INTRODUCTION Students’ competency is a problem which is still faced by terjemahan - INTRODUCTION Students’ competency is a problem which is still faced by Bahasa Indonesia Bagaimana mengatakan

INTRODUCTION Students’ competency i

INTRODUCTION
Students’ competency is a problem which is still faced by the National Education of Indonesia. The students’ competency is the “estuary” of the long and complex process encountered by the students in learning for a range of time. Many perception still regard competency as the students’ result of learning in answering achievement or cognitive test. Instead, competency is not just cognitive, but also psychomotor and affective (Undang- Undang No. 20 tahun 2003 tentang SISDIKNAS). Operationally, competency covers knowledge, skill, and values. In the context of foreign language instruction, i.e English, students’ competency is how the students can communicate by using English. It is based on the nature of the language itself as a tool for communication. Depdiknas (2003) states that language has central role in intellectual, social, and emotional development.
To construct students’ competency in English, the teachers should direct the English instruction to constructivist paradigm viewing that knowledge contsruction occurs through individual operation (Piaget in Elliot et al., 1996) and social interaction (Vygotsky in Elliot et a.l, 1996). The students must be given ample opportunity to participate actively during learning process. Besides the area of learning process, the role of assessment can not be ignored. It is because there is a close relationship between learning and assessment context (Gagne et al.,2005). The assessment method should be directed to be able to measure students’ competency covering three domains, namely: cognitive, affective, and psychomotor. Here, the assessment can be directed to the implementation of authentic assessment which attempts to measure performance in real-life contexts (McAlpine, 2000).
However, the condition in real situation is on the contrary. The paradigm of constructivist and authentic assessment are not implemented well yet. It is based on the result of empirical study through pre- observation done in SMAN 1 Mengwi. Teaching reading was still dominated by explaining materials (genre) and translating text. Then, the students were assigned to answer the questions relating to the text. The students worked individually. Next, the answers were discussed by the teacher. In assessing students’ reading, multiple- choice test, matching, true-false and sometimes essay tests were used. It seems that the test types just measure students’ cognitive. Meanwhile teaching writing was done after reading. Here, the teacher explained again the concept of genre to make the students get deeper understanding. Then, the students were assigned to write genre. To score students’ writing, a rubric was used. Theoretically, assessing students’ writing by rubric is good. However, it was not done ideally. The teacher just assessed the students’ writing from linguistic aspects, such as: grammatical structure, vocabulary, spelling, and mechanic. It was done because the working time of the teachers. In one week, the teacher should teach 24 hours. Since English is taught 5 hours in a class, the teacher should teach 5 classes. It can be imagined if in the class consists of 30 students. As the result of this condition, 80% of the students got score less than 70 for reading and 76% of the students got score less than 70 for writing in pre-test given by the researcher. These results were absolutely dissatisfied. It made teaching model and assessment type used by the teacher should be reviewed again. By analyzing the instruction and assessment in reading and writing, it is expected that the teacher should be creative in designing instruction and assess
0/5000
Dari: -
Ke: -
Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 1: [Salinan]
Disalin!
INTRODUCTION Students’ competency is a problem which is still faced by the National Education of Indonesia. The students’ competency is the “estuary” of the long and complex process encountered by the students in learning for a range of time. Many perception still regard competency as the students’ result of learning in answering achievement or cognitive test. Instead, competency is not just cognitive, but also psychomotor and affective (Undang- Undang No. 20 tahun 2003 tentang SISDIKNAS). Operationally, competency covers knowledge, skill, and values. In the context of foreign language instruction, i.e English, students’ competency is how the students can communicate by using English. It is based on the nature of the language itself as a tool for communication. Depdiknas (2003) states that language has central role in intellectual, social, and emotional development. To construct students’ competency in English, the teachers should direct the English instruction to constructivist paradigm viewing that knowledge contsruction occurs through individual operation (Piaget in Elliot et al., 1996) and social interaction (Vygotsky in Elliot et a.l, 1996). The students must be given ample opportunity to participate actively during learning process. Besides the area of learning process, the role of assessment can not be ignored. It is because there is a close relationship between learning and assessment context (Gagne et al.,2005). The assessment method should be directed to be able to measure students’ competency covering three domains, namely: cognitive, affective, and psychomotor. Here, the assessment can be directed to the implementation of authentic assessment which attempts to measure