1

A SUMMARY

THE IMPLEMENTATION OFCOMMUNICATIVE LANGUAGE TEACHING

IN DEVELOPING THE THIRD YEARSTUDENTS’ ENGLISH PROFICIENCY

AT PONDOK MODERN GONTOR

Muhammad Farkhan(muhammadfarkhan@gmail.com)

2

INTRODUCTIONRealizing the important role played by English in various sectors of life, the

Indonesian government makes it as the most prior foreign language to learn atschools. As a foreign language, English is not used as a means of communication ingovernmental, educational, political activities, and other fields within the country(Brown, 1994: 182). With this status, English will be acquired only through learningand teaching activity designed and conducted as well as possible.

In conducting a good English teaching program, the elements of a method likean approach, design, and procedure should be taken into account as well as alanguage environment. The approach can be defined as a set of correlativeassumptions dealing with the nature of language teaching and learning. An approachis axiomatic, it describes the subject matter to be taught (Anthony, 1963: 95). Thisindicates that the approach that is in theoretical level colors the design andprocedure. Design is defined as the level in which objectives, syllabus and contentare determined, and in which the roles of teachers, learners, and instructionalmaterials are specified. Procedure is the actual moment-to-moment techniques,practices, and behaviors that operate in teaching a language according to a particularmethod (Richards and Rogers, 1986: 16-26).

As a component of design, the objective should be formulated clearly what thelearners have to master if they have completed the program. Usually, it ischaracterized by the adopted theory of language. The objective may vary from thedevelopment of linguistic competence to the development of communicativecompetence. The second part of the design that has a crucial influence is syllabus.Syllabus, according to Harmer, concerns with the decision about parts of thelanguage the learner has to know, how is the language to be organized and whatskills should be concentrated on (1991: 25). It implies that the syllabus has to includethe learning objectives to accomplish, learning materials to use, how these materialsare graded and organized, and how they are developed in the class room. If asyllabus has already been established, learning activity as the third component of thedesign has also be considered. It may take the form of activities that lead the learnersto develop their grammatical competence; or that expose the learners how to use thelanguage in its real context; or the one that emphasizes both of them. In relation tothese activities, learner’s roles and teacher’s roles as the other parts of the designmust also be thought seriously. The learner’s roles vary according to the learningactivity developed in the classroom. She/he may play as a partner, facilitator,motivator, problem-solver, negotiator, or improviser (Rodgers, 1998: 7). On the otherhand, the teacher plays not only the roles belonging to the learner, but also theseroles, such as a context setter, a need analyst, an error corrector, an action monitor,counselor, and drill leader. The last component of the design is the role of learningmaterials. They may be textbooks, newspapers, magazines, films, cassettes, CD, TVprograms as long as the learners can make use of them. What kind of materials is

3

used in learning activity should enrich the learner with the experiences how to usethe language.

The third level of the methodological aspect is the procedure that refers toany real teaching activity done by the teacher in the classroom. It may covers threephases of teaching activity: pre-teaching activity intended to arouse the learner’sinterest to study; whilst teaching activity intended to lead the learner to master thetopic being discussed; and post teaching activity intended to evaluate what thelearner has already acquired.

In addition to the methodological aspects, there is other thing that should bepaid attention to in conducting English teaching that is language environment. It isdefined as a setting or situation where the learner has a big possibility to use Englishas a means of communication. It involves not only formal language environment thatoccurs mostly in the classroom, but also informal language environment that occursmostly outside the classroom (Huda, 1999: 18). Both language environments shouldbe provided to help the learner experience the language she or he learns, so that he orshe will acquire English communicatively. The attention to the methodologicalaspect and the provision of both language environments are the requirements toconduct a good English program.

In general all schools are able to realize a good English program that fulfilledthose three aspects of a method as discussed above. If viewed from the languageenvironment, not all schools are able to set up an informal language environment, asthere are many obstacles and weaknesses that can not be avoided. The schools cannot handle and control learner’s life outside the classroom where she or he isinvolved or takes a part in real communicative events.

Based on the fact above, it is assumed that Islamic boarding schools with theireducational system are able to apply Communicative Language Teaching indeveloping students’ English proficiency supported by their informal languageenvironment. One of successful institutions is Pondok Modern Gontor (PMG). Itprovides both formal and informal language environments integratedly. It has beendeveloping a language teaching characterized by the learner’s need to use English asa means of everyday communication.

In this institution, the learners have more chance to use English in everydaycommunication activities. They can express their idea, thought, and feeling throughwritten media, such as learners’ magazines and bulletin; or through face to facecommunication with his friends and teachers. As they are accustomed to use Englishin everyday communication, they will be able to acquire English communicatively.

How teachers see English and how it should be learned has already becomeinstitution’s belief for a long time, and been implemented in designing Englishlearning program and providing conducive language environment for the learners tolearn English communicatively. Such belief and efforts done by the institution formthe unique implementation of Communicative Language Teaching in developingstudents’ English proficiency

4

How this institution implements Communicative Language Teaching indeveloping students’ English proficiency makes the writer interested in conducting aresearch. It, of course, not only includes the aspects of method, such as the approach,design, and procedure; but also the language environment developed. So, the crucialproblem to discuss, deals with the teaching of English at PMG.

As it covers too many things, the research is focused only on theimplementation of Communicative Language Teaching in developing students’English proficiency. So, it is very necessary to know previously the approach,design, procedure, and language environment provided by PMG. Those fourinterrelated aspects function and play each role to form a unique CommunicativeLanguage Teaching. Therefore, the main problem of the research can be formulatedas follows: How is the implementation of Communicative Language Teaching indeveloping the third year students English proficiency at PMG? In connection tothis problem, the research questions that appear are: (1) How do the English teachersview English in the implementation of Communicative Language Teaching indeveloping the third year students’ English proficiency at PMG? (2) How do theEnglish teachers view English teaching that enables the third year students todevelop their communicative competence at PMG? (3) How do the English teachersdefine the objectives of English teaching that enable the third year students to useEnglish as a means of communication at PMG? (4) How is the English syllabus thatis oriented towards the development of the third year students’ communicativecompetence developed at PMG? (5) How do the English teachers design learningactivities that develop the third year students’ communicative competence at PMG?(6) How do the third year students play their roles in English teaching that is orientedtowards the development of their communicative competence at PMG? (7) How dothe English teachers play their roles in English teaching that is oriented towards thedevelopment of the third year students’ communicative competence at PMG? (8)How do the learning materials play their roles in English teaching that is orientedtowards the development of the third year students’ communicative competence atPMG? (9) How do the English teachers develop the teaching procedures that areoriented towards the development of the third year students’ communicativecompetence at PMG? (10) How does PMG create the language environment thatenables the third year students to use English as a means of communication?

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKThis section focuses the discussion only on Communicative Language

Teaching and language environment.

