Collaborative learning to improve students` critical thinking skills in critical reading and writing II class of English Language Education Sanata Dharma University.

137 

Teks penuh

(1)

vii ABSTRACT

Baskoro, Andreas Rahardjo Adi. (2015). Collaborative Learning to Improve Students’ Critical Thinking Skills in Critical Reading and Writing II Class of English Language Education Sanata Dharma University. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University.

The demand from the society for the scholars to contribute in many aspects of human life and the enormous amount of available information in this globalization era are the reason for universities to improve students’ quality. This situation leads higher education to improve essential skills for their students: critical thinking skills. English Language Education Sanata Dharma University has realized the concern and answers the situation by holding a course to improve

students’ critical thinking skills: Critical Reading and Writing II. However, improving critical thinking skills was found difficult in Critical Reading and Writing II.

The research was conducted to implement collaborative learning to

improve students’ critical thinking skills in Critical Reading and Writing II Class

of English Language Education Sanata Dharma University. The research problem was formulated into two research questions: how is collaborative learning method

implemented to improve students’ critical thinking skills in CRW II? What are the

difficulties for the students to improve critical thinking skills in CRW II?

The research was designed as a classroom action research. The participants were 19 students of CRW II Class B Semester 4 English Language Education Sanata Dharma University. The research was conducted in two cycles with the implementation of peer involvement, peer assessment, and peer feedback as the collaborative learning strategies. Observation, writing test, and questionnaire were employed in the data gathering. The data analysis was qualitative data analysis in form of narrative discourse and descriptive statistics.

From the result, it was found that the implementation of collaborative learning method gave students opportunity to improve students’ critical thinking

skills in CRW II, which was indicated by students’ general attitudes of critical thinking, suspended judgements, high participation, and the significant change

percentages of students’ scores on argumentative essay (17% change percentage on final mean score).

(2)

viii

ABSTRAK

Baskoro, Andreas Rahardjo Adi. (2015). Collaborative Learning to Improve Students’ Critical Thinking Skills in Critical Reading and Writing II Class of English Language Education Sanata Dharma University. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University.

Tuntutan masyarakat yang sangat tinggi terhadap para sarjana untuk berkontribusi dalam berbagai aspek masyarakat dan informasi yang sangat luas di era globalisasi merupakan alasan mengapa perguruan tinggi perlu meningkatkan kualitas mahasiswa. Situasi tersebut menyebabkan perlunya perguruan tinggi meningkatkan kemampuan yang esensial bagi para mahasiswa: daya berpikir kritis. Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Sanata Dharma menjawab kebutuhan tersebut dengan menyelenggarakan sebuah mata kuliah: Critical Reading and Writing II. Meski demikian, peningkatan daya berpikir kritis masih menjadi hal yang sulit dalam mata kuliah tersebut.

Penelitian ini dilaksanakan untuk mengimplementasikan pembelajaran kolaboratif untuk meningkatkan daya berpikir kritis mahasiswa dalam mata kuliah Critical Reading and Writing II Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Sanata Dharma. Pokok permasalahan dirumuskan dalam dua pertanyaan: bagaimana metode pembelajaran kolaboratif diimplementasikan untuk meningkatkan daya berpikir kritis mahasiswa di kelas CRW II? Apa kesulitan mahasiswa dalam meningkatkan daya berpikir kritis di kelas CRW II?

Penelitian ini dirancang sebagai penelitian tindakan kelas. Para partisipan merupakan 19 mahasiswa CRW II kelas B semester 4 Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Sanata Dharma. Penelitian dilaksanakan dalam dua siklus dengan mengimplementasikan tutor sebaya, assessment sebaya, dan umpan balik sebaya sebagai strategi pembelajaran kolaboratif. Observasi, tes menulis, dan kuesioner digunakan dalam proses pengumpulan data. Data analisis menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif dalam bentuk diskursi naratif dan statistika deskriptif.

Berdasarkan hasil penelitian, telah ditemukan bahwa implementasi metode pembelajaran kolaboratif memberi kesempatan kepada mahasiswa untuk meningkatkan daya berpikir kritis di kelas CRW II; hal ini diindikasi dengan sikap berpikir kritis mahasiswa, penilaian kritis, partisipasi yang tinggi, dan persentase perubahan yang signifikan dari skor essai argumentatif mahasiswa (17% peningkatan rata-rata nilai akhir).

(3)

i

COLLABORATIVE LEARNING

TO IMPROVE

STUDENTS’

CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS

IN CRITICAL READING AND WRITING II CLASS

OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

A

SARJANA PENDIDIKAN

THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree

in English Language Education

By

Andreas Rahardjo Adi Baskoro Student Number: 121214146

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA

(4)
(5)
(6)

iv

“I need to believe, that something extraordinary is possible.”

(Alicia Nash, A Beautiful Mind)

This thesis is dedicated to the eager young minds,

(7)
(8)
(9)

vii

ABSTRACT

Baskoro, Andreas Rahardjo Adi. (2015). Collaborative Learning to Improve

Students’ Critical Thinking Skills in Critical Reading and Writing II Class of

English Language Education Sanata Dharma University. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University.

The demand from the society for the scholars to contribute in many aspects of human life and the enormous amount of available information in this globalization era are the reason for universities to improve students’ quality. This situation leads higher education to improve essential skills for their students: critical thinking skills. English Language Education Sanata Dharma University has realized the concern and answers the situation by holding a course to improve

students’ critical thinking skills: Critical Reading and Writing II. However, improving critical thinking skills was found difficult in Critical Reading and Writing II.

The research was conducted to implement collaborative learning to

improve students’ critical thinking skills in Critical Reading and Writing II Class

of English Language Education Sanata Dharma University. The research problem was formulated into two research questions: how is collaborative learning method

implemented to improve students’ critical thinking skills in CRW II? What are the

difficulties for the students to improve critical thinking skills in CRW II?

The research was designed as a classroom action research. The participants were 19 students of CRW II Class B Semester 4 English Language Education Sanata Dharma University. The research was conducted in two cycles with the implementation of peer involvement, peer assessment, and peer feedback as the collaborative learning strategies. Observation, writing test, and questionnaire were employed in the data gathering. The data analysis was qualitative data analysis in form of narrative discourse and descriptive statistics.

From the result, it was found that the implementation of collaborative learning method gave students opportunity to improve students’ critical thinking

skills in CRW II, which was indicated by students’ general attitudes of critical thinking, suspended judgements, high participation, and the significant change

percentages of students’ scores on argumentative essay (17% change percentage on final mean score).

