1

Research Proposal Evaluation of Use of MT in EFL Classes of Secondary

Schools in Jadetabek: Students and Teachers’ Perception

Chapter I

INTRODUCTION

A. BackgroundIn the field of second language (SL) and foreign language (FL)

teaching in general and English as a second language (ESL) or Englishas a foreign language (EFL) teaching in particular, the role of thestudents’ mother tongue (MT) and its influence on the target language(TL) has long been a controversy. Based on his review of the literaturerelated to language teaching methods, Stern (1992, p. 279) stated thatthe role of MT in SL teaching is “one of the most long-standingcontroversies in the history of language pedagogy”. One the one hand,those supporting the prohibition of MT use in SL/FL classrooms, laterbecomes popular as the monolingual approach, suggest that the targetlanguage should be the only medium of communication, becauseSL/FL is best learned and taught through the language itself (Richardsand Rodgers 2001). For them, the avoidance of the MT wouldmaximize the effectiveness of learning the TL, because maximumexposure to TL and least exposure to MT are of crucial importance,and the use of MT may obstruct TL learning process (Cook, 2001 andKrashen, 1981).

On the other hand, the advocates of MT use believe MT can behelpful in most classroom activities, such as learning new vocabularyitems, explaining complex ideas, studying grammatical rules, orstudying cultural elements. They assert that the monolingual approachseems to be only partially implemented in SL/FL teaching practice,and, as a matter of fact, most ESL/EFL teachers and students oftenresort to MT during the learning and teaching process. Nation (2003)and Larsen-Freeman (2012), for instances, argued that students’ MTshould not completely eliminated from a SL or FL classes andreiterated that a judicious and well–planned use of the students’ MTcan give positive results.

Despite the continuous debates over the role of MT, empiricalstudies during the last three decades have suggested that it is likely tobe unavoidable in SL/FL classrooms, especially when students speakthe same MT and when teachers know the MT of their students.Auerbach (1993) for example, lists several different positive uses ofL1 in L2 classrooms, i.e. classroom management, language analysis,presenting grammar rules, discussing cross-cultural issues, givinginstructions or prompts, explaining errors, and checking forcomprehension. Macaro’s (2001) study on six student teachers inEngland revealed that the participants use their MT up to 15.2% intheir teaching. Based on their study on 13 Korean teachers of Englishin high schools, Liu et al (2004) reported their use of Korean ranged

The start statingthe “controversy” isvery effective toattract reader’sintention

Citations used toprove the“controversy” werevery well selected

This presentationof the results ofrecent researchconducted invarious places iseffective to showthe importance ofunderstanding theMT use in EFLclasses

2

from 10% to 90% of class time. Kim and Elder’s (2005) study onseven teachers who taught foreign languages in New Zealand revealedthat the proportion of target language use among these teachers variedfrom 23% to 88%.

Kim Anh (2010) study on the attitudes of Vietnameseuniversity teachers towards using Vietnamese in teaching Englishindicated that judicious use of MT is found to be necessary in somesituations in teaching English. In addition, Al-Nofaie’s (2010) studyshowed that the students and teachers’ attitudes towards using theArabic in EFL classroom were positive and the students preferred MTto be used in certain situations. However, the teacher participantsclaimed that the untimely and excessive use of MT should be avoidedbecause it may obstruct learning English. In the Chinese context,Tang’s (2002). study revealed that students supported the use ofChinese in English classes because it makes English learning moreeffective and less time-consuming.

Though researches on the use of MT in FL classrooms haveincreased dramatically in many places in the world, in Indonesianpublic schools, very little attention has given specifically to this issueand only few studies have been carried out to investigate the role ofIndonesia in English classes. To the present writers’ knowledge, thereare only two accessible studies carried out concerning this issue inIndonesian context so far. Zacharias’ (2003) study revealed tertiaryeducation English teachers’ account about what Indonesian is used forin their English classes: explaining the meaning of new words andgrammatical points, giving instructions, checking learners’understanding and giving feedback to individual learners. The secondwork, Usadiati’s (2009) action research, revealed that the use ofIndonesian interchangeably with English in the explanations ofconcepts and rules for teaching students to write English sentences inPresent Perfect Tense improved the students’ achievement.