Communicative Language TeachingApproach

The approach to language teaching can be defined as the theory of languageand the theory of language learning underlying the teaching of a language. Theapproach not only plays very important role in determining the objective to

5

accomplish, but also other aspects of teaching such as learning materials, learningactivities; and the procedures developed by the teacher in the classroom. Explainingwhat the approach is, Brown says that it is theoretical positions and beliefs about thenature of language, the nature of language learning, and the applicability of both topedagogical settings (1994: 159). This idea conforms to those that have been alreadyintroduced by Richards and Rodgers saying that an approach refers to theories aboutthe nature of language and language learning that serve as the source of practices andprinciples in language teaching (1986: 16).

Theory of LanguageRelated to the theory of language, there are three theories that are commonly

known, structural, functional, and interactional. The first sees the language as asystem consisting of interrelated components, such as phoneme, morpheme, syntax,and semantics. The language teaching employing this theory is directed to developthe learner’s mastery of language components and skills separately (Harsh, 1988:11). The second sees the language as a means to express communicative functions oflanguage according to the context, where communication takes place (Halliday,1978: 18). This theory does not direct the language teaching to develop the learner’smastery of language components, but the learner’s ability to use the language toexpress communicative functions or what the learner can do with the language. Thethird sees the language as a means to build and maintain the social relation. Thelanguage teaching adopting this theory is directed to develop the learner’s ability tointeract with the others through the language. Of the three theories of language,functional and interactional view color Communicative Language Teachingdominantly.

Theory of Language LearningThe second element of an approach is the theory of language learning which

colors learning activities developed by the teacher in the classroom. How the learnershould be treated and how the teacher should do are the core implementation of thetheory in the classroom. In general, the adopted theories of language learning can beclassified into threefold: Behaviorism, Cognitivism, and Humanism. The essence ofBehaviorism is that all language learning occurs through a habit formation created bythe relation of stimulus, responses, and reinforcement. According to behaviorists, alllearning, whether verbal or non-verbal, takes place through the same underlyingprocess, habit formation. Learners receive linguistic input from speakers in theirenvironment, and positive reinforcement for their correct repetitions and imitations.As a result, habits are formed (Lightbown and Spada, 1993: 23). Such a model oflearning indicates that the environment is the most important factor affecting thelearner to acquire a foreign language.

Unlike Behaviorism that puts the learner as a passive receptor of the inputfrom surrounding environments, Cognitivism sees the learner with his cognitiveability as an active and creative person who processes all of the input he gets from

6

his environment. Utilizing his background knowledge, the learner is able tounderstand, apply, synthesize, analyze, or do other cognitive abilities to process theinput to obtain new information, knowledge, or skills. Such ideas are not onlyapplicable to learn the science and technology, but also to acquire a mother tongue,and even to learn a foreign language. In a cognitive view, language learning istreated as skills learning, analogous to learning how to ride bicycle or play a violin,although probably more complex (Ellis, 1994: 295). Therefore, language learningengages the same cognitive systems, like perception, memory, problem solving,information processing, as learning other types of knowledge and skills. Such amodel of learning puts the cognitive ability as the most dominant factor in masteringa foreign language.

Different from the two previous theories, Humanism sees individual not onlyfrom his cognitive aspect, but also from his affective aspect in relation to hissurrounding social life (Clark, 1987: 5). Besides, individual should be treated as awhole person who needs warm, love, respect, and honor from others to develop hispotentials optimally (Carlson and Buskit, 1997: 473). So, it can be pointed out thatthe attention to cognitive, affective, and social aspects as an integral part is thecentral ideas of Humanism. Specifically in language teaching, humanistic teacherssee language learning as something which must engage the whole person, not assomething purely intellectual; they recognize that their students are people likethemselves, with emotional and spiritual needs as well as intellectual ones, peoplewho can contribute to their own learning, who are not the passive recipients ofsomeone else’s teaching (Brumfit, 1985: 79). In Communicative Language Teaching,the three theories are synthesized to develop learning activities that enable learners touse a target language communicatively.

DesignThe theories of language and language learning should be the inspiration for

determining the design of a method. According to Richards and Rogers, design isthe level of method analysis in which the objectives are condidered; language contentis selected and organized within the syllabus; the types of learning tasks and teachingactivities are proposed; and the roles of learners, teachers, and instructional materialsare considered (1986:20).

Learning ObjectiveTeaching English using thius method is aimed at developing communicative

competence, that is the ability to use English in real communicative interaction.Huda says that proponents of Communicative Language Teaching claim that thelearning objective is the development of communicative competence, that is theability to use English for communication in real life situations as opposed toclassroom situations (1999: 93). The learner is not required to produce grammaticallycorrect sentences, but she/he is expected to have the ability to use the sentences toexpress his communicative functions he wants to convey. In Hyme’s view, a person

7

who acquires communicative competence acquires both knowledge and ability forlanguage use with respect to whether or not something is formally possible, feasible,appropriate to the context, and is fact done (1979: 14). Based on the explanation, itcan be understood that communicative competence is made up of the knowledge oflanguage and the ability to use the language in real situations.

SyllabusSelection and gradation of learning materials are usually recorded on a

document named as a syllabus or curriculum. Some experts say that the syllabus andcurriculum refer to the same concept; and some say that both are different terms. Thesyllabus is the description of a subject matter to be given to the learners, which is apart of the curriculum; and the curriculum is the whole school program. Explainingthe difference between syllabus and curriculum, Rogers says that syllabus, whichprescribes the content to be covered by a given course, forms only small part of thetotal school program. Curriculum is a far broader concept. Curriculum is all thoseactivities in which children engage under the auspices of the school (1989: 26). Thisidea puts the syllabus as a an integral part of the curriculum containing all activitiesand learning experiences, including the subject matter, designed for the leraners atcertain level. Therefore, a syllabus should contain a more detailed and operationalstatement of teaching and learning elements which translates the philosophy of thecurriculum into a series of planned steps leading towards more narrowly definedobjectives at each level (Dubin and Olshtain, 1986: 35).

In Communicative Language Teaching, the syllabus should be characterized bythe adopted theories of language and language learning. According to Yalden (1986:25), a communicative syllabus should be based on how is a language used, not onhow it is taught. Such syllabus, of course, provides for the learners a classroomexperience, which more closely approximates an environment of real language use.So, in the communicative English syllabus, the learners are not taught the English’srules, but since the early beginning they are encouraged to use the target languagecommunicatively. Related to this idea, Milne (1981: 20) asserts that the syllabus ofthe course should be arranged on a functional or communicative basis and thelearners should be encouraged to learn to communicate effectively in English at asimple level from the beginning.

Learning ActivitiesLearning activities can be defined as all activities involving the learners to

learn, such as interview, task, and problem solving; while communicative activitiesare all activities leading the learners to experience how to use English in its realcontext (Stern, 1992: 177). Communicative activities developed by the teachers inthe classroom can be classified in terms of what ability is developed and the personwho is mostly involved. Seen from the viewpoint of what ability is developed, thereare two kinds of activities, namely pre-communicative and communicative activities.The first consists of structural and quasi activities in which the aspects of the

8

language and the functions of the language are presented separately. The secondcontains functional and social interaction activities in which the learners are givenchances to apply both structural and pre-communicative ability in real context(Littlewood, 1981: 85-86). Seen from the viewpoint of the person, who is mostlyinvolved, there are also two kinds of activities, namely student-centered and teacher-centered activities. The former refers to activities in which the learners play verydominant role; while the later refers to activities in which the teacher plays thedominant role (Ward, 1988: 203).

