THE TEACHING OF LITERATURE USING READER-RESPONSE APPROACH (A CASE STUDY OF THE THIRD GRADE STUDENTS OF ONE PRIVATE UNIVERSITY IN SUMEDANG).

(1)

1 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background of research

Literature has been a subject at schools in many countries, and it has been

offered since primary to tertiary education particularly in ESL/EFL learning. In

Indonesia context, literature is also included in the subject of language like ethnic

language, Indonesian, or English. According to Purves, Rogers and Soter (1990)

literature as a body of knowledge, is considered important and it keeps knowledge

itself, practice and choice, which has complex interrelationships. Therefore, in order

to explain this interrelationship, it is essential to discuss the importance of literature

in process of the teaching of literature.

There are several reasons why literature should be taught and learnt. Macmillan

(2004) says literature has several functions. First, literature allows learners to live

thousand of lives in a short time, and gains little experience from each of them.

Second, literature is also considered to offer them insights, which they apply to life.

This gives them insights and feelings into other people’s minds that will be perceived

as being more human, because it relates to emotions rather than logic. The last,

literature can give them some experiences, although it will be limited.

To do this, in Indonesia, as stated by Suyono (2005), the aim of language and

literature teaching at schools is students can read, write, listen, speak proficiently, and

(5)

2 which they face some problems. Like in one private university in Sumedang, where

the study was conducted, the teaching of literature still has been unsuccessfully to

obtain that aims above. To some extents, the weakness of the teaching of literature

was caused by several problems which faced not only by lecturer himself, but also by

students themselves. Commonly some problems have similarities as some previous

research findings, which have been found in the teaching of literature using

reader-response technique. However, other differ which were based on lecturer and students’

problems of one private university, in Sumedang.

Based on description above, the study attempted to investigate the teaching of

literature, which covered the aim of teaching literature, materials given to learners,

teaching literature techniques and approach, and assessment of teaching literature.

The study also attempted to find out some problems, particularly in the teaching of

literature in EFL context, especially in the research site.

Although literature has been taught and learnt for years, there has been limited

research concerning the teaching of literature, the effectiveness of the study of

literature, the appropriate materials with suitable techniques and approaches applied

by the teachers/the lecturers, and assessment to evaluate the teaching of literature.

1.2 Research Aims

(6)

3 (1) To investigate the teaching of literature conducted at one private university in

Sumedang, particularly in terms of the teaching process, materials and

assessment.

(2) To identify the problems (if any) faced by both lecturer and students.

(3) To find out how the lecturer and students solve the problems.

1.3. Research Questions

In line with the purpose of the study, this study attempted to address the

following research questions.

(1) How is the teaching of literature using reader-response at one private university

in Sumedang, conducted?

(2) What problems (if any) do lecturer and students face in the teaching of literature

using reader-response approach?

(3) How do lecturer and students solve the problems?

1.4. Significance of the study

This study significantly attempted to (1) investigate teaching literature at one

private university in Sumedang using reader-response approach; (2) identify the

problems (if any) faced by both lecturer and students during teaching and learning

literature process; (3) find out solutions of problems.

Then the results of this study may become essential information and source in the

(7)

4

The results of the study, which will also be concerned with the problems, are expected

to be a basis for policy-makers to make a policy in the development of the teaching of

literature.

Besides, the results of the study are also expected as an analysis of the

implementation of literature curriculum and its syllabi for the literature subjects, such

as ‘Introduction to literature’, ‘Poetry’, ‘Prose’ and ‘Drama’ reflected in the classroom

activities, whether or not those subjects have attained the objectives of literature

teaching.

Hopefully the results of the study are also expected to allow lecturer and students’

awareness of the importance of literature, and develop them to love literature for

further researches and investigations. The institution of research site and staff are also

expected to understand and pay more attention to students’ needs, interests and

intentions in developing literature.

1.5. Organization of Thesis

This thesis is actually organized into five chapters namely:

1.5.1. Chapter I is introduction which covers: background of research; research

aims; research questions; significance of the study; and organization of thesis.

1.5.2. Chapter II mentions relevant review of literature.

1.5.2. Chapter III describes methodology of the study.

1.5.3. Chapter IV elaborates findings of the study and discussion.

(8)

(9)

(10)

18 CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

This chapter elaborates ways of collecting data from the field through

documentary review, observation, and interview. These techniques are quite

appropriate with this case study to gain essential information relevant to the topic.

