TEACHERS’ DIFFICULTIES IN LESSON PLANNING.

(1)

TEACHERS’ DIFFICULTIES IN LESSON PLANNING

A Paper

Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of Sarjana Pendidikan Degree

MIFTAH FARID

(0809325)

ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION

INDONESIA UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION

(2)

Teachers’ Difficulties in Lesson Planning

Oleh

Miftah Farid

Sebuah skripsi yang diajukan untuk memenuhi salah satu syarat memperoleh gelar Sarjana pada Fakultas Pendidikan Bahasa dan Seni

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia

April 2014

Hak Cipta dilindungi undang-undang.

Skripsi ini tidak boleh diperbanyak seluruhya atau sebagian,

(3)

Page of Approval

Teachers’ Difficulties in Lesson Planning

A Research Paper

By

Miftah Farid

0809325

Approved by:

First Supervisor Second Supervisor

Dr. Wachyu Sundayana, M.A. Lulu Laela Amalia, S.S., M.Pd.

195802081986011001 1975040920071022001

The Head of English Education Department

Prof. Dr. H. Didi Suherdi, M.Ed.

(4)

Miftah Farid, 2014

Teachers difficulties in lesson planning

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu

Teachers’ Difficulties in Lesson Planning

Abstract

This study investigated the teachers’ preparation in developing lesson plans, in terms of formulating objectives, developing materials and media, plotting the

teaching procedures and conducting students’ evaluation; also pictured their consideration and difficulties in planning lessons for their classes. As the study employed qualitative data analysis, the data were collected through document analysis on lesson plans, also conducting interview with the teachers. The data then were analyzed using Miles and Huberman’s (1994) interactive model. The findings showed that in developing the lesson plans the teachers applied the systematic planning proposed by Reiser and Dick (1996), in which they started with analyzing the syllabus, followed by formulating objectives and indicators, selecting learning materials, and designing learning activities and assessment procedure. However, the interview result showed that the teachers dealt with some problems during the process, such as formulating indicators, selecting materials, determining learning activities, selecting media and developing assessment procedure. Based on the findings in this study, it is recommended that the teachers improve their competences in lesson planning.

Keywords: lesson plan, lesson planning, teacher’s difficulties

Abstrak

Dibawah bimbingan Dr. Wachyu Sundayana, M.A. dan Lulu Laela Amalia, S.S., M.Pd.,

penelitian berjudul “Teachers’ Difficulties in Lesson planning” menginvestigasi cara guru

mengembangkan RPP dan kesulitan-kesulitan selama proses pengembangannya. Dengan menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif, data diperoleh dari analisis RPP dan wawancara dengan para guru. Data kemudian dianalisis dengan model interaktif Miles dan Huberman (1994:12). Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa para guru mengembangkan RPP sesuai model perencanaan sistematis Reiser dan Dick (1996). Akan tetapi, para guru tersebut menghadapi kesulitan dalam mengembangkan beberapa bagian RPP.

(5)

TABLE OF CONTENT

1.6. Research Methodology... 4

1.7. Clarification of Terms ... 4

2.1.1. Definition of Lesson Plan and Lesson Planning ... 8

2.1.2. Significance of Lesson Planning in Teaching ... 10

2.1.3. Principles of Lesson Planning ... 12

2.1.4. Elements of Lesson Plan ... 14

(6)

2.1.4.2. Objectives ... 15

2.1.4.3. Learning Materials ... 16

2.1.4.4. Teaching Methods ... 17

2.1.4.5. Learning Activities ... 18

2.1.4.6. Assessment ... 20

2.1.5. Models/Approaches of Instructional Planning ... 21

2.1.6. Factors Considered in Lesson Planning ... 24

2.2. Problems of EFL Teaching in Indonesia ... 27

2.3. Related Studies on Lesson Planning ... 28

Chapter 3 Research Methodology ... 30

3.1. Research Design ... 30

Chapter 4 Findings and Discussion ... 36

4.1. Lesson Planning Procedure ... 36

4.1.1. Data from Document Analysis ... 36

4.1.1.1. Indicators ... 36

4.1.1.2. Objectives ... 38

4.1.1.4. Instructional Media ... 40

4.1.1.5. Instructional Activities ... 40

4.1.1.6. Assessment ... 42

(7)

