THE EFFECT OF TEACHING METHODS AND GRAMMATICAL
ABILITY ON STUDENTS’ ACHIEVEMENT
IN WRITING EXPOSITION ESSAY
A THESIS
Submitted to the English Applied Linguistics Study Program in a Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Magister Humaniora
By:
AHMAD SARDON
Registration Number: 082188330067ENGLISH APPLIED LINGUISTICS STUDY PROGRAM
POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL
THE EFFECT OF TEACHING METHODS AND GRAMMATICAL
ABILITY ON STUDENTS’ ACHIEVEMENT
IN WRITING EXPOSITION ESSAY
A THESIS
Submitted to the English Applied Linguistics Study Program in a Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Magister Humaniora
By:
AHMAD SARDON
Registration Number: 082188330067ENGLISH APPLIED LINGUISTICS STUDY PROGRAM
POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all, the writer would like to start off by thanking Allah SWT, the
most gracious and the most merciful for blessing his to write this thesis. This
study is concerned with The Effect of Teaching Methods on Students’ Achievement in Writing Exposition Assay. This study is submitted to Post
Graduate School of State University of Medan in a partial fulfillment of the final
academic requirements to obtain the degree of Magister of Humaniora from
English Applied Linguistics.
In writing this thesis, the writer faced a lot of difficulty, trouble and
without any help from the following people, it was impossible for his to finish this
thesis. Therefore, the writer would like to thank all the people mentioned below.
The writer expresses his greater gratitude to Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning,
M.Pd as his first adviser for his valuable guidance, criticism, consultations and
supports and Prof. Dr. Lince Sihombing, M.Pd., as his second adviser for her
valuable corrections and advices in finishing this thesis.
He also expresses his gratitude to Director of Post Graduate School, Head
and Secretary of English Applied Linguistics Study Program of State University
of Medan, all lectures who have equipped his during the times of lecturing and
finishing this thesis
Special thanks are expressed to Prof. Amrin saragih, M.A., Ph.D., Dr. Sri
Minda Murni , Dr. Anni Holila Pulungan, M. Hum., as his reviewers and
A very special gratitude is given for his beloved parents; Adenan Hasibuan
(Alm) and Suryani (Alm), his beloved family, especially his wife; Mrs. Dra.
Dalila Haini and daughters; Annisa Sarah Hirmadhani Hasibuan, Ratih Virda
Ramayani Hasibuan, Liana Sari Aulia Hasibuan for their sincere prayer, love and
supports in moral and material during her academic year especially who have
given motivation and prayer in completing his study. May Allah SWT always
bless them forever.
Then, thanks to the headmaster of SMA N 1 Kisaran, Jumadi, S. Pd, M.M
who had welcomed and given him chance to permits him to conduct the research
in the school, and also thanks to B. Hutabarat, S.Pd and Suryani Gultom, S. Pd, as
the English teacher of SMA N 1 Kisaran who have given support in conducting
the research as source of data in this thesis. Finally, he would like to thanks to his
classmates and anyone who cannot be mentioned here for giving support in
finishing this thesis.
The writer realizes that every work has the weaknesses; hence he hopes
the good critics and suggestions for the perfection of this thesis. And hopefully his
thesis is useful for the readers.
