GENRE – BASED APPROACH AND TEACHING SPEAKING (A case study at a state junior high school in Bangka Belitung Province)

GENRE – BASED APPROACH AND TEACHING SPEAKING

(A case study at a state junior high school in Bangka Belitung Province)

A Research Proposal

Submitted to fulfill a Final Examination assignment of Qualitative Data Analysis course

Under the Direction of Bachrudin Musthafa, M.A., Ph.D.

Written by:

Rezki Firdaus

1407335

 

ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

SCHOOL OF POSTGRADUATE STUDIES

INDONESIA UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION

2016

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1         Background of the study

Speaking plays an important role in communication as well as teaching English since it is the natural development of communication and also the international language. This idea is in line with Wolfe & Nevills (2004) who found out that speaking and listening come before reading and writing and the process of speaking is natural. Therefore, the importance and necessity of speaking is undeniable.

Preliminary studies conducted in some schools in Bangka Belitung also strengthen the necessity and importance of speaking since most of the students said that they really wanted to be able to speak in English but at the same time they had no motivation. They claimed that rarely did they have chances to speak and whenever they tried to speak they always felt afraid of making mistakes as well as not motivated.

Speaking, particularly dealing with genres, is actually still paid attention in the Indonesian 2013 curriculum, even though it is said the emphasis of this curriculum is character building (Suherdi, 2013). Students are then exposed to different types or genres, both written and oral, to enable them to communicate in different situations appropriately.

In relation to teaching genres, genre-based approach (GBA), which was firstly established and successfully implemented in Australia and later on successfully implemented in some other countries, is believed to be one of the appropriate ways to deal with the current curriculum (Emilia, 2012). The approach derives from systemic functional linguistics (SFL) English grammar developed by Halliday. One of the main purposes of the approach is to introduce students to literacy which commonly covers reading and writing.

Despite the aforementioned purpose of GBA, it does not mean that GBA neglects oracy. Some research studies reveal that listening and speaking are also paid attention in GBA. In addition, this country curriculum also requires English learners to be able to comprehend all the major skills of language comprising listening, speaking, reading, and writing. In relation to this, a number of studies of the implementation this approach particularly in writing have been conducted including in Indonesia. Unfortunately, there are a few studies implementing the approach to speaking.

In a junior high school located in Bangka Belitung, there is a teacher whose students always say they are really motivated to speak in her class. They also convincingly confess that they speaking skill is improved after taking her class. It is said that the teacher frequently uses various activities in her class including implementing GBA combined with the use of ICT – based media so that her students really love to be in her class.

Departing from those reasons, this study attempts to investigate what types of techniques are applicable in teaching speaking through GBA and how the students’ speaking ability is improved through GBA.

1.2         Research questions

Here are the questions this study tries to answer:

1.    What techniques are applicable in teaching speaking through GBA?

2.    How is students’ speaking ability improved through GBA?

1.3         Aims of the study

Aligning with the research questions, this study aims at finding out techniques that are applicable in teaching speaking through GBA and investigating how the students’ speaking ability is improved through GBA.

1.4         Significance of the study

This study is expected to contribute to three layers covering theoretical aspect, practical element, and – if any – policy. Theoretically, this study will either support or deny any findings and theories stating that GBA is able to improve speaking. Practically, this can be a consideration for teachers to implement or not implement this approach and for further researchers to study the related issues in a more in – depth studies. In terms of policy, if there is any significant improvement, it can be set out as a teaching approach in at least a school.

1.5         Clarification of terms

GBA                      :    It refers to genre – based approach developed by Halliday.

Students                 :    The students are a class of eighth graders in state junior high school in Bangka Belitung. 

Speaking ability     :    It deals with the ability of the students particularly on telling past experiences.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1         Speaking

2.1.1   The Nature of Speaking

According to Chaney & Burke (1998), speaking is the process of building and sharing meaning through the use of verbal and non-verbal symbols, in a variety of contexts. Thus, it involves the process of generating ideas and sharing them with others either in verbal or no verbal ways. In addition, contexts play an important role in speaking since sometimes improper contexts lead to misunderstanding or miscommunication. Related to its function, Richard (1990) says that there are three functions of speaking covering interaction, transaction, and performance.  

