DEVELOPING ENGLISH SYLLABUS SPEAKING

COURSE
(A Developmental Study at Yayasan Pendidikan Islam Ibuku An-
nisaa)

THESIS
Completed in Partial Requirement for Completion of Master‘s
Degree
at English Department, Faculty of Tarbiya and Educational Sciences
Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University Jakarta

By
Ghassani Mandasari
21160140000018

GRADUATE PROGRAM OF ENGLISH EDUCATION

FACULTY OF TARBIYA AND EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES
SYARIF HIDAYATULAH STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY
JAKARTA
2020 M. /1441 H.

i
 STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY

I hereby declare that thesis entitled: Developing English

Syllabus Speaking Course (A Developmental Study at Yayasan
Pendidikan Islam Ibuku An-nisaa) represents my originality work
and that I have to use another sources except as noted by citations.
All data, tables, figures and text citations which have been produced
from other sources have been explicitly acknowledged as such. I
have read and understood the Ministry of National Education
(MoNE) of Indonesia decree No.17 year 2010 regarding plagiarism
in higher education, therefore I am responsible for any claims iin the
future regarding the originality of my thesis.
Ciputat, August 2020

Ghassani Mandasari
NIM.21160140000018

ii
APPROVAL OF THE SUPERVISOR

iii
 APPROVAL OF THE EXAMINERS

DEVELOPING ENGLISH SYLLABUS SPEAKING

COURSE
(A Developmental Study at Yayasan Pendidikan Islam Ibuku An-
nisaa)

A Thesis

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of Requirements for the Degree of

Master of Education (M.Pd.) in Graduate Program of English
Education

By

Ghassani Mandasari
NIM. 2116014000018

Approved by the Examiners

Dr.Alek, M.Pd Dr. Farida Hamid, M.Pd

NIP.196909122009011008 NIP. 196310101991032003

GRADUATE PROGRAM OF ENGLISH EDUCATION

FACULTY OF EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES
SYARIF HIDAYATULLAH STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY
JAKARTA
2020 M./1441 H.

iv
ENDORSEMENT SHEET

v
ABSTRACT
Developing English Syllabus Speaking Course
(A Developmental Study at Yayasan Pendidikan Islam Ibuku
Annisaa)
The objective of the research were (1) analysing the aspects in YPII
English speaking syllabus course (2) developing the YPII English
Speaking Syllabus Course (3) displaying the entity of YPII English
Speaking Syllabus Course. The research is conducted in Yayasan
Pendidikan Islam Ibuku Annisaa English Speaking Course for
teachers. This research belongs to educational research and
development (R&D) using a simplified six phases of Borg and
Gall‘s model (2019). There are planning which involved Focus
Group Discussion with the instructors and supervisors, the
development of preliminary form of product involves the analysis of
data collection for syllabus design. The preliminary field testing,
the main product revision and dissemination and implementation.
The findings show that the needs of daily conversation and
instruction in the classroom to accommodate them with the students.
Consequently, the communicative competence syllabus is needed to
accommodate daily conversation and instruction in the classroom to
accommodate them with the students as it is focused on speaking
skills and interactive activities.
Keywords: English syllabus speaking course

vi
ABSTRAK
Pengembangan Silabus Kursus Berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris
(Studi Pengembangan pada Yayasan Pendidikan Islam Ibuku
Annisaa)
Tujuan penelitian ini adalah (1) menganalisis aspek-aspek dalam
silabus kursus bahasa Inggris YPII (2) mengembangkan silabus
kursus bahasa Inggris YPII (3) menampilkan silabus kursus bahasa
Inggris YPII. Penelitian ini dilakukan di silabus kursus bahasa
Inggris untuk para guru Yayasan Pendidikan Islam Ibuku Annisaa.
Penelitian ini menggunakan enam fase sederhana educational
research and development (R&D) oleh Borg and Gall‘s model
(2019). Diawali dengan planning berisikan Focus Group Discussion
dengan para pengajar dan supervisor, lalu development of
preliminary form of product yang meliputi analisis pengumpulan
data untuk desain silabus, the preliminary field testing, the main
product revision and dissemination dan implementation. Hasil dari
penerlitian menunjukkan bahwa kebutuhan percakapan sehari-hari
dan instruksi kelas dapat mengakomodasi interaksi para guru dan
murid. Maka, silabus communicative competence di perlukan untuk
mengakomodasi percakapan seari-hari dan instruksi kelas yang
difokuskan di keterampilan berbicara dan aktifitas interaktif.
Kata kunci: Silabus Pengembangan Bahasa Inggris

vii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Alhamdulillahirabbil‘alamin. Praises be to Allah, the most

Gracious and Merciful, who has given me His remarkable blessing
and mercy so that she could finish this thesis. And may peace and
blessing of Allah be upon Muhammad SAW, his family, friends, and
companions. She would like to use this opportunity, to express my
great appreciation to her beloved mother, Ruzianty Sari Hikmawati
Darwis, B.Sc, my only one, M. Tri Panca Wiratama S.Sos, her
sonshine/my life, Aidan, her sister Haura Hafizhah, S.Ikom and her
brothers, M. Naufal Farras, and M. Hafizh Qabus for their endless
love, support and prayers. No words could possibly explain how
grateful she is, having a wonderful human being by her side like
them.
Furthermore, she would like to offer my thanks to all those
who have helped and supported me during the process of writing
this thesis. Her best gratitude goes to her supervisor Dr. Fahriany,
M.Pd. for her valuable suggestions and encouragement to me during
the process of writing this thesis. Her examiners, Dr. Alek, M.Pd for
his precious perspectives, Dr. Ratna Sari Dewi for her mind-opening
perspectives and Dr. Farida Hamid, M.Pd for her valuable insights.
To the Dean of Educational Sciences, Dr. Sururin, M.Ag, for the
encouragement of foinishing this thesis.
She would also like to convey her gratitude to Siti Apia, S.
Si as the head of Yayasan Pendidikan Islam Ibuku Annisaa and RDT
Puspasari, M.Psi, as the Yayasan Pendidikan Islam Ibuku Annisaa

viii
course supervisor who have sincerely given her their valuable
advice and suggestions during the process of this thesis.
Her special thanks go to all her friends of MPBI 2016
especially MPBI A class who always successfully burst her into
laughter. Especially, Mbak Cici Kurniasih, Mbak Imas Masturoh,
Tika, Pipit, Zakiyah, Robiyatul Adawiyah, Ayumi and Mbak Santi
Setyaningsih. Thank you for the support, help and thoughtfulness
during all this time and for all the laughter and togetherness.
Finally, she hopes that this thesis will give some contributions to the
readers. However, she realizes that this thesis is far from being
perfect. Therefore, any suggestions, ideas, and criticisms for further
improvement of this thesis are highly appreciated.

Ciputat. August 2020

Ghassani Mandasari

ix
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

COVER PAGE ................................................................................... i

STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY .................................................. ii
APPROVAL OF THE SUPERVISOR ............................................. iii
APPROVAL OF THE EXAMINERS .............................................. iv
ENDORSEMENT SHEET ................................................................ v
ABSTRACT ....................................................................................... vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................... viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................. x
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................ xiii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ......................................................... xv
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ................................................... 1
A. Background of the Research ....................................................... 1
B. Research Questions ..................................................................... 6
C. Research Objectives .................................................................... 7
D. Research Significance ................................................................. 7
CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW ..................................... 8
A. Speaking ...................................................................................... 8
1. The Notion of Speaking .......................................................... 8
2. Aspects of speaking................................................................. 9
3. Spoken versus written discourse ........................................... 11
4. Purpose of speaking .............................................................. 13
5. Speaking genres .................................................................... 13

x
 6. Speaking sub- skills............................................................... 14
B. Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) ............................. 15
1. Notion of Communicative Language Teaching.................... 15
2. Principles of CLT ................................................................. 17
3. Roles of Teachers and Students in CLT ............................... 17
4. English for Foreign Language in CLT ................................. 21
C. Communicative Competence .................................................... 21
1. Communicative Competence in Communicative Approach 22
2. CLT and Communicative Competence ................................ 23
D. Adult.......................................................................................... 25
E. Andragogy ................................................................................. 26
1. Andragogical Approach to Learning .................................... 28
a. Informed learners................................................................... 29
b. Self-concept and taking responsibility ................................. 29
c. Self-directed learning ............................................................ 30
d. Experiential learning ............................................................. 31
e. Transformational learning ..................................................... 32
F. Adult English for Foreign Language Learner ........................... 33
1. Teaching English as Foreign Language for Adults .............. 34
G. Needs Analysis .......................................................................... 43
1. Purpose of Need Analysis .................................................... 43
2. Types of Needs Analysis ...................................................... 44
3. The Approach to Need Analysis ........................................... 45
4. Procedure for Conducting Need Analysis ............................ 51
H. Syllabus ..................................................................................... 54
1. The objective of the syllabus ................................................ 55
2. Components of the syllabus.................................................. 55

xi
 3. Approach and Types of Syllabus .......................................... 57
4. Types of CLT Syllabus ......................................................... 58
5. Communicative Competence as an Alternative Approach to
Syllabus Design in ELT ........................................................ 60
6. Syllabus Evaluation ............................................................... 61
I. Previous Related Research ........................................................ 62
CHAPTER III: RESEARCH AND METHODOLOGY ............ 65
A. Research Design ........................................................................ 65
B. Research Setting ........................................................................ 66
C. Research Instrument .................................................................. 67
D. Resources of the Data................................................................ 67
E. Procedure of Data Collection .................................................... 67
F. Procedure of Data Analysis ....................................................... 70
G. Triangulation ............................................................................. 70
CHAPTER IV: FINDING AND DISCUSSION ......................... 72
A. Data Description........................................................................ 72
1. What are the aspects included in developing English speaking
syllabus course in YPII? ....................................................... 72
2. How to develop English speaking syllabus course in YPII? . 87
3. What is the entity of English speaking syllabus course in
YPII?..................................................................................... 97
B. Discussions ................................................................................ 99
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS ......... 104
A. Conclusion............................................................................... 104
B. Suggestion ............................................................................... 104
REFERENCES ............................................................................ 106
APPENDICES ............................................................................. 110
xii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1 The Needs Analysis Framework .................................... 52

Figure 3.1 R&D Cycle from Borg and Gall .................................... 66

xiii
 LIST OF APPENDICES

Interview Protocol for Head of the Foundation ............................. 110

Interview Protocol for Training Supervisor .................................. 112
Interview Protocol for Teachers .................................................... 113
Interview Protocol for Students ..................................................... 114
Result of Interview for Head of the Foundation ............................ 115
Result of Interview for Training Supervisors ................................ 120
Result of Interview for Teachers ................................................... 125
Result of Interview for Students .................................................... 132
Result of Forum Group Discussion (FGD) ................................... 146
Blueprint of Questionnaire ............................................................ 156
Table of Preliminary Development ............................................... 162
Table of Main Product Revision.................................................... 187
Developed Syllabus Term One ...................................................... 212
Developed Syllabus Term Two ..................................................... 221

xiv
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CLT : Communicative language teaching

CNP : Communication Needs Processor
ESL : English as a Second Language
EFL : English as Foreign Language
L2 : Second Language
NA : Needs Analysis
R&D : Research and Development
TSA : Target Situation Analysis

xv
 CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

This chapter consists of background of the research, focus and

sub-focus of the research, research questions, objective of the
research and significance of the research.

A. Background of the Research

English as a tool to communicate is the dominant international
language. It is widely used in all sectors such as communications,
science, information technology, business, entertainment and
diplomacy. Therefore, the acquisition of English serves as the
primarily skill to enhance the competence development. In this term,
communicative competence is needed as Gao in TESOL Quarterly
36, (2012, p.21) said that the acquisition of English language skills
is needed to provide life-changing development that links to
governmental and academic circles which the demand of
communicative competence in English is required. Before going any
further with the communicative competence term, it is comprised of
two words, the combination of which means competence to
communicate as stated by Bagaric and Djigunovic in Sidik (2018,
pp. 94-103). To communicate effectively in a language requires the
speaker‘s good understanding of linguistic, sociolinguistic and
socio-cultural aspects of the language. These factors determine the
speaker to use the right language, context and purpose. If those
factors are covered, he can be referred to as communicatively
competent. However, this communicative competent has become a
challenge for foreign language learners. They often embrace the
obstacles through their journey towards the achievement of this goal.
Therefore, as cited in Mappiase and Sihes (2014, p.119) there is a
1
need of adequate improvement in Indonesian English curriculum
both in curriculum and the teachers to achieve this goal. As in
Indonesia, although English is taught in all units from primary to
high schools, the competency-based language curriculum is
emphasized on the performance-based outcomes in the forms of
national standards. Furthermore, the 2013 curriculum focuses four
essential skills in English. It covers listening, speaking, writing and
reading which the learning activities emphasize in communicative
competence. As Yassi and Kaharuddin (2015, p. 8) stated that the
2013 curriculum serves influential communicative functions in
student-centered learning activities. Through the student-centered
learning activities, students are able to explore their skills and
teachers deliver the materials as guidance, they will serve as
facilitators.
Moreover, Dardjowidjojo (2013, p. 13) said that, this new
approach encourages flexible and independent learning. It can be
concluded that by this development of the curriculum, teachers as
the agent of change, put significant part of this improvement and
relies on teacher competencies in delivering materials. The role of
teacher competencies covered in The Lecturer and Teacher Act of
Republic of Indonesia No.14 2005, it defines that the teacher
competence is a set of certain skill, knowledge and behaviour. This
set should be required by teachers and lecturers in doing
professional work. In addition, Broke and Stone in Kheruniah (2013,
p. 45) defined competence as the descriptive of qualitative nature or
teacher behaviour appears to be entirely meaningful. There are four
competencies of teachers‘ requirement, pedagogical, attitude, social
and professional competence. (Article 10 verse (1) of the Lecturer

2
and Teacher‘s Act No. 14 2005). One of the competence to highlight
is pedagogical competence which is an ability to develop students.
The pedagogic competence is the teacher‘s ability in developing
learning process, curriculum, syllabus, and most importantly the
actualization of students‘ potential. The role of the teacher plays
pivotal part in communicative language teaching. The teacher is a
facilitator of his students‘ learning, as a model of language user and
learner as one of his major responsibilities is to promote
communication. Freeman in Thamarana (2014, p.2) also says that in
communicative language teaching the teacher is the initiator of the
activities, but he does not always himself interact with the students.
One of the basic assumptions of the Communicative Approach is
that students will be more motivated to study a foreign language
since they will feel they are learning to do something useful with the
language they study. Teachers give students an opportunity to
express their individuality by having them share their ideas and
opinions on a regular basis. This helps students ―to integrate the
foreign language with their own personality and thus to feel more
emotionally secure with it Littlewood (2013, p. 3). A teacher
evaluates not only his students‘ accuracy, but also their fluency. In
the further development, the communicative approach has broaden
its scope to communicative competence as cited by Hymes in Yassi
and Kaharuddin (2015, p. 8) defining the concept as the requirement
of knowledge and ability in using the language. Meanwhile,
Richards (2010, p. 150) put focus on the use of language knowledge
in producing and understanding meaningful communication. Thus, it
does not only stand in grammatical but also the sociolinguistic and
contextual competence. In line with national teacher‘s competence

3
of Article 10 verse (1) of the Lecturer and Teacher‘s role in
communicative competence, the writer has concern in Yayasan
Pendidikan Islam Ibuku An-nisaa‘(YPII), a place where she teaches,
to develop communicative competence syllabus for teachers.
Particularly in the English Language Teaching program. YPII as the
education institution of early to secondary education held the
English Language Training for regular playgroup to elementary
school teachers to cope with the students‘ high exposure of English,
as the writer has presented the arguments above, students need
teachers‘ English communicative competence to face the
globalization era. It has been held for two years and has no specific
syllabus with proper needs analysis development. Through the need
analysis development, it will reveal what the teachers‘ need in
communicating with the students, what the teachers‘ wants and the
lack gap between the previous and current syllabus. Moreover, the
Research and Development phase of Borg and Gall will cover the
evaluation in two phases. Meanwhile, the challenge that the writer
face is the limited time and changes of participant total. In the
preliminary development, there are 51 YPII teachers who joins the
afternoon English Speaking Course called English Language
Training that has been held since 2015. Therefore, there are 58
students in total in main product revision phase as the 7 new
teachers joined to replace the resigned are changes. As its main
purpose is to develop the teachers‘ communicative competence, the
most ideal approach to develop the syllabus is the Communicative
Language Teaching. Therefore, in keeping with the general notion
of teaching practice, the English teacher is also expected to carry out
practical tasks in the classroom which are informed by some

4
psychological or linguistic principles with the purpose of facilitating
students‘ development of communicative competence in the target
language. In fact, in the recent decades, the particular field of
teaching English as a foreign language (TEFL) has gained a wide
diversity of pedagogical practices to develop students‘
communicative competence, the communicative approaches being
the most needed. The development of communicative competence
involves the acquisition and use of language skills. In an array of the
development of these communicative language skills, the English
teacher has a wide options from pre-communicative activities to
proper communication activities. The development of
communicative activities in the classroom also implies that teachers
and learners expect certain roles. Richards and Rodgers (2010, p.
10) noted that one of the teacher‘s roles is a facilitator, which
encourages interaction and communication among learners.
Furthermore, according to Larsen-Freeman (2010, pp. 21-22),
during the activities the teacher acts as a counsellor, answering
questions and monitoring the students‘ performance while Harmer
(2010, p. 70) is communicator, or participant. As communicator
teacher is assumed to contribute actively in tasks that encourages
interaction among students, while, according to Larsen-Freeman
(2010, p.56), the teacher should take part as a counsellor to provide
the development of communicative competence feedback from the
strengths and weaknesses of the students. In all of the teacher roles
definition, the teacher itself should have the four kinds of
communicative competence skills in this global era, in accordance
with the curriculum, such as listening, speaking, reading and
writing. According to Richards (2010, p. 201), the large portion of

5
English language learner in the world is improving their proficiency
in speaking as for what my research participants need. Thus, Shumin
(2012, p. 204) stated that to achieve the speaking proficiency level,
the learners should possess the concept of grammar, vocabulary,
pronunciation and contextual meaning. Therefore, the competence
of communicate will be gained. By this concept, the communicative
competence of this research will be focus on how implementation of
the ability and skill in the communicative events. To provide a
sufficient syllabus of this research, a systematic and formal
procedure will be developed. To fulfil the needs, the research will
apply Munby‘s communicative syllabus and Richards‘
communicative competence curriculum development model.
Munby‘s communicative syllabus is used to gain participants‘ needs,
domain and profile while Richards‘ communicative competence
curriculum development model will be used to form the language
knowledge and ability framework. This combination is needed to to
develop a comprehensive, practical and reliable syllabus for the
YPII teachers. Therefore, the syllabus will apply the
communicative-competence based framework and syllabus.

B. Research Questions
1. What are the aspects included in developing English
speaking syllabus course in YPII ?
2. How to develop English speaking syllabus course in YPII?
3. What is the entity of the English speaking syllabus course in
YPII?

6
C. Research Objectives
1. The study has analysed the aspects in YPII English speaking
syllabus course.
2. The study has developed the YPII English speaking syllabus
course.
3. The study has displayed the entity of the YPII English
speaking syllabus course.

D. Research Significance
The results of this research were expected to give some
significance not only theoretically but also practically.
1. Theoritically
Theoritical significance goes to YPII English speaking
course students and other researcher. For YPII English
speaking course students, this research can provide
information on theory of communicative competence
syllabus.
2. Practically
Practical significance goes to English lecturer, students,
other researcher and institution. For English teacher, this
research can become guidance in developing syllabus and
material that accommodate students‘ need. For students, it
can make them are able to study based on their field. For
other researchers, it can be her/his reference in doing similar
research and further studies can be conducted in a larger
scale. For the institution, it can be used to improve
educational quality.

7
 CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW

In line with the objective of this study, some essential

fundamental aspect, this can provide information on characteristics
and theoretical aspects of some terms related to the study, need to be
highlighted in this section. In this concern, the section provides
Communicative Language Teaching theory, communicative
competence, need analysis theory, syllabus theory and previous
studies.

A. Speaking

1. The Notion of Speaking

There are two main approaches are adopted to define speaking,
the bottom-up and the top down approach. Bygate (2017, pp. 5-6)
points out that traditionally the focus in speaking was on motor
perceptive skills. Within this context, speaking is defined as the
production of auditory signals designed to produce differential
verbal responses in a listener. It is considered as combining sounds
in a systematic way, according to language specific principles to
form meaningful utterances. This approach is adopted by audio-
lingualism. Eventually, in terms of teaching speaking, the bottom-up
approach suggests that we should start with teaching the smallest
units- sounds and move through mastery of words and sentences to
discourse as stated by Cornbleet & Carter (2011, p. 18). Actually,
the problem with this approach is that it overlooks the interactive
and social aspect of speaking, restricting it only to its psychomotor
sense. This top-down view considers the spoken texts the product of
cooperation between two or more interactants in shared time, and a

8
shared physical context. Thus, Nunan (2019, p. 45) suggested that,
rather than teaching learners to make well-formed sentences and
then -putting these to use in discourse we should encourage learners
to take part in spoken discourse from the beginning and then they
will acquire the smaller units. Attempting to elaborate more on the
interactive nature of speaking, Luoma (2014, p. 2) define speaking
as an interactive process of constructing meaning that involves
producing, receiving and processing information. Its form and
meaning are dependent on the context in which it occurs, including
the participants themselves, the physical environment, and the
purposes for speaking. It is often spontaneous, openended, and
evolving. However, speech is not always unpredictable. Language
functions (or patterns) that tend to recur in certain discourse
situations can be identified. It is this latter approach that is adopted
in the current study, and speaking is defined as the learner's ability
to express himself/herself orally, coherently, fluently and
appropriately in a given meaningful context.

2. Aspects of speaking
Eventually, aspects of the speaking skill need to be closely
scrutinized and put into consideration. These aspects pose some
challenges and identify some guidelines for understanding this skill
and hence design instructional activities to prepare learners to
communicate effectively in real life situations.

a. Speaking is face to face:

Most conversations take place face to face which allows speakers to
get immediate feedback, i.e. ―Do listeners understand? Are they in

9
agreement? Do they sympathize? Thus Cornbleet &Carter (2011, p.
16) suggested that communication through speaking has many
assets, such as facial expressions, gestures and even body
movements. Speaking also occurs, most of the time, in situations
where participants or interlocutors are present.

b. Speaking is interactive:
Turn taking, a main feature in interaction, is an unconscious part of
normal conversation. Turn takings are handled and signaled
differently across different cultures, thus as stated by Donough &
Mackey (2010, p. 84) causing possible communication difficulties in
conversation between people of different cultures and languages.

c. Speaking happens in real time:

During conversations, responses are unplanned and spontaneous and
the speakers think on their feet, and producing language . These
constraints affect the speaker's ability to plan, to organize the
message, and to control the language being used. Speakers often
start to say something and change their mind midway; which is
termed a false start. The speaker's sentences also cannot be as long
or as complex as in writing. Similarly, Miller (2010, p.27) said that
speakers occasionally forget things they intended to say; or they may
even forget what they have already said, and so they repeat
themselves. This implies that the production of speech in real time
imposes pressures, but also allows freedoms in terms of
compensating for these difficulties. The use of formulaic
expressions, hesitation devices, self-correction, rephrasing and
repetition can help speakers become more fluent and cope with real

10
time demands. Actually, exposing students to these spoken discourse
features facilitates their oral production and helps them compensate
for the problems they encounter. It also helps them sound normal in
their use of the foreign language.

3. Spoken versus written discourse

Understanding the subtle differences between written and
spoken discourse helps in planning instruction in the light of these
distinctions. It helps also to overcome the problems with traditional
approaches to teaching speaking overlooking such differences.
Basically, spoken discourse is different form written discourse in
three main parameters: planning, contextualization and formality.
Speech is more commonly unplanned, contextualized and informal
than writing. In addition, Yule (2019, p. 165) said that speech is
more reciprocal than is writing. Specifically, speaking can be
distinguished from writing in many areas.
These include:
 Discourse structure: the spoken discourse is characterized
by: reciprocal openings and closings, interactive negotiation
of meaning and conversation structures. Besides, it is
characterized by the use of simple linking devices (discourse
devices) such as ‗and, ' but‘, 'anyway', 'right' rather than
complicated ones used in written discourse as stated in
Nunan (2019, p. 56)
 Typical features of the speech stream (e.g. segmental and
suprasegmental features, pauses, hesitations, interruptions,
and false starts) as stated by Bygate (2018, p. 21).

11
  Features related to the cultural nature of speaking. The
spoken discourse contains numerous social and contextual
factors as well as pragmatic presuppositions as stated by
Carter (2019, p.70).
 Grammatical and lexical features: As for grammar, the
spoken language is characterized by:
 Contractions and elliptical constructions lacking
subjects or rejoinders; ex: (sure, me too, or not now,
thanks) as stated by Widdowson (2018, p.76).
 Incomplete sentences called ―utterances‖ as stated by
Yule (2019, p. 170)
 Fronting which refers to the movement of an element
from its position and its relocation as the first element
in a construction to allow a focus to fall on as state
dbby Nuna (2018, p.89)

As in the lexical, widdowson (2019, p.80) stated that spoken

English has a lower lexical density than written English, using more
grammar words and more verb phrases than noun phrases.
Furthermore, spoken language is characterized by what is called
"vague language" which refers to objects and events in general
terms especially when speakers are uncertain or don‘t want to sound
too particular; e.g. (by the window or something) (Widdowson,
1998). Spoken language is characterized also by fixed expressions
that play an important part in enhancing fluency during speaking.
Examples of fixed expressions include expressions such as "a matter
of fact, once and for
all…etc"(Carter & McCarthy, 1997: 18 and Segaowitz, 2000).

12
4. Purpose of speaking
It was argued that the purpose of speaking can be either
transactional or interactional. Apparently, there are some differences
between the spoken language used in both transactional and
interactional discourse. In transactional discourse, language is used
primarily for communicating information. Language serving this
purpose is 'message' oriented rather than 'listener' oriented Nunan
(2019, p. 27) stated that clearly, in this type of interaction, accurate
and coherent communication of the message is important, as well as
confirmation that the message has been understood. Examples of
language being used primarily for a transactional purpose are: news
broadcasts, descriptions, narrations and instructions. Richards (2010,
p. 90) said that speaking turns serving this purpose tend to be long
and involve some prior organization of content and use of linguistic
devices to signal either the organization or type of information that
will be given. On the other hand, some conversations are
interactional with the purpose of establishing or maintaining a
relationship. This latter kind is sometimes called the interpersonal
use of language. Yule (2019, p.67) stated that it plays an important
social role in oiling the wheels of social intercourse. Examples of
interactional uses of language are greetings, small talks, and
compliments.

5. Speaking genres
The genre theory assumes that different speech events result in
different

13
types of texts, which are distinct in terms of their overall structure
and kinds of grammatical items typically associated with them .
Carter and McCarthy (2017, p. 67) classify speaking extracts in
terms of genres as follows:
 Narrative: A series of everyday anecdotes told with active
listener participation.
 Identifying: Extracts in which people talk about themselves,
their biography, where they live, their jobs, their likes and
dislikes.
 Language-in-action: Data recorded while people are doing
things such as cooking, packing, moving furniture… etc.
 Comment-elaboration: People giving casual opinions and
commenting on things, other people, events and so on.
 Debate and argument: Data, in which people take up
positions, pursue arguments and expound on their opinions.
 Decision-making and negotiating outcomes: Data illustrating
ways in which people work towards decisions/consensus or
negotiate their way through problems towards solutions. It is
recognized that no speech genre can be entirely discrete; for
example, narratives can be embedded within other main
generic categories. Furthermore, speaking genres overlap
with language functions explained before.

6. Speaking sub- skills

Many people believe that informal everyday conversation is
random. Moreover, unfortunately, most ELT course books do not
deal with speaking by breaking it down into micro- skills. Instead,
they often have the vague aim of "promoting learner's fluency".
14
However, a fundamental issue to understand the nature of speaking
is to analyze it in terms of competencies- underlying abilities- that
characterize the speaking proficiency. It is generally assumed that
such underlying abilities have some sort of structure, made up of
different components, with some sort of interaction and
interrelationship between them. It is also assumed that different
performances draw upon these underlying abilities in different but
comprehensible ways according to Bachman (2010, p.78) Of
course, identifying these competencies will help in teaching them
and hence determining how far they have been achieved.
Eventually, some of the taxonomies used to define speaking sub-
skills adopt a communicative stance assuming that speaking is
mainly used for communication. These are mainly general models of
language ability that are used to analyze speaking as well as other
skills.

