DESIGNING ENGLISH ACADEMIC WRITING
INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS FOR THE DENTISTRY
STUDENTS AT GADJAH MADA UNIVERSITY
YOGYAKARTA
A Thesis
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree
in English Language Education
BY
RUTH HASTUTININGSIH Student Number: 021214027
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM
DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION
FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY
2008
This thesis is dedicated to: .
Everyone all over the world who has
helped me believe in my dreams
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my deepest gratitude to the Lord Jesus Christ, who keeps pouring all His blessings to me with love. His never-ending love and guidance keep me on my destined path. He has been so kind to give me a chance to know number of people who took participation directly or indirectly in completing this thesis. First of all, I owe a great debt to Paulus Kuswandono. S.Pd., M.Ed., my sponsor who willingly reads and gives corrections, comments, and suggestions to my thesis.
I owe a great debt to Prof. Dr. drg. Munakhir Mudjosemedi, S.U. as the dean of Dentistry Faculty Gadjah Mada University. drg. Muh. Masykur Rahmat, Sp.BM., as the Vice Dean 1, drg. Sri Suparwitri S.U., Sp.Ort., as the Vice Dean 2, drg. Bambang Priyono, S.U., as the Vice Dean 3 of Dentistry Faculty Gadjah Mada University who allow me to conduct research in Dentistry Faculty and the lecturer of English class Drs. Arief Rachman, M.Hum., who allows me to conduct his class. My thanks especially go to drg. Suryono, Ph.D., (Dentistry-UGM), dr. Michele Dawn Shen, M.Kes., (Medical-UGM), Miss Enny (PPBI-USD), Miss Siska (PPBI-UKDW), Pak Arief (English-UGM), whom I really appreciate for their big help in filling the questionnaires.
My gratitude also goes to all of the lectures in English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University who have given me enough knowledge and who have provided me with examples of caring and perseverance that really enrich my life experiences. I would also like to thank to
Mbak Tari and Mbak Danik for helping me with the administrative matters. I am indebted to all students of first semester of Dentistry Faculty Gadjah Mada University and administration staff for helping me.
To my parents, Soedarsono and Hanna to whom I owe the greatest debt of love and understanding, I want to dedicate this thesis to them. To my brothers Hastangka, S.Fil., Lindra, and Daniel. I thank them for all the fight and sharing. My thank goes to my friends for her sharing and unforgettable experiences, all friends of PBI 2002 that I cannot mention one by one, and my special thank goes to Heather for reading this thesis.
Ruth Hastutiningsih
TABLE OF CONTENTS
4. Writing and Teaching Academic Writing ……....………. 22
a. Process writing ………...…..…...…….……… 23
b. Error Analysis ………..………….………. 27
B Theoretical Framework ………...…………..…………... 28
CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY ………...….…..…... 31
A Method .………...…...…..……….. 31
1. Educational Research and Development (R&D) …..……… 31
2. Need Survey ….………...….……… 36
B Respondents ….. ……….….…..……….. 37
1. The Respondents of Need Analysis Survey ….……...………….…. 37
2. The Respondents of Material Evaluation Survey …..……...………… 37
C Setting .………...…... 38
D Instruments .……….……….………... 38
1. Questionnaires ….………...……….. 39
2. Interviews …..………...…..…..……….. 40
3. Classroom Observation checklist .………....….……..…….…………. 41
E. Writing Procedure Document (Error Analysis) ….…….…..…..……….… 42
F. Data Gathering .……….…..….…..……….… 43
G. Data Analysis ….………...….….….……... 43
H. Research Procedure ………...…….…………... 45
CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS ………….… 47
A Conducting Needs Survey Research ……….…… 46
B. Analyzing the Data ……….... 49
C. Writing a Syllabus of Instructional Materials Development ……… 62
D. Developing Instructional Materials ….….……….………. 63
1. Selection of the Writing Tasks …..……… 64
2. The Technical Presentation …..………...….. 65
E. Evaluating the Instructional Materials …..……….. 66
F. Revision the Instructional Materials …..………. 67
1. The Second Research Respondents’ General Evaluation and Suggestions ….………...……… 67
2. Discussion on the Design Materials Evaluation …..…………..……… 69
G. Writing the Final Draft of the Materials ….……… 70
H. Presenting the Final Version of the Designed Materials …..……….….… 70
CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS ….……….…... 71
A. Conclusions …..………..…...…... 71
B. Suggestions …..……….….…..…... 72
BIBLIOGRAPHY …..……….……… 74 APPENDIX
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2. 1 Kemp’s Instructional Model: then relationship of each step in the plan to the other step.
Figure 2. 2 A Learning Centered Approach to Course Design. (Hutchison and Waters 1987:72)
Figure 2. 3 The Materials Evaluation Process Model Figure 2. 4 A Materials Design Model.
Figure 2. 5 An Expanded Materials Model
Figure 2. 6 The Research Steps (Combined Models)
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1 The First Questionnaire (Need Analysis)
Table 3.2 Tally Sheet for Analyzing Classroom Interaction (Checklist) Table 4.1 First Survey Data Setting Research
Table 4.2 The Descriptive Statistics of the Respondents’ Opinion on the First Survey Research.
Table 4.3 The Descriptive Statistics of Tally Sheet for Analyzing Classroom Interaction (Checklist)
Table 4.4 Sub-Categorized Errors
Table 4.5 The Second survey Research Data
Table 4.6 The Descriptive Statistics of the Respondents’ Opinion on the Second Survey Research.
Table 4.7 The Second Questionnaire Data Tabulation
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix 1 Permission Letters
Appendix 2 Need Survey First Questionnaire (Need Analysis) Appendix 3 Need Survey Second Questionnaire
Appendix 4 Worksheet Writing
Appendix 5 The Descriptive Statistics of the Respondents’ Opinion on the First Survey Research.
Appendix 6 Sub-Categorized Errors
Appendix 7 The Descriptive Statistics of the Respondents’ Opinion on the second Survey Research.
Appendix 8 The Designed Materials Syllabus and Lesson Plan Appendix 9 The Designed Materials Presentation.
ABSTRACT
Hastutiningsih, Ruth. 2008. Designing English Academic Writing Instructional Materials For The Dentistry Students At Gadjah Mada University Yogyakarta. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma Yogyakarta.