In the meantime, Huebner (1960) says that language is essentially speech, and speech is basically communication by sounds. Furthermore, it is also suggested by Huebner (1960) that speaking is a skill used by someone in daily life communication whether at school or outside. The skill is acquired by much repetition; it primarily a neuromuscular and not an intellectual process. It consists of competence in sending and receiving messages.

The characteristics of good speaking, particularly in English, according to Brown and Yule (1983) comprise using an appropriate format, presenting information in an appropriate sequence, maintaining audience engagement, using correct pronunciation and grammar, creating an effect on the audience, using appropriate vocabulary, and using appropriate opening and closing.

In addition to those definitions, Wolfe and Nevills (2004) reveal that speaking, along with listening, is the natural development of human beings’ brains. This obviously shows that it is one of the most initially important skills to acquire. However, when dealing with second of foreign language, speakers need to adjust several things.

From the above definition, it can be inferred that speaking is a natural as well as necessary skill to express ideas, opinions, or feelings to others by using words or sounds of articulation in order to inform, to persuade, and to entertain that can be learnt by using some teaching and learning methodologies.

2.1.2   Teaching Speaking

Speaking is a crucial part of second language learning and teaching. Despite its importance, for many years, teaching speaking has been undervalued and English language teachers have continued to teach speaking just as a repetition of drills or memorization of dialogues. However, today's world requires that the goal of teaching speaking should improve students' communicative skills, since, only in that way, students can express themselves and learn how to follow the social and cultural rules appropriate in each communicative circumstance. More importantly, English speakers, particularly whose English is their second or third language, need to be able to speak in various contexts properly.

To this relation, Nunan (2003) highlights that what is meant by teaching speaking is to teach English language learners to:

1)        Produce the English speech sounds and sounds patterns.

2)        Use words and sentence stress, intonation patterns and the rhythm of the second language.

3)        Select appropriate words and sentences according to the proper social setting, audience, situation and subject matter.

4)        Organize their thoughts in a meaningful and logical sequence.

5)        Use language as a means of expressing values and judgments.

6)        Use the language quickly and confidently with few unnatural pauses, which is called fluency.  

There are many activities to promote speaking. As Kayi (2006) infers in her article on Teaching English as a Second Language (TESL) journal, there are thirteen activities to promote speaking, covering:

a.             Discussion

After a content-based lesson, a discussion can be held for various reasons. The students may aim to arrive at a conclusion, share ideas about an event, or find solutions in their discussion groups. Before the discussion, it is essential that the purpose of the discussion activity is set by the teacher. In this way, the discussion points are relevant to this purpose, so that students do not spend their time chatting with each other about irrelevant things.

b.             Role Play

Students pretend they are in various social contexts and have a variety of social roles. In role play activities, the teacher gives information to the learners such as who they are and what they think or feel. Thus, the teacher can tell the student that "You are David, you go to the doctor and tell him what happened last night, and." (Harmer, 1983).

c.              Simulations

Simulations are very similar to role-plays but what makes simulations different than role plays is that they are more elaborate. In simulations, students can bring items to the class to create a realistic environment. For  instance, if a student is acting as a singer, she brings a microphone to sing and so on.

d.             Information Gap

In this activity, students are supposed to be working in pairs. One student will have the information that other partner does not have and the partners will share their information. Information gap activities serve many purposes such as solving a problem or collecting information. Also, each partner plays an important role because the task cannot be completed if the partners do not provide the information the others need.

e.              Brain Storming

On a given topic, students can produce ideas in a limited time. Depending on the context, either individual or group brainstorming is effective and learners generate ideas quickly and freely. The good characteristic of brainstorming is that the students are not criticized for their ideas so students will be open to sharing new ideas.

f.               Storytelling

Students can briefly summarize a tale or story they heard from somebody beforehand, or they may create their own stories to tell their classmates. Story telling fosters creative thinking. It also helps students express ideas in the format of beginning, development, and ending, including the characters and setting a story has to have.

