A Research Paper
Submitted to the Department of English Education of FPBS UPI in partial fulfillment of the requirements for Sarjana Pendidikan degree
by
Dessy Wulandari 1000982
DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH EDUCATION
FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE EDUCATION INDONESIA UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION
TEACHERS’ TECHNIQUES IN ASSESSING WRITING SKILLS OF YOUNG LEARNERS IN A JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL ENGLISH
CLASSROOM
Oleh Dessy Wulandari
Sebuah skripsi yang diajukan untuk memenuhi salah satu syarat memperoleh gelar Sarjana Pendidikan pada Fakultas Pendidikan Bahasa
dan Sastra
© Dessy Wulandari 2015 Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia
Agustus 2015
Hak Cipta dilindungi undang-undang.
TEACHERS’ TECHNIQUES IN ASSESSING WRITING SKILLS OF YOUNG LEARNERS IN A JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL ENGLISH CLASSROOM
ABSTRACT
The Study aimed to investigate the teachers’ techniques in assessing writing to young learners. This study was also intended to find out the teachers’ way in designing the assessment. To gather the data, document analysis and interview were employed to the two teachers involved in the study. Then, the data that had been gathered were analyzed qualitatively. The findings reveal two main points. The first finding was about the techniques of assessing writing. Regarding the data analysis of the teachers’ lesson plan, it was found that the first teacher chose project and homework as the techniques to assess writing, while the second teacher used project, homework and portfolio. The interview clarifies that the first teacher mostly relied on homework, while the second teacher combined the techniques to assess students’ writing, meaning that the second teacher was more consistent to what she wrote and stated. The second finding was about the teachers’ way in designing the assessment. In designing the assessment the teachers had some similarities and different ideas. In the first step of designing the assessment, both teachers were using goal-centered criteria where the assessment were based on the objectives of learning that they have made which had been referred to the syllabus. They also designed the teaching and the assessment for integrated-skill purposes. However, the first teacher did not fulfill the second step of designing instrument where the elements or aspects assessed were not clear; there was not any restriction for the skill tested. As for the second teacher, though the objectives were designed for integrated-skill, the instrument was designed by differentiating the skills tested and the aspects for each skill. The last step in designing the instrument is selecting the type of assessment rubric (Dick and Carey, 1998). Both teachers used ranging scales and test item of instruction. However, the first teacher designed it regarding the practicality assumption while the second teacher was carefully following the guidelines on the teacher’s book and curriculum, then adapting the rubric to the lesson plan. Thus, it can be derived from the findings that choosing appropriate techniques to assess students’ writing did not guarantee the techniques were used appropriately. To be reliable in using the techniques, teachers have to design the instrument as clear as possible; identify the objectives, identify the aspects that would be assessed, create a rubric, and determine how the instrument will be scored.
ABSTRAK
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menginvestigasi teknik-teknik guru dalam menilai kemampuan menulis siswa(anak usia dini). Penelitian ini juga bertujuan untuk mengetahui cara guru dalam mendesain penilaiannya. Dalam mengumpulkan data, analisis dokumen dan wawancara diterapkan terhadap dua orang guru yang terlibat dalam penelitian. Data yang terkumpul kemudian dianalisis secara kualitatif. Ada dua hal pokok yang menjadi temuan. Penemuan pertama terkait dengan teknik yang digunakan untuk menilai kemampuan menulis. Berdasarkan analisis data dari rencana perencanaan pembelajaran (RPP) kedua guru, guru pertama memilih proyek dan tugas sebagai teknik dalam penilaian tulisan siswa, sedangkan guru kedua selain proyek dan tugas, juga