This study focuses on investigating the effect of audio-visual media (AVM) on students’ vocabulary retention and determining students’ perception about learning using AVM. This experimental research was conducted at an Islamic Boarding School in West Lombok Indonesia. The population of the study were the 9th grade students. Two classes were selected using cluster random sampling method. Each class consists of twenty-eight students, 56 in total. The classes were divided into two groups; Experimental and Control group. Pre-Test and Post-Test design and Survey method were used in the data collection. The data indicate that there was no student in the experimental group classified into excellent category, but after doing the treatment the students’ scores in the experimental group improved well. The result of paired sample test showed the Sig. value was 0.00 < 0.05 which means there was a significant difference of students’ learning outcome.
{"title":"THE EFFECT OF AUDIO-VISUAL MEDIA ON VOCABULARY RETENTION OF THE 9th GRADE STUDENTS AT AN ISLAMIC BOARDING SCHOOL IN LOMBOK, INDONESIA","authors":"Silvia Eka Safitri, Santi Farmasari, Lalu Thohir","doi":"10.29303/j.v2i1.273","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29303/j.v2i1.273","url":null,"abstract":"This study focuses on investigating the effect of audio-visual media (AVM) on students’ vocabulary retention and determining students’ perception about learning using AVM. This experimental research was conducted at an Islamic Boarding School in West Lombok Indonesia. The population of the study were the 9th grade students. Two classes were selected using cluster random sampling method. Each class consists of twenty-eight students, 56 in total. The classes were divided into two groups; Experimental and Control group. Pre-Test and Post-Test design and Survey method were used in the data collection. The data indicate that there was no student in the experimental group classified into excellent category, but after doing the treatment the students’ scores in the experimental group improved well. The result of paired sample test showed the Sig. value was 0.00 < 0.05 which means there was a significant difference of students’ learning outcome.","PeriodicalId":301632,"journal":{"name":"Journal of English Education Forum (JEEF)","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132009394","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Grammar is badly needed by all thesis writers in order that they can produce good outputs as expected by the English Education Department. Therefore, the study aims to reveal the types of grammatical errors and to identify the most types of grammatical errors in students’ thesis. In this research, the researcher employed a descriptive qualitative method. In this study, the researchers only focused on analyzing the grammatical errors in English students’ thesis at the University of Mataram using a surface strategy taxonomy. The researchers used a purposive sampling method to gather the data. The data were derived from students’ theses submitted between 2018 and 2020. There were a total of 9 theses studied for the purpose. The data were classified into 4 determined categories suggested by the theory of Surface Strategy Taxonomy, i.e. (1) Omission, (2) Addition, (3) Misformation and (4) Misordering. The result of the study shows that the theses under investigation contained the four categories of errors. There were a total number of 275 errors found in students’ theses. The most common types of errors were in Misformation (49.81%) and the least one was Misordering (0.72%). Implication of the present study is provided succinctly in the concluding part of this article.
{"title":"PATTERNS OF GRAMMATICAL ERRORS IN STUDENTS’ THESIS","authors":"F. Hakim, U. Waluyo, Henny Soepriyanti","doi":"10.29303/j.v2i1.274","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29303/j.v2i1.274","url":null,"abstract":"Grammar is badly needed by all thesis writers in order that they can produce good outputs as expected by the English Education Department. Therefore, the study aims to reveal the types of grammatical errors and to identify the most types of grammatical errors in students’ thesis. In this research, the researcher employed a descriptive qualitative method. In this study, the researchers only focused on analyzing the grammatical errors in English students’ thesis at the University of Mataram using a surface strategy taxonomy. The researchers used a purposive sampling method to gather the data. The data were derived from students’ theses submitted between 2018 and 2020. There were a total of 9 theses studied for the purpose. The data were classified into 4 determined categories suggested by the theory of Surface Strategy Taxonomy, i.e. (1) Omission, (2) Addition, (3) Misformation and (4) Misordering. The result of the study shows that the theses under investigation contained the four categories of errors. There were a total number of 275 errors found in students’ theses. The most common types of errors were in Misformation (49.81%) and the least one was Misordering (0.72%). Implication of the present study is provided succinctly in the concluding part of this article. ","PeriodicalId":301632,"journal":{"name":"Journal of English Education Forum (JEEF)","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124287638","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This study aimed at finding and analyzing the types of Adjacency Pairs and their preference structures used by a teacher and students in speaking class. This study used a descriptive research method using changing observer. The sample included teacher and students of 2nd Level speaking class at Cake English Course (CEC) Kampoeng Pare Mataram. The data were collected using video recording then transcribed to be analyzed. The study shows that there are eleven types of adjacency pairs and seven of their preference structures discovered in teaching learning process. The first type is question – answer in which its preference structure is expected as preferred response and unexpected as unpreferred one. The second type is request – acceptance/rejection which acceptance is as preferred and rejection as unpreferred response of its preference structure. The next type is apology – acceptance/refusal in which both preferred and unpreferred occurred as preference structures in this type. Then, complaint – apology/denial was found in which its preference structure is preferred and unpreferred. Furthermore, invitation – acceptance in which its acceptance response is known as preferred response in preference structure. Lastly, suggestion – disagreement and offer – rejection, each of this pair has its preference structure in formed of unpreferred. However, announcement – acknowledgment, greeting – greeting, summon – answer and closing – closing adjacency pairs also occurred in this study, yet their preference structure does not exist.