g.             Interviews

Students can conduct interviews on selected topics with various people. It is a good idea that  he teacher provides a rubric to students so that they know what type of questions they can ask what path to follow, but students should prepare their own interview questions. After interviews, each student can present his or her study to the class. Moreover, students can interview each other and "introduce" his or her partner to the class.

h.             Story Completion

For this activity, a teacher starts to tell a story, but after a few sentences he or she stops narrating. Then, each student starts to narrate from the point where the previous one stopped. Each student is supposed to add from four to ten sentences. Students can add new characters, events, descriptions and so on.

i.               Reporting

Before coming to class, students are asked to read a newspaper or magazine and, in class, they report to their friends what they find as the most interesting news. Students can also talk about whether they have experienced anything worth telling their friends in their daily lives before class.

j.               Playing Cards

In this game, students should form groups of four. Each suit will represent a topic. For instance: diamonds represent earning money, hearts represent love and relationships, spades represent an unforgettable memory, and card represent best teacher. Each student in a group will choose a card. Then, each student will write 4-5 questions about that topic to ask the other people in the group. For example: if the topic "diamonds: earning money" is selected, here are some possible questions: .Is money important in your life? Why?. or .What is the easiest way of earning money?. or .What do you think about lottery?. Etc. However, the teacher should state at the very beginning of the activity that students are not allowed to prepare yes-no questions, because by saying yes or no students get little practice in spoken language production. Rather, students ask open-ended questions to each other so that they reply in complete sentences.

k.             Picture Narrating

This activity is based on several sequential pictures. Students are asked to tell the story taking place in the sequential pictures by paying attention to the criteria provided by the teacher as a rubric. Rubrics can include the vocabulary or structures they need to use while narrating.

l.               Picture Describing

For this activity students can form groups and each group is given a different picture. Students discuss the picture with their groups, then a spokesperson for each group describes the picture to the whole class. This activity fosters the creativity and imagination of the learners as well

m.           Find the Differences

For this activity students can work in pairs and each couple is given two different pictures, for example, picture of boys playing football and another picture of girls playing tennis. Students in pairs discuss the similarities and/or differences in the pictures.

2.2         Genre – Based Approach

2.2.1   The Nature of GBA

SFL GBA (Systemic Functional Linguistic Genre-Based Approach) was firstly established in Australia, inspired by the SFL developed by Halliday (1985, 1994; Ministry of National Education of Indonesia, 2009) and then elaborated by Martin (1992) and Christie (1999) among others. Genre here means text types and texts mean social constructions that have identified structure, and as constructions, the structure and social functions are able to be deconstructed and analyzed (Macken-Horarik, 1997: 305, cited in Emilia et al., 2008). The implementation of GBA mainly aims at improving students’ critical thinking and literacy. Thus, in GBA students learn the language, learn through language, and learn how to use the language. 

There are some principles in GBA as discussed for instance by Callaghan and Rothery (1988), Cope and Kalantzis (1993), Derewianka (1990), Derewianka (2003), DSP (1989), Feez and Joyce, (1998a), Feez (2002), Gibbons, (2002), Hammonds (1990), Macken-Horarik (2002), Veel and Coffin (1996). The first one is that language learning is a social activity deriving from Halliday’s theory that language is a resource for meaning whose structural shape reflects its socio-cultural functions. This means that to learn how to mean is to learn how to construct meanings. This principle aligns with Vygotsky’s (1978) of ZPD. 

Under this principle, GBA should consider the following aspects:

·      Students learn language

·      Students learn through language

·      Students learn about language

The second principle is that learning takes place effectively when teaching is explicit. This concept is influenced by that of Bernstein (1971) in investigating the codes of different social classes. Referring to this work, then, GBA, as proposed by Christie (1991) requires the educators to intervene the learning process and the teaching and learning processes to be explicit. This idea is fully supported by Le (2010) who says that to be totally involved in a culture, people need to be told explicitly.