4.1.2.1. Indicators ... 44

4.1.2.2. Objectives ... 45

4.1.2.4. Instructional Media ... 46

4.1.2.5. Instructional Activities ... 48

4.1.2.6. Assessment ... 49

4.2. Teachers’ Difficulties in Designing Lesson Plans ... 49

4.2.1. Data from Document Analysis ... 50

4.2.1.1. Lesson Plan 1 ... 50

4.2.1.2. Lesson Plan 2 ... 50

4.2.2. Data from Interview ... 51

4.2.2.1. Interview with the First Participant ... 51

4.2.2.2. Interview with the Second Participant ... 53

Chapter 5 Conclusion ... 55

5.1. Conclusion ... 55

5.2. Recommendation... 57

Bibliography ... 58

Appendices Appendix 1 Questions for Interview ... 66

Appendix 2 Analysis on Lesson Plans ... 68

Appendix 3 Lesson Plans ... 71

Appendix 4 Interview Transcript ... 82

Appendix 5 Interview Transcript (Coded) ... 96

(8)

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1. Stages in Designing Instructional Systems ... 7

Table 2.2. Events of Instruction and Their Relations to Process of Learning . 18

Table 3.1. Checklist for Lesson Plan Analysis based on Reiser and Dick’s

(9)

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1. Kemp’s Instructional Design Model ... 21 Figure 2.2. PPSI Model ... 22

Figure 2.3. Reiser and Dick’s Systematic Planning ... 23

Figure 3.1. Component of Data Analysis: Interactive Model by Miles and

(10)

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

This chapter highlights the background of the study, research questions, purposes

of the study, the scope and significance of the study, research methodology, also

the clarification of terms and organization of the paper.

1.1. Background of the Study

The Decree of Minister of National Education No. 41 Year 2007 which explains

the development of teaching syllabus and lesson plan highlights the importance of

lesson planning stage in teaching. In line with this, Cunningham (2009) states that

having a well-designed lesson contributes to teaching success. As stated by Evans

(2009), good planning can also improve students’ motivation and positive attitude

toward the learning process.

However, during his teaching practice program in a high school in Bandung, the

writer had to prepare a 90-minute instruction within only 15 minutes as he was

suddenly asked to teach in a class by a teacher 15 minutes before it started.

Asking the teacher for the lesson plan, the writer was just told to continue the

previous lesson. Considering the writer’s position at the moment, that

phenomenon reflected that the teacher did not put consideration on the planning

before classroom instruction.

Previously, some research related to lesson planning have been conducted. Fishers

et al’s (1980 cited in Steere, 1988) study concluded that lessons need to be

structured so that the students know why the lesson is occurring, as they tend to

(11)

(2009) study on lesson plans made by teachers in two elementary schools in

Bandung showed that there was still a gap between each aspect of the lesson

plans, if they should meet the students’ characteristics. In addition, Wijayanto’s

(2010) study on the aspects taken by the elementary school teachers in designing

lesson plans indicated that the teachers were lack of the use of real media.

Moreover, some teachers still delivered their instruction using traditional

grammar-translation method. As mentioned by Emilia (2005), teacher practice

remains the same as it was in the past when the first English curriculum in

Indonesia was created, that is they focused on grammar. In contrary, Lynch (2000

as cited in Reese, 2002) states that most high school students find the traditional

teaching methods involving lecturing, lecturing with overhead or chalkboard, and

working or reading at one's desk are boring.

To picture those phenomena, especially the teachers’ preparation before

conducting an instruction and the difficulties they encounter during the process,

the writer is interested to conduct a study on the teachers’ difficulties in lesson

planning. Taking two English teachers in a vocational school as participants, this

study is focused on the teachers’ consideration in designing learning activities for

the students, as well as the difficulties that the teachers encountered during the

process of lesson planning considering that each teacher has to teach more than a

class, which consists of 24 credit hours in a week, as stipulated in the Decree of

Minister of National Education No. 30 Year 2011.