B. Communicative Language Teaching

1. Notion of Communicative Language Teaching
It is important for us to know that Communicative Language
Teaching (CLT) was developed in the Great Britain in the
1960s, it occurred when British applied linguists argued of
the underscoring Situational Language Teaching. Noam
Chomsky was the prominent figure that argued the individual
sentences incapability of creativity and uniqueness was found in
standard structural theories of language. Therefore, to reach
appropriate communicative proficiency, it needs functional and
sociocultural context in communicative syllabi as there was a

15
lack ability in the mastery of grammatical structures on
communicative proficiency. As stated from Wilikins cited in
Basta (2011, p.3 ) it needs functional and communicative
definition of language in developing communicative syllabi
for language teaching while Firth as cited in Basta (2011, p.4)
suggested that sociocultural context should be included in
teaching foreign language. This covers participants, their
behaviour and beliefs, objects of linguistic discussion and a
word choice. Other theorists Canale and Swain, et.al as cited in
Basta (2011, p.6) put communicative approach as the
foundation of the ability to use language for different purposes
and the relationship between linguistic systems and their
communicative values in texts and discourses. Furthermore,
Hymes as cited in Basta (2011, p.6) stated that "communicative
competence" as the goal of language teaching. It requires the
acquisition of both ability and knowledge to use language. In
other words, communicative competence serves language as a
tool for communication. In its focus on the development of four
language skills and the correlation between the skills. In
addition, Hedge in Fang (2010, p.10) said that communicative
competence is used to have correlation in psychological,
cultural and social rules. Therefore, the communicative
approach, encouraged the idea that social and cultural
knowledge have main roles in understanding and using
linguistic forms.
There are five points of communicative competences
proposed by Hymes and other theorist as cited in Basta (2011,
p.3) :

16
1. Grammatical competence;
2. Pragmatic competence;
3. Discourse competence,
4. Strategic competence,
5. Fluency.

2. Principles of CLT
The communicative approach has wide-ranging scope
defined as a list of general principles or features. Nunan as cited
in Sreehari (2012, p.24) concluded the five principles of CLT:
1. The interaction in the target language in the learning
situation.
2. The use of authentic texts into the learning situation.
3. The opportunities for learners to focus in the learning
process.
4. The learner‘s personal experiences in the classroom
learning.
5. The language activities outside the classroom.

3. Roles of Teachers and Students in CLT

The roles of teacher and students are important in a
communicative classroom includes to establish the atmosphere
of active communication. Larsen-Freeman in Sreehari (2012,
p.131) stated that he role of the teacher during the activities are
acting as an adviser, responding student‘s questions and
observing their performance. The teacher writes down the errors
and being the co-communicator as the students are the
communicators. In CLT, the students will freely trying to make

17
 themselves understood and in understanding others and the
teachers corrects their knowledge when the target language is
incomplete. This situation is what Larsen-Freeman said as the
nature of teacher-student interaction in a student-centered
method.
Criticizing the dominant role of teachers, Mclean (2012)
explains that ‗only when the teacher‘s authority recedes can the
learner be thrown back on his own resources‘ (p. 33). Thus, CLT
advocates ‗teacher-directed student-centered‘ (Rance-Roney, 2010,
p. 20) L2 teaching and learning. Again, most of the classroom
activities in CLT are carried out around learners. The teacher is
supposed to direct the learnercentered class, and work as a guide, a
facilitator. Learners often complete different tasks assigned by
teachers to engage themselves in real communication using
authentic materials and realia. They work in pairs and groups to get
these tasks done. Larsen-Freeman (1986) suggests that teachers must
make sure that students interact a lot in the classroom among
themselves and with teachers. Teachers in communicative
classrooms talk less and listen more; consequently, they will be
active facilitators of students‘ learning. Then, CLT does not target
mastery of language forms rather it emphasizes the processes of
communication; consequently learners find themselves in different
roles in a L2 class (Richards & Rodgers, 2002). Explaining the role
of learners, Breen and Candlin (1980) comment as follows: The role
of learner as negotiator – between the self, the learning process, and
the object of learning – emerges from and interacts. with the role of
joint negotiator within the group and within the classroom
procedures and activities which the group undertakes. The

18
implication for the learner is that he should contribute as much as he
gains, and thereby learn in an interdependent way. (p. 110)

The final significant factor of CLT in English language

teaching is learner-centered instruction. Brown (2010, p.17) stated
that learner-centered instruction is beneficial in teaching language
because the techniques focus on students‘ style, need and goal. A
learner-centered instruction might help students to be more
responsibility and creativity. The other characteristic of learner-
centered instruction is curriculum tends to be cooperative not
competitive. For example: the teacher shows a picture and asks the
students to describe about the picture. Before starting the class, the
teacher divides students into four groups, then students work
together while the teacher is as guidance. The learners-centered
instruction links with interactive learning. The students are
motivated to speak spontaneously without worrying about errors.
According to Taylor (2011, p.18), learners-centered instruction
makes students feel secure and free to do exercises in their own
initiative in communication. The teachers might provide many
opportunities to students practicing languages naturally. Assessment
is important to measure students‘ achievement in learners-centered
instruction. Brown (2010, p.18) stated that CLT has structures tasks
that are useful for learners to improve their language skills.
Meanwhile, Noble (2017, p.20) said that the most important thing,
teachers give repetitions and immersion while learning and teaching
processes are happening.
In the CLT classroom, the roles of both teacher and students
are different. According to Larsen-Freeman (2010, p.45), the role of

19
the teacher is to facilitate the communication in the classroom. In
this role, one of his/her major responsibilities is to establish
situations likely to promote communication. Besides that, the
teacher also acts as an adviser, answering students‘ questions, and
monitoring their performance. Students, on the other hand, are the
communicators. Meaning that they are actively engaged in
negotiating meaning – in trying to make themselves understood and
in understanding others – even when their knowledge of the target
language is incomplete.
Because CLT employs student-centered approach, Larsen-
Freeman (2010, p.46) mentions that the teacher‘s role is not too
dominant. Students are seen as more responsible managers of their
own learning. When applying CLT method in the classroom, the
teacher should be aware that the students have their own
characteristics. In other words, the students have their own feelings
to find out in what situation they learn best. Regarding to this,
Savignon (2012, p.67) declares that within classroom communities,
as within society at large, some people are leaders and some prefer
to be followers. Both are essential to the success of group activities.
In this case, the teacher should be fair in forming groups for
students. The teacher should recognize the characteristics of the
students, whether they are the ―leaders‖ or ―followers‖. In order to
reach fairness, the teacher may put those ―leaders‖ and ―followers‖
together in the same group, not put only all of the ―leaders‖ in the
same group and vice versa. From the above explanations, it can be
seen that the Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) method
prioritizes the use of interaction in the process of teaching and
learning. This is in line with the main goal of this method that makes

20
the students to be able to cope with communicative competencies.
The English teachers have an important role in this case. The way
they lead the classroom and interact with students becomes the
successful key for teaching and learning, especially in helping the
students to reach all of the abilities contained in communicative
competencies.

4. English for Foreign Language in CLT

The important points in English for foreign language in CLT
are divided into several points one of them is teacher and
learners role. According to Nunan (2010, p. 30), the pivotal role
in communicative-based teaching is the involvement of learners
and teacher. Meanwhile, Savignon & Wang (2018, p. 52) has
noted that the pivotal role in communicative-based teaching is
the teacher performance with the learners-centered particular
instructional or technical culture. Along with that, the interaction
between school context, teacher perceptions, and teacher
performance are also beneficial factors. Finally, Sato (2014, p.
21) said that the teacher performance is established in a
technical culture which affected by the teachers‘ way in their
daily tasks.

C. Communicative Competence
The development of communicative proficiency in language
teaching began when the British applied linguist resulted a new
awareness demonstrating communicative use of language as the
need of communicative proficiency in language teaching. According
to Richards and Rogers in Yassi and Kaharuddin (2015, pp. 46-47)

21
this has received positive response to Chomsky who viewed that
speakers have innate competence underlined in knowledge to
produce grammar and sound. This competence later formed to
produce and able to understand language which is called linguistic
performance. However, Hymes argued the idea as competence is not
only rely on grammatical but also sociolinguistics and contextual
scopes. As for this perspective, the speaker have the ability to
function in the speech community. Consequently, communicative
serves in four main skills, namely; listening, speaking, reading, and
writing. Communicative competence in this term comprises both
productive and receptive competencies.

1. Communicative Competence in Communicative Approach

As communicative competence serves in how to use
language for meaningful communication. It covers grammatical
competence as an important foundation in how sentences are
formed. Therefore, Richards (2010, p. 48) stated how speakers
should have capability in language knowledge indicators to form
a meaningful communication:

1. The speaker should possesses variety of language

purpose and functions.
2. The speaker should possesses the awareness of language
in accordance to the setting and participants.
3. The speaker should possesses the understanding of texts
varieties.
4. The speaker should possesses communication strategies
in maintaining communication.

22
 These indicators are in line Richards and Rogers (2010, pp.
64-65) who supported communicative competence at the level of
Communicative Approach. Their arguments rely on these
components:
1. The expression of meaning reflected in language
2. Interaction and communication serves as a primary
function to language
3. The functional and communicative uses serves heavily in
the structure of language
4. Discourses serve as the primary unit of language, it
delivers in the categories of functional and
communicative meaning.

2. CLT and Communicative Competence

CLT focuses on improving learners‘ communicative
competence. The first concept of competence in the second and
foreign language learning was introduced by Chomsky while
communicative competence was originally developed in the
early 1970s by Hymes. It was then further developed in the early
1980s by Canale and Swain. According to Canale in Sreehari
(2012), communicative competence refers to ―the underlying
systems of knowledge and skill required for communication‖.
They identified communicative competence in four components:
1. Grammatical competence: it covers on linguistic
competence which includes in phonology, vocabulary,
orthography and syntax.

23
 2. Sociolinguistic competence: it covers on the social
context knowledge
3. Discourse competence: it covers on the learners‘ ability
in listening, speaking, reading and writing.
4. Strategic competence: it covers on the appropriate use of
maintaining communication

Furthermore, Bachman in Sreehari (2012) divides

communicative competence into the broad headings of
―organizational competence,‖ which includes both grammatical
and discourse (or textual) competence, and ―pragmatic
competence,‖ which includes both sociolinguistic and
―illocutionary‖ competence. Kiato and Kiato in Sreehari (2012,
p.20) observed that ―the basic idea of communicative
competence remains the ability to use language appropriately,
both ―receptively and productively, in real situations‖.
Communicative competence, according to Richards (2010, p. 3)
includes the following aspects of language knowledge:

1. Knowing how to use language for a range of different

purposes and functions
2. Knowing how to vary our use of language according to
the setting and the participants (e.g., knowing when to
use formal and informal speech or when to use language
appropriately for written as opposed to spoken
communication)

24
 3. Knowing how to produce and understand different types
of texts (e.g., narratives, reports, interviews,
conversations)
4. Knowing how to maintain communication despite
having limitations in one‘s language knowledge (e.g.,
through using different kinds of communication
strategies).

D. Adult
The term adult is defined into four criteria by Knowles
(1998:57). The first criteria is biological, this can be seen
through the biological age as adult is measured by the age of
early adolescence. Second criteria can be seen through legal
definition as adult is stated in law. Third criteria is defined
through social definition as an adult is the person who adopts
responsible roles. Thus, the fourth criteria lies in psychological
view as adult is the phase of individual self-awareness. From all
of the criteria above, the psychological view is the fundamental
base of adult learning (andragogy). Meanwhile, the approach for
adults in formal educational environment is quite different as
adults have been out of the educational system for a while. In
order to gain successful learning, methods and skills must be
modified as cited in Rodgers (2010, p.76). Adults are individual
with fulfilling goals. It makes them being a self-directed
learners.

25
E. Andragogy
The word andragogical introduced by Malcolm Knowles in
1980. As the founding father of adult education, he introduced
learning styles, techniques and strategies in an environment that
suited to adults. Therefore, according to Knowles, Holten &
Swanson, it is important to understand the principles of learning
and how students learn. In addition, as andragogy is the art and
science of adults learning, the important focus of andragogy is
the learner-centred education (2018, p.64). Van Enkevort in
Long (2011, p.74) defines andragogy as ― any intentional and
professionally guided activity that aims at a change in adult
persons. Meanwhile, Gravett (2012, p.65) adds that ―andragogy‖
is often used as synonym for adult education.
Andragogy as concept is sometimes used as formulated in a
theory or as a set of assumptions and guidelines or hypothesis
for adult education practice. According to Conner (2013, p,34)
defines andragogy in a broader context and refers to learner-
focused education for people of all ages. Andragogy has a direct
bearing on how educators in blended learning should approach
learners as stated by Ryan & Serdyukov (2013, p.23). Adult
learners are seen as differentiated learners. Adults, according to
Knowles (2010, p.63), need to know why they learn something
and how this knowledge will assist them personally or
professionally. Learning or the knowledge required will improve
the quality of their lives, will make a contribution to the work
they are doing as adults. This need-to-know aspect focuses also
on what adult learners see as essential components; of how the
information learned is linked with real life and the life they are

26
living. It promotes internal motivation and leads to success or
qualifications that in turn will bring more motivational aspects to
the fore. These achievements will lead to an improved self-
concept that will lead to self-direction and independence.
Learners develop a self-directed approach to learning and will
move away from the dependency on educators. A learner who
has achieved this status also applies and utilises his own learning
experiences and that of others to be more independent. This
feeling of independence improves motivation and vice versa. It
assists the adult learner to be ready to assimilate more difficult
tasks and promotes his/her readiness to approach new tasks and
assignments and to explore the unknown, because a solid basis
and array of knowledge empowers him/her to do so For adults,
the benefit of most learning lies in the knowledge they gain and
how this can help them, or in how it can be applied. According
to Carlson (2013, p. 89) children usually learn because they will
receive marks, get a diploma or because they are rewarded in
some other way at school. A learner-focused model of teaching,
aimed at real-life applications is supported by the assumptions of
andragogy. Another important distinction is that adults are often
motivated internally .
An andragogical approach, according to Ryan & Serdyukov
(2013, p.90), requires learners to be actively involved in
learning. The learner determines the time, place and pace of
learning. Children do not have the vast learning experiences that
adults are likely to have, and the latter therefore bring a vast
amount of life experiences into the learning environment. Adults
are needs focused in their seeking of learning and the programs

27
 they enroll for. This last point has an enormous influence on the
motivation of adult learners, because they select their own
learning programs
The effectiveness of learning materials and the design of the
course determine the effectiveness of learning and is a
prerequisite in the quality of learning s stated by Rovai (2012,
p.78). A combination of theories can be used to develop and
design course materials to select the best theory and most
appropriate instructional strategies.

1. Andragogical Approach to Learning

It is important to develop a framework to facilitate adult learning.
Andragogy lends itself to the adding of value and to helping adults
learn. Andragogy is an ideal way of assisting learners to acquire
skills to empower them to keep up with the progress to be made as
stated by Cross (2010, p. 259).
To achieve certain goals or expected outcomes, educators must
set effective outcomes to be achieved. These outcomes will vary
amongst learners and planning is essential in order to achieve these
goals. According to Thorpe , et.al (2013, p.35) andragogy has raised
much awareness that a need has arisen for the separate and enhanced
provision for adults as learners, and the fact that the focus should be
on outcomes for adults rather than those methods used to educate
children.
The following two sections contain a discussion of principles that
need to be incorporated into the framework for blended learning, as
they are the assumptions that andragogy is based upon. The

28
following discussion will further clarify the central assumptions of
an andragogical approach to learning.

a. Informed learners
Adult learners participate voluntarily according to their own
needs. According to Knowles in Rodgers (2016, p. 60), claims that
adulthood is attained at the point of time when a person sees
him/herself as self-directing. The social climate or culture plays an
important role in this respect. For example, in some cultures women
are deprived of access to education. It is important that the
educational process should coincide with the process of reaching
maturity. Learning is hindered if adults are treated like children in
their endeavours to learn as stated by Merriam & Caffarella (2019,
p. 87). Meanwhile, Rodgers ( 2016, p.65) stated that adults question
new knowledge as they compare it with experiences and knowledge
previously acquired. If mistakes have been made adults can rectify
them. Adult learners can also assist each other as they can all benefit
from each other‘s learning experiences. This will not only bind
group members more strongly together, but will enrich each adult
learner taking part.

b. Self-concept and taking responsibility

According to Merriam & Caffarella (2011, p. 249) the self-
concept moves from educator dependence to self-direction in the
learning process. Adults have a self-concept of being responsible for
their own environment and destination in life. The self-concept
needs to be developed to reach self-actualisation. In doing so a move
away from dependency needs to be followed. As a person matures,

29
the self-concept moves away from learner dependency towards self-
direction as stated by Gravett (2010, p. 65). Adults need to be seen
by others as independent and treated as being capable of self-
direction. Merriam (2018, p. 7), referring to Knowles, views the
andragogical learner as one who is autonomous, free and growth-
oriented. Meanwhile, Guffy (2018, p. 426) points out that the learner
should take responsibility for his learning. The instructor merely
facilitates the learning process. According to Caffarella, (2014, p.
24) the learner together with the facilitator must devise a plan, for
meeting course objectives from the perspective of the needs of the
respective learner. The instructor becomes a facilitator and is not
merely a disseminator of knowledge.

c. Self-directed learning
According to Knowles (2015, p. 90), self-directed learning
describes as ―a process in which individuals take the initiative, with
or without the help of others, to diagnose their learning needs,
formulate learning goals, identify resources for learning, select and
implement learning strategies, and evaluate learning outcomes‖.
Knowles (2015, p. 31) explains that the educator has to get the
learner to engage in a process of mutual enquiry. The end result
should be the transmitting of knowledge and the evaluation or
conformity of acquired knowledge. The individual is engaged in
collaborative, self-directed inquiry in self-actualising situations.
Knowles (2015, p. 45) supported the idea that learners become
increasingly self-directed as they develop as learners. The learner
must accept responsibility for his own learning. In self-directed
learning the learner controls both the learning objectives and the

30
means of learning. Self-directed learning embraces the elements of
lifelong learning as stated by Meredith (2018, p.41). When a learner
decides what should be learned, who should learn, what methods
and resources should be used, and how the success of the effort
should be measured, then that learning is defined as self-directed
learning. Self-directed learning is attempting to empower learners
with new skills, knowledge and attitudes. These principles form the
core elements of outcomes-based education and place the learner as
central in the learning process.
Self-learning is an essential component of adult education. Research
has shown that adults are very capable in acquiring skills,
knowledge and self-insight when engaging in learning activities.
According to Rutherford (2019, p.90 ) adults need to be self-
directing and move away from authority-orientated, formal and
competitive techniques and engage in collaborative learning
environments.

d. Experiential learning
Adults have a reservoir of experience and rely on this previous
learning to draw for their learning and accumulated many
experiences and adults in themselves become a rich source for
learning. Caffarella (2014, p.24) stated that learners must connect
learning that is relevant and influenced by previous experiences.
Meanwhile, Lieb ( 2010, p. 34) stated that heories and concepts must
be related to learners and recognise the value of experience in
learning.
In addition, Rodgers (2016, p. 61) stated that adults change and
develop continuously and adapt to new life and work experiences;

31
they need to adapt to their circumstances. Educators must realise this
and adapt their educational techniques accordingly. Thus,
continuous learning forms the basis of adult learning. They can use
their previous skills and knowledge to lead them to the
understanding and acquisition of new knowledge and insight into
such knowledge. Constant feedback is given to enrich the whole
class.

e. Transformational learning
One concept that can be used to summarize adult learning is
‗transformational learning‘. Transformational learning has at its
theoretical base the transformation of the individual through
learning. This process of transformation can occur suddenly and can
be a powerful experience. The change within the individual to
transform and change his/ her world is based not on information
added to existing knowledge, but focus on changes on ―how we
know‖ instead of what we know as stated by Baumgartner (2011, p.
15). Through empowerment and new knowledge learners can
transform their world and environment. It is clear that adult learners
should be empowered. Knowledge is available for the person who
wants to find it. In this light, Mezirow (2011, p.170) stated that new
experiences are characterised by interpretations and reinterpretations
of what is discovered. Rational thought and reflection make up the
recursive process referred to as perspective transformation. After
experiencing a ―dilemma‖ people engage in critical reflection and
re-evaluate their circumstances. In doing so a realisation of
inconsistency in the truth takes place. Transformation learning takes
place as the learner changes or transforms his/her inconsistent

32
schema that includes beliefs, values, habits and rules for interpreting
experience and changes (perspective transformation). New
perspectives are discussed with peers to obtain consensual
validation. Once the learner achieves this stage, action needs to be
taken for transformation and implementation. Social interaction is an
important concept as the learner is an affective, emotional and social
human being and learning seldom takes place in isolation

F. Adult English for Foreign Language Learner

There are many background factors for adult learner in learning
English. According to Smith and Strong in E Illes (2019, p.14)
stated that adult language learners are more motivated as they
recognize their needs and demands. They are more focused and
attain relevant value. Additionally, Knowles, Holton, and Swanson
in Araghi&Amineh (2014, p.11) said that adult learners have
significant factors that established their purpose in learning. As they
are offer mature, competent and experienced in a variety of different
roles. These shaped them into various process-oriented approach and
learning styles.
Smith and Strong in E Illes (2019, p.20) further added that adult
language learners have different identities of background. Learners
that are immigrants or international students, professionals, workers,
or refugees have their own culture and belief systems. They actively
communicate in their first language (L1) and makes code-switching
in return. Furthermore, their background knowledge is impactful.
The L1 literacy ability affects their development among adult EFL
learners. These factors established their identities and progress in
EFL learning. However, Cook (2016, p.21) stated that learning an

33
L2 (second language) creates interconnection in their internal brain
walls. So that bilingual learners have multiple competencies.
Similarly, Skehan in Ahangari (2011, p.22) argued that many factor
lies in adult EFL learners such as learner traits, learning styles, and
strategies develops problematic concepts. He stated that personality
factors influence their learning style as they are more actively fluent
in verbal tasks. Nevertheless, as an adult, learners are individually
employ their own learning strategies and evaluation. As they have
their own preferences in strategies according to Cohen in Cook
(2016, p.23). In order to use language in relevant situations. To
make this happen, the teachers should provide a supportive
environment, so that the adult learners will engage securely and
actively. The collaboration between students and teachers are
important. Simultaneously, this correlates to Vygotsky‘s social
constructivism as cited in Smith & Strong E Illes (2019, p.25) in
dynamic interaction which involves the learners, teacher, task, and
learning context. It can be referred to active listening, sharing
opinions and discussion in a cohesive group. Therefore, it can be
concluded that there are three main points in adult language
learners‘ scope. For instance, classroom practice development,
learner autonomy and teaching method to promote dynamic
interaction it needs the active environment of speaking skills.
according to Schumin in Nguyen (2017, p. 33), EFL learners require
clear instruction to promote active speaking environment
. .
1. Teaching English as Foreign Language for Adults
One of the huge role in adult English students learning is
their cultural background. Brookfield (2013, p.2) states that the

34
connection between teacher and students are important as the
students should feel reserved when they need help to
communicate in English.
Furthermore, adult learners have already gotten their
individual knowledge. This is why lessons should be measurable
in the objectives. According to Wlodkowski (2020, p. 23), there
are two main factors in teaching EFL to adult learners. The first
is specific objective that will facilitate students in understanding
their goals during the lesson. The second is the collaboration of
team activities. Thus, Galbraith (2015, p. 15) stated that team
activities creates active environment to learn and collaborate
with each students.
In conclusion, there are a several significant points stated by
some experts that could be attained in teaching adults
successfully:
a. Fleming and Garner in Parker (2018, p.10) states that
students‘ need analysis is significant as they have
various abilities, experiences, and expectations in the
learning environment.
b. Ambrose and Bridges (2010, p. 20) states that teachers‘
modelling develops learners‘ introduction to language as
they are able to become familiar with vocabulary,
conversational patterns, grammar structures, and even
activity formats before producing them. Therefore,
teachers demonstration is important.
c. Bouchard (2017, p. 24) states that teachers‘ talk is
essential. The teachers‘ talk refer to directions,

35
 explanations, and general comments and conversations
within the classroom.
d. Hughes and Schwab (2010, p. 25), argues that variety
learning preferences is important. Providing patterns and
routines encourage learners to get familiarize with new
items.
e. Blumberg (2013, p. 142) states that teacher should be
aware in coreecting mistakes as they will feel
unedermined.
Meanwhile, the aims on teaching English for Foreign
Language for Adults are begin with a brief consideration
of what the mastery of the target language involves. A
convenient point of reference for this purpose is the
model of communicative competence first put forward
by Canale and Swain in Pawlak (2015, pp. 50), stated
four components are distinguished, namely: (1)
grammatical or systemic competence, which is related
to the knowledge of the subsystems of the TL (i.e.
grammar, lexis, pronunciation and spelling), discourse
competence, which is concerned with constructing
spoken and written texts(e.g. issues of coherence and
cohesion), sociolinguistic competence, which pertains to
pragmatic considerations (e.g. sociopragmatic and
pragmalinguistic issues), and strategic competence,
which is reflective of the ability to deal with
communication breakdowns and to make communication
more effective1 . In addition, a key distinction has to be
made between explicit knowledge, which is declarative,

36
conscious and can only be drawn upon when learners
have sufficient time to plan their utterances, and implicit
knowledge, which is procedural, subconscious and can
be accessed in real processing time. It is the latter or a
highly automatized version of the former that is
indispensable for spontaneous communication, since, for
example, a learner may be able to use advanced
grammar structures or vocabulary in traditional exercises
or be aware of a variety of pragmatic features, but
be incapable of employing them interacting with others
due to lacking attentional resources. Finally, such
knowledge has to be used across different language
skills which, in most cases, have to be integrated for
successful communication, which places even greater
demands on learners‘ working memory capacity, with
the effect that becoming adept in fluent language use
in different situations poses a formidable challenge.
Obviously, attaining such superior command of a foreign
language can only be regarded as a viable goal in the
case of students majoring in that language, with
the caveat that even for most of them such
accomplishment often turns out to be unrealistic, either
because of constantly falling levels of proficiency, scant
exposure to the target language and limited contacts
with native speakers, insufficient aptitude or simply lack
of motivation or need to become native-like. In fact,
even if such students gain superior control of target
language subsystems, that is achieve high levels of

37
grammatical competence, the other competences are
bound to lag behind, a deficiency that can hardly
be rectified without intensive, high-quality exposure
in a TL environment. For the vast majority of adults,
however, the goals of foreign language education will
be much more modest. For those, who take language
courses as a requirement in their BA and MA programs
and do not see any immediate value of foreign languages
in their lives, such a goal, sadly, might simply be getting
a credit which is necessary to complete the course
of study. As a result, such individuals may be fully
content with being able to satisfy rudimentary
communicative needs when they go on holidays abroad,
assuming that such an opportunity ever arises. As
regards adult learners who need a foreign language for
their future jobs, whatever these may be, the aim
of learning and teaching will be determined by specific
professional needs. For instance, for a physicist, one
that is perhaps contemplating seeking a doctoral degree,
the priority might be in the main reading academic texts
and, perhaps, at some point, writing papers or being able
to understand and deliver speeches at international
conferences. For a business person, much more
important is likely to be the ability to engage in
negotiations with partners in different contexts, although
gaining ample skill in reading and writing may also
constitute a desirable goal as he or she climbs
the successive steps of the corporate ladder. What should

38
be borne in mind, however, is that different grammatical
constructions and different lexis will be useful for such
individuals, and their need for strategic competence
is also likely to vary, with such issue as good
pronunciation or pragmatics taking a back seat as long
as messages can be effectively conveyed. Yet another set
of goals of language learning may be envisioned by a
secretary who uses a foreign language one or twice
a month, a retired individual who decides to start
language English for sheer entertainment, or an adult
who chooses to go abroad for good to join a family
residing in a country where the target language is
spoken. In the last of these cases, learners are likely to
place highest premium on basic communicative skills
that will allow them to get by at airports, in shops or in
everyday encounters with native speakers. What may
come as a surprise, it is them that may be most in need
of awareness of pragmatic conventions even if they are
not able to adhere to them in their own target language
production. Such diverse goals are bound to impact the
ways in which a foreign language is taught and the
targets for instruction, issues to which we now turn our
attention.
On the other hand, the challenges in teaching
English as foreign language in adult is the individual
learner differences, as Gregersen and MacIntyre (2014)
so superbly demonstrate in their recent book, individual
learner variation does not have to be seen as a necessary

39
evil that should be grudgingly tolerated, ignored or
to some extent tamed, but, rather, viewed as an asset that
can be capitalized on and successfully harnessed with
an eye to making instruction more effective. Clearly,
there are individual difference variables that are entirely
beyond the control of the teacher, such as age or
gender. In this case, all practitioners could do is trying to
differentiate the way they conduct classes with people
in their twenties or in their sixties, for example
in recognition of the declining cognitive abilities
of the latter, or organizing group work in such a way
that, when class composition allows, males are
sometimes paired with females to optimize interaction.
Other variables can only be manipulated to a minimal or
very limited extent, good examples being language
aptitude, working memory, intelligence or learning
styles. Still, there are surely things that teachers can do
to ameliorate their effect in order to enhance the process
of learning. Gregersen and MacIntyre (2014, p. 79), for
example, maintain that ―although they may be
somewhat stable features, (perhaps in specific domains),
cognitive abilities and attentional variables can
be changed and manipulated through instruction and
experience‖, as well as presenting a number of
activities that could be used for this purpose. Cohen
(2010, p.23), in turn, talks about style-stretching, where
students are encouraged to experiment with learning
approaches that deviate from their preferred ones.