Nowadays the students must produce academic writing as an assignment and academic papers in order to finish their study. This study was meant to discuss how a set of academic writing instructional materials is designed and what the set of academic writing for the Dentistry instructional materials look like.
In order to answer the first question on how to develop the instructional materials, two combined models of instructional design were employed, i.e. Hutchinson and Waters’ and Kemp’s model. The steps recommended in the two models were identifying learner, analyzing learning and target situation, determining learning objectives, listing the subject content, making a choice of learning activities determining support services and evaluating and opinion on ten instructional materials from English instructor and experienced in teaching writing English for dentistry students or graduate students of other studies. From the second survey research respondent opinion of the designed materials, it can be seen that between the ranges of scales 1-5 the mean scores of the answer were 4.0. It means that most of the respondents agree that the designed set of academic writing skill proposed in this study had fulfilled the requirements of suitable material. The results of the second survey research were used as the basis for the revision and improvement of the instructional materials.
To answer the second question, text analysis of the Dentistry faculty textbooks, error analysis of the students writing drafts and the evaluation of the existing writing materials were carried out. The relevant tasks for the actual Dentistry students were drafting, identifying sentences, topic sentence, summarizing, outlining, paraphrasing, paragraph and essay writing.
The designed materials consist of eight units. Each unit is presented in three sections and sequenced from easier to more difficult, simpler to more complex and from controlled to free activities. The “Pre-writing stage” section acts as the input stimulus to motivate students’ interest on the topic. Then, the “language focus” provides opportunity for the students to break the language into pieces, study how it works and put it back together again. The “Whilst-writing” section provides explanation on various tasks to practice writing ranging from simple to more complicated tasks. Besides that students are provided exercises on writing tasks based on each type of tasks. The “Post-writing” section provides revising and editing where the lecturer gives comment and students analyze their mistake
Based on the conclusions, two suggestions are proposed. First, teachers need to carefully select materials in order to match the learners’ need. Second, it is suggested that the English Language Education Program of Sanata Dharma University train its students to be able to teach English for academic purpose and specific purpose to meet the demands of the education areas.
ABSTRAK
Hastutiningsih, Ruth. 2008. Designing English Academic Writing Instructional Materials For The Dentistry Students At Gadjah Mada University Yogyakarta. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma Yogyakarta.
Sekarang ini mahasiswa harus menghasilkan penulisan akademik sebagai tugas kuliah dan makalah akademik dalam menyelesaikan studi mereka. Studi ini dimaksudkan untuk bagaimana satu rangkaian tugas-tugas menulis untuk mengembangkan kemampuan mahasiswa dalam menulis tugas akademik untuk mahasiswa Kedokteran Gigi didesain dan seperti apa bentuk kelompok tugas tugas menulis itu.
Untuk menjawab pertanyaan pertama, yakni bagaimana mengembangkan materi pengajaran, dua model kombinasi rancangan instruksi pengajaraan digunakan yakni model Hutchinson dan Waters dan model Kemp langkah-langkah yang dianjurkan dalam dua model ini adalah mengidentifikasi pembelajar, menganalisa situasi dan target belajar, menentukan tujuan pembelajaran, mendaftar isi materi pembelajaran, memilih kegiatan belajar, menentukan jasa jasa pendukung dan mengevaluasi meteri yang telah didesain. Penelitian survey yang kedua dilakukan untuk memperoleh evaluasi dan pendapat tentang survey materi pengajaran dari instruktur bahasa Inggris yang berpengalaman mengajar bahasa Inggris untuk mahasiswa Kedokteran gigi atau mahasiswa S2 disiplin ilmu lain. Dari pendapat respondent penelitian survey kedua, dapat dilihat bahwa antara skala 1 sampai 5 skor rata-rata jawaban adalah 4.0 ini berarti bahwa sebagian besar responden setuju bahwa kumpulan tugas-tugas menulis yang disusun untuk mengembangkan kemampuan menulis tugas-tugas akademik mahasiswa yang diusulkan selama studi ini telah memenuhi tuntutan materi yang sesuai. Dari hasil penelitian ini digunakan sebagai dasar bagi revisi dan penyempurnaan materi pengajaran.
Untuk menjawab pertanyaan kedua, analisa wacana buku-buku pegangan kuliah bahasa Inggris, analisa kesalahan dari naskah konsep mahasiswa dan evaluasi materi materi writing yang ada dilaksanakann. Tugas-tugas menulis yang relevan untuk kuliah kuliah kedokteran gigi yang sebenarnya adalah tugas mencatat, menulis, mengidentifikasi kalimat, menulis kalimat utama, meringkas, membuat garis besar, membuat konsep, membuat paraphrase, menulis paragraf dan menulis esei.
Materi yang disusun terdiri dari delapan satuan pelajaran. Masing-masing satuan pelajaran disajikan dalam tiga bagian dan dirangkai dari yang lebih mudah ke yang lebih sulit, dari yang lebih sederhana ke yang lebih rumit, dari yang terkendali ke yang lebih bebas. Bagian tahapan “Pre-writing” berperan sebagai stimulus awal untuk memotivasi minat mahasiswa pada topik. Kemudian “Language focus” memberi kesempatan pada mahasiswa untuk mengupas bahasa menjadi bagian yang terkecil, mempelajari fungsinya dan menyusunnya kembali. Bagian “Whilst-writing” memberi penjelasan tentang tugas-tugas menulis yang beragam untuk berlatih menulis yang mulai dari tugas-tugas sederhana sampai
pada tugas-tugas yang rumit. Disamping itu siswa juga diberikan latihan soal menulis berdasarkan masing-masing tipe latihan. Bagian “Post-writing” memberikan pengoreksian dan pengeditan dimana dosen akan memberikan koreksinya dan komentarnya dan siswa menganalisa kesalahan tersebut.
Berdasarkan kesimpulan yang diambil, ada dua saran yang diberikan. Pertama, pengajar perlu untuk menyeleksi materi secara berhati-hati supaya sesuai dengan kebutuhan pembelajar. Kedua, disarankan bagi Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Sanata Dharma untuk melatih mahasiswanya untuk mampu mengajar bahasa Inggris untuk tujuan khusus untuk memenuhi tuntutan pendidikan.
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
This study addresses Designing English Academic Writing
Instructional Materials for the Dentistry Students at Gadjah Mada
University Yogyakarta
.