(12)

In order to explore how the English teachers prepare their teaching and face their

difficulties in planning a lesson, the writer has formulated the research questions

as follows:

1. How do teachers plan their lessons, in terms of setting indicators and

objectives, selecting materials and media, plotting the teaching procedures

and conducting students’ evaluation?

2. What difficulties do the teachers encounter in planning a lesson?

1.3. Purpose of the Study

This research is conducted to meet the following aims:

1. To picture teachers’ preparation before conducting a lesson in terms of

designing learning activities to conduct in classroom, particularly in setting

indicators and objectives, selecting materials and media, plotting the teaching

procedures and conducting students’ evaluation

2. To investigate the difficulties faced by the teachers in planning lesson

1.4. Scope of the Study

This study focuses on picturing teachers’ preparation before class which includes

the process of designing learning activities, particularly in setting indicators and

objectives, selecting materials and media, plotting the teaching procedures and

conducting students’ evaluation; also investigating their consideration and

difficulties in planning lessons for their classes.

(13)

The study depicts the lesson planning stage before conducting a classroom

instruction, particularly on the issue of teachers’ selection in developing

classroom activities for the students. Theoretically, the result of the study is

expected to reinforce the importance of lesson planning stage in teaching.

Practically, the result of the study can provide teachers with classroom practice for

their own classes. This study is also expected to help fresh-graduated teachers in

picturing how to develop classroom activities in the future based on the

experiences of the senior teachers.

1.6. Research Methodology

As the purpose of this study is to portray teacher’s preparation before class, which includes their difficulties in planning lessons and their considerations in deciding

classroom activities for the students, the writer conducts the study as a case study,

in which the researcher explores a bounded system (a case) or multiple bounded

systems (cases) over time, through detailed, in-depth data collection involving

multiple sources of information, and report a case description and case-based

themes (Creswell, 2007:73).

Involving two English teachers in a vocational high school as participants, this

study employs document analysis and interviews with the participants as the

means of data collection. First, the teachers’ lesson plans are analyzed using

Reiser and Dick’s (1996) concept of systematic planning. Later, semi-structured stimulated interviews are conducted with the teachers to find out how the teachers

plan their lessons.

As the data are collected, they are analyzed using Miles and Huberman’s (1994) interactive model which divides the data analysis procedures into three steps; data

(14)

For details of the procedures, this topic will be elaborated further in Chapter 3.

1.7. Clarification of Terms 1.7.1. Lesson Plan

Lesson plan in this study refers to a series of guidance for teachers in conducting

their classes. Farrell (2002, in Richards and Renandya, 2002) describes lesson

plan as a written description of how students will move toward attaining specific

objectives. In line with this, Milkova (2011) defines a lesson plan as the

instructor’s road map of what students need to learn and how it will be done

effectively during the class time.

1.7.2. Lesson Planning

Lesson planning is defined as considering the students, thinking of the content,

materials, and activities that could go into a lesson to ensure the lesson is good

(Woodward, 2001). Farrell (2002, in Richards and Renandya, 2002) also defines

lesson planning as the daily decisions a teacher makes for the successful outcome

of a lesson. In this study, lesson planning refers to the process in which a teacher

prepares a lesson/instruction before conducting it in the classroom.

1.8. Organization of the Paper

This paper is organized into five chapters: introduction, theoretical foundation,

research methodology, findings and discussion, also conclusion and suggestions.

The first chapter is introduction. It presents the background of the study, which

(15)

covers the research questions, the purposes of the study, scope of the study,

significance of the study, research methodology, clarification of terms, and the

organization of paper.

The second chapter, theoretical foundation, covers the theories supporting the

issue of lesson planning. The discussion covers some theories of lesson planning

including the definition of lesson plan and lesson planning, its significance in

teaching, the principles of lesson planning, elements of lesson plan,

models/approaches of lesson planning, and factors to consider in lesson planning.

The discussion also covers some problems of EFL teaching in Indonesia, also

related studies on lesson planning.

The third chapter, research methodology, discusses the framework and design

employed in the study.

The fourth chapter, findings and discussion, explores the findings obtained in the

study, as well as the discussion related to the theories used as basis of the study.

The discussion covers lesson planning procedure, teachers’ considerations in

planning a lesson, also elements of lesson plan and the difficulties encountered by

the teachers during the process of planning.