Medan, Juli 2013
The writer,
AHMAD SARDON
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.1 The Background of the Study………. …1
1.2 The Problems of the study………... …6
1.3 The Objective of the Study………...…7
1.4 The Scope of the Study ………...…7
1.5 The Significance of the Study………. ....8
CHAPTER II : REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE……….……. .. 9
2.1 Theoretical Framework. ………... .. 9
2.1.1 The Students Achievement in Writing ……...……… 9
2.1.2 Assessment of writing Achievement ………... ..14
2.1.3 Writing ………...……….…... ..15
2.1.4 Exposition Text………....21
2.1.5 Teaching Methods…....…...……...……….…... ..24
2.1.5.1 Content Based-Instruction (CBI)………... …………... ..29
2.1.5.1.1 Theory of Learning on CBI………..……….32
2.1.5.1.2 Types of Learning and Teaching Activities…..………....33
2.1.5.2.4 Learners’ Role………...44
2.1.5.2.5 Teacher’s Roles……….45
2.1.5.2.6 The Roles of Instructional Materials.……… 48
2.2 Grammatical Ability ………...50
2.3 Conceptual Framework…………..………..53
2.3.1 The Differences of Students’ Achievement in Writing Exposition Essay That Taught By Using CBI method and TBLT method………..53
2.3.2 The Difference of Students’ Achievement in Reading Comprehension that has high grammatical ability and that has low grammatical ability...55
2.3.3 The Interaction between CBI Method and Grammatical Ability on Students’ Achievement on Writing Exposition Essay………..……...59
3.3 Instruments of Data Collection…….………...…………...70
3.3.1 Students’ Grammatical Ability Test …...………70
3.3.2 Students’ Writing Achievement Test…….……...………... 71
3.4 Calibration………...72
3.4.1 Validity……… 72
3.4.1.1 Validity of GA Test……… 72
3.4.1.2 Validity of Writing Test………74
3.4.2 Reliability of the Test……… 72
3.5 The Procedure of Data Collection..……….... 76
3.5.1 Preparation……….. 76
3.6 Control of Treatment ……….………..………...78
3.6.1 Internal Validity………….………....………….78
3.6.2 External Validity……….…...……….80
3.7 Technique of Analyzing The Data……….……….…………81
3.8 Statistical Hypotheses………..………… 82
CHAPTER IV: DATA AND DATA ANALYSIS……….………. 83
4.1 Description of Data………..……….. 83
4.1.1 Students’ Achievement in Writing Exposition Essay Taught by using CBI Method………..……….. 84
4.1.2 Students’ Achievement in Writing Exposition Essay Taught by using TBLT Method……..………..……….. 85
4.1.3 Students’ Score Description Having High Grammatical Ability……….. 87
4.1.4 Students’ Score Description Having Low Grammatical Ability ……….. 89
4.1.5 Students’ Achievement in Writing Exposition Essay Having High Grammatical Ability taught by Using CBI Method……….90
4.1.6 Students’ Achievement in Writing Exposition Essay Having Low Grammatical Ability taught by Using CBI Method………..92
4.1.7 Students’ Achievement in Writing Exposition Essay Having High Grammatical Ability taught by Using TBLT Method.………..94
4.1.8 Students’ Achievement in Writing Exposition Essay Having Low Grammatical Ability taught by Using TBLT Method………..96
4.2 Requirement of Data Analysis……… 98
4.2.1 Normality Test……… 98
4.2.2 Homogeneity Test……….. 99
4.2.2.1 Groups of Teaching Method and Grammatical Ability ……… …101
4.2.2.2 Group of Interaction………102
4.3Testing of Hypotheses………. 102
4.3.2Writing Exposition Essay Achievement of Students having high
Grammatical Ability and Low Grammatical Ability ……….... 104
4.3.3The Interaction Between Teaching Methods and Grammatical Ability On Students’ Achievement in Writing Exposition Essay …………...… 104
4.4 Discussion……… 108
4.4.1 Students’ Achievement in Writing Exposition Essay Taught by using CBI Method is higher than taught by using TBLT Method………. 108
4.4.2 Students’ Achievement in Writing Exposition Essay Having High Grammatical Ability is higher than Having Low Grammatical Ability ...111
4.4.3The Interaction Between Teaching Strategies and Grammatical Ability On Students’ Achievement in Writing Exposition Essay …………....…. 112
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND SUGGESTIONS………… 113
5.1 Conclusions……… 113
5.2 Implications……….. 114
5.3 Suggestions……… 115
LIST OF TABLES
Page Table 1 Preliminary data of Achievement in Writing Exposition Essay
Of SMA Negeri 1 Kisaran………. 3
Table 2 Comparison between CBI and TBLT……… 49
Table 3 The Application of CBI and TBLT………..……….. 58
Table 4 Specification of Students’ Grammatical Ability………. 71
Table 5 Specification of Students’ Writing Indicator………...……… 71
Table 6 Grammatical Text Item………...……… 73
Table 7 The Procedure of the Treatment in two groups………...……… 76
Table 8 The Summary of Data Description………...……… 83
Table 9 Frequency Distribution of Students’ Achievement in Writing Exposition Taught by using CBI Method….………...……… 84
Table 10 Frequency Distribution of Students’ Achievement in Writing Exposition Taught by using TBLT Method………...……… 86
Table 11 Frequency Distribution of Scores of Students Having High GA……….. 87
Table 12 Frequency Distribution of Scores of Students Having Low GA……….. 89
Table 13 Frequency Distribution of Students’ Achievement in Writing Exposition Having High GA Taught by using CBI………...……… 91
Table 14 Frequency Distribution of Students’ Achievement in Writing Exposition Having Low GA Taught by using CBI………...……… 93
Table 15 Frequency Distribution of Students’ Achievement in Writing Exposition Having High GA Taught by using TBLT…...……….. 95