This study intends to develop instructional materials foracademic writing. To establish the purpose of this study, chapter one consists of
several main parts. This chapter discusses the Background of the Study, Problem
Limitations, Problem Formulations, Objectives of the Study, Benefits of the
Research, Definitions of Terms.
A. The Background of the Study
The ability to write in English is very important in current times.
English is considered the most acceptable language among other international
languages. This has created a need for mastering English. Many people study
an English course to become competent with the language or learn it by
themselves through books.
Nowadays, in Indonesia, university students must produce academic
papers written in English as a prerequisite to completing their study.
Therefore, the immediate need to write in the English language motivates the
students to take an English academic writing course. Undergraduate students
face many kinds of writing tasks as they study their chosen degree program.
Naturally, these tasks are different from one-degree program to another. They
are, however, similar in two respects. First, the tasks become more complex.
Second, they need to be written in appropriate academic language.
Writing skills are considered the most difficult aspect of language
skills because it takes a long time to process and may be considered as a
boring activity. Writing skills require students to express their ideas, opinions
and thought in written form. Sometimes ideas just come out spontaneously;
therefore, writing is a good tool to record our ideas without having lost any of
the ideas.
Another reason why writing in English is considered as one of the
most difficult requirements is because they know what to write but they do
not know how to phrase their ideas appropriately into their paper. Moreover,
many students think in their first language and translate their thoughts a
sentence per sentence as they write in English, rather than translating the
broader ideas from the first to the second language.
B. Problem Identification
The students of Dentistry Faculty in Gadjah Mada University are
required to pass an English course that is offered by Dentistry Curriculum for
Undergraduate students. Most students of the Dentistry Faculty have already
mastered Basic English grammar but these students still have many problems
in their writing.
English. The reason for this is that in Indonesia, not many research studies
exist on writing courses designed to help such students complete a thesis
writing to an acceptable standard.
The Dentistry Department of Gadjah Mada University needs to
reconstruct its old instructional materials and create a new English design
subject. The reason is that the old design does not cover all the students’
needs in order to understand English textbooks and write academic writing
well. It means that the design consists of one subject materials that are
translating materials. There are many assignment papers and English books
available as references that may be used in the Dentistry faculty. The students
need guidance in writing skills in order to be able to write good paragraphs
and summarize the books. Furthermore, there are not many alternative
materials that are especially designed for Dentistry study. The materials used
were authentic texts that did not represent the Dentistry field. There were no
English materials or textbooks available for this department based on the
Dentistry curriculum. Moreover, the Dentistry Department of Gadjah Mada
University needs to design a new English syllabus because it is important in
order to promote positive student behavior by addressing students learning
needs.
The problem with the Dentistry students’ lack of English writing
ability is attributed to a number of factors. Firstly, students do not have
sufficient knowledge and guidelines of how to write well. Secondly, writing
the class. As a result, the lack of English writing skills and achievement of
Dentistry students becomes an obstacle in producing good English writing,
although several techniques have been applied to teach writing. Students still
have trouble when they are asked to write. Thirdly, the students face
difficulties in formatting a paragraph, summarizing, and organizing ideas to
form well-developed English academic piece of writing.
C. Problem Limitation
The first semester students need to have a strong writing foundation
because they will use more complex texts in the following semesters, it means
that they need to prepare themselves from the very first of semester. The
writing deals mostly with writing essays, research papers, report papers and
summaries. Therefore, in this study the researcher limits the problem in
writing a good paragraph and summarizing, organizing the idea to form
well-developed English academic piece of writing. The researcher focuses on
Designing English Academic Writing Instructional Materials for the Dentistry
Students at Gadjah Mada University.
D. Problem Formulation
Based on the above discussion, two problems can be identified as follows:
1. How is a set of instructional academic writing materials designed?
E. Objectives of the Study
The goal of this research is to design a set of English instructional
materials for students of Dentistry. The aim of the research is to:
1. Design a set of instructional academic writing materials.
2. Present a set of English instructional materials
F. Benefits of the Study
The results of this study should make a beneficial contribution to the
following:
1. The students of the Dentistry department, who will be provided with
scientifically well-developed English Academic Writing instructional
materials that are developed based on general scientific research such as
lab reports, argumentative pieces of writing and essays.
2. The English lecturers of the Dentistry department, who will gain a set of
English Academic Writing instructional materials matching the need of the
Dentistry students.
3. The researcher, who is a student of the English Education Program, will gain benefits from this research because she will learn how to design an instructional program in English for Academic Purposes and how to develop teaching materials.
G. Definitions of Terms
This section aims to describe the terms concerning the research that
are considered important for Dentistry students to know. Without the
description of the terms there may be confusion, misunderstanding or
misinterpretation about those terms, which is why the description of terms is
very important and becomes an essential part to understanding the research.
Defining the following terms:
1. Academic writing (Robinson 1991: 103) is the kind of writing that is
required in college or university. In order to write effectively, it takes
practice to develop the skill. It is important, therefore, to bear in mind
that writing is an ongoing process, not a finished “product”. This means
that a piece of writing is never complete; it can be continuously reviewed
and revised.
2. Instructional materials as defined by Kemp (1977:134-136) stated that
instructional materials mean those that would help teachers in
transmitting information to their students so that the previously stated
objectives can be optimally achieved.
3. Course design
According to Hutchinson and Waters (1987:65), course design is a
process by which the raw data related to the learning needs is interpreted
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
The first part discusses the theoretical foundation underlying the study that
will be presented in the theoretical description. The second part is the discussion
of the theoretical framework of the study.
A. Theoretical Description
This section contains six major discussions of theories underlying this
study. Firstly, it discusses the definition of English for academic purposes,
since the instructional materials designed are intended for the Dentistry
students. Secondly, theories of instructional design models and processes are
elaborated. The discussions are two instructional models; a need analysis,
learning objectives, syllabus and instructional materials. Finally, an
appropriate teaching method for academic writing is presented.
1. English for Academic Writing
The instructional materials designed in this study are intended for the
Dentistry students of Gadjah Mada University. As previously mentioned they
are undergraduate students of Dentistry. This section will discuss the
definitions of the English for Academic Purposes that underlie the design of
the language course for the Dentistry students. The types of students taught in
an ESP course are those who are about to enter study at or already study
through the university. They may be undergraduates or graduates. Robinson
(1991:103) states that the design of an EAP course is based on a range of
topics and texts from several disciplines. Of general current concern however,
is the focus on discipline-specific topics and texts, such as, economics,
medicine, and engineering. The format and development are similar in each,
suggesting that the authors believe that students require practice in the same
strategies and tasks, whatever the discipline. The researcher used two
approaches; the product approach and the process approach Robinson (1991:
103). Two approaches used in teaching writing are namely process and
product approaches.
