• Tidak ada hasil yang ditemukan

t ing 0807990 table of content

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2017

Membagikan "t ing 0807990 table of content"

Copied!
6
0
0

Teks penuh

(1)

i

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ... 1

1.1. Background of the Study ... 1

1.2. Research Question ... 4

1.3. Research objectives ... 5

1.4. Significance of Study ... 5

1.5. Definition of Key Terms ... 6

1.6. Organization of the Thesis ... 7

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW ... 8

2.1. Historical Overview of Scaffolding ... 8

2.1.1 Piaget’s Constructivism ... 8

2.1.2 Vygotsky’s Constructivism ... 9

2.2. Instructional Scaffolding ... 12

2.2.1 Definition of scaffolding ... 12

2.2.2 Types of Scaffolding ... 15

2.3. Genre-Based Approach ... 19

2.3.1 Definition of Genre-based Approach ... 20

2.3.2 Basic Principle of Genre-Based Approach ... 21

2.3.3 Scaffolding as a Basic Principle in Genre-based Approach ... 23

2.4. Exposition Texts ... 27

2.4.1 Definition of Exposition Text ... 27

2.4.2 Types of Exposition text ... 28

2.4.3 Schematic Structure of Hortatory Exposition ... 28

2.4.4 Language feature of Hortatory Exposition ... 30

2.5 Systemic Functional Grammar ... 31

2.5.1 Defining Systemic Functional Grammar ... 31

2.5.2 Transitivity System ... 33

2.5.3 Modality System ... 38

2.8 Related Research ... 38

CHAPTER THREE. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ... 42

3.1. Research Design... 42

3.2. Research Site ... 43

3.3. Participants ... 43

(2)

ii

3.4.1 Observation ... 44

3.4.2 Interview ... 45

3.4.3 Documentation of Students Text ... 46

3.5. Data Analysis ... 47

3.5.1 Observation ... 47

3.5.2 Interview ... 50

3.5.3 Documentation of Students’ Text ... 50

3.5.4 Research Validity ... 50

CHAPTER FOUR: DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION ... 51

4.1 Actualization of Scaffolding ... 51

4.1.1 Types of Scaffolding ... 51

4.1.1.1 Offering Explanation ... 52

4.1.1.2 Modeling ... 55

4.1.1.3 Inviting Students’ participation... 58

4.1.1.4 Verifying and Clarifying Students’ Understanding ... 59

4.1.1.5 Inviting Students Contribute to Clues ... 61

4.1.1.6 Bridging ... 62

4.1.1.7 Schema Building ... 64

4.1.1.8 Developing Metacognition... 65

4.1.1.9 Content Scaffolding ... 66

4.1.1.10 Strategic Scaffolding ... 69

4.1.1.11 procedural Scaffolding ... 69

4.1.1.12 Summary of Scaffolding provided by Teacher A and B... 70

4.1.2 The Relation of Scaffolding to Each Curriculum Cycle ... 72

4.1.2.1 Scaffolding in Building Filed of Knowledge (BKoF) ... 73

4.1.2.2 Scaffolding in Modeling of Text (MoT) ... 75

4.1.2.3 Scaffolding in Joint Construction of Text (JCoT) ... 78

4.1.2.4 Scaffolding in Independent Construction of Text (ICoT)... 80

4.1.3 Teacher Awareness of Scaffolding ... 81

4.1.3.1 Teacher Awareness of the Scaffolding Concept ... 82

4.1.3.2 Teacher Awareness of Scaffolding Realization in the Classroom ... 88

4.1.3.2.1 Offering Explanation ... 89

4.1.3.2.2. Modeling ... 92

4.1.3.2.3 Inviting Students’ Participation ... 94

4.1.3.2.4 Verifying and Clarifying Students’ Understanding ... 96

4.1.3.2.5 Inviting Students to contribute to clues ... 98

4.1.3.2.6 Bridging ... 99

4.1.3.2.7 Schema Building ... 101

4.1.3.2.8 Developing Metacognition... 103

4.1.3.2.9 Content Scaffolding ... 104

4.1.3.2.10 Strategic Scaffolding ... 106

4.1.3.2.11 Procedural Scaffolding... 106

4.1.3. 3 Teacher’s Awareness and Realization of Scaffolding ... 107

4.2 Students’ Progress in Writing Hortatory Exposition ... 108

(3)

