TABLE OF CONTENT
DECLARATION ... i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ... ii
ABSTRACT ... iii
TABLE OF CONTENT ... iv
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background ... 1
1.2 Research Questions ... 5
1.3 Purposes of Research ... 5
1.4 Scope of the Research ... 6
1.5 Significance of the Research ... 6
1.6 Organization of Paper ... 7
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Critical Discourse Analysis ... 8
2.1.1 Definition of Critical Discourse Analysis ... 9
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 THREE: METHODOLOGY 3.1 Research Design ... 31
3.2 Site and Participant ... 33
3.3 Data Collection ... 34
3.3.1 A Phase of Teaching ... 34
3.3.1.1 Participant Observation ... 35
3.3.1.2 Students’ Reflective Journal ... 36
3.3.1.3 Questionnaire ... 36
3.4 Data Analysis ... 37
3.5 Concluding Remarks ... 38
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
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 5.1 Conclusions ... 83
5.2 Limitations of the Study... 84
5.3 Recommendations ... 85
BIBLIOGRAPHY ... 86
APPENDICES 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
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
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
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,
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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.
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:
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
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.
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:
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.
Ivanov, S. (2009). Discourse Analysis in EFL Reading. Available at:
http://dspace.mah.se:8080/bitstream/2043/8453/1/Sergej%20Ivanov%20degree
%20project.pdf. Accessed on 8 December 2010.
Johnson, K. (2001). An Introduction to Foreign Language Learning and Teaching.
London: Longman.
Knott, D. (2008). Critical Reading towards Critical Writing. New College Writing
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.
Macrine, SL. (2009). “What Is Critical Pedagogy Good For? An interview with Ira
Shor. In Macrine, S. L., Critical Pedagogy in Uncertain Time. New York:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Martin, J. R. and Rothery, J. (1994). “Grammar: making meaning in writing.” In B.
Cope and Kalantzis, M. (eds). The Powers of Literacy: a genre approach to
teaching writing. London: Falmer Press.
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,
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.
Meyer, M. (2001). “Between Theory, Method, and Politics: positioning of the
approaches to CDA”. In Wodak, R. & Meyer, M. (eds.). Methods of Critical
Discourse Analysis. London: Sage Publications.
Molden, K. (2007). “Critical Literacy, the Right Answer for the Reading Classroom”.
Reading Improvement, Vol. 44 Issue 1, pp. 50-56. Available at:
http://web.ebscohost.com/
ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?hid=107&sid=c9def8a6-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
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.
Van Lier, L. (1988). The Classroom and the Language Learner. Essex: Longman
Group Limited.
VanTassel-Baska, J. et al. (2009). “A Longitudinal Study of Enhancing Critical
Thinking and Reading Comprehension in Title I Classrooms”. Journal for the
Education of the Gifted, Vol. 33, Issue 1, pp. 7-37. Available at:
http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?hid=107&sid=e4fe2fac-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.