menggunakan portofolio sebagai tekniknya. Hasil wawancara menunjukkan bahwa guru pertama lebih banyak mengandalkan tugas, sedangkan guru kedua mengkombinasikan teknik-teknik yang dipilih untuk menilai kemampuan menulis siswa, yang mana menjelaskan bahwa guru kedua lebih konsisten terhadap apa yang ditulis dalam RPP dan yang dinyatakan dalam wawancara. Penemuan kedua berkaitan dengan cara guru dalam mendesain penilaian. Dalam mendesain penilaian, kedua guru memiliki persamaan dan perbedaan ide. Dalam langkah pertama mendesain penilaian kedua guru sama-sama berorientasi pada tujuan (goal-centered criteria) dimana penilaian didasarkan pada tujuan pembelajaran yang telah dibuat dengan berdasarkan pada silabus. Mereka juga sama-sama mendesain pembelajaran dan penilaian untuk integrated-skill. Akan tetapi, sebagai langkah kedua dalam mendesain penilaian, guru pertama tidak secara jelas menjabarkan tentang aspek-aspek apa saja yang akan dinilai, tidak ada batasan mengenai kemampuan mana saja yang akan dinilai dari siswa. Sedangkan guru kedua memisahkan aspek dan kemampuan-kemampuan apa saja yang akan dinilai dari siswa, meskipun didesain untuk integrated skill. Langkah terakhir dalam mendesain instrumen penilaian adalah memilih rubrik penilaiannya (Dick and Carey, 1998). Kedua guru menggunakan skala penilaian dan test item berupa instruksi. Akan tetapi, guru pertama mendesainnya berdasarkan asumsi praktis, sedang guru kedua mendesain instrumen sesuai dengan petunjuk dalam buku guru dan kurikulum, kemudian mengadaptasi rubriknya ke dalam RPP. Dengan demikian, berdasarkan penemuan-penemuan yang ada menunjukkan bahwa memilih teknik yang tepat untuk menilai kemampuan menulis siswa belum tentu menjamin teknik-teknik tersebut diaplikasikan dengan baik pula. Agar teknik-teknik tersebut bisa berfungsi dengan baik, guru harus mendesain instrumennya dengan jelas dan sebaik mungkin dengan mengidentifikasi tujuan, aspek-aspek yang akan dinilai, membuat rubriknya, dan mempertimbangkan bagaimana instrumen penilaian tersebut akan dinilai.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE APPROVAL ... i
STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION ... ii
PREFACE ... iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... iv
ABSTRACT ... vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS ... vii
LIST OF TABLES ... ix
LIST OF FIGURES ... x
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ... 1
1.1 Background of the Study ... 1
1.2 Research Questions ... 4
` 1.3 Aims of the Study ... 4
1.4 Scope of the Study ... 4
1.5 Significance of the Study ... 4
1.6 Research Methodology ... 5
1.7 Clarification of Key Terms ... 7
1.8 Organization of Paper ... 7
CHAPTER II THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ... 9
2.1 Teaching Writing to Young Learners ... 9
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ... 26
3.1 Research Design ... 26
` 3.2 Site of the study ... 27
3.3 Participant of the study………... 28
3.3 Data Collection ... 28
3.3.1 Document analysis ... 28
3.3.2 Interview……….. 29
3.4 Data Analysis ... 31
CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS ... 34
4.1 Assessment Techniques ... 34
4.1.1 T1 Techniques ... 34
4.1.2 T2 Techniques ... 36
4.2 Teachers’ Way in Designing the Assessment ... 37
4.2.1 Assessment Instrument of T1 ... 37
4.2.2 Assessment Instrument of T2 ……… 45
4.3 Concluding Remarks……… 51
CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ... 52
5.1 Conclusions ... 52
5.2 Recommendations... 53
5.3 Limitations of The Research………... 54
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
This chapter starts with the background of the study that describes the reasons for choosing the topic and the aims of the study. This chapter also includes the significance of the study, research questions, and the brief description of the research methodology that contain research design employed in the study, which is presented
in relation to data collection and analysis. In addition, clarification of the key terms is also delivered to clarify some specific terms. Last but not the least, the organization of the paper is explained at the end of this chapter.
1.1 Background of the Study
effective selection and proper interpretation of students’ performance. (Shaaban, 2001).