Table 16 Frequency Distribution of Students’ Achievement in Writing Exposition Having Low GA Taught by using TBLT…...……… 97
Table 17 Summary on the result of Normality Test………... 99
Table 18 Group of Teaching Method and GA………... 100
Table 20 Two-Way ANOVA with 2x2 Factorial Design………... 102
Table 21 Summary on calculation result of Two-Way ANOVA………... 102
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 1 Students’ Achievement in Writing Exposition Taught by using CBI ……….… 85
Figure 2 Students’ Achievement in Writing Exposition Taught by using TBLT…………..87
Figure 3 Students Having High GA………. ……….…. 88
Figure 4 Students Having Low GA……… ……….…. 90
Figure 5 Students’ Achievement in Writing Exposition
Having High GA Taught by using CBI……… ……….…. 92
Figure 6 Students’ Achievement in Writing Exposition hension
Having Low GA Taught by using CBI………. ……….…. 94
Figure 7 Students’ Achievement in Writing Exposition
Having High GA Taught by using TBLT………...……….…. 95
Figure 8 Students’ Achievement in Writing Exposition
Having Low GA Taught by using TBLT……… ..……….….. 98
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Study
There are four major skills in communicating through verbal language
often defined as listening, speaking, reading and writing. One who studies English
and would like to converse well must master the four basic skills. Writing as one
of the language skills seem to be a very difficult skill to be mastered. Experiences,
events, histories, and ideas can be expressed through writing which is considered
very difficult to many students. Sentences formations of ideas and vocabularies
are important to be used correctly, so that the writers or the candidate writers can
express the ideas freely and completely and the readers can perseive the message
totally.
The difficulty of good writing is resulted from some aspects. The first is as
(Peat, 2002: 9) stated that writing can be difficult if the writer’s learning
experience is protractd process of trial and error. It is because the writer or the
writing students just keep writing directly what exist in his mind without well
prepared procedure from beginning to the end. And when the writer himself or
some body else find some errors in the writing, he will of course cross it out and
start another writing again and again.
The second difficulty of writing is caused by the general intervention,
(Westwood, 2008: 47). For most readers, narrative text, with its settings,
understanding than expository text. Most young children are familiar with
narrative structure from having listened to stories read to them. However,
researchers have discovered that some students with writing exposition difficulties
seem to have a poor grasp of typical story structure and can’t use it to help them
process, understand and remember information.
The next difficulty of writing resulting in the failure of the students in
writing achievement has been empirically proved by some researchers. To
mention some as (Suprinata, 2002) in the finding of his thesis clearly stated that
many students of senior high school made errors in writing, especially in narrative
and exposition paragraph. And similar conclusion was also taken by (Marta,
2003) stating that among 40 students, there were only 11 students (27.9%) that
could get minimum standard of writing achievement, while the other 29 students
(72.5%) failed to get the minimum standard. And the writer assumed that this
failure is the result of trial and error way of writing done by the students without
applying good procedure based on the nature or the principle of writing itself, and
most of the students didn’t master adequate vocabularies to cover ideas to transfer
into writing symbols.
Personal experience of the writer by analysing the English achievement of
the students of grade XI in SMA Negeri 1 Kisaran shows that writing
achievement mostly made up the failure of the students in English. Based on the
evidence compiled from three academic years, it is found that student’s ability in
Table 1 Preliminary Data of Achievement in Writing Exposition essay of
Lowest Score Highest score Average
1 2007/2008 55 75 60
2 2008/2009 58 75 67
3 2009/2010 60 80 70
(Source of data kumpulan nilai (DKN) SMA Negeri 1 Kisaran)
Seeing the evidence above it is concluded that there has been something
wrong in the teaching of writing in high school especially in SMA Negeri 1
Kisaran. Consequently, the method of writing or the teaching of writing should
not be as the activity of trial and error but must be based on good procedure and
related to the principle or the nature of writing. Byrne (1980: 1) stated that writing
refers to the skills in using graphic symbols (letter, word, phrase, and sentence),
which have to be arranged to certain convention. It means that writing is to be
done by appropriate rules related to the types of the writing itself.
Some factors influence students’ achievement in writing which are
generally divided into social factors that covers attitude,interest, and motivation;
and cognitive factors which consists of methods of teaching, material of learning,
teacher competence, and facilities of learning process. And it is believed that
teaching method is one factor that plays an important role which can affect the
students’ achievement in writing.