40
Clearly, attempts to take such steps can and should
be made with adults, although teachers must be aware
that older learners, particularly those who have been
successful in learning another language or are experts
in other domains, may prove to be overly confident
in the efficacy of their approach and reluctant to change
their ways. There are also individual difference variables
that are to a large extent malleable and thus more
susceptible to the impact of teachers‘interventions, such
as anxiety, beliefs, willingness to communicate,
motivation or language learning strategies. Since the last
of these will be dealt with at some length in the
following section, let us briefly comment on the first
three and then devote a little more space to motivation
which seems to play a pivotal role in teaching a foreign
language to adults. Since anxiety may have a particularly
debilitating effect on older learners, especially more
mature ones who are professionals in other walks of life,
it is clearly necessary to take steps to diminish it by, for
example, ensuring a non-threatening atmosphere or
resorting to anxiety-reducing activities of the kind
described by Gregersen and MacIntyre (2014, p.80),
such as those which help learners identify triggers of
their anxieties or equip them with appropriate strategies
for managing apprehension (e.g. relaxation
techniques).It may also be imperative to address
the beliefs held by adults since some of those
assumptions, manifested, for instance, in the

41
mythsillustrated earlierin the present paper, may
be especially harmful and render the task faced by
teachers even more challenging than it is on account
of the personal and professional obligations of adult
learners. This could be done, for example, by getting
learnersto reflect on their beliefs, share them with peers
or take part in debates on the nature of language
learning, and then making them aware of a lack of
sufficient grounds for some of those or demonstrating
how erroneous assumptions of this kind can interfere
with the learning process Gregersen and MacIntyre
(2014, p.81). Intervention of some kind may also be
required with respect to willingness to communicate
(WTC), defined as ―the probability of initiating
communication, given choice and opportunity‖
MacIntyre (2014, p. 20). This is because adult learners,
especially older ones, may display reluctance to speak
as a result of affective concerns, related to the belief that
they cannot be successful, that their utterances may
be unintelligible, or that they cannot express their true
personality or expertise in a foreign language. In order
to remedy detrimental sentiments of this kind, teachers
could try out a number of solutions, such as ensuring
the presence of factors facilitating WTC, limiting factors
hampering it, encouraging learners to plan for
hesitations, raising students‘ awareness as to potential
future uses of the TL, generating a sense of security or

42
 fostering a propitious intergroup climate in the
classroom .

G. Needs Analysis
Needs analysis is considered helpful in analysing further topic
by a number of schools. It is defined as a fundamental significant
establishment development in academic affairs. Therefore, as the
notion has wide definition, there are some scholars who tried to
deliver their visions. Bosher&Smalkowski (2012, pp. 23-25)
explained the definition is focused on language needs and
curriculum analysis development in terms of language programs.
Meanwhile, Yalden (2012, p.34) stated that needs analysis is the
correlation of learners‘ wants and learners‘ needs. Moreover,
Brindly (2011, p. 38) combines the definition on two significant
terms, like ―objective needs‖ and ―subjective needs‖. He developed
the the students‘ objective needs to the objectives of the learning
outcomes as the basis. Additionally, Brown (cited in Al-Hamlan,
2011) defines that needs analysis are the combination of students‘
personal data background and the objective of target linguistics.

1. Purpose of Need Analysis

Needs Analysis is a significant tool to understand students‘
needs and develop the implementation of educational policies.
Nunan in Juan (2016, p.10) states that the information obtained
from NA can be delivered through the following purposes:
a. It is used to set the objective of the course and to direct
the selection of contents.

43
 b. It is used as the adjustment of syllabus and methodology
to fill in the recess between the teachers‘ and learners‘
expected teaching and learning approach.

Meanwhile, Richards (2010, p.2) considers Needs Analysis

as ‗significant establishment‘ general language courses and in
language curriculum planning. As Needs Analysis can be
employed for things, below:
a. It covers for immense input for language program.
Richards (2010, p.2)
b. It covers for significant language needs in a language
program. Richards (2010, p.2)
c. It covers improvement in pedagogy and assessment
Tarone & Yule (2010, p.10)

All in all, through the definition of NA notions and

purposes, it refers to the fact that Needs Analysis can be used for
extensive range of purposes. Furthermore, it can serve as an
assessment for a program improvement.

2. Types of Needs Analysis

As various linguists have different view of types of NA,
Nunan refers to two types of NA which has been used by
syllabus designers as cited in Haque (2014, p.3). They are:
a. Learner analysis: a type of NA that delivers information
about the learner.
b. Task analysis: a type of NA that delivers information
about the expected learner tasks.

44
 Equally, Richeterich defines two other two types of NA as
cited in Haque (2014, p.3).
a. Subjective Need Analysis: it delivers learners‘
information of their perceptions, goals, and priorities.
b. Objective Need Analysis: it delivers learners‘ factual
information of their biographical information on age,
nationally, home language.

3. The Approach to Need Analysis

There are several components to develop investigation in
language planning, teaching and learning. The following
namely:
a. Target Situation Analysis (TSA)
The development of Needs Analysis was firmly
established in the mid 1970s. It was was mainly concerned
with linguistic and register analysis. Dudley-Evans and St.
John (2016, p.12) suggested that the scope of it circles in
grammar and vocabulary. In addition to the publication of
Munby‘s Communicative Syllabus Design (2018, p.13)
needs analysis developed to take learner‘s purposes in the
central position. Therefore, it was called as target which
broaden into the term of Target Situation Analysis (TSA). It
was first used by Chambers in 1980. He claimed that TSA is
the communication in the target situation. Meanwhile,
Munby (2018, p.20) explained that Communicative Needs
Processor (CNP) was the organization of variables that
affected the communication. Munby‘s variables model is
based on the following elements:

45
 1) Participants: identification of the learners‘ identity
information of age, sex, nationality and
competencies of target language.
2) Communication Needs Processor: identification of
the learners‘ communication needs based on socio
cultural and stylistic variables.
3) Profile of Needs: identification of the data result
established through the processing of data in the
CNP;
4) The Language Skills Selector: identification of the
specific language skills data result in CNP.
5) The Linguistic Encoder: identification of contextual
approach.
6) The Communicative Competence Specification:
identification of the learners‘ communicative
competence.

From the components above, it can be concluded that the

Munby model of Communication Needs Processor (CNP) is
a significant tool to provide needs analysis profile.
Therefore, there are eight parameters to be the approach of
needs analysis. There are:
1) Purposive domain: the aim of target language setting
at the end of the course.
2) Setting: the environment where English will be used.
3) Interaction: the learners‘ interlocutors and
relationship prediction.

46
 4) Instrumentality: the medium of the language
learning.
5) Dialect: the learners‘ production of their spatial,
temporal, or social aspect.
6) Communicative event: the production of learners‘
communication and interaction.
7) Communicative key: the learners‘ manner in the
communicative event.
8) Target level: the learners‘ level of linguistic skills
achievements at the end of the course.

The purpose of Munby‘s CNP is to explore the learners‘

target level in the learning program. According to
Hutchinson and Waters (2010, p.35) the result of Munby‘s
model is to acqyire the learners‘ profile of the target
situation. In addition, Robinson cited in Nur‘aeni (2016,
p.16) stated that Munby‘s model provide the learners‘
comprehensive data banks and target performance.
As many researchers in the scope of target situation
needs analysis acquired Munby‘s CNP. Hutchinson and
Waters (2010, p.35) complement the model with a
comprehensive target situation analysis framework. It
consists a list of questions for the learners‘. The questions
refer to the learners‘ learning process of target. These
questions can be found below:

Table 2.1

47
 Munby‘s CNP Model

No Question Parameters
1. What is the purpose of learning Munby‘s
the language? purposive domain
a. To study;
b. To work;
c. For training
d. For a combination of
studying, working and
training;
e. For some other purposes,
e.g. social status,
examination preparation,
job promotion
2. How will the learners‘ use the Munby‘s
language? instrumentality
a. Medium: listening,
speaking, writing, reading.
b. Channel: dialogue, video,
conference, etc.
c. Discourse: publication,
academic text, lectures, etc.
3. What will cover the content Munby‘s
areas? Communicative
a. Subjects: biology, politics, event
education, etc;
b. Level: teacher, staff, under-

48
 graduate, etc
4. Where will the learners use the Munby‘s Setting
language? (physical and
a. Physical setting: hospital, psychological)
school, company;
b. Human context : groups,
conversation;
c. Linguistic context: abroad,
rural areas.
5. When will the learners use the
language?
a. Regularly with the course;
b. Frequently with the course.

Jordan (2016, p.21) claimed that Target Situation

Analysis which focuses on the learner‘s needs and target
level performance is renowned as Munby‘s influential
approach and model. But Dudley-Evans and St. John (2016,
p.21) argued that the drawback in this model is that he did
not provide detailed lists of how to prioritize micro functions
in his CNP or any of the affective factors which today are
recognized as important. Thus, West (2016, p.22)
summarized the drawbacks in four major points:
1) Complexity: the instrument system of Munby‘s
model is inflexible, complex, and time-consuming.
2) Learner-centered: the learners‘ data collection only
identify data about the learner rather than from the
learner.

49
 3) Constraints: in Munby‘s model constraints should be
analysed after the needs analysis procedure. In
contrast, many researchers urges that constraints
should be done at the beginning of the needs analysis
process.
4) Language: the lack in the Munby‘s system is not
subsequent to convert the learner profile into a
language syllabus.

Furthermore, Hutchinson and Waters (2018, p.23) stated

that writing micro details of the learners‘ is less efficient. It
only focuses on one viewpoint, in the analysis but neglects
the user-institutions and other things. Meanwhile, there is no
distinction between necessities, wants, and learning needs.
In addition, Hutchinson and Waters (2018, p.23) overlook
three types important aspect in needs analysis, which are:
1) Necessities:
Necessities are concerned in learners‘
communicative competent in which they will be able
to use the language effectively in the particular field.
2) Wants:
Wants are concerned in learners‘ wants for
successful future language learning and teaching.
3) Lacks:
Lacks are concerned with the gap of learners‘
necessities and wants.

b. Situational Analysis

50
 A particular curriculum planning that carries out
contexts or situations in language program is the situational
analysis defined by Richards (2010, p.90). Furthermore,
Richards states that the factors that are analysed in
situational analysis are the potential impact and obstacles
that happens through the needs analysis

4. Procedure for Conducting Need Analysis

Needs analysis serves as the fundamental point in language
curriculum development. In terms of gathering information of
what the learners‘ desire, require and constraints, Brown (2010,
pp.62-64) administers the concept into the systematic chart as
follows:

NA Process

A. B. C.
Making Gathering Using the
fundamental information information
decision about through as the
the NA selecting components
questions of
curriculum

51
 Figure 2.1

The needs analysis framework (Brown, 2010)

From the systematic chart above, as cited in Brown (2010,

pp.62-64) there are explanations of each steps as follows :
a. Making fundamental decision about the needs analysis
The first step in making fundamental decision is doing
four steps in determining the people who will be involved in
the analysis, they are:
a. Target group: the people whom the information will
be gathered.
b. Audience: the people whom the analysis will be
acted upon.
c. Need Analysts: the people whom the analysis will be
responsible to.
d. Resource Group: the people whom the information
will be served as the resources to the target group.

The next step is considering four philosophies in

gathering the type of information that will be used in need
analysis stated by Stuffflebeam as cited in Brown (2010,
p.38):
a. Disrepancy philosophy : the differences between
student‘s current performance and future desired
goals.
b. Democratic philosophy : the desired views of the
majority chosen group in the process of language.

52
 c. Analytic philosophy : the views that acquired from
the research and reports of learners‘ learning
processes.
d. Diagnostic philosophy : the requirement of language
performance elements.

b. Gathering information through selecting questions

After considering decisions, delimitating questions and
selecting appropriate instruments are the important step in
gathering information. The first process is involved in
having five questions categories as cited in Rossett in Yassi
and Kaharuddin (2018, p.40):

1. Selecting types of questions

a. Identifying problems questions: the questions are

addressed to find problems in target groups
b. Priority questions the questions are addressed to
find the major skills in learning goals.
c. Ability questions: the questions are addressed to
measure the target groups abilities.
d. Attitude questions: the questions are addressed to
reveal the target groups‘ views and response
towards the program.
e. Solution questions: the questions are addressed
to obtain resolution and understanding of
problems.

53
 The second process is using appropiate instruments as
Brown (2010, p.45) stated six categories of instrumentation,
as follows:

a. existing information: the procedure to obtain

information through literary sources.

b. tests: the procedure to assess the ability in the target

groups, namely proficiency, placement, diagnosis

c. observations: the procedure of perceiving the target

groups behaviour

d. interviews: the procedure of asking responses and

views in the target groups.

e. meetings: the procedure of discussion with the target

groups to reach agreement for the learning program.

f. questionnaire: the procedure of providing sequence

of questions to the target groups.

c. Using the information as the components of curriculum

In this final process, the information gathered will be
used to be utilized as goals and objectives for the language
program tests, materials, teaching activities and evaluation
strategies as the components of the curriculum or syllabus.

H. Syllabus
Syllabus and curriculum are two major points in the learning
process. Nunan as cited in Al-Hamlan (2011, p.22) stated that there
are fundamental perceptions of this term. According to Candlin as

54
cited in Al-Hamlan (2011, p.23), curriculum consists of language
learning, learning purpose, experience, evaluation which these
elements are covered through the role and relationships of teachers
and learners in a more general points. However, syllabus consists of
classroom documents and records in a rather wide than the syllabus.
To much of a broader scope, Nunan and Candlin as cited in Basta
(2011, p.3) conveyed that curriculum is a teaching methodology
that consists of major processes in planning, implementation,
evaluation, management, and administration.

1. The objective of the syllabus

Hutchinson and Water as cited in Lolita (2009, p.14) stated
that syllabus serves as the highlight of the knowledge into an
organized units which ensure the proficiency through teaching
materials and will be evaluated in the end of the term.
Meanwhile, Hutchinson and Water in Savitri, (2009, p.31) also
states that syllabus delivers its main purpose as a source of
students‘ formal information in an array policies, procedures,
content of the course, and equipment in the language program.

2. Components of the syllabus

Syllabus contains specific and operational statements of
teaching and learning elements. Each series of planned elements
leads defined objectives. Dubin as cited in Songhori (2011, p.22)
stated that syllabus is detailed and operational. The lists are
contained of selected and ordered specific objectives which can
be explained like this:

55
 Table 2.2

Components of a Language Syllabus (Adapted from Nunan,

2010)
Language Component in the
Remarks
Syllabus
Situations Things to be dealt with
Things to be engaged in
Activities
(learners)
Functions Things to be fulfilled by learners
General notions Things to be handled by learners
Specific notions Things to be handled by learners
Things that learners will be able
Forms
to use
Things that learners will be able
Skills
to perform (level)
Scope to be covered and
Topics
learners‘ activities
Therefore, Ur (2012, p. 20) categorized the characteristics of a
syllabus:
1. It consists a complete list of content points (words,
structures and topics and process items (tasks and
methods)
2. It consists of organized points
3. It has clear objectives
4. It is accessible and understandable as public document
5. It indicates time schedule
6. It indicates particular methodology
7. It has recommended materials
56
 3. Approach and Types of Syllabus
There are various approaches and types of language syllabus
design that can be used by the syllabus designer as the following
table below cited in International Journal of Academic Research
in Business and Social Sciences by Alduais 2012, Vol.2 No.11.

Table 2.3

Major approaches to Language Syllabus Design

(Adapted from Alduais 2012, Vol.2 No.11. )
Possible Planning
Approach Characteristics
Types Approach
Product- Grammatical Grammatical less
oriented focused syllabuses, analytical
syllabuses learning, functional-
unintegrated notional
linguistic items syllabuses
and skills
learning
processes,
language is
learned
gradually.
Process- Tasks focused Procedural less
oriented learning, syllabuses, synthetical
syllabuses linguistic items task-based and natural
and skills are syllabuses,
learned content
gradually. syllabuses

57
 Meanwhile Richards (2010, p.21) categorized syllabus into
two points as follow:
1. A priori syllabuses
This is the common syllabus used in school and applied
in comprehensive teaching.
2. A posteriori syllabuses
This is the common syllabus used in the English course.
It is developed from the evaluation into preferred topics
and content.

4. Types of CLT Syllabus

Richards categorized several syllabus types of CLT (2012,
p.27-28), as follows:
1. Functional syllabus:
This syllabus is commonly used for speaking and
listening courses and applied to the learners‘ communicative
competence of English. Several topics will be developed to
bridge the learners‘ skill in mastering various situations of
communication.

2. Situational Syllabus
Situational syllabus refers to contextual setting which the
learners are expected to use communicative acts in where it
takes place. The context typically occurred in the airport,
hotel, hospital, etc.

58
3. Topical or Content Based Syllabus
The syllabus is utilized to be designed around certain
themes and topics to facilitate four skills. The themes
typically covers religion, architecture, ecology, etc.

4. Skills-Based Syllabus
This syllabus focuses in the four skills of English and
organized into specific skills. For instance, recognizing the
skill of keywords, topic, speakers‘ attitude, speech and
identifying key information in a text.

5. Competency Based Syllabus

This syllabus focuses on specific competencies to be
obtained in particular situations and activities. The
foundation of major skills, knowledge and attitudes are
obtained through performance and activities as the social
survival and work language programs.

6. Task Based Syllabus

It is the kind of syllabus that integrated activities,
grammar and tasks that encourages learners to engage in a
meaningful communication acts. Richards (2012, p.27-28),
categorized the two types of task based syllabus, as follows;
a. Pedagogical Tasks
It covers the learning process and strategies that are
developed based on SLA theory. It consists of
namely jigsaw, information gap, problem-solving
tasks, etc.

59
 b. Real World Tasks
It covers the real world context tasks to prepare
learners in the real context.

7. Text Based Syllabus

It is a syllabus that led the learners to identify text and
discourse in a specific context.

8. An Integrated Syllabus
It is a syllabus that organizes different types of syllabus
elements in each level.

5. Communicative Competence as an Alternative Approach to

Syllabus Design in ELT
The process of learning English as a foreign language is
acquiring four skills such as listening, reading, speaking and
writing. Speaking, is the main indicator that learners look out
for. Richards (2012, p. 201) stated that speaking proficiency
development took the large portion of learners‘ percentage in
acquiring English. Speaking, is what the learners‘ maintain to
make social contact with other people. Meanwhile, Ellis (2010,
p. 16) said that learners should have knowledge capacity to
produce and perceive foreign language. It refers to declarative
and procedural knowledge. The declarative language refers to
learners‘ knowledge of grammar and vocabulary while
procedural knowledge refers to strategies of using the language.
Furthermore, Shumin (2010, p. 24) stated that in learning
foreign language the learners should focus on the knowledge and
context of the authentic language. Thus, it requires more than

60
 grammatical and semantic rules. It all can be concluded that, as
Yassi and Kaharuddin (2015, p. 55) said that in the concept of
speaking, the learners should possess the function and social
contexts of the foreign language to shape communicative
competence. In which the function and social contexts mean
both grammatical and sociolinguistics scope.

6. Syllabus Evaluation
The syllabus evaluation is based on four criteria typical of
learning-centered syllabi: (1) learning goals and objectives, (2)
assessment activities, (3) schedule, and (4) overall learning
environment. According to Bach and Scheiifer (2014, p. 1), the
criterion is divided into multiple components, and provide a
range of options for what evidence of proficiency in those
components might look like. For example, the criterion of
Overall Learning Environment contains components such as
positive tone, fostering motivation, and high expectations, each
of which syllabi may signal in a variety of ways, from giving
students a degree of control over their learning experience, to
offering resources to help them succeed, to opening with
enthusiastic language that communicates the opportunity to
wonder and ask questions about the course material without fear
of criticism. Each of the 16 components—designated as
essential, important, or less-important—is scored on the strength
of supporting evidence. Strong evidence indicates that many (but
not necessarily all) of the characteristics of the component are
present in the syllabus and match the descriptions closely.
Moderate evidence indicates that a few of the characteristics of

61
 the component are present in the syllabus and/or only partly
match the descriptions. Low evidence indicates that very few of
the characteristics of the component are present in the syllabus
and/or don‘t match the descriptions.

I. Previous Related Research

This research focuses on the speaking syllabus development
through evaluation. Some of the previous research here are
presented to build the framework and insight of similar cases.
Mostly taking part in curriculum development, as the research
conducted by Sadeghi (2012, p.11) in Urmia University of Iran that
revealed the gap between the current objectives and curriculum for
education. It resulted to revise the current curriculum to put focus on
the needs of the society and students. Therefore, the importance of
English for Foreign Language (EFL) Program evaluation research
needs to be the foundation of curriculum development in order to
improve the quality of the students. Moreover, in the research of Al-
Hamlan, S.A and Baniabdelrahman, A.A. (2015, p.15), it is found
that the needs analysis should be conducted regularly to reach the
suitable objectives and curriculum which needed to update the
curriculum with such insightful needs. In contrast of the focus on the
curriculum, the evaluation of the teacher quality should take place to
reach the goals in establishing student-centred learning and quality
in teaching and learning. The relevant people – administrators,
instructors, students, and staffs affect the improvement of the
program.

62
 As the acknowledgement of CLT approach in ESL and EFL
context, according to Ahmad and Rao (2013, p.200) there are some
points to be highlighted. The first is the revised syllabus for English
language teaching, the oral skill development for learners, the
technology utilization in teachers‘ training programs, and the
evaluation and assessment system. Meanwhile, Shaweer (2013,
p.12) argued that CLT should be highlighted English as a foreign
language/English as a second language (EFL/ESL) curriculum
development. As his research studies the teachers‘ contexts and
instruction failures in utilizing CLT approach. Therefore, he
recommends the development in adult educator preparation
programs and teacher improvement in in-service teacher training. In
his study, he points out the importance of communicative classroom
practices lead to improve student communicative competence and
four skills. In contrast, non-communicative practices bring about
poor achievement in student learning. In the highlight of teachers
instruction, he recommends the involvement of policymakers, the
initial and in-service teacher training programs in order to offer
communicative training that mixes and balances theory and practice.
Thus, teachers‘ cognition and behaviour in actual classrooms should
be monitored.
In order to serve the current research in communicative
competence and syllabus evaluation, the research conducted by
Yassin and Kaharuddin (2018, p.3) delivers systematic stages of
communicative competence syllabus development and how ESP and
language program development has a standpoint. They recommend
that to improve the communicative competence, the review of pre-
existing syllabus and the development of systematic framework

63
through needs analysis. The stages of the systematic planning
includes needs analysis, formulation of learning objectives,
development of syllabus and the evaluation to discover the
effectiveness of the curriculum. Furthermore, Ginaya, et.al (2018,
47) stated that communicative activities enhances students‘ attention
and response. This learning method improves students‘ motivation
to produce and practicing speaking skill. Meanwhile, Ahmad&Rao
(2013, p.202) stated that communicative competence as a result of
the CLT approach should be ackonowledged to help learners fluent
in English. In addition, Seker (2010, p. 60) addresses the challenges
in instilling communicative competence in the curriculum which is
the incompetence to put L2 sociolingusitics context in the
classroom. When the authentic materials is given, the L2 context
should be the atmosphere in the classroom rather than just delivering
text-book materials. Therefore, the teacher serves as the main role to
equp students in L2 context. In other part, Nikian, et.al (2016, p.8),
the teacher-centered teaching method and grammatical
examinations. These traditional methods are being a barrier to reach
successful communicative competence in the second language
learners.

64
 CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY AND RESEARCH DESIGN

The current study applies qualitative methods and research uses

Research and Development approach by adapting Borg and Gall
Model that describes and analyse the YPII teachers‘ needs in
English learning. The study design constructed here is based on the
developed study questions.

A. Research Design
Developmental research serves as the research design in this
study. The process involves a Research and Development (R&D)
cycle, which consists steps of studying research findings, field
testing and revising. These process is used to correct the deficiencies
that found in the field-testing stage.
The following are the steps of R&D cycle taken from Borg &
Gall which consists of research and information collecting, planning,
develop preliminary form of product, preliminary field testing, main
product revision, dissemination and implementation. In summary,
R&D cycle can be categorized into three main stages which are
research and information testing, developing preliminary product
and evaluating. The research and information collecting involves
needs analysis, interview and observation. The planning phase
involves Focus Group Discussion with the teachers and supervisors.
The development of preliminary form of product involves the
analysis of data collection for syllabus design. The data are collected
from the questionnaire, interviews and observation. The
questionnaire, interviews and observation serve as the tool of needs
analysis to create profiling between needs, wants and lacks of the
students. The preliminary field testing involves the

65
 implementation of the preliminary syllabus design. The main
product revision involves the revision of the preliminary syllabus
and the dissemination and implementation involves the
implementation of the final syllabus in YPII English Speaking
Course.

Research and Develop Preliminary

Information preliminary field testing
Collecting Planning form of product

Dissemination Main
and product
implementa- revision
tion

Figure 3.1

R&D cycle from Borg&Gall (2019, p.24) Adopted by the writer

According to the R&D cycle, the process of developing takes

more the presentation of this process. The process doesn‘t end to the
developing steps. Furthermore, it will be continued to the validating
and revising steps.

B. Research Setting
Yayasan Pendidikan Islam Ibuku Annisaa (YPII) is a foundation
which covers playgroup until senior high school. This Islamic
education foundation established based on national integrated
curriculum, implemented in active learning method. It is located
66
Bintaro area on Jl. Jombang Raya No. 25A, Pd. Aren, Kota
Tangerang Selatan, Banten 15224.

C. Research Instrument
As a qualitative research, the instruments are the researcher. The
tools of instruments are needed to gain the comprehensive data. This
study obtains the data from three types of data, there are
transcription of interview, field note of observation, and document
records. Thus, the instrument preparation for those data are
interview guidelines, observation guidelines, and curriculum
documents. All of the data will be analysed and attached in to
appendix in this study. Moreover, for the consistencies of the data,
the teaching process will be recorded through the audio, and the
teaching documents (curriculum, syllabus, lesson plan, and students‘
assignment instruments) will be photocopied.

D. Resources of the Data

This research comprised a sample of 51 YPII teachers who joins
the afternoon English Speaking Course called English Language
Training that has been held since 2015 in the preliminary
development. There are changes of sample amount in main product
revision phase as the 7 new teachers joined to replace the resigned.
There are 58 students in total . There are 7 classes from three
different levels. Beginner level called Starter which consists of four
classes, Middle-Beginner called Elementary consists of one class, a
class of Pre-Intermediate, and a class of intermediate.

E. Procedure of Data Collection

The study collected the data by applying the following
techniques:

67
1. Questionnaire
The questionnaire is based on assessing the learners‘ needs
of study related to the language learning process. The
questionnaire will be designed by the researchers based on the
relevant literature and previous studies that covered the students‘
needs in English language learning. The questionnaire is based
on the 5 point Likert scale with ―strongly disagree‖, ―disagree‖,
―not sure‖, ―agree‖, and ―strongly agree‖ rating of assessment
the statements. As using the Likert scale, the questionnaire will
be presented by close-ended questions. The questionnaire is
developed by analysing the needs analysis.

