INCORPORATING THE PRINCIPLES OF CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS IN A READING CLASSROOM.

29 

Teks penuh

(1)

TABLE OF CONTENT

2.1.2 Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis ... 11

2.1.3 Critical Discourse Analysis in Reading ... 17

2.2 Systemic Functional Linguistics ... 25

2.3 Concluding Remarks ... 30

CHAPTER FOUR: THE TEACHING PROGRAM: ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION 4.1 Preliminary Phase of the Teaching Program ... 39

4.1.1 Stage 1: Introducing the Teaching Program ... 40

4.1.2 Stage 2: Deciding on the Topic for Discussion ... 42

4.1.3 Stage 3: Distributing Pre-program Questionnaire ... 43

4.1.4 Stage 4: Undertaking Diagnostic Test ... 46

4.1.5 Summary of the Preliminary Phase ... 50

4.2 The Teaching Program ... 50

4.2.1 Explicit Teaching of CDA-related Guiding Critical Questions ... 51

4.2.2 Explicit Teaching of SFL-related Framework for Critical Reading ... 51

(2)

4.2.3.1 Pre-reading Stage ... 61

4.2.3.2 While-reading Stage ... 65

4.2.3.3 Post-reading Stage ... 71

4.3 The Effect of the Teaching Program towards Students’ Critical Reading .... 74

4.3.1 Students’ Progress on Critical Reading ... 4.3.2 The Positive Effect ... 74

4.3.3 The Negative Effect ... 78

4.4 Students’ Responses towards the Teaching Program ... 79

4.5 Synthesis of Findings ... 81

4.6 Concluding Remarks ... 82

CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSIONS, LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Appendix 1: Guiding Critical Questions... 93

Appendix 2: Diagnostic and Progress Test Format ... 94

Appendix 3: Pre-program Questionnaire ... 95

Appendix 4: Post-program Questionnaire ... 96

Appendix 5: Sample of Students’ Reflective Journals ... 98

Appendix 6: Sample of Observation Notes ... 100

Appendix 7: Syllabus ... 103

Appendix 8: Lesson Plan ... 104

Appendix 9: Handout of CDA ... 111

Appendix 10: Handout of SFL ... 114

Appendix 11: Text for Practicing SFL... 115

Appendix 12: Text for Diagnostic Test ... 116

Appendix 13: Text for Progress Test ... 119

Appendix 14: Reading Materials ... 121

Appendix 15: Condensed Form of Data from Pre-program Questionnaire ... 133

Appendix 16: Students’ Answers on Diagnostic Test ... 149

Appendix 17: Students’ Answers on Progress Test ... 160

(3)

1 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

This chapter is an initial description of the thesis that will review some

research-related notions of the current study. It is organized by firstly introducing the

background of the research on implementing Critical Discourse Analysis

principles in a reading classroom. The subsequent part is the discussion of the

purposes of the research followed by research questions, significance and scope of

the research. The chapter is ended by the presentation of the organization of the

thesis.

1.1.Background

The fact of the global era today indicates that the world has developed rapidly in

all aspects of life, including in the field of information technology. The advance of

information technology enables people worldwide to connect to each other,

consuming all genres of information, even witnessing historical and momentous

events in another sphere of the world within seconds. What is needed in that

condition is simply to open pages of newspaper or magazine, to watch video or

television broadcast, or even to surf the internet that presents more hybrid

information both in content and form.

The confrontation of information to people’s life however requires the

ability of its consumers to sort out the message presented including anticipating

(4)

2 2003). To do so, people are not supposed to minimize their contact with the

sources of information but rather how to see them from a critical perspective

through a process of thinking, as Chaffee puts it as “making sense of the world by

carefully examining the thinking process to clarify and improve our

understanding” (2000: 47). What is essential is not only the ability to access every

bit of information but also how to interpret them as well as contrast them with any

other references (García, 2008).

One best circumstance to foster critical capacity is in the classroom, as an

answer to Burke’s (2010) criticism, that the prevailing curriculum, mainly in the

context of US’ education, does not prepare students with cognitive skills

demanded by the workplace (in Nathan, 2010: 6). In this sense, language lesson

can be regarded as one appropriate background since it focuses on studying

language with all of its attributes.

Congruent with this, many studies on improving critical thinking in the

classroom setting have been undertaken along with the raising awareness of the

importance of being able to evaluate any received information in this

unlimited-access age. Most of them revolve around the notion of critical thinking (Burgess,

2009; Van Tassel-Baska et al., 2009; Yağcioğlu, 2009), critical pedagogy

(Fredricks, 2007), critical literacy (Huang, 2009), and critical reading or writing

(Bosley, 2008; García, 2008), in which the current study deals with. Although

each term has different entailments, still in the pedagogical circle, they share the

(5)

3 “banking education” (Morrow & Torres, 2002) that regards “students as passive,

empty, silent recipients” (Shor in an interview with Macrine, 2009: 126).

