classroom action research examples pdf

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

1 What is Action Research for Classroom Teachers?

ESSENTIAL QUESTIONS

• What is the nature of action research?
• How does action research develop in the classroom?
• What models of action research work best for your classroom?
• What are the epistemological, ontological, theoretical underpinnings of action research?

Educational research provides a vast landscape of knowledge on topics related to teaching and learning, curriculum and assessment, students’ cognitive and affective needs, cultural and socio-economic factors of schools, and many other factors considered viable to improving schools. Educational stakeholders rely on research to make informed decisions that ultimately affect the quality of schooling for their students. Accordingly, the purpose of educational research is to engage in disciplined inquiry to generate knowledge on topics significant to the students, teachers, administrators, schools, and other educational stakeholders. Just as the topics of educational research vary, so do the approaches to conducting educational research in the classroom. Your approach to research will be shaped by your context, your professional identity, and paradigm (set of beliefs and assumptions that guide your inquiry). These will all be key factors in how you generate knowledge related to your work as an educator.

Action research is an approach to educational research that is commonly used by educational practitioners and professionals to examine, and ultimately improve, their pedagogy and practice. In this way, action research represents an extension of the reflection and critical self-reflection that an educator employs on a daily basis in their classroom. When students are actively engaged in learning, the classroom can be dynamic and uncertain, demanding the constant attention of the educator. Considering these demands, educators are often only able to engage in reflection that is fleeting, and for the purpose of accommodation, modification, or formative assessment. Action research offers one path to more deliberate, substantial, and critical reflection that can be documented and analyzed to improve an educator’s practice.

Purpose of Action Research

As one of many approaches to educational research, it is important to distinguish the potential purposes of action research in the classroom. This book focuses on action research as a method to enable and support educators in pursuing effective pedagogical practices by transforming the quality of teaching decisions and actions, to subsequently enhance student engagement and learning. Being mindful of this purpose, the following aspects of action research are important to consider as you contemplate and engage with action research methodology in your classroom:

• Action research is a process for improving educational practice. Its methods involve action, evaluation, and reflection. It is a process to gather evidence to implement change in practices.
• Action research is participative and collaborative. It is undertaken by individuals with a common purpose.
• Action research is situation and context-based.
• Action research develops reflection practices based on the interpretations made by participants.
• Knowledge is created through action and application.
• Action research can be based in problem-solving, if the solution to the problem results in the improvement of practice.
• Action research is iterative; plans are created, implemented, revised, then implemented, lending itself to an ongoing process of reflection and revision.
• In action research, findings emerge as action develops and takes place; however, they are not conclusive or absolute, but ongoing (Koshy, 2010, pgs. 1-2).

In thinking about the purpose of action research, it is helpful to situate action research as a distinct paradigm of educational research. I like to think about action research as part of the larger concept of living knowledge. Living knowledge has been characterized as “a quest for life, to understand life and to create… knowledge which is valid for the people with whom I work and for myself” (Swantz, in Reason & Bradbury, 2001, pg. 1). Why should educators care about living knowledge as part of educational research? As mentioned above, action research is meant “to produce practical knowledge that is useful to people in the everyday conduct of their lives and to see that action research is about working towards practical outcomes” (Koshy, 2010, pg. 2). However, it is also about:

creating new forms of understanding, since action without reflection and understanding is blind, just as theory without action is meaningless. The participatory nature of action research makes it only possible with, for and by persons and communities, ideally involving all stakeholders both in the questioning and sense making that informs the research, and in the action, which is its focus. (Reason & Bradbury, 2001, pg. 2)

In an effort to further situate action research as living knowledge, Jean McNiff reminds us that “there is no such ‘thing’ as ‘action research’” (2013, pg. 24). In other words, action research is not static or finished, it defines itself as it proceeds. McNiff’s reminder characterizes action research as action-oriented, and a process that individuals go through to make their learning public to explain how it informs their practice. Action research does not derive its meaning from an abstract idea, or a self-contained discovery – action research’s meaning stems from the way educators negotiate the problems and successes of living and working in the classroom, school, and community.

