Figuring the Context of CTL under 2013 Curiculum

Chairina Nasir, Ika Apriani Fata, Bukhari Daud, Nia Isniati


The 2013 curriculum states that the purpose of teaching English for junior high school is to develop students’ communicative competence. In line with this expectation, several learning characteristics have been defined i.e. learning from model, observing, questioning, gathering information, associating, and communicating. Therefore, the teaching approaches that are used by the teacher in teaching English must suit the criteria to promote students' communicative competence. Contextual Teaching and learning (CTL) seems to be compatible as an approach since it has the the characteristics of constructivism, questioning, inquiry, learning community, modelling, reflection, and authentic assessment, which are similar to the learning characteristics mentioned above, which are similar to the learning characteristics mentioned above. , which are similar to the learning characteristics mentioned above. Therefore, a qualitative research concerning the issue was conducted to see how CTL approach is implemented under the 2013 curriculum in teaching reading comprehension. From the result of observation, questionnaire, and interview as the instruments, it was found that CTL was implemented properly from phase to phase and is applicable to be implemented under the curriculum. Also, it promotes active and enjoyable learning, facilitates the students to comprehend the material and helps them to implement the knowledge in real life. The. The teacher had implemented all of the procedures of CTL under the instruction of the 2013 curriculum. Thus, applying the CTL CTL approach in the process of teaching for the 2013 curriculum for the 2013 curriculum is recommended since it gives satisfactory benefits for students.


CTL, Teaching Reading Comprehension, the 2013 Curriculum.

Full Text:



Berns, R.G., & Erickson, P. M. (2001). Contextual Teaching and Learning: Preparing Students for the New Economy. The Highlighted Zone Research @Work. 2(5).1-8.

Department of National Education. (2003). Pendekatan Kontekstual (Contextual Teaching and Learning-CTL). Jakarta: Depdiknas.

Dewey, J. (1900). The School and Society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Fata, I.A., & Nasir, C. (2014). Current Issues of 2013 Curriculum In Indonesia. Banda Aceh. Unpublished.

Haryati, N. (2012). Teaching Reading Using Contextual Teaching and Learning Approach in the First Grade of Al Irsyad Satya Islamic School Padalarang Bandung Jawa Barat. Bandung: STKIP Siliwangi Bandung.

Johnson, E.B. (2002). Contextual Teaching and Learning: what it is and why it is here to stay. London: Routledge Falmer.

KEMENDIKBUD. (2014). Kurikulum 2013. Jakarta: Depdiknas.

Marta, D. S. (2014). Teacher Questioning in Classroom Interaction. CELT. Vol 14 (1).

Mikulecky, S. B. & Jeffries, L. (1996). More Reading Power: Reading for Pleasure, Comprehension Skills, Thinking Skills, Reading Faster. Boston: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company,Inc.

Muhlison. (2011). The Effectiveness of Contextual Teaching and Learning to Teach Reading Comprehension (An Experimental Study at the Eighth Grade Students of MTS At-Thosari Kalirejo Ungaran Timur in Academic Year of 2010/2011. Thesis: Faculty of Tarbiyah State Institute for Islamic Studies Walisongo Semarang.

Pang, S. E., Angaluki, M.E. & Michael, L. K. (2000). Teaching Reading. Chicago: IAE Education Practice Series.

Richards, J. C. and Rogers, T.S. (2007). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching.Second Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Tindale, Jen. (2003). Teaching Reading. Sydney: National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research.


Copyright (c)

| pISSN (print): 1412-3320 | eISSN (online): 2502-4914 | web
analytics View My Stats