Since English has recently been taught in all levels ofeducation, such lack of attention to the use of Indonesian in Englishclassrooms a great disadvantage. Since both teachers and studentshave the same MT (most English teachers in the public school areIndonesians) they must be apt to resort to Indonesian as a support tosurvive or to make sense of whatever is going on in the English class.If only we have appropriate empirical data on this issue, we will beable to raise our awareness of where we are at present in our use ofIndonesian in English classes and to prepare the ground for a morereasoned use of Indonesian in the English classroom. And this study isa trial to provide such necessitated data.

B. Research ProblemsBased on the discussion in the background section above, the

use of Indonesian appears, in some ways, to be beneficial for learningand teaching English. It has also been learned that little attention hasbeen given to the use of Indonesian in English classes. There is,therefore, a great urgency to study this issue. By having appropriate

The little attentionin Indonesiatowards the issueis effective to showthe “gaps” betweencurrent practice ofEnglish teachingandmethodologicalknowledge on it.Thus it is urgent toconduct thisresearch

The background isvery relevant to theproblems.

3

empirical data concerning this issue, we will have more solid basis todecide what methodology is best for our students. The problem to beaddressed in this study is students and English teachers’ perceptiontowards the use of Indonesian in English classrooms at senior highschools around Jadetabek. More specifically, the study tries to seekanswers to the following questions.1. What is the perception of teachers and students towards using

Indonesian in their English classroom?2. To what extent do English teachers and students believe in the role

of the Indonesian?3. How much Indonesian do teachers use in their English classroom?4. How much Indonesian do students expect their teachers use in

their English class?5. How much Indonesian do students want to use themselves?6. What for do students and teachers employ Indonesian?7. What is the relationship between years of English teaching

experience and teachers' use of Indonesian?8. What is the relationship between years of English learning and

students' expectation in the use of Indonesian?

C. Research ObjectivesBased on the discussions on the previous sections, this study

will be carried out to get empirical data about:1. English teachers and students’ perception on the use of Indonesian

in English classroom.2. the extent of English teachers and students’ belief in the role of the

Indonesian in English classroom.3. the frequency of teachers use of Indonesian in English classroom.4. Students’ expectation of the frequency of teachers’ use of

Indonesian in their English classes.5. Students’ expectation of the frequency of their use of Indonesian

in their English classes.6. The students and teachers objectives for employing Indonesian.7. The relationship between years of English teaching experience and

teachers' use of Indonesian.8. The relationship between years of English learning and students'

expectation in the use of Indonesian.

D. Significances of the studyThe findings of this study are hopefully useful to the following

four groups:1. English teachers can make use of the findings and become aware

of the role Indonesian plays in teaching and learning English.2. Teacher educators-could make use of the findings to reexamine

their foreign language teaching methodology at the teachertraining and development centers.

3. Material writers and syllabus designers-may make them toconsider Indonesian while preparing teaching materials ordesigning the syllabus.

These specificresearch questionsare clearly statedand relevant to theresearch topic--Students andEnglish teachers’perception towardsthe use ofIndonesian inEnglishClassrooms.

the objective s areclearly stated andconsistent with theresearch questions

This part clearlytells how the studywould be beneficialto specific persons

4

4. Researchers might be stimulated to conduct further research in thearea which may open the way to the development of a new ELTmethod and techniques that work to incorporate the use ofIndonesian in the EFL classroom.

E. Scope of the studyDue to budget and time constraint, the present study confined

itself to investigate the perception of students and English teacherstowards the use of Indonesian in English classes at senior high schoolsaround Jadetabek (Jakarta, Depok, Tangerang, and Bekasi).

