This chapter will demonstrate how two major traditions of scholarship can be used to inform the development of critical language and literacy programs at the secondary school level. They are:
Action research – a tradition that involves researchers in partnership in researching practical educational problems with a view to improving them.
Genre based pedagogy – a tradition already explained in earlier chapters, and in this case employed in the light of the most recent secondary school English curriculum for Indonesia (need proper ref here).
3.1 Introduction
Where chapter 2 presented a language and literacy program at the tertiary level, this chapter will present a language program conducted cooperatively with a teacher and a class of secondary school students in Indonesia using action research (Kemmis & McTaggart, 1988a,b, 2005; Carr & Kemmis, 1993; Cohen & Manion, 1985; McTaggart (1990); Smith (1990) and Reason & Bradbury, 2001; Macintyre, 2000; McNiff & Whitehead, 2005; Noffke, 2009; Wells, 2009; Noffke & Somekh, 2009; Stringer et al, 2010). Like other action research, this research aimed to bring about useful practical knowledge and understanding for all parties involved in the teaching of English. The interest was in exploring the SFL GBA, including basic principles, aims and implementation of each step of the approach in the classroom in order to promote an improved quality in the teaching of English. Enhancement of teachers‟ understanding of both the theoretical and practical aspects of the SFL GBA will be of great value to help them promote their teaching quality, and this in turn will eventually enhance students‟ achievement in their learning of English. Moreover, like other action research, this kind of program should also uphold the principle that everyone in the program has a status, in that everyone has something to share and to contribute .
The SFL genre based approach is compatible with the 2006 or the 2007 curriculum of English for International standard schools in Indonesia (Depdiknas, 2007). Here, we will focus on the implementation of the genre-based approach in two teaching cycles, as suggested in the 2006 English curriculum of Indonesia (Depdiknas, 2006). The two cycles are:
A written cycle which aims to develop students‟ reading and writing ability. In this cycle, all stages of the genre-based approach can be implemented, such as: Building Knowledge of the Field, Modelling, Joint Construction and Independent Construction.
A spoken cycle which aims to help develop students‟ spoken language ability. Like in the written cycle, in this cycle all stages of the genre-based approach were implemented in the study reported here, including: Building Knowledge of the Field, Modelling, Joint Construction and Independent Construction.
Apart from the stages and basic principles of the SFL GBA, the program reported in this chapter, implemented as it was in an English as a foreign language context, also emphasised two aspects. These are:
The important characteristics of a successful teacher, as reported by Ladson-Billings (1994, cited in Allington & Johnston, 2002: 22) which are also relevant to diaogic education from critical pedagogy. There are at least two characteristics: the first is that the teacher should be sure that all students can learn. The second is that the teacher should try to help students to achieve excellence but attach a great importance to individual uniqueness. This is based on the belief that “At risk students can be taught to perform successfully at demanding academic level” (Richardson, Morgan & Fleener, 2006:34).
As in the previous program at the tertiary level, the program reported in this chapter also emphasises the necessity of the use of the students‟ native language, in this case bahasa Indonesia. This has been guided by theoretical discussions and research findings about the use of the students‟ native language, whish suggest that the first language may contribute to student target language comprehension, use and learning and that a small amount of first language use may indeed lead to more comprehensible input and target language production (Turnbull & Dailey-O‟Cain, 2009: 5).
3.2 The Indonesian English curriculum
The teaching of English in Indonesia has had a long history, since independence in 1945. The curriculum of English in Indonesia has gone through several changes, starting from “The Old Style Curriculum, The New Style Curriculum, The 1984, The 1994, 2001, 2004 curricula” (Kasihani, 2000) and the last one is The 2006 curriculum, which is called the
KTSP (Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan/ Curriculum of Educational Unit). Students
of secondary schools are expected to develop their English in all language skills, including listening, speaking, reading and writing. It is said in the curriculum of English (Depdiknas, 2006, see also the standard competence of English in for international standard schools released by Depdiknas, 2007) that the teaching of English should focus on the development of four language skills, and each skill should cover the following:
Listening
Students can make meaning of simple transactional and interpersonal spoken discourse in formal and informal situation, in different text types like: recount, narrative, procedure,
descriptive, report, in daily life contexts.
