LESSON PLANNING:
THE DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION
IN THE TEACHING OF ENGLISH
(A Case Study in a Senior High School in Cianjur, West Java)
A THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the
Master’s Degree in English Education
By:
BADRIAH
1006940
ENGLISH EDUCATION PROGRAM
SCHOOL OF POST GRADUATE STUDIES
INDONESIA UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION
==========================================================
Lesson Planning:
The Development and
Implementation
in the Teaching of English
(A Case Study in a Senior High School in Cianjur, West Java)
Oleh Badriah
Dra. UNINUS Bandung, 1992
Sebuah Tesis yang diajukan untuk memenuhi salah satu syarat memperoleh gelar Magister Pendidikan (M.Pd.) pada Fakultas Pendidikan Bahasa dan Seni
© Badriah 2013
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia Juli 2013
Hak Cipta dilindungi undang-undang.
APPROVAL PAGE
This thesis entitled “Lesson Planning: the Development and Implementation in the
Teaching of English (A Case Study in a Senior High School in Cianjur, West Java)” has been approved by the supervisor.
Approved by: Supervisor,
LESSON PLANNING:
THE DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION IN THE TEACHING OF ENGLISH
(A Case Study in a Senior High School in Cianjur, West Java)
ABSTRACT
This study aims to investigate how English teachers develop and implement lesson plans, and what teachers consider as obstacles during lesson planning. The study employed a case study design conducted in a senior high school in Cianjur, West Java. The study involved an English teacher with ten years of teaching experience. All data were gathered from several sources, including a sketchy-lesson plan for a curriculum cycle, scripted-sketchy-lesson plans, eight weeks non-participant classroom observations and semi-structured interview upon the completion of teaching-learning activities. The study revealed three findings. First, as the result of document analysis revealed, the teacher developed two kinds of lesson plan: the sketchy-lesson plan and scripted-lesson plan. The former was developed prior to its implementation as the proposal of teaching-learning activities. The later was developed upon the teaching completion to record what the teacher had successfully performed in the classroom to inform subsequent classes. Secondly, the classroom observations revealed that despite the fact that the teacher did not use any lesson plan as navigator during its implementation, the teacher showed her expertise in delivering the instructional events and helping students to undergo learning experiences. In addition, the teacher reliance on the textbook during the teaching-learning activities and deviation from lesson plans emerged as her self-conviction that lesson plans were merely to fulfill the administration requirement. Last but not least, as the interview data indicated, the teacher faced fundamental problem in lesson planning including the difficulties to state the objectives, to select suitable content, to develop activities and assignment relevant to knowledge, skill and attitude, and to create an appropriate evaluation. The findings above suggest that the teacher needs more enhancement and guidance in developing lesson plans.
CHAPTER III: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
4.3 Teacher’s Personal Conviction towards Lesson Planning ………. 72
APPENDICES Page
Appendix 1 Lesson Plan Analysis ………. 99
Appendix 2 Lesson Plan Template (Ministerial Regulation No. 41 Year 2007) 103 Appendix 3 Analysis on Cognitive, Psychomotoric, and Affective Domain …. 104 Appendix 4 Observation Schedule ………. 105
Appendix 5 List of Guiding Questions ………... 106
Appendix 6 Interview Transcription ……….. 107
Appendix 7 The Sketchy-Lesson Plan ……… 112
Appendix 8 The Scripted Lesson Plans ……….. 117
Appendix 9 The National Syllabus ………. 135
LIST OF TABLES Page Table 2.1 Lesson Plan Format Adopted from Ministerial Regulation No 41/ 2007 ………... 20
Table 2.2 The Assessment ……….. 23
Table 3.1 Interview’s Theme ……….. 33
Table 4.1 The Summary of Analysis on Principles in Lesson Planning ……… 37
Table 4.2 Checklist on Teacher’s Entry in the Title Element……… 40
Table 4.3 Performance Indicators ……….. 42
Table 4.4 Check Questions on Five-Component Teaching Objective ………... 44
Table 4.5 Bloom’s Taxonomy Domains……… 45
Table 4.6 Material ……….. 48
Table 4.7 The Example of Material in a List ……….. 50
Table 4.8 Summary of Teaching Method and Media ………...……….. 51
Table 4.9 Sample of Teaching Procedure ………... 53
Table 4.10 The List of Skills Stated in the Scripted-Lesson Plans ………. 55
Table 4.11 Assessment Stated in the Scripted Lesson Plan ………... 56
Table 4.12 Summary of Various Activities in the Pre Activity ……….. 61
Table 4.13 Summary of Major Activities in the Main Activity ………. 64
Table 4.14 Summary of Activities Captured in the Main Activities ………….. 67
Table 4.15 Planned-Content and Its Demonstration ……….. 68
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
This chapter includes an introductory explanation of the study. It will cover the background information relevant to the study, the research questions, the purpose of the study, the significance of the study, and the thesis organization.