Therefore, assessing young learners is different from assessing older learners because of several reasons. Firstly, children learn from direct experiences as a simple one; what they experienced is a lesson for them. Then, they are learned from hands-on physical activities, meaning that they learn from what they see, hear, and feel. In other words, they have their own ways of doing things and so with learning. Hence, assessment for young learners should be handled with care and child-friendly method with regards to their ways of learning (Pinter, 2006).
Before considering specific techniques to assess young learners, a teacher has to understand learners’ characteristics first. Young learners’ first language and cognitive abilities are still developing, so they have relatively short attention span, by means they cannot concentrate on the lesson for a long period. The assessment itself should be given in the form of interaction because they learn through social interaction and mostly it relates with things that attractive to them such as pictures, colors, stories, and plays (Hughes, 2003). In short, in assessing young learners, teacher have to be aware of age, content of language learning, methods of teaching, aims, and learning theories (Cameron, 2001). Nevertheless, every effort made by teacher must allow students to perform at their best by creating conditions to support teaching and learning activities for students.
3
mastering Roman alphabet, handwriting, spelling, and basic sentence formation (Georgiou and Pavlou, 2003).
In terms of assessing writing for young learners, Shaaban (2001) in his study also stated that the younger the kids being assessed, the greater the risk of assigning false labels to them. It explains why the technique that is used must be proper and suitable for children. In addition, Brumen et. al (2009) that conducted study in three countries found that among four skills, mostly teachers are giving big portion to the
assessment for listening and speaking skills, even though the national guidelines clearly stated that the four skills should get equal attention. According to Rea-Dickens and Rixon (2000), different proportion occurs because the content of many testing for young learners are focused on grammar vocabulary items where it can be tested by traditional assessment that easy-to-mark procedure, meaning that assessing grammar vocabulary items in form of listening and speaking skills tested are more practical compared to writing. Widya (2012) found that strategies in assessing writing of young learners are alternative assessment such as portfolio, observation and K-W-L strategies. Portfolio chosen because it is easy to be used; teacher could give any comments on the works, and most importantly it is suitable because the teacher knew the students’ mistakes. Observation was chosen because the students could easily be assessed without disturbing any activities because teacher only have to prepare the point for assessing and it can be done during the teaching-learning process and students also could not cheat on exam. From the previous researches, it can be concluded that the teachers generally had principles in conducting the assessment, it regards to the suitability, practicality, and comprehension.
Having some information about those issues, this study specifically is designed to discover what techniques that appropriate to use for assessing writing especially for young learners case. This study attempts to investigate how those techniques are designed by the teacher since the success of assessment depends on the effective
would be limited only to find out what and how the techniques designed by the teacher.
1.2 Research Questions
1) What types of assessment techniques do the teachers adopt in assessing students’ writing ability?
2) How do the teachers design the instrument of assessment techniques to assess young learners’ students writing ability in English classroom?
1.3 Aim of the Study
The purpose of the research is to find out the teacher’s techniques and its instruments in assessing students’ writing ability to explore teachers’ knowledge of assessment for young learners. This research focuses on two major objectives. Firstly, it is aimed to find out about what assessment techniques the teachers adopt to assess students’ performance especially in writing skills. Then, the research is intended to find out how the teacher design the instrument of the assessment techniques used.
1.4 Scope of the Study
5
1.5 Significance of the Study
Theoretically, the findings of the research are expected can help teachers to explore the teachers’ knowledge of assessment for young learners. Thus, this study would be a reference for English students who investigate the similar variables, in this case related to the assessment for young learners.
Practically, the findings could provide information on what and how the English teachers assess their students’ performance especially in writing skills. Moreover, the findings would also help English students to know how to effectively design
assessment techniques and its instruments for young learners since appropriate techniques that are chosen determine the way teacher design the assessment that would be used in the classroom later.
1.6 Research Methodology 1.6.1 Design
This study used qualitative method in order to reach the objectives of the study. The research used qualitative method because it deals with assumptions, motives, reasons, goals, and values which are being the focuses of the writer’s questions. Moreover, qualitative method is more concerned with understanding situations and events from the point of view of the participant, and the participant usually involved directly in the research process itself (Fraenkle, 2012).
obtain the answer, the research used two main instruments, those namely document analysis and interview.