2. Interviews
In addition to the questionnaire, semi-structured interviews
are conducted with the participants. Apart from the participants,
the teacher and the supervisor are interviewed in order to
identify their professional needs, language skills, tasks, and
deficiencies, learning styles, teaching methods, perspectives and
their suggestions for better English language learning.
Interviews are solid foundation as it is the triangulation of
conducting questionnaire. Furthermore, the sampling of the
interview will be based on criterion sampling, as the analysis of
questionnaire‘s likert scale is being the foundation and used as a
follow-up. The sample of the interview are selected in
purposive sampling technique. The reason of using this
technique lies in the purpose of the research, to increase the
effectiveness of the program and by that, gathering information
from a carefully selected members. There will be 5 of 62

68
participants, 2 of 7 teachers, 1 training supervisor and 1 chief of
foundation for the interview session.

3. Observation
The researcher observes certain level of the classes to obtain
the major activities. Observation allows the researcher to see the
learning activities, learning materials and class management.
The observation are conducted in the minimum of three times.
The researcher uses recorder, field note and observation
guidelines during the process. The role of the researcher is the
participant observer. Hence, as the researcher is the instructor of
the course, she is a complete participant as she experiences the
same way as the participants. She observes 2 of 7 classes, the
starter and intermediate classes.

4. Forum Group Discussion (FGD)

To reach the in-depth understanding of data collection and
conduct the planning phase, the focus griup discussion was
conducted along with the instructors, chief of foundation and
the training supervisor.

5. Documentation
As the program has conducted for two years. Several
documents need to be analysed to gather the data, such as
English curriculum documents, English syllabus, English yearly
program, Teachers‘ lesson plan and Program Evaluation
documents.

69
F. Procedure of Data Analysis
1. The questionnaires are collected and put for analysis. The
frequencies and percentages of the participants‘ responses
are recorded for each statement in the questionnaire. Data
from the questionnaire are calculated with the formula
below:

n=N

( 1 + N. ( e )² )

In which:
N = sample
N = population limit
e = error tolerance

2. The data are tabulated and represented in figures in order to

present the responses visually, in a more understandable
way.
3. All the interviews, documentation and observation will
manually code. The coding process is essential to structure
the data and facilitate working with and building knowledge
about the collected data.
4. Then, findings were discussed and analysed in the light of
the previously conducted literature review.

G. Triangulation
In order to obtain reliable and accurate data of the research, the
writer uses the triangulation types as the following:

70
 The triangulation addresses the credibility of the data
through the following types:
a. Method
As this study obtains the data through the questionnaire,
observation, interview and documentation, the researcher
reviews some information to some key informants.
Moreover, the role of documentation strengthens the
confirmed data. The credibility of data will be seen
through the methods.
b. Sources
This study involves some of sources of data. First, three
English teachers as participants. Second, the instructors,
principal, and research and development team as key-
informant. Third, two types of documents (syllabus and
teaching planning).
c. Theoritical
This study applies expert judgement to evaluate the
finding of research with certain theory. In order to obtain the
data findingg with the perspective theory.

71
 CHAPTER IV
FINDING AND DISCUSSION

This chapter describes and analyses the data which are obtained
during the research process. It includes the result of interview,
questionnaires and journal analysis. All the students, teachers, a
program supervisor and the chief of foundation. In this study have
responded to the questions forwarded to them fully as far their realm
of knowledge and preferences. In addition, it also contains the
discussion about the answer of the research problems are: (1) What
are the aspects included in developing English speaking syllabus
course in YPII? (2) How to develop English speaking syllabus
course in YPII? (3) What is the entity of the English speaking course
for YPII?

A. Data Description
1. What are the aspects included in developing English
speaking syllabus course in YPII?

1. Necessities
In this point, necessities covers material content and skills
on material content, the writer took the topics that will be
used by the teacher to communicate in the classroom.

a. Content Material

1. Asking Question (Do, Does, WH Questions)

According to the questionnaire result, (TPD1). The
needs asking simple questions are adequate.It can be

72
seen from the index percentage that resulted of 69%.
Furthermore, in Do, Does and WH Questions, the same
percentage shares the result of 69%. However, the
students were having difficulties in producing those
questions although they have adequate background
knowledge in the material. In the FGD session one of the
starter teacher (PSFGDL7) said that the asking questions
material needs further notice; generally, we have taught
the material but they still do mistakes fatally in that
section. Moreover, in an interview with a participant in
Starter 1 which is equal to pre-beginner level. It revealed
another challenge as they had difficulties understanding
basic English utterance (P1S1L8); I am in the same
group as Mr. Sam. The teacher uses slides and speaks
English all the time, we can’t understand it. Mr. Sam
usually translates it in Bahasa. I don’t understand it. It
can be concluded that there should be an emphasis in
developing techniques and methods of using these
simple questions to be practiced well.

2. Giving Imperative sentences (imperative mood:

don‘t, please, go)
According to the questionnaire result (TPD2), most
of the participants are quite able using ―don‘t‖ as the
percentage resulted in 64%. Meanwhile, in using ―let‘s
as an imperative, it shares higher result of 69%.
However, the imperative sentences that act as basic
instruction in the classroom should be added in the

73
syllabus as one of the program teacher (T1PIL19) stated
that I think simple instructions in class is needed for
them to practice in their own classroom, the daily
conversation also. Because sometimes students are
smarter than the students. They have various vocabs ad
they want to talk to their teachers. Meanwhile, the
simple instruction has been applied in the previous
teachers, but it didn‘t apply holistically. As one of the
intermediate student (P4IL13) said that we used
instructional English when we had a full-English
speaking teacher with a name tag: speak to me in
English named Miss Febri. I think it’s important to be
applied as the foundation followed all the way in these
two years and the students are mostly active in English.
However, the vision of the foundation to be semi-
bilingual is not clear enough.From the result above, it
can be summed up that it is important for them to learn
more about instruction in the classroom as a habitual and
real-context teaching.

3. Giving Request (will and would)

According to the questionnaire result (TPD3) the

percentage shares of 75% index result, the participants
are able to express request with will and would. In fact,
it has been applied before in the subject schedule during
the break with the students as one of the starter student
(P2S3L21) stated that we used to apply basic English

74
 instruction in the classroom with the hand out of
instruction and request. The handout were given to the
students and teachers then we spoke in the snack time.
But now we missed it. It can be concluded that there was
a habitual in using the expressions and that the handout
is important to have.

4. Giving Advice

According to the questionnaire result (TPD4), the

participants are able to express advice. As the result of
the index percentage is 75%.

5. Giving Opinion

From the questionnaire result (TPD5), the

participants are able to express opinion. It can be seen
from the index percentage of 75%. However, the
students still need constant correction in using it in
utterance as one of the teacher in the FGD stated that we
have given the giving opinion material but to achieve the
understanding for them to utter in the correct way is still
difficult (PSFGDL7).

b. Skills
Each of the points will be explained in the explanation
below:

75
1. Speech Context (syntax and semantics)
According to the questionnaire result (TPD6) the
students share 74% index percentage, it can be concluded
that the students are able to express simple present tense. In
contrast of the questionnaire result, most of the students are
having difficulties in delivering English utterance in a
coherent manner. They need English to be practiced as a
habitual. As stated by one of the students‘ view in the
interview, I am still confused to arrange the correct words
(P2S3L8). I only rely on my feelings..I think there should be
a mandatory English daily practice program so that we will
use it everyday, I read a story that people who live abroad
speaks English well for a conditioned situation (P4IL10). In
addition, a teacher stated the same thing during the FGD
session, through the 2 years running program, we have
thought all of the basic English, but they still have
difficulties in using do/does. Hopefully they will have
deeper understanding by applying daily activities in this
term (PSFGDL4). Thus, the supervisor in the FGD said that
the daily activities should be emphasized in starter level
(PSFGDL8). To sum up, the students need more emphasis
on using simple English to accommodate them in everyday
teaching context. The challenge of this item is, the students
should implement it in everyday conversation.

2. Vocabularies

76
 From the questionnaire result of 79% index percentage
(TPD7), the participants are able to find the right
vocabularies when it comes to find the right vocabularies.
Meanwhile, the teacher said that their vocabs are still limited
and needed further practice ; Speaking skills, but when you
want to make them speak, you need them to know the basic
skills, right? Like the vocabulary, but they limited
vocabs..that’s why I prefer to give them games.. (T1PIL17).
Yes, some of them just like I told you before, Ms. Rina. She
still needs a lot of practice and also get more vocabs.. you
cannot produce sentences without vocabs (T1PIL21). It can
be concluded that the students need more content to apply
various contextual vocabularies in the syllabus through the
activities.

3. Pronunciation
From the questionnaire result of 80% index percentage
(TPD8), the participants are able to pronounce English
words wonderfully. Whereas, the interview statement proved
the opposite as one of the participants said that for the we
can’t pronounce well on the conversation and can’t
determine the vocab as well. (P4IL3). It can be concuded
that the syllabus should emphasize more on verbal
communication as they have to produce utterance and the
teachers correct their pronunciation.

4. Speech Logic

77
 According from the questionannaire result (TPD9), the
participants are able in replying English. It can be seen that
in responding English, the index percentage result is 81%.
This result is contradicted in the interview statements of part
A. Necessities. They still have difficulty in producing basic
English, vocabulary and pronunciation. Meanwhile, the
internal motivation is resulted in 85%. In contrast, a
participant said personally, I enjoy this program but I still
don’t understand if I should talk in English (P2S3L6). The
other participant stated that the teacher always teaches in
english so I would ask my peer to translate it to me
(P1S1L8). To sum up, basic English development in the
syllabus should meet their needs in order to improve the
program consciousness.

2. Lacks

The points will be explained specifically as follows:

A. Teacher Preparation
1. Material Preparation

78
 From the questionnaire result of 54% disagree that the
teachers are having lack of preparation. (TPD10), the
participants agree that the teachers serve the well-prepared
material preparation. A student said the teacher has already
prepared the topic and distribute it to the students
(P2S3L15) . Meanwhile, the supervisor in the FGD session
emphasized that the lesson plan had been prepared
(PSFGDL52) . Moreover, a teacher said that adding
references is used for materials enrichment so it will be
more interesting (T1PIL10). This is supported by the
interview statements that the teachers are well prepared
because of the lesson plan.

2. Material Competence
Based on the questionnaire result (TPD11) of a 51%
disagree that the teachers are having lack of material
competence, the teachers has already given competent
materials. This is in accordance with the teacher preparation.
Although the result is adequate, the result is still need to be
improved, as we can see from Necesssities result, the
materials are not adequate to accomodate students needs.

B. Learning Activity
1. Method
From the questionnaire result (TPD12) of 54% disagree
that the learning method activity is interesting, we can see
that the learning activity is already interested to be
participated of. This is in accordance with the interview

79
 statement:the previous methodis already enjoyable to learn
for instance by using pictures and quizzes (P1S1L18) .
However, the learning method in the syllabus should be
more varied.

C. Participant’s Motivation
1. Participant‘s personal motivation
According to the questionnaire result of 52% disagree
that the students has lack of motivation. For the Participant‘s
Personal Motivation, there are various views from the
student, teacher and training supervisor. The students think
that there should be reward upon joining the course; I think
it’s an obligation because it is based on instruction but there
should be guidance and controlling, consistency. Reward is
a way to appreciate the teachers. Moreover, the confidence
should be improved, most of our students are English well-
spoken (P3PIL19). The other students also added that the
motivation should be from the management in other words,
performance indicator (PSFGDL25).
Meanwhile, the teacher see that the students have lack pf
motivation as the test result was nt synchronized with the
evaluation questionnaire. The obstacles are the students.
They thought they did enough effort. There are some
students who have enough preparation, some of them are
not. Maybe they are just using the course time to gather with
their friends. The test result contradicts with the evaluation
questionnaire (TPL20).

80
 In addition, the supervisor of the program said that the
main oroblem lies in the recruitment program. The problem
is the self-motivation, it might be the underlining probkem
when the recruitment interview is running. We can not see
the intrinsic factors such as responsibility and persistence,
we don’t serve the psychological test. Consequently, they
don’t have the sense of ownership although it costs nothing
(TPL32).-. Maybe they learned it too late, the turning points
for everyone is different right…maybe the other friends they
realize it on senior high school…they started to late then it
will be difficult for them to memorize and also the time. and
the activities we have as teachers (T1PIL23). To sum up,
participants' personal motivation is crucial but the finding
stated that there are different view from the students, teacher
and training supervisor. As the students think that they have
lack of motivation because of the minimize result of reward,
the teacher thinks that they should be more enthusiastic.
They failed in the evaluation and contradicted their answer
in the evaluation questionnaire. Meanwhile, the training
supervisor stated that the problem is the early recruitment
program so the varied capability becomes a challenge. In
this case, the foundation should take on hand to make the
vision in line.

D. Teacher’s Motivation
According to the questionnaire result (TPD14) of
percentage 57% disagree that the teacher has lack of

81
 motivation, the teachers have adequate motivation in
delivering materials and serving the course.

E. Test Relevancy
1. The Test
Based on the questionnaire data result (TPD15) of
percentage 53% disagree that the test is not relevant in
accordance to the material given., while it can be concluded
from the interview that the presentation test is crucial. The
grammar test is always applied, we don’t need grammar
anyway (P4IL10). I prefer using powerpoint just like in ms
uthie’s class, I don’t think we need the grammar test, we’r
not going to apply for TOEFL anyway (P4IL17). We have to
do the presentation as the test (PSFGDL44). Some of the
students use cue cards and text while having some test
because the preparation time is limited (PSFGDL46). In the
previous syllabus, the assesment covers up in grammar
written test and presentation based on their interest topics.
Therefore, as the focus of the syllabus is daily activities and
instruction, a micro-teaching presentation using the
expression given should be applied. Thus, the teachers will
present their own subject. Consequently, the communicative
competence will be reached.

F. Time
1. Program Period
According to the questionnaire data result (TPD16) of
78% agree that the program period is too short. The

82
 statements from the students and teachers are supporting the
improvement of meeting frequency. We would like to
continuously run this program to engage the students to
maximize their potential (TPL24). The class is fun but we
only have twice a week meeting (P3PIL17). I think the
meeting frequency should be improved as we have so many
crashed schedule (P2S3L25).

G. Program evaluation and monitoring

1. The conduction of program evaluation and monitoring
According to the questionnaire data result (TPD17) of
80% agree that the conduction of program evaluation and
monitoring is insignificant for the program improvement. The
data is supported by these interview statements from the FGD,
the students don’t have enough time to review neither do the
spare time they have (PSFGDL9). The teacher, Oh okay, since
we speaks English, I think so far so good, I think I need some of
them to revise the teaching aids, what do you call it…active
teaching materials (T1PIL8). We have done the class
regrouping based on the test result but there are challenges
from the attendance and schedule changes (TPL22).
Meanwhile, the students should let themselves aware in the
importance of enhancing personal skills as the training
supervisor stated that We need more attention from the unit, so
that the students have more sense of belonging. They need to
know that the foundation has served them free course to improve
their value (T1PIL18). And strengthen by the chief of the
foundation, We haven’t include their achievement in the course

83
as the performance indicator. We want them to have adequate
skill then we will evaluate it. We want to see how far it will be
applied to our students (P2S3L23). In conclusion, the
attendance problem correlates with the reward system that is
expected from the foundation. Menawhile, the communicative
language teaching method should be applied in the syllabus.

3. Wants
Each points will be explained specifically as follows:
A. Class Activities
1. Pair work Activities
According to the questionnaire data result (TPD18) 77%
the students agree that the pair work activities are significant
to their learning.

2. Role-Play
According to the questionnaire data result (TPD19) 72%
agree that they prefer role-play in classroom activities, The
teachers are already applied the activities. You mean role
play?yes, we do that. No, I don’t teach it grammatically,
although they are in pre-intermediate, they are still in
elementary level. I prefer to give them examples rather than
the theories (T1PIL4). In this kind of activity, the students
are able to produce utterance in a real-contect manner.

3. Group-work Activities
According to the questionnaire data result (TPD20) 76%
agree that the group work activities are preferable to the

84
 students . One of the students said that it makes the course
interesting. The teachers discussed about mall as in future
tense discussion. Then we discussed about environment.
After that we have presentation about favorite food and then
we sing. (P2S3L17).it can be concluded that the students like
to work together with their friend as a means of
communication, so they don‘t feel ashamed when they make
mistakes.

4. Project Work
According to the questionnaire data result (TPD21) 79%
agree that project Work activities are preferable to the
students .

B. Teachers and participants’ role

1. Cooperative Approach
According to the questionnaire data result (TPD22) 80%
agree that Cooperative Approach are preferable to the students.
It is supported by the interview statements as follows, there are
partner tasks, dialogue, group, or just a casual chat (P4IL27).
There are always themes, and we are free to choose what theme
we would like to discuss. Although the teacher already prepared
the themes (P2S3L11). It can be concluded that, the students like
to be involved in decision making and feel in charge in the
communication learning process. They need authority as they
are teacher in real-life.

85
C. Content Materials
1. Authenticity
According to the questionnaire data result (TPD23) 80%
agree that the students prefer British English rather than
American English. Although the interview statement from
teacher is astounding. The fact is astounding, they have
difficulties in just having materials in American English
(PSFGDL37). The fact that they have difficulties in simple
English and pronunciation contradicts this result. The
majority of the teachers are using American throughout the
years.

2. Exposure

According to the questionnaire data result (TPD24) 80%

agree that authentic materials , 83% instructional english,
88% everyday english conversation should be served in the
materials. As stated in the interview, I think simple
instructions in class is needed for them to practice in their
own classroom, the daily conversation also. Because
sometimes students are smarter than the students. They have
various vocabs ad they want to talk to their teachers
(T1PIL19). Based on my experience being a chief of
admission, the students are able to speak from a habitual
routine like watching TV, or their daily conversation with
their parents. So I think daily conversation is needed
(P4IL19). We haven’t got instructional English as in
teaching, it was usually grammatical (P4IL15). The purpose

86
 of this program is simple, we highly hope pur teachers are
able to speak simple conversation as a means of habitual
act. They have responsibility to create English atmosphere
in the classroom (T1PIL20). In conclusion, authentic
materials is needed to develop real context atmosphere in the
classroom. The context of authentic materials cover
instructional and English daily conversation.

2. How to develop English speaking syllabus course in YPII?

The writer uses R&D educational research from Borg and Gall
(2019, p. 90) to develop the English speaking syllabus course in
YPII. The explanation as follows:

a. Research and Information Collecting

Based on Borg and Gall‘s R&D cycle, the first phase
includes Research and Information Collecting. The step was
begun with needs analysis process. The first one is making a
decision, this includes deciding the participants of the research,
the types of information that must be collected and which
points of view should be presented. The participants of the
research are 51 YPII teachers from pre-school, kindergarten,
and elementary school. The participants are normally consist
of 62 teachers but 11 teachers were resigned when the first
cycle of developed syllabus (term one, August-November
2018) begun. Then, the writer begun to develop interview
questions that has been compiled from Munby‘s CNP,
Richards‘ Communicative Competence Points, Macalister and
Cresswell. The writer interviewed 5 of 62 participants, 2 of 7
87
teachers, 1 training supervisor and 1 chief of foundation for the
interview session. Then, the writer developed points from
questionnaire questions based on the theories and interview result
to find out what the students‘ need in the speaking course
syllabus.

b. Planning
From the research and information collecting, there is
planning. In this step, all of the collected data from questionnaire
and interview were being presented in the FGD session that refers
to PSFGD code in the appendix. This aims to validate the field
data to formulate the speaking course syllabus.

c. Developing Preliminary Form of Product

In this phase, the first cycle syllabus (see appendix) was
developed and was being prepared for the Preliminary Field
Testing phase. The syllabus was developed using Richards‘
Communicative Competence Approach and Curriculum
Development Model.

d. Preliminary Field Testing

In this phase, the first cycle developed syllabus are tested in
the learning process, to see how the students cover the materials.
This phase is crucial for the main product revision.

88
e. Main Product Revision
In the Main product revision, the communicative competence
output in the needs analysis was the questionnaire and the expert
review. For the questionnaire results are as follows:

1. Necessities
a. Content Material

1. Asking Question (Do, Does, WH Questions)

According to the questionnaire data result
(TMPR1) 89% the students are able in in asking
simple questions of Do, Does and 85% of
students are able in asking simple questions in
English using 5W + 1H. In the main product
revision syllabus, the writer emphasized in simple
present tense and covered the competencies in
stating and asking daily routine and differentiating
between the using of both kind of asking
questions. In the do and does section, the writer
focuses on the differentiation using s/es while in
the 5W + 1H, the writer focuses in requesting
personal identification and information.

2. Giving Imperative sentences (imperative mood:

don‘t, please, go)
From the questionnaire result (TMPR2), both of
the imperative mood using don‘t and please shares
the same result, that is 100%. In the main product

89
 revision syllabus, the writer emphasized in
illustrating attitude about instruction in the
classroom.

3. Giving Request (will and would)

According to the questionnaire data result
(TMPR3) both of the giving request expression
shares the same result of 94% in will and would.
In the main product revision syllabus, the writer
emphasized in addressing questions with polite
request as the competencies.

4. Giving Advice
According to the questionnaire data result
(TMPR4) 100% of the students agree that the
students have no difficulties in uttering advice
sentence. In the main product revision syllabus, the
writer emphasized in illustrating attitude about
instruction in the classroom.

5. Giving Opinion
According to the questionnaire data result
(TMPR5) 73% of the students are quite able in
uttering opinion sentence. In the main product
revision syllabus, the writer emphasized in

90
 illustrating attitude about instruction in the
classroom.

b. Skills
1. Speech Context (syntax and semantics)
According to the questionnaire data result
(TMPR6) 87% of the students are able in uttering
Simple Present Tense. In the main product revision
syllabus, there is Grammar Focus section to make
sure the utterance is in a coherent manner.

2. Vocabularies
According to the questionnaire data result
(TMPR7) 87% of the students are able in
producing vocabularies. In the main product
revision syllabus, there is Skill Getting section that
includes Vocabulary Snapshot to determine
contextual vocabularies.

3. Pronunciation
According to the questionnaire data result
(TMPR8) 81% of the students are able in uttering
pronunciation well. In the main product revision
syllabus, there is Skill Getting section that includes
Pronunciation drills through native English
speakers recordings

4. Speech Logic

91
 According to the questionnaire data result
(TMPR9) 75% of the students are quite able in
responding in English and 89% of the students are
quite able in improving English skills awareness.
In the main product revision syllabus, in the
competencies section there are things about stating
about daily routine and asking about daily routine.

2. Lacks

A. Teacher Preparation
1. Material Preparation
According to the questionnaire data result (TMPR10)
100% of the teachers have adequate material
preparation. In the main product revision syllabus,
there is Course General Description that explains
details about the learning process.

2. Material Competence
According to the questionnaire data result (TMPR11)
100% of the teachers are qualified in material
competence. In the main product revision syllabus,
there is Course General Description that explains
details about the learning process.

92
B. Learning Activity
1. Method
According to the questionnaire data result (TMPR11)
100% of the students are interested with the method
given. In the main product revision syllabus, there is
skill getting section that explains the method used.

C. Participant’s Motivation
1. Participant‘s personal motivation
According to the questionnaire data result (TMPR12)
86% of the students are having intrinsic motivation.

D. Teacher’s Motivation
1. Teacher‘s motivation to the participant
According to the questionnaire data result
(TMPR14) 92% the teachers are motivated.

E. Test Relevancy
1. The Test
According to the questionnaire data result (TMPR15)
92% of the students said the test is relevant.

F. Time
1. Program Period

93
 According to the the questionnaire data result
(TMPR16), 76% of the students said the program
period is quite relevant.

G. Program evaluation and monitoring

1. The conduction of program evaluation and
monitoring
According to the questionnaire data result
(TMPR17), 77% of the students said the program
period is quite relevant.

3. Wants

A. Class Activities
1. Pairwork Activities
According to the questionnaire data result
(TMPR18) 75% of the students said the Pair work
activities are quite effective.

2. Role-Play
According to the questionnaire data result
(TMPR19) 94% of the students said the Role play
activities are effective.

3. Group-work Activities
According to the questionnaire data result
(TMPR20) 45% of the group-work activities is quite
effective.

94
 4. Project Work
According to the questionnaire data result
(TMPR21) 81% of the program period project work
activities are effective.

B. Teachers and participants’ role

1. Cooperative Approach
According to the questionnaire data result
(TMPR22), 99% the program period project work
activities are effective.

C. Content Materials
1. Authenticity

According to the questionnaire data result (TMPR23) ,

96% of the materials are balance both from British English
and American English .

2. Exposure

According to the questionnaire data result (TMPR24),.

98% of the students said that authentic materials are in
accordance to the topic given. In addition, 92% of the
students are able to use instructional and 95% conversational
English in the classroom activities.

95
 Meanwhile, the expert review use the Finkle‘s syllabus
grading. The writer covered the review as follows:

Alicia Bradley, M.A

(Teachers College, Columbia University)
This syllabus is well-organized and contains many activities
to engage students in learning. The grammar focus and
competencies are clearly stated for each unit, and the
activities are designed to correspond with them. To make the
syllabus stronger, assessment criteria should be added. The
syllabus does not include any formal assessments. If
assessment will be done through the unit activities, this
should be noted in the syllabus along with a description of
how that will be done.

Yuta Otake, M.A in TESOL

(New York University)
The strongest area of the syllabus is its emphasis on
language as a tool for communication. Based on the activity
types and objectives, I predict that students would be highly
engaged and learn to become confident communicators.
Although there are clear columns for objectives and
competencies, I believe the weakest area of this syllabus to
be the assessments. It is not clear how teachers are expected
to measure student outcomes within the framework of the
cumulative objectives.

96
 From their reviews, it can be concluded that the strong
points from the syllabus is the communicative activities,
meanwhile the assessment should be explained in every unit.

e. Dissemination and Implementation

In this phase, the syllabus is ready to use. Through the
two cycles, we can see the pre developed and post developed
syllabus. This enables us to evaluate and fill the lacks into
needs and wants.

3. What is the entity of English speaking syllabus course in

YPII?
A syllabus is a significant document to serve foundation of
learning objective and process. The previous syllabus has been
done by inviting expert and senior teacher, but none of them
considered need or need analysis in developing the syllabus.
The researcher is the informal participatory observer for 2
years and does the research for the current year. From the
current observation, documents analysis, interview and needs
analysis process she analyse the English syllabus theme and
topics. As speaking is the major concern in the course, some of
them are instructional and daily English.
Therefore, based on the needs analysis findings, the
researcher identifies general purpose of the course and designed
the course framework using the communicative competence
syllabus design. This course framework contains week, units,
topics, activities, grammar focus and competencies.

97
a. WEEK
It shows the week meeting of certain competencies to be
obtained. The course is held twice a month.
b. UNITS
It shows which unit will represent the class, as the topics
are the same but the competencies are varied based on the
level of the class. The classes range between starter 1, starter
2, starter 3, starter 4, 2 pre-intermediate classes, and one
intermediate. Each classes consists of six up to ten classes.
c. TOPICS
The topics represents the theme of the lesson that
accommodates the competencies. The topics cover:
1. Daily Routine
2. Personal Identification
3. Polite Request
4. Imperative Sentence
5. Giving Opinion
6. Giving Advice
d. ACTIVITIES
The activities concerns on how the skill is obtained and
applied in the activity classroom.
1. Skill Getting
a. Vocabulary Snapshot:
b. Pronunciation Drills
c. Practices
2. Skill Using
a. Functional Activity:
b. Social Interaction Activity

98
 e. GRAMMAR FOCUS
The grammar focus serves the specific grammar items
used in each lesson.
f. REVIEW
The review consists of language game that serves
minimum review time with fun activities. This course
framework is the foundation to design the syllabus. Then,
the researcher developed the syllabus concerning daily
conversation and instructional English. The researcher
elaborates them with skills which should be achieved with
grammar, pronunciation and vocabularies. The syllabus
developed as a communicative competence syllabus. It is
appropriate with the objective learning to serve kindergarten
and primary school teacher in accelerating their English in
order to accommodate their classroom atmosphere.
Therefore, the syllabus takes specific topics that they
commonly used in real life context.