The last chapter, conclusion, concludes the paper with some conclusions obtained

(16)

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter highlights the methodology employed in the study. The discussion

covers research design, site and participants, data collection method, and data

analysis procedure in the study.

3.1. Research Design

This study is conducted as a case study, in which the design focuses on a particular

unit or set of units – institutions, programs, events, etc – and the aim is providing a

detailed description of the units (Richards, 2003:20). Similarly, Creswell (2007:73)

mentions that this design enables the researcher to understand an issue or problem

using the case as a specific illustration.

As the study is trying to explore how the teachers prepare the lessons to be conducted

in the classroom, including their considerations in selecting materials, learning

activities and assessment procedures for the students; this design is well suited for the

study for its specific-illustrated nature.

3.2. Site and Participants

The data are taken in a vocational school (Sekolah Menengah Kejuruan – SMK) in Bandung, West Java. The school is chosen as site of the study as it is accessible for

conducting the study, which fits one of the considerations in conducting a research

proposed by Cohen et al. (2007:100).

As this study is conducted in the context of school based curriculum (Kurikulum

(17)

research questions in this study; which are to do with lesson planning procedure in

the school, especially in the context of KTSP. In addition, those teachers are available

and willing to participate in this study. Those criteria match the considerations in

conducting a research proposed by Gay et al (2006), also Hancock and Algozzine

(2006).

3.3. Data Collection Method

The data used in this study are obtained from documents and interviews with the

participants. As mentioned by Richards (2003:20), qualitative study usually involves

multiple sources of information in order to generate rich description of the case. Thus,

those procedures are conducted to get the clear information regarding the teachers’

difficulties in planning lessons. The details of each instrument can be seen in the

following subsections:

3.3.1. Documents

The documents used in this study refer to lesson plans which are collected from the

participants in the beginning of the study. As mentioned by Gay et al (2006:421),

qualitative researchers examine various types of records or documents to gain

valuable insights, identify potential trends and explain a phenomenon (See also

Hancock and Algozzine, 2006 for similar discussion).

The two lesson plans apply the standard format of the school, i.e. written in Bahasa

Indonesia and consisted of several elements such as title, number of lesson plan,

identity (school name, lesson, grade and semester), basic competence, competence

code, competence standard, indicators, allotted time, lesson objectives, materials,

teaching method, learning activities, teaching media, reference, and assessment

procedures. However, this format is still in line with the elements of lesson plan

mentioned in Decree of Minister of National Education No. 41/2007 regarding the

(18)

Related to the aims of this study which focus on the teachers’ decisions in setting

indicators and objectives, selecting materials and media, plotting the teaching

procedures and conducting students’ evaluation, some elements of the lesson plans

such as title, number of lesson plan, identity (school name, lesson, grade and

semester), basic competence, competence code, competence standard, allotted time,

and the reference will not be elaborated in the following chapters.

3.3.2. Interview

Another method of collecting data in this study is interview with the participants.

Hancock and Algozzine (2006:39) mention that interviews are frequently used in case

study research. The interviews in this study are conducted as non directive interviews,

which mean that the interviewer has a number of key issues which s/he raises in

conversational style instead of having a set questionnaire (Cohen et al, 2007:356).

In this study, the interviews are conducted with the teachers to find out how the

teachers plan their lessons. The questions are developed based on the Process

Standard in Decree of Minister of National Education No. 41/2007 regarding the

development of lesson plan and principles of lesson planning, supported by Gagne

and Briggs’ (1979) theory about principle of instructional design (See Appendix 1 for the detailed list of the questions).

The interviews are conducted in Bahasa Indonesia in order to keep the conversation

communicative and natural. Audio-taping is required in this study to avoid losing

important information provided by the participants, as suggested by Creswell

(2007:134).

3.4. Data Analysis

As the interviews have been conducted and audio-taped, the next step to do is

(19)

with teachers are analyzed using qualitative method in order to identify teacher’s

difficulties in planning lessons and their considerations in deciding classroom

activities.

In analyzing the data, the writer employs the interactive model by Miles and

Huberman (1994:12) which divides the data analysis procedures into three steps; data

reduction, data display and drawing conclusion and interpretation. The data analysis

begins as the observation conducted, and keeps on going during the whole study. The

process can be seen in the following figure:

Figure 3.1. Components of Data Analysis: Interactive Model (Miles and Huberman, 1994:12)

After the data are collected, the first step of data analysis is data reduction, which

refers to the process of selecting, focusing, simplifying, abstracting, and transforming

the data that appear in written-up field notes or transcriptions (Miles and Huberman,

1994:10).

The second process involved in the study is data display. Miles and Huberman

(1994:11) define data display as “an organized, compressed assembly of information

(20)

analysis and interviews are classified and analyzed to get clear description from the

data. Regarding this, Hancock and Algozzine (2006:57) mention that summarizing

and interpreting information are key aspects of doing case study research. In this step,

the researcher is writing the research report, including the researcher’s interpretation of the data (Lodico et al., 2010).

Finally, the last step in Miles and Huberman’s (1994:11) interactive model is

conclusion drawing. In this study, the conclusion is drawn to get a description of

teacher’s difficulties in planning lessons and their considerations in deciding classroom activities.

The detailed procedure of data analysis can be seen in the following subsections:

3.4.1. Document Analysis

In this study, lesson plans are analyzed to get a broad picture of the instruction before

it is conducted in the classroom, in relation to the first research question. Later, the

lesson plans are analyzed using several categories in Reiser and Dick’s (1996)

Systematic Planning, as mentioned previously in Chapter II. The checklist can be

seen as follow:

Table 3.1. Checklist for lesson plan analysis based on Reiser and Dick’s (1996)

Systematic Planning (Adapted from Jannah, 2008)

Lesson Plan Elements

- Considering the domain of learning

- Measurable

Identify instructional objectives:

- Stated explicitly

(21)

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu - Translated on the instruction

- Measured on the assessment tools

Choose the material:

- Appropriate with the goals and objectives

- Appropriate with student’s level

- Relevant with the condition & students’ characteristics

Plan instructional activities:

- Reflecting students-centered instruction

- Reflecting communicative method

- Motivate students to learn and to expose foreign language

- Helping students to recall prerequisite

- Presenting information and examples

- Integrating the four skills (reading, listening, speaking & reading

The results of interviews with participants are coded to get the information regarding

the procedures of lesson planning and the difficulties faced by the teachers during the

process. Miles and Huberman (1994:56) define codes as “tags or labels for assigning

units of meaning to the descriptive or inferential information during a study”. Further,

(22)

data s/he has retrieved and the reflections s/he makes about the information (Miles

(23)

CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION

This chapter presents the conclusion drawn from the study, as well as some

recommendations for future research.

5.1. Conclusion

Based on the findings that have been presented in the previous chapter, some

conclusions can be drawn. They are:

1. Each Lesson plan collected from the participants contains specific elements

mentioned in Decree of Minister of National Education No. 41/2007, which

consist of course identity, competence standard and basic competence, objectives

and indicators, learning materials, learning activities, instructional media, and

assessment tools.

2. The indicators mentioned in all lesson plans cover three learning domains, i.e.

cognitive, affective and psychomotor domains. From the interview with the

participants, it was found that in formulating the indicators, the teachers

considered the syllabus, characteristics of the students and the school facilities.

This is in line with Muslich’s (2007:33) theory. However, a participant claimed to have difficulties in formulating the indicators that meet the students’ needs and

condition.

3. Each lesson plan included objectives of the lesson. In formulating the objectives,

the participants claimed to follow the guidelines in the syllabus and the Decrees

(24)

objectives with the other elements of the lesson plan. However, only one lesson

plan reflected the criteria of good objectives mentioned by Haynes (2007:14).

4. All lesson plans contained learning materials to deliver in the instruction. In the

interview, both participants claimed to develop the materials from authentic

materials such as magazine, recordings, videos, also newspaper and internet

articles. This practice is in line with the Decree of Minister of National Education

No. 41/2007. However, it was found that the materials in both of the lesson plans

mismatched the instructional objectives. The interviews with participants

revealed that the teachers encountered difficulties in finding suitable materials

for the students due to the lack of resource books for vocational school.