Document analysis was applied to acquire information regarding the assessment techniques applied in the classroom. Interview was used to acquire information from the teacher regarding the participant’s background, the idea and opinion about how the teacher developed the assessment. Interview was also employed as the way to reveal the factors and reasons that lead the teacher in designing those kinds of assessment techniques.
1.6.2 Site and Participant
The research takes place in one of junior high schools in Bandung. Two different English teachers from the school are being involved in the research. The teachers are English teacher who teach 1st grade of students in the school. The schools are selected based on two main reasons; those are the school qualification in accreditation, and the accessibility of the school.
1.6.3 Data Collection
As mentioned above, in this research, the data is collected by using document analysis and interview.
Document analysis
Document analysis is intended to find out the data regarding the teachers’ instrument of assessment. It covers the form of assessment techniques applied in the classroom includes the syllabus and lesson plans.
7
Interview
Interview is conducted to get some information and more focused to the ideas on how the teacher developed the assessment techniques that are usually used in the classroom to assess students’ writing, and teachers’ knowledge of teaching-learning and assessing students in English class. The teacher is also asked about some questions regarding their reason and opinion about the techniques chosen to support the data collected.
1.6.4 Data Analysis
In analyzing the data, document analysis is the first step to be done, and then interview is followed afterwards. Document analysis is conducted to analyze syllabus, lesson plan, and instruments of assessment that has been given to the students. Interview is conducted to acquire more information regarding teacher’s techniques and reasons in assessing their students. It also provides information about how and why the teacher chooses the assessment techniques. The data is analyzed, described, and synchronized with each of instruments to find the result and findings.
1.7 Clarification of Key Terms
learners in this research refers to the 1st grade of students in junior high school since their rate of age are in 11-12 years old who are considered as young learners according to Pinter (2006).
1.8 Organization of Paper
This paper is organized into five chapters as follows
CHAPTER I: Introduction
It contains background of the study, research questions, aim of the study,
scope of the study, significance of the study, research methodology, clarification of terms, and organization of the paper.
CHAPTER II: Theoretical Frameworks
This chapter consists of related theories from the experts that sited by the writer in this study. The theories are related to the topic about assessing writing of young learners.
CHAPTER III: Research Methodology
This chapter describes and elaborates more about the methods that used in doing the research which covers research design, site and participant of the research, data collection, and data analysis.
CHAPTER IV: Findings and Discussion
This chapter portrays the result and the findings of the study that will be explained literally and discussed in the discussion section.
CHAPTER V: Conclusion and Recommendation
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter discusses the methodology of the study that has been briefly explained in Chapter I. In this section, research design is covered first, and then site and participant follow afterwards. The overview of the methodology is continued to data collection which is done by using two techniques; document analysis and interview. Data analysis is presented as the last part of this chapter.
3.1 Research Design
The study is conducted to answer the questions as follows:
a. What types of assessment techniques do the teachers adopt in assessing
students’ writing ability?
b. How do the teachers design the instrument of assessment techniques to assess young learners’ writing ability in English classroom?
In relation to the qualitative method, descriptive study is chosen in order to describe explicitly what and how the teacher developed the assessment. As asserted by Grimes and Schulz (2002), a descriptive study is concern with and designed only to describe the existing distribution of variables. Descriptive was considered appropriate since it is intended to describe an intervention or phenomenon and the real-life context in which it occurred (Yin, 2003 in Baxter and Jack, 2008). The settings are naturals, in which there is nothing such control and treatment for subjects or variables of research, but rather within the context of its natural occurrence. (Hatch, 2002; Alwasilah, 2008).
This research includes a small number of participants; the sample is small and purposive, meaning that the participants involved in collecting data do not have to be large number, but it is selected purposively in accordance with the necessity of the investigation since researcher can gather information as much as possible from any accounts (Fraenkel and Wallen, 2006; Cresswell, 2007; Alwasilah, 2008).