The commonality of the mentioned research trends is that all are centered

on the teaching of reading. In Indonesia’s higher education context, similar studies

have been conducted on incorporating critical thinking (Gustine, 2007; Kustini,

2010) as well as the synthesis of critical thinking, critical literacy and critical

pedagogy (Maulida, 2010) to reading subject.

Given the fact above, it seems that there is still space for other researchers

to develop reading activities from other critical perspectives. In this respect,

Critical Discourse Analysis is another critical approach which has a possibility to

be infused in a reading classroom. Under its pedagogical wing, namely Critical

Language Awareness (CLA) (Fairclough, 1992c in Pennycook, 2001; Wallace,

2003), many researchers have developed CDA in their teaching. Farias’ (2005)

study in an EFL class in Chile reveals that CLA can contribute to the teaching and

learning of English as a global language. Meanwhile, Smith (2004) outlines some

practical aspects of CLA in an informal context of English teaching.

CLA’s aim to build students’ awareness on the use of language is the

interest of the current investigation which believes that CDA generates a lot of

benefits to the practice of language pedagogy, primarily in the reading subject.

Some previous studies on related subject have become valuable references for the

present research, such as those of conducted by Ivanov (2009), Świerczyńska,

(6)

4 The purpose of Ivanov’s study is to find out the areas of discourse analysis

relevant to the teaching of EFL reading at a Swedish upper-secondary school as

well as to identify what language teachers and learners can borrow from the

linguistic study of text and discourse and then make use of it inside and outside

the language classroom.

Meanwhile, the implementation of CDA to EFL teaching in general and

reading subject in particular is also endorsed by Świerczyńska, Cots (2006), and

Dar et al (2010). Świerczyńska presents an article containing the main

assumptions of CDA and its analytical tools to be applied in a language course.

Although the title is intriguing, a practical guide to the implementation of CDA in

the classroom activity however is not available in this article. In contrast, a more

comprehensive description is provided by Cots’ study (2006) who applies one of

CDA frameworks proposed by Fairclough and breaks it down into a set of critical

questions as guidance for students to read texts critically. The last study conducted

by Dar’s et al (2010) which applies CDA techniques in a reading course to

disclose students’ CLA and critical thinking. Unfortunately, CDA techniques are

not clearly clarified and the research only takes one session of teaching which is

regarded far from sufficient for this complex subject of discussion.

Regarding this, the present study will undertake a research on a critical

reading teaching in Indonesia’s EFL classroom whose major goal is to

demonstrate the implementation Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) in the reading

subject of tertiary level of education. The main distinctive feature of the present

(7)

5 which is not taken from one framework but rather generally taken from the

principles of CDA itself. The result of this investigation is expected to contribute

to the pedagogical practice mainly to the reading teaching in Indonesia’s EFL

context.

1.2.Research Questions

The research is conducted in order to find the answer of the following questions:

1. How are the principles of CDA implemented in a reading classroom?

2. What are the effects of the teaching program towards students’ critical

reading?

3. What are students’ responses towards reading activities based on CDA

principles?

1.3.Purposes of the Research

In line with the research questions, thus the purposes of the study are:

1. To explore the implementation of CDA’s principles in a reading classroom.

2. To figure out the effects of the teaching program towards students’ critical

reading.

3. To investigate students’ responses towards reading activities based on CDA

(8)

6

1.4.Scope of the Research

The essence of this study is the testing of a considerably more critical approach to

teaching reading through principles of Critical Discourse Analysis and whether or

not this implementation has positive results towards the improvement of students’

critical reading. This study is designed by focusing the investigation to the reading

activity based on eight principles of CDA (Fairclough and Wodak, 1997) which

are not explicitly taught in the classroom but are drawn into a set of critical

questions, whose idea is adapted from Cots (2006), as a means to evaluate the

texts. By doing so, it is expected that the principles of CDA can be incorporated in

the teaching of critical reading without resulting any confusion of the complex

notion of CDA itself.

1.5.Significance of the Research

This study is significant in such a way that: firstly, it attempts to demonstrate

CDA as not solely a critical approach to examine text regarded as an individual

activity, but also as a framework possibly developed in the teaching practice to

become a more negotiable, communal activity; secondly, the incorporation of

CDA’s principles in a reading classroom is regarded as a new method in Indonesia

whose primary aim is to build a critical attitude of students’ reading as suggested

by the CDA’s pedagogical wing, namely critical language awareness; lastly, in a

more practical way, this study is expected to be a worthy model for implementing

(9)

7 literacy) in general and critical discourse analysis in particular to classroom

practices in order to foster students’ criticality as required in the current era.