There are many theories on how second or foreign language is learned and
how to implement various methods in the classroom. These theories are intended
to help teachers to improve teaching – learning process achievement. In addition
also find ways to engage the class with the lesson plan that they have planned.
One of them is Content – Based Instruction (CBI) which has some models which
focus on the content and language use based on the topic given and Task-Based
Language Teaching which focus on grammar and linguistic competence. It is
assumed that it is one of the best methods in teaching English as a Foreign
Language(EFL) to overcome the classroom’s problems on writing. It is also
believed that grammatical ability can positively affect students’ achievement in
writing as to create self esteem in them.
Besides teaching methods, students’ achievement in writing is also
influenced by many factors. One of them is gramatical ability. Grammar is
extremely important for all lanuage skills including writing. Whatever is spoken
or written, the main tool used to construct words or vocabulary is grammar.
Mastering grammar will help us to use the correct version of the word for our
intended purpose. (Sinclair: 2007: 6 ) The learners do this automatically, however,
whether with grammar or not. If other people cannot understand what we are
saying or think that we have not expressed ourselves clearly, then it may be
because there is a grammatical error. People make judgments about others on the
basis of the grammar they use; whether this is fair or right, it definitely happens
and it is important that you know about it. The grammatical ability is the ability of
all components of grammar of combining meaningful words up to complicated
sentences and texts and to combine meaningful words until sentences, the high
On the other hand, Some linguists as (Barton, 2010: 1) states that knowing
grammar is important for teachers and pupils but it is not an end in itself. He
explains that he had gone for only bits of grammar in his teaching that he thought
that would make a difference to pupils’ reading and writing skills. It was
explicitly added that grammar shouldn’t dominate teaching rather than trying to
have students be involved in active talking about literature, listening to peoples,
reading great texts, watching worthwhile films, exploring language, having fun
with it. Grammar can actually enhance all of those but it can’t replace them.
Thus it is badly needed to do some research about the appropriate
difficulty of students in writing and to see the adequate effect of grammar ability
on writing achievement. Based on the underlying facts and concept of
explanation, this research is intended to discover the effect of teaching methods
and students’ grammatical ability on students’ achievement in writing exposition
essay. It means that the effect of applying the two teaching methods and students’
grammar ability in teaching writing will be proven whether they are effective
towards the students’ writing achievement in exposition essay.
1.2 Problems of the study
Based on the background of the research, the problems of this research are
formulated as follows:
1. Is the students’ achievement in writing exposition essay taught by using
Content – Based Instruction (CBI) method significantly higher than taught by
2. Is the students’ achievement in writing exposition essay for those students
with high grammatical ability significantly higher than those students with low
grammatical ability?
3. Is there any interaction between Teaching methods and students’ grammatical
ability to students’ achievement in writing exposition essay?
1.3 Objectives of the Study
In line with the problems of the study, the objectives of the research are
discovering:
1. to find out whether the students’ achievement in writing exposition essay
taught by using Content – Based Instruction (CBI) method significantly higher
than taught by using Task – Based Language Teaching (TBLT) method.
2. to find out whether the the students’ achievement in writing exposition essay
for those students with high grammatical ability significantly higher than those
students with low grammatical ability.
3. to find out whether there is a significant interaction between teaching methods
and the students’ grammatical ability to students’ achievement in writing
exposition essay.
1.4 Scope of the Study
This research focuses on the application of the Content – Based Instruction
(CBI) and Task – Based Language Teaching (TBLT) as the teaching method in
the classroom to help students improve teaching instruction and to help students
increase their writing achievement. Among many factors which influence
which is to be researched by the writer. The writing text chosen to be taught and
tested is exposition text since it is one of the most widely used genre text in
writing of Senior High School Standard Competency on Educational Unit
Oriented Curriculum (Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan / KTSP SMA, 2004
and revised in 2008). Exposition text (both in reading and writing) appears in all
grades: ten to twelve and it was not one of the text type taught in junior high
school. So the teaching and the assessment of exposition for senior high school is
not influenced by the students’ knowledge taken from junior high school.
1.5 Significances of the Study
The findings of the study are expected to be useful theoretically and
practically.
Theoretically: 1) to enrich the science specifically related to English
teaching methods in Senior High School, 2) to be the input for the teachers and
educational institutions in considering the dynamic students’ needs in students’
achievement in writing, 3) to give a lot of positive contribution to the
improvement of teachers professionalism and the educational institutions and
other researchers who want to discover an in-depth research as the follow-up of
the result of applying the teaching methods.