The starting point for this section is considering research site and participant of the

study, research design, data collection techniques, and data analysis.

3.1 Research site and participant of the study

This study was conducted at one private university in Sumedang, which is

located on Jalan Angkrek Situ No. 19 Sumedang. Actually, this institution has two

level degrees like diploma and graduate degree. In diploma degree, literature is given

only two credits in the subject ‘Introduction to English Literature’. Meanwhile in

graduate degree, literature is given eight credits, offered in the subjects ‘Introduction

to English Literature’, ‘Drama’, ‘Poetry’, and ‘Prose’.

Furthermore, for conducting teaching and learning process, the institution only

has two rooms and a simple language laboratory. In addition, its small library was

joined together with other institutions which provides uncompleted books and

references. Furthermore, the number of students is 150 as a whole, from first year to

(11)

19 There were some considerations and reasons why the researcher selected one of

private university in Sumedang, as the research site of the study. This institution is a

place where the researcher teaches English and literature. The results of the study are

expected to help to the policy which will allow for the improvement of the teaching

of literature in this institution including models of the teaching of literature, materials,

and assessment.

In terms of participant, this study only took two groups of participants. The first

group contained one class namely the third years students who were studying

literature course, namely the subject ‘Introduction to English Literature’ in the fifth

semester. This class consisted of twenty-five students who were talk-active compared

with other levels. It was their first experience in learning literature.

Meanwhile the second group included a lecturer who taught literature in the

subject ‘Introduction to English Literature, and three students selected based on their

level achievements: higher, middle, and lower achievement, as suggested by the

lecturer. It was considered that they represented other participant concerning their

knowledge and ability on each level. In addition, limited time and tools became

important aspects to concern. The lecturer and the students selected as the

respondents, were interviewed to check out their consistency between what had been

(12)

20 3.2 Research Design

This study used a qualitative research design particularly a case study. This

qualitative research design was considered appropriate in the study, because it

allowed the researcher to explore more about the teaching of literature and its

problem and solution. Further, this study paid attention to what lecturer and students

do in the teaching of literature to be documented and analyzed, which relevant to the

characteristics of a case study, as stated by Creswell. (1994, p. 2) and Burn (1994. p.

314).

This case study was divided in two steps, namely major study through

long-persistent observation and minor study through interview and document analysis.

Observation was administered through long term observation, starting at September

29th to December 19th 2006. Then interview was held twice on January 8th and 9th

2007, that purposed to complete and to check the consistency to what has been found

in observation. Meanwhile, documents analysis was analyzed after observation and

interview.

3.3 Data Collection techniques

This part clarifies data collection techniques applied in this study, such as:

documents analysis, observation and interviews.

3.3.1 Documents analysis

The document analysis in this study were the syllabus of the subject

(13)

21 Sumedang 2005, the revised-version, and the students’ tasks. This document analysis

is considered important in this study, as Merriam suggests, that documentary material

could be as data which did not much differ from using interviews or observation.

(1988, p. 115).

This document analysis aimed to find whether or not there was a consistency

between the syllabus demand and its implementation. In analyzing the syllabus and

students’ tasks, the researcher tried to identify the content of the syllabus, its

weaknesses and strength. Meanwhile students’ tasks was analyzed to identify the

content of the teaching of literature and its problems. This document analysis

answered the research question number: 1), i.e. “How is the teaching of literature

using reader-response at one private university in Sumedang conducted?” 2) What

problems (if any) do the lecturer and students face in the teaching of literature using

reader-response approach?”

3.3.2 Observation

Applying observation here meant, to portray what actually the lecturer and

students did in the teaching of literature activity more accurately. This observation

was functioning as a continuation of preliminary study which had been conducted for

more than three months since September 29th to December 19th 2006. In this

observation, the researcher’s role was as the observer-as-participant which mainly

concerned on what the lecturer and the students did in the classroom, and helped to

(14)

22 Then, during observation, the teaching of literature activity always started at ten

o’clock, sometimes undertaken on Tuesday and Friday in one of other school’s room,

because the rooms were full by the first and the second year students at ten o’ clock,

so the institution borrowed one from another institution. The teaching of literature

activity usually was conducted for 100 minutes for two credits. It was divided into

three sections namely: first section usually for opening the lecture, second section for

discussion and doing activities, and the last for closing the lecture.