1.6.Organization of the Thesis

The thesis is organized into five chapters. The first chapter is an introduction to

the thesis which is started by the background of conducting the research and

followed by some important notions of the research covering research questions,

purposes of the research and scope and significance of the study. The subsequent

chapter addresses literature review that underpins the study and become the

theoretical reference during the overall process of the research. The theories

covered in this section are Critical Discourse Analysis as its principles are applied

in the reading subject, Critical Reading as the process as well as the expected goal

of the study, and Systemic Functional Linguistics as the analytical tool for

observing the text in the textual level. Chapter three presents methodology which

contains the objective of the research, description of site and participants, research

design, teaching material, including data collection as well as data analysis. The

next chapter is the elaboration of the teaching program. It highlights the overall

process of the teaching of critical reading by implementing principles of CDA in

which findings and discussions are presented simultaneously. The thesis is ended

in chapter five which provides the conclusion of the overall study together with

limitation of the study and recommendation for the betterment of the related

(10)

31 CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

This section addresses some methodological elements in conducting the research

on implementing CDA to the teaching of reading and how this program affects to

and was responded by the students. The elements in this chapter consist of

research design, site, participants, techniques of data collection and techniques of

data analysis.

3.1. Research Design

The present study employed a qualitative research by applying a case study as the

specific research design (Alwasilah, 2002; Silverman, 2005). By qualitative

research, the data gained will be analyzed in a descriptive way to explore their

attitudes, behavior and experience (Dawson, 2009) which emerged along the

teaching program. It did not merely try to seek the final result of the program but

also to take into account the process of the teaching and learning itself.

Additionally, the study puts its emphasis on “the quality of a particular activity

than in how often it occurs or how it would otherwise be evaluated” (Fraenkel &

Wallen, 2008: 422). This study was also not designed to find any significant result

in a form of statistical quantification as it should be in quantitative one, but rather

to find patterns of data, “trying to create a full and rich understanding of the

research context (Croker, 2009: 3-4)” as the nature of qualitative investigation.

Thus, observation becomes one such prominent process in this study as to gain

(11)

32 In addition, case study was applied since it “seeks to preserve the

wholeness and integrity of the case” (Punch in Silverman, 2005: 127). In other

words, a case study is about boundedness (Hood, 2009: 68) in which cases are

limited to a certain degree, both on the object of the study and the scope of the

researcher’s interest (Hood, 2009: 72). In a more specific way, a qualitative case

study is best utilized in this study since it has a similar reason to what Hood has

drawn for applying it in applied linguistics, as: 1) the object of the study is a

bounded system, comprised of an individual or entity and the context in which

social action occurs; 2) what the researcher wish to learn is not merely on the

efficacy of a particular teaching technique, but how this technique proceeds along

the course; 3) the findings are to be used to improve practice of a particular

teaching or even extended to other cases of similar condition (2009: 72-73).

In order to establish trustworthiness, several data collection techniques

were employed as a form of methodological triangulation (Mason, 1996 in

Silverman, 2005: 121), that is “collecting information from a diverse range of

individuals and settings, using a variety of methods” (Denzin, 1970 in Maxwell,

1996: 75). The techniques comprised the information gained from observations,

questionnaire, and participants’ journals. This triangulation further allowed the

study to have a better assessment of the validity, primarily that resulted from

feedback in students’ journals and reduced bias or limitation of one particular

(12)

33 3.2. Site and Participant

The study was undertaken among 5th semester students of English Department at

Faculty of Adab and Humanities, State Islamic University Sunan Gunung Djati

Bandung. The prior reason for choosing this site was the researcher’s intention to

learn, evaluate, and develop the teaching practice in an institution in which she

devotes her time as a lecturer. Another reason was based on the feasibility in

which, as a faculty member, it was easier for the researcher to reach the site in

terms of access, permission, as well as initial information regarding the students’

critical capacity.

The participants of the present study were one whole class consisting 31

fifth semester students of English Department at Faculty of Adab and Humanities,

State Islamic University Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung. The selection of these

participants is based on the reason that students in this semester have completed

the Reading subject series. The subject itself is conducted up to the fourth level

which consists of intensive reading 1 and 2 and extensive reading 1 and 2. By this

completion, it was assumed that they have already had adequate capacity to

continue their reading activities to the more complex one, viz. critical reading, as

critical reading can only be pursued to advanced readers (Huang, 2011).

The participants were also purposively selected. They were one class

students out of five classes of the same semester who were selected based on the

researcher’s “personal judgment to select a sample” (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2008:

99) because of their more active participation than students of the other classes.

The purpose of choosing one whole class is also based on the researcher’s

(13)

34 number which, in Indonesian context, mostly of large class consisting 30 to 40

pupils. This choice is in line with van Lier’s suggestion to have research in

ongoing and regular classes (1988: 9) that further contribute to the reliability of

the study. In this case, there were 31 students involved in the research whose

names were replaced by code based on their initial order to maintain objectivity.