Speaking
Students are able to express meaning in simple transactional and interpersonal spoken discourse, in formal and informal situations, in text types such as: recount, narrative,
procedure, descriptive, report, in daily life contexts.
Reading
Students are able to make meaning of simple transactional and interpersonal written texts, in formal and informal situations, in different text types such as: recount, narrative, procedure,
descriptive, report, in daily life contexts.
Writing
Students are able to express meaning in simple transactional and interpersonal written texts in the forms of recount, narrative, procedure, descriptive, report, in daily life contexts.
Unlike the previous curriculum of English, the 2006 curriculum of English in Indonesia, does not recommend explicitly any particular teaching method. Teachers are just given a guideline on language skills that have to be developed when students learn English. Teachers can use any method in order to teach their students. However, the aim of the teaching of English in the junior high school, stated above, makes clear that the 2006 curriculum of English in Indonesia emphasises the students‟ mastery of different text types and development of language skills, which is in line with the SFL GBA. Thus, although this method is not mentioned explicitly, it is clear that the curriculum is based on the theory and concepts of the SFL GBA, which was initially developed in Australia, and now has been used not only in Australia but also in other countries from primary up to tertiary levels. Therefore, the SFL GBA is still relevant to the 2006 curriculum and can be applied in the classroom to teach English, especially in secondary schools.
3.3 Action research
The program described here is based on three cycles of action research (Emilia et al, 2008) which involved the implementation of the SFL GBA, focusing on written and spoken language as suggested in the 2006 curriculum of English in Indonesia. The study involved two university researchers, one female teacher and one class of 44 eighth grade students for one semester. All involved in this study together acted as learners, wanting to find out more about what was happening in the English classroom and to contribute to our understanding of the processes of English teaching and learning in Indonesian contemporary schools in general, and in the class involved in particular. Apart from that, the study was also about developing partnership between teachers and university researchers, in which distinctions between theory and practice are challenged and expertise is distributed as we learn together (Baumfield, et al 2008:1). Regarding this partnership, the researchers tried to be aware of a possible internal challenge (Johnston, 2009: 245) in doing action research with classroom teachers. That is, as Johnston argues, there is an inherent power imbalance in a great many collaborative relationships, especially teacher-researcher partnership, and this has the potential to create problems. Therefore in commenting on what happened in the classroom and then acting upon the results of the analysis, we – that is, the academic researchers, led by Emilia - were very careful. Fortunately, the teacher involved was open-minded and was willing to learn, even though she already had a strong background knowledge of the SFL GBA and she was a very experienced teacher. It was thus kept in mind that to create a partnership like this was not easy, for it can be difficult to find teachers who are willing to be observed and to work cooperatively with researchers from outside the schools.
Like other action research, this research has three dimensions: professional, personal, and political (see Noffke, 2009 and Carr & Kemmis, 2009). In the professional dimension, the focus is on issues related to developing the practices of schooling and the enhancement of the teaching profession. The personal dimension involves the individual process of examining one‟s own practice, in this case the teacher‟s and researchers‟ practice. This concerns questions around individual actions, how one might do things differently to improve one‟s practice, or initiate research with a central emphasis on the value of the teacher‟s own voice. Finally, the political dimension focuses on the interest, in this case in developing students
who can write English well, who will thus develop useful skills, and build a sense of agency in dealing with life issues in the future as well as a sense of civic participation in the building of more democratic social and political relations, as pointed out by Noffke (2009: 8-18; see also Carr & Kemmis, 2009).
One matter about action research should be noted here, that is, “action research is practical, and it is so practical that when people meet the idea they often say, “that‟s what I do in any case, what‟s different?” (McNiff & Whitehead, 2005:2). What is different, as McNiff & Whitehead further explain, is that action research insists on teachers justifying their claims to knowledge by the production of authenticated and validated evidence, and then making their claims public in order to subject them to critical evaluation. Hence, it is also believed in this study that “if we want to improve the opportunities for learning in school, we must find ways to create the conditions for the dialogue of thinking together to become the dominant mode of the interaction,” (Wells, 2009:55). These conditions, Wells further suggests seem to include, among others, the following:
The topic must be of interest to the participants;
Individual students must have relevant ideas, opinions or experiences that they want to share;
Others must be willing to listen attentively and critically.