performance in real-life contexts (McAlpine, 2000). However, the condition in real situation is on the contrary. The paradigm of constructivist and authentic assessment are not implemented well yet. It is based on the result of empirical study through pre- observation done in SMAN 1 Mengwi. Teaching reading was still dominated by explaining materials (genre) and translating text. Then, the students were assigned to answer the questions relating to the text. The students worked individually. Next, the answers were discussed by the teacher. In assessing students’ reading, multiple- choice test, matching, true-false and sometimes essay tests were used. It seems that the test types just measure students’ cognitive. Meanwhile teaching writing was done after reading. Here, the teacher explained again the concept of genre to make the students get deeper understanding. Then, the students were assigned to write genre. To score students’ writing, a rubric was used. Theoretically, assessing students’ writing by rubric is good. However, it was not done ideally. The teacher just assessed the students’ writing from linguistic aspects, such as: grammatical structure, vocabulary, spelling, and mechanic. It was done because the working time of the teachers. In one week, the teacher should teach 24 hours. Since English is taught 5 hours in a class, the teacher should teach 5 classes. It can be imagined if in the class consists of 30 students. As the result of this condition, 80% of the students got score less than 70 for reading and 76% of the students got score less than 70 for writing in pre-test given by the researcher. These results were absolutely dissatisfied. It made teaching model and assessment type used by the teacher should be reviewed again. By analyzing the instruction and assessment in reading and writing, it is expected that the teacher should be creative in designing instruction and assess
Sedang diterjemahkan, harap tunggu..
Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 2:[Salinan]
Disalin!
PENDAHULUAN
kompetensi siswa merupakan masalah yang masih dihadapi oleh Pendidikan Nasional Indonesia. Kompetensi siswa adalah "muara" dari proses panjang dan rumit yang dihadapi oleh siswa dalam belajar untuk berbagai waktu. Banyak persepsi masih menganggap kompetensi sebagai hasil siswa belajar dalam menjawab prestasi atau tes kognitif. Sebaliknya, kompetensi bukan hanya kognitif, tetapi juga psikomotorik dan afektif (Undang-Undang No. 20 Tahun 2003 TENTANG Sisdiknas). Secara operasional, kompetensi meliputi pengetahuan, keterampilan, dan nilai-nilai. Dalam konteks pengajaran bahasa asing, yaitu bahasa Inggris, kompetensi siswa adalah bagaimana siswa dapat berkomunikasi dengan menggunakan bahasa Inggris. Hal ini didasarkan pada sifat dari bahasa itu sendiri sebagai alat untuk komunikasi. Depdiknas (2003) menyatakan bahwa bahasa memiliki peran sentral dalam perkembangan intelektual, sosial, dan emosional.
Untuk membangun kompetensi siswa dalam bahasa Inggris, guru harus mengarahkan pengajaran bahasa Inggris untuk paradigma konstruktivis melihat bahwa contsruction pengetahuan terjadi melalui operasi individu (Piaget dalam Elliot et al., 1996) dan interaksi sosial (Vygotsky dalam Elliot et al, 1996). Para siswa harus diberi kesempatan yang luas untuk berpartisipasi secara aktif selama proses pembelajaran. Selain bidang proses belajar, peran penilaian tidak dapat diabaikan. Hal ini karena ada hubungan erat antara belajar dan konteks penilaian (Gagne et al., 2005). Metode penilaian harus diarahkan untuk dapat mengukur kompetensi siswa yang mencakup tiga domain, yaitu: kognitif, afektif, dan psikomotorik. Di sini, penilaian dapat diarahkan untuk pelaksanaan penilaian otentik yang mencoba untuk mengukur kinerja dalam konteks kehidupan nyata (McAlpine, 2000).
Namun, kondisi dalam situasi nyata adalah sebaliknya. Paradigma penilaian konstruktivis dan otentik tidak diimplementasikan dengan baik belum. Hal ini didasarkan pada hasil studi empiris melalui observasi pra dilakukan di SMAN 1 Mengwi. Pengajaran membaca masih didominasi dengan menjelaskan materi (genre) dan menerjemahkan teks. Kemudian, siswa ditugaskan untuk menjawab pertanyaan-pertanyaan yang berkaitan dengan teks. Para siswa bekerja secara individual. Selanjutnya, jawaban dibahas oleh guru. Dalam menilai membaca siswa, tes pilihan ganda, cocok, tes esai benar-salah dan kadang-kadang digunakan. Tampaknya bahwa jenis tes hanya mengukur kognitif siswa. Sementara mengajar menulis itu dilakukan setelah membaca. Di sini, guru menjelaskan lagi konsep genre untuk membuat siswa mendapatkan pemahaman yang lebih dalam. Kemudian, siswa ditugaskan untuk menulis bergenre. Untuk skor menulis siswa, rubrik digunakan. Secara teoritis, menulis menilai siswa dengan rubrik baik. Namun, hal itu tidak dilakukan idealnya. Guru hanya menilai tulisan siswa dari aspek linguistik, seperti: struktur gramatikal, kosa kata, ejaan, dan mekanik. Hal itu dilakukan karena waktu kerja guru. Dalam satu minggu, guru harus mengajar 24 jam. Karena bahasa Inggris diajarkan 5 jam di kelas, guru harus mengajar 5 kelas. Bisa dibayangkan jika di kelas terdiri dari 30 siswa. Sebagai hasil dari kondisi ini, 80% dari siswa mendapat nilai kurang dari 70 untuk membaca dan 76% dari siswa mendapat skor kurang dari 70 untuk menulis di pre-test yang diberikan oleh peneliti. Hasil ini benar-benar puas. Hal itu membuat model pengajaran dan jenis penilaian yang digunakan oleh guru harus ditinjau lagi. Dengan menganalisis instruksi dan penilaian dalam membaca dan menulis, diharapkan guru harus kreatif dalam merancang instruksi dan menilai
Sedang diterjemahkan, harap tunggu..
 