5. Both participants determined the teaching media in the process of lesson

planning. The lesson plans showed that all participants used various media in

teaching. From the interviews, it was revealed that they did this to gain students’

interests and participation during the instruction. This practice is in line with the

Decree of the Minister of National Education No. 41/2007. However, the

participants claimed to encounter some difficulties in determining media of

instruction, such as finding appropriate medium for teaching and using the school

facilities.

6. All lesson plans contain learning activities to conduct in the classroom. In

determining the activities, a participant claimed to always use PPP

(Presentation-Practice-Production) technique while another one claimed to make her decision

based on the learning materials. The analysis on all lesson plans revealed that the

activities reflected student-centered instruction as mentioned by Burden and

Williams (1998), as they involve students’ active roles in the activities. However, both of the lesson plans are not specific in depicting the procedure to conduct in

the classroom.

7. All lesson plans contain assessment tools. This is in line with the assessment

(25)

The assessment procedures in all lesson plans include written and oral test.

However, a test item in one of the lesson plans mismatched the objectives of the

instruction. In setting assessment procedure, a participant stated that the

assessment was based on three domains of learning, also the materials that she

taught in the lesson. However, interview with a participant revealed that she

sometimes had issues in developing the assessment procedure.

5.2. Recommendation

This section presents some recommendations offered based on the findings in this

study. The recommendations are as follow:

1. Even though the participants showed positive attitude toward the procedure of

lesson planning and have implemented the procedure of lesson planning in the

process standard mentioned in Decree of Minister of National Education No.

41/2007, the teachers still need to improve their competences. As the findings

previously presented in Chapter 4 revealed that there were some mismatches

between some elements of the lesson plans, it is suggested that the teachers pay

more attention to the details in developing their lesson plans in the future.

2. The study involved a small number of participants, only three EFL teachers in a

vocational school. It is recommended that a future study will involve a large

(26)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ahmadian, M. J. (2011). The Effects of Simultaneous Use of Careful Online

Planning and Task Repetition on Accuracy, Complexity, and Fluency in

EFL Learners’ Oral Production. [online]. Available at: http://ltr.sagepub.com/content/15/1/35 [4 January 2013]

Ali, M. (2009). Education for Indonesian National Development. Bandung:

IMTIMA.

Arends, R. I. (2012). Learning to Teach (9th eds.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Berliner, D. C. and Rosenshine, B. V. (Eds) (1987). Talks to Teachers. New York:

Random House.

Brown, G. (1975). Microteaching: A Programme of Teaching Skill. London:

Methuen & Co.ltd.

Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to

Language Pedagogy, Second Edition. New York: Pearson Education.

Bungin, M. B. (2007). Penelitian Kualitatif. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media

Group.

Burden, R. and Williams, M. (1998). Thinking through the Curriculum. London:

Routledge.

Burns, A. and Hood, S. (Eds) (1995). Teachers’ Voices: Exploring Course Design in a Changing Curriculum. Sydney: Macquarie University.

Cameron, L. (2001). Teaching Languages to Young Learners. Cambridge:

(27)

Celce-Murcia, M. (Eds) (2001). Teaching English as a Second or Foreign

Language (3rd Edition). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.

Choate, J.S. et al. (1995). Curriculum-Based Assessment and Programming (3rd

ed.). Needham Heights: Allyn & Bacon.

Cohen, L. et al. (2007). Research Methods in Education. New York: Routledge.

Creswell, J.W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing

Among Five Approaches. California: Sage Publication.

Creswell, J.W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and

evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle

River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc.

Cunningham, G. (2009). The New Teacher’s Companion: Practical Wisdom for Succeeding in The Classroom. [online]. Available at:

http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/109051.aspx [3 January 2013]

Darling-Hammond, L. et al. (1999). A Lisence to Teach: Raising Standards for

Teaching. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Davies, I. K. (1981). Instructional Technique. New York: McGraw-Hill Inc.

Depdiknas. (2003). Standar Kompetensi Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Inggris: Sekolah

Menengah Atas dan Madrasah Aliyah. Jakarta: Pusat Kurikulum Balitbang

Depdiknas.

Dick, W. and Carey, L. (1990). The Systematic Design of Instruction (3rd ed.).