1.1 The Background of the Study
Lesson planning is important and has a pervasive influence on successful teaching-learning activities (Brown, 2001, p.149). It is during the planning process that a framework to select goals is provided; activities and assignments relevant to knowledge, skills, and attitudes are developed (Cooper 1990). In addition, appropriate assessments that make the planning process complete are designed (Hunter, 1994, p. 87 cited by Jalongo et al., 2007, p. 42). Research has found planning skills are essential part of successful teaching (Haynes, 2010; McArdle, 2010). A carefully prepared plan develops the pupils to a maximum level in the time available (Husain, 1990, p. 32), and promotes student achievement (Jalongo, et. al 2007). Furthermore, it helps teachers to fulfill the essential elements of good teaching such as shape the space, time and learning they share with students (Woodward, 2009, p.1).
procedures, assessment, and sources (Ministerial Regulation No. 41 year 2007, pp 6-8; McArdle, 2010). In short, Brewster (2003) describes planning lessons as one with clear objectives, a range of activities, is enjoyable for the students and appropriately challenging (p. 231).
Lesson planning becomes an important measure of teacher’s competence (Kwo, 1988). A teacher with pedagogical and professional competence can demonstrate the ability to bring about the intended learning outcomes (Cooper, 1990, p. 3). Yet, lesson planning is often neglected, underutilized, misinterpreted, or poorly executed (Jalongo, et al., 2007, p. 43). Rivers (1981, p. 484, cited by Brewster et al., 2003, p.231) argues that some teachers consider lesson planning as collecting a number of more or less interesting ideas. Some others see lesson planning as a worksheet, a handout, a textbook, or a classroom game (www.englishclub.com).
Likewise, previous findings show that many teachers have substandard lesson planning skills. For example, Alwasilah (2012) reports that 65% out of 130,000 of EFL teachers’ mastery on lesson planning remain appalling. Jalongo et al. (2007) mention that many teachers develop poor lesson plans. Woodward (2009, p. 3) explains most teachers were concerned about lesson planning. On one hand, beginner teachers tended to worry that planning lessons take too long and, that there were too many things to consider. Experienced teachers tended to remark that to planning they to be found boring. In short, findings show that many teachers are in the state of not having enough professional and pedagogic competence. As a result of this they do not see lesson planning as an ultimate step to improve the effectiveness of teaching and learning (Richards, 2002 p. 112).
1.2 The Research Questions
In line with the background above, this study attempts to address the following questions:
1. How does an English teacher develop lesson plans?
2. Does an English teacher implement the lesson plans in their teaching-learning activities?
3. What problems are faced by English teachers in developing the lesson plan?
1.3 The Purpose of the Study
Based on the research questions outlined above, the purposes of this study are to:
1. Investigate how the English teacher develops the lesson plan.
2. Investigate the implementation of the lesson plan in teaching-learning activities.
3. Examine the difficulties faced by the English teacher in developing the lesson plan.
1.4 The Significance of the Study
1.5 The organization of the thesis
This thesis consists of five chapters.
Chapter 1 introduces the background of the study, the research questions, the purposes of the study, the significance of the study, and the organization of the thesis.
Chapter 2 presents the theoretical framework that has shaped this study. It covers the lesson planning, the value of lesson planning, the components of the lesson plan, and the implementation of the lesson plan.
Chapter 3 describes the research methodology of this study. It covers the research problem, the research design, research site and participants, data collection and data analysis.
Chapter 4 presents data presentation and analysis.
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Previous chapter has described the theoretical background of the study. It discusses the literature review about lesson planning, the development of lesson plans, and the implementation of lesson plans.
This chapter discusses a set of methodological approaches which covers the research problems, the research design, the research site, and the participant in the study. It also informs the instruments of research, and the role of researcher. Further, it presents the data collection through the documentation analysis especially the lesson plan, classroom observation, and interview. The conclusion ends this chapter.
3.1 Research Problems
This research was conducted in an attempt to address three research questions. These questions are as follows:
(1) How do English teachers develop lesson plans?
(2) Do English teachers implement the lesson plan in their teaching-learning activities?
(3) What problems are faced by English teachers in developing the lesson plan?
3.2 Research Design
In line with the research questions above, this study applied a qualitative method in order to understand the phenomenon of lesson planning (Taylor and Bogdan, 1984; Nunan, 1992, p. 81; Travers, 2001; Alwasilah, 2009; Nunan and Bailey, 2009, p. 158; Hood, 2009). The qualitative method was regarded as the most suitable design to understand how teachers develop lesson plans and implement them in the classroom.