iii 4.2.1.1 Analysis of Schematic structure and social function of Text 1

and Text 2 ... 110

4.2.1.2 Analysis of Linguistic Feature ... 114

4.2.2 Analysis of Middle Achiever Students of Teacher 1 ... 119

4.2.2.1 Analysis of Schematic Structure and social function of text 3 and text 4 ... 119

4.2.2.2 Analysis of Linguistic Feature ... 122

4.2.3 Analysis of Low Achiever Students’ Text of Teacher 1... 126

4.2.3.1 Analysis of Schematic Structures and Social Function of Text 5 and text 6 ... 127

4.2.3.2 Analysis of Linguistic Features ... 129

4.2.4. Analysis of High Achiever Students’ Text of Teacher 2 ... 133

4.2.4.1 Analysis of Schematic structure and social function of Text 1 and Text 2 ... 133

4.2.4.2 Analysis of Linguistic Feature ... 137

4.2.5 Analysis of Middle Achiever Students of Teacher 2 ... 140

4.2.5.1 Analysis of Schematic Structure and social function of text 3 and text 4 ... 140

4.2.5.2 Analysis of Linguistic Feature ... 143

4.2.6 Analysis of Low Achiever Students’ Text of Teacher 2... 146

4.2.6.1 Analysis of Schematic Structures and Social Function of Text 5 and text 6 ... 146

4.2.6.2 Analysis of Linguistic Features ... 148

CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION ... 150

5.1 Conclusions ... 150

5.2 Suggestion ... 153

BIBLIOGRAPHY ... 154

APPENDIX 1: Semi- Structured Interview with Teachers... 162

APPENDIX 2: Students’ Text ... 165

APPENDIX 3: Condensed Version of Data from Interview with Teachers ... 167

APPENDIX 4: Samples of Reading Materials ... 175

(4)

iv LIST OF FIGURE

Figure 2.1 Representation of Purposeful Scaffolding ... 18

Figure 2.2 Cycles and Stages of Learning ... 27

Figure 2.3 Relational Processes ... 37

(5)

v LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 The Summary of process type and participant roles ... 37

Table 4.1 Types of Scaffolding Instruction used by Teacher A ... 70

Table 4.2 Types of Scaffolding Instruction used by Teacher B ... 71

Table 4.3 Scaffolding Instruction used by teacher in BKoF Stage ... 73

Table 4.4 Scaffolding Instruction used by Teacher in Modeling Stage ... 77

Table 4.5 Scaffolding Instruction used by Teachers in JcoT Stage ... 79

Table 4.6 Scaffolding Instruction used by Teachers in ICoT ... 80

Table 4.7 Summary of Scaffolding Instruction of Research Finding ... 81

Table 4.8 Text 1 Produced by High Achiever student ... 110

Table 4.9 Text 2 Produced by High Achiever student ... 111

Table 4.10 The Summary of Schematic Structures Produced by High Achiever Student ... 114

Table 4.11 The Summary of Linguistic Features of Texts Produced by the High Achiever Students ... 114

Table 4.12 Text 3 Produced by Middle Achiever Student ... 119

Table 4.13 Text 4 Produced by medium Achiever student ... 121

Table 4.14 The Summary of Schematic Structures produced by Middle Achiever student ... 122

Table 4.15 The summary of Linguistic Features of Text Produced by Middle Achiever Student ... 123

Table 4.16 Text 5 Produced by Low Achiever Student ... 127

Table 4.17 Text 6 Produced by Low achiever Student ... 127

Table 4.18 The Summary of Schematic Structure Produced by Low Achiever student ... 129

Table 4.19 The Summary of Linguistic Features Produced by Low Achiever Student ... 130

Table 4.20 Text 1 Produced by High Achiever Student ... 133

Table 4.21 Text 2 Produced by High Achiever Student ... 134

Table 4.22 The Summary of Schematic Structures Produced by High Achiever Student ... 136

Table 4.23 Linguistic Features of Text 1 and Text 2 ... 137

Table 4.24 Text 3 Produced by Middle Achiever Student ... 140

Table 4.25 Text 4 Produced by Middle Achiever Student ... 141

Table 4.26 The Summary of Schematic Structures by Middle Achiever Student ... 143

Table 4.27 Linguistic Features of Text 3 and Text 4 ... 143

Table 4.28 text 5 produced by Low Achiever Student ... 146

Table 4.29 Text 6 produced by Low Achiever Student ... 146

Table 4.30 The Summary of Schematic Structure Produced by Low Achiever Student ... 147

(6)

vi

Gambar

Figure 2.1 Representation of Purposeful Scaffolding ...................................

Referensi

Dokumen terkait

DEVELOPING STUDENTS’ WRITING ABILITY THROUGH READING TO LEARN PROGRAM Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu.. TABLE

The Implementation of Extensive Listening and its Effect on the Students’ Listening Skill Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu.. TABLE

CLASSROOM INTERACTION: A CASE STUDY OF STUDENT TALK IN AN EFL CLASSROOM Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edui. TABLE

The Process of teaching literary translation: a case study at a state university in Bandung Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu.. TABLE

4 The Result of Reliability Test on Students' Responses toward Teacher Written Indirect Feedback in Writing Recount Text Questionnaire...33.

Teaching writing multimodal recount text using genre based approach. Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu

Ta ble 2.3 Diagnostic Assessment Checklist for Assessing Learner’s writing 34 Table 2.4 Example of an Abstract involving more than one tense

Perceived self efficacy vs actual teaching performance : A case in teaching writing Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu.. TABLE