Overall, following the 2006 curriculum of English for junior high school in grade 8 in Indonesia, it was decided to focus on the teaching of the personal Recount genre, using the SFL GBA, and exploring its teaching using an action research cycle. Students would be asked to talk and share information about their personal experience in the past, and they would also be asked to write about them.. As to the topics, it was decided that these would be health and vacations.
The teaching program outlined below has the following phases: a diagnostic phase, in which students‟ capacities are established, and any problems are identified, and a therapeutic phase, in which steps are taken to address the problems. However, before providing an account of these, it is important that the teacher and researchers understand the nature of a Recount genre. Hence, the next section will provide an overview of the schematic structure and grammatical features of a Recount.
3.4 An overview of characteristics of a Recount text
A Recount text, especially a personal Recount is a text which retells activities in the past. A Recount text has the following characteristics:
Purpose: To retell what happened and this can involve the writer‟s personal interpretation.
Focus: A sequence of activities written chronologically. Types: Recount can be classified into:
Personal Recount: Retelling personal experiences of the writer;
Factual Recount: Retelling an event or an incident, like news or accident reports sometimes found in newspapers;
Imaginative Recount: Creating an imaginative character and imaginative events, like a day in a puppy life.
A Recount can be based on the writer‟s personal experience or imaginative, outside the writer‟s experience (Western Australian Education Department, 1997:45).
A Recount has a schematic structure that is displayed in Table 3.1 below, adapted from Derewianka (1990); DSP (1994); Christie & Derewianka (2008); Martin & Rose, (2008).
Table 3. 1 The Schematic Structure of a Recount Text Schematic Structure Function Orientation Record of Events Reorientation (and sometimes Comments)
Orients the readers to the events that follow which introduces
character(s) in a setting of time or place (or sometimes both)
(Some Recounts, introduced to Indonesian students, like those written by the students in this study, has an Opening Salutation (Hi, My name
is Karina … ).
Give a sequence of events .
Returns the reader to the point of departure (and sometomes the writer also gives comments on the whole sequence of events described). Rounds off the text, normally returning to the protagonists to the point whence thy came .
Examples of Recounts can be found in a biography, an autobiography, news items, history, a letter, a journal, or a testimony of a witness of an event or insident, accident report made to claim for an insurance (Anderson & Anderson, 1997; Durkin, Ferguson & Sperring, 2006). Some Recounts have an evaluative comment or a conclusion which may constitute the writer‟s comment on events described previously, but this is just optional. Evaluative comments are often comments reflecting the writer‟s feeling about the events mentioned in the previous part of the Recount (Western Australian Education Department, 1997). The conclusion is written in the last paragraph and because this part is optional, some Recounts may not have this conclusion paragraph.
Some linguistic features of Recounts
A Recount also has several linguistic features, among others:
Use of specific participants: a younger brother, sister, mother, father, or the writer him/herself: I, my brother, my mother (I have an older sister. Her name is Anin … );
Use of temporal and additive conjunctions to connect the messages of clauses (Martin, 2009: 156) and help make the text cohesive: After, when, then, before,
during, or conjunctions such as “first, next, then”;
Personal comments (except for factual Recount) (see Derewianka, 1990:15-16) (The holiday was cool … : I was happy because I had a great vacation in Italy).
After describing the features of a Recount text which is the focal text in this study, it is now time to describe each activity conducted in each cycle of the action research.
3.5 The teaching program: Action research cycles
At one level, the idea of participatory action research is straightforward enough (McTaggart, 1997: 27). Social psychologist, Kurt Lewin (1946, 1952, cited in McTaggart, 1997: 27), inventor of the term action research in English usage, described action research as proceeding in a spiral of steps, each of which is composed of planning, acting, observing, and evaluating the results of the action. In practice, the process begins with the idea that some kind of improvement or change is desirable (see also Macintyre, 2000: 1). In deciding just where to begin in making improvements, as Kemmis & McTaggart (1988; 1997:27) argue, a group identifies an area where members perceive a cluster of problems of mutual concern and consequencs. The group decides to work together on a thematic concern (Kemmis & McTaggart, 1988, cited in McTaggart, 1997:27).