Bailey: 2009, Freebody, 2003 in Emilia, 2005, p.74; Nunan, 1992, p. 75). The case was focused on the development, the implementation, and the problem faced in the lesson planning where the researcher acted as a non-participant (Taylor and Bogdan, 1984; Holliday, 2005).
Yet in terms of a case study design, this study collected and analyzed the data that were obtained from „multiple sources”, i.e. documents analysis, classroom observation, and semi-structured interviews. By doing so, „in depth information‟ on lesson planning and its implementation (Alwasilah, 2009, p. 154) could be achieved. The multiple data collection techniques employed in this study insure validity of the study (McMillan and Schumacher, 2001, p.407; Holliday, 2005).
3.3 Research Site
This study was conducted at a Senior High School located in Cianjur, West Java. This research site was chosen for three reasons. First, it was related to technical consideration, that is, easy access. Secondly, the researcher was welcomed warmly by the principal for conducting this research topic so that this „increases the feasibility of the study‟ (Bogdan and Biklen, 1998, p. 54). The third reason was that the research conducted on lesson planning was rare because there was hardly ever anyone who tried to do such research at the site.
For that reasons, this research is worth carrying out as the initial step to get complete information on teachers‟ competence in planning and implementing lesson plans (Nunan, 1992) as stipulated in Ministerial Regulation No. 16 year 2007 on teachers obligation to do lesson planning.
3.4 Participants
knowledgeable and fully informed about the study investigated. Besides, the sole participant helped the researcher to fully focus on what the teacher do in lesson planning, and hence, increased the feasibility of the study.
The participant above was optimized to obtain the best possible data from multiple sources i.e. classroom observation, document analysis, and semi-structured interviews. Each of the data collection techniques are discussed below.
3.5 Data Collection
As stated above, this study collected data from various sources such as document analysis, observation, and semi-structured interview. Each of these will be described briefly below.
3.5.1 Document Analysis
To follow Cohen and Manion (1994) regarding the use of documents in data collection, two types of documents were collected in this study. The first was a sketchy-lesson plan for a curriculum cycle developed prior its implementation and the second was seven scripted-lesson plans developed after its implementation. Those two kinds of lesson plans became documents that functioned as natural sources that provided real information on lesson plan development and its implementation (Alwasilah, 2009; Nunan & Bailey, 2009), and at the same time they represented an essential part of „triangulation‟ (Holliday, 2005, p. 43; Rallis and Rosman, 2009).
and psychomotoric domain were provided evenly (see Appendix 3). The analysis will be presented in Chapter 4.
3.5.2 Classroom Observation
Classroom observation was conducted to gain “the authentic data” (Van Lier, 1998; Patton, 2002 cited in Cowie, 2009) on how teacher demonstrated the lesson plan in the teaching-learning activities. Besides, it also enabled the researcher to describe in detail how the lesson plan was implemented in the classroom. In this way, the researcher was encouraged to understand and to know how to implement the lesson plan (Creswell, 2008, p. 223; Nunan and Bailey, 2009) in ongoing and regular class (Van Lier, 1998).
The researcher employed an observation sheet to collect the data on lesson plan‟s implementation in three major areas. The first area was pre-activity
covered: gaining attention, informing learners of objectives, stimulating recall for prior learning, as suggested by Gagné (1992). The examples of observation sheets are in appendix 7. The second area was the main activity. It was the materials presentation that covered process of exploration, elaboration, and confirmation. And, the third area was post activity covered: providing feedback, assessing performance, and enhancing retention and transfer.
To further understand how to implement the lesson plan, the researcher conducted “field observation” as suggested by McMillan and Schumacher (2001, p. 437) and Holliday (2005). The observation was conducted ten times. The first of the ten observations was conducted to give the researcher a familiar presence while remaining unobtrusive in order to lessen the anxiety on the part of the participant (Creswell, 2008, p. 225). Meanwhile, the rest was devoted to understand on how the teacher implemented the lesson plan. The observations were conducted from October to November 2012 with each meeting lasting in 90 minutes (The schedule can be seen completely on Appendix 4).
examining whether the teacher implemented all the three major components of a lesson plan in its entirety. Furthermore, to be fully aware of what the teacher did in the implementation of the lesson plan, the researcher also did the informal discussion the teacher for about 10 to 15 minutes upon the completion of the lesson by the teacher. Data from classroom observation will be presented and discussed in Chapter 4.
3.5.3 Interviews
The interview was conducted to gain a deeper understanding on how the teacher developed and implemented the lesson plan as well as to understand what problems were faced by the teacher in relation to the lesson planning.