Related to explicit teaching in ESL and EFL, Grabe and Kaplan (1996) and Galagher (2000) get in touch with the issue. Having analyzed it, they argue that explicit teaching does not mean getting back to the conventional and traditional way of teaching grammar, dictation, etc.; however, the emphases are on the contextual and actual use of the language being taught. By this principle, it is believed that the hidden curriculum, or what McLaren (cited in Wink, 2000) calls pedagogical unsaid can be avoided.

The other principle underpinning GBA is so called apprenticeship (Cope and Kalantzis, 1993a; Feez and Joyce, 1998a; Butt et al., 2000). Under this principle, GBA coincides with the concept of scaffolding (Wood, Bruner, and Ross, 1976) and ZDP (Vygotsky, 1962; 1978).

Besides the aforementioned principles, GBA is also closely related to critical thinking. In GBA, students are exposed to the knowledge of the field (further discussion about this is presented below) and critical thinking cannot occur without the absence of knowledge as suggested by Lazere (1987); Lipman (1991, 2003); Paul (2002); Perkins (1987a, b); Siegel (1988, 1992); Sternberg (1987); Thayer-Bacon (2000).

2.2.2   Teaching Cycle in GBA

According to DSP (Disadvantaged School Program) in New South Wales, Australia, curriculum cycle of GBA mainly consists of three first steps namely Modeling, Joint Negotiation of Text and Independent Construction of Text. However, some experts getting involved in GBA have implemented additional steps offered by DSP such as preparation, negotiating field, or building knowledge of the field. Therefore, as suggested by the 2004 English curriculum in Indonesia, the teaching steps in GBA contains building knowledge of the field, modeling of the text, joint construction of the text, and independent construction of the text.

In the first step, building knowledge of the field, students are expected to master the field of topic to be written since someone will not be able to write if he / she does not know the topic (Feez, 2002; Macken-Horarik, 2002, Gibbons, 2002, cited in Emilia et al., 2008). Considering the primary aim of this step, in this step, students are exposed with different types of texts talking about the same topic. Emilia et al., (2008) says that it is better that the texts are authentic so that it can enrich students’ knowledge and mastery to the topic.

Unlike in BKOF, students are exposed with several texts in the same genre in modeling step. After knowing the topic, students should know how to write certain genres so they are introduced to the identities of the genres. As suggested by Emilia et al., (2008), teachers can explain the social function, generic structure, and linguistic features of the texts and relate them to daily lives so that students are stimulated to think critically. When teachers explain the materials in this step, it does not mean that the students merely sit down and fully listen to what the teachers talk, but teachers need to give huge chance for them to get actively involved in the process. Teachers can also make the students in groups and ask them to do peer discussion prior to the teacher’s explanation. In making groups, students should consider students’ capabilities so that each group consists of equal high achievers and low achievers.

When the teachers consider that all students have already mastered the topic and the text identities, joint construction of the text takes place. There are two options in this process: first, teachers write on the board and along with the students arrange the text and second, students are divided into groups and write their own text. When teachers write on the board in front of the class, the students are actually told that writing is a recursive process (Gibbons, 2002, cited in Emilia et al., 2008), a process where the texts made are usually not perfect in the first draft. Therefore, revision frequently occurs in creating texts.

Finally, after going through the three aforementioned processes, students and teachers do the next step, independent construction of the text. This process occurs when the students are already confident to make the texts in the topic and genre learned before.

Nevertheless, it is not compulsory that those processes should take place linearly. Some processes might be skipped if the teachers think that it is not really crucial. For instance, when the teachers think that students already master the topic to learn, building knowledge of the field can be skipped.   

In this study, the teaching and learning processes seem to carry out merely in BKOF. Therefore, students are introduced to the field or the topic to study which is my holiday. Then, during the six sessions of the observation, all the students are going to learn about how to talk about holiday in various activities.

2.3         GBA and Speaking

Most researchers dealing with GBA including Changpueng (2005), Emilia (2005) and Forkin, Forey, and Sengupta (2007) focus on reading and writing. This is realistic since, as it has been mentioned before, GBA derives from SFL which mostly deals with written language. Therefore, the pioneers of GBA tend to do research studies on writing and reading rather than speaking and listening.

