A Case Study of Academic Writing Development Through Principled Versus Standard Clt Method at Binus University
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21512/humaniora.v4i2.3514Keywords:
academic writing skills, academic writing development, principled CLT method, standard CLT methodAbstract
The purpose of the research project is to investigate how far the academic writing skills of Binus University students can be developed through two conflicting CLT methods: standard and principled. The research project is expected to result in computer-animated format which can be used as one of the main tools in teaching and learning grammar at Binus University. The research project uses the qualitative approach, and thus uses verbal data. The research project involves two subject groups (experimental and control). The experimental group will receive the treatment of grammar learning by using the Principled CLT approach, while the control group receives the standard CLT approach. Survey is then conducted to the two groups so as to find out their comments on the two teaching methods. From the results of the questionnaires, it is found that Principled CLT method is favored for its knowledge and accuracy factors, while the Standard CLT is preferred for its fun and independence factors.
Plum Analytics
References
Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., Razavieh, A., & Sorensen, C. (2006). Introduction to Research in Education. USA: Thomson Wadsworth.
Asmani, A. B. (2011) How do Binus undergraduate students value English under linguistics imperialism and macroacquisition influences? Its impacts on the ELT model (qualitative approach) Lingua Cultura, Vol. 6 (May 2012), 14.
Celce-Murcia, M., Dornyei, Z., & Thurrell, S. (1997). Direct approaches in L2 instruction: a turning point in communicative language teaching? TESOL Quarterly, 31 (1), 141 – 152
Cohen, L., Manion, L., et. al. (2000). Research Methods in Education. London: Routledge Farmer.
Joyce, H. S., and Burns, A. (1999). Focus on Grammar. National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research.
Savignon, S. J. (1990). Communicative language teaching: Definitions and directions. In J. E. Alatis (ed.), Goergetwon University Round Table on Language and Linguistics 1990 (pp. 205-217). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Spada, N., & Lightbown, P. M. (1993). Instruction and the development of questions in the L2 classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 205-224.
Usher, R. (1996). A critique of neglected epistemological assumptions of educational research. In D. Scott and R. Usher (eds), Understanding educational research. London: Routledge.
Widdowson, H. G. (1989). Knowledge of language and ability for use. Applied Linguistics,10, 128-137
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
a. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License - Share Alike that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
b. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
USER RIGHTS
All articles published Open Access will be immediately and permanently free for everyone to read and download. We are continuously working with our author communities to select the best choice of license options, currently being defined for this journal as follows: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC BY-SA)