3.2 Site
28
3.3 Participant
As the participants, two of English teachers who teach 1st grade of students in the school were involved in this study. The first teacher (T1) graduated from Non-Education Department in 2008 and has been teaching since he graduated from college, while the second teacher (T2) graduated from English Department and she has been teaching English for more than 30 years, meaning that the two teachers have
significant differences in the matter of educational background and teaching experiences.
3.4 Data Collection
As mentioned in Chapter I, the data collection methods of the study were document analysis and interview. The researcher analyzed the form of assessment implemented in the classroom includes the syllabus and lesson plans as the document analysis. Interview was conducted to the teacher by using a set of interview questions as the guidance of interview which was then transcribed. All instruments were used to discover what types of assessment techniques the teachers adopt, and how the teacher design those techniques with its instrument to assess students’ writing skills.
3.4.1 Document Analysis
see the ideal teaching-learning and its assessment plan that has been made by the teacher. The analysis document both from the syllabus and the lesson plans of each teacher would be compared to each other to be then analyzed. Meanwhile, the table below showed the analysis guideline of the syllabus and lesson plans:
Table 2
Guideline of Document Analysis
No. Notion
1. Identifying the objective of the lesson plan
2. Comparing the objectives in the lesson plan with the syllabus
3. Identifying teacher’s techniques of assessment
4. Identifying the instrument of assessment techniques
3.4.2 Interview
According to Cohen, Manion, and Morrison (2007), interview functions to
look into participant’s experience and concern of situation from their point of view.
Interview is intended to know what happen to people. It is needed as directive means of finding what people are thinking, feeling, and doing (Given, 2008).
30
In this study, the interview was a formal interview where it was guided by a set of questions. According to Hatch (2002) as cited in Maulida (2013), formal interview is called as structured/semi-structured interview where guideline questions are included and designed to see the level of understanding of the participant. A semi-structured interview was planned to create a set of open-ended questions for the interview, but additional questions to explore much more information needed from participants were presented as the interview proceeded. Setyadi (2006) also states that formal interview is an interview where the topic of the question has been prepared to
avoid similar or unnecessary information from different participant, even it is naturally flexible to add spontaneous question to find out more information in detail.
In addition, the interviews were simultaneously carried out with audio-tapping. By taking audio-tapping while interviewing the participants has a lot of benefits, Firstly, the researcher is free to think creatively while the interviews are taking place. Secondly, it allows the researcher later to analyze the statements
recorded. Then, recording participants’ words ensures reliability of the data as well as
the whole data are recorded (Creswell, 2007; Given, 2008). As the result,
audio-tapping participants’ interviews make researcher more assured that they are capturing what so called the essence of interview’s intents (Given, 2008). Meanwhile, the
interview consists of which are specifically organized based on the following guideline:
Table 3
Guideline of the interview
Details Item Number
Identifying teachers’ background 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Identifying teachers’ knowledge of teaching
young learners
Identifying teachers’ techniques in assessing
writing skills
10, 11, 12
The weaknesses and the benefits of the assessment techniques
13, 14
The difficulties and how to handle it 15, 16
3.5 Data Analysis
In every single study, data analysis is very important part in order to give meaning to the data gathered. It can be simultaneously since the researcher begins to undertake the data collection up until the purposes of the research are pursued and completed (Denzin & Lincoln, 1998; Fraenkel & Wallen, 2006; Creswell, 2008).
To analyze data, Denzin and Lincoln (1998) purpose an interactive model as an
ongoing process throughout the whole investigation process. It is containing three sub-processes adapted from Denzin and Lincoln (1998) that can be illustrated as follows:
Figure 1 (Component of Data Analysis: Interactive Model)
1. Data Reduction, it functions to select the essential and relevant data to the study under investigation. This reduction of data was carried out based on research
DATA COLLECTION
CONCLUSION DRAWING/VERIFICATION
32
questions and purpose of the research. Not all part of the lesson plans were captured to be extracted in the analysis, it was only the evaluation part in the lesson plan. As for the interview, it was only some certain statements that was extracted to be analyzed.