However, some other researchers such as Endah (2008) and Purnomo (2009) prove that GBA is relevant to teaching speaking. Some of the principles of GBA are not in contrast with those of speaking. One of the most obvious ones is the idea of GBA proposed by the ministry of national education of Indonesia saying that the most important aspect in GBA is that students are expected to be able to communicate both orally and in a written form in different contexts with different functions properly. This means that in GBA students are expected to be able to communicate in the right way. Even some educators are recently trying to relate GBA to CALL; computer assisted language learning.

2.4         Criticism of GBA

There are some critiques of GBA for instance those argued by educators in Britain and North America (Haneda and Wells, 2002). The first critic(s), Freedman and Medway (1994) claim that explicit teaching is unnecessary. Freedman (1994) also explains that being able to identify genres, even though it might be useful, tends to make students prescriptive of a list of the differences (see also the discussion in Barton, 1994; Richardson, 1994; Hasan and William, 1996; Lemke, 1995; and Nunan, 1999).

Another criticism about GBA is related to the process. Some educators such as Sawyer and Watson (1987), Dixon (1987), and Berkenkotter and Hukkin (1995) point out that the process of genre based teaching and learning limits creativity and expression. One of their reasons is that learning a new genre is not a conscious process. The last criticism comes from Luke (1997) who argues that power is utterly sociologically contingent; there are no genres of power.

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHOLODOGY

3.1         Research Design

First of all, this study is considered qualitative since the study investigates the quality of relationships, activities, situations, or materials, emphasize on holistic description, attempt to both describe in detail all of what goes on in a particular activity or situation rather than on comparing the effects of particular treatment and the attitudes or behaviors of people, and also involve interpretive and naturalistic approaches, multiple sources of evidence, interpreted meanings, in which all the processes of data collection, data analysis, and reviewing theories usually go simultaneously. Those ideas are in line with the ideas of Alwasilah (2011), Berg (2007: 3), Creswell (1998: 14), Creswell (2012: 16), Frankel., Wallen., & Hyun (2012: 426), Holliday (2005: 19 – 21), Maxwell (1996: 2 -3), McMillan et al., (2001: 395), Snape & Spencer (2003: 3), Sugiyono (2008: 7 – 8), and Yin, (2011).

Therefore, as Nunan (1993) says, the data involved in qualitative research studies are likely to be in forms of words, pictures, charts, diagram, and so on instead of numerical ones. This does not mean that qualitative research cannot contain numerical data at all. Sometimes numerical data can be in qualitative research such as frequency and percentage (Emilia, 2000).    

This qualitative study employs a case study since the characteristics of this study fits those of a case study. First of all, this study studies a single case in a bounded system in a small scale (Creswell, 1998: 61). Second of all, it studies a phenomenon in its real context (Liamputtong, 2009; Yin, 2011: 17). In this study, the phenomenon is one teacher teaching speaking through GBA whose students think that this class really motivates them and increases their speaking ability.

3.2         Site and Participant

Involved in this study serving as respondents are a class consisting of eighth graders and an English teacher. The respondents are purposively selected, in which Carpenter & Suto (2008, cited in Liamputtong, 2009: 11) define as a sampling technique that refers to the deliberate selection of special individuals, events, or setting because of their crucial information they can provide that cannot be obtained so well through other channels, since it is said that the teacher uses GBA to teach speaking. The eighth graders are chosen since the teacher teaches in the class and eighth grade is considered as the most available grade to investigate regarding that seventh grade is too early to investigate and ninth grade is busy dealing with the national examination. 

In addition to the availability of the data, accessibility becomes the second reason of the site and participant selection. Van Lier (1988, cited in Duff, 2008) very well states that one of the advantages of selecting the familiar participants is that they seem to act naturally. By the intimacy between the participants and researchers, the participants do not need to adapt many things in the research.