While we can debate the idea of action research, there are people who are action researchers, and they use the idea of action research to develop principles and theories to guide their practice. Action research, then, refers to an organization of principles that guide action researchers as they act on shared beliefs, commitments, and expectations in their inquiry.

Reflection and the Process of Action Research

When an individual engages in reflection on their actions or experiences, it is typically for the purpose of better understanding those experiences, or the consequences of those actions to improve related action and experiences in the future. Reflection in this way develops knowledge around these actions and experiences to help us better regulate those actions in the future. The reflective process generates new knowledge regularly for classroom teachers and informs their classroom actions.

Unfortunately, the knowledge generated by educators through the reflective process is not always prioritized among the other sources of knowledge educators are expected to utilize in the classroom. Educators are expected to draw upon formal types of knowledge, such as textbooks, content standards, teaching standards, district curriculum and behavioral programs, etc., to gain new knowledge and make decisions in the classroom. While these forms of knowledge are important, the reflective knowledge that educators generate through their pedagogy is the amalgamation of these types of knowledge enacted in the classroom. Therefore, reflective knowledge is uniquely developed based on the action and implementation of an educator’s pedagogy in the classroom. Action research offers a way to formalize the knowledge generated by educators so that it can be utilized and disseminated throughout the teaching profession.

Research is concerned with the generation of knowledge, and typically creating knowledge related to a concept, idea, phenomenon, or topic. Action research generates knowledge around inquiry in practical educational contexts. Action research allows educators to learn through their actions with the purpose of developing personally or professionally. Due to its participatory nature, the process of action research is also distinct in educational research. There are many models for how the action research process takes shape. I will share a few of those here. Each model utilizes the following processes to some extent:

• Plan a change;
• Take action to enact the change;
• Observe the process and consequences of the change;
• Reflect on the process and consequences;
• Act, observe, & reflect again and so on.

Figure 1.1 Basic action research cycle

There are many other models that supplement the basic process of action research with other aspects of the research process to consider. For example, figure 1.2 illustrates a spiral model of action research proposed by Kemmis and McTaggart (2004). The spiral model emphasizes the cyclical process that moves beyond the initial plan for change. The spiral model also emphasizes revisiting the initial plan and revising based on the initial cycle of research:

Figure 1.2 Interpretation of action research spiral, Kemmis and McTaggart (2004, p. 595)

Other models of action research reorganize the process to emphasize the distinct ways knowledge takes shape in the reflection process. O’Leary’s (2004, p. 141) model, for example, recognizes that the research may take shape in the classroom as knowledge emerges from the teacher’s observations. O’Leary highlights the need for action research to be focused on situational understanding and implementation of action, initiated organically from real-time issues:

Figure 1.3 Interpretation of O’Leary’s cycles of research, O’Leary (2000, p. 141)

Lastly, Macintyre’s (2000, p. 1) model, offers a different characterization of the action research process. Macintyre emphasizes a messier process of research with the initial reflections and conclusions as the benchmarks for guiding the research process. Macintyre emphasizes the flexibility in planning, acting, and observing stages to allow the process to be naturalistic. Our interpretation of Macintyre process is below:

Figure 1.4 Interpretation of the action research cycle, Macintyre (2000, p. 1)

We believe it is important to prioritize the flexibility of the process, and encourage you to only use these models as basic guides for your process. Your process may look similar, or you may diverge from these models as you better understand your students, context, and data.

Definitions of Action Research and Examples

At this point, it may be helpful for readers to have a working definition of action research and some examples to illustrate the methodology in the classroom. Bassey (1998, p. 93) offers a very practical definition and describes “action research as an inquiry which is carried out in order to understand, to evaluate and then to change, in order to improve educational practice.” Cohen and Manion (1994, p. 192) situate action research differently, and describe action research as emergent, writing:

essentially an on-the-spot procedure designed to deal with a concrete problem located in an immediate situation. This means that ideally, the step-by-step process is constantly monitored over varying periods of time and by a variety of mechanisms (questionnaires, diaries, interviews and case studies, for example) so that the ensuing feedback may be translated into modifications, adjustment, directional changes, redefinitions, as necessary, so as to bring about lasting benefit to the ongoing process itself rather than to some future occasion.