The interview was undertaken with the individual teacher for about 10 to 15 minutes upon the completion of the lesson in the teacher‟s room. The interview was to get „in-depth‟ information about how the teacher developed and implemented the lesson plan, as well as what problems she encountered in developing and implementing it (Taylor and Bogdan, 1984; Holliday, 2005; Marshal and Rossman: 2006). The interview format used was a semi-structured interview as proposed by Stainback & Stainback (1988, p.52), Van Lier (1998), Cohen and Manion (2004), and Dawson (2009). It is regarded as the most suitable format to learn about the perception of the teacher for the questions „are more flexible worded‟ (Merriam, 1988, p. 73).
teacher‟s problem in developing lesson plan, and the teacher‟s view on lesson plan‟s demonstration as depicted in table 3.1 below.
Table 3.1 Interview‟s Themes
No Elements Classification
1. Teacher‟s perspective on lesson planning
Teacher‟s problems in developing
lesson plan implementation of the lesson plan. The analyses and interpretation were carried out based on the document in the form of the teacher‟s written and typed lesson plan, the observation, and the interview. The data from each source was analyzed in steps described below.
The data obtained from classroom observation in the form of a field note was categorized into three main categories of lesson plans implementation as suggested by Ministerial Regulation No. 41 year 2007. The categorization was aimed to enable the researcher to find out whether each elements of the lesson plan emerged or deviated from the plan.
The data obtained from the interviews were analyzed by transcribing, subsequently categorizing, and interpreting them to answer the research questions. During the transcription stage, the teacher‟s name was replaced with pseudonym (Silverman, 1993). Then, the transcripts were given back to the teacher to make sure that it was indeed what she meant. In the effort to maintain validity, the researcher also conducted member checks by „sending back‟ (Rallis and Rossman: 2009; Creswell, 2008, p. 266; Kvale, 1996) the transcripts of interview results to the participant who had been interviewed to ensure that the results were appropriate with her given responses After that, the transcripts were condensed into briefer statements by rephrasing them into shorter ones (Kvale, 1996, p. 192). Finally, data were coded and categorized by applying thematic data analysis in line with the focus of this study such as the teacher‟s difficulties in developing the lesson plan and the deviation of implementing the lesson plan.. The results were interpreted in Chapter 4 of this research.
At last, all of the data obtained from documentation analysis, classroom observation, and interviews were triangulated by making comparison and contrast to get „in depth information‟ to enhance validity and to gain accuracy of the conclusion of this study (Marshal and Rossman, 2006).
3.7 Concluding Remark
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
This chapter presents conclusion and some recommendation. The conclusion of the study is drawn based on the data analysis which is discussed in Chapter Four. Meanwhile the recommendations are provided to give information as well as guidance to conduct further related research concerning the same issue. The last but not least, the recommendations are addressed to those who will get involved in the development and implementation of the lesson plan such as teachers, principals, and supervisors.
5.1 Conclusion
This study investigates how English teacher develops and implements the lesson plan as well as finds out what problems are faced by the teacher during
lesson plan’s development and its implementation. As discussed in Chapter Four based on the data gained from the document analysis, the classroom observations, and the interviews, the major conclusion of this study can be drawn as follows.
implementing the sketchy-lesson plan. This finding coincides with planning a lesson after its implementation as proposed by (Cooper, 1990); and those of reflecting and recording on what teachers do and what happens during the teaching-learning activities in detail to inform subsequent classes as put forward by Partin (2009).
Second, in terms of elements of lesson plan wrote in both sketchy and scripted-lesson plan, the teacher applied a Systematic Model for designing instruction lesson plan as proposed by Gagné (1977) where in the lesson plan the teacher started her planning with identifying teaching objectives, followed by selecting material, determining procedures, and ended with the stating evaluation. Additionally, the teacher took the advantage of lesson plan template issued by Ministerial Regulation No 41 Year 2007 to write all the lesson plan’s elements completely in her scripted-lesson plan. In contradictory, in the sketchy-lesson plan the teacher developed her own format and wrote only standard competence, basic
competence, objective, material and teaching procedure as her lesson plan’s
elements. The method of developing her own format in the sketchy-lesson plan is in line with the previous findings of lesson planning by Piskurich (2006) and Petrina (2007) that there is ‘no correct’ way to write a lesson plan and there is no
‘single, universal’ format to give a clear picture of what a teacher intends to do and achieve in the teaching-learning activitie. Yet, the elements stated in the sketchy-lesson plan is not parallel with the elements of lesson plan proposed by Brewster (2003) that a lesson plan format should at least typically cover a description of students, a statement of objectives, a description of procedures, materials to be used, and the evaluation.