F. Operational Definitions Terms and Acronyms1. SL refers to second language2. FL refers to foreign language3. MT refers to mother tongue, i.e. Indonesian in the context of

this study4. TL refers to target language, i.e. English in the context of this

study5. EFL refers to English as a foreign language6. ELT refers to English Language Teaching

Limitation (scope)of the study isclearly indicated

The terms andacronyms arebriefly butconcisely defined

Chapter II

LITERATURE REVIEW AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

This chapter presents two sections: In the first section, researchfindings, arguments, and ideas relevant to the study are summarizedand synthesized as a mean to provide the study with relevant context.The second section relates the background to the problems and showshow the present proposed research could contribute to the literature ofthe use of MT in ELT classes.

A. Literary Review1. History of language teaching methods focusing on MT use in FLteaching

A look at the history of MT use in the SL/FL classroomquickly reveals periodic but regular changes in how it is viewed(Auerbach, 1993, p.12). Therefore, Stern (1983) stated that “the role offirst language in foreign language teaching is one of the mostlongstanding controversies in the history of language pedagogy.”Several hundred years ago bilingual teaching was the ‘norm’, withstudents learning through translation, which is later well-known as theGrammar Translation Method. The use of MT to study a SL/FL underthe domination of this method was almost universal and readilyaccepted, in part because language teaching placed an emphasis on thewritten word above the spoken word. Under the Grammar TranslationMethod, MT is freely used as “reference system” in the process offoreign language acquisition (Stern, 1983). In other words, MT is used

The introductorypart seems “toogeneral”. It’s betterif the writersmention the fivesubheadings thatfollow.

This subheadingeffectivelysummarizes andcritically discussesthe historicalbackground oflanguage teachingmethods focusingon the problems tobe addressed.

5

as the main means of instruction.In the 19th Century, this trend slowly reversed itself (towards a

monolingual approach), in part due to a shift towards an emphasis onthe spoken word. The shift of the emphasis was partly due to massmigration and colonialism which caused people need to learn foreignlanguages in order to communicate orally. This led to the emergenceof the Direct Method, which is based on the belief that FL learningshould be an imitation of MT learning. In this light, learners should beimmersed in the target language through the use of that TL “as a meanof instruction and communication in the language classroom”, andthrough “the avoidance of the use of MT and translation as atechnique” (Stern, 1983). After its highest popularity during the periodfrom the late nineteenth century to the first quarter of the twentiethcentury, the Direct Method began to decline. However, the method haslaid foundation upon which many of the later methods and approachesexpanded and developed. Among them are the Audio-lingual Methodand Communicative Approach.

The Audio- lingual Method, whose origin is found in the ArmyMethod developed in response to the need for Americans to learn thelanguages of their allies and enemies alike during World War II, aimsat helping learners “to be able to use the target languagecommunicatively” (Larsen- Freeman, 2012). Like the Direct Method,this method focuses on the spoken language and forbids translationand the students’ MT in the classroom (Ellis, 2003). Meanwhile, in theCommunicative Approach, which has attracted most attention from thelanguage teaching profession during the past five decades, therestricted use of learners’ mother tongue is allowed where feasible andtranslation may be used when learners find it essential and helpful(Ellis, 2003).

Recently, there has been an increasing attention to theadvantages of MT use in the FL classrooms. Numerous studies relatedto the roles of MT in FL teaching and learning have been carried outaround the world in order to develop communicative languageteaching which considers MT as a classroom resource. Weschler’s(1997) Functional-Translation Method, which combines “the best oftraditional “grammar translation” with the best of modern “direct,communicative” methods”, is a good example for this.

2. The Use of MT in the EFL classroomAs indicated in previous sections, two opposing arguments

have emerged regarding MT use in the EFL classes, i.e. those againstit and those favoring it. Both are briefly discusses in the followingsections.

a. Arguments against Using MT in the EFL classroomVarious arguments have been put forth for prohibiting the

students’ MT in the ESL/ EFL classroom. The first and most commonis interference from the native language. Dulay, Burt & Krashen, citedin Al-Harbi (2010, p. 145) define the interference “as the automatic

Subtopics 2 to 5are effectivesummaries andcritical discussionsof arguments,previous researchfindings, theoriesand approachesrelevant to thewriters’ ownresearchproblems, purposeand rationale.