3.3. Data Collection

The data in this study were obtained by means of some techniques comprising a

phase of teaching, included in it participant observation and students’ reflective

journals, and questionnaire. The use of these multiple techniques aims to establish

validity as the realization of triangulation (Maxwell, 1996). The techniques of

collecting data will be respectively described as follows:

3.3.1. A Phase of Teaching

A phase of teaching involved 12 sessions of teaching critical reading in a fifth

semester class. The teaching consisted of two sessions of a preliminary phase, two

sessions of explicit teaching (Hancock, 1999) of reading-related features, seven

sessions of the teaching of critical reading, and one last session of a progress test

and questionnaire distribution. The activities in the preliminary phase comprised

the introduction to the teaching program, joint decision of topics for discussion,

the distribution of pre-program questionnaire, and the administration of diagnostic

test (Hood, 1996; Hughes, 2003). In the next phase, two concepts regarding CDA

(14)

35 matters as they would be used during the whole reading sessions in the activities

which followed.

The phase of teaching also involved several techniques of collecting data.

They were participant observation and students’ reflective journals which were

undertaken throughout the teaching.

3.3.1.1. Participant Observation

Observation, defined as “the conscious noticing and detailed examination of

participant’s behavior in a naturalistic setting” (Cowie, 2009: 166), was

undertaken during a phase of a teaching program consisting of twelve sessions.

This classroom observation (Allwright, 1988) was carried out by the researcher

who acted as the teacher categorizing it as participant observation (Fraenkel &

Wallen, 2008; Cowie, 2009; Dawson, 2009). It is “involving both participating in

and observing a particular context at the same time” (Cowie, 2009: 167).

Observation involved note taking to record students’ activities as well as

the teacher researcher’s questions or stimuli during the interaction and instruction

(Allwright, 1988), particularly in the process of discussion on assessing texts by

means of CDA’s principles. However, the activities in the first and last sessions

were less observed since the agenda in the first was still on course introduction

and the latter on progress test. More detailed notes were then jotted down

immediately after the completion of each session including to record some

methodological issues, students’ thoughts, and preliminary analyses in a form of

(15)

36 3.3.1.2. Students’ Reflective Journal

Students were asked to write a journal immediately after the end of each session.

This technique was applied as the complementary data mainly as feedback from

students towards the teaching processes in order to construct validity (Maxwell,

1996). It was also to gain information regarding students’ understanding on the

overall process, their feeling, opinion and suggestion for the upcoming sessions as

well as to record their learning process of what they got from the teacher as well

as from peers. Thus, the success of the teaching program does not only lie on the

result of the test but also the students’ progress reflected through their journals. It

is also as a critical reflection for the researcher herself of how “to see herself

through the students’ eyes”(Brookfield, 1995 in Emilia, 2005: 78).

3.3.2. Questionnaire

As to gain comprehensive information of the students’ critical reading capacity, a

questionnaire was utilized twice. First is pre-program questionnaire designed as

preliminary input to indicate the participants’ engagement with reading in general

and reading English texts in particular, their understanding on the content of text,

their criticality on reading, and their expectation towards the teaching program.

Meanwhile, the second is post-program questionnaire containing questions to

explore students’ interest on the teaching, their opinion about the need of being

critical reader including their criticality improvement, their understanding on the

nature of text, the term CDA, and their opinion and suggestion for further teaching

program. These points were spread out within eleven questions for the first

(16)

open-37 response items (Brown, 2009) or open-ended (Dawson, 2009) type of

questionnaire that allowed “the respondents to answer in their own words”

(Brown, 2009: 202).

3.4. Data Analysis

Data analysis were conducted over the course of the study and after the

completion of the overall program that were based on each session’s observation,

students’ journals, questionnaire, and the result from diagnostic and progress tests.

Data from classroom observation were directly analyzed and interpreted. It was

scrutinized the teacher’s and students’ activities during the lesson, particularly

students’ individual engagement in the discussion and their relevant responses to

questions. By this analysis, students’ progress could be identified.

Data from both questionnaires were analyzed in steps by firstly

transcribing the students’ answers and putting them into table of condensed form

based on categories related to central themes. Data from pre-program

questionnaire in particular and data from diagnostic test were analyzed

simultaneously to figure out students’ initial criticality in reading. These results

were then contrasted with data from post-program questionnaire and progress test.

Thus, it could be revealed the students’ progress, or even decline, as a result of the

program.

Meanwhile, students’ reflective journals were analyzed complementarily

to support the information gained from other methods. Data from this technique

was used to complete the discussion of students’ activity taken from observation.

(17)

38 confirmed. It was also made use to confirm the results from post-program

questionnaire mainly regarding students’ responses towards the program as

questioned in the reading question.