Lastly, Koshy (2010, p. 9) describes action research as:

a constructive inquiry, during which the researcher constructs his or her knowledge of specific issues through planning, acting, evaluating, refining and learning from the experience. It is a continuous learning process in which the researcher learns and also shares the newly generated knowledge with those who may benefit from it.

These definitions highlight the distinct features of action research and emphasize the purposeful intent of action researchers to improve, refine, reform, and problem-solve issues in their educational context. To better understand the distinctness of action research, these are some examples of action research topics:

Examples of Action Research Topics

• Flexible seating in 4th grade classroom to increase effective collaborative learning.
• Structured homework protocols for increasing student achievement.
• Developing a system of formative feedback for 8th grade writing.
• Using music to stimulate creative writing.
• Weekly brown bag lunch sessions to improve responses to PD from staff.
• Using exercise balls as chairs for better classroom management.

Action Research in Theory

Action research-based inquiry in educational contexts and classrooms involves distinct participants – students, teachers, and other educational stakeholders within the system. All of these participants are engaged in activities to benefit the students, and subsequently society as a whole. Action research contributes to these activities and potentially enhances the participants’ roles in the education system. Participants’ roles are enhanced based on two underlying principles:

• communities, schools, and classrooms are sites of socially mediated actions, and action research provides a greater understanding of self and new knowledge of how to negotiate these socially mediated environments;
• communities, schools, and classrooms are part of social systems in which humans interact with many cultural tools, and action research provides a basis to construct and analyze these interactions.

In our quest for knowledge and understanding, we have consistently analyzed human experience over time and have distinguished between types of reality. Humans have constantly sought “facts” and “truth” about reality that can be empirically demonstrated or observed.

Social systems are based on beliefs, and generally, beliefs about what will benefit the greatest amount of people in that society. Beliefs, and more specifically the rationale or support for beliefs, are not always easy to demonstrate or observe as part of our reality. Take the example of an English Language Arts teacher who prioritizes argumentative writing in her class. She believes that argumentative writing demonstrates the mechanics of writing best among types of writing, while also providing students a skill they will need as citizens and professionals. While we can observe the students writing, and we can assess their ability to develop a written argument, it is difficult to observe the students’ understanding of argumentative writing and its purpose in their future. This relates to the teacher’s beliefs about argumentative writing; we cannot observe the real value of the teaching of argumentative writing. The teacher’s rationale and beliefs about teaching argumentative writing are bound to the social system and the skills their students will need to be active parts of that system. Therefore, our goal through action research is to demonstrate the best ways to teach argumentative writing to help all participants understand its value as part of a social system.

The knowledge that is conveyed in a classroom is bound to, and justified by, a social system. A postmodernist approach to understanding our world seeks knowledge within a social system, which is directly opposed to the empirical or positivist approach which demands evidence based on logic or science as rationale for beliefs. Action research does not rely on a positivist viewpoint to develop evidence and conclusions as part of the research process. Action research offers a postmodernist stance to epistemology (theory of knowledge) and supports developing questions and new inquiries during the research process. In this way action research is an emergent process that allows beliefs and decisions to be negotiated as reality and meaning are being constructed in the socially mediated space of the classroom.