Next, during observation, the researcher wrote what the lecturer and students

said, and sometimes she did something to help the implementation of reader-response

approach, since the opening to end of the lecture (Van Lier. 1988). To attain the

inquiry, filed notes, audio-recorder, and camera constituted useful instrument, so that

the researcher could gain the data both verbal and non-verbal communications easily,

that might appear during the process of teaching and learning literature. During

observation, the researcher also sometimes helped to teach literature when the

lecturer came late in order to gain essential information appropriate with

reader-response model.

This observation also answered the research question number: 1), i.e. “How is

the teaching of literature using reader-response at one private university in Sumedang

conducted?” 2) What problems (if any) do the lecturer and students face in the

teaching of literature using reader-response approach?” and 3) “How do lecturer and

(15)

23 3.3.3 Interview

Interview was taken as instrument for collecting data which aimed to gain the

information missed in observation and to check the consistency between what the

respondents had done during observation with what they had said, and to construct

more valid data gain from the respondent (Alwasilah. 2003). Semi-structured

interview was a kind of interview taken by the researcher to give freedom to the

participant in responding to the questions themselves. This interview was indicated to

four people, including: a lecture of the subject ‘Introduction to English Literature’

named Mr. UP, and three students ‘NN’, ‘RAG’, ‘DH’, selected based on their

involvement and their level achievement in teaching and learning literature process as

the lecturer’ s recommendation.

Then the interview was administered in the researcher’s room, so that the

respondents would reply more comfortably and feel secure. It had been conducted

twice, namely on 8th January 2007 at ten o’clock to the lecturer, Mr. UP, and on 9th

January 2007 to three respondents, NN, RAG and DH at one o’clock p.m. Each

respondent spent less than an hour after they followed the lecture. During the

interview, the researcher provided tape-recorder to record and transcribe what the

respondent said.

This interview data was intended to answer the research question number 1),

i.e. “How is the teaching of literature using reader-response at one private university

(16)

24 face in the teaching of literature using reader-response approach?” and 3) “How do

lecturer and students solve the problems?”

3.4 Data Analysis

As Cresswell (1994, p. 153. in Tesch, 1990) asked since there is no “right way”

for analyzing data, the data gained in the study were analyzed eclectically. What the

researcher did in analyzing data, will be discussed in the following steps.

Data taken from documents analysis was analyzed by collecting the syllabus

and students’ tasks, then, they were identified to find the content and its problems.

Furthermore, data from observation was analyzed in steps: first, the data were

categories into central themes, as suggested by Van Lier (1988) relevant to the

research question. Second, the data were analyzed to answer the research questions.

Similarly the data from interview were analyzed in steps. First of all, the researcher

transcribed all the data from the recording. Second, the researcher categorized the

data into central themes (Kuale. 1996), relevant to the research questions.

Third, the researcher presented the interview data in a condensed version of

interview data. Fourth, the researcher tried to interpret the data, comparing what the

participants said with what the theory says, as presented in chapter II, particularly to

do with the teaching of literature, as suggested by the reader-response theory,

(17)

25 Concluding remark

This chapter has presented the research methodology applied in this study. It

(18)

(19)

75

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

After discussion of findings in chapter four, finally this thesis comes to the last

part, that is, conclusions and recommendations. The conclusions, in line with the

research questions will be to do with three aspects, namely: 1) “How is the teaching

of literature using reader-response at one private university in Sumedang

conducted?”; 2) “What problems (if any) do lecturer and students face in the

teaching of literature using reader-response?”; and 3) “How do lecturer and students

solve the problems?” Moreover, the recommendations will also deal with aspects to

be proposed to the institution as the research site as for further research.

A. Conclusions

Data obtained from all sources indicate that the teaching of literature used

reader-response approach in the research site was, to some extents relevant to the

theory of reader-response theory as suggested by Rosenblatt (1976), and other

supporting theory like Purves, Soter, and Rogers (1990). This is particularly to do

with the role of the lecturer in applying the principles of reader-response approach to

invite students’ response. However, concerning the materials given to the students,

the lecturer still refers to the teaching orientation than learning orientation which he

(20)

76

of inviting students’ response, the lecturer still applied limited and inefficient

techniques, which he preferred to implement discussion technique almost in the

whole meetings.