3.5. Concluding Remarks

This chapter has reviewed methodology of the research that covers research

design, site and participants, data collection and data analysis. In terms of data

collection, multiple techniques were equipped in order to gain fruitful information

for answering the research questions. These include a phase of a teaching covering

classroom observation and students’ reflective journals, pre and post program

questionnaires, and diagnostic and progress tests. The discussion on the way

(18)

83

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS, LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY, AND

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

This final section reports the conclusion and limitation of the study and proposes

some recommendations for further related research. The conclusions and

limitations of the study are drawn based on the discussion elaborated in the

previous chapter. Meanwhile, recommendations are proposed based on some

limitations in the current study for the betterment of the similar studies in the

future.

5.1. Conclusions

The CDA-based reading teaching program incorporated in this study has resulted

in students’ critical reading improvement in general. This conclusion is mainly

drawn by looking at the implementation which includes two phases. The first is

preliminary phase comprising several stages. They are the introduction of the

teaching program, the joint decision of the topics for reading, the distribution of

diagnostic test and the performance of preliminary questionnaire. The second

phase is the teaching program covering stages of explicit teaching of CDA-based

guiding critical questions and SFL-related framework for critical reading and the

teaching of critical reading itself. Following Wallace (1992a; 1992b), the teaching

of critical reading is divided into three activities: pre-, while, and post-reading

(19)

84 The success of the teaching can also be identified from some sources of

data, mainly classroom observation and progress test. Students’ discussion based

on the guiding questions went lively both in the group and classroom discussion.

Most of them were also able to provide relevant responses to the questions.

Additionally, students’ improvement was also signified by the active participation

of those who were considered as passive students before the teaching program

was carried out.

In line with the above conclusion, the teaching program has a greater

positive influence towards the promotion of students’ critical reading. Not only

from the researcher’s observation and the result of test, the complementary data

from students’ reflective journals as well as post-program questionnaire also

reveal their confession that the course had improved their reading habit and more

importantly their critical reading. They also realize that being critical in reading is

of paramount importance in the current era since there are wide range of

information nowadays that should be well-selected. Nevertheless, there is a

negative effect the program has on the students that some of them tend to be

judgmental in evaluating the texts.

Regarding students’ responses towards the teaching program, data from

students’ reflective journals as well as post-program questionnaire reveal students’

enjoyment during the teaching though there was time they felt bored and tired

since the situation was not really supportive. Some students also confessed that

the techniques applied by the researcher were new for them and regarded better

than the previous reading lessons they have taken. It indicates that the way CDA’s

(20)

85 reading. Finally, students’ positive responses are also completed by their

suggestion to the teacher to give grammatically easier texts and include

Indonesian texts and literary texts.

5.2. Limitations of the Study

The limitation of the study includes: First, the absence of co-researcher becomes

one particular drawback mainly in the process of collecting data from observation.

It was felt that the researcher’s agenda during the teaching was quite dense as she

should teach and, at the same time, jot down the dynamics in the classroom.

Moreover, the study involved 31 students which is categorized as big class. As a

consequence, not every individual performance of the students could be evaluated.

To anticipate this, the researcher simultaneously took notes anytime there was

pause in teacher students’ interaction as they have individual or group activities

and directly complete these notes at the end of each session while recalling

anything took place during the teaching. The second is the fact that the research

involved the researcher as participant observer and the absence of second opinion

to assess both students arguments and activities are open to possible subjective

evaluation of the researcher.

5.3. Recommendations

Based on the limitations of the study drawn above and in order to have better

teaching practice in the future, it can be recommended that the presence of

co-researcher becomes prominent to assist the co-researcher to do the observation

(21)

86 assessment of students’ activities. Secondly, the materials presented to students

can be made more varied and might include the use of literary texts as it was

suggested by the students in this research. Third, the teaching can be made longer

following the curriculum for tertiary educational level in which there are around

16 sessions within one semester including for tests. Thus, the teaching can really

represents the real situation and later can be directly adopted in our teaching.

Further researcher can also redesign the instruments to meet the requirements of

action research. Lastly, since the incorporation of CDA in the classroom practice

is still rare, it is highly encouraged for further researchers to implement this in

other language subjects.

(22)

86 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Allwright, D. (1988). Observation in the Language Classroom. London: Longman.

Alwasilah, A. C. (2002). Pokoknya Kualitatif: dasar-dasar merancang dan melakukan

penelitian kualitatif. Bandung: Pustaka Jaya.

Anthonissen, C. (2010). “Interaction between Visual and Verbal Communication:

changing patterns in the printed media”. In Weiss, G and Wodak, R. (eds).

Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Atkinson, D. (1993). Teaching Monolingual Classes: using L1 in the classroom.

Harlow: Longman Group Ltd.

Auerbach, E. (1993). ”Reexamining English only in the ESL Classroom”. TESOL

Quarterly, Vol. 27, pp. 9- 32. Available at: http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/files/rcd/

BE019020/Reexamining_English_Only.pdf. Accessed on 18 November 2011.