6

transfer, due to habit, of the surface structure of the first language ontothe surface of the target language". According to Cook, (2001),interference is a major source of difficulty in the TL learning and toavoid that, the separation of MT and TL should be made. Harbord(1992) also supports MT and TL separation, and he acknowledges thatoverusing MT makes students believe that word for word translation isa useful technique, and, consequently, they will work towardstransferring meaning in learning the TL.

The second argument asserts that using MT might negativelyaffect students' learning process because it reduces the exposurelearners get to the TL and reduces their opportunities for using the TL(Turnbull, 2001, and Deller & Rinvolucri, 2002). In other words, MTuse will prevent the maximum provision of the TL. This argument isusually strengthened with the idea that EFL learners often have littleor no exposure to the target language outside the classroom. Teachers,therefore, should not spend this valuable classroom time using MT. Inagreement with this view, Auerbach (1993) indicates that "the morestudents are exposed to English, the more quickly they will learn; asthey hear and use English, they will internalize it and begin to think inEnglish" (p. 14).

The other argument, chiefly advanced by Krashen (1981), isMT acquisition argument. The philosophical basis Krashen used tosupport this claim is that adults learn the TL similar to the waychildren pick up their MT. The justification put forward for the claimis that to acquire their MT, children do not rely on another language.However, Cook (2001a) argues that the analogy to MT acquisition issimply beside the point, According to him, the nature of MTacquisition is fundamentally different from SL/FL learning, especiallyin terms of age and situations. Therefore, the fact that by definitionchildren do not fall back on another language while acquiring theirMT has no implication for whether or not SL/FL learners should makeuse of their MT while learning SL/FL. In line with this, Weschler(1997) asserts that, “Children take years following the natural order ofacquisition to master the concrete before the abstract. By contrast,already having mastered the latter, adults can take shortcut” (p. 4). Inthe same vein, Cook (2002) notes that the misguided vision of the MTacquisition is one of those factors that have outlawed the role oftranslation in SL/FL teaching. He further comments that the idea ofrelating SL/FL learning to MT acquisition is based on assertionswithout evidence or weak evidence.

Based on these arguments, we can conclude that the advocatesof the monolingual approach believe the best way to teach EFL is byusing English as the medium of teaching.

b. Arguments Supporting MT Use in the EFL ClassroomThe monolingual approach has been criticized by researchers

and practicioners who believe that limited use of MT is a very naturaland useful tool in the SL/FL classroom. Thus, many researchers havethought of ways to use MT into the EFL teaching effectively

7

(Schweers, 1999; Cook, 2001, Deller & Rinvolucri, 2002; and Al-Nofaie, 2010). Atkinson (1987) strongly supports that students' MTshouldn’t be completely ignored in the English classes since "the useof L1 can be very effective in terms of the amount of time spentexplaining" (p. 242). According to Auerbach (1993), "when the nativelanguage is used, practitioners, researchers, and learners consistentlyreport positive results" (p. 18).

As shown by Harbord (1992), Auerbach (1993) and Deller andRinvolucri (2002), MT represents a powerful source that can be usedto enhance the SL/FL learning. In this situation, there is a extensiveamount of literature which strongly suggests that MT can play asupportive and facilitating role in the EFL classroom as a valuablelinguistic resource, and consequently, it should not be totally avoided(Schweers, 1999 and Nation, 2003). ELT teachers must have everexperienced or felt that the students’ MT can be used as a teachingtechnique especially in the areas where there is marked differencebetween MT and EFL system. Harmer (2001) also notes that MT useis a quick and helpful technique in teaching the TL. To conclude, themost realistic principle in ESL/EFL teaching should be to use Englishwhere possible and MT where necessary" (Atkinson, 1993).