Florida: HarperCollinsPublishers.

Djojonegoro, W. (1996). Lima Puluh Tahun Perkembangan Pendidikan

(28)

Dudeney, G. and Hockly, N. (2007). How to Teach English with Technology.

Edinburgh Gate: Pearson Education Ltd.

Duncan, G., & Met, M. (2010). STARTALK: From Paper to Practice. College

Park, MD: National Foreign Language Center at the University of

Maryland. [online]. Available at:

http://www.startalk.umd.edu/lesson_planning [4 January 2013]

Emilia, E. (2005). A Critical Genre-based Approach to Teaching Academic

Writing in a Tertiary EFL Context in Indonesia. University of Melbourne:

Unpublished Paper.

Emilia, E. (2011). Pendekatan Genre-Based dalam Pengajaran Bahasa Inggris:

Petunjuk untuk Guru. Bandung: Rizqi Press.

Evans, C. et al. (2009). Teaching English: Developing as a Reflective Secondary

Teacher. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Feez, S. and Joyce, H. (1998). Text-based Syllabus Design. Sydney: Macquarie

University.

Forsyth, I. et al. (1995). Planning A Course: Practical Strategies for Teachers,

Lecturers and Trainers. London: Kogan Page.

Gagne, R. M. and Briggs, L.J. (1979). Principles of Instructional Design. New

York: Holt, Rineheart and Winston.

Gay, I. R. et al. (2006). Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and

Applications. New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.

Graves, K. (2000). Designing Language Courses: A Guide for Teachers. Canada:

(29)

Green, D. (Eds) (2003). “From Theory to Practice: Gagné’s Theory of Instruction”. The Office for Teaching and Learning Newsletter [online], Vol 7 (5), 4 pages. Available at: http://www.otl.wayne.edu [29 December 2013]

Greenwood, G. G. and Parkay, F. W. (1989). Case Studies for Teacher Decision

Making. Toronto: Random House, Inc.

Griffiths, C. (Eds) (2008). Lesson from Good Language Learners. New York:

Cambridge University Press.

Halliwell, S. (1992). Teaching English in the Primary Classroom. New York:

Longman Publishing.

Hancock, D.R. and Algozzine, B. (2006). Doing Case Study Research: A

Practical Guide for Beginning Researchers. New York: Teachers College

Press.

Harmer, J. (2007). How to Teach English: New Edition. Cambridge: Pearson

Education Ltd.

Haynes, A. (2007). 100 Ideas for Lesson Planning. New York: Continuum

International Publishing Group.

Ibrahim, R. and Syaodih, N. (1996). Perencanaan Pengajaran. Jakarta:

Depdikbud.

Imperiani, E. D. A. (2012). English Language Teaching in Indonesia and Its

Relation to the Role of English as an International Language. [online].

Available at: http://ejournal.upi.edu/index.php/psg/article/view/43/13 [21

January 2013]

Ivone, F. M. (2005). “Teaching English as a Foreign Language in Indonesia: The

(30)

Jalal et al. (2009). Teacher Certification in Indonesia: A Strategy for Teacher

Quality Improvement. Jakarta: Depdiknas.

Jannah, M. (2008). The Difficulties Encountered by English Teachers in

Designing Instructional Plan towards the Implementation of Kurikulum

Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan (KTSP). UPI Bandung: Unpublished Paper.

Kauchak, D. et al. (2002). Introduction to Teaching: Becoming a Professional.

New Jersey: Merril Prentice Hall.

Kemp, J.E. (1977). Instructional Design: Plan for Unit and Course Development

(2nd ed.). Belmont: David S. Lake Publishers.

Kizlik, B. (2012). Lesson Planning, Lesson Plan Formats and Lesson Plan Ideas.

[online]. Available at: http://www.adprima.com [13 August 2012]

Lestari, L. A. (1999). “English Classroom Culture Reformation: How Can It be

Done?”. TEFLIN Journal. 10, (1).

Lie, A. (2007). “Education Policy and EFL Curriculum in Indonesia: Between the Commitment to Competence and the Quest for Higher Test Scores”. TEFLIN Journal. 18, (1), 1-14.