Bartlett, T. (2004). “Mapping Distinction: towards a systemic representation of power

in language”. In Young, L. & Harrison, C. (eds). Systemic Functional Linguistics

and Critical Discourse Analysis. NY: Continuum.

Beyer, B. K. (1997). Improving Student Thinking: a comprehensive approach. Boston:

Allyn and Bacon.

Bosley, L. (2008). “’I Don't Teach Reading’: critical reading instruction in composition

courses”. Literacy Research & Instruction, Vol. 47, Issue 4, pp. 285-308.

Available at: http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?hid=107&

sid=e618a885-a0c2-4172-a936f8fbe1016a1a%40sessionmgr111&vid=1

Accessed on 17 March 2011.

Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by Principles. New York: Longman.

Brown, J. D. (2009). “Open-Response Items in Questionnaires”. In Heigham, J. &

Croker, R. A. (Eds.). Qualitative Research in Applied Linguistics. New York:

Palgrave Macmillan.

Burgess, M. L. (2009). “Using WebCT as a Supplemental Tool to Enhance Critical

Thinking and Engagement Among Developmental Reading Students”. Journal

of College Reading & Learning, Vol. 39 Issue 2, pp. 9-33. Available at:

(23)

viewer?hid=107&sid=f020fd8a-87 4109-47c6-8e63-6940c3348090%40sessionmgr 110&vid=1 Accessed on 17

March 2011.

Charteris-Black, J. (2004). Corpus Approaches to Critical Metaphor Analysis. NY:

Palgrave Macmillan.

Christen, W. L Murphy, & Thomas J. (1991). Increasing Comprehension by Activating

Prior Knowledge. ERIC Digest. Available at:

http://www.ericdigests.org/pre-9219/prior.htm. Accessed on 20 September 2001.

Cots, J. M. (2006). “Teaching 'with an Attitude': critical discourse analysis in EFL

teaching”. ELT Journal: English Language Teachers Journal, Vol. 60, Issue 4.

Available at: http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=960cc

74b-934-401e-a311-8fb1c2f2ba5f%40sessionmgr114&vid=1&hid=104.

Accessed on 17 March 2011.

Cowie, N. (2009). “Observation”. In Heigham J. & Croker, R. A. (Eds.). Qualitative

Research in Applied Linguistics. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Danesi, M. (2009). Dictionary of Media and Communications. New York: M.E.

Sharpe, Inc.

Dar, Z. K. et als. (2010). “Teaching Reading with a Critical Attitude: using critical

discourse analysis (CDA) to raise EFL university students' critical language

awareness (CLA)”. International Journal of Criminology and Sociological

Theory, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 457-476. Available at: http://pi.library.yorku.ca/ojs/

index.php/ijcst/article/viewFile/30585/28534. Accessed on 17 January 2011.

Dawson, C. (2009). Introduction to Research Methods. Oxford: How to Books.

De Lissovoy, N. (2008). Power, Crisis, and Education for Liberation: rethinking

critical pedagogy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Elder, L & Paul, R. (2009). “Close Reading, Substantive Writing and Critical Thinking:

foundational skills essential to the educated mind”. Gifted Education

Intemational. Vol 25, pp. 286-295. Available at: http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/

pdfviewer/pdfviewer?hid=107&sid=a6a97f6d-4e7c-4e38-9bc5-2141676b383e%

40sessionmgr113&vid=1. Accessed on 17 March 2011.

Eggins, S. (2004). An Introduction to Sistemic Functional Linguistics. London: Printer

(24)

88 Emilia, E. (2005). A Critical Genre-Based Approach to Teaching Academic Writing in

A Tertiary Level Context in indonesia. Unpublished Dissertation.

Emilia, E. (2009). Menulis Tesis dan Disertasi. Bandung: Alphabeta.

Eriyanto. (2001). Analisis Wacana. Yogyakarta: LKiS.

Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis: the critical study of language.

London: Longman.

Fairclough, N. (2001). “Critical Discourse Analysis as a Method in Social Scientific

Research”. In Wodak R. & Meyer M. (eds). Methods of Critical Discourse

Analysis. London: Sage Publications.

Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing Discourse: textual analysis for social research.

London: Routledge

Fairclough, N. & Wodak, R. (2010). “Critical Discourse Analysis in Action”. In C.

Coffin et al. Applied Linguistics Methods: A Reader. London: Routledge.

Farias, M. (2005). Critical Language Awareness in Foreign Language Learning.

Available at: http://redalyc.uaemex.mx/pdf/352/35201612.pdf. Accessed on 16

July 2010.

Fisher, R. (2011). “Dialogic Teaching”. In Green, A. (ed). Becoming a Reflective

English Teacher. Berkshire: MG-Hill Open University Press.