3. Teachers’ Attitudes towards MT Use in the EFL ClassroomAccording to AL-Nofaie (2010), teachers’ attitudes towards

MT use have been examined in different countries with varied results.The results of Al-Buraiki’s (2008) study aimed to investigate theOmani English teachers' attitudes in basic education school showedthat the teachers believed that MT has a positive role to play inteaching the young learners. Crawford's study (2004) concerning theprimary level as cited in Al-Nofaie (2010) revealed that 54 % had"reservations" in using MT as the main medium of teaching. The studyof Sharma (2006) on the attitudes of Nepali teachers and studentstowards the use of the native language in the EFL classroom revealedthat all respondents preferred the occasional use of MT in the Englishclasses. They also asserted that judicious use of mother tongue isjustified because it helps students learn English better. Similarly, Kimand Petraki (2009) reported that for Korean students and teachers' MTplays a helpful role in the language classroom, especially in the earlystages.

4. Reasons for Using MT in the EFL ClassroomSeveral studies have been carried out in different countries to

investigate areas in which teachers can take advantage of theirstudents’ first language (Al-Nofaie, 2010).

The notion of MT serving as "a time–saving device" is themost frequent justification given by teachers for LI use (Atkinson,1987. p, 422) Similarly, Shimizu (2006, p. 77) indicated that "time-saving" is one of the principle arguments why researchers are in favorof using MT. As Turnbull (2001) stated, "I know from my personalexperience that it is tempting to use the MT to save time"(p.536).

8

Auerbach (1993) and Schweers (1999 also agree that saving time is ajustified reason for using MT especially at lower levels. According toHarbord (1992), teachers' use of MT to save time providesopportunities for "real teacher-student communication in TLclassroom" (p.352).

Another significant reason for teachers' use of the students' MTin the TL classroom is to achieve natural communication betweenthem and their students. Harbord (1992, p. 352) argues that"facilitating teacher-student communication", and "facilitating teacher-student rapport" are two basic objectives for the teachers' use ofstudents' MT in the EFL classroom. In accordance with the previousview, Auerbach (1993) indicates that achieving a good relationshipbetween students and teachers is a desirable aim that can be fulfilledthrough MT use. Nation (2003) indicates that it is easier and morecommunicative to use MT in the EFL classrooms to facilitatecommunication between students and teachers. Additionally, Miles(2004) considers that MT should be used in the EFL classroom inorder not to create a barrier between the students and the teachers.

It is also acceptable to use MT in the EFL classroom byteachers to convey the meaning of an unfamiliar word, to clarifyabstract word, and to explain difficult concepts (Meyer, 2008).Turnbull (2001) concurs with the opinion that “it is efficient to make aquick switch to the L1 to ensure that students understand an unknownword” (p. 535). As shown by Meyer (2008), the absence of MT whenexplaining the unfamiliar concepts can raise the level of anxietyamong students.

Motivating students by using MT has received much interest inliterature. Hamdallah (1999, p. 290), for example, emphasizes that inorder to keep the learner's motivation in an " ideal circle", appropriateuse of MT in EFL classroom could be used. He adds that using MT tomotivate students encourages them to express their ideas since it has adirect influence on the "psychological pressure". However, heconcludes that when learners' ability of TL increases, it is necessary tominimize the use of MT. Critchely (2002) indicates that with lowerlevel learners, teachers should use MT when appropriate to buildpositive and mutually supportive relationships that will promotestudent motivation (p. 3). It is also commonly agreed in the literaturethat MT could be used by EFL teachers to give complex instructionsto early levels (Harbord, 1992 and Auerbach, 1993). In Cook's (2001b)and AL-Nofaie's (2010) studies, the findings revealed that a largenumber of teachers' favorite choice for giving complex instructionswas by using the students' mother tongue. Harbord (1992) emphasizedthat giving class instructions by using MT is an important point toachieve and facilitate communication between teachers and students.

5. The Amount of L1 Use in the EFL ClassroomA body of research about how much MT is used in the EFL

classroom by both teachers and students with different kinds of data,including questionnaire, interviews and observation of lessons, has

9

been carried out in different contexts and indicated a great degree ofvariability in the amounts of the MT and the TL use by teachers.