Theorizing Action Research for the Classroom

All research, at its core, is for the purpose of generating new knowledge and contributing to the knowledge base of educational research. Action researchers in the classroom want to explore methods of improving their pedagogy and practice. The starting place of their inquiry stems from their pedagogy and practice, so by nature the knowledge created from their inquiry is often contextually specific to their classroom, school, or community. Therefore, we should examine the theoretical underpinnings of action research for the classroom. It is important to connect action research conceptually to experience; for example, Levin and Greenwood (2001, p. 105) make these connections:

• Action research is context bound and addresses real life problems.
• Action research is inquiry where participants and researchers cogenerate knowledge through collaborative communicative processes in which all participants’ contributions are taken seriously.
• The meanings constructed in the inquiry process lead to social action or these reflections and action lead to the construction of new meanings.
• The credibility/validity of action research knowledge is measured according to whether the actions that arise from it solve problems (workability) and increase participants’ control over their own situation.

Educators who engage in action research will generate new knowledge and beliefs based on their experiences in the classroom. Let us emphasize that these are all important to you and your work, as both an educator and researcher. It is these experiences, beliefs, and theories that are often discounted when more official forms of knowledge (e.g., textbooks, curriculum standards, districts standards) are prioritized. These beliefs and theories based on experiences should be valued and explored further, and this is one of the primary purposes of action research in the classroom. These beliefs and theories should be valued because they were meaningful aspects of knowledge constructed from teachers’ experiences. Developing meaning and knowledge in this way forms the basis of constructivist ideology, just as teachers often try to get their students to construct their own meanings and understandings when experiencing new ideas.  

Classroom Teachers Constructing their Own Knowledge

Most of you are probably at least minimally familiar with constructivism, or the process of constructing knowledge. However, what is constructivism precisely, for the purposes of action research? Many scholars have theorized constructivism and have identified two key attributes (Koshy, 2010; von Glasersfeld, 1987):

• Knowledge is not passively received, but actively developed through an individual’s cognition;
• Human cognition is adaptive and finds purpose in organizing the new experiences of the world, instead of settling for absolute or objective truth.

Considering these two attributes, constructivism is distinct from conventional knowledge formation because people can develop a theory of knowledge that orders and organizes the world based on their experiences, instead of an objective or neutral reality. When individuals construct knowledge, there are interactions between an individual and their environment where communication, negotiation and meaning-making are collectively developing knowledge. For most educators, constructivism may be a natural inclination of their pedagogy. Action researchers have a similar relationship to constructivism because they are actively engaged in a process of constructing knowledge. However, their constructions may be more formal and based on the data they collect in the research process. Action researchers also are engaged in the meaning making process, making interpretations from their data. These aspects of the action research process situate them in the constructivist ideology. Just like constructivist educators, action researchers’ constructions of knowledge will be affected by their individual and professional ideas and values, as well as the ecological context in which they work (Biesta & Tedder, 2006). The relations between constructivist inquiry and action research is important, as Lincoln (2001, p. 130) states:

much of the epistemological, ontological, and axiological belief systems are the same or similar, and methodologically, constructivists and action researchers work in similar ways, relying on qualitative methods in face-to-face work, while buttressing information, data and background with quantitative method work when necessary or useful.

While there are many links between action research and educators in the classroom, constructivism offers the most familiar and practical threads to bind the beliefs of educators and action researchers.  

Epistemology, Ontology, and Action Research

It is also important for educators to consider the philosophical stances related to action research to better situate it with their beliefs and reality. When researchers make decisions about the methodology they intend to use, they will consider their ontological and epistemological stances. It is vital that researchers clearly distinguish their philosophical stances and understand the implications of their stance in the research process, especially when collecting and analyzing their data. In what follows, we will discuss ontological and epistemological stances in relation to action research methodology.