Learner’s roleIn Rodgers’ view (1996: 158), learner’s role refers to actions performed by

the learners by which learning can run well. Specifically, role can be defined as allactions done by the learners in the context of learning activities, which can be in theform of memorizing previous knowledge, accepting new lesson, encouraging othersto learn, or facilitating the others to learn (Harris and Bell, 1996: 129-131). Based onthis definition, there are roles that can be played by the learner, such as receptor,improviser, negotiator, generator, or facilitator. As an improviser, the learner must beable to make use all of learning activities as the opportunities to use English asoptimally as possible. As negotiator, the learner is required to have the ability toprocess all of forms found in communicative interaction to understand its languagefunctions. Related to this communicative interaction, the learner may function asfacilitator to help the others solve their problem, and even to make the learning easilydone.

.Teacher’s Role

In communicative classes a teacher is demanded to play some roles relatedto the syllabus, learning materials, learning activities, and evaluation. The roles thatthe teacher may play are syllabus’ translator, communicative activities organizer, co-communicator, facilitator, material developer, and assessor (Harris and Bell, 1996:129-131). As a syllabus translator, the teacher is required to translate what has beenpointed out by the syllabus into learning materials and activities that enable learnersto develop their communicative competence. In relation to the learning activities, theteacher has to play as an organizer whose main duty is to manage the class to providea conducive situation for learning; and as a facilitator who provides learningmaterials, tasks, and exercises written by himself or picked up from other resources.

In addition to these roles, the teacher may be as a model, friend, and monitor.As a friend, the teacher has to chat or play with the learners to make them feelcomfortable and not under pressure. As a model, he has to give a good example ofhow to use English in everyday communication, so that they are encouraged toimitate and use their English in their communication. As a monitor, he has to look forand record their ill linguistic forms used as the basis for an evaluation (Prodromou,1994: 24).

9

Learning Material’s RoleLearning material can be defined as anything used by the teacher and learner

to facilitate learning and provide learning experiences for the learners. The teachermay use newspapers, magazines, videos, or even present a native speaker in theclassroom as a paertner in group discussion or other activities (Tomlinson, 1998: 2).Such definition opens up the teacher’s mind in viewing learning material, and showsits main role to facilitate learning. Nunan (1991: 214) says that learning materialshave to provide information of how a language works; and to focus on exerciseshelping learner use their English in its real context in the classroom or outside. It canbe said that learning material can also be a starting point to develop learningactivities.

ProcedureThe last level of conceptualization and organization within a method is

known as procedure. This encompasses the actual moment-to-moment techniques,practices, and behaviors that operate in teaching a language according to a particularmethod. It is the level at which a method realizes its approach and design inclassroom activities (Richards and Rodgers, 1986: 26). It can be defined as anoperational stage, which covers a set of activities done by the teacher and learners toaccomplish learning’s objectives. It is the stage in which the approach and design areactualized in term of operational activities inside or outside the classroom.

This operational stage usually consists of six steps: (1) introduction, aimedat associating the learner’s background knowledge with a new lesson; (2)presentation, aimed at a new lesson being discussed; (3) checking, aimed at ensuringthe learners’ understanding; (4) practice, aimed at giving the learners opportunity touse the language under the teacher’s auspices; (5) application, aimed at giving thelearners opportunity to use the language in its real context; and (6) evaluation, aimedat knowing how far the learners understand a new lesson has been discussed(Gibbons, 1994: 151-154).

Language EnvironmentLanguage environment is not related to internal factors of a language, but to

external ones, like economy, social status, and politics. It can be defined as a settingwhere language teaching takes place (Ellis, 1994: 214). Setting itself refers to allroles a language plays in relation to the roles of other languages within a community.In addition to this idea, Pearse says that setting is all the variables that make up thecontext of any sample of language: the mode (the spoken/written), places, users, andso on (1988:210). Simply, language environment refers to the status of a language asfirst, second, or foreign one because of non-linguistic factors.

Types of Language EnvironmentAlthough some linguists classify language environment into formal and

informal, this is not based on how language teaching is conducted. It is rather on how

10

an individual masters a language (.Lightbown dan Spada, 1993: 19). Formallanguage environment is known as the setting where the teaching of a language isdirected to the mastery of formal linguistics, like structure, and vocabulary. Asopposed to this, informal one is defined as the setting where the teaching of alanguage is directed to give the learner more chances to use the target languagenaturally rather than to learn structures. Ellis names the formal languageenvironment as educational setting; while the informal environment as a naturalsetting characterized by unconscious learning through everyday communicativeinteraction (1994: 214).

RESEARCH METHODOLOGYThe research with the aim of exploring how the teachers implement

Communicative Language Teaching in developing the third year students’ Englishproficiency at Pondok Modern Gontor, is qualitative one applying the ethnographicapproach introduced by Spradley. The unit of analysis of the research is class three.It consists of six classes from which the informants are taken

The research uses the researcher himself to collect the data through interviewand participant observation conducted from February to June 2002. The informants,whom the researcher obtains the data from, are six classroom teachers and theirstudents. In addition to this, the written and non-written data resources are alsooccupied as supplementary ones. The written data resources are learner’s work,autobiography, bulletins, a list of vocabulary, text-books, and annual magazines;while non-written data resources are the paintings, pictures, and photographs.

The analysis of data is conducted during the data collection in the field. Theactivity involves domain, taxonomic, componential, and theme analysis. The domainanalysis is intended to know the cover terms, included terms, and semanticrelationship. The taxonomic analysis is an attempt to know the relationship among allthe included terms in a domain. The componential analysis is the systematic searchfor the attributes (components of meaning) associated with cultural categories,including the entire process of searching for contrasts, sorting them out, groupingsome together as dimensions of contrast, and entering all this information onto aparadigm. The theme analysis is a search for any principles recurrent in a number ofdomains, tacit or explicit, and serving as a relationship among subsystems of culturalmeaning. Then, the analyzed data are interpreted qualitatively by comparing themcritically to the theories and other relevant information to obtain more meaningfulresearch findings.

One of the important things in a qualitative research is verifying thetrustworthiness of data. There are four criteria underlying the trustworthiness:credibility, transferability, depend-ability, and confirmability. The credibility isobtained through extending the participation, in-depth participation, andtriangulation. The transferability is obtained through thick description of the contextwhere the research is conducted. The dependability and confirmability are obtainedthrough auditing (Moleong, 1989: 170-188).

11

RESEARCH FINDINGSThe research findings that show how the teachers implement Communicative

Language Teaching in developing the third year students’ English proficiency atPMG are analytically elaborated from the point of view of the approach, design,procedure, and language environment.

