PACA (Predicting And Confirming Activity) Reading Strategies to Promote Students’ Teaching Strategy in TEFL 1 Class

Ririn Ambarini, Listyaning Sumardiyani, Subur Laksmono Wardoyo

Abstract


This research is based on the study which is attempted to examine the use of PACA reading strategies to promote students’ teaching strategies in TEFL 1 class. The objectives of this study are (1) To find out the students’ teaching strategies in TEFL I class before using PACA reading strategies, (2) To find out the significant difference between the students who use PACA reading strategies and those who do not use PACA reading strategies in their capability of teaching strategies in TEFL I class. The population of this study is the fifth semester students of English Department in PGRI University of Semarang. There are six classes of TEFL I class  in English Department and two classes are taken as the sample of the study. The classes are 5G and 5H. They are divided into the experimental class (5G) and the control group (5H). The result of the study shows that the students in the experimental class which were taught by using the technique of PACA Reading strategies to promote their teaching strategies had better achievement than the students in the control group which were taught without using the technique of PACA reading strategies. The average score of the pre-test of the experimental class was 76.72 and the control class was 72.85. The average score of the experimental class was 81.98 and the control class was 72.85. The pre-test and the post-test score then were calculated to get the t-test to know whether there was significant difference between the experimental class and the control class. The t-test was 0.47 and the t-table was 0.213. Then the t-test and t-table were compared. The data shows that the t-test was higher than the t-table. It means that there was significant difference between the experimental class and the control class.

Keywords


PACA Reading Rrategies, Teaching Methods and Strategies, TEFL.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Al-Tamimi, N. O. (2006). The effect of direct reading strategy instruction on students’ reading comprehension, metacognitive strategy awareness, and reading attitudes among eleventh grade students in Yemen (Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University Sains Malaysia).

Amaya, M. J. (2001). Implementing a content-based language teaching programme. In G. Sánchez (Ed.). Present and Future Trends in TEFL. Almería: Universidad de Almería, 135-165.

Ananthakrishnan, N. (1993). Microteaching as a Vehicle of Teacher Training-its Advantages-Disadvantages. Journal Postgraduate Medicine, 39(3), 142.

Baytekin, Ç. (2004). Learning Teaching Techniques and Material Development. Ankara: Ani Yayincilik.

Beydogan, Ö. (2002). Changes in teaching strategies and the changing role of teachers. Çağdaş Eğitim, 27(287), 34-39.

Bircan, I. (2003). New Directions in Education: Elementary School Teacher education in Developed Countries. Sivas: Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi.

Bowen, T. (2006). Methodology Challenge. The Communicative Classroom. Onestopenglish, Macmillan.

Celep, C. (2001). Teacher-Student Relationship in Classroom Management. Çağdaş Eğitim, 26(272), 19-24.

Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (2nd ed.). Sage Thousand Oaks.

Danasasmita, W. (2007). Efektivitas Model Directed Reading Actvity (DRA) Dalam Pengajaran Membaca Bahasa Indonesia Sebagai Bahasa Asing [The Effectiveness of the Directed Reading Activity (DRA) Model in Teaching Indonesian Reading as a Foreign Language]. Jurnal Educationist, 1(2).

Degu, G., & Yigzaw, T. (2006). Research Methodology: Lecture Notes for Health Science Students. Addis Ababa: The Carter Center (Ethiopian Public Health Training Initiative), 45-50.

Delgado, J. (2005). Engaging Strategies for All Students: The SpringBoard Reading Strategies. New York: The College Board.

Dillon, J., & Maguire, M. (Eds.). (1997). Becoming a Teacher. Issues in Secondary. Buckingham: Open University Press.

ERIC. (2000). Making large Classes More Interactive. No. EJ610221.

ESL Glossary. ESL Glossary: Definitions of common ESL/EFI terms: Communicative Approach. Retrieved on 25 October, 2012 from www.bogglesworld.com/glossary/communicativeapproach.htm

Gottlieb, S. (2004). Innovative Assessment in Competency Based Student Centered Learning. Adapazari, Sakarya: Esentepe Campus of Sakarya University.

Hanušová, S. (2004). Methodology: The Grammar-Translation Method. Faculty of Education, Brno.

Harmer, J. (1995). The Practice of English Language Teaching. Harlow: Longman House.

Hoffman, J.V., Baumann, J.F., & Afterbach, P. (2000). Balancing Principles for Teaching Elementary Reading. New Jersey: Lawrence Erbaum Publkisher.

Isman, A. (2003). Teaching Technologies and Material Development. Istanbul: Degişim.

Katchen, J. E. (2004). Teaching Presentation Skills Using Video as Role Model. In Proceedings of the MOE Conference on “Developing the Basics of Holistic General Education (pp. 41-50). Xinfeng, Hsinchu: MingHsin University of Science and Technology.

Kinsella, K. (2001). Mathematics Reading Strategies. California: Globe Fearon, Pearson Learning Group.

Larsen-Freeman, D. (1986). Teachiques and Principles in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Miles, R. (2009). Oral Presentation for English Proficiency Purposes. Reflections on English Language Teaching Journal, 8(2), 103–110.

Nunan, D. (2000). Language Teaching Methodology: A textbook for teachers. London: Pearson Education Ltd.

Oddens, D. A. M. (2004). Trend in Ducth Vocational Education Teacher Training in Terms of Personal Quality. In International Conference on VET Teacher Training (Vol. 1, pp.347-354). Ankara: SVET.

Otto-Van. (2004). Oral Presentation Rubric. Leistungskuis English K13/¸-2004/06 (Numberger). Van Taube Gymnasium.

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. London-Newbury Park, New Delhi: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Pinnell, G. S., & Fountas, I.C. (1998). Word Matterrs; Teaching Phonics and Spelling in the Reading/Writing Classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Rayner, K., Foorman, B. R., Perfetti, C. A., Pesetsky, D., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2001). How psychological science informs the teaching of reading. Psychological science in the public interest, 2(2), 31-74.

Richard. (2006). Total Physical Response. British Council: BBC World Service. Retrieved from www.teachingenglish.org.uk/think/methodology/tpr.shtml

Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2003). Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge university press.

Scrivener, J. (1994). Learning Teaching. Oxford: Macmillan Publisher Limited, 1-19.

Sisman, M. & Acat, B. (2003). The Effect of Teaching Practicum on the Perception of Teaching Prtofession. Firat Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 13(1), 235-250.

Sisman, M. (2001). Introduction to Teaching. Ankara: Pegema Yaytnctltk.

Stern, H. H. (1983). Fundamental Concepts of Language Teaching. Oxford University Press.

Vianty, M. (2007). The Comparison of Students’ Use of Metacognitive Reading Strategies between Reading in Bahasa Indonesia and in English. International Education Journal, 8(20), 449-460.

Wallace, A. E. (2005). The Impact of Implementing Four Specific Reading Strategies (Outlining, SQ3R, PLAN, and PACA) On the High School Geography Classroom. Shawnee Mission East High School. Shawnee Mission Board of Education.

Woods, P., Jeffrey, B., Troman, G. & Boyle, M. (1997). Restructuring Schools, Reconstructing Teachers. Buckingham: Open University Press.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.24167/celt.v18i1.893

Bookmark and Share


Copyright (c) 2018 Celt: A Journal of Culture, English Language Teaching & Literature



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