Ontology, or the theory of being, is concerned with the claims or assumptions we make about ourselves within our social reality – what do we think exists, what does it look like, what entities are involved and how do these entities interact with each other (Blaikie, 2007). In relation to the discussion of constructivism, generally action researchers would consider their educational reality as socially constructed. Social construction of reality happens when individuals interact in a social system. Meaningful construction of concepts and representations of reality develop through an individual’s interpretations of others’ actions. These interpretations become agreed upon by members of a social system and become part of social fabric, reproduced as knowledge and beliefs to develop assumptions about reality. Researchers develop meaningful constructions based on their experiences and through communication. Educators as action researchers will be examining the socially constructed reality of schools. In the United States, many of our concepts, knowledge, and beliefs about schooling have been socially constructed over the last hundred years. For example, a group of teachers may look at why fewer female students enroll in upper-level science courses at their school. This question deals directly with the social construction of gender and specifically what careers females have been conditioned to pursue. We know this is a social construction in some school social systems because in other parts of the world, or even the United States, there are schools that have more females enrolled in upper level science courses than male students. Therefore, the educators conducting the research have to recognize the socially constructed reality of their school and consider this reality throughout the research process. Action researchers will use methods of data collection that support their ontological stance and clarify their theoretical stance throughout the research process.

Koshy (2010, p. 23-24) offers another example of addressing the ontological challenges in the classroom:

A teacher who was concerned with increasing her pupils’ motivation and enthusiasm for learning decided to introduce learning diaries which the children could take home. They were invited to record their reactions to the day’s lessons and what they had learnt. The teacher reported in her field diary that the learning diaries stimulated the children’s interest in her lessons, increased their capacity to learn, and generally improved their level of participation in lessons. The challenge for the teacher here is in the analysis and interpretation of the multiplicity of factors accompanying the use of diaries. The diaries were taken home so the entries may have been influenced by discussions with parents. Another possibility is that children felt the need to please their teacher. Another possible influence was that their increased motivation was as a result of the difference in style of teaching which included more discussions in the classroom based on the entries in the dairies.

Here you can see the challenge for the action researcher is working in a social context with multiple factors, values, and experiences that were outside of the teacher’s control. The teacher was only responsible for introducing the diaries as a new style of learning. The students’ engagement and interactions with this new style of learning were all based upon their socially constructed notions of learning inside and outside of the classroom. A researcher with a positivist ontological stance would not consider these factors, and instead might simply conclude that the dairies increased motivation and interest in the topic, as a result of introducing the diaries as a learning strategy.

Epistemology, or the theory of knowledge, signifies a philosophical view of what counts as knowledge – it justifies what is possible to be known and what criteria distinguishes knowledge from beliefs (Blaikie, 1993). Positivist researchers, for example, consider knowledge to be certain and discovered through scientific processes. Action researchers collect data that is more subjective and examine personal experience, insights, and beliefs.

Action researchers utilize interpretation as a means for knowledge creation. Action researchers have many epistemologies to choose from as means of situating the types of knowledge they will generate by interpreting the data from their research. For example, Koro-Ljungberg et al., (2009) identified several common epistemologies in their article that examined epistemological awareness in qualitative educational research, such as: objectivism, subjectivism, constructionism, contextualism, social epistemology, feminist epistemology, idealism, naturalized epistemology, externalism, relativism, skepticism, and pluralism. All of these epistemological stances have implications for the research process, especially data collection and analysis. Please see the table on pages 689-90, linked below for a sketch of these potential implications:

Again, Koshy (2010, p. 24) provides an excellent example to illustrate the epistemological challenges within action research:

A teacher of 11-year-old children decided to carry out an action research project which involved a change in style in teaching mathematics. Instead of giving children mathematical tasks displaying the subject as abstract principles, she made links with other subjects which she believed would encourage children to see mathematics as a discipline that could improve their understanding of the environment and historic events. At the conclusion of the project, the teacher reported that applicable mathematics generated greater enthusiasm and understanding of the subject.

The educator/researcher engaged in action research-based inquiry to improve an aspect of her pedagogy. She generated knowledge that indicated she had improved her students’ understanding of mathematics by integrating it with other subjects – specifically in the social and ecological context of her classroom, school, and community. She valued constructivism and students generating their own understanding of mathematics based on related topics in other subjects. Action researchers working in a social context do not generate certain knowledge, but knowledge that emerges and can be observed and researched again, building upon their knowledge each time.