The feature of the product method is:
Model → comprehension/analysis/manipulation → new input → parallel → text
The features of the process approach are:
Writing task → draft 1 → feedback → revision → input → draft 2 → feedback → revision draft 3
(Robinson 1991: 103)
a.) The Product Approach
A model is provided in the product approach and various exercises
undertaken to draw attention to its important features. Students are required to
writing, its structure, cohesion, various grammatical aspects and academic
style; also some incorporate elements of the process approach.
b.) The Process Approach
This approach relates to the principles of learner-centered learning,
encouraging individuals to take more responsibility for their own learning.
Drafting, feedback, revisions and informed choices, students can make clearer
decisions about the direction of their writing.
Feedback is an important element in the process approach to writing. Keh (1990) discusses three types of feedback: peer-evaluation, conferences (i.e teacher-students interaction and written comments by a teacher. She concludes that each type of feedback has its uses and advantages. From the point of view of academic writing, this approach has the advantage of drawing attention to the constant need to draft and revise; in other words, encouraging students to be responsible for making improvements for themselves.
c.) Summarizing and Paraphrasing
Summary writing is an important aspect of academic writing and is linked to academic reading, by means of note making. An integral part of reading and summarizing is paraphrasing. Paraphrasing is expressing someone else’s ideas in your own words, structure and style. This difficult but essential skill is practiced step by step. The integration of others’ writing has also been commented on by Leki and Carson (1994) who recommended that:
work that encourages students to integrate those opinions and experiences with external sources of information and argument.’
2. Course Design
a. Course Design Models
Two course design models are used based on their applicability and
practicality to a language course design. The instructional design is a complex
process that is composed of many interrelated parts and functions that must
operate in a coherent manner in order to achieve success. Dick and Reiser
(1989:62-67) point out that instructional materials simply mean that the
materials are planned or designed by the instructor. Instructional material
design is done in order to set the context of instruction.
The models of instructional design that will be presented in this study
are designed by Kemp and by Hutchinson and Waters.
The models of instructional design that are presented include:
1) Kemp’s Model
Jerold E. Kemp (1977:8) states that the instructional design plan is
designed to supply an answer to three questions: • What must be learnt? (Objectives)
• What procedures and resources will work best to teach the
designed learning levels? (Activities and resources).
• How will we know when the required learning takes place?
Kemp (1977: 8) proposes an instructional design model, which consists of eight parts, namely:
• Consider the goals, list the topics, and state the general purposes
for teaching each topic.
• Enumerate the characteristics of the leaner for whom the
instruction is to be designed.
• Specify the learning objectives to be achieved in terms of
measurable students’ behavioral outcomes.
• List the subject content that supports each objective.
• Develop pre-assessments to determine the students’ background
and present their level of knowledge about the topic.
• Select teaching and learning activity and instructional resources
that will address the subject content in order that students will
accomplish the objectives.
• Coordinate such support services such as budget, personnel,
facilities, equipment, and schedules to carry out the instructional
plan.
• Evaluate students’ leaning in terms of their accomplishment of
objectives, with a view to revising and reevaluating any phases of the plan that need improvement.
that may start from any of the steps, whenever the designer is ready. Therefore the steps are interdependent on each other however they can also stand by themselves. The relationship of each step in the plan to the other step can be seen below:
Figure 2. 1 Kemp’s Instructional Model: then relationship of each step in the plan to the other step (Kemp 1977:9).
Goals, topics, & General Purposes
REVISION
Pre-assessment
Subject Evaluation
Support services
Teaching/learning Activities,
Resources
Learning Objectives Learner
Characteristic
2) Hutchinson and Waters’ Model
Hutchinson and waters (1987:72) offer a learning centered approach to
course design. Hutchinson and Waters (1987:21) state that course design is
“the process by which raw data about a learning need is interpreted in order to
produce an integrated series of teaching-learning experiences, whose ultimate
aim is to lead the learners to a particular state of knowledge.” This approach
holds on to the principle that the learner is the one who determines the
There are two reasons why this approach should be used. First, learning,
as an internal process, is seen as a process where the learners use their existing
knowledge and skills to process the information being presented to them.
Therefore, learning depends on the knowledge that the learners already have
and their ability and motivation to use it. Secondly, a learning centered
approach to course designs considers the learners at every step of the design
process.
Figure 2. 2 A Learning Centered Approach to Course Design. (Hutchinson and Waters 1987:74)
Identify learners
Identify skills and knowledge needed to function in the target situation
Write
syllabus/materials to exploit the potential of the learning situation in the acquisition of the skills and knowledge required by the target situation
Identify students’ attitudes/wants/potential Identify needs/potential/constraints of learning/teaching situation
A needs analysis is considered to be the first important procedure. Some
the course designers will find difficulties. Widdowson (1981:2) defines that
needs mean what they students have to be able to do at the end of their
language course. Mountford (1981:27) has another definition of needs
analysis. He says that needs mean what the users-institution or society at large
regards as necessary or desirable to be learnt from a program of language
instruction. To determine what English the students need, a needs analysis
must be carried out. It simply identifies the learners’ personal, socio-cultural,
and educational traits, their expectations and interest and what the students
need to do in English tasks, the context in which they will do it texts and what
their current level of English is. Because of the various definitions of needs,
course designers define needs as what a particular group of students need
English for.
1) Target Situation Analysis
Target situation analysis concerns the learner’s future roles and the
linguistics skills and knowledge required to perform competently in writing in
a target context. This involves mainly objective and product-oriented data:
identifying the contexts of language use, observing the language events in
these contexts, listing the genres employed, collecting and analyzing target
genres.
the target proficiency and the existing knowledge that the students already have. Wants are the perceived needs by the students. What the students want to learn may not necessarily match what they need to learn. Hutchinson provides a simple framework and Waters (1987:59) outlines the kind of information that course designers need to gather from an analysis of target needs.
• Why is the language needed?
• How will the language be used?
• What will the content areas be?
• Who will the learner use the language with?
• Where will the language be used?
• When will the language be used?