This means that the teacher deviated from her lesson plans and misinterpreted lesson plan. This finding support previous studies related to lesson plan by Jalongo, et al. (2007), Rivers (1981, cited by Brewster et al., 2003) suggesting that some teachers consider lesson planning as as a worksheet, a handout, or a textbook.
Fourth, from the interview, it was revealed that the teacher considered lesson planning found to be useless for she could follow textbook for engaging her students in learning English and she could rely on her imagination when she was about to teach a lesson. This self-conviction coincides with the like claimed by Woodward (2009) and Richards (2002) that many teachers teach successful lesson based on the mental planning. Then, it was also revealed that in general the teacher knew how to develop lesson plan. Yet, her lesson plans were made by copying from others merely to fulfill the administration demand and to satisfy the expectation of the principal. This is in line the reason of developing lesson plans claimed by Brewster et.al. (2003) that the external reason of developing lesson plan is to fulfill the administrative requirement that is demanded by the principal, and to provide accountability of the teacher’s professionalism by giving ‘a record
of work’ which can be shown to the observer or examiner.
Finally, it was also revealed that the teacher faced difficulties in developing and implementing the lesson plan, among others, the objectives, the contents, the procedures, and the evaluation. All these suggest that English teachers need enhancement and guidance related to the main issue. The findings of this study support the findings of Alwasilah (2012), and Adam & Tulaeisewicz (2005) who mentioned that there are deficiencies in teachers’ professional and pedagogical competence.
5.2Recommendations
First, with regard to the development of lesson plan, it has been mentioned that the teacher faced pressing problems in developing components of lesson plans into a scripted-lesson plan. In response to this, English teachers school association (MGMP) at school level and regency level should provide teacher with training and development to guide English teachers in developing the lesson plan.
Second, in terms of the implementation of the lesson plan covering the objectives, the contents, the procedures, and the evaluation as the teacher’s assurance of the success of classroom instruction (Hill and Flynn, 2006; Piskurich, 2006; Battersby and Gordon, 2007, see also Finnocchiaro, 1988), it is suggested that the English teachers should consult the works of others published in various scientific journals both printed and soft-copy files.
Third, in order to boost English teachers mastery in the development and the implementation of the lesson plans, it is recommended that the English teachers as individual are willing to enlarge their knowledge on developing as well as implementing the lesson plan by attending lesson study activities, seminars or workshops. Besides, it is also suggested that the principal and supervisor periodically supervise the teachers and provide direct guidance to
improve the teacher’s professional and pedagogical competence.
REFERENCES
Adam, Anthony and Tulaesiewicz, Witold (2005). The Crisis in Teachers’
Education. London: The Falmer Press e-Library.
Alwasilah, Chaedar. (2012). Redesigning the Curriculum for English Teachers.
The Jakarta Post: Saturday, 05/19/2012.
Alwasilah, (2009). Pokoknya Kualitatif: Dasar-Dasar Merancang dan
Melakukan Penelitian Kualitatif. Jakarta:Pustaka Jaya.
Alwasilah, Chaedar and Alwasilah, Senny Suzanna. (2007). Pokoknya Menulis: Cara Baru Menulis dengan Metode Kolaborasi. Bandung: PT Kiblat Buku Utama.
Arends, Richards I. and Kilcher, Ann. (2010). Teaching for Student Learning: Becoming an Accomplished Teacher. New York and London: Routledge.
Battersby, Jeff and Gordon, John. (2007). Preparing to Teach: Learning from Experience. Canada: Routledge, Taylor and Francis e-Library.
Bogdan, R.C & Biklen, S.K. (1998). Qualitative Research for Education:
AnIntroduction to Theory and Method. Boston Allyn and Bacon.
Boikhutso, Keene. (2010). The Theory into Practice Dilemma: Lesson Planning Challenges Facing Botswana Student-Teachers. Sage Publication.
Bennet, Randy Elliot. (2004). Hoe the Internet Help Large-Scale Assessment Reinvent Itself. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Bhatia, V.K. 1993. Analyzing Genre: Language use in professional settings
London: Longman.
Botturi, Luca and Stubbs, S. Todd. (2008). Handbook of Visual Languages for Instructional Design: Theories and Practices. USA: IGI Global
Boyd, Marlyn Duncan. 1992. The Teaching Process. London: Prentice Hakk Internationanl (UK)
Brady, Laurie and Keneddy, Kerry. 2012. Curriculum Construction. 4th edition. Australia: Pearson Australia.
Brewster, Jean; Eliis, Gail; Girard, Denis. (2003). The Primary English Teacher’s
Brown, James Dean. (1995). The Elements of Language Curriculum: A Systematic Approach to Program Development. USA: Henle &Heinle Publishers
Brown, H Douglas. (2001). Principles
Brook, Val. (2004). Learning to teach and learning about Teaching. USA: Open University Presss.