Researcher Positionality in Action Research

In this first chapter, we have discussed a lot about the role of experiences in sparking the research process in the classroom. Your experiences as an educator will shape how you approach action research in your classroom. Your experiences as a person in general will also shape how you create knowledge from your research process. In particular, your experiences will shape how you make meaning from your findings. It is important to be clear about your experiences when developing your methodology too. This is referred to as researcher positionality. Maher and Tetreault (1993, p. 118) define positionality as:

Gender, race, class, and other aspects of our identities are markers of relational positions rather than essential qualities. Knowledge is valid when it includes an acknowledgment of the knower’s specific position in any context, because changing contextual and relational factors are crucial for defining identities and our knowledge in any given situation.

By presenting your positionality in the research process, you are signifying the type of socially constructed, and other types of, knowledge you will be using to make sense of the data. As Maher and Tetreault explain, this increases the trustworthiness of your conclusions about the data. This would not be possible with a positivist ontology. We will discuss positionality more in chapter 6, but we wanted to connect it to the overall theoretical underpinnings of action research.

Advantages of Engaging in Action Research in the Classroom

In the following chapters, we will discuss how action research takes shape in your classroom, and we wanted to briefly summarize the key advantages to action research methodology over other types of research methodology. As Koshy (2010, p. 25) notes, action research provides useful methodology for school and classroom research because:

Advantages of Action Research for the Classroom

• research can be set within a specific context or situation;
• researchers can be participants – they don’t have to be distant and detached from the situation;
• it involves continuous evaluation and modifications can be made easily as the project progresses;
• there are opportunities for theory to emerge from the research rather than always follow a previously formulated theory;
• the study can lead to open-ended outcomes;
• through action research, a researcher can bring a story to life.

Action Research Copyright © by J. Spencer Clark; Suzanne Porath; Julie Thiele; and Morgan Jobe is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

A CLASSROOM ACTION RESEARCH: IMPROVING SPEAKING SKILLS THROUGH INFORMATION GAP ACTIVITIES

The research was based on a preliminary study on the causes of problems related to the students " inability to speak English. One of the research objectives is to describe the atmosphere in improving speaking by using activities in the Information Gap Technique (IGT). The researcher and the collaborator worked together in designing the lesson plans, implementing the actions, making observations and reflecting on the results. The subjects of this research study were second semester students from the English Department at Almuslim University. This study was conducted in three cycles following the procedures for action research, namely planning, implementing, observing and reflecting. To collect data, the researcher used instruments of observations, lists, tests and questionnaires. The data obtained was presented in two ways, qualitatively and quantitatively. The findings showed that IGT activities were effective in improving the speaking abilities of the student in class. This can be seen from the improvements after each cycle. This can be seen by the rise in the students " mean scores in the test results: 58.8 in the first cycle, 68 in the second cycle and 81.3 in the third cycle. Improvement was also seen based on the results from the observations that showed positivity, and good responses from the students. From the questionnaire results, it was found that the mean score for the students " perception was 3,616. This means that the students responded positively to the implementation of this technique.

Related Papers

OKARA: Jurnal Bahasa dan Sastra

Ansharul Fuqaha

Regina Regina

AbstractThe purpose of this study is to improve students’ speaking ability by using information gap technique to the eighth grade class F students of SMP Negeri 1 Rasau Jaya in academic year 2018/2019. This study was conducted by applying classroom action research method which is appropriate to overcome the existing problem faced by the students. The differences between spoken and written of English words caused the students difficult to pronounce English correctly. It makes them afraid to speak English in the classroom. The researcher used observation and measurement techniques to collect the data and used the observation checklist and field notes as the tools to collect the data in order to get the research finding. The researcher conducted this study in two cycles and the results showed that the use of information gap technique improved the students’ speaking ability in the aspect of the students’ pronunciation which became the problem in this study. It could be seen from the stu...