3.3         Data Collection

To collect data, three instruments are administered namely observation, interview, and questionnaire. First, observation, particularly non – participant observation since the researcher does not teach, is used to capture what happens during the sessions. Travers (2001: 2) proposes that it might be necessary to observe many hearings over a few weeks or months to obtain, enough examples for the kind of analysis conducted in these studies. Second, semi – structure interview is administered to both teacher and students. This type of interview is selected since it enables open – ended questions to appear and Travers (2001: 3) argues that if you ask open-ended questions, follow up particular topics in a second interview, and give the interviewee the opportunity to comment on your interpretation of the answer, you are likely to obtain some rich, original data. Six students from different level of achievement are then chosen to be the interviewees. Also, the interview is used since it is mainly aimed to find out the interviewee’s interpretation and to find out information that the researchers were unable to observe themselves (Stake, 2010). Third, open ended questionnaire, which according to Dowson (2009: 90) is hard to record as well as giving the respondents opportunities to speak their minds, is distributed to all the students. All the data gained from each instrument will be then triangulated to confirm information gathered.

3.4         Data Analysis

To analyze the data collected, Creswell’s (1998, 112 – 113) strategies involving data managing, reading, memoing, describing, classifying, interpreting, representing, and visualizing are used. Triangulation will then take place to confirm the data gained from each instrument.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alwasilah, A. Chaedar. (2011). Pokoknya Kualitatif. Jakarta: Pustaka Jaya.

Barton, D. (1994a). Literacy: An Introduction to the Ecology of Written Language. Blackwell: Oxford.

Barton, D. (1994b). ‘Preface: Literacy events and literacy practices.’ In Hamilton, M., Barton, D., and Ivanic, R. (1994). (Eds). Worlds of literacy. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.

Berg, B. L. (2007). Qualitative Research Methods for Social Sciences. New York: Pearson Education, Inc.

Berkenkotter, C., and Huckin, T. N. (1995). Genre Knowledge in Disciplinary Communication: Cognition/Culture/Power. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Bernstein, B. (1971). Class, codes and control. Volume 1. Theoretical studies towards a sociology of language. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Brown, Gillian and Yule, G. (1983). Teaching the Spoken Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Butt, D., Fahey, R., Feez, S., Spinks, S., Yallop, C. (2000). 2^nd Edition. Using Functional Grammar. An Explorer’s Guide. Sydney: National Centre for English Teaching and Research. Macquarie University.

Callaghan., M. and Rothery. J. (1988). Teaching Factual Writing. Sydney: Metropolitan East Disadvantaged Schools Program.

Chaney., A. L. & Burke, T. L. (1998). Teaching Oral Communication in Grades K-8. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Changpueng, P. (2005). LITU Journal. The Effects of the Genre-Based Approach on Engineering Students’ Writing Ability. 1 – 124.

Christie, F. (1991). ‘First and second-order registers in education. In Ventola, E. (1991). (Ed). Functional and Systemic Linguistics. Approaches and Uses. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Christie, F. (ed.). (1999). Pedagogy and the Shaping of Consciousness. London: Continuum.

Cope, B., and Kalantzis, M. (1993a). ‘Introduction: How a genre approach to literacy can transform the way writing is taught.’ In Cope, B. and Kalantzis, M. (1993). (Eds). The Powers of Literacy. A Genre Approach to Teaching Writing. London: The Falmer Press.

Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Traditions. California: SAGE Publication, Inc.

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research - 4th ed. USA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Derewianka, B. (1990). Exploring How Texts Work. Newtown: PETA

Derewianka. B. (2003). RELC Journal. Trends and Issues in GBA. 133 – 154.

Dixon, J. (1987). ‘The question of genres.’ In Reid, I. (1987). (Ed). The place of genre in learning: current debates. Melbourne: Deakin University Press.

DSP (Disadvantaged School Program), New South Wales Department of School Education. (1989). The Discussion Genre. Sydney: Metropolitan East Disadvantaged Schools Program.

Duff, Patricia. A. (2008). Case Study Research in Applied Linguistics. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Emilia, E. (2000). Research Method in Education: Hasil Pemikiran. Bandung: Indonesia University of Education.