Lodico, M. G. et al. (2010). Methods in Educational Research: From Theory to

Practice (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Loughran, J. (2010). What Expert Teachers Do. Australia: Allen Unwin.

Magos, K. and Politi, F. (2008). The Creative Second Language Lesson: The

Contribution of the Role-play Technique to the Teaching of a Second

Language in Immigrant Classes. [online]. Available at:

(31)

McDonald, E. S. and Hershman, D. M. (2010). Classrooms that Spark! Recharge

and Revive Your Teaching (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Miles, M. B. and Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis (2nd ed.).

California: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Mulyasa. (2008). Implementasi Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan:

Kemandirian Guru dan Kepala Sekolah. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.

Muslich, M. (2007). KTSP: Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan. Jakarta: Bumi

Aksara.

Patton, Q. (2002). Analyzing Qualitative Data. [online]. Available at:

http://sperkins.org/wk5slides.pdf [11 June 2012]

Reese, S. (2002). Contextual Teaching and Learning. Texas: ProQuest Education

Journals.

Reiser, R. A. and Dick, W. (1996). Instructional Planning: A Guide for Teachers

(2nd ed.). Massachusetts: Allyn & Bacon.

Rejeki, A. (2009). Lesson Plans for Teaching English to Young Learners: A Case

Study of Lesson Plans of Two Elementary Schools In Bandung Kulon, West

Java. UPI Bandung: Unpublished paper.

Richards, J. C. and Bohlke, D. (2011). Creating Effective Language Lessons. New

York: Cambridge University Press.

Richards, J. C. and Farrell, T. S. C. (2011). Practice Teaching: A Reflective

Approach. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Richards, J. C. and Renandya, W. A. (Eds) (2002). Methodology in Language

Teaching: An Anthology of Current Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge

(32)

Richards, J. C. and Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language

Teaching (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Richards, K. (2003). Qualitative Inquiry in TESOL. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Rifkin, B. (2003). “Guidelines for Foreign Language Lesson Planning”. Foreign Language Annals. 36, (2), 167-179.

Ritchie, J and Lewis, J. (2003). Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social

Science Students and Researchers. London: SAGE Publication.

Sambaugh, N. and Magliaro, S. G. (2006). Instructional Design. Boston: Pearson

Education.

Saville-Troike, M. (2006). Introducing Second Language Acquisition. New York:

Cambridge University Press.

Steere, B. F. (1988). Becoming an Effective Classroom Manager: A Resource for

Teachers. New York: State University of New York Press.

Sundayana, W. (2009). “Persepsi dan Kesulitan Guru Bahasa Inggris SMP/MTs di Jawa Barat dalam Pengembangan Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan”. Paper presented at Seminar Nasional Himpunan Pengembang Kurikulum

Indonesia (HIPKIN), Bandung.

Suparlan. (2011). Tanya Jawab Pengembangan Kurikulum dan Materi

Pembelajaran. Jakarta: PT Bumi Aksara.

Suskie, L. (2009). Assessing Student Learning: A Common Sense Guide. San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Tanni, M. (2012). “Teacher Trainees’ Information Acquisition in Lesson

Planning”. Information Research, 17, (03), paper 530.

Taylor-Powell, E. (1998). Questionnaire Design: Asking questions with a

(33)

http://learningstore.uwex.edu/Questionnaire-Design-Asking-Questions-with-a-Purpose-P1028C0.aspx [8 April 2013]

TEFLIN. (2013). Pokok Pikiran dan Rekomendasi tentang Kurikulum Mata

Pelajaran Bahasa Inggris Tahun 2013. [online]. Available at: http://upi.edu

[17 October 2013]

Thomas, R. M. (2003). Blending Qualitative & Quantitative Research Methods in

Theses and Dissertations. California: Corwin Press, Inc.

Wijayanto, M. D. (2010). Lesson Planning in Young Learner: A Descriptive Study

towards Teachers’ Lesson Plan of Elementary School. UPI Bandung: Unpublished paper.

Woodward, T. (2001). Planning Lessons and Courses: Designing Sequences of

Work for the Language Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Yuwono, G. (2005). “English Language Teaching in Decentralised Indonesia:

Voices from the Less Privileged Schools”. Paper presented at AARE 2005