Approach The approach to language teaching includes two basic theories, the theory oflanguage and language learning. Both of them characterize the other methodcomponents.

Theory of Language In relation to the theory of language, the teachers believe that English is ameans of communication used world widely in an academic field and non-academicone. English is seen from its function to express the idea, thought, and feeling. Thisis of course in line with the functional theory of language, which sees the language,as a means to express its communicative functions affected mostly by the context(Halliday, 1978: 18). Pointing out the substance of this theory, Purwo (1988:232)says that language should refer to what someone can do with it (function) or to themeaning that can be expressed through the language (notion). Such theory does notlead the teaching to develop learners’ mastery of English components and skills inisolation, but to the development of learners’ ability to use English incommunication. This belief is also a part of the interactional theory of language.Language is seen as a means to build and maintain social relation (Richards andRogers, 1986: 17), so that the teaching is directed to the development of learners’ability to build their social relation with others.

Through the application of the functional and interactional theory of language,the learners are not only able to use English to express the communicative functions,like asking for advice, and giving directions in oral communication, but also inwritten one. This enables the learners to build a social relation with others.

Besides a means of communication, the teachers sees English as a language ofscience and technology used to spread new discoveries and other information. Thisview directs English teaching to the development of reading and writing abilityenabling the learners to absorb and transfer science and technology. Such view, ofcourse, conforms to the function of English in Indonesia as a foreign language(Depdikbud, 1994: 1).

Theory of Language Learning In carrying out English teaching, the teachers see that learners’ cognitive,affective, and social aspect should be taken into account. It is also believed thatEnglish teaching needs a conducive language environment, a discipline to force the

12

learners to use English in their communication, a good textbook, and other learningfacilities.

The attention to the learner’s cognitive aspect is known from some teachers’view saying that learner’s potential and cognitive level play an important role inEnglish learning. Their view reflects that learners have an inherent capacity todevelop all input from the environment, and this is the core of the theory of languagelearning named as Cognitivism. This theory sees the learner as active and creative anindividual who is able to understand, apply, analyze, synthesize, or do othercognitive capacity to process all input to obtain new information. This view is notonly applicable to the learning of science and technology, but also the learning of alanguage (Ellis, 1994: 295). The learning, which is inspired by this theory, includesexplaining the meaning of difficult vocabularies and grammar in the classroom, andintroducing new vocabularies and utterances in the dormitory. In such learning, thelearners are given examples of the use of new vocabularies and grammar, andrequired to generate another examples. They are, of course, encouraged to producethe language creatively in their communication. This type of learning can be includedinto the creative construction hypothesis (Lightbown and Spada, 1993: 26) or rule-governed theory (Nunan, 1991: 233) as the application of cognitivism principles. It isobvious that the learners with their cognitive capacity are creative individuals whoprocess all input when they interact with others. This process shows that the teacherswant the learner not only to learn the language formally, but also informally from theenvironment as they acquire their first language (Krashen and Terrell, 1988: 26).

The attention to the learners’ affective aspect is known from some teachers’views saying that it is very crucial to arouse the learners’ interest, to know theircharacteristics, and to treat them as friends in learning English. Such views conformto the Humanism theory, which sees the learner as a real human armed with physical,cognitive, and affective elements (Brumfit, 1985: 79). The application of this theoryis found in the way the teachers play their role as a model using English ineveryday’s communication. In addition to this, the teachers always encourage thelearners to keep their positive attitude, interest, and motivation through a goodtreatment. Specifically, the theory is reflected in the attempt to create a comfortablelearning situation by decorating the class with the pictures, posters, and sloganssaying Who never tries, never wins the prize; No Gains without Pains; and NoSweat without Sweet ; and to create a good personal relation. In such situation, thelearners are able to find out the much opportunity to use English freely. Littlewoodsays that the development of communicative competence can only take place if thelearner has moti-vation and opportunity to express his own identity and to relate withthe people around him. It, therefore, requires a learning atmosphere, which gives hima sense of security and a value as individual (1981: 93)

Besides applying some principles of Cognitivism and Humanism theory oflanguage learning, the teachers also use some principles of other learning theory.They are obtained from some views revealing that in learning English there shouldbe a conducive language environment, discipline to use English, textbook, and

13

teacher who facilitates the learning. Such ideas reflect the importance ofenvironmental and habitual factors, which conform to the theory of Behaviorism.The most important principle of this theory is all learning, verbal or nonverbal, isresulted from the same process named building the habits. The habits are formed ifthe learners, responses upon the stimuli are reinforced (Ligthbown and Spada, 1993:23). The process can be described as Stimulus Responses Reinforcement (S-R-R).

The learning activities at PMG underlain by this theory are drilling, discoverylearning, trial and error, and conditioning. Drilling, like substitution andtransformation, is found in introducing new vocabularies and utterances to thelearners every morning in the dormitory and in the classroom with less frequency.Trial and error activity is mostly found in the classroom when the teachers introducenew vocabularies. The learners are required to understand the meaning byassociating the new vocabulary with other words in the context where it appears.Discovery learning is applied when the teachers want to explain a grammatical ruleby asking the learners to analyze samples of sentences to get the point. Conditioningis found in the form of English-use discipline enforcement, which demands thelearners to use English in their communication during the first two weeks everymonth, and the provision of language environment, which enables the learners tomaster English as they acquire their first language.

Based on the above discussion, it can be understood that three theories oflanguage learning are adopted in conducting the teaching of English at PMG. Theyinvolve Cognitivism, Humanism, and Behaviorism synthesized to obtain a fruitfulEnglish teaching.

DesignDesign is closely related to the determination of the objective, syllabus,

learning activities, learner’s role, teacher’s role, and the role of learning materials .

The ObjectiveHierarchically, the objectives that should be accomplished by the learners in

learning English at PMG are the ability to: use English in oral and writtencommunication; read English texts; widen the knowledge; be ready to take a part inbuilding the society; and continue the study in higher level. These objectives aresequenced in accordance with the learner’s needs.

The ability to use English communicatively lies in the initial position asEnglish is one of two official languages used in everyday oral and writtencommunication at PMG. The learners have to reach this competence since it isneeded in conducting interaction with others. If not, they will be thrown off thegroup. Using English, as a means of communication is the realization of functionaland interactional theory of language held by the teachers at PMG. Such ability, beingcommunicative competent in the target language, is regarded as the main objectiveof Communicative Language Teaching (Huda, 1999: 93). According to Hadley, thiscompetence refers to the ability to adapt the language forms with the total

14

informational input, both linguistic and paralinguistic (1993: 4). Supporting thisview, Hymes insists the competence require both knowledge and the ability forlanguage use with respect to the formality, feasibility, appropriateness, and actuality(1979: 14).

The other objectives are considered as secondary ones for they are notimmediately needed. Although secondary, they play very important role indeveloping and transferring the science, technology, and art. In addition, they do notdecline from the functions of English as a foreign language in Indonesia (Depdikbud,1994:1).