2. Data Display, it can be presented in the form of structured summaries, synopses, vignettes, diagrams and matrices with text. It enables researcher to give clear view of what was happening and what to do in further analysis as well as
conclusion drawing about its meaning. To display the data, evaluation parts from
the teachers’ lesson plans and some certain statements were extracted in the discussion part of this paper.
3. Conclusion Drawing/Verification is the last step to draw and to verify conclusion.
It is involved researcher’s interpretation to make sense of the displayed data. The
findings are process here and compared with one data to another. It is called
“Data Transformation” because the data is condensed, clustered, sorted, and
linked over time. The displayed data from the lesson plans and interview were synchronized to find out the techniques used by the teachers related to assessing writing and how the assessments were designed.
Figure 2 (The Steps in Analyzing the Data)
The first step to do before analyzing the data was to transcribe the recorded interviews by doing audio-tapping. The formal interviews were conducting once to each teacher, but it was possible to have less formal or informal interview that is not recorded. It was conducted if the information recorded from the formal interview was not clear or need more clarification. The transcriptions were then classified to see the information related to the theme of the research questions.
The second step was to analyze the syllabus and the teachers’ lesson plans that
the researcher gained from the teachers. The syllabus that used by the teachers were the same since it was included in the new curriculum used in the school which is called Kurikulum 2013. With regards to the syllabus, the lesson plans made by the teachers were compared and analyzed.
Having the data classified, the last step to do was analyzed and concluded the data according to the necessity and the research purposes; to find out the techniques
used in assessing writing and how it was designed and developed to assess students’
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS, SUGGESTIONS, AND LIMITATION OF THE STUDY
This chapter describes the conclusions and suggestions of the study. The conclusions present a whole of interpretation of the discussion in the previous chapter. Furthermore, suggestions are made as the follow-up of this study and a
reference for the next paper related study of assessing writing skills for young learners.
5.1 Conclusions
Assessment is needed to be done by teacher because it is important to check students in achieving the objectives of learning. It is concerned with what the students will be able to do, say or write as the result of their teaching. Assessing young learners can be problematic, because teaching and assessing young learners is different from assessing adults (Cameron, 2001; Hughes, 2003; Pinter, 2006). It is also important to know what skills which are going to be assessed. Specifically, writing for young learners only focus on mastering roman alphabet, copying, handwriting, spelling, and basic sentence formation (Georgio & Pavlou, 2003). Along with the constructs of writing, what is being assessed from the students were focus on five aspects, those are content, organization, vocabulary, language use, and mechanics (Jacobs, et al. in Weigle, 2001).
With regards to the first research question there are some techniques that
portfolio, and homework. The techniques are appropriate to be used to assess young learners and their writing skills since it is not stressful and competitive (Shaaban, 2001; Harmer, 2004; Pinter, 2006). Yet, providing feedback in assessing writing is needed. It is not only for correcting students, but also offering them assessment of how well they have done (Harmer, 2004). However, choosing appropriate techniques do not guarantee the techniques were
used appropriately. The teachers have to understand of students’ characteristics,
the objectives of learning, the aspects of the skills tested, and how it would be
used so that the assessment will be successful.
In responding to the second research question, the teachers have similarities and different ideas in designing the assignment. In designing the assessment, teachers have to focus on the criteria of assessment, where the assessment were based on the objectives of learning that have been made which has been referred to the syllabus. According to the theory, good assessment employs multiple techniques to enhance validity and reliability. It is also can
help teachers to obtain clearer picture about their students’ learning (McMillan,
2000; Shaaban, 2001; Brown, 2004; Pinter, 2006). From the study, it can be seen that teachers have different views and ways to do the assessment, they rely on their understanding of what and how the assessment for writing must be designed.
5.2 Suggestions
54
A further study would be needed to investigate more comprehensively about the implementation of the techniques to assess writing for young learners in the classroom. Furthermore, it will also lead to know the effectiveness of the techniques in assessing writing. Additionally, it would be much better if the further study conducted some observations that can give more accurate analysis of how the assessment developed and implemented in the classroom.