(10)

viii

ABSTRAK

Baskoro, Andreas Rahardjo Adi. (2015). Collaborative Learning to Improve

Students’ Critical Thinking Skills in Critical Reading and Writing II Class of

English Language Education Sanata Dharma University. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University.

Tuntutan masyarakat yang sangat tinggi terhadap para sarjana untuk berkontribusi dalam berbagai aspek masyarakat dan informasi yang sangat luas di era globalisasi merupakan alasan mengapa perguruan tinggi perlu meningkatkan kualitas mahasiswa. Situasi tersebut menyebabkan perlunya perguruan tinggi meningkatkan kemampuan yang esensial bagi para mahasiswa: daya berpikir kritis. Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Sanata Dharma menjawab kebutuhan tersebut dengan menyelenggarakan sebuah mata kuliah: Critical Reading and Writing II. Meski demikian, peningkatan daya berpikir kritis masih menjadi hal yang sulit dalam mata kuliah tersebut.

Penelitian ini dilaksanakan untuk mengimplementasikan pembelajaran kolaboratif untuk meningkatkan daya berpikir kritis mahasiswa dalam mata kuliah Critical Reading and Writing II Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Sanata Dharma. Pokok permasalahan dirumuskan dalam dua pertanyaan: bagaimana metode pembelajaran kolaboratif diimplementasikan untuk meningkatkan daya berpikir kritis mahasiswa di kelas CRW II? Apa kesulitan mahasiswa dalam meningkatkan daya berpikir kritis di kelas CRW II?

Penelitian ini dirancang sebagai penelitian tindakan kelas. Para partisipan merupakan 19 mahasiswa CRW II kelas B semester 4 Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Sanata Dharma. Penelitian dilaksanakan dalam dua siklus dengan mengimplementasikan tutor sebaya, assessment sebaya, dan umpan balik sebaya sebagai strategi pembelajaran kolaboratif. Observasi, tes menulis, dan kuesioner digunakan dalam proses pengumpulan data. Data analisis menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif dalam bentuk diskursi naratif dan statistika deskriptif.

Berdasarkan hasil penelitian, telah ditemukan bahwa implementasi metode pembelajaran kolaboratif memberi kesempatan kepada mahasiswa untuk meningkatkan daya berpikir kritis di kelas CRW II; hal ini diindikasi dengan sikap berpikir kritis mahasiswa, penilaian kritis, partisipasi yang tinggi, dan persentase perubahan yang signifikan dari skor essai argumentatif mahasiswa (17% peningkatan rata-rata nilai akhir).

(11)

ix

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would express my deepest gratitude to the Lord Almighty God, for

without His blessing this thesis would not have been completely done. I am very

grateful that with His blessing, I could enjoy my struggle and reap a lot of values

along the process until this thesis was done.

My next gratitude is addressed to Drs. Pius Nurwidasa Prihatin, M.Ed.,

Ed.D., who has given me lots of critiques and advices in completing my thesis. I

am very grateful to have him as my thesis advisor; for me, he is very experienced

in managing details on thesis, which he gives and shares to his students. I was

helped with the detailed feedback from him, which helped me dealing with

practical things, even the smallest ones, which actually held important roles in

completing my thesis.

I also addressed my gratitude to Priyatno Ardi, S.Pd., M.Hum. as the

lecturer of Critical Reading and Writing II, who gave me the opportunity to

conduct my research in his class. He also gave me many advices during the

research, which helped me completing my thesis. Last but not least, I addressed

my gratitude to all people who helped me with many things during the research.

My deepest gratitude for you, who have helped me completing this thesis and my

study in this university.

May this thesis be useful to the eager young minds, who never stop

learning and dedicate their life to others.

(12)

x

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

TITLE PAGE i

APPROVAL PAGES ii

DEDICATION PAGE iv

STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY v

PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI vi

ABSTRACT vii

ABSTRAK viii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ix

TABLE OF CONTENTS x

LIST OF TABLES xiv

LIST OF FIGURES xv

LIST OF CHARTS xvi

LIST OF APPENDICES xvii

CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION 1

A. Research Background 1

B. Research Problems 5

C. Problem Limitation 6

D. Research Objectives 6

E. Research Benefits 6

(13)

xi

CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 9

A. Theoretical Description 9

1. Defining Critical Thinking in Reading and Writing 9

2. Collaborative Learning Method to Improve Critical Thinking

Skills in Writing Argumentative Essay 14

a. Constructivism Approach as The Basis of Collaborative

Learning Method 15

b. The Benefits of Collaborative Learning Method to

Improve Students’ Critical Thinking Skills 16

c. Techniques in Collaborative Learning Method to

Improve Students’ Critical Thinking Skills 17

1) Peer Involvement 18

2) Peer Assessment 20

3) Peer Feedback 22

B. Theoretical Framework 24

CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 28

A. Research Method 28

B. Research Setting 31

C. Research Participants / Subjects 32

D. Research Instruments and Data Gathering Technique 33

1. Observation 33

2. Writing test 34

(14)

xii

E. Data Analysis Technique 36

1. Qualitative Data Analysis 37

2. Descriptive Statistics 37

F. Research Procedure 41

CHAPTER IV. RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 42

A. The Implementation of Collaborative Learning Method to

Improve Students’ Critical Thinking Skills in Critical Reading

and Writing II Class B Semester 4 English Language Education

Sanata Dharma University 42

1. Preliminary Study 43

2. Cycle 1 45

a. Planning 45

b. Action 47

c. Observation 50

d. Reflection 55

3. Cycle 2 58

a. Planning 58

b. Action 59

c. Observation 61

d. Reflection 66

B. Lesson Learned of Collaborative Learning Method to Improve

(15)

xiii

B Semester 4 English Language Education Sanata Dharma

University 74

CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 76

A. Conclusions 76

B. Recommendations 78

REFERENCES 80

(16)

xiv

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1. Bloom revised taxonomy table by Anderson et al. 11

2. Research schedule 32

3. Tabulation of mean scores and percentage differences 40

4. Research timeline 41

5. Students' scores and change percentage in cycle 1 54

6. Students' scores and change percentage in cycle 2 64

(17)

xv

LIST OF FIGURES

Figures Page

1. Kemmis’s model of the action research 29

2. Formula of total mean score 38

(18)

xvi

LIST OF CHARTS

Charts Page

1. Scoring rubric result in cycle 1 53

(19)

xvii

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendices Page

A. Research Instruments 83

1. Observation Sheet Cycle 1 Meeting 1 84

2. Observation Sheet Cycle 1 Meeting 2 87

3. Observation Sheet Cycle 2 90

4. Questionnaire 93

5. Scoring Rubric Small Group Schematic 94

6. Scoring Rubric Pair Schematic 95

B. Lesson Plan and Teaching Material 96

(20)

1

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

This chapter gives the introduction of the research. The research

background explains the issues on higher education contributions to society,

globalization era, and critical thinking, which are considered as the background of

the research. This chapter also formulates the research problems and the problem

limitation, determines the research objectives, explains the research benefits, and

describes specific terms on the research.