SyllabusIn PMG, Syllabus is seen a guidance for the teachers to conduct learning

activity both in and out of the classroom. It consists of detailed and operationalstatements of how learning should be carried out. This view is not different fromDubin and Olshtain’s saying “a syllabus is a more detailed and operational statementof teaching and learning elements which translates the philosophy of the curriculuminto a series of planned steps leading towards more narrowly defined objectives ateach level” (1983: 35). Syllabus is also seen as units of lessons that should be learnedby the learners in certain periods of time. It is in agreement with Rogers’ view,saying that syllabus refers to subjects given in a learning program (1989: 26).

Implicitly, the definition governs the teachers or institution to select andgrade learning materials. Of course, the selection and gradation of the materialsshould be based on their complexity or based on learners’ need. Realizing thisimportance, PMG sets up a syllabus developing team, which is named by Nunan assyllabus designer (1988: 6). With the help of senior and competent teachers, the teamhas the main duty to develop an English syllabus. The development of Englishsyllabus at PMG is aimed at adapting learning materials with the objectives; relatingEnglish subject with other subjects; anticipating the growing up of the science andtechnology; and keeping the good and relevant materials in existence.

The syllabus covers language components, like grammar and vocabulary; andlanguage skills, like listening, speaking, reading, and writing presented in integratedlearning activity or in isolation. To avoid repeating the contents and the learners’boredom, PMG selects and grades them in terms of their simplicity or complexity.The easier the contents the earlier they appear; or the more complex the contents, thelater they appear. Besides this principle, PMG also takes into account the learner’sneed. The more necessary the contents are in communication the earlier they appear.This indicates what the learners get, both in and out of the classroom, can be used ineveryday communication. Such type of syllabus does not contradict to Yalden’s viewpointing out the contents should be selected and graded in terms of how the languageis used, not how it is taught (1986: 25; 1983: 109).

So, from the early beginning, the learners have already been exposed to useEnglish communicatively. It is really possible since all learners have to stay in thedormitory that enables them to get the opportunity to use English in its real context

15

of communication. This possibility to use English in communication reflects thematerials the learners get are meaningful (Milne, 1981: 20). Seen from this point ofview, the English syllabus used by PMG has already fulfilled four characteristics ofthe communicative syllabus as pointed out by Stern (1992: 180). The syllabus shoulddevelop more effective learning; confront the learners to the totality of language useto maintain communicative inter-action; give more chance for the learners to use thetarget language in its real context; and enable the learners to interact with the cultureof the target language.

Based on the above explanation, the communicative syllabus used by PMG canbe categorized as Structural-Functional which tries to bridge between thegrammatical-oriented learning and language use-oriented learning (Yalden, 1983:110). It is relatively easier to implement since the linguistic contents and languageuse contents may be presented in isolation; and the emphasis may also be shifteddifferently following the learners, level. Therefore, it can also be classified asvariable-focus syllabus which is characterized by the principle of the higher the levelof the learners the more language use contents will be or the lower the level of thelearners the more the linguistic contents will be.

What have been selected and graded as learning materials are taken fromvarious resources, like textbooks, English newspaper, English magazine, articlesfrom Internet, CD-Roms, cassettes, or videos. Most of them are authentic ones,which provide the learner the real context in using English (Harmer, 1991: 187).Moreover, the materials used in PMG have also fulfilled the principles ofcommunicative learning: communication principle; task principle; andmeaningfulness principle (Richards and Rogers, 1986:72).

Learning ActivitiesHelping the learners accomplish the objectives, the teachers develop student-

oriented learning activities, which are intended to develop the learners’ mastery onlanguage use and language usage. Classroom learning activities cover lecture,translation, interview, written exercises, role play, group discussion, and listening tothe native speaker. In addition to the classroom activities, PMG also provides variousactivities, which are done outside the class. They are English clubs, weeklydiscussion, reading newspaper and magazines, browsing Internet, vocabularybuilding, listening to English news and song, making composition, morningconversation, drama, speech contest, and laboratory works. These activities reflectthe characteristics of communicative learning, such as concentration on use andappropriacy; an attention to communication tasks; an emphasis on student initiativeand interaction; sensitivity to learners’ differences; and an awareness of variation(Maley, 1986: 88-9).

Seen from the objectives to accomplish, the activities can be grouped into pre-communicative activities, which consist of structural and quasi-communicativeactivities; communicative activities, which cover functional and social interactionactivities (Littlewood, 1981:85-6). Pre-communicative activities are applied in

16

structured interview, lecture, making summaries, and building vocabulary activities,in which the learners are directed to the mastery of linguistic competence. Whereas,communicative activities are implemented in the form of group discussion, freeinterview, speech contest, and role-play activities, in which the learners are directedto the development of communicative competence. Viewed from the doer, theactivities can be differentiated into learners-centered and teacher-centered activities(Ward, 1988: 203). The former, in which the learners dominate the activities, isfound in role-play and discussion, free interview, and so on. The later, in which theteacher becomes the dominant, is found in lecture, and structured interview.

Learner’s RoleCurrently, language learning concentrates on providing the learners with the

opportunity to get the experience how to use the target language in its real context.Such orientation affects the role of learners as well as the teachers. In PMG, thelearners play as motivator, partner, facilitator, and monitor. The learners can play as a motivator and partner since the learning situation atPMG is a very conducive atmosphere to enable them active and get involved inlearning and communication (Gebhard, 1988: 210). The learners’ activeinvolvement, both consciously and unconsciously, likely helps them to solve other’sproblem, question, and give others advice, is categorized as extrinsic motivation. It,consequently encourages the others to learn and be more confident (Rogers, 1996:87).

Related to the communicative interaction in the classroom, the learners play asfacilitator, who does much for the others to learn easily and better (Harris and Bell,1994: 131). This situation does not make the learners under pressure, but help themfeel comfortable and able to communicate naturally. The role as a monitor is a role, which has a very significant contributiontoward the learners’ communicative competence. The learners perform it voluntarilyas their awareness to help the others; or/and compulsorily as the punishment forbreaking the discipline.

Teacher’s RolesThe roles, which are usually done by the teachers in PMG, are as a motivator,

facilitator, partner, monitor, model and evaluator. These are as the consequence ofthe implementation of communicative classroom (Bolitho, 1990: 27). Except as amodel and evaluator, the other roles are the same as the learners’ roles.

The role as a model refers to the teachers’ ability to use English in everydaycommunication. It is the most effective way for the teachers to help the learners usethe target language. The teacher plays the role on purpose to enforce the disciplineand to develop learners’ competence to use English in its real context (Halliwell,1992:15).

17

Different from the previous roles, the role as an evaluator is mainly performedby the teachers in the classroom. Its main focus is to give feedback and critics on theerror made the learners in using English, so that they feel easy to learn English.

Learning Material’s RoleLearning materials used by the teachers to conduct teaching and learning

activity at PMG are taken from various resources including textbooks, newspaper,magazine, videos, cassette, bulletin, and others. Explaining about it, Tomlinson sayslearning material is anything, which is used by teachers or learners to facilitate thelearning of a language (1998: 2).