This question outline is used as source of information for the course
designer to gather from an analysis of target needs. The materials course
designer is made to reflect on this outline.
2) Present Situation Analysis
Present situation analysis refers to information about learners’ current
abilities, familiarity with writing processes and writing genres, their skills and
perceptions; what they are able to do and what they want to do at the
beginning of the course. Data can therefore be objective (age, proficiency,
prior learning experiences) and subjective (self perceived needs, strengths, and
Hutchinson and Waters have defined the gap between the target
situation and the present situation as the learning needs. Hutchinson and
Waters (1987:62-63) have developed a checklist to analyze learning needs.
They are stated as follows:
• Why are the learners taking the writing course?
• How do the learners learn?
• What resources are available?
• Who are the learners?
• What do learners know about writing?
The course designer used this checklist to analyze learning needs. This
checklist helped a course designer to follow the step in designed materials.
c. Learning Objectives
The important step in instructional planning is specifying learning
objectives in which the teacher’s concern is with learning as the outcome of
instruction. Writing objectives is a developmental activity that requires
refinements, changes, and modification as the writer develops subsequent
planning steps. Once collected and analyzed needs analysis data are used to
formulate course goals or aims and objectives. Goals are the global target
outcomes around which the syllabus is organized, given the students’
d. The EAP Syllabus
According to Hutchinson and Waters (1987:80), a syllabus is a
document that details what will be learnt. A syllabus is plan of work essential
for the teacher as a guidelines and context for class content. In other words, a
syllabus is a coherent plan for a course of study, providing a map for both
teachers and learners, which specify the work to be accomplished by students
based on explicit objective. There are three types of approaches to EAP
syllabus (Yalden 1987, Hutchinson and Waters 1987, Robinson 1991). They
are content or product-based approaches, skills based, and method- process
based syllabuses.
• Content-Based syllabus: Situation, Topic, language form,
English for Academic Purposes employ a situational syllabus. A
topic-based syllabus employs the content of students’ work or specialist study,
which will be used as an organizing device for the syllabus to motivate
the students.
• Skill-based syllabus
The development of skill-based syllabuses indicates that the constituents
of four language skills (listening, speaking, reading, and writing) have
also been considered.
• Method-Based syllabus: Tasks, processes, and learning centered
A Tasks syllabus consists of asset of tasks or activities. These tasks have
been graded carefully in accordance with the cognitive difficulty. To
of activities called tasks. In a language-centered approach the syllabus is
the determiner of the entire course. In a skill-centered approach, there is
a degree of negotiation between texts and skills.
The researcher used two types of syllabuses in this design. They will be
discussed in relation with the topic of this study. First, the Content-Based
syllabus: Situation, Topic, and language form, and second, the Method-Based
syllabus: Tasks.
Learning is not only a matter of presenting items or skills and strategies,
but also the process through which they are mastered. Therefore, the syllabus
must be used in a more dynamic way in order to enable methodological
considerations such as interest, enjoyment, and learner involvement, to
influence the content of the entire course design. In terms of practical
implementation, learners need to be presented with tasks, which are concerned
with language skills as real communication in real time, not in isolation. The
writing skills have been expanded to focus on their communicative goals
(Dubin and Olshtain, 1986:101). In an academic course (EAP), learners write
assignments that are suitable to their specific field of study; lab, reports,
library research reports, etc. Writing is tied to learners’ real world needs as
well writing academic papers and research articles. To sum up, the writing
activity becomes an interactive process with focus on time, the reason for
writing, and the reader. The objective of the activity is communicating to the
3. Material Design
When needs analysis, course design and a syllabus have been completed
the next step is to decide how to turn the course design into actual teaching
materials. Hutchinson and waters (1987:96) recommend two ways to do that:
First, materials evaluation by selecting from existing materials, second,
materials development by writing original materials.
An important consideration when selecting or designing materials is that
of authenticity. According to Hutchinson and waters (1987:158), authenticity
carries a sense of being ‘taken from the target situation and therefore not
originally constructed for language teaching purposes’. Nunan (1989:54)
states that it is necessary to use authentic materials since the most effective
way to develop a particular skill is to rehearse that skill in class. Materials
created to specifically stimulate writing, practice language items, introduce
content and highlight features of target texts may actually be more effective
than complete texts.
a. Materials Evaluation
Hutchinson and Waters (1987:97) divide the evaluation into four major
steps:
• Defining criteria
• Subjective analysis
• Objective analysis
To compare different sets of materials, Hutchinson and Waters
(1990:99) develop a criteria checklist for objective and subjective analysis
of existing materials in developing instructional materials.
Figure 2. 3 the Materials Evaluation Process Model (Hutchinson and Waters 1987: 98)
Define criteria
On what basis will materials be judged? Which criteria will be more important?
Subjective analysis
What realization of criteria does the designer want in his/her course?
Objective analysis
How does material being evaluated realize the criteria?
Matching
How far does the material match the needs?
b. Materials Development
Hutchison and Waters (1987:107) outline three major steps in
developing creative ESP materials;
1) Defining objectives.
To define the purpose of writing materials, Hutchinson and Waters
(1987:107-108) identify some principles to guide us in the actual writing of
materials. They point out that:
• Materials provide a stimulus to learning. Good materials, therefore,
for learners to use their existing knowledge and skills.
• Good materials should provide a clear and coherent unit structure,
which is flexible enough to allow creativity and variety.
• Materials should embody a view of the nature of language and
learning.
• Materials reflect the nature of the learning tasks.
• Materials give useful function to broaden the basis of teacher training.
Materials are a statement of language use rather than a vehicle for
language learning.
• Materials provide models of correct and appropriate language use.
2) A material design model.
Hutchinson and Waters (1987:108) present a model of materials. This
model is designed to provide a coherent framework for the integration of the
various aspects of learning and to allow enough space for creativity and
variety. This material design should cover four elements, which will help
learners achieve the aim stated before. The four elements are: • Input (pre-writing, whilst-writing, post-writing)
• Language focus
Good materials should involve both opportunities for analysis and synthesis. The learners should be able to use language, have a chance to take the language to pieces, study how it works and practice putting it back together again. In other words, language focus provides a language pattern for students in composing their paragraphs.
• Content focus
Content should be exploited to generate meaningful
communication in the classroom. The text models are related to the general
prior knowledge of the students. Based on the background of the students in
Senior High School, the researcher tries to give the general and basic
knowledge required because they have not yet learnt about Dental
medicine.