A. Research Background

People nowadays have become a learning society. People are facing lots of

problems in many aspects: poverty, economical crisis, increasing demands of

business and industry, global warming, and many other problems to be solved.

This situation gives certain effects to higher education. Apps (1988)

mentions that learning society demands higher education to be an integral part of

the society in order to make applied solutions to solve the problems and make a

better society. As Apps (1988) states:

(21)

Within the situation, it is not enough for higher education only to conduct

research and produce scholarships. Society demands higher quality of scholars in

order to serve and contribute to the society. Therefore, universities need to

improve their students’ quality by improving not only their knowledge, but also

their way of thinking.

The demand from the society for the scholars to contribute in many aspects

of human life is not the only reason for universities to improve students’ quality,

particularly their way of thinking which affect the way they work and contribute to

the society in the future. The enormous amount of available information in this

globalization era is also considered as a concern. Meyers (1986) states, “The

amount of information available through computers and the media seems to have

outstripped people’s abilities to process and use information” (p.1). The enormous

amount of information also exceeds people’s ability to think critically upon the

information (Meyers, 1986). This situation leads higher education to improve

essential skills for their students: critical thinking skills.

Slavin (2012) defines critical thinking as “the ability to make rational

decisions about what to do or what to believe” (p.242). Critical thinking is also

defined as suspended judgement or healthy scepticism (Dewey, 1982). In language

learning context, critical thinking is defined as being healthy sceptical in assessing

claims and arguments in a text, whether the claims are supported by valid relevant

evidences and logical justifications, and building strong claims and arguments

with valid-relevant evidences and logical justifications to convince sceptical

(22)

English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University

has realized the need of critical thinking skills for their students. In order to

improve their students’ knowledge and their critical thinking skills on the four

language skills (listening, speaking, reading, and writing), ELESP makes four

courses which focus on that concern (each course contains two language skills, a

pair of perceptive and productive): Critical Listening and Speaking I (CLS I) in

semester 3, Critical Listening and Speaking II (CLS II) in semester 4, Critical

Reading and Writing I (CRW I) in semester 3, and Critical Reading and Writing II

(CRW II) in semester 4. According to Panduan Akademik Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Sanata Dharma (2012), “Critical Reading and Writing 1 is designed to give students practice to write responses critically based on the given

texts or passages” (p.47), while Critical Listening and Speaking is described as

follow,

On completing the course, the students will be able to employ strategic skills, to comprehend intermediate extended discourse such as news reports, narratives, expository passages; paraphrase, take notes and summarize intermediate extended discourse such as news reports, narratives, and expository passages. Afterwards, the students will be able to give oral critical response and reflection based on the given topics in the form of short individual/group presentation (p.47).

To improve students’ critical thinking skills has become the main goal of both

CLS and CRW. Learning activities are conducted by the lecturers to improve

students’ critical thinking skills in those classes.

The students of CRW II still had some difficulties in improving their

(23)

research, the students still had difficulties in getting more perspective in reading

and criticizing a text, which was indicated by similar arguments stated by the

students during the classroom discussion. They also needed opportunities to have

arguments with their peers in more organized discussions to practice building

critical arguments, evaluating other people’s arguments, and to improve their

critical thinking skills; it was indicated by the lack of organized discussion for the

students to have better arguments with their peers in the classroom. The students

had to answer the demands of critical reading and critical writing; in critical

reading, students have to identify the claims and arguments of a text and be

healthy sceptical in evaluating the claims and arguments by considering the

underlying values and assessing the sources and evidences. In critical writing,

students have to build strong arguments with valid-relevant evidences and logical

structured text in order to convince the readers with the claims and arguments

(Wallace and Wray, 2011). These demands and students’ difficulties had to be

answered to help the students improve their critical thinking skills.

The researcher tried to implement collaborative learning as a solution to

help students improve critical thinking skills in CRW II. Collaborative learning is

an instructional learning method which allows students at various performance

levels to work together in small groups to reach a common goal in their learning.

Students are responsible for one another’s learning, so that they can reach

successful learning together by helping each other in their learning process

(24)

The basis of collaborative learning method is constructivism; knowledge is

constructed, and transformed by students (Dooly, 2008). Vygotsky’s socio

-cultural theory is the cornerstone of it, with Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD)

as the main core which explains that learners can achieve higher intellectual level

and enhance their critical thinking skills by doing collaborative learning rather

than individual learning (Gokhale, 1995). Collaborative learning is also important

for the students to learn how to contribute to the society. Slavin (2012) states:

In the 21st century, teamwork and the ability to solve problems and learn in groups are increasingly important in the world of work, and every student should know how to work productively with others (p.235).

This research was a Classroom Action Research. According to Kemmis and

McTaggart (1988), Classroom Action Research is a dynamic and reflective cycle

which consists of four essential processes: planning, action, observation, and

reflection. Classroom Action Research was chosen as the research design in order

to answer students’ difficulties in improving critical thinking skills which became

an immediate concern in Critical Reading and Writing II class.

B. Research Problem

According to the research background, there are two research problems to

be answered through this research:

1. How is collaborative learning method implemented to improve students’

critical thinking skills in CRW II?

2. What are the difficulties for the students to improve critical thinking skills

(25)

C. Problem Limitation

The researcher put problem limitation on students’ process and difficulties

in improving critical thinking skills in CRW II. Research scope was limited in

students’ writing on argumentative essay. Problems were limited in students’

difficulties in analyzing, evaluating, and synthesizing argumentative essay and

how students improved their critical thinking skills through collaborative learning

method in CRW II.

