students which is appropriate with the materials given before, and

checking the students’ exercise.

C. The Evaluation Used by the Teacher in Teaching Functional Expression at MTs Pembangunan UIN Jakarta

In the evaluation, the writer tried to find out it by using questionnaire

which are given to the students and to find out the result, the writer used the formula as follow;

Table 4.9: The data of evaluation calculation which is given in the end

of the meeting of the teaching-learning activities (Question number 6)



1. Apakah Bapak/Ibu guru anda eberikan

evaluasi/penilaian pada setiap akhir pertemuan?

a. Selalu

b. Kadang-kadang

c. Tidak pernah

10

24

1

28.57%

68.57%

2.85%

40

Based on the calculation described above, it can be drawn that the teacher

not often give the evaluation in the end of the teaching-learning process and it is

in line with the students’ responses who answered Always only 28.57% and

68.57% the students who answered Sometimes and the students who give the

answer Never only 2.85%. So the teacher does not always give the students

evaluation in the end of the teaching-learning process.

Table 4.10: The data calculation of the evaluation (daily exercises) in

the end of the teaching-learning process (Question number 7)



1. Pada akhir pertemuan apakah Bapak/Ibu guru anda

meberikan tugas harian?

a. Selalu

b. Kadang-kadang

c. Tidak pernah

1

33

1

2.85%

94.28%

2.85%

From the data calculation described above, it can be shown that the teacher

not often give the evaluation in the end of the teaching-learning process, but the

teacher sometimes give them evaluation and it is in line with the students’

responses who answered Always only 2.85% and 94.28% the students who

answered Sometimes and the students who give the answer Never only 2.85%. So

the teacher does not always give the students evaluation in the end of the

teaching-learning process, but the teacher sometimes give them evaluation as

many as 98.24%.

Table 4.11: The data of calculation for the kinds of evaluation are

given to the students by the teacher (Question number 8)


41


1. Apakah evaluasi yang sering Bapak/Ibu guru anda

gunakan?

a. Formatif

b. Sumatif

35

0

100%

0%

From the data calculation above, formative test is a test that always given

by the teacher to all of the students, it is in line with the fact of the data calculation

result that formative test has 100%, it is meant that all of the students answered

formative test as a main test which is given by their teacher.

Table 4.12: The data of forms of evaluation which are given to the

students in their exercises (Question number 9)



1. Dalam bentuk apakah tes evaluasi yang Bapak/Ibu

guru anda berikan kepada anda?

a. Tes tertulis

b. Tes lisan

c. Ter tertulis dan lisan

11

0

24

31.42%

0%

68.57%

The writer can take summarized from the data calculation above that the

text or evaluation which is mostly given to the students is writing and oral test, it

can be seen from the students’ answer percentage as much as 68.57% for the

writing and oral test and the percentage of the writing test which is given to the

42

students only 31.42%, it explained that writing test was not mostly used in the

teaching-learning activities. Besides, no one student who answer the oral test, so

the oral test is rightly was not given to the students in the physical classroom.

Table 4.13: The data information of whether the teacher told the

students about evaluation which will be conducted (Question number 10)



1. Apakah Bapak/Ibu guru anda memberitahukan anda

jika ulanagan akan dilaksanakan?

a. Selalu

b. Kadang-kadang

c. Tidak Pernah

28

7

0

80%

20%

0%

From the data calculation above, the writer can give conclusion that the

teacher always informs the students about the evaluation which will be conducted

in the classroom, so they can prepare themselves in studying and exercising, the

real fact of its percentage is 80% of the students who answer that their teacher

Always informs them about the evaluation before it will be conducted in the

classroom. Besides, there were some students who answer sometimes as much as

20% and no one of the students who answer never it is meant 0%. So, the teacher

has a big responsibility for her students.

Besides giving the questionnaires to students, the writer also perform an

interview with all English teachers about the evaluation Used by the English

Teacher in Teaching Functional Expression, and the result is as follows. Base on

interview result, known that the teacher using writing and oral test for students

evaluations.

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

This chapter presents about conclusions and suggestions of the research

which is done by the researcher at MTs Pembangunan UIN Syarif Hidayatullah

Jakarta.