In general, learning materials function to facilitate the learning, and inparticular, they make the teachers’ explanation much clearer; they help the learnersreview the lesson at home; and they arouse and keep the learners’ interest to study.Facilitating the learning of a language, which is the role of any materials, meansthe learning becomes well directed, effective and efficient. Helping the learners toreview the lesson in their room is achieved through textbooks, and cassette, whichare designed to help the learner learn independently. Arousing the learners’ interest isachieved through the physical performance of materials whether they are welldesigned or not; and the content which is designed in accordance with the level oflearners. They become interested since they can make use of the background know-ledge they have to process a new input (McDowell, 1996: 159).

ProcedureIn PMG, the teaching procedure developed by the teachers covers three

stages: pre-teaching, while-teaching, and post-teaching activity. Pre-teaching isintended to see the learners’ readiness to learn new lesson by attracting theirattention; while-teaching is intended to present the new lesson through variouslearning activities; and post-teaching is intended to know how far the learners haveacquired the new lesson by giving them an evaluation. Ellis names pre-teaching aswarming up stage; and while teaching as presentation and learning stage; and post-teaching as using stage (1994: 567).

Language EnvironmentLinguage environment is mostly defined by PMG’s teachers as an

environment that enables the learners to use English as a means of communication.English is treated as one of the two official languages used in this institution. Thisidea indicates that language environment is not related to linguistic matters, but it isnon linguistic ones (Dubin and Olhstain, 1986: 7-8).

There are two kinds of language environment, formal and informal. Thisclassification is based on the process how the learners acquire the target language. Ina formal language environment, which usually takes place in the classroom, thelearners learn the target English rules mostly or formal linguistic matters. In aninformal language environment, which usually takes place outside the classroom, the

18

learner learns how to use English as a means of everyday communication (Huda,1999: 18). Realizing the importance of language environment, PMG integrates bothenvironments to create a very conducive atmosphere for the learners to acquireEnglish as a means of everyday communication during their stay in the campus. Thisintegration is in line with Nunan’s view saying that language learning done formallyshould be armed with one done informally (1991: 173).

Utilizing Language EnvironmentTo utilize both language environments optimally, PMG carries out some

activities, like setting up language improving boards and motivating the learners.

Language Improving BoardsPMG sets up three language improving boards whose main job is to develop

the learners’ communicative competence They are language motivators recruitedfrom fifth grade learners; Center for Language Improvement (CLI) whose membersare chosen from senior learners; and Language Advisory Council (LAC) whosemembers are taken from competent teachers. Language motivators are responsiblefor the language development of the first to fourth grade learners who stay in onedormitory. CLI, who coordinates all language motivators, has a main job to developthe language of the learners in the campus. LAC, who plays as advisors for languagemotivators and CLI, handles very crucial activities and problems that appear fromsenior learners.

Language Improving Boards’ Activities Their activities are differentiated into threefold: everyday, weekly, and monthlyactivities. Everyday activities include introducing English vocabularies andexpressions, monitoring the learners’ use of English, discipline enforcement andcarrying out language court. Everyday activities are intended to enrich the learners’vocabularies mastery and pragmatic competence through the real exposure ofEnglish use in communication, so that they become accustomed to use English(Munby, 1978: 26).

Weekly activities cover inter-dormitory language contest; speech contest,publishing bulletin, morning conversation exercise, correcting learners’ vocabularieswriting, inviting senior teachers to motivate the learners; and discussion. They areintended not only to develop the learners’ communicative competence, but also tokeep them motivated to learn English.

Monthly activities include a training to use English dictionary, languagecontest, carrying out English vocabularies and expressions mastery test andpublishing conversation guide. Besides to facilitate the learners to acquire English,the activities are intended to evaluate their English development.

Language Use Discipline

19

Providing the learners with the opportunity to use English, PMG conditionsthem to communicate in English through language use discipline. Discipline is meantas enforcing certain rules to produce specified behaviors (Cotton, 2001: 2) or toachieve the goal together (Ur, 1996: 270-1). Since there are two official languages,PMG regulates the first two weeks in a month as English days, and the second twoweeks as Arabic days. During the English days, all learners and teacher have to useEnglish as a means of communication.

SanctionsThere are some efforts done by PMG to enforce the discipline. One of them is

giving those who break it certain sanctions fairly. It conforms to Cotton’s idea sayingthat discipline can be enforced through giving sanctions (2001: 3). The sanctions aregiven on the basis of the rule or discipline the learners break. In general, they takethe forms of assignments, like writing a composition, monitoring other learners’English use; and punishment, like standing in front of the public to speak Englishloudly, or other educative physical punishment. On the one hand, the sanctionsfunction to correct misbehaviors of those who break the rule; and on the other hand,they function as a warning for the others not to break the rule.

Motivating the LearnerAs inspired by Churchward (2001: 2), other efforts done by PMG to enforce

the discipline are motivating the learners and monitoring the learners’ English usecontinuously. Motivating the learner is achieved directly or indirectly throughvarious activities, like giving some advice, correcting the errors wisely, providinglearning facilities, being a good model, and language contests.

Monitoring learners’ English use is done on the basis of the principle “from andfor the learner”. It means the learner himself is the monitor for the others’ Englishuse because of the sanction the learner gets or his awareness to enforce the discipline.It is an effective way to monitor the learners’ English use as the language improvingboards can not manage all learners numbered more or less 5000 persons.

CONCLUSIONBased on the research findings, there are some conclusions can be drawn.

Seen from the approach, there are two points considered important, the theory oflanguage and language learning.

The English teachers at PMG believe in two theories of language, namelyFunctional and Interactional theory. Both theories direct the teaching of English todevelop the learner’s ability to use English as means of communication rather thanthe mastery of its rules.

In relation to the theory of language learning, the teachers believe in threetheories, namely Cognitivism Behaviorism, and Humanism. The application of

20

cognitivism principles is found in developing learning materials in the forms ofexercises and tasks; humanism principles is found in decorating the classroom withthe pictures and slogans that stimulate joyful, comfortable, and peaceful learning;while behaviorism principles is found in a language learning using drill techniques,and conditioning the learner to use English in everyday communication by makinguse of both formal and informal linguistic environments.

Viewed from the design, there are also some important points, like the objectiveand syllabus. The main objective that the learners have to accomplish is the ability touse English in everyday communication. The other objectives that are regarded assecondary and instrumental ones cover the ability to read English texts, enlarge theknowledge, take a part in building the society, and continue his study in highereducation. Helping the learner reach the objectives, PMG facilitates him with thedevelopment of English syllabus. The developed syllabus is named as a structuralfunctional one since the language components and language used are still given inisolation. The materials are selected and graded on the basis of their complexcity andthe learners’ needs in communication. The easier and the nearer the learner needs theerlier the materials appear; and the more difficult and further he needs the later thematerials appear. The materials used by PMG to facilitate learning include textbooks,videos, magazine, newspaper, radio, and Internets. They are presented incommunicative activities which can be student-centered or teacher-centered, likelistening to teacher’s lecture, group discussion, making summary, role-play, andspeech contest, etc. Like other method, the Communicative Language Teachingapplied by English teachers in developing the learner’s English proficiency at PMGrequires the learner’s, teacher’s and materials’ roles. The roles that are commonlyplayed by the learner and teacher are as facilitator, partner, model, motivator,monitor, and evaluator; while the roles the materials play include facilitating thelearning, helping the learner review the lesson, and attracting the learners to keeplearning motivation.