PROJECT (Professional Journal of English Education)

Robiatul adawiah

Speaking is the one of language skill that is used in communication to deliver the intention of utterances. speaking is an activity that can not be separated with teaching and learning process. speaking has become a skill that should be owned by teacher. Information gap activity is the activity that each student have different information that should be completed with exchanging the information with their friend because there is a gap between the information. The objective of the research is whether information gap activity effective to the students’ speaking ability. The writer used quantitative research design and for the method is pre-experimental method. The participants of the research is X IPA 2 of MAN 4 Karawang consist of thirty two students. The data conducted through pretest and posttest and computed using SPSS 24. The result of the test is effective. From the normality of distribution test, the result of the test is normal, significance value on Kolmogrov Smirnov is 0.078...

Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on English Language and Teaching (ICOELT-8 2020)

gibran arjuna

EduLite: Journal of English Education, Literature and Culture

ranti harvi rahimi

The final project was about the use of information gap technique to improve speaking skill. The objective of this study was to find out whether Information Gap technique was effective to improve students’ speaking skill or not. A quasi experimental research design was used in this study. The population of this study was the eleventh graders of MAN 2 Semarang in the academic year 2014/2015 with the number of population around 210 students. Non-equivalent groups’ pretest-posttest design was used in this study. Two classes were taken as the samples with around 60 students. The data were collected by using several activities. They were pre-test, treatment, and post-test. The result of this study shows that the pretest average of experimental class was 45.81 while the pretest average of control class was 42.12. After giving treatment for four meetings the posttest average of experimental class was 70.76 and while the posttest average control class was 49.48. The result of the analysis sh...

EXPOSURE : JURNAL PENDIDIKAN BAHASA DAN SASTRA INGGRIS

Nurdevi Abdul

This study was conducted to know whether or not the use of Information Gap Activities improves students’ accuracy in speaking skill that covers three elements of accuracy; vocabulary, pronunciation, and grammar; and to know whether or not the use of Information Gap Activities improves students’ literal comprehension in reading skill. This research applied a quasi-experimental design; the nonequivalent control group design. It used two groups; experimental groups and control group. The data obtained from the test was analyzed quantitatively and then its’ result was compared with t-table to know whether they were significantly different or not. The data showed students’ mean score of accuracy in speaking skill and literal comprehension in reading skill improved after teaching by using Information Gap Activities. In experimental class, the students’ accuracy of pretest was 1.55 and improved to be 3.06 in posttest, students’ literal comprehension of protest was 0.82 and posttest was 3.2...

Oviana Puspitasari

IMPROVING THE SECOND GRADE STUDENTS’ SPEAKING SKILLS THROUGH INFORMATION GAP ACTIVITIES AT SMP N 2 SLEMAN IN THE ACADEMIC YEAR OF 2010/2011 By Oviana Puspitasari 06202244020 ABSTRACT This research study is aimed at improving the students’ speaking skills through information gap activities at SMP N 2 Sleman. To limit the aspects to be analysed in this study, the researcher formulates three research questions: (1) How are the information gap activities implemented in the second grade of SMP N 2 Sleman?, (2) How can information gap activities be applied to improve the students’ speaking skills?, and (3) How are the students’ responses to the implementation of information gap activities? The study was action research in two cycles. In the study, the researcher collaborated with the English teacher and the second grade students of SMP N 2 Sleman. Data of this study were qualitative in nature supported by quantitative data. Qualitative data were obtained from the results of classroom obse...