Emilia, E. (2005). A Critical Genre-Based Approach to Teaching Academic Writing in a Tertiary EFL Context in Indonesia. A dissertation. The University of Melbourne.

Emilia, E. (2012). Pendekatan Genre – Based dalam Pengajaran Bahasa Inggris: Petunjuk untuk Guru. Bandung: RIZQI PRESS.

Emilia, E., Hermawan, B., & Tati, D. (2008). Pendekatan Genre-Based Dalam Kurikulum Bahasa Inggris Tahun 2006: Penelitian Tindakan Kelas di sebuah SMP Negeri di Bandung. Bandung: FPBS UPI.

Feez, S. (2002). ‘Heritage and innovation in second language education’. In Johns, A. M. (2002). Ed. Genre in the Classroom. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Feez, S., and Joyce, H. (1998a). Text-based Syllabus Design. Sydney: National Centre For English Language Teaching and Research.

Firkins, A., Forey, G., and Sengupta, S. (2007). English Language Teaching Journal. A Genre-Based Pedagogy Literacy: Teaching Writing to Low Proficiency EFL Students, 1-12.

Frankel., Jack. R, Wallen., N. & Hyun. H. (2012). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education. New York: The McGraw Hill company.

Freedman, A., and Medway, P. (1994). ‘Locating genre studies: Antecedents and prospects.’ Freedman, A., and Medway, P. (1994). (Eds). Genre and the new Rhetoric. London: Taylor and Francis.

Gallagher, C. (2000). Writing Across Genres. (http://www.hyper.chubu.ac.jp/jalt/pub/tlt/00/jul/gallagher.html)

Gibbons, P. (2002). Scaffolding Language and Scaffolding Learning. Teaching Second Language Learners in the Mainstream Classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Grabe, W., and Kaplan, R. (1996). Theory and Practice of Writing. New York: Longman.

Halliday, M. A. K. (1985b). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London, Edward Arnold.

Halliday, M. A. K. (1985a). Spoken and Written Language. Geelong, Victoria: Deakin University Press.

Halliday, M. A. K. (1994a). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. (2^nd Ed). London, Edward Arnold.

Halliday, M. A. K. (2002b). On Grammar. London: Continuum.

Hammond, J. (1990). ‘Teacher expertise and learner responsibility in literacy development.’ Prospect V (3), May, 1990.

Haneda, M., and Wells, G. (2002). Writing in Knowledge Building Communities. http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/~gwells/Write.html

Harmer, J. (1983). The Practice of English Language Teaching: Longman Handbooks for Language Teaching. New York: Longman Inc.

Holliday, Adrian. (2005). Doing and Writing Qualitative Research. Londong: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Huebner, T. (1960). Audio Visual Technique in Foreign Language. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Kayi, H. (2006). Teaching Speaking: Activities to Promote Speaking in a Second Language, 7, 11.

Lazere, D. (1987). ‘Critical thinking in college English studies. ERIC Digest.’ http://ericfacility.net/ericdigests/ed284275.html. Accessed on 7th May, 2013.

Le, Q. (2010). A Genre-Based Approach to Computer Assisted Language Learning.

Lemke, J. (1995). Textual politics. Discourse and social dynamics. London: Taylor and Frances, Ltd.

Liamputtong, Pranee. (2009). Qualitative Research Methods. Australia: Oxford university Press.

Lipman, M. (1991). Thinking in Education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lipman, M. (2003). Thinking in Education. Second Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Luke, A., and Freebody, P. (1997a). ‘Critical literacy and the question of normativity: An introduction. In Muspratt, S., Luke, A., and Freebody, P. (1997). (Eds). Constructing Critical Literacies. Teaching and Learning Textual Practice. Sydney: Allen and Unwin.

Luke, A., and Freebody, P. (1997b). ‘Shaping the social practices of reading.’ In Muspratt, S., Luke, A., and Freebody, P. (1997). (Eds). Constructing critical literacies. Teaching and Learning Textual Practice. Sydney: Allen and Unwin.