Guthries (1984), who investigated the MT and the TL use of 6university French instructors, found that there was a great degree ofvariability in the amounts of the MT and the TL use by teachers.Overall, most of them used the MT in a relatively low percentage ofthe total time. Five out of the six instructors apparently used the MT2% to 17% of the time (with one exception above 40%). Duff andPolio’s (1990) study in FL classes at the University of Californiashowed a wide range of percentages across languages: from 0% to90% the first language with a 32.1% “cross-class average” (p.156).Their interviews with teachers dealing with the variability in MT/TLratio showed that the variables that might have played a role includedlanguage type, departmental policy and guidelines, lesson content,materials and formal teacher training.

Macaro (1997), intended to investigate how much MT wasused by instructors, why they claimed to use it, and what factorsappeared to influence their decision to use it, found that very little MTwas used in the classes recorded by the instructors. When instructorsinitiated a switch to MT, it appeared that they did so for the sake ofefficiency and convenience, or to impose discipline or keep control ofthe class. According to Macaro (1997), teachers switched from TL toMT mainly to give and clarify instructions for classroom activities, togive feedback to students, to translate, and to check comprehension.

More recent studies on this issue also revealed a great degreeof variability in the amounts of the MT and the TL use by teachers.Macaro’s (2001) study on six student teachers in England revealedthat the participants use their MT up to 15.2% in their teaching. Basedon their study on 13 Korean teachers of English in high schools, Liu etal (2004) reported their use of Korean ranged from 10% to 90% ofclass time. Kim and Elder’s (2005) study on seven teachers whotaught foreign languages in New Zealand revealed that the proportionof target language use among these teachers varied from 23% to 88%.

Based on the results of these studies, it can be concluded thatthe amounts of the MT and the TL use by teachers are varied, andthus, more empirical support is needed before sound pedagogical andpolicy decision are made.

B. Conceptual FrameworkThe inclusion of the students’ MT in SL/FL classes has long

been a controversy. On the one hand, proponents of the monolingualapproach believe that to maximize the effectiveness of learning theTL, MT should be prohibited, because maximum exposure to TL andleast exposure to MT are of crucial importance, and the use of MTmay obstruct TL learning process. Thus a second/foreign language isbest learned and taught through the language itself. On the other hand,the proponents of the MT use argue that MT can be helpful in mostclassroom activities. As a consequence, MT should not completelyeliminated from a SL or FL classes for a well-judged and well–

This conceptualframework brieflybut concisely linksthe researchproblems toexisting literatureand the researchobjectives.However, a goodconceptualframework

10

planned use of the students’ MT can give positive results.Since most current research results tend to support the

judicious and well–planned inclusion of MT, this issue deserves morestudies to get more empirical data. The more data concerning thisissue available to use, the easier it is for us to find more suitableteaching methodology for our students. This study is one of the trialsto meet this challenge. Its findings will at least enrich empirical dataconcerning with secondary school students and English teachers’perception towards the use of Indonesian in English classrooms.

should be able toguide (like a mapdoes)researchers’inquiry, it will bemuch better if italso includes theresearch method,instruments, anddata analysis.

Chapter III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter provides the basic plan of the proposed study. Itcovers the specific research purposes and questions, research design,participants, time and place, data collection instruments andtechniques, data analysis technique, and research procedure. At theend of this chapter, information about the budget is also presented.

A. Specific Research PurposesThe findings of this study are hopefully able to get empirical

data about:1. English teachers and students’ perception on the use of Indonesian

in English classroom.2. The extent of English teachers and students’ belief in the role of

the Indonesian in English classroom.3. The frequency of teacher’s use of Indonesian in English

classroom.4. Students’ expectation of the frequency of teachers’ use of

Indonesian in their English classes.5. Students’ expectation of the frequency of their use of Indonesian

in their English classes.6. The students and teachers objectives for employing Indonesian.7. The relationship between years of English teaching experience and

teachers' use of Indonesian.8. The relationship between years of English learning and students'

expectation in the use of Indonesian.