In each stage, to follow Stringer et al (2010) and to some extent Macyntire (2000), activities in each cycle of each stage can be described in three different phases, including: Look, Think, and Act. To follow Mcyntire (2000) all activities conducted were also informed by the literature.
Look is the stage when classroom observations were conducted by the researcher, to see to what extent the SFL genre based approach had developed, whether it was successful, what aspects could be improved, whether students‟ learning could be enhanced, and what strategies could be used to enhance students‟ learning.
Think is when the researcher and teacher discussed the above matters in the post observation conference and before the teaching learning process began, and they analysed the evidence obtained from observation. This phase also involved tentative action plan, consideration of different strategies.
Act is when the teacher and researchers took action to improve the teaching practice and students‟ learning. This stage also involved monitoring the effects or evaluation of strategies used.
Thus, to follow Stringer et al (2010), the cycle of the action research can be described in three phases as described in Figure 3.1 below:
Look Think Act (Gather Information Observe Classroom) (Reflect Analyse Classrom Activity) (Plan, Teach, or Evaluate) Look Think Act (Gather Information Observe Classroom) (Reflect Analyse Classrom Activity) (Plan, Teach, or Evaluate) Look Think Act (Gather Information Observe Classroom) (Reflect Analyse Classrom Activity) (Plan, Teach, or Evaluate)
Figure 3.1 Action research cycles (From Stringer et al, 2010: 8)
Activities to collect data in all stages involved classroom observations, interviews and discussion with the teacher in post-observation conference and discussions with the students inside and outside the classroom. Document analysis was also conducted, especially to do with students‟ work and the curriculum of English for Junior High School in Indonesia and some text books used in the class.
Below is the discussion of each step to provide detailed information on how every step of the SFL GBA can be implemented at a secondary level of education in an Indonesian context, especially in teaching a Recount text.
3.5.1 Diagnostic Phase: Cycle 1
Activities in each stage can be described below.
3.5.1.1 Phase 1: Look
Does the research project address a concrete issue or practical problem?
Is the research sufficiently small scale to be combined with a routine workload? Regarding the GBA, the questions were:
To what extent is the SFL GBA developed in the teaching of English? In what way should the teaching be improved?
How will the pupils‟ learning be enhanced?
What strategies can be tried to bring about the enhancement of students‟ learning? As in the program described in Chapter 2, this program took account of students‟ perspectives. Flutter and Ruddock (2004, cited in Baumfield et al, 2008:36-37) give a number of reasons why student consultation is a key to improving teaching and learning. These will be described below.
For pupils: Involving pupils in the discussion about teaching and learning Develops an understanding and awareness of learning processes; Helps pupils to see learning as a serious matter;
Promotes the development of higher order thinking skills (metacognition); Raises pupil‟ self confidence and self- esteem;
Allows pupils to acquire technical language for talking about learning. For teachers: Involving students in the discussion about teaching and learning:
Offers teachers feedback to help improve aspects of their practice; Can offer help to improve the quality of teacher-pupil relationships; Enables teachers to identify problems impeding pupils‟ progress; Helps to create a more collaborative classroom environment;
Can be used to develop new ideas to improve teaching and learning. For schools involving pupils in the discussion about teaching and learning:
May suggest new directions for school improvement;
Can contribute to monitoring and evaluating processes for school self-review; Helps to establish a more positive learning culture within the school;
Provides a practical expression of ideas taught in ciitizenship education;
Encourages pupils and teachers to feel that they are valued and respected members of an inclusive, collaborative learning community.
When all data needed had been obtained, the next phase was to analyse it, when the researcher and teacher thought about the meaning of the data which would become the basis of action for improvement.
The observations made in the diagnostic step provide a broad description of the class, in a manner which is common in Indonesian contexts. These are, among others:
The class was big. Different from the other programs proposed in this book, the class