Macken-Horarik, M. (2002). ‘Something to shoot for.’ In Johns, A. M. (2002). Ed. Genre in the classroom. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Martin, J. R. (1992). English Text. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Qualitative Research Design: an Interactive Approach. California: Sage Publications.

McMillan., James. H. and Schumacher. S. (2001). Research in Education. A Conceptual Introduction. Fifth Edition. Boston: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.

Ministry of National Education. (2009). Introduction to Genre Based Approach. Jakarta: Author.

Nunan, D. (1999). Second Language Teaching and Learning. Boston: Heinle and Heinle Publishers.

Nunan, D. (2003). Practical English Language Teaching. New York: McGraw – Hill.

Nunan, D. (1993: 4 adapted from Reichardt and Cook 1979). Research Method in Language Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Paul, R. (2002). A draft statement of principles. The National Council for Excellence in critical thinking. Retrieved from http://www.critical thinking.org/ncect.html

Perkins, D. N. (1987a). ‘Thinking frames: An integrative perspective on teaching cognitive skills.’ In Baron, J. B., and Sternberg, R. J. (1987). (Eds). Teaching thinking skills: Theory and practice. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.

Perkins, D. N. (1987b). ‘Knowledge as design’. In Baron, J. B., and Sternberg, R. J. (1987). (Eds). Teaching thinking skills: Theory and practice. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.

Richards, Jack C. (1990). Conversationally speaking: approaches to the teaching of conversation. In Jack C Richards. The Language Teaching Matrix. New York: Cambridge University Press. 67-85.

Richardson, P. W. (1994). ‘Language as personal resource and as social construct: Competing views of literacy pedagogy in Australia.’ In Freedman, A., and Medway, P. (1994). (Eds). Learning and teaching genre. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers.

Sawyer, W., and Watson, K. (1987). ‘Questions of genre.’ In Reid, I. (1987). (Ed). The place of genre in learning: current debates. Melbourne: Deakin University Press.

Siegel, H. (1988). Educating Reason: Rationality, critical thinking, and education. New

Siegel, H. (1992). ‘The generalisability of critical thinking skills, dispositions, and epistemology.’ In Norris, S. P. (1992). (Ed). The generalisability of critical thinking. Multiple perspectives on an educational ideal. New York: Teachers College Press.

Snape, D & Spencer, L. (2003). Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers. New Delhi: SAGE Publications.

Stake, Robert E. (2010). Qualitative Research: Studying How Things Work. New York: The Guildford Press

Sternberg, R. J. (1987). ‘Questions and answers about the nature and teaching of thinking skills.’ In Baron, J. B., and Sternberg, R. J. (1987). (Eds). Teaching thinking skills: Theory and practice. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.

Sugiyono. (2008). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif dan R&D. Bandung: Alfabeta.

Suherdi, D. (2013). Buku Pedoman Penyelenggaraan Pendidikan Profesi Guru Bahasa Inggris: Bahan Ajar Pemantapan Kompetensi Akademik. Bandung: Celtics Press.

Thayer-Bacon, J. B. (2000). Transforming critical thinking. Thinking constructively. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.

Travers, M. (2001). Qualitative Research Through Case Studies. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Veel, R., and Coffin, C. (1996). ‘Learning to think like an historian: the language of secondary school history.’ In Hasan, R., and William, G. (1996). (Eds). Literacy in society. London: Longman.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. (Hanfman, E., and Vakar, G. Trans). Cambridge: The M.I.T. Press.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wink, J. (2000). Critical pedagogy: Notes from the real world. New York: Longman.

Wolfe, P., & Nevills, P. (2004). On the Nature of Reading. Building the Reading Brain, 3, 1-13. Retrieved on January 5, 2012 from www.corwinpress.com

Wood, D., Bruner, J., Ross, G. (1976). ‘The role of tutoring in problem solving’ Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry.xvii, p. 89-100.

Yin, R. K. (2011). Qualitative Research from Start to Finish. New York: Guilford Press. New York: Routledge.