The last component of the design is teaching procedures. The teachers at PMGapply three steps of English teaching: pre-teaching, while-teaching, and post-teaching. The first is intended to know the learners’ readiness to learn new lessons,the second is for presenting the new lesson, and the last is for checking the learners’mastery of the new lesson.

To implement successful English teaching, PMG makes use of both formal andinformal language environments. Formal language environment, like in theclassroom, is the environment where the learners learn English rules mostly orformal linguistic; while informal language environment, like in the room, mosque,kitchen, shopping centers, and sport court, is the environment in which the learneracquires English unconsciously as a means of communication. Such environment isoptimally utilized by PMG through setting up language motivator, CLI, and LAC;various English contests; English use discipline enforcement; and motivating thelearners.

21

IMPLICATION Based on the research findings, the theoretical and practical implications canbe drawn.

Theoretical ImplicationIn implementing Communicative Language Teaching in developing the

learner’s English proficiency, it is necessary to integrate both functional andinteractional theories of language to produce meaningful learning. The two theoriesof language lead the learner to master communicative functions of English used tobuild and maintain his social relation with the others. This integration will be moremeaningful if it is supported by the synthesis of three theories of language learning,as they are complementary to each other. They include behaviorism emphasizinglearning conditioning; cognitivism highlighting the role of cognitive ability inlearning process; and humanism necessitating the treatment of a learner as a wholeperson with his cognitive, affective, and social potential to develop.

Related to the design, the research findings implicate that in developing thedesign of Communicative Language Teaching, the theories of language and languagelearning should be taken into account as the basis to determine the learning objective,develop the syllabus and learning activities, and determine the roles of learner,teacher, and materials.

The research findings also implicate that communicative English learning canbe done effectively and efficiently through three procedural activities. The first, pre-teaching activity, is intended to attract the learners’ attention and interest learn a newlesson. The second, while-teaching, is intended to present learning materials throughvarious learning activities. The third, post-teaching activity, is used to check thelearners’ progress after learning the lesson.

Related the language environment, the research implicate that if the teaching ofEnglish is directed to the development of linguistic competence, the formal languageenvironment is needed; but if the teaching of English is directed to the developmentof communicative competence, both formal and informal language environment areneeded.

Besides theoretical ones, the practical implication can also be elaborated asfollows. To conduct Communicative Language Teaching well, the teacher shoulddevelop his professional competence related to the mastery of English and thecommunicative methodology. A good mastery of English leads him to developlearning materials easily and to be a model how to use English well; and theknowledge of communicative methodology governs him to design appropriatelearning activities.

The research findings show also the importance of providing a conducivelearning atmosphere by creating informal language environment to support theformal one. It implicates that the schools have to provide informal-like languageenvironment to expose the learners in real context of communication. The schools

22

have to give the learners more opportunity to express their ideas in English throughEnglish activities, contests, and English use discipline.

The research limitations and possibility to apply Gontor model ofCommunicative Language Teaching in developing the learners’ English proficiency,necessitate series of further research. It is hoped the research can give a meaningfulcontribution to the implementation of Communicative Language Teaching, indeveloping the learners’ English proficiency.

SUGGESTIONBased on the research finding and implications, the following suggestions can

be drawn up. The first, since the implementation of Communicative LanguageTeaching in developing the third year students’ English proficiency at PMGconducted by the teachers has some strength, it is suggested for the institution tokeep using its own way and following the advancement in English learning andteaching.

The second, if the formal education, like junior and senior high schools want toconduct Communicative Language Teaching in developing the students’ Englishproficiency, it would be better for them to adopt and adapt the way developed byPMG.

The third, it is suggested for the teachers, who want to develop theirprofessionalism, to attend seminar and workshop on communicative Englishlearning. The forth, it is suggested for those who are interested in English learning andteaching to conduct further research on the way PMG apply CommunicativeLanguage Teaching in developing the third year students’ English proficiency.

REFERENCES

Ahmad, Sutrisno, dkk. Warta Dunia Pondok Modern Gontor. Gontor: Gontor Press,2001.

Anonymous, Kurikulum Sekolah Menengah Umum: GBPP Mata pelajaran BahasaInggris. Jakarta: Depdikbud, 1994.

Anonymous. Undang-undang tentang Sistem Pendidikan Nasional (UU No. 2Tahun 1989) dan Peraturan Pelaksanaanya, Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 1992.

Antonellis, Marcia Kemen. “Some Techniques for Group Instruction.“ A ForumAnthology. ed. Anne Covell Newton. Washing-ton D.C.: English LanguagePrograms Division Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs United StatesInformation Agency, 1988.

Anthony, Edward M., “Approach, Method, and Technique”, Teaching English as aSecond Language, ed. Harold B. Allen. New York: University of Minnessete,1963.

Bolitho, Rod. “An Eternal Triangle? Roles for teachers, Learners, and TeachingMaterials in a Communicative Approach.” Language Teaching Methodology

23

for Nineties, ed. Sarinee Anivan. Singapore: Seamo Regional LanguageCentre, 1990.

Brown, H. Douglas. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. EnglewoodCliffs: Prentice Hall Regents, 1994.

Brumfit, Christopher. Communicative Methodology in Language Teaching.Cambridge: CUP, 1984.

-------, Language and Literature Teaching: From Practice to Principle. Oxford:Pergamon Press Ltd., 1985.

Carlson, Neil R. and William Buskit, Psychology: The Science of Behavior. Boston:Allyn & Bacon, 1997.

Churchward, Budd. 11 Techniques for Better Classroom Discipline, http:/members.aol. com/church-ward/ hsl/techniqus.html., Tang-gal 1 Maret 2001.

Cotton, Kethleen, Schoolwide and Classroom Discipline, http: /www.nwrelorg/scpd/sirs/5/ cu. html, Tanggal 1 Maret 2001.

Dubin, Fraida and Olshtain Elite. Course Design. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress, 1986

Ellis, Rod. The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress, 1994.

Finocchiaro, Marry “Reflections on the Past, the Present, and the Future” A ForumAnthology, ed. Anne Covell Newton. Washington D.C: English LanguagePrograms Division Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs United StatesInformation Agency, 1988.

------,“The Functional-Notional Syllabus: Promise, Problems, Practices”, A ForumAnthology, ed. Anne Covell Newton. Washington D.C: English LanguagePrograms Division Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs United StatesInformation Agency, 1988.

Gebhard, Jerry G. “Some Suggestion for the EFL Conversation Class,” A ForumAnthology, ed. Anne Covell Newton. Washing-ton D.C: English LanguageProgram Division, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs U.S.information Agency, 1988.