D. Research Objectives

The research had four objectives. The first objective was to find out the

students’ difficulties in improving critical thinking skills in analyzing, evaluating,

and synthesizing argumentative essay in CRW II. The second objective was to find

a solution for the difficulties by implementing collaborative learning method in

CRW II. The third objective was to help students and lecturers improve their

knowledge and improve critical thinking skills in their learning process in CRW II.

The last objective was to complete the thesis as a part of prerequisites for the

researcher to graduate from ELESP Sanata Dharma University.

E. Research Benefits

The research will give benefits for students and lecturer in CRW II and the

researcher. The given benefits are listed as follows:

1. Students can solve their difficulties to improve their critical thinking skills

by helping each other through collaborative learning method and to get

(26)

2. Lecturer can find an effective way to solve students’ difficulties and to help

students improve their critical thinking skills through collaborative learning

method in CRW II.

3. The researcher can deepen his knowledge on English Language teaching

and education, particularly on Critical Reading and Writing, critical

thinking, and collaborative learning.

F. Definition of Terms

Below is the definition of terms related to the research:

1. Critical thinking skills: Critical thinking is defined as being healthy

sceptical in assessing claims and arguments in a text, whether the claims

are supported by valid-relevant evidences and logical justifications, and

building strong claims and arguments with valid-relevant evidences and

logical justifications to convince sceptical readers in language learning

context, particularly in reading and writing (Wallace and Wray, 2011).

2. Collaborative learning: Collaborative learning is an instructional learning

method which allows students at various performance levels to work

together in small groups to reach a common goal in their learning. Students

are responsible for one another’s learning, so that they can reach successful

learning together by helping each other in their learning process (Gokhale,

1995). The basis is constructivism; knowledge is constructed, and

transformed by students (Dooly, 2008). Vygotsky’s socio-cultural theory is

the cornerstone of it, with Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) as the

(27)

and enhance their critical thinking skills by doing collaborative learning

rather than individual learning (Gokhale, 1995).

3. CRW II: CRW II stands for Critical Reading and Writing II. This class is

held in semester four ELESP Sanata Dharma University after CRW in

semester three. This class aims to improve students reading and writing

skills together with critical thinking skills to bring students reading and

(28)

9

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

This chapter explains the underlying theories of the research. In the

theoretical description, all major relevant theories related to the research are

deliberated. In the theoretical framework, all major relevant theories on the

research are summarized and synthesized in order to solve the research problems.

A. Theoretical Description

In this part, all major relevant theories on the research are deliberated. The

researcher limits the theories into two parts: defining critical thinking in reading

and writing, and collaborative learning method to improve critical thinking skills

in writing argumentative essay. Further explanations are listed as follows:

1. Defining Critical Thinking in Reading and Writing

Critical thinking has been defined in various ways across different studies.

It attracts experts and philosophers to define it in many particular ways, especially

in education. In western culture, critical thinking has been closely identified in a

traditional way as discipline of logic (Meyers, 1986). Logic is considered as an

important element in critical thinking, that even “Students who have difficulty in

demonstrating critical thinking abilities are often told to take courses in logic to

(29)

Critical thinking is also defined as general problem solving skills. There are

five problem solving steps which are considered in critical thinking skills

according to Meyers (1986): “(1) recognizing and defining the problem, (2)

gathering information, (3) forming tentative conclusions, (4) testing conclusions,

and (5) evaluating and making decisions” (p.4). However, “The identification of

critical thinking with problem solving also assumes that critical thinking always

begins with a problem and ends with a solution” (Meyers, 1986, p.5). It is realized

that critical thinking does not always deal with providing a solution for a problem.

It mostly deals with evaluating claims and arguments with suspended

judgement/healthy scepticism (Dewey, 1982) and building strong claims and

arguments with valid-relevant evidences and logical justifications to convince

sceptical people (Wallace and Wray, 2011).

Healthy scepticism is considered as an important element in critical

thinking. It deals with evaluating and questioning claims and arguments in critical

thinking. It also occurs in three general attitudes in critical thinking by Meyers

(1986): raising questions, temporary suspension of one’s judgements, and

enjoyment of mysteries and complexities. These attitudes reflect a critical thinker

with healthy scepticism as the guidance.

Critical thinking is also considered as an educational goal. The definition of

critical thinking skills as educational goals can be found in Bloom revised

taxonomy. Bloom revised taxonomy is a revised edition of the original Bloom

Taxonomy of educational objectives. According to Anderson et al. (Eds., 2001),

(30)

process dimension and knowledge dimension. The two dimensions represent the

main educational objectives which are mainly classified as cognitive process as the

learning activity and knowledge as the subject matter. The cognitive process

dimension consists of six levels of cognitive processes: remembering,

understanding, applying, analysing, evaluating, and creating. The knowledge

dimension consists of four types of knowledge: factual knowledge, conceptual

knowledge, procedural knowledge, and meta-cognitive knowledge. According to

Bloom revised taxonomy by Anderson et al. (2001), critical thinking skills refer to

the last three levels of the cognitive process dimension: analyzing, evaluating, and

creating claims and arguments.

Table 1: Bloom Revised Taxonomy Table by Anderson et al. (Eds., 2001, p.28)

The Knowledge

In language learning context particularly in reading and writing, critical

thinking is defined from two different perspectives: reader’s perspective and

writer’s perspective. From reader’s perspective, critical thinking is defined as

(31)

claims are supported by valid-relevant evidences and logical justifications or not

(Wallace and Wray, 2011). A critical reader must be a sceptical person who

evaluates claims and argument in a text. Therefore, suspension on the writer’s

judgement is urgently needed to be a critical reader. Scepticism becomes an

important thing in this perspective.

From writer’s perspective, critical thinking is defined as the ability to build

strong claims and arguments with valid-relevant evidences and logical

justifications to convince sceptical people (Wallace and Wray, 2011). A critical

writer must be careful in making claims and arguments in their writing. Deep

analysis must be conducted by a critical writer on a certain issue before he or she

synthesizes and builds a claim and argument on it. Valid-relevant evidences are

also important to support claims and arguments with logical justifications. In the

end, the main goal of critical thinking in this perspective is to convince sceptical

people through a critical writing with strong and logical claims and arguments

supported by valid-relevant evidences.

Written assignment, particularly the term paper assignment, encourages

critical thinking and offers potential for demonstrating critical thinking abilities by

students (Meyers, 1986). The writing product of the paper assignment is academic

writing in form of argumentative essay. Argumentative essay gives students

opportunity to improve their critical thinking skills as a writer by building strong

arguments and justifiable claim with valid, adequate and relevant evidences and

justifications. It also gives students opportunity as a reader to be sceptical in a

(32)

justifiable claim with valid, adequate and relevant evidences and justifications

(Wallace and Wray, 2011).