Bahasa lainnya
Dukungan alat penerjemahan: Afrikans, Albania, Amhara, Arab, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahasa Indonesia, Basque, Belanda, Belarussia, Bengali, Bosnia, Bulgaria, Burma, Cebuano, Ceko, Chichewa, China, Cina Tradisional, Denmark, Deteksi bahasa, Esperanto, Estonia, Farsi, Finlandia, Frisia, Gaelig, Gaelik Skotlandia, Galisia, Georgia, Gujarati, Hausa, Hawaii, Hindi, Hmong, Ibrani, Igbo, Inggris, Islan, Italia, Jawa, Jepang, Jerman, Kannada, Katala, Kazak, Khmer, Kinyarwanda, Kirghiz, Klingon, Korea, Korsika, Kreol Haiti, Kroat, Kurdi, Laos, Latin, Latvia, Lituania, Luksemburg, Magyar, Makedonia, Malagasi, Malayalam, Malta, Maori, Marathi, Melayu, Mongol, Nepal, Norsk, Odia (Oriya), Pashto, Polandia, Portugis, Prancis, Punjabi, Rumania, Rusia, Samoa, Serb, Sesotho, Shona, Sindhi, Sinhala, Slovakia, Slovenia, Somali, Spanyol, Sunda, Swahili, Swensk, Tagalog, Tajik, Tamil, Tatar, Telugu, Thai, Turki, Turkmen, Ukraina, Urdu, Uyghur, Uzbek, Vietnam, Wales, Xhosa, Yiddi, Yoruba, Yunani, Zulu, Bahasa terjemahan.

Copyright ©2024 I Love Translation. All reserved.

E-mail: