ADAPTIVE CONTROL OF THOUGHT OUTPUT MODEL: ENGLISH GRAMMAR TEACHING METHOD FOR NON-NATIVE STUDENT A CLASSROOM RESEACH STUDY AT SMA 4 PRAYA
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58258/jime.v3i1.59Abstract
This study was aimed at improving the teaching ofgrammar of the eleventgradenon-native students at SMA 4 Prayaby using Adaptive Control of Thought Output Model. This research was action research which consisted of two cycles with threemeetings in each cycle. The subjects of this research were the researcher, the students, the English teacher, and the collaborators. The data collection techniques were observations, interviews, and tests. The data were in the form of qualitative data and quantitative data. The qualitative data were obtained from the field notes and interview transcripts. These data were analyzed using five steps i.e. assembling the data, coding the data, comparing the data, building interpretations, and reporting the outcomes. Meanwhile, the quantitative data were obtained from the pre-test and the post-test scores. These data were analyzed by comparing the mean scores of the pre-test and the post-test. The results of the research show that the use of the Adaptive Control of Thought Output Model in combination with applying various media and activities, such as pictures and games, could improve the teaching of grammar. Based on the qualitative data, the teaching activities become more well-planned and structured. From the group work activities, the students could build their cooperation and improve their participation. The uses of games and pictures could facilitate the students to understand the texts easily. Based on the quantitative data, the students’ grammar comprehension scores increased. The students’ mean score increased from 65.54 to 73.97. The improvement on the students’ mean scores showed that the improvement of the teaching of grammar gave impacts to the students’ achievement. From the data above, it can be concluded that the use of the Adaptive Control of Thought Output Model can improve the teaching of grammar for non native students.References
Burns, A. 2010. Doing action research in English language teaching. New York: Routledge.
Harmer, J. 2002. The practice of English language teaching 3 rd edition. Edinburgh: Pearson Education Limited.
J.R. Anderson. (1976). Language memory and thought. Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum Associates. USA
Cameron, Deborah (2007). The teacher's guide to grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Du Xiaohong. (2009). A Study on English Grammar Teaching Model to College Students Majoring in English Education, Jinan:Shandong foreign language teaching (5), 42-45.
Krashen, S D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon.
Krashen, S. D. &Terrel, T. D. (1983). The natural approach. London: Prentice Hall Intl.
Krashen, S. D. (1992). Formal grammar instruction: Another educator comments. In S. McKay (Ed.), Teaching Issues. TESOL quarterly, 26(2), 409-411.
Liansheng, Pi. (2004). Educational psychology. Shanghai Education Press, 92-93.
Mills, G.E. 2003. Action Research: A guide for the teacher researcher 2nd edition. New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.
Rutherford, W. E. (1987). Second language grammar: learning and teaching. Harlow, England: Longman.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright Notice
Authors who publish with Jurnal Ilmiah Mandala Education agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.Â
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