Gibbons, John. “Instructional Cycle” Teachers Development, ed. Thomas Krall.Washington, D.C.: ELPD United States Information Agency, 1994.

Hadley, Alice Omaggio. Teaching Language in Context. Boston: Heinle & HainlePublisher, 1993.

Halliday, M. A. K. Language as a Social Semiotic. London: Edward Arnold, 1978.Halliwell, Susan, Teaching English in The Primary Classroom. London: Longman,

1992.Harris, Duncan and Bell, Chris, Evaluating and Assessing for Learning. London:

Kogan Page Limited, 1994.Harmer, Jeremy. The Practice of English Language Teaching. London: Longman

Group UK Limited, 1991.Harsh, Wayne “Linguistics and TESOL: A Turbulent Twenty Years”, A Forum

Anthology, ed. Anne Covell Newton. Washington D.C: English LanguagePrograms Division Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs United StatesInformation Agency, 1988.

Huda Nuril, Language learning and Teaching: Issues and Trends. Malang: IKIPMalang Publisher, 1999.

------,Menuju Pengajaran Bahasa Berbasis Strategi Belajar. Malang: IKIP MalangPublisher, 1999.

24

------“Metode AudioLingual VS. Metode Komunikatif: Suatu Perbandingan.” PelbaI, ed. Soejono Dardjowidjojo. Jakar-ta: Lembaga Bahasa Unika Atma Jaya,1989.

Hymes, D. H. “On Communicative Competence, ” The Communicative Approachto Language Teaching, eds. C. J. Brumfit and K. Johnson. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press, 1979.

Jarvis, Peter., Holford, John., and Griffin, Colin. The Theory and Practice ofLearning. London: Kogan Page Limited, 1998.

Johnson, Donna M. Approaches to Reseacrh in Second language Learning NewYork: Longman, 1992.

Kartono, Giri. “Kedudukan dan Fungsi Bahasa Asing di Indonesia.” Politik BahasaNasio-nal 2, ed. Amran Halim. Jakar-ta: PN Balai Pustaka, 1981.

Krashen, Stephen D. and Terrell, Tracy D. The natural Approach: LanguageAcquisition in the Classroom. London: Prentice Hall International, 1988.

Larsen-Freeman, Diane. Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. Oxford:Oxford University Press, 1986.

Lightbown, Patsy M. and Spada, Nina. How Languages are learned. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press, 1993.

Littlewood, William. Communicative Language Teaching. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, 1981.

Maley, Alan. “A Rose is a Rose, or is it?: Can communicative competence betaught?” The Practice of Communicative Teaching, ed. Christopher BrumfitOxford: Pergamon Press, 1986.

Marshal, Catherine and Gretghen B. Rossman. Designing Qualitative Research.Newbury Park: Sage Publication, inc., 1989.

McDowell, Liz. “Enabling Student learning Through Innovative Assessment,”Enabling Student Learning: Systems and Strategies, ed. Gina Wisker dan SallyBrown. London: Kogan Page Limited, 1996.

Milne, John. “Teaching Adult Beginner.” Communication in the Classroom, eds.Keith Johnson and Keith Morrow. Essex: Longman Group Limited, 1981.

Moleong, Lexy J. Metodologi Penlitian Kualitatif. Bandung: PT RemajaRosdakarya, 1989.

Morrow, Keith. “Principle of Communicative Methodology Communication in theClass-room, eds. Keith Johnson and Keith Morrow. Essex: Longman GroupLimited, 1981.

Munby, John. Communicative Syllabus Design. Cambridge: Cam-bridge UniversityPress, 1978.

Nunan, David. Language Teaching Methodology. London: Prentice HallInternational Ltd., 1991.

_-----,“An Empirically Based Methodology for the Nineties,” Language Teachingmethodology for the Nineties, ed. Sarinee Anivan. Singapore: SEAMEORegional Language Centre, 1990.

_------, Syllabus Design. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988.Papalia, Anthony Learner-Centered Teaching: Methods and Materials.

Massachusetts: Newbury House Publisher, Inc., 1976.Pearse, Roy. “Realistic and Real English in the Classroom.” A Forum Anthology.

Washington, D.C.: English Language Program Division, Bureau of Educationaland Cultural Affairs, United States Information Agency, 1988.

25

Popham, W. James. “Objective,” The Curriculum Studies Reader, ed. David J.Flinders dan Stephen J. Thornton. New York: Routledge, 1997.

Prodromou, Luke “The Good Language Teacher,” Teacher Development, ed.Thomas Kral. Washington, D.C.: English Language Programs Division UnitedStates Information Agency, 1994.

Purwo, Bambang Kaswanti. “Pragmatik dan Pengajaran Bahasa”, PELBA I, ed.Soejono Dardjowidjojo. Jakarta: Lembaga Bahasa Unika Atma Jaya, 1988

Richards, Jack C. and Rodgers, Theodore S. Approaches and Methods in LanguageTeaching. Cambridge: CUP, 1986.

Rivers, Wilga M. “Psychology, Linguistics, and Language Teaching”, A ForumAnthology, ed. Anne Covell Newton Washington D.C: English LanguagePrograms Division Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs United StatesInformation Agency, 1988.

Rogers, Alan. Teaching Adults. Buckingham: Open University Press, 1996.Rodgers, Ted. “The Future of Language Teaching Methodology.” TEFLIN Journal.

eds. Zuchridin Suryawinata dan Willy A. Renandya. Volume IX Number I,Agustus 1998.

Rodgers, Theodore S. “Syllabus Design, Curriculum Development, and PolityDetermination.” The Second Language Curriculum. Ed. Robert Keith JohnsonCambridge: CUP, 1989.

Sanders, Austin. “Activities for Communication Practice.” A Forum Anthology, ed.Anne Covell Newton. Washington D. C: English Language Division, Bureauof Educational and Cultural Affairs Unites States Information Agency, 1988.

Spradley, James P. Participant Observation. New York: Holt, Rinehart andWinston, 1980.

------,The Ethnographic Interview. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1979.Stern, H. H. Issues and Opinions in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University

Press, 1992.Tomlinson, Brian. “Introduction.” Material Development in Language Teaching, ed.

Brian Tomlinson. Cambridge: CUP, 1998.Ur, Penny. A Course in Language Teaching. Cambridge: CUP, 1996.Ward, James G. “Communicative Activities in The ESL Class-room.” A Forum

Anthology. ed. Anne Covell Newton. Washing-ton D. C: English LanguageDivision, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs Unites States InformationAgency, 1988.

Wilkins, D. A. “Grammatical, Situational and Notional Syllabuses.” TheCommunicative Approach to Language Teaching, eds. C. J. Brumfit dan K.Johnson Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979.

Williams, David. Penelitian Naturalistik, Penerjemah Lexy J. Moleong Jakarta:Fakultas Pascasasjana IKIP, 1989.

Wiryosukarto, Amir Hamzah, dkk. KH. Imam Zarkasyi dari Gontor MerintisPesantren Modern. Gontor: Gontor Press, 1996.

26

27

1