Forum Qualitative Social Research. What Is Critical Discourse Analysis?: Ruth Wodak

in Conversation with Gavin Kendall. V. 8, No. 2, Art. 29 – May 2007. Available

at: http://www.ling.lancs.ac.uk/staff/wodak/inter view.pdf. Accessed on 11

October 2011.

Fraenkel, J. R. & Wallen N. E. (2008). How to Design and Evaluate Research in

Education 7th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Frank, M. (1972). Modern English. New Jersey. Prentice-Hall.

Fredricks, Lori. (2007). “A Rationale for Critical Pedagogy in EFL: the case of

Tajikistan”. The Reading Matrix. Vol.7, No. 2. Available at:

http://www.readingmatrix.com/articles/fredricks/article2.pdf. Accessed on 17

March 2011.

García, A. (2008). “Removing the Veil: developing critical reading skills through

systemic functional linguistics”. Zona Próxima. 2008, Issue 9, pp. 28-45.

(25)

89 =8fa7bd88-f830-4fbc-aedc-ba44369ba3d9%40sessionmgr111&vid=1. Accessed

on 17 March 2011.

Gee, J. P. (1990). Social Linguistics and Literacies. Hampshire: The Falmer Press.

Gee, J. P. (1999). An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: theory and method. London:

Routledge.

Gebhard, J. G. (1996). Teaching English as a Second of Foreign Language. Michigan:

the University of Michigan.

Gerot, L. & Wignel, P. (1995). Making Sense of Functional Grammar. Cammeray:

AEE.

Gibbons, P. (2002). Scaffolding Language and Scaffolding Learning: teaching second

language learners in the mainstream classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Goatly, A. (2000). Critical Reading and Writing. London: Routledge.

Grabe, W. & Stoller, F. L. (2002). Teaching and Researching Reading. Edinburgh:

Pearson Education Ltd.

Gustine, G (2007). Reading Beyond the Lines: infusing critical thinking into reading.

Unpublished Thesis.

Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An Introduction to Functional Linguistics. London: Arnold.

Hancock, J. (ed.). (1999). The Explicit Teaching of Reading. International Reading

Association.

Harmer, J. (1991). The Practice of English Language Teaching. London: Longman.

Harmer, J. (1998). How to Teach English. Edinburgh: Pearson Education Ltd.

Harmer, J. (2007). The Practice of English Language Teaching (4th edition). London:

Longman.

Hood, M. (2009). “Case Study”. In Heigham, J. & Croker, R. A. (Eds.). Qualitative

Research in Applied Linguistics. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Hood, S. et al. (1996). Focus on Reading. Sydney: NCELTR.

Horváth, J. Critical Discourse Analysis of Obama’s Political Discourse. Available at:

http://www.pulib.sk/elpub2/FF/Ferencik2/pdf_doc/6.pdf. Accessed on 6

December 2010.

Huang, S. (2009). “ EFL Reading Through a Critical Literacy Perspective”. English

Teaching & Learning. 2009, Vol. 33, Issue 3, p. 51-93. Available at:

(26)

http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?hid=107&sid=5424dada-90 2de0-4ade-bc39-ec074d267543%40sessionmgr111&vid=1. Accessed on 17

March 2011.

Hughes, A. (2003). Testing for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Centre. Available at: http://www.writing.utoronto.ca/images/stories/Documents

/critical-reading.pdf. Accessed on1 June 2011.

Kress, G. (1985a). Linguistic Processes in Sociocultural Practice. Melbourne: Deakin

University.

Kress, G. (1985b). Ideological Structures in Discourse. In Van Dijk, T. A. (Ed).

Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Volume 4. London: Academic Press.

Kustini, S. (2010). Engaging Critical Thinking in the Teaching of Reading.

Unpublished Thesis.

Lee, W. (1995). “Authenticity Revisited: text authenticity and learner authenticity”.

ELT Journal, 49(4), pp.323–328.

Martin, J. R., Matthiessen, C., Painter, C. (1997). Working with Functional Grammar.

London: Arnold.

Martin, J. R. & Rose, D. (2007). Working with Discourse: meaning beyond the clause.

London: Continuum.

Marshall, J. (1999). “Explicitly Teaching the Reading of Nonfiction Texts. In Hancock,

(27)

91 Maulida, R. D. (2010). Teaching Critical Reading to Tertiary EFL Students in

Indonesia. Unpublished Thesis.

Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Qualitative Research Design: an interactive approach. London:

Sage Publications.

c26f-4a52-b20b-ef7e3110b 448%40sessionmgr110&vid=1. Accessed on 17

March 2010.

Moore, T. (2010). “The ‘Process’ of Learning: on the use of Halliday’s transitivity in

Academic Skills Advising”. In C. Coffin et al., Applied Linguistics Methods: A

Reader. London: Routledge.

Morgan, W. (1997). Critical Literacy in the Classroom. London: Routledge.

Morrow, R. A. & Torres, C. A. (2002) Reading Freire and Habermas: critical

pedagogy and transformative social change. NY: Teachers College Press.