There are several criteria of a text in critical writing, particularly an

argumentative essay. The criteria are used as the product indicators of students’

critical thinking skills in their critical writing in form of argumentative essay as

their learning product. Below are five criteria summarized from the book Critical Thinking, Reading, and Writing: A Brief Guide to Argument by Barnet and Bedau (2011) and the book Critical Reading and Writing for Postgraduates by Wallace and Wray (2011):

1. Arguable arguments

The essay has sharp-arguable thesis statement which is supported by

acceptable arguments, significant counter arguments and counter evidences.

2. Relevant evidences

The arguments are supported by relevant, appropriate, and convincing

evidences with persuasive material and statistical data (if possible).

3. Particular target audience

The essay is aimed at a particular audience: neutral, sympathetic, or hostile

audience on the topic. A good argumentative essay is able to persuade

neutrals to support the claim, reaffirms the sympathetic pros on their stand

on the topic, or able to change the hostile cons to support the claim. A good

(33)

4. Effective logical organization

The essay has a logical structure, coherent sequence of arguments from each

paragraph which support the thesis statement, effective introductory and

concluding paragraph.

5. Reliable sources

Reliable sources (books, journals, especially websites; websites reliability

must be carefully considered) are used to support the argumentative essay;

all quotes, summaries, and citations are well written and credited; all

borrowed words and ideas are credited.

2. Collaborative Learning Method to Improve Critical Thinking Skills in Writing Argumentative Essay

It is important for students to improve critical thinking skills nowadays.

There are many ways to improve critical thinking skills. One learning method

which is found effective to improve critical thinking skills is collaborative

learning.

Collaborative learning is an instructional learning method which allows

students at various performance levels to work together in small groups to reach a

common goal in their learning. Students are responsible for one another’s learning,

so that they can reach successful learning together by helping each other in their

(34)

a. Constructivism Approach as The Basis of Collaborative Learning Method

Collaborative learning is a learning method which is based on particular

approach as its basis. The basis of collaborative learning method is constructivism;

knowledge is constructed, and transformed by students (Dooly, 2008). According

to Bruning, Schraw, Norby, and Ronning (2004):

Constructivism is a psychological and philosophical perspective contending that individuals form or construct much of what they learn and understand. (as cited in Schunk, 2008, p. 235).

It is a learning theory which states that a person constructs most of his

knowledge by himself. Constructivism states that knowledge is constructed by

people based on their interactions with environment or situation. Therefore, human

becomes an active learner who constructs their knowledge through the interaction

between situation, social context, and their own being.

Collaborative learning is supported by Vygotsky’s theory of Zone of

Proximal Development (ZPD). It is a socio-cultural theory that has become the cornerstone of constructivist movements. According to Tudge and Scrimsher

(2003), Vygotsky’s socio-cultural theory is a constructivist theory that emphasizes

the social environment as a facilitator of development and learning (as cited in

Schunk, 2008, p. 242). Social environment is deeply considered in Vygotsky’s

theory; it helps learners to be critical in their learning process. Social interactions

in social environment help learners to coordinate three factors (interpersonal

(social), cultural-historical, and individual factors) to build a critical learning

(35)

It can be seen obviously in students’ learning experiences in the class; students

often find learning much easier by doing some group discussions together with

their friends. Vygotsky (1978) called it as Zone of Proximal Development, which is defined as:

The distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in

collaboration with more capable peers” (p. 86) (as cited in Schunk, 2008, p.

245).

There are some important elements in forming collaborative learning.

According to Slavin (1989), there must be group goals and individual

accountability to form an effective collaborative learning (as cited in Gokhale,

1995). It is the group’s task to make sure that all members get a good

understanding in their learning, while each group member has to explain the

learning materials to their friends as they are responsible on it. According to Webb

(1985), research has consistently found that those who give and receive elaborated

explanations will gain most in their learning process (as cited in Gokhale, 1995).

b. The Benefits of Collaborative Learning Method to Improve Students’ Critical Thinking Skills

Collaborative learning gives lots of benefits in learning process. There have

been lots of researches on collaborative learning. The important benefit from

collaborative learning is that it helps students to improve their critical thinking

skills. Meyers (1986) states:

(36)

The opportunity to practice critical and analytical thinking, which is stated

by Meyers, is available in collaborative learning. Dooly (2008) states that students

are encouraged to think critically by engaging in discussions and taking

responsibility for their learning, which could possibly occur in collaborative

learning. Meyers (1986) also states that to promote critical thinking in the

classroom, students have to create their own mental structures for critical thinking;

this is closely related to constructivist theory and Vygotsky’s ZPD which support

collaborative learning. Divergent perspectives and free discussions are also

important elements to encourage students to think critically in the classroom

(Slavin, 2012), and those elements are supported in collaborative learning.

Collaborative learning involves learners’ engagement in collaborative

learning process together with other learners, and the engagement involves lots of

idea and perspectives among them. Each learner has different cognitive level and

background knowledge, and it opens possibilities for them to learn beyond their

own limitation. We can see it from Vygotsky’s theory of Zone of Proximal

Development, which explains that learners can achieve higher intellectual level

and enhance their critical thinking skills by doing collaborative learning rather

than individual learning (Gokhale, 1995).

c. Techniques in Collaborative Learning Method to Improve Students’ Critical Thinking Skills

There are many techniques from collaborative learning method in

education, particularly in language learning. Three techniques from collaborative

(37)

assessment (Brown, 2004), and peer feedback (Gaies, 1985). These three

techniques were chosen and implemented in the lesson plan to respond the result

of the preliminary study of the research (further explanation on the significance of

these techniques in answering the result of the preliminary study will be explained

in chapter four). Below are the explanations of each technique:

1) Peer Involvement

Peer involvement is a technique in collaborative language learning.

According to Gaies (1985):

Peer involvement is the use of learners as models, sources of information, and interactants for each other in such a way that learners assume roles and responsibilities normally taken by a formally trained teacher (p.2).

The classical method of teacher centred learning is oppositely applied with

an active interaction between the students as peer tutors to one another. It is not

the teacher who holds the main role in the class; it is the students instead. They do

discussions and give feedback to one another in their learning process. Here, the

teacher plays his role only as an instructor and a supervisor; he gives general

instructions to the students about what they have to do and let the students

engaged in their learning process by doing peer involvement, while the teacher is

supervising their learning process.