Practically: 1) to assist the English teachers in their attempts to improve
students’ achievement in writing, 2) these can also help teachers to teach writing
because by using CBI and TBLT, it will be easy to motivate the students in
solving their problems in writing tasks, 3) For the English teachers as one
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND SUGGESTIONS
5.1 Conclusions
Based on data analysis, hypotheses testing, and discussion, it can be
concluded that :
1) Both CBI and TBLT effect students’ achievement in writing exposition
essay. While, writing exposition essay achievement of students taught by
using CBI strategy is significantly higher than those students taught by
using TBLT.
2) Grammatical Ability effect students’ achievement in writing exposition
essay. While, writing exposition essay achievement of students having
high grammatical ability is significantly higher than those students having
low grammatical ability.
3) There is significant interaction between teaching methods and grammatical
ability on students’ achievement in writing exposition essay. Students
having high grammatical ability showed significant effect in their writing
exposition essay achievement if they were taught by using CBI method
while students having low grammatical ability showed significant effect in
5.2 Implications
The findings of this study gives implication to the students who want to
improve their writing exposition essay achievement and to the teachers who want
to develop writing exposition essay skill of their students when learning and
teaching process takes part in the classroom. This study has examined two writing
teaching methods, namely CBI and TBLT. They are applied to students with high
and low grammatical ability in order to know which teaching method is more
suitable for them in improving their writing exposition essay achievement.
The research findings that have been discussed in the previous chapter can
be used as the consideration for the teacher to choose an appropriate method to be
applied in a certain class. Teacher should realize that every class has different
condition and they should be aware of individual differences because the students
as the member of the class come from different background of personality and
ability. So the teacher should be able to choose different method that can
encourage most students to get involved in the language learning teaching
process.
There are various kinds of teaching methods that have been tried,
researched, applied by linguists and language teacher in the process of learning
and teaching foreign languages. Two of them are Content Based Instruction (CBI)
and Task based Language Teaching (TBLT). By previous research and by the
result of the research accomplished by the writer of this thesis, both of them are
good methods to be applied in teaching writing for high school students by
The result of this research showed that Content Based Instruction (CBI) is
better than Task Based Language teaching (TBLT) in teaching writing to high
school students. Besides the proof about teaching methods, grammatical ability of
students also play important role to help them succeed in writing exposition essay.
But even if the grammatical ability of the students is not good enough, Task
Based language Teaching (TBLT) can still be applied since it is not only focused
on the grammatical ability to construct ideas into sentences and text but the
content of the topic that is going to be written also plays good role in writing.
5.3 Suggestions
In relation to the conclusions presented in previous chapter, it is suggested
that:
1. It is suggested for the English teacher high school students to apply Content –
Based Instruction (CBI) method and Task Based Language Teaching in
teaching writing because it is significantly effective.
2. It is suggested for the English teacher, especially in teaching writing to
consider students’ grammatical ability because it significantly and directly
affects students’ achievement in writing.
3. If there must be combination of more than one method related to the students’
different grammatical ability, the combination of Content – Based Instruction
(CBI) and Task Based Language Teaching (TBLT) is suggested and if the
students are lack of grammatical ability, Task Based Language Teaching
REFERENCES
Acar, Ahmet. 2006. Models, norms and goals for English as an international language pedagogy and task based language teaching and learning. Asian EFL Journal Quarterly September 2008, Volume 8, Issue 3
Anthony, T.P. (1985). Writing in EAP: Climate and process. ESP Newsletter, 95, 1-6.
Arends, Richards. (1997). Learning to Teach. New York: Mc Grow Hill.
Ary, Donald, et al, (1979). Intruduction to Research in Education. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Ary, Jacobs and Sorensen. 2010. Introduction to Research Education (Eight Edition). USA: Wadsworth.
Barton, Geof. (2010). Grammar Survival. New York: Routledg
Brinton, D. (2003). Content-based instruction., Practical English Language Teaching. New York: McGraw Hill.
Bruton, A. 2005. Task Based Language Learning: For the state secondary FL classroom? Language Learning Journal, No 31, 55-68
Broady, Elspeth Winter. 2006. Learning and Interaction: Developing Through Talk. Language Learning Journal, No 34 0-00
Brown, H. Douglas (2000). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching, Fourth edition, New York : Addison Wesely Longman. Inc.
_______________ (2001). Teaching by Principles. London: Longman Inc.
Byrne, D. 1984. Teaching Writing Skill. London: Longman.