Task •
Materials are designed to lead towards a writing task where
learners use the content and language knowledge that they have built up so
far.
Figure 2. 4 A Materials Design Model.
LANGUAGE CONTENT
c. The Expanded Model
However, Hutchinson and Waters (1987:118) have developed and
expanded the model as shown in figure 2.5
Figure 2. 5 An Expanded Materials Model (Hutchinson and
Waters 1987:118)
INPUT
TASK CONTENT
Students’ own knowledge and ability
Additional input Project
LANGUAGE
4. Writing and Teaching Academic Writing
To communicate our thought, ideas, and feelings, we can use written as well as spoken language. In fact, due to a limitation of time, writing seems to be a neglected skill. In addition, the students believe that writing is a difficult subject to learn because they are expected to produce accurate and correct written work while they are offered the same kind of writing activity repetitively. It leads to the students’ low motivation in learning writing skills. In order to teach writing successfully, the teachers need to understand the nature of written text.
language structure. Raimes (1983) as cited in Musthafa (1994:5) defines writing as a set of decision-making process involving an intricate choice of grammar, syntax, mechanics, organization, word choice, purpose, audience, content and the writing procedure.
In the English foreign language classes, reading and writing tasks often
depend on each other. Sometimes reading is used as a preparation for a
writing task. In writing classes, reading is indeed the most frequently used
method of providing input. This is either because teachers use models that
suggest this method, because they select texts on the subject of the
composition.
a. Process writing
The teacher’s role is to guide students through the writing process,
avoiding an emphasis on form to help them develop strategies for generating,
drafting, and refining ideas. This is achieved through setting prewriting
activities to generate ideas about the content and structure, encouraging
brainstorming and outlining, requiring multiple drafts, giving feedback,
seeking text level revisions, facilitating peer responses, and delaying surface
corrections until the final editing (Raimes, 1992). Gardner and Johnson (1997)
describe the stages of the writing process:
Prewriting. •
Students generate ideas for writing: brainstorming; reading literature; creating life maps, webs, and story charts; developing word banks;
deciding on form, audience, voice, and purpose as well as through teacher
motivation. For example, instead of telling the students "Write a composition
about your holiday", the instructions could be "Write a postcard to a friend
about how you are spending your holiday".Some examples:
Audience Purpose Form
The general public To report an accident / medical histories A newspaper article Peers or the lecturer. To provide information on your medical lab. Report
A patient and doctor To complain about tooth ache and faulty medicine
A letter
Samples of pre-writing tools:
First draft Second draft Third draft
Beginning Ending
Topic/title
Why I got toothache
My teeth
The way to avoid toothache Looking after my
teeth
The outline can help prepare students in writing a description (e.g.,
My tooth), where the different branches represent the different
paragraphs (e.g., my healthy teeth, how I look after my teeth, why I got
•
•
•
•
•
•
Rough Draft.
Students get their ideas on paper. They write without concern for conventions. Written work does not have to be neat; it is a 'sloppy
copy.'.
Reread.
Students proof their own work by reading aloud and reading for
comprehension.
Share with a Peer Revisor.
Students share and make suggestions for improvement: asking
who, what, when, where, why, and how questions about parts of the
story the peer does not yet understand; looking for better words; and
talking about how to make the work better.
Revise.
Improve what the narrative says and how it says it: write additions, imagery, and details. Take out unnecessary work. Use peer suggestions to improve. Clarify.
Editing.
Work together on editing for mechanics and spelling. Make sure the work is 'goof proof.'
Final Draft.
write a final draft.
• Publishing.
Students publish their written pieces: sending their work to publishers; reading their finished story aloud, making books. This is a time to celebrate!
This process of writing will introduce students to some principles and
techniques of the writing process. Process writing is an approach to teaching
writing, which tries to simulate the process that many writers go through in
their native language. In this way it does not only focus on the final product
but also on the stages along the way, such as gathering ideas, noting them
down, reorganizing and rephrasing the ideas and preparing a final, accurate
version. In other words, process writing marks a shift from exclusive
emphasis on the products of writing to an emphasis on the process of writing
and on interactive learning between lecturer and students, and among students
themselves.(Hyland, 2002).
b. Error Analysis
language to express what they want to say in a comprehensible way.
This study was done to identify and classify errors of Dentistry students' writing, the purpose of the study was to find the most common errors and the frequency of errors the respondents made, Error analysis (EA) would allow teachers to figure out what areas should be focused on and what kind of attention is needed in an L2 classroom. If this is done, the language teachers will be better able to develop curriculum and select materials that successfully facilitate L2 learning processes Brown (1994) and Littlewood (1995) have found that L2 learners at a beginning level produce a large number of interlingual errors.
B. Theoretical Framework
There are seven steps necessary to conduct in the theoretical framework. They are conducting the research by carrying out a needs analysis, writing a syllabus, developing evaluating tools, revising instructional materials and finally writing the final draft of the instructional materials. The procedure will be shown in figure 2.5
Step 1: Conducting Research
Research needs to be undertaken to answer the problem identified in the problem formulation. In the previous chapter, the theoretical foundation for such has been discussed as evaluation on the syllabuses, study skills and published materials on writing skills limiting the writing tasks.
Step 2: Carrying Out a Needs Analysis
(Target Situation Analysis) attempts to identify the learner’s needs at the end of the language course having been designed. Second, a PSA (Present Situation Analysis) aims to identify their characteristics; the results of the analysis will be used as an important foundation in formulating course objectives and writing the syllabus. Distributing questionnaires to Dentistry students will be the methods for collecting the data required.
Step 3: Writing a Syllabus
There are two parts to this step. The first part is formulating learning objectives based on the results of the materials evaluation and the needs analysis step 1 and step 2 respectively. The second part is writing a particular type of syllabus, which covers learning objectives, course content and the methodology.
Step 4: Developing Instructional Materials.
Materials will be developed based on the selected materials drafts of the Dentistry students. Error analysis will be carried out to determine the structural points needed to be covered in the tasks. The materials will be developed as the instructional materials according to the expanded material design model proposed by Hutchinson and waters (1987:118).
Step 5: Evaluating the Instructional Materials
To evaluate the materials developed in step 4, materials and questionnaires will be distributed to English instructors who have experience in teaching Dentistry students. The questionnaire will be followed up by a series of interviews and discussions.