B. Research MethodThis study will employ an explanatory mixed method design,

which, according to Creswell et al. (2003) enables the researcher togather qualitative input to explain and extend quantitative results, inorder to gain a comprehensive insight of the research.

A brief but conciseintroductoryparagraph. Itenables thereaders toanticipate whatfollows in the nextsubsections.Unfortunately, notall items includedis exposed. Theresearchprocedure andbudget sectionscould not be found.

This restatement ofthe SpecificResearchPurposes helps thereader to easilysee the connectionof the researchobjectives andother points in thischapter.

The researchmethod is justifiedand very relevantto achieve theobjectives.

11

C. ParticipantsThe target participants of this study are 20 English teachers

and 750 students from 20 secondary schools around Jabodetabek(Jakarta Depok, Tangerang, and Bekasi)

D. Time and PlaceThis study will be conducted in May—August 2013 in

Jadetabek.

E. Data Collection Instrument and TechniqueData will be collected employing survey and interview

techniques. The survey will be conducted using two questionnaires:(1) teachers’ questionnaire and (2) students’ questionnaire. Both ofthem will be constructed to gauge the perceptions of both teachers andstudents toward the use of MT in their English classes. Focused semistructured open-ended interviews will be conducted to all teachers and40 students (2 students from each school), who were respondents tothe questionnaire administered, to gather qualitative input. The themesthat emerged during the interview sessions were coded in accordanceto the quantitative dimensions from the questionnaire. The rationalefor using focused semi structured open-ended interviews is tounderstand the respondents’ point of view rather than makegeneralizations.

F. Data Analysis TechniqueData will be analyzed descriptively. To run frequency analysis

and to cross tabulation of the data, SPSS version17.0 will beemployed.

G. Data Triangulation ?????????????????????????

The participantsare properly define,but the samplingtechnique is notmentioned

Time of the studyis properly stated,but the placedeserves moredetailed description

The data collectiontechniques areproperly described.The instrumentsare described, butit lacks ofquestionnaire’sreliability andvalidity tests.

The data analysistechnique properlydescribed

Since this studyinvolves qualitativedata, theresearchers shouldhave describedhow the datatrustworthiness willbe enhanced. Inother words, theyshould haveincludedexplanation aboutdata triangulation.

12

References

Al-Harbi, A. (2010). Mother tongue maintenance and second languagesustenance. A two way language teaching method. TESOLJournal, 2, 144-158.

Al-Nofaie, H. (2010). The attitudes of teachers and students towardsusing arabic in EFL classrooms in Saudi public schools.Novitas-ROYAL, 4 (1), 64-95

Atkinson, D. (1993). Teaching monolingual classes: Using L1 in theclassroom. Harlow: Longman Group Ltd.

Auerbach, E. (1993). Reexamining english only in the ESL classroom.TESOL Quarterly 27, (1), 9–32.

Cook,G. (2002). Breaking Taboos. English Teaching Professional,Issue23, 5-7.

Cook, V. (2001a). Second language learning and language teaching.London: Arnold.

_______ (2001b). Using the first language in the classroom. TheCanadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue Canadiennedes Language Vivantes, 57 (3), 402 – 423.

Critchley, M.P. (2002). The role of L1 support in communicativeELT: A guide for teachers in Japan. The Language Teacher,23(9), 1-9.

Deller, S. & Rinvolucri, M. (2002). Using the mother tongue: Makingthe most of the learner's language. London: Baskerville PressLtd.

Duff P.A. and Polio, C.G. (1990). How much foreign language is therein the foreign language classroom? Modern Language Journal,74, 154-66.

Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford:Oxford University Press.

Guthrie, E.M.L. (1984). Six cases in classroom communication: Astudy of teacher discourse in the foreign language classroom.In: Lantolf J.P. and Labarca A, (Ed.). (1984). Research insecond language learning: Focus on the classroom. Norwood,NJ: Ablex

Hamdallah, R. (1999). To use or not to use Arabic in English languageteaching, An-Najah National University Research Journal- B,13 (1), 285-296.