There are several patterns of peer involvement in language learning. They

are mainly classified into two different categories: same level and cross level. The

researcher used the same level pattern in the research. Same level pattern includes

intra class tutoring, where learners come from the same class; they are in the same

(38)

inside the class. There are two options available in intra class tutoring which are

used in this research:

1. Pair work

In pair work, students work as peer tutors in pair. It gives students

opportunities to have intensive work and discussions with their pair (Gaies,

1985). They also have intensive opportunity to give peer feedback with their

pair, which will help them to give and receive good quality feedback on their

work.

2. Small group work

In small group work, students work as peer tutors in small group (Gaies,

1985). The advantage of small group work is students will get more

perspectives, which is not available in pair work. However, the quality of the

feedback might not be as good as in pair work, since the intensiveness in

small group work is lower than pair work.

Peer involvement is beneficial for language learners. Since language is

basically used for communication, peer involvement gives learners opportunities

to practice their language skills by communicating each other in such a real

situation. It also increases students’ motivation, sense of self direction, higher

intelligence level, and critical thinking skills. It breaks the limitation of teacher

centred learning where learners have limited opportunities to use and improve

their skills, which often leads learners to frustration, spoon-feeding, and negative

dependence with the teacher (Gaies, 1985). Particularly in improving critical

(39)

discussions and arguments with their peers. Dooly (2008) states that students are

encouraged to think critically by engaging in discussions and taking responsibility

for their learning, and the opportunities are available in peer involvement which

involves the students in discussions in the learning process. Peer involvement also

gives divergent perspectives which help the students in evaluating their arguments

and building strong arguments on it. Divergent perspectives and free discussions

are important elements to encourage students to think critically in the classroom

(Slavin, 2012), and those elements are supported in peer involvement.

2) Peer Assessment

Peer assessment is a part of learner-centred and collaborative education,

where the students are given the opportunity to do the language learning

assessment themselves. It is derived from self assessment where students monitor

their own learning process and performance as a successful learner. Brown (2004)

states:

Most successful learners extend the learning of process well beyond the classroom and the presence of teacher or tutor, autonomously mastering the art of self assessment. Where peers are available to render assessments, the advantage of such additional input is obvious (p.270).

There are two principles in peer assessment: the principle of autonomy and

the principle of cooperative learning. The principle of autonomy stands on

students’ abilities and autonomy as an independent learner. The abilities refer to

setting one’s own learning goals, pursuing the goals without the presence of an

external prod, and independently monitoring that pursuit (Brown, 2004). The

(40)

collaboratively with the benefits of collaborative learning. The advantages of

collaborative learning are often neglected in teaching-learning process; peer

assessment is one of many options of techniques and procedures in learner-centred

collaborative learning which bring the advantages of collaborative learning to the

learners (Brown, 2004).

There are five types of peer assessment: assessment of a specific

performance, indirect assessment of general competence, meta-cognitive

assessment for setting goals, socio-affective assessment, and student-generated test

(Brown, 2004). The research uses assessment of a specific performance in

assessing students’ writing performance. Students assess each other on written

performance by using a scoring rubric which is very suitable to use in performance

assessment. Slavin (2012) states, “Performance assessments are typically scored

according to rubrics that specify in advance the type of performance that is

expected for each activity” (p.433). Peer editing is also conducted by students in

peer assessment to give feedback to their peers.

Peer assessment gives students opportunity to practice critical and

analytical thinking to improve their critical thinking skills. Meyers (1986) states:

Students will develop good critical thinking skills only by being challenged to practice critical and analytical thinking in the context of all the different subjects they study (p.5).

Students can practice analytical thinking by assessing their peers,

particularly in analyzing their peers’ critical writing which help them to improve

(41)

learning to the learners (Brown, 2004), which helps them to improve their critical

thinking skills.

3) Peer Feedback

Peer feedback is a technique in collaborative learning method where the

learners are responsible in giving feedback to each other. The feedback is given to

signal the errors and provide the correct form to their peers in their learning

process (Gaies, 1985). Peer feedback has a practical benefit which holds a very

crucial factor in students’ learning process: students’ opportunity to receive

immediate feedback. Peer feedback allows students to give and receive feedback

immediately at the “precious moment”, which is when the students’ motivation is

high. Students can also get feedback simultaneously in the class, which is not

possible to be provided by one teacher in a single time. Peer feedback also helps

students to learn more by giving feedback to each other. (Gaies, 1985)

One option of peer feedback is student-initiated correction and editing.

Student-initiated correction and editing gives students opportunity to work in pairs

or small groups, exchange and compare their papers, and have discussion on their

papers. Feedback is given to each other in the discussion while teacher may

circulate among the students to monitor the discussion. (Gaies, 1985)

There are three advantages from student-initiated correction and editing.

The first advantage is students are going to have profitable discussions which give

them opportunity to have arguments and get critical feedback from it. The second

advantage is by having arguments in the discussion students will get positive

(42)

errors they have made. The third advantage is students are given opportunity to

sharpen their proofreading skills in correcting their peers’ papers. (Gaies, 1985)

Another effective way to improve students’ critical thinking skills is by

employing written assignment. Written assignment, particularly the term paper

assignment, encourages critical thinking and offers potential for demonstrating

critical thinking abilities by students (Meyers, 1986). The writing product of the

paper assignment in this research was academic writing in form of argumentative

essay. Argumentative essay was chosen because it gives students opportunity to

improve their critical thinking skills as a writer by building strong arguments and

justifiable claim with valid, adequate and relevant evidences and justifications. It

also gives students opportunity as a reader to be sceptical in a positive way by

assessing other students’ arguments whether the arguments are justifiable claim

with valid, adequate and relevant evidences and justifications (Wallace and Wray,

2011). In this research, collaborative learning method and written assignment in

form of argumentative essay were employed to improve students’ critical thinking

skills in CRW II.

The three techniques from collaborative learning method were

implemented in the research to improve students’ critical thinking skills. The

indicator was behavioural indicator in form of students’ participation, which

represents three general attitudes in critical thinking by Meyers (1986): raising

questions, temporary suspension of one’s judgements, and enjoyment of mysteries

(43)

as the guidance and are represented in the intensity of the students’ participation in

the discussion during the class.

B. Theoretical Framework

There were two research questions to be answered through this research.