Step 6: Revision the Instructional Materials.
input for revising the instructional materials. This will then lead to the final step of this study.
Step 7: Writing the Final Draft of the Materials
After the revision and improvement have been completed in the
previous step, the final draft of the writing tasks to develop, academic skills
Figure 2.6 The Research Steps (Combined Models) Step 1
Step 2
Step3
Step4
Carrying out needs analysis
Conducting research
Writing a syllabus
Developing
instructional materials
Evaluating
instructional materials
PSA
TSA
Distributing the materials
Processing questionnaires
Research and ation colle
inform cting
Develop the
preliminary form of the product
Main product revision Preliminary field testing Planning
Revising the
instructional materials Step 5
Step 6
Writing the final draft of the materials Step 7
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
This chapter presents information about the method used in this study. The
discussion involves the method of the research, the research participants, the
setting of the research, the research instruments, the process of collecting the data
and the research procedure. Each of these instruments is described to give a clear
verification on how this study is conducted.
A. Method
According to Sprinthall (1991:99), research or a study is typically
called descriptive. Descriptive study is done on particular types of
populations to measure one or more variables that can be used to describe the
group of interest. Since it is a descriptive study, it is not aimed at proving a
hypothesis about a particular phenomenon. However, it is conducted to attain
as much information as possible from the learners’ textbooks as the basis for
designing instructional materials.
1. Educational Research and Development (R&D)
The researcher used Educational Research and Development (R&D) in
conducting her designing materials. Educational Research and Development
(R&D) is a process used to develop and validate educational product (Walter
R. Borg, 1983). Product here included not only material objects such as
textbook instructional materials but also referred to establish procedures and
processes such as a method of teaching or a method for organizing instruction.
The steps of this process are usually referred to as the R&D cycle which
consists of studying research findings pertinent to the product to be developed,
developing the product based on these finding, field testing it in the setting
where it will be used eventually and revising it to correct the deficiencies
found in the field testing stage.
The course designer selects five cycles out of ten because there are
some reasons why the course designer cannot apply the whole cycle. The
design of an R & D product does not need to be based on trial and error; there
are many validated methods of instructional technology. These methods cover
various aspects of R & D design; front-end analysis (needs assessment,
systems analysis, task analysis, analysis of skill hierarchies), typologies of
learning outcomes, the matching of instructional techniques to learning
outcomes, the match of learners characteristics to instructional methods,
meta-cognitive processes in learning, individualized instruction and domain
referenced assessment. The major steps in the R & D cycle used to develop
design materials are as follows:
a) Research and information collecting – includes review of literature,
classroom observations, and preparation of report.
b) Planning – includes defining skills, stating objectives determining
course sequence, and small scale feasibility testing.
instructional materials, handbooks and evaluation devices.
d) Preliminary field testing – conducted in one to three schools, using six
to twelve subjects. Interview, observational and questionnaire data are
colleted and analyzed.
e) Main product revision - revision of the product as suggested by the
preliminary field test results.
f) Main field testing – conducted in up to 15 schools with thirty to a
hundred subjects. Qualitative data on subjects’ pre-course and
post-course performance are collected and the results are evaluated with
respect to course objectives. Results are then compared against the data
from the control group, as appropriate.
g) Operational product revision –revision of the product as suggested by
main field test results.
h) Operational field testing - conducted in ten to thirty schools involving
forty to two hundred subjects. Interviews, observational and
questionnaire data is collected and analyzed.
i) Final product revision – revision of the product as suggested by
operational field test results.
j) Dissemination and implantation – report on the product at professional
meetings and in journals. Work with the publisher who assumes
commercial distribution. Monitor distribution to provide quality control.
The researcher chose five steps in conducting the research, which are as
a) Research and information collecting – including a review of literature,
classroom observations and preparations of a report.
The researcher used library research to conduct the review of
literature. A literature review is undertaken to collect research findings
and other information pertinent to the planned development. Some
purposes of the literature review is to determine the state of knowledge
in the area of concern, to locate research that could be used to develop a
basic instructional model, questioning and discussing skills to identify
specific techniques that teachers could use to accomplish these goals.
b) Planning – includes defining skills, stating objectives, determining the
course sequence, and small scale feasibility testing.
The researcher used an Instructional design model from Kemp
for the design materials to determine the goal, topics and general
purpose, learning objective, subject content, and teaching and learning
activities. Hutchinson and Water’s model designed materials used to
identify learner characteristic.
c) Develop the preliminary form of the product – including the preparation
of instructional materials, handbooks and evaluation devices.
The researcher designed the materials of Academic writing
using some theories of instructional design and various other sources.
This involved a wide range of tasks and materials designed to
supplement the instructional lessons, which were drafted, revised and
printed.
d) Preliminary field testing – included interviews, observational and
questionnaire data, which was collected and analyzed.
The researcher conducted interviews, and questionnaires to
obtain the data, which was then analyzed. The researcher made two
questionnaires; the first was distributed to the students of Dentistry.
The second was distributed to the respondents able to evaluate
the materials. The purpose of the preliminary field test is to obtain an
initial qualitative evaluation of the new educational product.
Questionnaires and interviews that served as guides to be used
in the preliminary field test were developed. In developing the
preliminary form of an educational product, the product must be
structured so as to permit obtaining as much feedback as possible from
the field test. Therefore, questionnaire and interview data should be
obtained from all participants.
e) Main product revision – revision of the product as suggested by the
The researcher revised the materials designed to improve the
designed materials. The purpose of the main field test was to determine
whether the educational products under development meet the
performance objectives, to determine the success of the new product in
meeting its objectives, and to collect information that can be used to
improve the course in its next revision. This cycle of field-testing and
revision would continue until the product meets the minimum
performance objectives set for it.
2. Need Surveys
The first survey is used in conducting a need survey in order to obtain
data about students’ interest, necessities, wants and lacks in learning English.
The survey is conducted by observing, distributing and gathering
questionnaires and through interviews. The information is focused on the
personal information of the respondents, the use of English textbooks, the
topics of the materials related to their work, respondents’ needs in the way of
study, and respondent’s opinions on English language learning.
B. Respondents
Since there were two types of surveys used in this study, there were
also two groups of respondents. The first group was the respondents of the
needs analysis survey and the second groups were the respondents of
materials evaluation survey.