Bot, Kees de; Lowie, Wander, Verspoor Majolijn. (2005). Second Language Acquisition: An Advance resource Book. New York: Rouledge applied linguistics
BSNP. (2007). Peraturan Mentri Pendidikan Nasional No. 14 Tahun 2007 tentang Standar Proses untuk satuan pendidikan dasar dan Menengah.
Jakarta
BSNP. (2007) Peraturan Mentri No. 16 Tahun 2007 tentang Standar Kualifikasi Akademik dan Kompetensi Guru. Jakarta.
BSNP. (2009). Peraturan Mentri Pendidikan Nasional No. 63 Tahun 2009 tentang Sistem Penjaminan Mutu Pendidikan. Jakarta
BSNP. (2009). Peraturan Mentri Pendidikan Nasional No. 10 Tahun 2009
tentang Sertifikasi Bagi Guru dalam Jabatan. Jakarta.
BSNP. (2006). Panduan Penyusunan Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan
Dasar dan Menengah. Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.
BSNP. (2007). Petunjuk Teknis Pengembangan Silabus dan Contoh/Model Silabus. Mata pelajaran; Bahasa Inggris kelas X, program IPA, IPS dan Bahasa. SMA/MA. Jakarta.
Calvert, Sandra L. (2004). Media Forms for Children Learning in the Design of Instruction and Evaluation: Affordance of Suing Media and technology. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Coe, Richard M. 1994. Teaching Genre as Process. Portsmouth NH, Cook Publisher, Inc.
Creswell, John W. (2008). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating, Quantitative and Qualitative Researh. Third Edition. New Jersey: Pearson International Edition.
Cowie, Neil (2009). Observation. United Kingdom: Palgrave Macmillan
Creswell, John W and Clark, Vicki L. Plano. (2007). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Researach. University of Nebraska: Sage Publication. Depdiknas. (2008). Panduan Umum Pengembangan Silabus. Direktorat
Jenderal Manajemen Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah: Direktorat Pembinaan Sekolah Menegah Atas. Jakarta.
Derewianka, Beverly. (2004). Exploring How Texts Work. Australia: Penguin Books Australia Ltd.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Publishers. Djikstra, Sanne. (2004). The Integration of Curriculum Design, Instructional
Design, and Media Choice. New Jersey
Doff, Adrian. (1990). Teach English: A Training Course for Teachers. Trainer’s
Handbook. USA: Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge. Douglas, Fisher; Rothenberg, Carol, and Frey, Nancy. (2008). Content-Area
Conversation: How to Plan Discussion-Based Lessons for Diverse
Language Learners. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, USA.
Enclosure Permendiknas No 19 Tahun 2007 tentang Standar Pengelolaan Pembelajaran, Jakarta Depdiknas.
Elliot, Paul. (2004). Planning for Learning. England:Open University Press Emilia, Emi. (2011). Pendekatan Genre-Based dalam Pengajaran Bahasa
Inggris: Petunjuk untuk Guru. Bandung: Rizqi Press.
Emilia, Emi. (2012). Panduan Memahami dan Menyususn RPP Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Inggris: Materi IHT Peningkatan Mutu Pembelajaran. Kemdiknas, Jakarta.
Effendi, Yusuf. (2007). The Implementation of Genre-Based Approach in an
EFL context. A case study at a Senior High School in Depok West Jawa.
Bandung: UPI, thesis, unpublished.
Farrell, Thomas S. C. (2002). Lesson Planning.
Freeman, Aviva and Medway, Peter. (2009). Introduction New View of Genre and Their Implication for Education. Learning and Teaching Genre. Portsmouth NH Boynton/Cook Publisher, Inc.
Feez, Susan and Joyce, Helen. (2000). Writing Skills: Narrative and Non-Fiction Text Types. Australia: Phoenix Education Pty. Ltd.
Feez, Susan. (2002). Heritage and Innovation in Second Language Education.
Australia: National Center for English language Teaching and Research (NCELTR), Macquarie University.
Fisher, Douglas; Frey, Nancy; Rothenberg, Carol. (2008). Content-Area Conversations: How to Plan Discussion-Based Lesson for Diverse Language Learners. USA: Associaton for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Finnocchiaro, Mary. (1998). Teacher Development: A Continuing Process.
TESOL, Italy, English Teaching Forum , vol XXVI. NO. 3. July 1988 Gibbons, Pauline. (2009). English Learners, Academic Literacy, and Thinking.