B. Discussions
1. The Aspects included in developing English Speaking
Syllabus Course in YPII
The objective of this research were to develop English
speaking syllabus for teachers. The English speaking syllabus
was developed based on the need analysis since this study using
communicative approach. As the objective is to evaluate the
language program development, the researcher uses the concept
of needs analysis by Richards and combine it with Munby‘s

99
communicative processor to develop the framework. Munby‘s
Communicative Syllabus Design (2018, p.13) needs analysis
developed to take learner‘s purposes in the central position.
Meanwhile, Munby (2018, p.20) explained that Communicative
Needs Processor (CNP) was the organization of variables that
affected the communication. Therefore, Richards (2010, p. 48)
stated that communicative competence serves in how to use
language for meaningful communication. It covers grammatical
competence as an important foundation in how sentences are
formed. By using needs analysis, the picture of needs, lack and
wants are clear to be given. Accordingly, Al-Hamlan, S.A and
Baniabdelrahman, A.A. (2015, p.15), found that the needs
analysis should be conducted regularly to reach the suitable
objectives and curriculum which needed to update the
curriculum with such insightful needs. In conclusion, from the
findings above, it can be concluded that the teachers in YPII
need; daily conversation and instruction in the classroom to
accommodate them with the students. The early syllabus were
designed with the prediction of basic topics without proper
needs analysis and there were no further evaluation on the
content of the syllabus, rather only the evaluation of attendance
and course satisfaction implementation. Therefore, the twice a
month course period is the only solution. The syllabus should be
punctual and fun as they have limited time in attending the
course.
Moreover, the problem lie in their basic capability and age
as most of them have very basic capability in English and are
very mature. The challenge is they need to catch up with a very

100
limited time course, packed school activities no performance
indicators included.
Consequently, the communicative competence syllabus is
needed to accommodate daily conversation and instruction in the
classroom to accommodate them with the students. It is focused
on speaking skills and interactive activities. Solid concern on
vocabularies and pronunciation is significant rather than just
grammar lessons. Although the instructors are quite capable in
delivering materials, they need to be more focused on
communicative purpose. In this term is communicative method.
Whereas, the previous course implemented generalized paper-
based test that all level should pass and a free topic presentation
test. Accordingly, a practical test should be adjusted in
delivering expressions they needed in the classroom.

2. The YPII English Speaking Syllabus Development

The researcher developed English speaking syllabus
framework using Borg and Gall‘s research and development
educational research. The researcher adopted its R&D cycle can
be categorized into three main stages which are research and
information testing, developing preliminary product and
evaluating. The research and information collecting were
conducted to obtain the needs, lacks and wants of the students.
The planning phase involves Focus Group Discussion with the
teachers and supervisors. The development of preliminary form
of product involves the analysis of data collection for syllabus
design. The data are collected from the questionnaire,
interviews and observation. The expert judgement is also

101
incuded to evaluate the syllabus. The questionnaire, interviews
and observation serve as the tool of needs analysis to create
profiling between needs, wants and lacks of the students. The
preliminary field testing involves the implementation of the
preliminary syllabus design. The main product revision
involves the revision of the preliminary syllabus and the
dissemination and implementation involves the implementation
of the final syllabus in YPII English Speaking Course. The
researcher did not include main field testing and the final
product phase in this research as the course period is limited.
However, Borg and Gall (2019, p. 18) stated that the strength of
its cycle concists of studying research findings pertinent to the
product to be developed and revising the deficiencies to meet
the objectives. The researcher covered the points in two phases
rather than three phases to reach the time efficiency where the
syllabus need to be applied eventually. Futhermore, Sadeghi
(2012, p.11) revealed that the gap between the current
objectives and curriculum for education needs to be filled in.
The researcher applied the R&D cycle to find the gap and fill in
the lacks.

3. The English Syllabus for the YPII English Speaking

Course
The researcher developed English speaking syllabus for
YPII teachers based on the finding of needs analysis. As the
objective of the syllabus development is communicative
competence for the teachers, the syllabus has communicative
approach as its foundation. In line with Richards (2012, p. 201)

102
who stated that speaking proficiency development took the large
portion of learners‘ percentage in acquiring English. Therefore,
communicative competence acts as the concept and
communicative language teaching as the method. Consequently,
the researcher developed a course framework that contains of
week, units, topics, activities, grammar focus, and review. Then,
the syllabus acts as a guidance to encourage English course
learning process.
However, Yassin and Kaharuddin (2018, p.3) delivers
systematic stages of communicative competence syllabus
development and recommend to improve the communicative
competence through the review of pre-existing syllabus. The
stages of the systematic planning includes needs analysis,
formulation of learning objectives, development of syllabus and
the evaluation to discover the effectiveness of the curriculum.
However, this syllabus has little coverage of review as the time
course is limited. Moreover, this syllabus covered
communicative activities to encourage students to practice and
increase personal motivation as Ginaya, et.al (2018, 47) stated
that communicative activities enhances students‘ attention and
response.

103
 CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

This chapter provides a conclusion of the study.as a result,

the suggestions are presented in this chapter for further research.
A. Conclusion
Based on the finding, it can be concluded that English syllabus
for YPII speaking course is based on the needs analysis. Interview,
observation and questionnaire were concluded to obtain the picture
of YPII teachers in English.
The data from the observation, questionnaire and interview had
illustrated a number of issues to be considered. The finding of this
study revealed the most significant of the teachers‘ needs is daily
conversation and instructional English. Accordingly, the researcher
develops the syllabus in the concern of communicative competence
with basic grammar and vocabularies. The syllabus develops in
communicative competence syllabus. It is appropriate with the
objective of the YPII English speaking course which is to
accommodate English communication with their students. Thus, the
syllabus takes the real-life context language uses as their basis, the
syllabus acts as the guidance in the learning process.
B. Suggestion
Based on the conclusion, it can be delivered some suggestions
to:
 The students
It is suggested that the students should be more critical about
their needs and motivation in learning English.
 Educators

104
 The English teachers should consider in doing need analysis.
It is suggested that developing English syllabus
accommodates students need. Thus, the evaluation should be
made to see the efficiency and effectiveness of the syllabus
applied in order to achieve the goals and brush the
improvements.
 Institution
The institution should be considered need analysis in
conducting the course and revise the product based on the
students‘ need.
 English Teachers
English teachers are able to use the framework of the
syllabus to assist them in developing communicative
purpose in their materials.
 Further researcher
It is suggested that the further researcher to evaluate the
syllabus and develop it for further research.

105
 REFERENCES

Alduais, Ahmed Mohammed, S. (2012). Analysis of ESP

Syllabus: Analysing the Book Basic English for
Computing as a Sample and Testing its Suitability
for ESP Learners in Public and Private Yemeni and
Saudi Arabian Universities. International Journal of
Academic Research in Business and Sciences, Vol 2 No
11, ISSN:2222-6990.
Al-Harby, Majid. (2005). ESP Target Situation Need Analysis:
The English language communicative needs as
Perceived by Health Professionals in the Riyadh area,
Electronic version approved: Maureen Grasso dean of
the Graduate School the University of Georgia:
Cambridge University Press.
Basturkmen, H. (2010). Developing Courses in English for
Specific Purposes, New Zealand: Palgrave McMillan.
Borg and Gall. (2019). Educational Research: An Introduction,
8th Edition. Pearson
Brown, James Dean. (1995). The Elements of Language
Curriculum, Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
David, R Hall (ed). (2013). Need Analysis for Language Course
Design: A Holistic Approach to ESP. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Davies, Paul & Eric Pearse. (2000). Success in English Teaching.
Oxford: Oxford
University Press.

106
Dudley-Evans, T, & St. John, M. (1998). Development in ESP: A
Multidisciplinary, Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
El-Imane, Benmakhlouf Azza Nour. (2013). ESP Material
Selection: The Case of Second Year Computer Science
Students . Masters‗ thesis. Ourgla University.
Fang, F. (2010). A Discussion on Developing Students’
Communicative Competence in College English
Teaching in China. Journal of Language Teaching and
Research 1 (2). pp.111-116.
Gonzalez, E. (2010). Evaluating a Communicative Syllabus in a
Mexican EFL. University of Birmingham
Haque, Nurul. (2014). A Brief Study on Need Analysis, Express
an International [Journal of Multi Disciplinary
research, ISSN 2348-2052, vol 1, issue 1, January.
Available at www. express-journal.com.
Harmer, Jeremy. (2004). How to Teach English: An Introduction
to the Practice of English language Teaching. Malaysia:
Longman.
Jack R. Fraenkel, Norman, E, Wallen & Helen, H. Hyun. (2012).
How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education.
New York: McGraw-Hill.
Jeremy, Harmer. (2010). How to Teach English. Malaysia:
Longman
Itoo, B.A, & Mohammad, T. (2016). Evaluation of Listening and
Speaking Syllabus in EFL Students at the Preparatory
Year Program. Arab World English Journal. pp. 490-504.

107
Many, E.J, & Bhatnagar, R. (2017). Implementing and Analyzing
Performance Assesments in Teacher Education. IAP.
Mohammadi, Valli and Nasser Mousavi. (2013). Analyzing
Needs Anlysis in ESP: A (re) Modeling, International
Research Journal of Applied and Basic Sciences, ISSN
2251-838 X/Vol 4(5):1014-1020. Science explore
publication.
Munby, J. (2017). Communicative Syllabus Design, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Nunan, D. (2013). The Learner-Centered Curriculum,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nunan, D. (2013). Research Methods in Language Learning.
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Paltridge, brian & Sue Starfield. (2013). The Handbook of
English for SpecificPurposes. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Richard, J. C & Willy A. Renandya, (Eds). (2010). Methodology
in Language in Language Teaching: An Anthology of
Current Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Richards, J. C and Rodger, T. S. (2010). Approaches and
Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press.
Richards, J. C. (2012). Curriculum Development in Language
Teaching, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Seedhouse, P. (2012). Need Analysis and General English
Classroom. ELT Journal, 49/1, pp 59—65.

108
Savignon. S.J. (2018). Communicative Competence. The TESOL
Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching. Pp. 120-
122.
Sidik, E.J. (2018). Representation of Communciative Competence
in English Language Textbooks in Indonesia. University
of Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa.
Tomlinson, Brian (2011). Materials Development in Language
Teaching. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.
Yassi, A.H, & Kaharuddin. (2018). Syllabus Design for English
Language Teaching, 2nd Edition. Prenadamedia Group.

109
APPENDICES

110
Interview Protocol : Needs Analysis at YPII, South

Tangerang
Time of Interview :
Date :
Place :
Interviewer :
Interviewee :
Position of Interview : Ketua Perguruan
Ketua Perguruan yang terhormat, pertama-tama peneliti
mengucapkan terimakasih atas kesediaannya untuk menjawab
pertanyaan di bawah ini. Ini akan digunakan untuk mengetahui
kebutuhan para guru dalam pembelajaran Bahasa Inggris serta
mengembangkan materi Bahasa Inggris yang sesuai dengan
kebutuhan pengajaran di kelas.
Jawablah pertanyaan-pertanyaan di bawah ini dengan jelas dan
ringkas.
1. Apakah menurut ibu program ini sudah sesuai dengan harapan?
2. Bagaimana selama ini supervisi di jalankan?
3. Siapa yang bertanggung jawab dalam pembuatan silabus?
4. Bagaimana pencapaian peserta selama 2 tahun ini?
5. Apakah frekuensi waktu kursus dirasa cukup?
6. Apakah peserta yang memperoleh pencapaian yang baik
mendapatkan insentif?

(Source: Adopted from Cresswell, 2012)

111
Interview Protocol : Needs Analysis at YPII, South

Tangerang
Time of Interview :
Date :
Place :
Interviewer :
Interviewee :
Position of Interview : Training Supervisor
Training Supervisor yang terhormat, pertama-tama peneliti
mengucapkan terimakasih atas kesediaannya untuk menjawab
pertanyaan di bawah ini. Ini akan digunakan untuk mengetahui
kebutuhan para guru dalam pembelajaran Bahasa Inggris serta
mengembangkan materi Bahasa Inggris yang sesuai dengan
kebutuhan pengajaran di kelas.
Jawablah pertanyaan-pertanyaan di bawah ini dengan jelas dan
ringkas.
1. Apakah menurut ibu program ini sudah sesuai dengan harapan?
2. Bagaimana selama ini evaluasi di jalankan?
3. Bagaimana pengembangan silabus setiap semester?
4. Bagaimana pencapaian peserta selama 2 tahun ini?
5. Apakah frekuensi waktu kursus dirasa cukup?
6. Apakah peserta yang memperoleh pencapaian yang baik
mendapatkan insentif?
7. Apakah hambatan berarti dalam pengembangan kursus 2 tahun
ini ?

(Source: Adopted from Cresswell, 2012)

112
Interview Protocol : Needs Analysis at YPII, South

Tangerang
Time of Interview :
Date :
Place :
Interviewer :
Interviewee :
Position of Interview : Teachers
Ibu guru yang terhormat, pertama-tama peneliti mengucapkan
terimakasih atas kesediaannya untuk menjawab pertanyaan di bawah
ini. Ini akan digunakan untuk mengetahui kebutuhan para guru
dalam pembelajaran Bahasa Inggris serta mengembangkan materi
Bahasa Inggris yang sesuai dengan kebutuhan pengajaran di kelas.
Jawablah pertanyaan-pertanyaan di bawah ini dengan jelas dan
ringkas.
1. Apakah menurut ibu program ini sudah sesuai dengan harapan?
2. Bagaimana selama ini evaluasi di jalankan?
3. Bagaimana ketercapaian tujuan pembelajaran setiap semester?
4. Bagaimana menerapkan metode yang variatif?
5. Apakah yang menjadi masalah dalam motivasi peserta?
6. Apakah peserta memberikan peningkatan setiap semester?
7. Apakah hambatan berarti dalam pengembangan kursus 2 tahun
ini ?

(Source: Adopted from Cresswell, 2012)

113
Interview Protocol : Needs Analysis at YPII, South

Tangerang
Time of Interview :
Date :
Place :
Interviewer :
Interviewee :
Position of Interview : students
Bapak/ibu yang terhormat, pertama-tama peneliti mengucapkan
terimakasih atas kesediaannya untuk menjawab pertanyaan di bawah
ini. Ini akan digunakan untuk mengetahui kebutuhan para guru
dalam pembelajaran Bahasa Inggris serta mengembangkan materi
Bahasa Inggris yang sesuai dengan kebutuhan pengajaran di kelas.
Jawablah pertanyaan-pertanyaan di bawah ini dengan jelas dan
ringkas.
1. Apakah menurut ibu program ini sudah sesuai dengan harapan?
2. Bagaimana proses pembelajaran di kelas?
3. Bagaimana kemapuan pengajar selama proses pembelajaran?
4. Apakah proses pembelajran variatif?
5. Apakah yang menjadi hambatan dalam motivasi pembelajaran ?
6. Apakah ada peningkatan setiap semester?
7. Apakah capaian yang diharapkan sesudah mengikuti kursus ini ?

(Source: Adopted from Cresswell, 2012)

114
Result of Interview for Head of the Foundation
Participant‘s Profile
Name : Pia
Class : Starter 1
Position : Chief of the Foundation
Interview Coding
Chief of the Foundation = CF
Line =L

Transcript Code
July, 23 2018
P: Participant
R: Researcher
R:Assalamu‘alaikum…Ibu..kita mulai ya bu,
interviewnya..makasih udah sempet untuk interview CFL1
ya bu…
P:Waalaikumsalam…oke baik Miss Egha CFL2
R: Aku ijin rekam ya bu.. CFL3
P: Oke CFL4
R: Ibu bisa ceritain, overview dari program ini? CFL5
P: Hmm..untuk satu tahun ini memang di bawah
litbang jadi aku belum dapat laporan secara utuhnya.
Cuma memang yang aku lihat itu, masih berjalan
kurang lebih sama seperti tahun sebelumnya. Kalau CFL6
tahun sebelumnya itu, aku bisa kasih gambaran dari
pesertanya, untuk mengikuti kegiatan belum optimal,
dalam arti, kesempatan ini tidak dimanfaatkan sebaik-
baiknya..itu terbukti kenapa.. beberapa orang masih

115
datang terlambat dan absen sehingga kita pernah
memberikan kuisioner mereka menyampaikan bahwa
tutornya monoton kemudian kurang menarik ketika
didiskuikan dengan tim kecil, mereka merasa kurang
tertarik pertama dari motivasi mereka sendiri dan
karyawan yang mengajar temen perlu situasi yang
baru, tapi sebenarnya saya melihatnya harapannya
sebagai guru gak boleh berhenti belajar terus gimana
kesempatan ini dioptimalkan tapi yang sebuah itu
ngajar guru kan ya..ketika gurunya bosen terus mereka
beralibi pada rutinitas mereka, padahal kita mau
masukin dalam sistem jadi harus lebih serius.
R: Baik bu, bisa diceritakan lebih detail tentang
CFL7
program ini?
P:Baik, program ELT ini ada karena mengacu pada
visi misi yayasan ini. Misinya itu kan SDM yang
tangguh kemudian bagaimana kita itu menjadi sekolah
terkemuka di dunia, which means language-nya itu
international yaitu Bahasa Inggris. Nah, ketika kita
mau mengekspektasi anak-anak berbahasa Inggris,
otomatis dimulai dari gurunya dulu. Sebenernya
tujuannya gak muluk-muluk banget sih..artinya kita
berharap bagaimana kalau guru-gurunya melakukan
simple conversation sehingga bisa diaplikasikan di
keseharian. Karena guru-guru ini tidak ada tanggung
jawab memberikan materi, selama ini hanya tanggung CFL8
jawab dari guru-gurunya saja. Mereka punya tanggung
jawab menciptakan atmosfer ke-bahasa inggrisan itu.
Nah, makanya kita bekali dulu dengan English
learning untuk teachers. Memang kita belum
masukkan program ini sebagai kondite, makanya kita
mau samakan persepsi dulu. Kami mau memberikan
pembekalan yang cukup dulu. Program ini diadakan di
KB-SD karena secara umum kemampuan guru-guru
SMP dan SMA sudah lumayan.karena resources
mereka kebanyakan dalam Bahasa Inggris. Tapi kalau
yang agak poor di KB, TK dan SD. Ketika gambaran
(kemampuan berbahasa inggris-red) hampir sama,
116
nanti kita akan berlakukan.
R: Jadi mau di keep-up dulu ya..mau diliat progress-
CFL9
nya seperti apa…
P: Betul, kita mau liat progress-nya dulu karena kan
ga adil ketika sudah diterapkan sistem tetatpi tidak ada
pembekalan untuk kemampuan yang masih poor.
Karena kita tidak ada kriteria berbahasa Inggris ketika
proses rekrutmen. Sehingga kemampuan Bahasa
Inggris belum bisa dimasukkan dalam kondite karena
kemampuannya yang beragam, tapi kita bisa
masukkan penilaian melalui kartu training, karena
tidak semua guru ‗ngeh‘ akan hal itu. Perlu kesadaran
dari temen-temen guru secara umum. Selain itu, untuk
guru-guru Bahasa Inggris, ini merupkan suatu
tantangan buat mereka supaya terus bisa menggali CFL10
potensi temen-temen lainnya. Dengan cara berdiskusi
dengan teman sejawatnya, tapi seperti yang kita
ketahui sendiri motivasi belajarnya beragam. Inilah
artinya, ketika awal program dimulai sudah dilakukan
sosialisasi pada guru Bahasa Inggris. Kita sudah
berikan end in mind nya, dulu ada Pak Iin yang kita
mintai tolong untuk placement test, kemudian kita
running dan dalam pelajarannya seperti ini. Maka aku
sudah mulai berpikir apakah untuk tahun depan
dimasukkan dalam penilaian. Karena sudah diberikan
3 tahun supaya untuk mengembangkan diri.
R: Oh, jadi memasukkan penilaian dalam kondite
memang sudah direncanakan ya bu, tapi sambil dilihat CFL11
progress-nya..
P: Iya betul, betul.. CFL12
R:Terus bu, hambatannya apa bu di program ini? CFL13
P:Ya, itu tadi..mungkin semua orang masih belum
memahami kenapa program ini ada. Pemahaman CFL14
sudah dilakukan tapi kayanya masih harus dilakukan,
untuk kedua belah pihak artinya baik dari tutor dan

117
peserta. Kita ingin pendekatannya pemahaman, saya
berpikir apakah ini harus dimasukin ke sistem, gitu
lho..artinya ya ini suatu mandatory yang harus mereka
kerjakan, karena belum masuk kesitu tapi saya akan
liat apakah ini menjadi sebuah solusi dari masalah
yang ada. Masih meraba juga sih…..
R:Kalo supervisinya selama ini gimana bu?
CFL15
Maksudnya evaluasinya lah ya…
P: Nah ini, kalo saya melakukan evaluasinya tahun
lalu ya..tahun ini belum evaluasi..kalo tahun lalu itu
biasanya kita minta dari tiap guru itu, Miss Ega juga
mengalaminya, memberikan laporan kan, nilai dan CFL16
siapa yang datang dan gak dateng .. nah, ini kita
sampaikan ke kepala sekolah. Nah, kalo taun ini aku
belom dapet laporannya
R:Terus, kalo selama ini yang bertanggung jawab
CFL17
sama silabus siapa bu? Ada leadernya gak…
P: Tahun lalu kan kita minta Pak Iin, untuk membuat
silabus tersebut, kita bayar lho ke dia..tapi kemudian
silabus yang beliau buat itu kurang detail..yang
kemudian diterjemahkan oleh temen-temen, bahkan CFL18
kita mengundang Bu Itje untuk membuat silabus
tersebut, nah semenjak Pak Iin pergi, belum ada yang
fokus lagi.
R: Berarti dua tahun yang lalu itu sama ya bu,
mekanismenya? Buat bareng sama Bu Itje, Pak Iin, CFL19
dan guru-guru ikutan..
P: Iya CFL20
R: Oh gitu.. CFL21
P: Ya, aku sih berharap dari Miss Egha ini..kita dapat
solusi lah ..apa hal yang dapat dilakukan untuk
mengoptimalkan program ini. Karena program ini gak CFL22
mau asal ada dan asal jalan tapi ada end in mind nya..
ada milestones-nya..artinya kita ada di tahun ketiga

118
harusnya ada achievement -nya, ada yang terlihat,
kemampuan guru masih gini-gini aja kemudian, animo
yang datang masih gini-gini aja..berarti ini kurangnya
dimana, apa bener di monitoring? harusnya ini ada di
bawah siapa terus tindak lanjutnya harus gimana.
R: Baik bu.. berarti nanti setelah kuisioner dan
wawancara terkumpul, kita adakan pertemuan dengan CFL23
tutor ya bu untuk mendiskusikan hasilnya
P: Baik..mungkin minggu depan ya.. CFL24
R: Baik bu.. terimakasih banyak, Assalamu‘alaikum… CFL25
P: Kembali kasih.. wa‘alaikumsalam… CFL26

119
Result of Interview for Training Supervisors
Participant‘s Profile
Name : Puspa
Position : Training Supervisor
Interview Coding
Training Supervisor = TP
Line =L
Transcript Code
July, 23 2018

P: Participant
R: Researcher
R:Assalamu‘alaikum…Ibu..kita mulai ya bu,
interviewnya..makasih udah sempet untuk interview TPL1
ya bu…
P:Waalaikumsalam…oke baik Miss Egha TPL2
R: Aku ijin rekam ya bu.. TPL3
P: Oke TPL4
R: Ibu bisa ceritain, ketertarikan peserta untuk
TPL5
program ini?
P: Alhamdulilah 50 persen mereka masih ghirah
ya..dalam artian dari guru-gur u KB dan SD kelas
TPL6
bawah, sedangkan untuk guru bidang studi kayanya
masih harus ditingkatkan..
R: Kira-kira kenapa bu, apakah memang karena usia
TPL7
atau apa?
P: Hmm..salah satunya mungkin, kalau saya melihat TPL8
ada faktor usia, terus juga belum adanya rasa

120
kepentingan karena kita bukan sekolah
bilingual/internasional kemudian belum terbiasa
menggunakan Bahasa Inggris untuk di kelas (karena
merasa tanggung jawab guru bidang studi-red). Juga,
karena pada saat kita rekrutmen arahnya gak
kesitu..itu juga yang menjadi kendala, karena
kemampuan Bahasa Inggris bukan standar pada saat
rekrutmen. Juga dulu ada RSBI pada saat di SMP, kita
sebenarnya sudah masuk di kondite dan pendapatan,
setelah itu ga ada lagi, gak masuk lagi tuh…ini kan
juga sebenarnya salah satu motivasi tapi itu belum
menjadi penilaian utama bahwa misalnya siapapun
yang punya kemampuan itu mendapatkan rupiah, jadi
temen-temen juga bertanya: tujuannya mau kemana??
Itu yang paling utama . harapan dari mereka pasti
connect ke itu.
R: Terus bu, selama ini ketika ada kendala itu,
TPL9
kontribusi pesertanya cukup baik atau bagaimana?
P: Dalam artian apa nih, hanya hadir aja? TPL10
R: Iya, bagaimana kontribusi peserta dari evaluasi dari
TPL11
tahun ke tahun, keikutsertaannya?
P: Mereka sebenarnya biasa aja ya..ikut-ikut aja tapi
dilihat dari kuisioner kemaren mereka enjoy dan
seneng tapi ga relate sama kehadiran. Padahal mereka
ngerasa itu buat refreshing mereka, ketemu sama
temen-temen..tapi mungkin saya gatau apakah ini
berhubungan dengan kepemimpinan per unit? Karena TPL12
setiap unit harus ikut mengevaluasi bukan hanya
manajemen litbang. Kalo diliat partsipasi dari TK
lebih solid kan ya.. datang tepat watu, konsisten dan
mereka semangat. Kalau yang aku liat dari banyak
faktor juga
R:Waktu itu pernah ada pelatihan sebelum ELT gak? TPL13
P:Ada tapi udah lama banget TPL14

121
R:Kalau di KBM ada rules pake Bahasa Inggris atau
TPL15
gak?
P: Enggak ada, kecuali guru Bahasa Inggris. Dulu
poin pemakaian Bahasa Inggris kita masukkan di
supervise. Cuma, kemudian ada penilaian dari diknas
yang berhubungan dengan sertifikasi ada saat tertentu TPL16
yang mereka langsung ke lapangan dengan rancangan
penilaian mereka sendiri, tapi akhirnya mengacu ke
diknas tapi kita lagi merancang lagi yang kita banget.
R:Ada gap program yang harus dimasukin ke
pembelajaran yang mereka harus pake Bahasa Inggris
TPL17
atau misalnya pas snack time..ada yang pengen dibuat
kaya gitu gak?
P: Sebenernya iya, karena kita menginginkan dari
unit, mereka melakukan itu tapi perlu dukungan
manajemen,dalam artian mereka memfasilitasi,
membuat kebijakan dalam artian yang lain mengikuti TPL18
sehingga ada sense of belonging. Karena kalau cuma
dari kita ga ada ownership-nya..padahal dengan kita
punya kemampuan itu jadi nilai tambah..
R: Kalau persiapan dari tutor itu sendiri gimana,
TPL19
pernah ada hambatan atau gimana?
P: Hambatan sih dari siswanya sendiri ya.. mereka
merasa udh berupaya..Cuma saya melihat tiap orang
kan beda-beda, ada orang yang preparation-nya oke
banget, ada yang biasa aja..ternyata participant yang
dewasa yang tanpa rules mereka malah seneng, yang
hepi-hepi aja..kemaren juga ada yang tanya..taun
TPL20
depan boleh gak, gak ada oral test, lah terus gimana
kita bisa tau progressnya.Yah, jadi aku bisa paham
mereka seneng ngumpul-ngumpul tapi ya gitu aja..jadi
kalo aku baca kuisioner kontradiktif interpretasinya.
Kalo di TK motivasinya tinggi, beda dengan guru di
SD.
R: Kalau tiap tahun apakah ada re-grouping lagi dari TPL21

122
hasil tes..
P: Sebenarnya iya.. tapi dilihat juga dari absensi tidak
hanya potensinya . Ada perubahan intensitas jadwal
TPL22
juga kan, dari tiap minggu jadi 2 minggu sekali jadi
perubahannya belum terlihat signifikan.
R:Program ini sampe kapan sih bu, ada tenggat
TPL23
waktunya gak atau continously?
P:Ya, kita pengennya continuously karena
kemampuan Bahasa terus berlanjut..karena di kursus
Bahasa aja kita bisa setelah setahun atau dua tahun,
TPL24
nah ini dua minggu sekali berarti kan mau gamau kita
harus continuously. Kita mengingkan tanggung jawab
dan rasa bersama untuk temen-temen.
R: Ada reward yang disediain gak untuk pencapaian
TPL25
tertentu?
P: Kalau kemaren sih concern sama kehadiran, karena
kehadiran kelas variatif banget. Ini tergantung juga
sama pembawaan tutor dan pergeseran waktu dari
TPL26
tutor yang berbeda unit. Jadi ada beberapa yang
apatis, apakah juga ada celebration di awal atau di
akhir?
R: KayaKnya mereka juga butuh trigger di kelas ya
bu, untuk pencapaian mereka. Mungkin lebih ke TPL27
insentif atau apa
P:Pernah tersampaikan gitu ya? TPL28
R: Iya, beberapa pada saat wawancara. Mereka
banyak menyampaikan trigger dalam hal reward TPL29
dalam kehadiran dan kemampuan.
P: Aku juga sebenarnya sudah mengusulkan ke unit,
tapi belum sih..karena beda mata anggaran dan TPL30
perundingan lagi.
R: Kalau yang ibu liat overview-nya dari program TPL31