1. The Respondents of the Needs Analysis Survey
The respondents of the survey study were first year Dentistry students
who took an English class in the first semester as part first year dentistry
curriculum. There were two hundred first year students of 2006 students
within the Dentistry Department who registered for the class. However, the
students who repeated the subject from the previous semester were not
included in this study. Also students who studied abroad were excluded from
the study because their extended study improved their skills well beyond those
of students whose highest level of English study was through Gadjah Mada
University.
2. The Respondents of Materials Evaluation Survey
The subject of materials evaluation survey were five evaluators,
including: one English lecturer from Sanata Dharma University and one
English lecturer from Gadjah Mada University who has ever been teaching
academic writing and has the knowledge of academic writing. One lecturer
in both spoken and written English and has knowledge about academic
writing in the Dentistry Field, and two English Instructors from the language
center who have experience in academic writing for ESP, EAP, EOP, and so
on.
C. Setting
This study was conducted in the Dentistry Department of Gadjah
Mada University. The time needed to do the observation and interview were
around seven weeks from September to November 2006 for students’ needs
analysis and the specific time to do the questionnaires for lecturers’
evaluations were around three weeks during July 2007. The first week of
September was used to ask for a letter of permission from the Dean of the
Dentistry Faculty, which was followed by sending a letter of permission to an
English lecturer to enter his class and ask permission to use students’ writing
assignments. There was a short observation period from which to conduct the
research because of the National Holiday. The researcher used one particular
class as a source of her data. It was a large class because it considered of 200
students of which 150 students were first year students and the rest had
repeated the subject from the previous semester. The class seemed crowded
when all students attended the class together and it was difficult for the
lecturer to conduct teaching and learning activities intentionally with such a
large class. During the first meeting all students attended the class. At the
population under permission from the English lecturer.
D. Instruments
In conducting the study, the researcher used three types of instruments
to gather data and answer the problem formulation: questionnaires, interviews
and observations checklist. They were explained as follows:
1. Questionnaires
The instrument used for this study is a set of questionnaires designed
to gather information about the needs and to find out the gap of the students’
needs to match with the academic setting. The questionnaire consists of three
sections: personal details and English writing needs at the Dentistry
Department of Gadjah Mada University.
Table 3.1 The First Questionnaire (Need Analysis)
Academic writing Question outlines Points
1 2 3 4 5
General writing Is writing important? Group work
Peer-editing Peer-assessment Worksheets Structure of writing Model of writing
Free writing
Types of academic writing Skills in writing Grammar or language focus.
The researcher chose three main topics and for each topic a main idea
was developed that would be used as a questionnaire outline before the
questionnaires was written. From the question outlines 16 questions were
designed for the questionnaire. The researcher made five categories for the
questionnaire’s assessment. The researcher used a scale to rate each category
as a percentage, as follows:
1 = absolutely disagree with statement, ranges between 0% and 20%
2 = disagree with statement, ranges between 21% and 40%
3 = neither agree or disagree with statement, range between 41% and 60%
4 = agree with statement, ranges between 61% and 80 %
5 = absolutely agree with statement ranges between 81% and 100%
The researcher discussed this questionnaire in chapter four. In
conducting data analysis of this questionnaire, the researcher explained in
paragraphing sentence using percentage assessment and a scale rate category.
2. Interviews
considered a sufficient sample size to collect the information needed. The researcher discussed the data analysis in chapter four.
3. Observation Checklist
If the researchers wanted to enrich their understanding of language
learning and teaching time was required to be spent in classroom. The
researcher attended the regular class of first year Dentistry at Gadjah Mada
University. It was necessary to determine what current English comprehension
and skills the students have, in order to design and create a suitable
curriculum. The teaching and learning activities were observed within the
class. The researcher observed what the roles of the teacher in the classroom
were. It was necessary to determine how the lecturer created a writing
environment in the class and how the lecturer managed the class.
Table 3.2 Tally Sheet for Analyzing Classroom Interaction
No. Observation tally sheet
1. Lecturer asks a display questions (i.e. a question to which he knows the answer) 2. Lecturer asks a referential question (i.e. a question to which he does not know the
answer)
3. Lecturer explains a grammatical point
4. Lecturer explains meaning of a vocabulary item 5. Lecturer explains functional point
6. Lecturer explains point relating to the content (theme/topic) of the lesson 7. Lecturer gives instructions/directions
The researcher made the tally sheet for analyzing classroom activities
during class visits and observed the teaching-learning activities in the class.
This sheet would be used as a guideline in teaching and learning activities.
E. Writing Procedure (Content Error Analysis)
The researcher used students’ writing as the error analysis. Students
were given free writing as the first writing draft to ascertain the students’
weaknesses and strengths. However, those compositions were later analyzed
to observe the types of errors made. The researcher used one class meeting to
conduct the writing task with permission from the English lecturer. She took
75 respondents as her writing sample from 87 respondents because 12
respondents were repeating the subject.
The researcher used the minimum requirements to assess the writing
error:
No. Minimum requirements
1. Incorrect use of word caused by transfer or awkward expression and words. 2. Subject verb agreement
3. Incorrect selection of word 4. Incorrect use of tense
5. Incorrect use or deletion of preposition 6. Incorrect use of verb be
7. Incorrect use of auxiliary 8. Incorrect use of gerund 9. Incorrect use of noun 10. Redundant use of words
11 Incorrect use of voice
12. Incorrect or omission use of article 13. Incorrect or omission of pronoun 14. Incorrect plural
work. The students’ written work errors in each criterion would be presented
in percentage.
F. Data Gathering
There were two major categories of data obtained from this survey.
The first was from the learners and the second was from the English lecturers.
This data was obtained from observations, closed questions, open questions
and interviews. The first step in collecting the data was observing the class
and distributing the questionnaires to students. This was done in order to find
out the learners’ needs for learning English. The researcher distributed the
designed materials, questionnaire and conducted some informal interviews
with the English lecturers to obtain their recommendation, criticism, and
suggestions.
G. Data Analysis
The researcher analyzed the data attained through observation,
interviews and questionnaires. There were two ways of analyzing the data.
The data for the needs analysis were grouped and analyzed in order to the
design of the materials that fitted the learners’ needs. The data collected for
evaluating the design materials were analyzed to find out the modus, median,
and mean. Brown (1988:66-67) defines the mean as the sum of all the values
in a distribution divided by the number of the values. The median is the point