A. Conclusions

Based on the research findings described previously, the conclusion can be

described as follows:

The functional expressions that were taught to the students at the first

grade of MTs Pembangunan UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta were good enough

and reached and the result of the KTSP objectives can be handled and reached

well. The teacher also has a good responsibility for her duty as a teacher and also

for her students, the teacher tried to apply the functional expression materials to

the students in their daily activities, so they can interact and communicate

between each other well and they did not find any difficulties when they were in

the social networking.

43

44

B. Suggestion

The following were some suggestion for English teachers, school principal

and further researchers. (1) For the English teachers, in line with the research

findings previously, is that the functional expressions were suggested taught to the

students well in order they can establish themselves in facing social networking in

their daily activities. Functional expression must be taught carefully, because it is

as an essential skill to communicate between each other and also must be apply in

their daily activities step by step. (2) For the principal, the school principal should

help the teachers in completing the media needed when they want to start teaching

in order they can be reach the objectives of the study and to make the student feel

interest in learning materials, so they can learn fun and happy without any

stressing and they can accept the materials well. (3) For the further researchers,

the further researchers were suggested that they conduct further study about the

functional expression better, because it was so important for the students to

interact with the people in another world in order they could comprehend what

should they do.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anonymous, Standar Isi dan Standar kompetensi Lulusan untuk Satuan Pendidikan Sekolah Menengah Pertama (SMP) / Madrasah Tsanawiyah (MTs) Beserta Peraturan Pelaksanaannya (Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan Nasional Republik Indonesia No. 22, 23, dan 24 Tahun 2006), Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan Nasional. Unpublished.

Arikunto, Suharsini, Prosedur Penelitian, Jakarta: Rineka Cipta. 1992

Burton. S. H and J. A. Humphries. 1992. Mastering English Language, London; Macmillan

Depdiknas, Kurikulum 2004, Standar Kompetensi Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Inggris

SMP/MTs, Jakarta: Depdiknas. 2003 Finocchiaro, Mary and Michael Bonomo. The Foreign Language Learner: A

Guide for Teacher, New York; Regents Publishing Company. 1973. Foreign Language Annals, October 1987/volume 20.

Harmer, Jeremy. 2002. The Practice of English language Teaching 3rd Edition Completely revised and updated. Longman.

Hasibuan, Bahrul. KTSP: Problem or Solution?. Onward English Education Journal, Vol. I, No. 2, December 2006.

Hoerr, Thomas R. Buku Kerja Multiple Intelligences. Bandung: Kaifa, 2000.

Huda, Nuril, Language Learning and Teaching; Issues and Trends, Malang: IKIP Malang Publisher. 1999

Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English, Longman: Pearson Education

Limited. 2002 Muslich, Masnur, KTSP (Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan) Dasar

Pemahaman dan Pengembangan, Jakarta: PT Bumi Aksara. 2007

Nunan, David. 1991. Language Teaching Methodology. New York: Prentice Hall, Ltd.

Sudijono, Anas, Pengantar Evaluasi Pendidikan, Jakarta: PT. RajaGrafindo Persada, 1996

43

44

Sugiyono. Statistika Untuk Penelitian. Bandung; CV. Alfabeta. 2005. Tan, Ai-Hui, and James E. Alatis., ed. Language in Our Time: Bilingual

Education and Official English, Ebonics and Standard English, immigration and the Unz Initiative. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 2001.

Tjokrosujoso, Drs. Harsono, M.Pd. Kurrikulum 1994 dan Pengembangan Materi Bahasa Inggris SLTP dan SMU, Malang: Institute Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan Malang. 1996

Tinambunan, Wilmar, Evaluation of Students Achievement, Depdikbud, Ditjend,

1988. UU RI Tahun 2003 Tentang Pendidikan Nasional Yalden, Janice, The Communicative Syllabus: Evolution, Design and

Implementation, London: Prentice Hall International, 1987 Worthen, B.R. Borg and K.R. White, Measurement and Evaluation in the School,

New York: Longman, 1993

THE TEACHING OF FUNCTIONAL EXPRESSION FOR THE FIRST...

Documents

Transcript of THE TEACHING OF FUNCTIONAL EXPRESSION FOR THE FIRST...