In terms of the problems, this study finds out that some problems in the teaching

of literature using reader-response approach, support the findings of the previous

research of the teaching of literature, especially that underpinned the theory of

reader-response. Some difficulties faced by the teacher were, namely: teaching-based

orientation than learning-based orientation which is lack of efficient techniques;

neglects out-bond learning; and lack of identifying students’ interest and needs.

Moreover, from the perspective of the students, the difficulties were to do with: lack

of practice of extended writing; low reading habit of literary work; lack of capacity to

interpret literary work; neglect students’ creativity; and need ample time to explore

initial response to text.

Finally, regarding the solutions to the problems emerged, some activities that

the lecturer did also to some extent found relevant with the findings from previous

researches. They were: growing motivation of reading literary work; identifying

students’ interest and needs; thinking aloud; and employing talking and writing

strategies. However, there are some solutions still ignored by the lecturer, like

embarking out-bound learning; giving guidance to write; and triggering students’

(21)

77 B. Some Recommendations

First, in the syllabus it is stated that the aim of the teaching literature is only to

give knowledge and comprehension about English literary work to students. This is

inconsistent with the suggestion of Purves, Soter and Rogers (1990). The teaching of

literature should promote individuality, understanding and culture. Therefore, the

policy maker of the institution should construct an appropriate literature curriculum,

in order to expand both the lecturer and the students’ knowledge and experience.

Second, concerning the problems of the teaching literature using

reader-response, the institution should provide appropriate and comfortable facilities

including classroom, teaching tools, books and other sources, so that both the lecturer

and the students are easier to access information. Then it should be constructed an

obligation to read literary works, for those who become students in this institution.

The obligation of reading literary works is classified into three levels of reading from

simple literary works to complex ones. Then categorization of reading level should

consist of elementary, intermediate, and advanced reading, which is relevant with the

amount of literary works for each level, that could be managed appropriately. This

solution coincide with Ismail’s research finding (1999).

Finally, further research should be conducted in other context and levels of

education to appreciate literary work, so that students would have good

communication of English in both spoken and written form. Therefore, the teaching

(22)

78

students’ English. It also suggested that the principles of reader-response approach to

the teaching of literature should be applied more comprehensibly, to enable students

to develop their imaginative capacity, which of great importance in other context and

(23)

(24)

79 REFERENCES

Akhmadi, Muksin. 1989. Strategi Belajar-Mengajar: Keterampilan Berbahasa dan

Apresiasi Sastra. Malang: YA3.

Alwasilah, A.C. 2000. Perspektif Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris di Indonesia dalam

Konteks Persaingan Global. Bandung: Andira.

--- 2006. Pengajaran Berbasis Sastra. Pikiran Rakyat. Edisi Rabu 7 Desember.

Beach. In Press. The Creative Development of Reading: Using Autobiographical

Experiences to Interpret Literature. Cited in Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The United States of America: The National

Council of All English Teachers.

--- In Marshall. 1987. In Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The United States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.

Bleich, D. 1986. Gender Interest in Reading and Language. In E. Flynn & P. Schweickart (Eds), Gender and Reading. 13-38. Baltimore: Johns Hopkin Press.

Brunner. 1986. Cited in Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The United States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.

Burn, R. 1994. Introduction to Research Methods. Second edition. Australia: Longman Australia Pty Ltd.

Christie, Frances. 2005. Language Education in the Primary Years. Australia: University of New South Wales Press Ltd.

Cresswell, J.W. 1994. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among

Five Traditions: London: SAGE Publication.

Ericson, B.O. 1984. A descriptive Study of the Individual and Group responses of

three 10th grade readers to two short story and two textbook selections. Cited

in Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The United States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers

(25)

80 Flynn, Elizabeth. 1986. Gender and Reading. In Elizabeth Flynn, and Patrocinio Schweickart, eds. Gender and Reading. Baltimore: Johns Hopkin Press. In Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The United States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.

Freeman & Freeman. Between Words: Access to Second Language Acquisition. Heinemann: Portsmouth, NH.

Hade, D. 1988. Children, Stories, and Narrative Transformations. Research in the

Teaching of English 2: 310-26. In Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The United States of America: The National Council of All English

Teachers.

Harmer, J. 2000. The Practice of English Teaching. England: Longman.

Heathcote. 1980. Cited in Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The United States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.