Nathan, R. (2010). “Back to the Future?: the role of critical thinking and high levels of

reading comprehension in the 21st century”. California English, Vol. 16, Issue

2, pp. 6-9 Available at: http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?

hid=107&sid=a5624da8-0901-4f9d-94f7-daa03f92fbb1%40sessionmgr111&vid

=1. Accessed on 17 March 2010.

Pennycook, A. (2001). Critical Applied Linguistics: a critical introduction. New

Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Richards, K. (2009). “Interview”. In Heigham, J. & Croker, R. A. (Eds.). Qualitative

Research in Applied Linguistics. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Rogers, R. (ed.). (2008). “An Introduction to Critical Discourse Analysis in Education”.

In Rebecca Rogers, Critical Discourse Analysis in Education. New Jersey:

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Sadoski, M. (2004). Conceptual Foundations of Teaching Reading. New York: The

(28)

92 Silverman, D. (2005). Doing Qualitative Research. London: Sage Publications.

Smith, J. (1999). “It’s Just a Different Answer”: exploring point of view. In Hancock, J.

(Ed.). The Explicit Teaching of Reading. International Reading Association.

Smith, H. A. (2004). “Critical Language Awareness (CLA) through Sex and the City:

a classroom example”. TESOLANZ Newsletter, Vol 13 No 3. Available at:

http://associates.iatefl.org/pages/materials/i4c13.pdf. Accessed on 16 July 2010.

Spears, R. A. (2005). McGraw-Hill’s Dictionary of American Idioms and Phrasal

Verbs. McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Strangman, N. & Hall, T. (2004). Background Knowledge. National Center on

Accessing the General Curriculum (NCAC). Available at: http://www.cast.org/

system/galleries/download/ncac/ncac_BK.pdf. Accessed on 20 September 2011.

Stubbs, M. (1983). Discourse Analysis: the sociolinguistics analysis of natural

language. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Świerczyńska, A. (2010). Critical Discourse Analysis in EFL Context. Available at:

http://www.nkjosieradz.pl/pub/critdisc.pdf. Accessed on 2 December 2010.

Van Dijk, T. (1988). News as Discourse. Broadway: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,

Inc.

Van Dijk, T. (1993). “Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis”. In Van Dijk, T. (ed.).

Discourse and Society. London: Sage.

Van Dijk, T. (2001a). “Critical Discourse Analysis”. In Tannen, D., Schiffrin, D. &

Hamilton, H. (Eds.). Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Blackwell.

Van Dijk, T. (2001b). “Multidisciplinary CDA: a plea for diversity”. In Wodak, R. &

Meyer, M. (eds.) Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Sage

Publications.

Van Leeuwen, T. (2008). Discourse and Practice. New York: Oxford University Press.

(29)

93 9c5f-45fa-9ac5-535bfa8c8118%40sessionmgr114&vid=1. Accessed on 17

March 2011.

Wallace, C. (1992a). Reading. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Wallace, C. (1992b). “Critical Literacy Awareness in the EFL Classroom”. In

Fairclough, N. (Ed). Critical Language Awareness. London: Longman.

Wallace, C. (1999). “Critical Language Awareness: key principles for a course in

critical reading”. In Critical Language Awareness Special Issue of Language

Awareness.: 98-110.

Wallace, C. (2003). Critical Reading in Language Education. NY: Palgrave Macmillan

Wilkinson, L. (1999). “An Introduction to the Explicit Teaching of Reading”. In

Hancock, J. (Ed). The Explicit Teaching of Reading. International Reading

Association.

Wodak, R. (2002). Aspects of Critical Discourse Analysis. Available at:

http://userpages.uni-koblenz.de/~diekmann/zfal/zfalarchiv/zfal36_1.pdf.

Accessed on 5 September 2010.

Wodak, R. (2001). “What CDA is about: a summary of its history, important concepts

and its developments’. In Wodak, R. & Meyer, M., Methods of Critical

Discourse Analysis. London: Sage Publications.

Wodak, R. & Weiss, G. (eds.) (2003). Critical Discourse Analysis: Theory and

Interdiciplinary. NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

Wodak. R. (2009). The Discourse of Politics in Action. NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

Yağcioğlu, Ö. (2008). “Critical Thinking and Tasked Based Learning in Teaching

Reading Courses at Dokuz Eylul University in Turkey”. Ekev Academic Review,

Vol. 13, Issue 38, pp. 287-298. Available at: http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost

/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?hid=107&sid=615269d6-532b-40f3-ac5c-65e83a14e773

%40sessionmgr104&vid=2. Accessed on 17 March 2011.

Young, L. & Harrison, C. (2004). Systemic Functional Linguistics and Critical

Discourse Analysis (Eds.). NY: Continuum.

Figur

Memperbarui...

Referensi

Memperbarui...