123
dalam 2 tahun ini gimana?
P: Sama, dan problem nya di self-motivation.
Berharap yang sudah ada tinggal dilanjutkan, sayang
aja keinginan untuk mendapatkan ilmu..tapi memang
berbeda sih sense of ownership-nya. Sebenarnya
mungkin gini, kalo di tempat lain pada saat rekrutmen
ada berbagai macam tes, termasuk tes psikologi , dll.
TPL32
Ini untuk mengetes kematangan, jadi kerja keras dan
tanggung jawab itu sangat melekat. Disini mungkin
masalahnya kematangan..kalau itu sudah selesai,
kedisiplinan dan masalah interpersonal lainnnya
terselesaikan. Karena kalo interview biasa tidak
tergambarkan.
R:Jadi memang kompleks ya bu…banyak yang harus
diluruskan dalam sistem sehingga ini bisa berjalan TPL33
secara maksimal
P: Betul, betul .. mudah-mudahan dengan adanya
pergantian kepala bisa lebih memeluk mereka dalam
hal ownership. Aku menginginkan adanya share TPL34
leadership dari temen-temen. Memang pendekatannya
yang harus mulai satu-satu lagi.
R: Lagipula, gap antara starter 1-4 itu juga jauh ya
TPL35
bu..
P: Iya betul, karena starter 3 dan 4 itu mereka yang
TPL36
punya kemampuan lebih daripada starter 1 dan 3
R:Baik bu, kalau begitu terimakasih banyak ya bu.. TPL37
P: Baik..sama sama ..mudah-mudahan programnya
TPL38
berhasil

124
Result of Interview for Teachers
Participant‘s Profile
Name : Maya
Class : Pre-Intermediate
Position : ELT Pre-Intermediate Teacher/Elementary School
Teacher
Interview Coding
Teacher 1 = T1
Pre-Intermediate = PI
L = Line

Transcript Code
July 24 2018
R: Researcher
P: Participant
R: Bu Maya, bisa diceritakan activities apa saja yang
T1PIL1
diaplikasikan di kelas?
P:Biasanya warm up, break the ice, PPP-lah…if the
T1PIL2
students comes late, we just do the game.
R: Is it common for you to do the situational dialogue
for example we are in the bank, at the shop or you just T1PIL3
explain..this is the simple present tense….
P: Oh, you mean role play?yes, we do that. No, I don’t
teach it grammatically, although they are in pre-
T1PIL4
intermediate, they are still in elementary level. I prefer
to give them examples rather than the theories
R: So, the activities are.. role play… T1PIL5

125
P: Yes, role play.. and then games, sentences T1PIL6
R:And then what do you think about the program that
T1PIL7
has been running for almost 3 years?
P:Oh okay, since we speaks English, I think so far so
good, I think I need some of them to revise the teaching T1PIL8
aids, what do you call it…active teaching materials..
R:Do you usually follow the syllabus or you modify
T1PIL9
them?
P: Based on our syllabus, if we need materials.. I take
from my references so it will be more interesting.. the T1PIL10
references is used for enrichment
R:What do you think about the pre-intermediate
T1PIL11
students? How far they can communicate in English?
P: Since they have various capability in speaking, only
20% of them who still has difficulties in
English..uhm…only one or two students get confused T1PIL12
about materials.. since we talk about further
tenses…not only the basic one
R: How do you deliver the materials? T1PIL13
P: I take it from pinterest, especially from
T1PIL14
www.allthingsgrammar.com
R: What do you think about the syllabus, do you modify
it, do you think it can cope your needs?
P: The syllabus was made by us right? Not the
foundation so I use it but I modify it based on my
students’ needs because sometimes I have a new
student coming, like Ms. Nia from Ms Uthi’s class, so I T1PIL15
have to adjust it. I think we have to to have a meeting
once a month, I think we need to meet again regularly,
to discuss it.
R:What do you think your students’ needs? T1PIL16

126
P: Speaking skills, but when you want to make them
speak, you need them to know the basic skills, right?
T1PIL17
Like the vocabulary, but they limited vocabs..that’s
why I prefer to give them games..
R: Based on the questionnaire that I collected it
showed that their needs are instructional speaking
skills, like what they use in class..such as simple
imperative sentences, request. Do you think it will T1PIL18
suitable for them or do you think they only need how
they can speak daily…which one do you think is the
best for them?
P: I think simple instructions in class is needed for
them to practice in their own classroom, the daily
conversation also. Because sometimes students are T1PIL19
smarter than the students. They have various vocabs
ad they want to talk to their teachers
R:Do you think in your level, pre-intermediate..they
T1PIL20
still have difficulties in speaking?
P: Yes, some of them just like I told you before, Ms.
Rina. She still needs a lot of practice and also get more T1PIL21
vocabs.. you cannot produce sentences without vocabs
R: What do you think about their challenges? Is that
T1PIL22
their age, or they’re already tired
P:Maybe they learned it too late, the turning points for
everyone is different right…maybe the other friends
they realize it on senior high school…they started to T1PIL23
late then it will be difficult for them to memorize and
also the time. and the activities we have as teachers
R: Do you have any ideas for the next term of next
T1PIL24
semester?
P: The resources..like we used to use the cutting edge
T1PIL25
then it’s gone..then I make adjustments
R:So, what we lack here are the resources, the updated T1PIL26

127
syllabus, the guidance like for their booklet..
P: Yes, they don’t have any guidance book to
review..when they are absent..we only give them T1PIL27
handouts and they lost it
R: and what about the assessment? T1PIL28
P: It is better for them not to have grammatical
T1PIL29
assessment like they used to..it will get them dizzy
R: Ok, Ms Maya..thank you very much.. I think you’d
better run for your class, I am afraid I’m interrupting T1PIL30
your class.
P: Thank you..that is so thoughtful of you T1PIL31

128
Participant‘s Profile
Name : Mia
Class : Starter 1
Position : ELT Starter 1 Teacher/Elementary School Teacher
Interview Coding
Teacher 2 = T2
Starter 1 = S1
L = Line

Transcript Code
July 20 2018
R: Researcher
P: Participant
R:Assalamu‘alaikum…Hai,Ms Mia…gak ganggu kan
T2S1L1
nih. Hehe
P:Waalaikumsalam…gak dong miss..hayu sini-sini T2S1L2
R: Aku ijin rekam ya bu..supaya ga lupa.. ? T2S1L3
P: Oke T2S1L4
R: Sebenernnya yang jadi " miss" di program ini apa
T2S1L5
sih, miss?
P:Iya, sebenernya kan "miss" nya udah lama, kita udah
gali dari dulu ..masalahnya kita gak menerapkan wajib
berbahasa inggris di sekolah, guru Bahasa Inggris
udah suka bilang, "ayo kita Englishnya disaat snack
time, lunch time, karena anak-anak kan sedang free, T2S1L6
sedang main-main, itu kan bisa kan.." . Kita juga udah
minta ke kepala sekolah..jadi biar guru dan anak bisa
practice. Nah, ini belum ada ruang untuk itu dan
mereka harus di push untuk belajar disaat waktu
129
mereka pulang, yang kelas atas apalagi pulangnya baru
jam tiga dan jam setengah empat baru turun ke kelas.
Kelasku itu cuma 30 menit jadinya. Harusnya
konsisten, dan ga bisa cuma seminggu sekali. Satu lagi,
secara usia ya..support dari sekolah dan peserta harus
komitmen. Kita sebagai guru sih emang udah
kewajiban kita, istilahnya komitmen ya udah bagus.
Tapi kendala dari peserta, dari usia dan
kehadiran.kelasku tuh cuma 3-4 orang itupun
datangnya telat, akupun sebagai guru udah berusaha.
Selain dari kelas tinggi, peserta guru TK rapatnya
banyak. Motivasi dari mereka juga kurang, dua,
mereka nanyain ini untuk apa. goals dari yayasan ke
mereka kurang jelas. Merekan kan hanya bilang ini
tidak berbayar, mereka hanya lihat dari sudut mereka
tanpa melihat sudut pandang lain. Sedangkan peserta
merasa beban banyak dan butuh kompensasi.
R: Tapi kalo misalnya telat miss habisin waktu sampe
T2S1L6
jam 4 atau gimana?
P: Paling jam 4 dan jam 4 lewat.. RPP yang aku buat
T2S1L7
bisa buat dua kali meeting
R: Di kelas miss yang paling muda umur berapa? T2S1L8
P: Aku gatau pasti umurnya..yang pasti sudah cukup
berumur tapi ada yang fresh graduate dan kemampuan
sama motivasi lumayan..tapi ya itu..kebentur sama
kegiatan. Sebenernya yang jadi kendala itu jam
belajarnya, setidaknya saat hari jumat kosong karena
anak pulang siang..sebenernya jadi pertanyaan juga
kenapa guru SMP dan SMA ga dikasih program yang
sama jadi peserta merasa apakah kemampuan kami T2S1L9
rendah. Kita selalu kasih masukan tapi gak ada
perbaikan bertahun-tahun, yang akhirnya jadi korban
karena ini menjadi beban buat peserta. Jadi kan agak
gontai karena kadang sudah di persiapkan dari awal
lalu gak maksimal karena waktu kedatangan mereka.
Kalo semua bersinergi dengan baik kan enak. Misalnya
diperbaiki dari jadwal dan jam, terus goals. Kalo
130
materi kan udah dipersiapkan ke kita bisalah kita kasih
ke mereka, tapi kalo goals dan jam belum diperbaiki
ya.. gak jalan-jalan. Ujungnya goals itu kan
kompensasi apakah masuk kondite atau apa..kita kan
gatau karena gak ada . Peserta banyak kasih masukan
ke tutor tapi akhirnya ya kita pun gak didengar.
R:Tapi waktu jaman Pak Iin, beliau yang bikin semua
T2S1L10
yah?
P:Waktu itu sih bukan bikin yah, jadi ada buku yang
disiapkan terus tinggal ngikutin step by step tapi buku
yang kemaren pada hilang .. kalo ga salah buku long T2S1L11
man terus ilang-ilangan. Kalo kita nyari resource agak
ribet, kalo di internet kan ga fokus
R:Kalo miss mia challenge di kelas gimana? T2S1L12
P: Semua ya..kita kerjakan drama masuk..jungkir balik
pokoknya mereka bosen ngantuk capek, nyanyi -
T2S1L13
nyanyi pun harus di latih dulu. Terus nanti minggu
depan ulang lagi, yang datang beda lagi.
R:Oke deh bu, kalo gitu makasih banyak ya bu.. T2S1L14
P: Oke, Miss Eghaa T2S1L15

131
Result of Interview for Students
Participant Interview
Participant‘s Profile
Name :Meida
Class : Starter 3
Position : Elementary School Teacher
Interview Coding
Participant 2 = P2
Starter 3 = S3
Line =L

Transcript Code
July 20 2018
R: Researcher
P: Participant
R:Assalamu‘alaikum…Bu Meida…aku minta
P2S3L1
waktunya untuk wawancara ya
P:Waalaikumsalam…oke miss P2S3L2
R: Aku ijin rekam ya bu..supaya ga lupa.. P2S3L3
P: Oke P2S3L4
R;Kesan pesan ibu gimana untuk programnya, 2 thn ini P2S3L5
P:Kalo saya pribadi sih seneng banget ya seneng
banget kita setuju dengan program ini memang banyak
perkembangan yang ada ke saya imbasnya P2S3L6
efeknya..saya jadi lebih pede , aku bukan orang yang
aktif dalam Bahasa Inggris..aku cuma ngerti aja kalo
orang ngomong apalagi di ELT dikelompokkan dengan

132
jumlah yang sedikit, jadi lebih terasa interaktif saya
setuju sekali dengan program ini bisa nambah kosakata
dan rasa percaya diri saya.
R: Tapi susah ngomngnya itu karena ga pede atau
P2S3L7
bingung pas ngomong
P: Ya, itu karena bingung pas ngomong, ngerangkai
kata karena biasa berbahasa Indonesia jadi suka
bingung rangkaiannya apa . Nah, itu kendala untuk
tek-toknya karena aku bukan orang yang banyak P2S3L8
ngobrol juga..aku gatau apa karena faktor pribadiku
yang jarang ngobrol..kalo udah komunikasi interaktif
kaya lola lama mikirnya
R:Kalo di kelas diajar sama siapa bu? P2S3L9
P: Miss Yuni P2S3L10
R:Nah Miss Yuni kalo dikelas ngajarinnya, hari ini
Simple Present Tense, atau dia ngajarinnya today we P2S3L11
are the bank..kaya ada situasi nya gitu atau grammar?
P:Lebih banyak per tema . tema yang mau diangkat
apa nih misalnya tema nya dilempar ke temen temen
tema apa yang mau di bahas ajadilah kita angkat tema
yang mau di ambil mau bahas apa abarneg bareng. Nah
tapi ga nutup kemungkinan tema nya diambil dari yang
miss yuni udh siapkan, kita ga jadi Grammar
banget..ada sih yang grammar kaya Future Perfect
Tense
R:Wah susah ya Future Perfect Tense P2S3L12
P: Ada yang will have gitu pernah.. P2S3L13
R:Jadi, Miss Yuni kasih topik trus kita di suruh pilih
P2S3L14
topiknya sesuai situasi atau gimana?
P: Topiknya sesuai situasi miss, tapi gak setiap saat
karena Miss Yuni udah punya programnya. Beberapa P2S3L15
kali pertemuan pernah dilemparkan ke kami , dan
setiap awal pembelajaran sering nanya perasaan

133
kita..jadi sebelum masuk materi kita cerita-cerita dulu..
R: Kalo misalnya topiknya situasi kaya gimana? P2S3L16
P; Pernah bahas tentang mall, tapi masuk ke materi
kaya materi Future itu . trus juga bahasan bahasan
tentang lingkungan. Sering juga aktifitasnya , kita
P2S3L17
presentasi, makanan kesukaan, kita belajar nyanyi
bareng-bareng, menariklah menurut aku cara
penyampaiannya
R: Terus yang pernah di pelajarin di kelas pernah di
P2S3L18
praktekkin di kelas gak?
P: Kalo untuk masuk di anak menurut aku masih
kurang yak karena kan sebenernya dulu pengennya
P2S3L19
kalimat perintah, keinginan. Dulu pernah sebelum ELT
, sama dari litbang juga.
R:Tapi kepake ga di kelas dulu? P2S3L20
P: Dulu kepake miss, pake instruksi sederhana di kelas
, kita juga di kasih handout isinya tentang kalimat
instruksi dan ijin. Dan dipakenya tertentu pada saat P2S3L21
snack time. Jadi guru sama murid sama, dikasih
panduannya juga. Sempet missed tuh akhirnya.
R: Itu berapa tahun yang lalu? P2S3L22
P: 5 tahunan yang lalu. Terus yang materi ELT ini
menurutuku manfaatnya masih buat pribadi belum bisa
dipraktekkan ke anak-anak. Kecuali kita yang arrange P2S3L23
prakteknya ke anak-anak. Belum bisa di praktekkin
secara full.
R:Terus dari yang udah berjalan kepengennya kaya
P2S3L24
gimana bu?
P: Kalo aku sih pengen tetep ada tapi frekuensi
pertemuannya ditambah walaupun kendalanya waktu .
Terus berbenturan sama jadwal per unit yang akhirnya P2S3L25
kita jadi gak masuk..apalagi kan gratis jadi
seneng..dilemma jadinya..kecuali kalo ga ada target

134
kehadiran, jadi lebih fleksibel
R: Berarti harapan ke depannya simple instruction ya
P2S3L26
di kelas..
P:Iya di review lagi, lebih banyak prakteknya ke kita P2S3L27
R: Makasih banyak ya bu.. P2S3L28
P; Ada lagi? P2S3L29
R: Udah cukup bu, makasih banyak Bu Meida.. P2S3L30
P: Okeee, sama-sama P2S3L31

135
Participant Interview
Participant‘s Profile
Name : Rina Fajarwati
Class : Pre Intermediate
Position : Elementary School Teacher
Interview Coding
Participant 3 = P3
Pre- Intermediate = PI
L = Line

Transcript Code
July 18 2018
R: Researcher
P: Participant
R:Assalamu‘alaikum…Ms Rina…maaf ganggu
sebentar..boleh wawancara sebentar bu, untuk P3PIL1
keperluan ELT?
P:Waalaikumsalam…oh iya iya miss.. P3PIL2
R: Aku ijin rekam ya bu..supaya ga lupa.. P3PIL3
P: Wah..direkam yah.. P3PIL4
R: Iya bu..ini confidential di aku aja kok, soalnya aku
P3PIL5
yang ngolah data
P: Oh..gitu..oke.. P3PIL6
R: Oke..menurut ibu, kesan-kesan program ELT ini
P3PIL7
gimana?
P: Kalo saya pribadi sih seneng banget ya..seneng P3PIL8
banget..perkembangan dan kemajuan lah ..contohnya

136
saya jadi lebih pede karena aku bukan tipe yang aktif
tapi aku mengungkapkannya ada kendala, aku pasif
orangnya, dengan adanya ELT dikelompokkan di
jumlah sedikit jadi interaktif . Saya setuju banget
dengan program ini, bisa nambah kosakata dan
kepedean saya juga dalam bahasa inggris
R: Nah..itu kesulitan kosakatanya P3PIL9
P: Instruksi..instruction ya.. P3PIL10
R:Kaya misalnya would you please put..gitu ya.. P3PIL11
P:iya..kaya welcome to the class in the morning..ya
kaya gitu..greeting nya..kalo perlu kita dikasih booklet
nya jadi kita bias hafalin..maklum aja buat guru-guru P3PIL12
yang sudah capek gini kalo kita dikasih panduannya
akan lebih baik
R:Jadi ga bingung ya.. P3PIL13
P: iya jadi kaya .. collect your homework ..gitu ada
P3PIL14
panduannya
R:Tapi ada program gak bu dari yayasan hari ini harus
P3PIL15
ngomong Bahasa Inggris gitu..
P: Belum..dulu ada English Day..tapi gak konsisten P3PIL16
R: Kalo di kelas sendiri bu, activity nya gimana?
P: Lebih ke grammar tapi nanti diterapin..sebenarnya
di kelas Miss Maya lebih menyenangkan ya nanti ada
P3PIL17
game..Cuma Full English nya di ELT aja..udah gitu..
cuma dua kali sebulan ya udah ilang cepet..
R: Tapi kalo misalnya yang diterapin instruction di
kelas trus yayasan bikin program misalnya di jam P3PIL18
pertama pakai full English gimana bu, keberatan ga?
P: Aku rasa sih enggak ya..karena udah instruksi..mau
ga mau..tapi harus ada bimbingan dan controlling, P3PIL19
butuh konsitensi juga..juga bikin reward supaya
semangat..harus ada begitu sih…minimal ada

137
penghargaan buat yang usaha lebih…terus disini
masalahnya kepercayaan diri..apalagi disini anaknya
pinter-pinter
R:Baik bu..kalau begitu terimakasih ya bu untuk
P3PIL20
waktunya..
P: Iya iya..sukses ya Gha..kamunya.. P3PIL21

138
Participant Interview
Participant‘s Profile
Name : Nur Rochmad
Class : Starter 2
Position : Elementary School Teacher
Interview Coding
Participant 1 = P1
Starter 1 = S1
L = Line

Transcript Code
July 20 2018
R: Researcher
P: Participant
R:Assalamu‘alaikum…Pak Rochmad…aku minta
P1S1L1
waktunya untuk wawancara ya?
P:Waalaikumsalam…oke miss P1S1L2
R: Aku ijin rekam ya pak..supaya gak lupa.. P1S1L3
P: Oke P1S1L4
R: Iya, Pa Rochmad bisa ceritain gak dikelas biasanya
P1S1L5
ngapain aja, kegiatannya kalo ELT?
P:Oh, Bahasa Inggris? P1S1L6
R: Iya P1S1L7
P: Saya kan kebetulan satu grup sama Pak Sam ..kalo
ELT yang biasa kita kumpul, biasanya pake slide, P1S1L8
missnya pake Bahasa Inggris terus, bagi sayang kalo
pake Bahasa Inggris …sering di translate ke Bahasa

139
Indonesia..saya kurang paham..kalo di peserta ada
yang bisa tapi ada yang belum paham maksudnya
R: Berarti susah ya kalo belajar.. P1S1L9
P: Emang karena udah lama gak belajar Bahasa
Inggris.. dari SMP ke SMA tapi seiring waktu sih P1S1L10
lumayan, kalo kondisi ELT sendiri baik-baik aja
R: Aktivitasnya menarik gak pak di kelas? P1S1L11
P:Hmm… menarik sih.. P1S1L12
R:Biasanya ngapain pak? P1S1L13
P: Kalo Miss Mia kan banyak humornya, jadi santai.. P1S1L14
R:Berarti lumayan seru asyik yah . tapi kalo di kelas
P1S1L15
kalo ngajar pernah pake Bahasa Inggris gak?
P: Cuma yang 7 Habit Stephen Covey aja. P1S1L16
R: Kira-kira menurut bapak harusnya kegiatan ELT
P1S1L17
nya gimana?
P: Gimana ya..kalo idealnya susah digambarin tapi
paling kaya model kemaren aja sih..dari materi juga ga
susah banget..kaya pake gambar terus disuruh teka-
P1S1L18
teki. Jangan pake yang sulit..karena kalo saya Bahasa
Inggris tuh ngerti tapi selintas doang paling nanti tanya
Pak Sam..atau miss nya
R: Ada masukan gak pak untuk ke depammy akaya
P1S1L19
gimana atau saran
P: Kalo bisa ya ..bentuknya dipermudah aja..entah itu
dari materi kaya model masuk kelas 1 atau 2.pake
P1S1L20
gambar, terus ada soal pilihan kaya menjodohkan..itu
dari saya gatau kalau yang muda-muda
R: Tapi perlu gak kalo bisa pake Bahasa Inggris di
kelas..kaya misalnya nyapa anak-anak pake ‗‘good P1S1L21
morning, students‘‘ supaya bisa make di kelas

140
P: Ya pasti pengen bisa..kan kita bikin
presentasi..pengalaman pribadi..ngangkat temanya P1S1L22
apa..kan bisa gak bisa nyampein apa yang kita bisa
R: Oke pak gitu aja..makasih banyak ya pak P1S1L23
P: Okee P1S1L24

141
Name : Ms. Yunita
Class : Intermediate
Position: Elementary Teacher
Interview Coding
Participant 2 = P4
Intermediate =I
Line =L
Transcript Code
July 17 2018
R: Researcher
P: Participant
R:Assalamu‘alaikum…Hai,Ms Nita…gak ganggu kan
P4IL1
nih. Hehe
P:Waalaikumsalam…gak dong miss..hayuu.. sini-sini P4IL2
R: Aku ijin rekam ya bu..supaya ga lupa..? P4IL3
P: Oke P4IL4
R: Oke, Bu Yunita, gimana interaksi dengan native di
P4IL5
kelas Intermediate?
P:Yang paling lancar berinteraksi sih Ms. Feby yah..
karena dia pernah tinggal di Inggris…dari 2 native, Mr.
Musa yang Afro-Amerika dan Mr Tekin yang Turki,
dia yang paling nyambung kalo untuk interaksi dan P4IL6
becandaan. Kalo aku dan temen-temen rada susah
ya…karena gak paham aksennya. Kalo dengerin aja
paham, tapi kalo ngomong belibet aja ngomongnya..
R: Tapi pembelajaran di kelasnya gimana, apa dikasih
P4IL7
tema, topik apa gimana, activity nya gitu
P: Kalo Mr Tekin itu biasanya pake tema untuk P4IL8

142
grammar
R: Berarti lebih ke grammar gitu ya bu. Kaya simple
present.. ga yang msialnya, we are at the bank..jadi P4IL9
kaya at the bank kan ada unsurnya
P: Gak….cenderung ke grammar sih..kalo aku sih
sebenernya gini ya..tujuan dari yayasan apa sih untuk
program ini? Kalo untuk kita bicara secara aktif,
menurutku grammar ga penting, karena kita kan
sebagai orang Indonesia kadang grammar nya gak
bener ya..soalnya selama ini tesnya kan grammar, jujur
aku mainnya feeling aja karena aku bingung...aku rasa P4IL10
harus ada program untuk ngomong bahasa Inggris,
dipaksakan biar ada practice..kalo kita dipaksain
ngomong bahasa Inggris kita akan ngomong, walaupun
masih campur pasti ningkat..karena aku pernah baca
buku orang-orang yang pernah tinggal di luar kalo
mereka dikondisikan ngomong akhirnya bisa..
R:Oke, kalo sama guru sebelumnya, Mr. Musa, apakah
sama?misalnya kita hari ini belajar simple present tense
P4IL11
ya..bukan kaya hari ini kita shopping jadi kaya ada
kondisinya gitu..
P:Iya..daily kan..gak juga..kadang kita nonton video,
terus ada diskusi atau ga kita dikasih artikel tapi emang
ya bukan daily..kalo mungkin daily yang kaya Miss
Egha bilang.. we are at the shopping mall..bla bla bla..
R:Kalo yang miss pengenin sendiri gimana,lebih
pengen yang instruksi sederhana yang bisa di pake
P4IL12
sepatah-patah atau pengen bisa ngomong daily sama
anak-anak?
P: Kayanya dua-duanya sih miss, soalnya instruksional
itu kan akan ngikut karena dulu kita pernah punya guru
English, Miss Febri dia bener-bener gak pake Bahasa P4IL13
Indonesia kadang-kadang pake name tag: speak to me
in English…kita pun mendukung..menurut aku penting
juga kaya gitu…sebenarnya yayasan udah berbagai

143
cara ..Cuma akhirnya keinginan yayasan untuk buat
sekolah jadi semi-bilingual gak jalan. Aku di kelas
udah coba..dan emang enak banget ketemu anak yang
Inggrisnya aktif..yang susah kalo anaknya nolak..ya
gitu sih sebenernya 2 tahun ini speak up nya blm
keluar..jadi belum ada hasilnya
R:Tapi berarti dari tutorny asendiri selama 2 tahun ini
P4IL14
variasi aktifitas di kelasnya macem-macem ga?
P: Kalo dulu Mr Musa ngajarin resep, kalo Mr. Tekin
ini lebih ke grammar, jadi belom dapet yang
instruksional, karena jarang banget diajarin. Mungkin
gini ya..kau pernah ngomong di kepsek untuk praktek
English pas rapat,,cuma ya gitu aja kan kita sebagai
orang indo gaK appreciate kalo ada yang ngomong P4IL15
English..mungkin ELT bisa ilang kalo kita practice tiap
hari. Kalau aku sih mikir yang simple aja..apalagi kalo
dari manajemen yang nyontohin, jadi mau gamau kita
speak up..lagian juga kalo instruksional aku rasa pada
bisa semua cuma ga ada trigger aja
R: Kalo misalnya taun ajaran ini lebih ke instruksional
P4IL16
trus tesnya ke microteaching gimana?
P: Aku lebih suka kaya gitu tuh ..kaya kelas Ms. Uthie
bikin slideshow..tapi sebenernya daily aja yang dipake
P4IL17
di kelas..toh kita kan ga butuh grammar untuk toefl dan
gamau kemana-mana yang bentuknya tes grammar
R: Jadi emang buthnya daily yang bias buat nemenin
P4IL18
anak ngomong yah?
P: Kan aku juga pernah jadi ketua PSB setaun dan aku
jadi tau gitu anak-anak bisa Bahasa Inggris karena
P4IL19
keseharian, dari TV, jadi pembiasaan gitu..dari hal
yang simple itu bisa banget
R:Berarti yang di ajarin itu yang dipake di kelas sehari-
P4IL20
hari dan dibuat program khusus ya bu..
P: Iya kaya dulu tuh pernah level kita tiap Jumat bikin P4IL21

144
program di kelas tapi ending nya lupa..untuk istiqomah
kurang
R: Tapi untuk 2 tahun ini materinya tiap tahun sama? P4IL22
P: Enggak sih ada yang beda-bedajuga.. P4IL23
R:Tapi di kelas miss kan udah bagus-bagus nih.. P4IL24
P: Ceritanya..hahah secara tulis iya ya…cuma untuk
conversation kadang kita ga terlalu bagus untuk
pronunciation-nya trus juga untuk ngomong vocab-nya
bingung cuman maksudnya ya itu keluarnya
susah..sebenarnya kita kaya dapet kehormatan dapet
P4IL25
guru native tapi jadi susah dengernya karena
aksen..akhirnya jadi males gitu..kalo ajaran Mr. Musa
dia banyak ngenalin banyak tokoh islam..tapi jadinya
berat banget gitu..bahasa inggrisnya juga yg academic
banget..kalo Mr. Tekin lebih simple dan nyantai
R: Tapi bentuk activities di kelas Mr.Tekin gimana
P4IL26
sekarang bu?
P:Kadang ada yang partner, dialog, kelompok, gantian
P4IL27
jawab..kadang ngobrol
R: Oke miss makasih banyak..komperhensif
P4IL28
banget..singkat, padat, jelas..makasih banyak miss
P: Sama-sama Ms. Egha.. P4IL29

145
Result of Forum Group Discussion (FGD)

The Field Data (Transcript)- Coding

Informant Code
M = Maya (Pre-Intermediate Teacher)
P = Puspa (Training Supervisor)
Y = Yuni (Starter 3 Teacher)
Mi = Mia (Starter 1 Teacher)
G = Ghassani (Researcher/Starter 4 Teacher)
Moderator = Puspa (Training Supervisor)

Coding
Proposed Syllabus Forum Group Discussion = PSFGD
Line =L
Transcript Code
August, 1 2018
G: Assalamualaikum, wr, wb. Thank you for coming
to the syllabus presentation and group discussion,
berikut saya akan paparkan hasil interview dan
kuisioner saya kemarin. Indikatornya dibagi tiga yaitu
necessities (kebutuhan), lacks and wants. Berikut dari
indikator necessities (kebutuhan) dapat disimpulkan
bahwa sebagian besar murid mempunyai kesulitan di ;
penggunaaan Simple Present Tense (Do /Does), 5W + PSFGDL1
1 H Questions, imperative sentence with “Don’t”,
giving advice, (should/must), giving opinion,
penggunaan English Vocabs, Pronunciation, giving
responds/feedback utterance. Maka,
The syllabus should focused on Simple Present Tense
and Instructional English in the Classroom.
Sedangkan, pada bagian lacks, yaitu hal-hal yang
146
harus dikembangkan pada pembelajaran semester ini,
terdapat kesimpulan sebagai berikut, Material
development, Handbook, Motivation from the teacher,
Activities, Synchronization of the test, Meeting
Frequency and Final Evaluation. Terakhir, pada
bagian wants yaitu keinginan peserta terkait
pembelajaran, terdapat Pairwork Activities, Role Play
Activities,Group Work Activities, Project Activities,
Cooperative Activities, British English is preferred
and Instructional English. Berdasarkan data inilah
saya membuta proposed syllabus yang sudah
dibagikan ke bapak ibu, mohon masukan dari bpk
ibu..