Lucy Dewinta Elvan

Abstrak Berdasarkan observasi di kelas XI Program Keahlian Usaha Perjalanan Wisata SMK Negeri I Gorontalo, Nampak bahwa para siswa memiliki masalah dalam menyelesaikan tugas speaking yang diberikan oleh guru. Para siswa biasanya takut dan malu dalam melakukan tugas tersebut. Berdasarkan pengalaman dan realitas dalam pembelajaran di kelas, menunjukkan bahwa hanya terdapat 33,3% dari 36 siswa yang mampu melakukan tugas speaking yang diberikan guru dengan baik. Hal ini menunjukkan bahwa kompetensi siswa dalam speaking, harus segera ditingkatkan. Aspek-aspek yang dinilai dalam speaking adalah; pronunciation grammar, word choice, fluency dan communicative ability. Strategi yang biasa digunakan dalam pengajaran speaking masih konvensional dan kadang-kadang tidak relevan dengan materi. Para siswa hanya menghapal dialog yang ada dalam buku paket dan mendemonstrasikannya di depan kelas. Solusi dari persoalan ini, peneliti menggunakan Information Gap Technique dalam pembelajaran speaking, untuk membantu meningkatkan kompetensi siswa kelas XI Program Keahlian Usaha Perjalanan Wisata dalam speaking. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa pada siklus pertama, terdapat 25 siswa (69,44%) belum berhasil dalam pembelajaran dan 11 siswa lainnya (30,56%) berhasil. Pada siklus kedua, terdapat 36 siswa (97,22%) yang berhasil. Berdasarkan temuan di atas dapat disimpulkan bahwa Information Gap Technique dapat meningkatkan kompetensi speaking siswa kelas XI Program Keahlian Usaha Perjalanan Wisata SMK Negeri I Gorontalo.

Opny Vitia Randha

Abstract: The research is a classroom research that was conducted based on the problem occurred at the eighth grade students of SMP 34 Pekanbaru at studying the improvement on the ability of the eighth grade students of SMP 34 Pekanbaru in speaking in making information questions. Besides, knowledge in making information questions is mostly improved after being taught by information gap activity method. The participants were 34 students from VIII 2 of SMP 34 Pekanbaru. This research was conducted in two cycles. The data collection technique was obtained through (1) observation sheet which was applied to know the students and teacher performance during the teaching and learning process, (2) test was done to measure students’ achievement, and (3) field note was obtain information about teacher, the students activities and performance in the teaching and learning process during the implementation of picture series. The research finding can briefly explain as follow: first the student’s...

Desi Sugiarti

This study was aimed at improving the English speaking skills of XI KR 4 students at SMK Negeri 3 Yogyakarta through the use of information-gap activities during the teaching and learning process. It consisted of two cycles with three meetings in each cycle. The instruments used were observation checklists, interview guidelines, a camera, a recorder, and speaking rubrics. The data were collected in two forms: qualitative (through interviews and observations) and quantitative (through speaking tests). The qualitative data were analyzed through data collection, data reduction, data display, and conclusion, while the quantitative data were analyzed by means of the descriptive technique to obtain the mean, median, mode, and standard deviation. A t-test in SPSS 16.0 was also applied using the students’ scores to investigate the improvement. The data of this study were reliable by the fact that their Pearson’s coefficient correlations (r) were 0.850198 (in the pre-test) and 0.935613 (in t...

RELATED PAPERS

krantee jamdaade

Journal of Neurosurgery

Alexander MENDELOW

Matéria (Rio de Janeiro)

Marcello Filgueira

wasmaa jabbar

The PhD Series of the Faculty of Social Sciences

Vibeke Just Andersen

Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes

Berit Nielsen

farhana zaidi

Delano Ibanez

Sunil Dutta Purohit

Anales De La Facultad De Ciencias Juridicas Y Sociales

Jose Lezcano

Electric Power Systems Research

Antoni Sudrià Andreu

Anuário do Instituto de Geociências - UFRJ

Venerando Amaro

Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine

Rafael Freire

Asian journal of andrology

Carles Soler

Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems

Norman Sleep

Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness

Ernest Owusu

The European Physical Journal Special Topics

Metals and Materials International

Martin Inca flores

CES Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia

Jhon Buitrago

David Celentano

IEEE Aerospace and Electronic Systems Magazine

Roberto Sabatini

SN Applied Sciences

Adenise L Woiciechowski

Experimental Astronomy

卡尔加里大学毕业证书办理成绩单购买 加拿大文凭办理卡尔加里大学文凭学位证书

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024