Learning in the Challenge Zone. USA, Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc. Gujjar, Aijaz Ahmed & Malik, Muhammad Ashraf. (2007). Preparation of
Insrtuctional Material for Distance Teacher Education. Turkish online Journal of Distance Education-YOJDE, Vol. 8, No. 1, article: 4.
Hamm, Mary and Adams, Dennis. (2009). Activating Assessment for All Students: Innovative Activities, Lesson Plans, and Informative Assessment. Lanham, New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. Hayland, Ken. 2007. Genre and Second Language Writing.USA: University of
Michigan Press.
Hastuti, Sri. (2008). Teaching Report Genre through Genre-Based Approach.
Hill, Jane D. and Flynn M., Kathleen. (2006). The Stages of Language Acquisition: Classroom Interaction that Works with English Language
Learners. McREL, Alexandria, Virginia, USA.
Hood, Michael. (2009). Case Study. United Kingdom: Palgrave Macmillan Holliday, Adrian. (2005). Doing and Writing: Qualitative Research. London:
Sage Publication Ltd.
Husbands, Chris. (2004) Models of the Curriculum. England: Open University Press
Jauhara, Dadan. (2010). A GBA teaching writing an exposition in EFL context.
A case study at a private university in West Java. Bandung: UPI, a thesis, unpublished Keppell, Michael J.. (2007). Instructional Design: case Studies in Communities of Practice. New York: Hersey, Infosci Jhon, Peter D. (2006) Lesson Planning and the Student Teacher: Rethinking
the Dominant Model. Journal Curriculum Studies, Vol. 38, No. 4 pp. 483 - 498.
Kalyuga, Slava. (2009). Cognitive Load Factors in Instructional Design for Advanced Learners. New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc.
Khoirot, Umdatul. (2008). The Study of BKoF in an EFL Context. A case study in Senior High School in Nganjuk, East Java. Bandung: UPI, a thesis, unpublished
Knapp, Peter and Watkins, Megan. (2005). Genre, Text, Grammar. Technologies for Teaching and Assessing Writing. Australia: University of New South Wales Press Ltd.
Kvale, Steinar. (1996). Inter Views: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing. New Delhi: Sage Publication.
Sudarwati, Th, M, and Grace, Eudia. (2007). Look Ahead: An English Course, for Senior High School Studnets year X. Jakarta: Erlangga
Lier, Leo Van. (1988). The Classroom and the Language Learner: Ethnography and Second-Language Classroom Research. UK: Longman Group Limited.
Klein, Stephen et all.(2000) teaching Practices and Students Achievement: Report of First-Year Findings from The “mosaic” study. Washington DC: RAND
Marshal, Catherine and Rossman, Gretchen B. (2006). Designing Qualitative Research. Fourth Edition. California: Sage Publications, Inc.
McArdle, Geri. (2010). Instructional Design for Action Learning.New York: American Management Association.
McKay, Sandra Lee. (2006). Researching Second Language Classrooms. ESL & Applied Linguistics Professional Series. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publisher.
McMillan, James H and Schumacher, Sally. (2001). Research in Education: A
Conceptual Introduction. Fifth Edition. New York: Longman.
Macalister, John and Nation, I.S.P (2010). Language Curriculum Design.
Routledge.
Macdonald, Ranald 2005). Assessment strategies for enquiry and problem-based learning. http://wwwnuigalway.ie/celt.pblbook/
Macias, Anna Huerta. (2002) Assessment in Methodology in Language Learning: An Anthology of Current Practice. New York : Cambridge University Press.
Marzano, Robert J; Pickering, Debra J; Pollock, Jane E. (2001). Classroom
Instruction that works:Research-Based Strategies
Murray, Bonnie P. (2002). The New Teacher’s Complete Sourcebook. Grade K -4. NY: Scholastic.
Moon, Jayne. (2006). Children Learning English. Thailand: McMillan Book. Morroew, Jean and Holland, Janet. (2008). Pask and Ma Join Forces in an
Elementary Mathematics Methods Course. Information Science Reference. USA: IGI Global
Neagle, Paula. (2012). How to Plan a Unit Study.
Nazzal, Allison, Dr. (2011). Peer and Self Assessment: 20 Classroom Strategies and other Resources to Increase student Motivation and Achievement.
SCMSA Journal. South Carolina Middle School Journal.
Nunan, David. (1992). Research Methods in Language Learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Nunan, David and Bailey, Kathleen M. (2009). Exploring Second Language Classroom Research: A Comprehensive Guide. Canada: Nelson Education, Ltd.
Ngongwikuo, Joseph. (1990). The Need and Format for Planning English Lanuguage Lesson. English Teaching Forum. Vol XXVII No. 3. July 1990
Pang, Terence T.T. 2002. Textual Analysis and Contextual Awareness Building:
A Comparison of Two Approaches to Teaching Genre. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, publisher.