The two research questions were answered by implementing the theories which

have been described in theoretical description. The first research question was

about the implementation of collaborative learning to improve students’ critical

thinking skills in CRW II. The theories which were implemented to answer this

research question were theories on critical thinking and collaborative learning.

Bloom revised taxonomy was used in composing the lesson plan. Critical

thinking as an educational goal was used to set critical thinking skills as a goal in

teaching-learning activities in the classroom. According to Bloom revised

taxonomy by Anderson et al. (2001), critical thinking skills refer to the last three

levels of the cognitive process dimension: analyzing, evaluating, and creating

claims and arguments. The learning objectives for the students were on these three

cognitive process dimensions.

Collaborative learning was used to structure the students learning activities

in the classroom. As stated before, collaborative learning gives certain benefits for

students to improve their critical thinking skills. Meyers (1986) states:

Students will develop good critical thinking skills only by being challenged to practice critical and analytical thinking in the context of all the different

(44)

The opportunity to practice critical and analytical thinking was available in

collaborative learning which allows students to get involved actively through

discussions.

Three techniques from collaborative learning method were implemented in

structuring students’ learning activities in the classroom: peer involvement, peer

assessment, and peer feedback. In the implementation of peer involvement, two

different types of peer involvement were used in the cycles of the action research.

Intra-class tutoring in small group work was used in the cycle 1. In small group

work, students work as peer tutors in small group (Gaies, 1985). The advantage of

small group work is students will get more perspectives, which is not available in

pair work. However, the quality of the feedback might not be as good as in pair

work, since the intensiveness in small group work is lower than pair work.

Intra-class tutoring in pair work was used in cycle 2. In pair work, students work as peer

tutors in pair. It gives students opportunities to have intensive work and

discussions with their pair (Gaies, 1985). They also have intensive opportunity to

give peer feedback with their pair, which will help them to give and receive good

quality feedback on their work.

Peer assessment was implemented during the classroom. The students do

peer-assessment by assessing each other’s critical writing in form of

argumentative essay. The type of peer assessment used was assessment of a

specific performance to assess students’ writing performance (Brown, 2004).

Students assess each other on written performance by using a scoring rubric which

(45)

students were given opportunities to do peer assessment in small group. In cycle 2,

students were given opportunities to do peer assessment in pair. The scoring rubric

was made based on the criteria of critical writing summarized from the book

Critical Thinking, Reading, and Writing: A Brief Guide to Argument by Barnet and Bedau (2011) and the book Critical Reading and Writing for Postgraduates

by Wallace and Wray (2011). Cycle 1 used small group schematic scoring rubric,

while cycle 2 used pair work schematic scoring rubric.

Peer feedback was implemented during the process of peer assessment. The

feedback is given to signal the errors and provide the correct form to their peers in

their learning process (Gaies, 1985). The type of peer feedback was

student-initiated correction and editing which gives students opportunity to work in pairs

or small groups, exchange and compare their papers, and have discussion on their

papers. Feedback is given to each other in the discussion while teacher may

circulate among the students to monitor the discussion (Gaies, 1985). In cycle 1,

students were giving peer feedback to each other in small groups. In cycle 2,

students were giving peer feedback to each other in pairs.

There were two main indicators to measure the improvement of the

students’ critical thinking skills: behavioural indicators and product indicators of

critical thinking. The behavioural indicators of critical thinking were used to

identify the improvement of the students’ critical thinking skills during the

learning process. The behavioural indicators were determined in students’

participation during the discussion. The intensity of the students’ participation

(46)

questions, temporary suspension of one’s judgements, and enjoyment of mysteries

and complexities. The product indicators of critical thinking were used to measure

the improvement of the students’ critical thinking skills in their critical writing in

form of argumentative essay as the product of their learning process. The product

indicators were determined in the criteria of critical writing summarized from the

book Critical Thinking, Reading, and Writing: A Brief Guide to Argument by Barnet and Bedau (2011) and the book Critical Reading and Writing for Postgraduates by Wallace and Wray (2011): arguable arguments, relevant evidences, particular target audience, effective logical organization, and reliable

sources.

The second research question was about students’ difficulties in improving

critical thinking skills in CRW II. The theories which were implemented to answer

the second research question were theories on critical thinking, particularly on

critical reading and writing. The criteria of critical writing (Barnet and Bedau,

2011; Wallace and Wray, 2011) were used to reflect students’ difficulties in

improving critical thinking skills in CRW II, particularly the difficulties in

reaching the five criteria in writing the argumentative essay: building arguable

arguments, using relevant evidences, aiming particular target audience, structuring

(47)

28

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter explains the research methodology. The research method, the

setting, the participants, the instruments, the data gathering technique, the data

analysis technique, and the procedure of the research are deliberated in details in

this chapter.

A. Research Method

This research was a Classroom Action Research. According to Burns

(1999), Classroom Action Research is a research which commonly uses qualitative

research as its method to answer concrete and practical issues of immediate

concern by observing and recording events and behaviour in the classroom. It is

neither categorized in qualitative research nor quantitative research. Although its

status as a research methodology is often seen as fragile because of the strong

claims on it as a process to enhance reflective practice and professional

development, Classroom Action Research is still considered as a research

methodology by lots of teaching and learning practitioners because it requires

systematic data collection and analysis (Burns, 1999).

According to Kemmis and McTaggart (1988), Classroom Action Research

is a dynamic and reflective cycle which consists of four essential processes:

(48)

cycle which involves Classroom Action Research practitioners and the participants

to:

develop a plan of critically informed action to improve what is already happening, act to implement the plan, observe the effects of the critically informed action in the context in which it occurs, and reflect on these effects as the basis for further planning, subsequent critically informed action and so on, through a succession of stages (Kemmis and McTaggart, 1988, p.10, as cited in Burns, 1999).

Figure 1: Kemmis’ model of the action research

According to Burns (1999), there are four characteristics of Classroom

Action Research (p.30):

1. Action research is contextual, small-scale and localised – it identifies and

investigates problems within a specific situation

2. It is evaluative and reflective as it aims to bring about change and

(49)

3. It is participatory as it provides for collaborative investigation by teams of

colleagues, practitioners, and researchers

4. Changes in practice are based on the collection of information or data

which provides the impetus of change

Classroom Action Research was chosen as the research design in order to

answer students’ difficulties in improving critical thinking skills which becomes

an immediate concern in Critical Reading and Writing II class. Collaborative

Learning method was applied by the lecturer in order to find an appropriate and

effective way for the students to improve their critical thinking skills in Critical

Reading and Writing II.