5.3 Limitation of The study
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alwasilah, A. C & Sussana. S. (2007). Pokoknya Menulis: Cara Baru Menulis dengan Metode Kolaborasi. Bandung: Kiblat Buku Utama.
Aminuddin, M. (2009). Analysis of Teachers’ Use of English Institutional Materials:
From Preparation to Implementation: A Case Study of English Institutional Material Use by English Teacher at STIA LAN Bandung. A Thesis – Unpublished.
Bailey, A. L. & Patricia, A. Carol. (2015). Assessment of English Language Learners in the Era of New Academic Content Standards. Review of Research in Education: vol. 39, 253-294.
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by Principles (2nd ed.). New York: Longman.
Brown, H. D. (2003). Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom Practice. New York: Longman
Cameron, L. (2001). Teaching Language to Young Learners. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
Christine, Coombe. (2010). Assessing foreign/second language writing ability, Education, Business and Society: Contemporary Middle Eastern Issues. Vol. 3 Iss 3 pp. 178 - 187
56
Clark, L. Irene. (2003). Concepts in Composition: Theory and Practice in Teaching of Writing. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Publisher.
Coker, D. (2006). The Impact of Firstgrade Factors On The Growth and Outcomes of
Urban Schoolchildren’s Primary-Grade Writing. Journal of Education
Psychology, 98, 471-488
Diem, C. D. (2011). A Model for Teaching Young Learners. TEFLIN Journal. 22(2), 125-149.
Emilia, E. (2011). Pendekatan Genre-Based dalam Pengerjaan Bahasa Inggris: Petunjuk Untuk Guru. Bandung: Rizqi Press.
Fathurrohman, Pupuh & Aa Suryana. (2012). Guru Profesional. Bandung: Refika Aditama
Fraenkel, R. J., et al. (2012). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education. New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Gass, Susan. N and Larry Selinker. (2009). Second Language Acquisition: An Introductory Course (3rd Ed). New York: Routledge.
Georgio, S. & P. Pavlou. (2003). Assessing Young Learners. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gordon, T. (2007). Teaching Young Children a Second Language. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.
Halliwell, S. (2004). Teaching English to Young Learner in The Primary Classroom. United Kingdom: Longman.
Harris, T. I & Hodges, R. E. (1995). The Literacy Dictionary: The Vocabulary of Reading and Writing. New York: IRA
Harmer, J. (2004). How to Teach Writing. London: Pearson Educational Limited.
Harmer, J. (2001). The Practice of English Language Teaching (3rd Ed). United Kingdom: Longman.
Harmer. J. (2007). The Practice of English Language Teaching 4th Ed. New York: Longman.
Hayes, D. (2009). Primary Teaching Today: An Introduction. New York: Routledge.
Hughes, A. (2003). Testing for Language Teacher (2nd. Ed). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Hughes, J. M. (2007). Teaching Language and Literacy [Online]. Available at: http://faculty.voit.ca/
Huhta, Ari, et. al. (2014). Assessing learners’ writing skills in a SLA study: Validating the rating process across tasks, scales and languages. Language Testing, 31(3), 307-328.
Hyland, K. (2008). Teaching and Researching Writing (2nd Ed). Edinburg: Pearson
Kim, Y. & Kim, J. (2005). Teaching Korean University Writing Class: Balancing The Process and The Genre Approach. ASIAN EFL Journal Quarterly, 7 (2),
58
Kirkpatrick, Andi. (2012). English as an International Language in Asia: Implication for Language Education. New York: Springer
Laksmi, D.L. (2006). Scaffolding Students Writing In EFL Class: Implementing Process Approach. TEFLIN Journal, 17(2), 144-156.
Lengkanawati, N. S. (2007). Ilmu dan Aplikasi Pendidikan Bagian 3: Pendidikan Bahasa. Tim Pengembang Ilmu Pendidikan FIP-UPI: Imperia Bhakti Utama
Luoma, Sari & Mirja Tarnanen. (2014). Creating a self-rating instrument for second language writing: from idea to implementation. Language Testing, 20 (4) 440–
465.