Partin, Ronald L. (2009). The classroom teacher’s survival guide: Practical strategies, management techniques, and reproducible for new and experienced teacher. Third edition. USA: Jossey Bass A wiley imprint. Pellegrino, James W et all (2001). Knowing what Student know: The Science and Design of Educational Assessment. Washington. D.C: National Academy press
Permendiknas No. 16 Tahun 2007 tentang Standar Kualifikasi Akademik dan Kompetensi Guru. Jakarta: Depdiknas.
Permendiknas No. 41 Tahun 2007 tentang Standar Proses. Jakarta: Depdiknas. Piskurich, George M. (2006). Rapid Instructional Design: Learning ID Fast and
Right. Second Edition. San Francisco: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
Petrina, Stephen. (2007). Advances Teaching Methods for the Technology Classroom. Canada: The University of British Columbia.
Popham, W.James. (1995). Classroom Assessment: What Teachers Need to Know. USA: A Simon and Schuster Company.
Rallis, Sharon F and Rossman, Gretchen B. (2009). Ethics and Trustworthiness.
United Kingdom: Palgrave Macmillan
Richards, Jack C. (2002). Curriculum Development in Language Teaching.
Second printing UK: Cambrigde University Press.
Richards, Jack C and Renandya A. Willy (2002). Methodology in Language Teaching: AN Anthology of Current Practice. Cambridge: University Press.
Rothwell, Willian J. and Kazanas, H.C. (2009). Mastering the Instructional Design Process: A systematic Approach. Second Edition. E-book.
Rust, Christ. (2002). Purposes and Principles of Assessment. Oxford Books University: learning and Teaching Briefing Paper Series. http://www.ied.edu.hk/apfslt/v3_issue1/wongts/index.htm#contents Sakamoto, Barbara Hoskin. (2012). How Important is Lesson planning.
http://itdi.pro/blog/2012/28/how-important-is-lesson-planning-barbara-sakamoto.
Seel, Norbert M and Djikstra, Sanne. (2004). Curriculum, Plans, and Processes in Instructional Design. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Silverman, D. (1993). Doing Qualitative Research. Second Edition. London: Sage Publications.
Scott, David. (2001). Curriculum and Assessment. USA: Greenwood Publishing Group.
Scott, Wendy A. and Ytreberg, Lisbeth H. (2000). Teaching English to Children. Longman Keys to Language Teaching. Longman
Shostack, Robert. (1990). Lesson Presentation Skill in Classroom Teaching Skills. Forth edition. Canada: D.C Heath Company.
Swales, J.M. (1981). Aspects of article introduction. Birmingham, UK: University of Aston Language studies Unit.
The Millennium Campaign Curriculum Project. (2007) Students Voices against Poverty: Lesson Plans and Resources Manual for Teachers. UN Millennium Campaign.
Travers, Max. (2001). Qualitative Research through Case Studies. London: Sage Publications.
Tumposky, RN (1984). Behavioral Objective, the cult of efficiency, and foreign language learning: Are they compatible? TESOL Quarterly 18(2): 295-310.
Toulmin, S.R. Rieke and A. Janik. 1979. An Introduction to Reasoning. New York: Macmillan.
UNESCO (2002). Information and Communication Technologies in Teacher education : A Planning Guide. Division of Higher Education.
Wijayanto, Muhammad Dwi. (2010). Lesson Planning in Young Learners. A
descriptive Study towards teachers’ lesson plan of elementary school.
Bandung: UPI, a thesis, unpublished
Whitman, Nancy I, et.al. (1992). Teaching in Nursing Practice: A professional Model. Second Edition. UK: Prentice Hall International Limited.
Wulandari, Fitrian. (2008). The problem faced by teachers in developing syllabus
based on SBC/KTSP in Junior High School in Bandung. A descriptive study on English Teaching in Bandung. Bandung: UPI, a thesis, unpublished.
Woodward, Tessa. (2009). Planning Lessons and Courses: Designing sequences of work for the language classroom. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Wyse, Domanic, (2002). Becoming a Primary School Teacher. Routledge. Yosefa, Rita. (2009). An Investigation on the Implementation of a GBA. A case
study at two senior high school in Natuna islands, kepulauan Natuna, Riau Province. Bandung: UPI, a thesis, unpublished.
How to Write a Lesson Plan: 5 Secrets of Writing Great Lesson Plans.
http://busyteacher.org/3753-how-to-write-a-lesson-plan-5-secrets.html. retrieved at 06/06/2012
Lesson planning in the Language classroom http://www2.education. ualberta. ca/staff/olenka.bilash/best%20of%20bilash/lessonplanning.html