During the research, the researcher played the role as a collaborator to the

lecturer. Based on the agreement with the lecturer of CRW II which was made

before conducting the research, the researcher became an observer instead of

teaching in the classroom since the responsibility of students’ academic study in

the university belongs to the lecturer, and the researcher was not supposed to take

the responsibility. The researcher collaborated with the lecturer during the research

in the cycles and each step of the Classroom Action Research: planning, action,

observation, and reflection. Therefore, the Classroom Action Research was

specifically categorized as Collaborative Action Research. The Collaborative

Action Research also gave certain benefits to the research, as Burns (1999) states:

(50)

B. Research Setting

The research was conducted in two cycles. The first cycle consisted of two

meetings and the second cycle consisted of one meeting. This research was held in

English Language Education Study Program Sanata Dharma University. The class

was Critical Reading and Writing II. The researcher became an observer in the

class without doing any intervention in order to get an authentic and natural data to

be analyzed. Discussion on the lesson plan by the researcher and the lecturer was

done a week before the cycles were started. The research was conducted in March

and April 2016.

The first cycle was conducted on March 23rd 2016 and March 30th 2016.

The researcher tried to analyze students’ progress and difficulties in improving

their critical thinking skills by doing observation on students’ activities in the

classroom and analyzing students’ score based on their peer assessment. Having

observed students’ activities, analyzed and compared students’ score from the first

meeting and the second meeting in the first cycle, the researcher found the

students’ progress and difficulties in improving their critical thinking skills. Based

on the data, the researcher made the second cycle and discussed the lesson plan

with the lecturer. The second cycle was conducted on April 1st 2016. Below is the

(51)

Table 2: Research Schedule

Cycle Meeting Day/Date Time Materials Activities

1

The participants were twenty seven (27) PBI students class B batch 2014 in

Critical Reading and Writing II class, the lecturer, and three observers including

the researcher as an observer. The qualifications of the observers were: (1)

semester 8 students of English Language Education Study Program Sanata

Dharma University and (2) those who had taken Micro Teaching and Research

Methodology. The qualifications were determined by the researcher based on the

capability on conducting classroom observation, and semester 8 students have

been taught the theories on conducting classroom observation in Research

Methodology and have practiced the theories in Micro Teaching. Nineteen (19)

students participated in the research consistently by submitting the result of their

(52)

D. Research Instruments and Data Gathering Technique

The researcher used three techniques to help the researcher collect the data

during the research. The techniques were observation, writing test, and

questionnaire. Observation was used to record teaching-learning activities in the

classroom, as Burns (1999) states that Classroom Action Research is done by

observing and recording events and behaviour in the classroom. Writing test was

used to measure students’ progress in improving critical thinking skills in writing

argumentative essay. Scoring rubric was made by the researcher to help the

students in doing peer assessment on their argumentative essay. The criteria in the

scoring rubric were considered as a standard to measure students’ progress and the

indicators in improving their critical thinking skills. Questionnaire was employed

to find the data on students’ difficulties in improving critical thinking skills. The

questionnaire consisted of open ended questions. Below are the instruments and

the data gathering techniques in details:

1. Observation

Observation was employed in cycle 1 and cycle 2 to record

teaching-learning activities in the classroom. Burns (1999) states, “It (observation) enables

researchers to document and reflect systematically upon classroom interactions

and events, as they actually occur rather than as we think they occur” (p.80). The

observation type was direct and non-participant observation. The researcher

watched and recorded the teaching and learning activities in the classroom without

personal involvement in the classroom. The purpose was to remain distant and

Figur

Table 1: Bloom Revised Taxonomy Table by Anderson et al. (Eds., 2001, p.28)

Table 1.

Bloom Revised Taxonomy Table by Anderson et al Eds 2001 p 28 . View in document p.30
Figure 1: Kemmis’ model of the action research

Figure 1.

Kemmis model of the action research . View in document p.48
Table 2: Research Schedule

Table 2.

Research Schedule . View in document p.51
Figure 2: Formula of total mean score

Figure 2.

Formula of total mean score . View in document p.57
Figure 3: Formula of percentage difference

Figure 3.

Formula of percentage difference . View in document p.58
Table 3: Tabulation of mean scores and percentage differences

Table 3.

Tabulation of mean scores and percentage differences . View in document p.59
Table 4: Research timeline

Table 4.

Research timeline . View in document p.60
Table 5: Students' scores and change percentage in cycle 1

Table 5.

Students scores and change percentage in cycle 1 . View in document p.73
Table 6: Students' scores and change percentage in cycle 2

Table 6.

Students scores and change percentage in cycle 2 . View in document p.83
Table 7: Students' scores and change percentage from cycle 1 to cycle 2

Table 7.

Students scores and change percentage from cycle 1 to cycle 2 . View in document p.85

Referensi

Memperbarui...

Unduh sekarang (137 Halaman)
Lainnya : Collaborative learning to improve students` critical thinking skills in critical reading and writing II class of English Language Education Sanata Dharma University. INTRODUCTION 1 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 9 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 28 RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 42 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 76 Definition of Terms INTRODUCTION Defining Critical Thinking in Reading and Writing Constructivism Approach as The Basis of Collaborative Learning The Benefits of Collaborative Learning Method Techniques in Collaborative Learning Method to Improve Students’ Conceptual Theoretical Framework REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE Research Method RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Research Setting RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Research Participants Subjects RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Observation Research Instruments and Data Gathering Technique Writing Test Research Instruments and Data Gathering Technique Questionnaire Research Instruments and Data Gathering Technique Qualitative Data Analysis Descriptive Statistics Research Procedure RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Preliminary Study The Implementation of Collaborative Learning Method to Improve Lesson Learned of Collaborative Learning Method to Improve Critical Conclusions CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Choose a controversial topic debatable and interesting Generate ideas free writing or brainstorming INDICATORS SOURCE OF LEARNING MATERIALS LEARNING METHODOLOGY LEARNING MEDIA LEARNING STEPS ANALYZING CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS SYNTHESIZING CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ANALYZING 1. Students analyze the structure of the SYNTHESIZING LEARNING ASSESSMENT INDICATORS CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS SOURCE OF LEARNING MATERIALS LEARNING METHODOLOGY CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS LEARNING MEDIA CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS LEARNING STEPS ANALYZING 1. Students analyze the structure of the final draft