Crandall, J. 1999. Content-based instruction (CBI). Concise encyclopedia of educational linguistics. Oxford, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Davies, S. 2003. Content based instruction in EFL contexts. The Internet TESL 31 Journal, 9(2), Retrieved September 20, 2012, from http://iteslj.org/Articles/ Davies-CBI.html
Duin, A.H., & Graves, M.F. (1987). Intensive vocabulary instruction as a prewriting technique. Reading Research Quarterly, 22 (3), 311-330.
Gerhard, J.G. (2000). Teaching English as A Foreign or Second Language. Ann Abrorr: The University of Michigan Press.
Grabe, W. & Stoller, F. 1997. Content-based instruction: Research foundations. In M. A.
Green Baum, Sidney & Nelson, Gerard. (2002). An Introduction to English Grammar. London: Longman.
Haliday, M.A.K. (2004). An Introduction to functional Grammar. London: Arnold.
Harmer, Jeremy. (1998). How to Teach English. London: Longman.
_____________ (2001) The Practice of English Language Teaching. London: Longman.
Heaton, J.B. (1988). Writing English Language Tests. London: Longman.
Hillocks, G. (1987). Synthesis of research on teaching writing. Educational Leadership
Hyland, Ken. (2004). Genre and Second Language Writing. London: The University of Michigan Press.
Hughes, A. (1989). Testing for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jong. I.J. 2006. EFL teachers’ perceptions of Task Based Language Teaching: with a focus on Korean secondary classroom practice. Asian EFL Journal Quarterly September 2008, Volume 8, Issue 3
Kasper,L.F. (2000). Content – Based College ESL Instruction. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Krashen, S.D. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. New York: Longman
Lightbown, P. M. & Spada, N. (1999). How languages are learned (2nd ed.). NY: Oxford University Press.
Linse, Caroline T. (2005). Practical English Language Teaching. New York: Mc Graw Hill.
Lonon – Blanton, L. (1992). A holistic approach to college ESL: Integrating language and Content. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Newell, G.E. (1984). Learning from writing in two content areas: A case study/protocol analysis. Research in the Teaching of English, 18, 265-287.
Nunan, D. (1999). Second Language Teaching & Learning. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publisher.
Nunan, David. 2006. Task Based Language Teaching in the Asia Context:
Defining “ Task”. Asian EFL Journal Quarterly September 2008,
Volume 8, Issue 3
Oxford, R.L 2006. Task Based Language Teaching and Learning: an overview. Asian EFL Journal Quarterly September 2008, Volume 8, Issue 3
O’ Malley, J.M. & Pierce, L.V.1996. Authentic Assessment for English Language
Learners. Massachussets: Addison-Wesley Publishing.
Patel, M.F. (2008: 71) English Language Teaching (Methods, Tools, and Techniques). Jaipur: Sun Rise Publisher and Distributor.
Peat, Jennifer, (2002). Scientific Writing, Easy When You Know How. London: BMJ Publishing Group.
Purpura, James. (2004). Assessing Grammar. New York: Cambridge University Press
Raphan, D. & Moser, J. 1993/94. Linking language and content: ESL and art history. TESOL Journal, 3, 17-21
Richards, Jack, and Roger, Theodore S. (1986). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J., & Rodgers, T. 2001. Approaches and methods in language teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Rohim, F. (2007).Writing and Teaching Writing, Training Materials for SMA English Teacher, Jakarta: Dirjen P4TK, Depdiknas.
Setyaningrum, Rizky. 2011. Task Based Language Teaching to teaching writing for 7th grade students. An action research at SMPN 17 Surakarta.
Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary in language teaching. Cambridge University Press.
Schuster, C.I. (1984). Situational sequencing. The Writing Instructor, 3, 177-184.
Sinclair, Christine (2007). Grammar: A Friendly Approach. New York: Mc Grow Hill.
Snow, M., & Brinton, D. 1988. Content based language instruction: Investigating the effectiveness of the adjunct model. TESOL Quarterly, 22(4), 553- 574.
Stoller, F. L. (2004). Content-based instruction: Perspectives on curriculum planning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 261-283.
Stryker, Stephen B. (1997). Content-based Instruction in Foreign Language Education : Models and Methods. Washington DC: George Town University Press.
Thornburry, Scott. (2002). How to Teach Vocabulary. England: Pearson Education Limited.
Weigle, Sara C.(2002) Assessing Writing. New York: Cambridge University Press.