Hook. 1978. In Saxby, M. & Hoogstad, V. 1991. Teaching Literature to Adolescents. Australia: National Library Australia.

Horatius (65-8 SM). Cited in Akhmadi, Muksin. 1989. Strategi Belajar-Mengajar:

Keterampilan Berbahasa dan Apresiasi Sastra. Malang: YA3.

Hudson, W.H. 1964. in Frederich, T.J. 1986. Teaching Poetry. Jakarta: Depdikbud.

Ismail, Taufik. 1999. Pengajaran Sastra yang Efektif dan Efisien. Yogyakarta: Balai Bahasa.

Isaeni. N. 2004. Literature in An EFL Classroom. At the English Department of UPI Badung. Unpublished Thesis. PPS UPI Bandung.

Rudi, R.I. 2004. Literature Instruction in EFL Classroom. At the English Deparrtment of UPI Bandung. Unpublished Thesis. PPS UPI Bandung.

Jacobsen, M. 1982. Looking for Literary Space: The Willing Suspension of Disbelief

Revisited. Cited in Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The

United States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.

Kuale. 1996. In Emi Emilia’s paper.

(26)

81 Lytle. 1982. In Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The United

States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.

Marshall. 1987. The Effects of Writing on Students’ Understanding of Literary Texts. Cited in Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The United States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.

McConnel, M. 1983. The Effect of Literature Exposure and Writing Practice on the

Original Narrative Writing of Second-grade Children. Cited in Farrel & Squire.

1990. Transactions with Literature. The United States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.

McKay. In Frederich T.J. 1986. Teaching Poetry. Jakarta: Depdikbud.

Mcmillan, J.H. & Schumacher, S. 2004. Research in Education: A Conceptual

Introduction. Fifth Edition. The United States: Afddison Wesley Longman, Inc.

Merriam.1988. In Rudi, R.I. 2004. Literature Instruction in EFL Classroom. At the English Deparrtment of UPI Bandung. Unpublished Thesis. PPS UPI Bandung.

Newkirk, T. 1984. Looking for Trouble: A Way to Unmask Our Reading. Cited in Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The United States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.

Probst, R.E. 1987. Transactional Theory in the Teaching of Literature. ERIC Digest.

Purve, S.C & Soter, A.Q. & Rogers, T. 1990. How Porcupines Makes Love II.

Teaching a Response-Centered Curriculum. Porsmouth, NH: Heineman.

Rani, S.A. & Sugiarti, E. 1991. Ikhtisar Roman Sastra Indonesia. Bandung: Pustaka Jaya.

Richard, J.C.001. Curriculum Development in Language Teaching. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

Rogers.T. 1987. In Purve, S.C & Soter, A.Q. & Rogers, T. 1990. How Porcupines

Makes Love II. Teaching a Response-Centered Curriculum. Porsmouth, NH:

Heineman.

Rosenblatt, Louise. 1976. Farrel & Squire. 1990. Transactions with Literature. The United States of America: The National Council of All English Teachers.

--- 1978. The Reader, The Text, The Poem. The Transactional

Theory of the Literary Work. The United States of America: Southern Illinois

(27)

82 Rusyana, Y. 2005. In Apresiasi Sastra di Sekolah Dasar. Buletin Pusat Perbukuan,

volume II, Januari-Juni 005. ISSN 1411-5476. Jakarta: Depdiknas.

Sardjono, Partini. 1992. Pengantar Pengkajian Sastra. Bandung: Pustaka Jaya.

Saxby, M. & Hoogstad, V. 1991. Teaching Literature to Adolescents. Australia: National Library Australia.

Showalter, E. 2003. In Karin Dienst. 003. Showalter Inspires Conversation about

Teaching Literature. February 17. Vol.9.No. 16. Princeton Buletin.

Suyono. 1980. Pendekatan Keterampilan Proses dalam Pengajaran Sastra di SMA: Sebuah Kajian Selintas. Malang: HISKI.

Van Lier. 1988. In Emi Emilia’ s paper.

Whardhani, I.G.K. 1981. Cited in Akhmadi Muksin. 1989. Strategi

Belajar-Mengajar: Keterampilan Berbahasa dan Apresiasi Sastra. Malang: YA3.

Widarmanto, T. 2003. In Gerbang. Majalah Pendidikan. Edisi 4 th III Oktober 2003, ISSN: 1412-0577.

(28)