APA style!!! The 1st

letter of “arabic”should becapitalized

the 1st letter of“English” should becapitalized

the word “Taboos”should be in smallletter

In general, thereferencing style,using the APA, iswell done, exceptin some itemsmarked in red

13

Harbord, J. (1992). The use of the mother tongue in the classroom.ELT Journal, 46, 350-355.

Hsieh, L..T. (2000) The effects of translation on English vocabularyand reading learning’, paper presented at the NinthInternational Symposium on English Teaching, Taipei,Taiwan, ROC.

Kim Anh, K. H. (2010). Use of Vietnamese in English languageteaching in vietnam: Attitudes of vietnamese universityteachers. ELT Journal, 3(2).

Krashen, S. (1981). Second language acquisition and second languagelearning. Oxford: Pergamon.

Krashen, S. & Terrell, T. (1983). The natural approach: Languageacquisition in the classroom. Oxford: Pergamon.

Kobayashi, H., and C. Rinnert. (1992). Effects of first language onsecond language writing: Translation versus directcomposition, Language Leaning, (42), 2: 183-215.

Larsen–Freeman, D. (2012). Techniques and principles in languageteaching. (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Macaro E. (1997). Target language, collaborative learning andautonomy. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Macaro E. (2001). Analysing student teachers’ code-switching inforeign language classrooms: Theories and decision making.Modern Language Journal. 85, 531-48.

McCann, K. (2005). Not lost in translation. IATEFL Issues, 186.

Meyer, H. (2008). The pedagogical implications of L1 use in the L2classroom. Retrieved September 12, 2010 fromhttp://www.kyoai.ac.jp/ college/ronshuu/no08/meyer1.pdf.

Miles, R. (2004). Evaluating the use of L1 in the English languageclassroom (Master thesis, University of Birmingham).Retrieved February 4, 2008 from:www.cels.bham.ac.uk/resources/essays/Milesdiss.pdf.

Nation, P. (2003). The role of the first language in foreign languagelearning. The Asian EFL Journal, 5 (2), 1-8.

Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and methods inlanguage teaching (2nd ed.). Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Schweers, W. Jr. (1999). Using L1 in the TL classroom. English

14

Teaching Forum, 37(2), 6-7

Stern, H.H. (1992). Issues and options in language teaching. Oxford:Oxford University Press.

Tang, J. (2002). Using L1 in the English classroom. English TeachingForum, 40(1).

Turnbull, M. (2001). There is role for the L1 in second and foreignlanguage teaching, but… The Canadian Modern LanguageReview, 54(4), 531-540. Retrieved August 9, 2010 fromhttp://www.utpjournals.metapress.com/index/n5753111t48u536r.pdf

Turnbull, M., & Arnett, K. (2002). Teachers’ uses of the target andfirst languages in second and foreign language classroom.Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 204–218.

Usadiati, W. (2009). Contribution of L1 in EFL teaching. Kata, 11(2),171-184

Vaezi, S., & Mirzaei, M. (2007). The effect of using translation fromL1 to TL as a teaching technique on the improvement of EFLlearners’ linguistic accuracy – focus on form. HumanisingLanguage Teaching, 9(5). Retrieved February 20, 2013 fromhttp://www.hltmag.co.uk/ Sep07/mart03.htm.

Weschler, R. (1997). Uses of L1 in the English classroom: Introducingthe functional-translation method. In The Internet TESLJournal, November, 1997. Retrieved March 16, 2013 fromhttp://iteslj.org/Articles/Weschler-UsingL1.html

Zacharias, N. T. (2003). A survey of tertiary teachers’ beliefs aboutEnglish Language Teaching in Indonesia with regard to therole of English as a global language (Master thesis,Assumption University, 2003). Retrieved fromhttp://www.asian-efl-journal.com/thesis.php.

should be in smallletters

Note:

This file is intended as a handout for ELT Research Proposal Critique in my ELT

Research classes at the English Teaching Study Program of UKI Jakarta.

Parlindungan Pardede