Manser, Martin. H. (2000). The Facts of File Guide to Good Writing. New York: Facts on File, Inc.
McKay, P. (2006). Assessing Young Language Learners. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mertler, Craig A. (2001). Designing Scoring Rubrics for Your Classroom. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 7(25). Retrieved from http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=7&n=25
Mihram, Danielle. (n. d.) Classroom Assessment Techniques. Retrieved from http://www.crlt.umich.edu/sites/default/files/resource_files/ClassroomAssessm
entTechniquesHopkins.pdf
Moon, Jayne. (2005). Children Learning English. Thailand: Macmillan Publisher Limited.
Mooney, C. G. (2000). Theories of Childhood: An Introduction to Dewey, Montessori, Errickson, Piaget, and Vigotsky. Ney York: Redleaf Press.
Murray, D. M. (1982). A Writer Teaches Writing. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Musthafa, B. (2010). Teaching English to Young Learners in Indonesia: Essential Requirements. Educationist, 4(2), 120-125.
NCRLC. (n. d.). The Essentials of Language Teaching. Retrieved from
http://www.nclrc.org/essentials/assessing/alternative.htm
Nissa, A. C. (2010). Assessment Techniques for Young Learners. A Report in Indonesia University of Education (UPI): unpublished.
Nurlaelawati, Iyen. (2009). Teaching English to Young Learners: Believes and Practices. A Thesis – Unpublished.
NSW State Literacy and Numeracy Plan. (n. d.). Assessing Students Writing
Achievement. Retrieved from
http://www.schools.nsw.edu.au/media/downloads/schoolsweb/studentsupport/p
rograms/lrngdificulties/writespellsec2.pdf
Oh, Saerhim. (2011). Classroom-based Language Assessment for Young Language Learners. 11(1), 55-56.
60
Pinter, A. (2006). Teaching Young Language Learners. New York: Oxford University Press
Pratiwi, Santi. D. (2011). Teachers’ Strategies in Teaching Grammar to Young Learners. A Thesis – Unpublished.
Public Schools of North Caroline. (2009). Teacher Evaluation Process. Retrieved from http://www.ncpublicschools.org/docs/effectiveness-model/ncees/instruments/teach-eval-manual.pdf
Rea-Dickins, P. & Rixon, S. (1999) Assessment of young learners of English: Reasons and means. In S. Rixon (Eds.). Young learners of English: Some research perspectives (pp. 89-101). Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
Rixon, S. Pearson Longman. Assessment of Young Learners of English. Retrieved from www.english-adventure.net/pdfs/assessment_of_young_learners.pdf
Santrock, John. W. (2007). Child Development (2nd Ed). New York: McGraw-Hill Companies.
Schaefer, Edward. (2008). Rater Bias Patterns In An EFL Writing Assessment.
Language Testing, 25(4), 465-493
.
Setiyadi, Bambang. Ag. (2006). Metode PEnelitian Untuk Pengajaran Bahasa Asing: Pendekatan Kuantitatif dan Kualitatif. Yogyakarta: Graha Ilmu
Shaaban, Kassim. (2001). Forum: Assessment of Young Learners. 39 (4), 18-28.
Smith, I. (Translated by P.A Lestari). (2011). Strategi Penilaian Untuk Belajar. Jakarta: Erlangga Group.
Spandel, V. (2004). Creating Writers’ Thought 6itrait Writing Assessment and
Instruction. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Tom, Bourner. (2003). Assessing reflective learning. Education + Training, Vol. 45 Iss 5 pp. 267 - 272
Weigle, Sara. Cushing. (2001). Assessing Writing. Cambridge: Cambrdige University Press.
Widya, Rani. N. (2012). Teachers’ Strategies in Assessing Writing In sn EYL Context. A Thesis – Unpublished.
Williams, J.G. (2003). Providing Feedback on ESL Students’ Written Assignment.