M: kalo misalnya sekaang kita mau pake ini ya sUdah

kita satukan, apakah ini suitable for all levels atau PSFGDL2
hanya lower levels, because our needs is different
P: Iya, kalo untuk starter sudah tergambarkan,
tantangannya beda-beda ada yang kelas sudah
PSFGDL3
terampil tapi motivasinya yang belum, kalo untuk
level yang lain bisa diselipkan,
Y: Berarti gini, ada practice di classroom, berarti
kemuginan kita sudah harus menggunakan Bahasa
Inggris , yang sehari-hari, end in mind nya bagus udah
kesitu. Karena selama ini end in mind yang kita pake
gak nyampe-nyampe. Sulit juga untuk mengukur
sendiri-sendiri, mereka juga bingung, belajar Bahasa
Inggris implementasinya gak ada, kalau ini aku setuju,
PSFGDL4
karena jelas kebutuhannya. Insya Allah kalo
kebutuhannya sesuai di kelas, mereka mau tidak mau
memakainya. Nah, untuk yang skill yang ada disini
semua pada dasarnya sudah kita berikan cuma
mungkin tidak mendalam ,dan kemarin pas kita tes aja
menggunakan do/does, daily activities mereka banyak
yang salah.

147
Mi: Maksudnya sudah diberikan semua miss, are you
PSFGDL4
sure starter sudah di berikan semua?
Y: No, no I mean in general PSFGDL5
Mi: Kita paling masuk do/does PSFGDL6
Y:Tapi secara general, pasti kita pernah berikan, kaya
yang I think di kelas aku pernah udah diajarkan tetapi
jarang banget, mereka do/does fatal miss padahal udah PSFGDL7
di sounding, aku setuju kalo end-in mind nya di ubah,
karena selama ini susah mengungkapkannya
P:Tapi kalo saya melihatnya begini, mereka sulit
mengimplementasikannya di kelas tapi memang
belum semuanya bisa, tampaknya harus diselipkan
yang sifatnya practical , tapi untuk starter harus
PSFGDL8
dikuatkan, harus dipilih-pilih, karena gini, do/does kan
gampang banget, mungkin kemarin liat pada liat gak
bisa semua, dan mereka kan orang dewasa, mereka
akan berpikir masa ini lagi, ini lagi.
M: They don’t have enough time to review, they
PSFGDL9
cannot spare time with them
P:Yes, bagaimana kalo yang tadi aku sampaikan,
bahwa kebutuhannya sama, karena gini, beda dengan
sekolah lain yang pada saat rekrutmen di syaratkan
untuk bisa berbahasa inggris, kit akan enggak.. nah PSFGDL10
makanya untuk menjaring minat dan motivasi, setahun
ini kita geser-geser dulu, nanti kita lihat
perkembangannya…
Mi:Komitmen, kita butuh komitmen , biar mereka
sendiri karena sekolah kan sudah menyiapkan. Seperti
PSFGDL11
yang salah satu peserta sudah utarakan, berikan tempat
untuk practice
Ma: Ya, I have said that once, if you want to practice
just come to my room, I will replied in English, but PSFGDL12
then when I did, he did nothing

148
P: Iya, aku juga sudah bicara dengan peserta tentang
itu, banyak juga yang complaint kenapa hanya unit sd
yang selalu diberikan tambahan, aku sudah kasih
pengertian juga dengan kepala sekolahnya. Supaya PSFGDL13
ownership-nya ada. Dan bisa bareng-bareng, yang
paling penting lagi apresiasi dengan temen-temen .
Okay, ada masukan dengan yang ini?
G: Jadi sebenernya general aja, kalo syllabus kan
mencakup yang general, untuk kebutuhan yang
PSFGDL14
spesisfik ada di lesson plan, mislanya di kelas miss
Mia akan ada penekanan di do/does…
Mi:Ini yang akan kita pakai setahun kedepan? PSFGDL15
P: Ini lagi dibahas dalam artian ini yang ditawarkan,
tapi ada level tertentu yang tampaknya tidak
tergambarkan karena kemampuannya sudah lebih.
Kebutuhan kita adalah bagaimana semua speak-up di
lapangan, mau salah mau bener ayuk. Nah,ini ada dua
hal yang harus bisa di-cover. Yang aku lihat sudah PSFGDL16
dilakukan sama temen-temen yang juga masukan dari
Bu Itje yang sudah paham, yang topik-topik yang
sudah diberikan memudahkan mereka untuk
implementasi. Nah, ini yang agak mengerucut di
kelas, harus di detailkan di kelas mana yang butuh.
Ma:Kalau mau disisipin gak masalah, tapi beda topik
PSFGDL17
..
P:Ini hanya sisipan dalam artian sesuai kebutuhan dan
ini dikuatkan, jadi temen-temen akan memudahkan PSFGDL18
mereka di lapangan, karena takutnya mereka bosen
Ma:Just keep on going kemarin saya pake past sama
comparison, we use this for practice and combined PSFGDL19
with the tenses that we teach.
G: Karena kebutuhan setiap kelas beda-beda, karena
ini general. Dan yang sudah ditemukan di lapangan PSFGDL20
mereka bingung mana yang harus di praktekkin,
mungkin yang bikin ini jadi instructional English

149
yang harus dipake di classroom gimana.
P:Oke sudah sampai sini, kesimpulan yang diambil
apa aja sih biar temen-temen juga liat gitu loh dari
PSFGDL21
hasil yang kemaren, perlu kan temen-temen, gambaran
besar aja
G:Yang kemarin mereka butuhin, ini yang mereka
butuhin banget, karena yang Intermediate sama Pre- PSFGDL22
Intermediate suaranya kalah sama yang Starter
P:Ya, karena fokus utama kebutuhannya ini jadi ada
PSFGDL23
item yang tidak tergambar, paham sekali
G: Sebenernya untuk yang intermediate mereka udah
paham, cuma how to implement-nya aja mereka yang
masih bingung terus untuk kebutuhannya mereka PSFGDL24
butuh handbook, untuk motivation mereka juga masih
butuh walaupun instruktur udah maksimal
Mi:Itu motivation-nya harus dari manjemen dalam
PSFGDL25
artian kondite
P:Ya, itu idealnya PSFGDL26
G:Mereka butuh project activities, dan mereka lebih
suka belajar pake British English, agak PSFGDL27
mencengangkan sih ya hasilnya
Mi:Masa sih, who said that? who?, what level is
PSFGDL28
them?
G:All level sih , jadi British nya 69, Americannya 63 PSFGDL29
Mi:Jangan-jangan mereka gak tau differentiation
PSFGDL30
between British and American
G:Kalau dari beberapa komentar dari yang pas aku
tungguin mereka bilang, aku lebih suka British karena PSFGDL31
kalo yang susah bisa yang Amerika pasti bisa
Mi, Ma, P: Siapa itu yang bilang? PSFGDL32
G: Dari majority yang aku temuin gituu

150
M:British itu ga pake do and does semua pake have
PSFGDL33
got
P:Dan itu confusing banget PSFGDL34
G: Ya sebenernya American yang tepat karena
PSFGDL35
Indonesia pakenya american
P: Gapapa jadi kita tau lapangan , that‘s okay, fine PSFGDL36
Mi: Mencengangkan ini faktanya PSFGDL37
P:Tapi ini serratus persen ga PSFGDL38
G: Gak ini 69, kalo yg American 63 PSFGDL39
P: Semua peserta isikah? PSFGDL40
G: Iya, mereka juga butuh imperative dan pair work
PSFGDL41
activities
Mi:Sering PSFGDL42
G: Tapi most of all sukanya partner, yang project dikit PSFGDL43
Mi: Paling kita pas tes presentasi PSFGDL44
Y:Karena pas presentasi pake keyword tapi ada juga
PSFGDL45
yang pake text
M: Karena waktu prepare-nya ga banyak PSFGDL46
G:Sebenernya kemaren ,aku interview kemaren aku
wawancara low dan high setiap kelas. Big applause
PSFGDL47
untuk tutor starter 1 dan 2 yaitu Miss Mia dan Miss
Ica karena full effort banget
P: Bangeet PSFGDL48
G: Pas diwawancara mereka bilang Ms Mia udah pake
segalanya udah pake lagu, pake apa segala macem PSFGDL49
cuma kitanya aja
Mi: Tuh kan, ngaku PSFGDL50
P: Beberapa mereka look in ya, reflektif PSFGDL51

151
Mi: Nah, menggali dai situ kita kan megang ini udah
lama almost 2 years with the same people, mereka
datang 30 menit, kita sudah prepare lesson plan, jadi PSFGDL52
bagus juga kalo ada penyegaran peserta, supaya
semangatnya baru
P: Sebenernya gimana temen temen? PSFGDL53
Y: Kalo muridku gak bisa PSFGDL54
Ma: Bisa liat dari hasil tes kan? PSFGDL55
P: Mungkinkah setiap level yang sama ketemuan tiap
minggu, untuk ngomongin kelas dan tes, paling enak PSFGDL56
Rabu jam berapa? 10.30 kah?
Mi: Terlalu siang PSFGDL57
P: Gimana temen-temen untuk Rabu bisa ya? PSFGDL58
G: Untuk mid-test nya mau practice di kelas karena
ini praktek mau micro-teaching atau finalnya baru PSFGDL59
micro-teaching di kelas gimana?
Y: Sebenernya kaya tahun lalu bisa ya.. PSFGDL60
P: Ini kan one on one, supaya yang digunakan di kelas
di implementasikan PSFGDL61

G: Kalo misalnya finalnya yang mau di kelas, kau gak

PSFGDL62
papakah keliling?
P:Gimana temen-temen? PSFGDL63
G: Lebih ke apapun yang mau mereka pake karena
lebih ke keseharian, ngucapin apa yag mereka udah
PSFGDL64
pelajari, nanti kita observe, mereka kasih perintah,
mereka ngajak…
Mi: Acuannya apa,rubriknya gimana?
G: Berdasarkan materi silabus, rubriknya nanti PSFGDL65

152
sekalian
P: Atau misalnya Miss Ega menyiapkan diri, minggu
kelima mereka dateng aja langusung observe, pre-test
sama post-test juga bisa asik banget. Mau gamau kan PSFGDL66
setting dari awal kelas, terus sama siswa, gak usah di
announce
Y: Kita introduce dari awal tujuan pembelajaran kita
di jurnalkan nanti menyangkut anak, nanti
penilaiannya gak ada tes, tapi penilaian kelas. Nanti PSFGDL67
dibilang akan ada tim yang menilai. Aku rasa kalau
gitu, mereka akan selalu prepare
P: Kita kan ga cuma ngajarin practice tapi juga ilmu,
tetep harus ada written tapi tinggal bagaimana Miss
Ega bsa buat setting-nya yang memudahkan misalnya PSFGDL68
ada English Day , hari apa diadakan, pada saat itulah
bisa observe.
G:Tapi apakah memungkinkan dari unit untuk
PSFGDL70
program English Day ?
P: Ini justru ownership dari unit yang kita tunggu.. PSFGDL71
Mi: Itu kita sudah minta ke unit, ke kepsek yang lama,
PSFGDL72
udah ada program tapi belum terimplementasi
G: Kalau misalnya ari unit memungjinkan, bisa, atau
PSFGDL73
pake ide dari Bu Yuni yang tadi
Mi: Sebenernya bisa aja pas breaktime, atau friday
PSFGDL74
speaking English
P:Iya bisa nanti di observasi aja PSFGDL75
Y: Jadi gimana nih? PSFGDL76
P: Yang pasti nanti dijabarkan detailya ya per-level,
artinya ada yang diselipkan di level yang lain, sudah PSFGDL77
ada ilmunya baru di tes
G:Jadi mulai kapan bu? minggu depan ya.. PSFGDL78

153
Ma: Nanti disosialisasikan aja mid-nya terus observasi PSFGDL79
P:Untuk silabus oke y.a. sudah spesifik per level, oke
PSFGDL80
jadi begitu ya semuanya. terimkasih sudah datang
G:Terimakasih Bapak/Ibu Sekalian PSFGDL81

154
Kepada Yth. Bapak/Ibu
Peserta English Language Teaching (ELT) YPII An-nisaa‘,

Assalamu’alaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh,

Dengan ini, saya Ghassani Mandasari, selaku salah satu instruktur
ELT dan juga mahasiswa magister Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris
UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta, memohon kesediaan waktu
Bapak/Ibu untuk mengisi kuisioner ini sebagai bahan
pengembangan silabus ELT di semester 1 periode 2018/2019 ini.
Data ini akan dipergunakan untuk penelitian Tesis dan juga bahan
pengembangan silabus yang akan diterapkan pada semester 1
periode 2018/2019 ini. Semua jawaban dan identitas yang
diberikan akan dijaga kerahasiaannya.
Demikian yang dapat saya sampaikan, atas waktu dan
kesediannya, saya ucapkan terimakasih.
Wassalamu’alaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh,

Ghassani Mandasari

155
 Blueprint of Questionnaire

Kuisioner Penelitian Pengembangan Silabus

Identitas Pribadi
Nama :
Level Kelas di ELT :
Unit : KB/TK/SD
Isilah kolom di bawah ini dengan centang √ sesuai dengan penilaian
Bapak/Ibu terhadap kebutuhan, kekurangan dan keinginan dalam
kegiatan pengajaran English Language Teaching (ELT) YPII An-
nisaa.
Dengan keterangan sebagai berikut:
SS : Sangat Setuju
S : Setuju
TS : Tidak Setuju
STS : Sangat Tidak Setuju

I. Necessities (Kebutuhan)

No. Pernyataan SS S TS STS

1. Saya kesulitan untuk menanyakan
hal yang sederhana dalam bahasa
Inggris.
Contohnya: Pengunaan Do you,
Does she/Does he, Are you, Is
she/Is he?
2. Saya kesulitan untuk menanyakan
kalimat Bahasa Inggris yang
menggunakan 5W + 1H

156
3. Saya belum mampu memberikan
kalimat perintah menggunakan
―don‘t‖ di kelas.
Contohnya: Don’t touch the glass
4. Saya belum mampu memberikan
kalimat perintah menggunakan
―please‖, di kelas.
Contohnya: Please be quiet
5. Saya belum mampu memberikan
kalimat perintah menggunakan
ajakan ―Let‘s‖, di kelas.
Contohnya: Let’s put the chair
back
6. Saya belum mampu mengatakan
kalimat Request (will and would),
di kelas.

Contohnya:
Will you take your bag, please?
Would you sit down, please?
7. Saya belum mampu mengatakan
kalimat advice di kelas.
Contohnya: You should study more,
next time
8. Saya belum mampu mengatakan
kalimat opinion di kelas.
Contohnya: I think your drawing is
really good

157
9. Saya belum mampu mengatakan
Bahasa Inggris sederhana dalam
Simple Present Tense,
Contohnya: She sit on the carpet
daripada She sits on the carpet
10. Saya merasa kesulitan menemukan
kosakata yang tepat dalam
berbicara kalimat Bahasa inggris
yang sederhana
11. Saya merasa belum mampu
mengucapkan kata-kata dalam
Bahasa Inggris secara benar
12. Saya merasa kesulitan merespon
percakapan Bahasa Inggris
(Contohnya: masih patah-patah dan
terkadang tidak bisa merespon
dengan baik)
13. Saya sepenuhnya sadar bahwa saya
memerlukan program ini untuk
meningkatkan kemampuan Bahasa
Inggris saya

158
II. Lacks (Kekurangan)
No. Pernyataan SS S TS STS
1. Dalam pembelajaran di kelas, saya
merasa persiapan materi ajar dari guru
kurang
2. Dalam pembelajaran di kelas, saya
merasa penguasaan materi ajar dari
guru kurang
3. Dalam pembelajaran di kelas, saya
merasa aktivitas pembelajaran yang
diberikan kurang menarik dan masih
perlu variasi
4. Dalam pembelajaran di kelas, saya
merasa motivasi guru pada peserta
kurang
5. Dalam pembelajaran di kelas, saya
merasa akivitas dan tugas yang
diberikan kurang menantang
6. Dalam program ini, saya merasa tes
yang diberikan di akhir semester
kurang relevan dengan materi ajar
7. Dalam program ini, saya merasa
waktu yang diberikan (sebulan 2x
pertemuan) kurang untuk
meningkatkan kemampuan Bahasa
Inggris
8. Dalam program ini, saya merasa
evaluasi yang dilakukan kurang
efektif sehingga kemajuan program
tidak signifikan

159
III. Wants (Keinginan)
No. Pernyataan SS S TS STS
1. Saya lebih menyukai aktivitas kelas
yang bersifat berpasangan, seperti
melakukan dialog berpasangan atau
diberi tugas dengan partner
2. Saya lebih menyukai aktivitas kelas
yang bersifat bermain peran, seperti
memainkan peran tertentu dalam
sebuah situasi lalu bercakap-cakap,
lalu membuat kembali variasi
percakapannya.
3. Saya lebih menyukai aktivitas
berkelompok
4. Saya lebih menyukai aktivitas yang
bersifat proyek,
Misal: proyek penggunaan Bahasa
Inggris di kelas sendiri
5. Saya menginginkan pendekatan yang
lebih kooperatif antar peserta daripada
dominasi peran guru
6. Saya lebih menyukai jika guru
memberikan materi yang bersumber
asli dari Inggris (British English)
7. Saya lebih menyukai jika guru
memberikan materi yang bersumber
asli dari Amerika (American English)
8. Saya lebih menyukai sumber
pembelajaran yang dicontohkan
langsung oleh penutur asli dengan
situasi yang sesuai dengan topik yang
diajarkan

160
9. Saya lebih menginginkan materi
Bahasa Inggris yang bersifat
instruksional (Memberikan perintah,
meminta sesuatu, memberi pendapat
dan memberi saran) sehingga dapat
diterapkan di kelas sehari-hari
10. Saya lebih menginginkan materi
Bahasa Inggris yang bersifat
percakapan sehari-hari (Dapat
berbicara tentang rutinitas, hal yang
sedang dikerjakan dan hal yang sudah
lewat) sehingga dapat diterapkan di
kelas sehari-hari.

161
Table Coding:
TPD : Table of Preliminary Development

Indexin
Scoring SU g
Domain Indicator Statement
M
SA A D SD Index

I have
difficulty in
asking simple
questions in
English, for
example: the 2 16 34 6 58 69%
using of Do
1. Asking
A. you, Does
Question
Materia she/Does he,
(Do, Does,
l Are you, Is
WH
Content she/Is he?
Questions)

I have
difficulty in
asking simple
1 16 37 4 58 69%
questions in
English using
5W + 1H

TPD1

162
 Indexi
Indicato Scoring
Domain Statement SUM ng
r
SA A D SD Index

I haven‘t
been able
to say
imperative
sentence
using
―don‘t‖, for 2 8 38 10 58 64%
example :
Don‘t
2. touch the
Giving glass, in
Imperati the
ve classroom
A. sentence
Material s
Content (imperat
ive
mood:
I haven‘t
don‘t,
been able
please,
to say
let‘s)
imperative
sentence
using, 1 22 26 9 58 69%
―let's‖, for
example:
Let‘s put
the chair
back in the
classroom

TPD2

163
 Indicato Scoring SU Indexing
Domain Statement
r SA A D SD M Index

I haven‘t
been able to
say request
sentence
3.
(will and
Giving
A. would), for
Material Request
example: 3 29 22 4 58 75%
Content (will
will you
and
take your
would)
bag,
please? in
the
classroom

TPD3

164
 Scoring Indexing
Domain Indicator Statement SUM
SA A D SD Index
I haven‘t
been able
to utter
advice
sentence,
for
4.
A. example:
Material Giving 2 29 25 2 58 75%
You
Content advice
should
study
more,
next time,
in the
classroom

TPD4

165
 Scoring Indexing
Domain Indicator Statement SUM
SA A D SD Index

I haven‘t
been able
to say
opinion
sentence,
A. 5. Giving for
Material 2 30 23 3 58 75%
Opinion example I
Content think
your
drawing
is really
good.

TPD5

166
 Scoring Indexing
Domain Indicator Statement SUM
SA A D SD Index
Domain Indicator Statement
I haven‘t Scoring SUM Indexing
been able
to say
simple
English
in Simple
1.
Present
Speech
Tense,
B. Context
for 2 30 21 5 58 74%
Skills (syntax
example
and
:She sit
semantics)
on the
carpet
rather
than She
sits on
the carpet

TPD6

167
 SA A D SD Index

I have
difficulties
in finding
2. the right 3 37 16 2 58 79%
B. Skills
Vocabularies vocabularies
in simple
English.

TPD7

168
 Indexin
Statemen Scoring SU g
Domain Indicator
t S S M
A A D D Index

I haven‘t
been
able to
3.
B. Pronunciatio say 4 1
4 3 58 80%
Skills n English 0 1
words
correctly
.

TPD8

169
 Scoring Indexing
Domain Indicator Statement SUM
SA A D SD Index

I have
difficulties
responding
in English.
4.
B. Skills Speech Such as 4 40 12 2 58 81%
Logic stuttering
and could
not respond
well.

I fully
realized that
I need this
program to 5 49 4 58 85%
improve my
English
skills.

TPD9

170
 Scoring Indexing
Domain Indicator Statement SUM
SA A D SD Index

The
teacher is
A.
1. Material lack of the 3 38 10 51 54%
Teacher
Preparation material
Preparation
preparation

TPD10

171
 Indexin
Indicato Scoring
Domain Statement SUM g
r
SA A D SD Index

The
teacher is
A. 2. lack of
Teacher Material the 1 38 12 51 51%
Preparatio Compet material
n ence competen
ce

TPD11

172
 Indexi
Indicat Stateme Scoring ng
Domain SUM
or nt
SA A D SD Index

I feel
that the
learning
activity
1. is
B. Metho unintere
Learning 9 29 13 51 54%
d sting
Activity and
needs
more
variatio
n.

TPD12

173
 Indexi
Scoring
Statemen ng
Domain Indicator SUM
t S
SA A D D Index

The
C. 1. participa
Participant Participant‘
nts has 1
‘s s personal 30 11 51 52%
lack of 0
Motivatio motivation
motivatio
n n

TPD13

174
 Indexin
Indicat State- Scoring g
Domain SUM
or ment
SA A D SD Index

1.
Partici The
D.
pant‘s teacher
Teacher
person has lack
‘s 3
al of 4 11 51 57%
Motivati 6
motiva motivatio
on
tion n to the
students

TPD14

175
 Indexin
Indica Scoring
Domain Statement SUM g
tor
SA A D SD Index

E. The test is
1. not relevant
Test
in
Relevan The
accordance 4 36 11 51 53%
cy Test
to the
material
given

TPD15

176
 Indexin
Scoring
Domai Indicato SU g
Statement
n r S M
SA A D D Index

The program
period is
F. 1. adequate to
Time Program improve the
Period English skills 6 36 9 51 78%
by only
having twice
a month
course

TPD16

177
 Indexin
Scoring
SU g
Domain Indicator Statement
S M
SA A D D Index

1. The
G. evaluation
The is less
Program conductio effective so
evaluatio n of that the 1
n and program 24 1 11 51 80%
improveme 5
monitorin evaluatio nt of the
g n and program is
monitorin insignifica
g nt

TPD17

178
 Indexin
Indicato Scoring SU g
Domain Statement
r S M
SA A D D Index

I prefer pair
1. work
A.
Pair activities, for
3
Class work example pair 10 3 1 51 77%
7
Activitie Activitie up dialogue
s s or pair up
task.

TPD18

179
 Indexin
Indicato Scoring SU g
Domain Statement
r S M
SA A D D Index

I prefer
role-play,
for
example
2. playing
A.
certain 2
Role- 18 8 1 51 72%
Class roles in a 4
Activities Play situation
and have a
variation
conversatio
n about it.

TPD19

180
 Indexi
Indicat Scoring ng
Domain Statement SUM
or
SA A D SD Index

3.
A. I prefer
Group- Group-
Class 12 31 7 1 51 76%
work work
Activities
Activiti Activities
es

TPD20

181
 Scoring Indexing
Domain Indicator Statement SUM
SA A D SD Index

4. I prefer
A. project
Project 12 26 12 1 51 79%
work
Class Activities Work activities

TPD21

182
 Index
Indicato Scoring
Domain Statement SUM ing
r
SA A D SD Index

B. 1. I prefer a
cooperative
Teacher Coopera approach
s and tive 8 37 5 1 51 80%
than the
particip Approa teacher‘s
ants’ ch domination
role

TPD22

183
 Indicato Scoring Indexing
Domain Statement SUM
r
SA A D SD Index

I prefer
British
C. Content 1.
English
Materials Authent 8 37 5 1 51 80%
rather
icity
American
English.

TPD23

184
 Indexi
Scoring
Indicat ng
Domain Statement SUM
or S S
A D
A D Index

I prefer
2. authentic
C. Exposu material 8 37 5 1 51 80%
re in
Material
Contents accordanc
e to the
topic
given.

I prefer
instructio
nal
English
material
(giving
order,
asking
somethin
g,giving
16 29 5 1 51 83%
opinion
and
giving
advice) so
it will be
applied
for
everyday
classroom
activities.

185
 Indexi
Scoring
Indicat ng
Domain Statement SUM
or S S
A D
A D Index
I prefer
everyday
English
conversati
-on
material
(Speaking
26 22 2 1 51 88%
about
routine,
the
current
situation,
and past
situation)

TPD24

186
Table Coding
TMPR :Table of Main Product Revision

Scoring Indexing
SU
Domain Indicator Statement S S M
A A D D Index
I am able
in asking
simple
questions
in
English,
for
example: 18 32 8 58 89%
1. Asking
the using
Question
of Do you,
A. Material (Do,
Does
Content Does, WH
she/Does
Questions
he, Are
)
you, Is
she/Is he?
I am able
in asking
simple
1
questions 12 34 58 85%
2
in English
using 5W
+ 1H

TMPR1

187
 Indexi
Stateme Scoring SU ng
Domain Indicator
nt S M
Index
A A D SD
I am
able to
say
imperati
ve
sentenc
e using
―don‘t‖,
for 50 8 58 100%
example
: Don‘t
touch
the
2. Giving
glass, in
Imperativ
the
e
A. classroo
sentences
Material m
(imperativ
Content I am
e mood:
able to
don‘t,
say
please,
imperati
let‘s)
ve
sentenc
e using,
―let's‖,
for 50 8 58 100%
example
: Let‘s
put the
chair
back in
the
classroo
m
TMPR2

188
 Scoring Indexing
Domain Indicator Statement SUM
SA A D SD Index

I am able
to say
request
sentence
(will and
3. Giving
A. would), for
Material Request
example: 32 18 8 58 94%
Content (will and
will you
would)
take your
bag,
please? in
the
classroom

TMPR3

189
 Scoring Indexing
Domain Indicator Statement SUM
SA A D SD Index

I am able
to utter
advice
sentence,
for
A. 4. Giving
Material example: 50 8 58 100%
advice
Content You should
study
more, next
time, in the
classroom

TMPR4

190
 Index
Indicat Statemen Scoring SU ing
Domain
or t S S M
A A D D Index

I am able
to say
opinion
sentence,
5.
for
A. Material Giving
example 2 30 23 3 58 73%
Content Opinio
I think
n
your
drawing
is really
good.

TMPR5

191
 Scoring Indexing
Domain Indicator Statement SUM
SA A D SD Index

I am able to
say simple
English in
1. Simple
Speech Present
Context Tense, for
B. Skills 10 38 10 5 58 87%
(syntax example
and :She sit on
semantics) the carpet
rather than
She sits on
the carpet

TMPR6

192
 Scoring Indexing
Domain Indicator Statement SUM
SA A D SD Index

I am able in
finding the
B. 2. right
15 37 2 4 58 87%
Skills Vocabularies vocabularies
in simple
English.

TMPR7

193
 Scoring Indexing
Dom
Indicator Statement S SUM
ain
A A D SD Index

I am able
3. to say
B.
Pronunci English 8 30 20 58 81%
Skill
ation words
s
correctly.

TMPR8

194
 Scoring Indexing
Domain Indicator Statement SUM
SA A D SD Index

I am able
responding in
English.
B. 4. Speech Such as 14 10 26 8 58 75%
Skills Logic stuttering and
could not
respond well.

I fully
realized that I
need this
program to 15 39 4 58 89%
improve my
English
skills.

TMPR9

195
 Scoring Indexing
Domain Indicator Statement SUM
SA A D SD Index

The
teachers
A. have
1. Material 45 8 5 58 100%
Teacher adequate
Preparation
Preparation material
preparation

TMPR10

196
 Index
Domain Indicator Statement Scoring SUM ing
SA A D SD Index

The
teachers
A. 2. are
100
Teacher Material qualified 45 8 5 58
Prepara Compet %
in material
tion ence competenc
e

TMPR11

197
 Scoring Indexing
Domain Indicator Statement SUM
SA A D SD Index

The
learning
B. 1.
Learning Method activity is 30 28 58 100%
Activity interesting
and varied.

TMPR12

198
 Index
Indica Scoring ing
Domain Statement SUM
tor S
A A D SD Index

1.
Partic
C. ipant‘
The
Particip s
participants
ant‘s perso 22 16 20 58 86 %
are
Motivati nal
motivated
on motiv
ation

TMPR13

199
Domai State- Scoring Indexing
Indicator SUM
n ment SA A D SD Index

1.
D. Participa The
Teache nt‘s teachers
r‘s personal are
22 34 2 58 92%
Motiva motivatio motiva-
tion n ting the
students

TMPR14

200
Dom Indica Scoring Indexing
Statement SUM
ain tor SA A D SD Index

E.
1. The test is
Test
relevant in
Rele
The accordanc
vanc 24 30 4 58 92%
Test e to the
y
material
given

TMPR15

201
 Scoring Indexing
Domain Indicator Statement SUM
SA A D SD Index
The
program
period is
adequate
to
1. improve
F. Time Program the
Period 4 24 30 58 76%
English
skills by
only
having
twice a
month
course

TMPR16

202
 Indexin
Scoring SU g
Domain Indicator Statement
M
SA A D SD Index

The
1. The evaluation
G.
conducti is
Program
on of effective
evaluati
program so that the
on and 15 5 38 58 77%
evaluatio improvem
monitori
n and ent of the
ng
monitori program is
ng insignifica
nt

TMPR17

203
Doma Indica Statem Scoring Indexing
SUM
in tor ent SA A D SD Index

Pair
work
1. activiti
A. es are
Pair 3
Class effecti 10 3 1 51 75%
work 7
Activi ve in
Activi
ties the
ties
classro
om

TMPR18

204
 Index
Domain Indicator Statement Scoring SUM ing
SA A D SD Index

Role play
2. activities
A. are
Role- 26 30 2 58 94%
effective
Class Activities Play in the
classroom

TMPR19

205
 Indexi
Scoring ng
Domain Indicator Statement SUM
S
A A D SD Index

Group-
work
3. Group- Activities
A. 2
work are 33 4 58 45%
1
Class Activities Activities effective
in the
classroom

TMPR20

206
 Indexi
Domain Indicator Statement Scoring SUM ng
SA A D SD Index

A.
project
Class work
Activiti activities
es 4. Project
are 29 19 58 81%
Work
effective
in the
classroom

TMPR21

207
 Inde
Scoring xing
Domain Indicator Statement SUM
S S Inde
A A D D x

B. 1. Cooperative
Cooperat approach is
Teacher 2
ive effective in 37 58 99%
s and 1
Approac the
participa h classroom
nts‘ role

TMPR22

208
 Index
Indicato Scoring ing
Domain Statement SUM
r
SA A D SD Index

The
C. materials are
Content 1. balance both
Materials from British 30 28 58 96%
Authent
icity English and
American
English

TMPR23

209
Doma Scoring Indexing
Indicator Statement SUM
in SA A D SD Index

C. Authentic
Mater materials are
ial 2. in
36 22 58 98%
Conte Exposure accordance
nts to the topic
given.

I am able to
use
instructional
English
(giving
order,
asking
19 39 58 92%
something,gi
ving opinion
and giving
advice) in
my
classroom
activities.

210
I am able to
use
conversati-
on English
(Speaking
about
routine, the
26 32 58 95%
current
situation,
and past
situation) in
my
classroom
activities.

TMPR24

211
Yayasan Pendidikan Ibuku Annisaa
English Language Training for
Teachers

Developed Syllabus
Term One
August-November
2018

212
The Course Aims:
1) To help students communicate effectively and
confidently in English by developing the students‘
vocabulary, pronunciation, and basic grammar.
2) To prepare students have a good basic foundation in
English classroom speaking which enables them to
communicate in daily classroom instructions, situations
and topics.

The Course Objectives:

1) Students are able to ask their students a daily routine
and able to talk about their own daily routines.
2) Students are able to state to their students about personal
identification.
3) Students are able to request with appropriate
expressions when using polite request to their students.
4) Students are able to instruct with appropriate
expressions when using imperative sentence to their
students.
5) Students are able to state intention to give and respond
to opinion to their students.
6) Students are able to state intention to give and respond
to advice to their students.

213
 The Syllabus Design of English Language Training
Week Units Topics Activities Grammar Competencies
Focus
1 ONE Daily SKILL  The use of  Stating
Routine GETTING Do and about daily
Does routine
 Vocabulary  Verbs with  Asking
Snapshot: s/es about daily
learning  Adverbs of routine
vocabulary time:  Differentiati
about daily  Every week, ng the use of
routine do and does
every once a
 Pronunciati  Differentiati
week, etc
on drills ng the use of
through  Adverbs of s/es
native frequency: 
English  always,
speakers usually, 
recordings
seldom,
 Pair
never,
practice:
Interview sometimes,
about often,
daily frequently,
routine generally,
habitually,
SKILL occasionally
USING , once,
twice, etc.
 Functional
activity: 
Presentatio
n about
daily
routine
 Social
interaction
activity:
Presentation
and

214
 discussion
REVIEW

 Language
game: daily
routine
game
2 TWO Persona  SKILL  
l GETTING  The simple  Recognizing
Identifi  Vocabulary present the using of
cation Snapshot: tense of 5W  5W + 1 H
learning + 1H  Requesting
vocabulary  personal
about identificatio
personal n
identificati information
on 
 Pronunciati
on drills
through
native
English
speakers
recordings
 Individual
practice:
 Class
survey
about daily
routine
 SKILL
USING
 Functional
activity:
Presentatio
n about
class
survey
 Social
interaction
activity:

215
  Interviewin
g class
survey
 REVIEW
 Language
game: class
survey
3 THR Polite  SKILL  Modals with  Addressing
EE Request GETTING Polite questions
 Vocabulary Request: with polite
Snapshot:  Could request
learning you...?
vocabulary Would it be
about possible..?
request in Do you
the mind
classroom  if I....? Of
 Pronunciati course! Not
on drills at all!
through Certainly!
native Sure! I‘m
English afraid...I‘m
speakers sorry but...
recordings
 Individual
practice:
 Asking
students to
do
something
in polite
request
 SKILL
USING
 Functional
activity:
listening to
polite
request
conversatio
n

216
  Social
interaction
activity:
Role play-
polite
request
 REVIEW
 Language
game:
board game


4 FOU Imperat  SKILL  Imperative  Addressing
R ive GETTING sentence: imperative
Sentenc  Vocabulary  ―don‘t,‖ sentence
e Snapshot: ―please,‖  Recognizing
learning ―go,‖ the use of
vocabulary  appropriate
about vocabulary
imperative on
in the instruction
classroom in the
 Pronunciati classroom
on drills  Illustrating
through attitude
native about
English instruction
speakers in the
recordings classroom
 Individual
practice:
 Asking
students to
do
something
in
imperative
sentence
 SKILL
USING
 Functional

217
 activity:
listening to
imperative
sentence
conversatio
n
 Social
interaction
activity:
Role play-
polite
request
 REVIEW
 Language
game:
board game
5 FIVE Giving  SKILL  Giving and  Addressing
Opinion GETTING asking asking and
 Vocabulary opinion giving
Snapshot:  I think opinion
learning that…  Recognizing
vocabulary  It seems to the use of
about me that… appropriate
giving  I would vocabulary
advice in argue that… on
the  I do not instruction
classroom believe in the
 Pronunciati that… classroom
on drills  I am  Illustrating
through unconvince attitude
native d that… about
English  instruction
speakers in the
recordings classroom
 Pair
practice:
 Giving
students‘
advice

 SKILL

218
 USING
 Functional
activity:
listening to
advice
conversatio
n
 Social
interaction
activity:
discussing
classroom
problems

 REVIEW
 Language
game:
board game

6 SIX Giving SKILL  Giving and  Addressing

Advice GETTING asking asking and
 Advice: giving
 Vocabulary advice
Snapshot:  You should  Recognizing
learning /shouldn't... the use of
vocabulary appropriate
about  If I were vocabulary
giving you, I'd... on
advice in instruction
the  You really
in the
classroom ought to...
classroom
 Pronunciati  Illustrating
 Why don't
on drills attitude
you...
through about
native  It would be instruction
English a good idea in the
speakers to... classroom
recordings

219
 Pair  I strongly
practice: advise you
Giving to...
students‘
advice  You could...

 How
about...
SKILL
USING

 Functional
activity:
listening to
advice
conversatio
n
 Social
interaction
activity:
discussing
classroom
problems

REVIEW
Language
game: board
game

220
 Yayasan Pendidikan Ibuku
Annisaa
English Language Training for
Teachers

Developed Syllabus
Term Two
Jan-May
2019

221
The Course Aims:
1) To help students communicate effectively and
confidently in English by developing the students‘
vocabulary, pronunciation, and basic grammar.
2) To prepare students have a good basic foundation in
English classroom speaking which enables them to
communicate in daily classroom instructions, situations
and topics.

The Course Objectives:

1) Students are able to ask their students a daily routine and
able to talk about their own daily routines.
2) Students are able to state to their students about personal
identification.
3) Students are able to request with appropriate expressions
when using polite request to their students.
4) Students are able to instruct with appropriate expressions
when using imperative sentence to their students.
5) Students are able to state intention to give and respond to
opinion to their students.
6) Students are able to state intention to give and respond to
advice to their students.

222
 The Syllabus Design of English Language Teaching
Week Units Topics Activities Grammar Competencies
Focus
1 ONE Daily SKILL  The use of  Stating
Routine GETTING Do and Does about daily
 Vocabulary  Verbs with routine
Snapshot: s/es  Asking
learning  Adverbs of about daily
vocabulary time: routine
about daily  Every week,  Differentiati
routine every once a ng the use
 Pronunciatio week, etc of do and
n drills  Adverbs of does
through frequency:  Differentiati
native  always, ng the use
English usually, of s/es
speakers seldom,
recordings never,
 Pair sometimes,
practice: often,
 Interview frequently,
about daily generally,
routine habitually,
occasionally,
SKILL once, twice,
USING etc.
 Functional 
activity:
Presentation
about daily
routine
 Social
interaction
activity:
 Presentation
and
discussion

REVIEW
 Language

223
 game: daily
routine game
2 TWO Persona SKILL
l GETTING
Identifi  The simple  Recognizing
cation  Vocabulary present tense the using of
Snapshot: of 5W + 1H 5W + 1 H
learning
vocabulary  Requesting
about personal
personal identificat
identificatio ion
n informati
 Pronunciatio on
n drills
through
native
English
speakers
recordings
 Individual
practice:
class survey
about daily
routine

SKILL
USING

 Functional
activity:
Presentation
about class
survey
 Social
interaction
activity:
Interviewing
class survey
REVIEW
Language
224
 game: class
survey
3 THR Polite SKILL  Modals with  Addressing
EE Request GETTING Polite questions
Request: with polite
 Vocabulary Could you...? request
Snapshot: Would it be
learning possible..?
vocabulary Do you mind
about if I....? Of
request in
course! Not
the
at all!
classroom
Certainly!
 Pronunciatio
Sure! I’m
n drills
through afraid...I’m
native sorry but...
English
speakers
recordings
 Individual
practice:
Asking
students to
do
something in
polite
request

SKILL
USING

 Functional
activity:
listening to
polite
request

225
 conversation
 Social
interaction
activity:
Role play-
polite
request

REVIEW
Language
game: board
game
4 FOU Imperat SKILL  Imperative  Addressing
R ive GETTING sentence: imperative
Sentenc “don’t,” sentence
e  Vocabulary “please,”  Recognizing
Snapshot: “go,” the use of
learning appropriate
vocabulary vocabulary
about on
imperative instruction
in the in the
classroom classroom
 Pronunciatio  Illustrating
n drills attitude
through about
native instruction
English in the
speakers classroom
recordings
 Individual
practice:
Asking
students to
do
something
in
imperative
sentence

226
 SKILL
USING

 Functional
activity:
listening to
imperative
sentence
conversation
 Social
interaction
activity:
Role play-
polite
request

REVIEW
Language
game: board
game
5 FIVE Giving SKILL  Giving and  Addressing
Opinion GETTING asking asking and
opinion giving
 Vocabulary I think that… opinion
Snapshot: It seems to  Recognizin
learning me that… g the use of
vocabulary I would appropriate
about giving argue that… vocabulary
advice in the on
I do not
classroom instruction
believe
 Pronunciatio in the
that…
n drills classroom
I am
through  Illustrating
native unconvinced
that… attitude
English about
speakers instruction
recordings in the
 Pair classroom
practice:
Giving

227
 students‘
advice

SKILL
USING

 Functional
activity:
listening to
advice
conversation
 Social
interaction
activity:
discussing
classroom
problems
REVIEW
Language
game: board
game
6 SIX Giving SKILL  Giving and  Addressing
Advice GETTING asking asking and
Advice: giving
 Vocabulary You should advice
Snapshot: /shouldn't...  Recognizin
learning If I were you, g the use of
vocabulary I'd... appropriate
about giving You really vocabulary
advice in the on
ought to...
classroom instruction
Why don't
 Pronunciatio in the
you...
n drills classroom
It would be a
through  Illustrating
native good idea
to... attitude
English about
speakers I strongly
advise you instruction
recordings in the
 Pair to...
classroom

228
 practice: You could...
Giving How about...
students‘
advice

SKILL
USING

 Functional
activity:
listening to
advice
conversation
 Social
interaction
activity:
discussing
classroom
problems

REVIEW
Language
game: board
game

229
 COURSE GENERAL DESCRIPTION
Subject Speaking Course
Study Program English Language Teaching
Level Starter, Elementary, Pre-
Intermediate, Intermediate
Semester One (1)
Course Aims The Course Aims:
1) To help students
communicate effectively
and confidently in English
by developing the
students‘ vocabulary,
pronunciation, and basic
grammar.
2) To prepare students have a
good basic foundation in
English classroom
speaking which enables
them to communicate in
daily classroom
instructions, situations and
topics.

Course Objectives The Course Objectives:

1) Students are able to ask
their students a daily
routine and able to talk
about their own daily
routines.
2) Students are able to state
to their students about
personal identification.
3) Students are able to

230
 request with appropriate
expressions when using
polite request to their
students.
4) Students are able to
instruct with appropriate
expressions when using
imperative sentence to
their students.
5) Students are able to state
intention to give and
respond to opinion to their
students.
6) Students are able to state
intention to give and
respond to advice to their
students.
Language Focus a. Vocabulary 50%
b. Pronunciation 40%
c. Grammar 10%
Activities a. Talking in pairs;
b. Learning in a small group;
c. Learning by role play;
d. Language Games
Media a. Audio Recordings;
b. Pictures
c. Video
Time 2 x 30 minutes = 60 minutes (one
session)

231
 COURSE GENERAL DESCRIPTION
Subject Speaking Course
Study Program English Language Teaching
Level Starter, Elementary, Pre-
Intermediate, Intermediate
Semester One (1)
Course Aims The Course Aims:
1) To help students
communicate effectively
and confidently in English
by developing the
students‘ vocabulary,
pronunciation, and basic
grammar.
2) To prepare students have a
good basic foundation in
English classroom
speaking which enables
them to communicate in
daily classroom
instructions, situations and
topics.

Course Objectives The Course Objectives:

1) Students are able to ask
their students a daily
routine and able to talk
about their own daily
routines.
2) Students are able to state
to their students about
personal identification.
3) Students are able to

232
 request with appropriate
expressions when using
polite request to their
students.
4) Students are able to
instruct with appropriate
expressions when using
imperative sentence to
their students.
5) Students are able to state
intention to give and
respond to opinion to their
students.
6) Students are able to state
intention to give and
respond to advice to their
students.
Language Focus a. Vocabulary 50%
b. Pronunciation 40%
c. Grammar 10%
Activities a. Talking in pairs;
b. Learning in a small group;
c. Learning by role play;
d. Language Games
Media a. Audio Recordings;
b. Pictures
c. Video
Time 2 x 30 minutes = 60 minutes
(one session)

233
Expert Reviewer 1 CV

Yuta Otake
400 W. 43rd St. Apt. #29M, New York, NY, 10036
646-456-2212 yutaotake@gmail.com

EDUCATION
NEW YORK UNIVERSITY, New York, NY, USA
Master of Arts in TESOL (4.0 GPA), May 2014
Department of Teaching and Learning‘s Graduation Award for
Excellence in Service
WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY, Middletown, CT, USA
Bachelor of Arts with honors in East Asian Studies, May 2007

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
TRAVEL TEACH SHARE, Indonesia August, 2019- April, 2020
Teacher Trainer/Public Speaker
• Facilitated teacher training workshops at universities, teacher
associations, and conferences across
Indonesia.
• Facilitated teacher training workshops for Fulbright English
Teaching Assistants.
• Collaborated with local teachers to lead model lessons at K-12
schools across Indonesia.

234
FULBRIGHT, Taipei, Taiwan July, 2018–July, 2019
FSE TEFL Trainer
• Developed the teaching of Fulbright English Teaching Assistants
and local English teachers through
training, observations, and consultations.
• Collaborated with local institutions to facilitate training events that
develop English teaching in Taiwan.
RELO, U.S. Department of State, Jakarta, Indonesia September,
2017–June, 2018
English Language Fellow, a program of the U.S. Department of
State
• Developed and conducted teacher training workshops on English
teaching methodologies.
• Organized and presented at conferences and seminars.
• Directed teachers training camps for pre-service and in-service
English teachers in Indonesia.
• Partnered with Fulbright ETAs to conduct teacher training
workshops for public high school English
teachers.
• Developed and conducted cultural sharing and art projects with
local community groups.
SESAME WORKSHOP, New York, NY May, 2014 – August, 2016
EFL Content Specialist
• Developed and oversaw the production of a K-12 content-based
EFL curriculum with media, lesson
plans, home review apps, textbooks, workbooks, assessments, and
supplementary classroom resources.
• Led research and testing to ensure the materials and curriculum are
appropriate and effective.

235
• Wrote TOEFL mock tests and prep course materials.
• Conducted teacher training and ensured the successful
implementation of the course in schools in Japan.
NEW YORK LANGUAGE CENTER, New York, NY February,
2014 – May, 2014
ESL Teacher
• Taught an intensive ESL course for adults preparing to enter
American universities.
• Created a curriculum around topics and themes that would help the
students in their transitions to life in
America.
SOVANNAPHUMI SCHOOL, Phnom Penh, Cambodia January,
2013 – August 2013
Academic Consultant
• Created the curriculum for a newly established EFL school.
• Designed a system of student and teacher assessments.
• Conducted teacher training and training of trainers.
• Assessed campuses around Cambodia as part of a national quality
assurance committee.
• Managed and taught a TESOL certification program in
collaboration with local non-profit organizations
and universities.
THE NEWTON THILAY COMMUNITY GROUP, Phnom Penh,
Cambodia October 2011 – August 2012
Training and Development Manager
• Assessed and trained English teachers for a network of twenty
schools in Cambodia.
• Recruited and prepared new English teachers.

236
• Designed a system of peer training and observations for teachers to
create a culture of collaboration and
accountability.
AMERICAN PACIFIC SCHOOL, Phnom Penh, Cambodia
Assistant Principal August 2010 – February 2011
• Developed a content-based EFL curriculum for middle school.
• Assessed and supported teachers.
• Communicated and worked with families to better meet their
needs.
• Organized school trips, open houses, sports tournaments, and
conferences.
Fifth Grade Teacher/Basketball Team Coach August 2010 –
February 2011
• Taught fifth grade English full-time to a class of twenty-five
students.
Second Grade Teacher/Basketball Team Coach July 2009 – August
2010
• Taught second grade English full-time to a class of twenty-eight
students.
LONG ISLAND JAPANESE WEEKEND SCHOOL, New York,
NY
A Saturday school sponsored by the Japanese government to educate
Japanese-American students
High School Humanities Teacher August 2007 – March 2009
• Taught Japanese language, literature, history, and essay writing.

237
Expert Reviewer 1 Syllabus Scoring Sheet

Yayasan Pendidikan Islam Ibuku Annisaa English Speaking

Course Syllabus
Expert Name: Yuta Otake
Award each essential component (yellow) three points, important
components (grey) two, and less-important components (white) one,
regardless of the strengths of evidence. For example, raters should
place a 3 in the appropriate strength-of-evidence column for
component #1 and a 2 in the appropriate column for component
#10. After scoring all components, sum and scale each column by
the appropriate factor: multiple the strong evidence subtotal by 2,
the moderate evidence subtotal by 1, and the low evidence subtotal
by 0.
Criterion Strength of Evidence
Component
Strong Moderate Low
1. Learning goals 2
encompass dimensions
of significant learning
Learning 2. Course level 2
Goals & learning objectives are
Objectives clearly articulated and
use specific action
verbs
3. Learning objectives 2
are appropriately
pitched
4. Objectives and 2
assessment are aligned
Assessment
5. Major summative 1
Activities
assessment activities
are clearly defined
Schedule 6. Course schedule is 2
fully articulated and
logically sequenced
7. Fosters positive 2
Classroom
motivation, describes
Environment
value of course,

238
 promotes content as a
vehicle for learning
8. Communicates high 3
expectations, projects
confidence of success
9. Syllabus is well- 2
organized, easy to
navigate, requires
interaction
Learning 10. Classroom 2
Activities activities, assessments,
and objectives are
aligned
11. Learning activities 3
likely to actively
engage students to
produce
communicative
competence
subtotal 9x2 8x 1 1
= 18 =8 =1
TOTAL 27

Comments:

The strongest area of the syllabus is its emphasis on language as a

tool for communication. Based on the activity types and objectives, I
predict that students would be highly engaged and learn to become
confident communicators. Although there are clear columns for
objectives and competencies, I believe the weakest area of this
syllabus to be the assessments. It is not clear how teachers are
expected to measure student outcomes within the framework of the
cumulative objectives.

239
Expert Reviewer 2 CV
Alicia Bradley
alicia.m.bradley@gmail.com
linkedin.com/in/aliciabradley
678-603-6680

EDUCATION
Teachers College, Columbia University, 2013
M.A. International Educational Development
University of Georgia , 2001
B.A. Sociology

EXPERIENCE
TEFL Trainer & Advisor
Fulbright Taiwan (FSE)
2018– 2019 Taipei, Taiwan
Provided TEFL professional development training and guidance to
113 Fulbright English Teaching Assistants and their Local English
Teacher counterparts

English Language Fellow

US State Department Program
2016–2018 Gorontalo, Indonesia
Cooperated with the US Embassy and Regional English Language
Office (RELO) to provide academic instruction, professional
development, and cultural exchange to English educators

240
AmeriCorps National Service Member
Youth Villages
2014-2015 Douglasville, Georgia
Completed over 1,700 hours at the Youth Villages Inner Harbour
Campus, a residential treatment facility for youth with severe
emotional and behavioral issues

M&E Intern
International Rescue Committee
2013-2014 Atlanta, Georgia
Implemented and monitored educational assessment in a non-profit
setting

English Instructor
Seongil Elementary School,
Poly School, Seoul English Village
2005-2011 Seoul, South Korea

Nova Group
2003-2005 Tokyo, Japan
Instructed students in ESP, EAP, and conversational English

241
Expert Reviewer 2 Syllabus Scoring Sheet
Yayasan Pendidikan Islam Ibuku Annisaa English Speaking
Course Syllabus
Expert Name: Alicia Bradley
Award each essential component (yellow) three points, important
components (grey) two, and less-important components (white)
one, regardless of the strengths of evidence. For example, raters
should place a 3 in the appropriate strength-of-evidence column
for component #1 and a 2 in the appropriate column for
component #10. After scoring all components, sum and scale
each column by the appropriate factor: multiple the strong
evidence subtotal by 2, the moderate evidence subtotal by 1, and
the low evidence subtotal by 0.
Criterion Strength of Evidence
Component
Strong Moderate Low
1. Learning 3
goals
encompass
dimensions of
significant
learning
2. Course level 3
Learning
learning
Goals &
objectives are
Objectives
clearly
articulated and
use specific
action verbs
3. Learning
objectives are
appropriately
pitched
4. Objectives 3
and assessment
Assessment
are aligned
Activities
5. Major 2
summative
242
 assessment
activities are
clearly defined
Schedule 6. Course 3
schedule is fully
articulated and
logically
sequenced
7. Fosters 3
positive
motivation,
describes value
of course,
promotes
content as a
Classroom vehicle for
Environment learning
8. 1
Communicates
high
expectations,
projects
confidence of
success
9. Syllabus is 1
well-organized,
easy to
navigate,
requires
interaction
Learning 10. Classroom 3
Activities activities,
assessments,
and objectives
are aligned
11. Learning 2
activities likely
to actively
engage students
to produce

243
 communicative
competence
subtotal 12 x 2 7x1=7 5x0
= 24 =0
TOTAL 31

Comments:

This syllabus is well-organized and contains many activities to

engage students in learning. The grammar focus and
competencies are clearly stated for each unit, and the activities
are designed to correspond with them. To make the syllabus
stronger, assessment criteria should be added. The syllabus does
not include any formal assessments. If assessment will be done
through the unit activities, this should be noted in the syllabus
along with a description of how that will be done.

244