{"title":"AN ANALYSIS OF ADJACENCY PAIRS IN SPEAKING CLASS AT CEC KAMPOENG PARE MATARAM 2022","authors":"Purnawan Aropi, Sahuddin, Y. Lestari","doi":"10.29303/j.v2i1.271","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29303/j.v2i1.271","url":null,"abstract":"This study aimed at finding and analyzing the types of Adjacency Pairs and their preference structures used by a teacher and students in speaking class. This study used a descriptive research method using changing observer. The sample included teacher and students of 2nd Level speaking class at Cake English Course (CEC) Kampoeng Pare Mataram. The data were collected using video recording then transcribed to be analyzed. The study shows that there are eleven types of adjacency pairs and seven of their preference structures discovered in teaching learning process. The first type is question – answer in which its preference structure is expected as preferred response and unexpected as unpreferred one. The second type is request – acceptance/rejection which acceptance is as preferred and rejection as unpreferred response of its preference structure. The next type is apology – acceptance/refusal in which both preferred and unpreferred occurred as preference structures in this type. Then, complaint – apology/denial was found in which its preference structure is preferred and unpreferred. Furthermore, invitation – acceptance in which its acceptance response is known as preferred response in preference structure. Lastly, suggestion – disagreement and offer – rejection, each of this pair has its preference structure in formed of unpreferred. However, announcement – acknowledgment, greeting – greeting, summon – answer and closing – closing adjacency pairs also occurred in this study, yet their preference structure does not exist.","PeriodicalId":301632,"journal":{"name":"Journal of English Education Forum (JEEF)","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125284851","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This study is targeting at portraying the sorts and the errors of discourse markers made in the articles on Hamlet drama composed by the 6th semester students of English education program at University of Mataram in the academic year 2019/2020. The technique of conducting this investigation is a blended strategy or mix of qualitative and quantitative techniques. The data were gathered from 26 students’ articles. The result of this study showed that all the types in three functional classes of discourse markers by Bruce Fraser (2009) were used by students in their articles. They are Elaborative Discourse Markers with total number of occurrences 200 times (43.20%), Contrastive Discourse Markers with total number of occurrences 169 times (36.50%), and Inferential Discourse Markers with total number of occurrences 94 times (20.30%). The researcher found that Elaborative Discourse Markers are most frequently employed by students to elaborate the ideas. Furthermore, there are some errors in student’s articles related to Kao and Chen's theory (2011) about the six types of misuse patterns. Turns out three of six misuse patterns occur in students’ articles such as distraction, wrong relation, and semantic incompletion. There are no surface logicality, non-equivalent exchange, and overuse occurred in students’ articles.
{"title":"AN ANALYSIS OF DISCOURSE MARKERS IN THE ARTICLES ON HAMLET DRAMA WRITTEN BY ENGLISH EDUCATION STUDENTS AT UNIVERSITY OF MATARAM","authors":"Frida Anjani Hidayat, B. Baharuddin, M. Isnaini","doi":"10.29303/j.v1i2.180","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29303/j.v1i2.180","url":null,"abstract":"This study is targeting at portraying the sorts and the errors of discourse markers made in the articles on Hamlet drama composed by the 6th semester students of English education program at University of Mataram in the academic year 2019/2020. The technique of conducting this investigation is a blended strategy or mix of qualitative and quantitative techniques. The data were gathered from 26 students’ articles. The result of this study showed that all the types in three functional classes of discourse markers by Bruce Fraser (2009) were used by students in their articles. They are Elaborative Discourse Markers with total number of occurrences 200 times (43.20%), Contrastive Discourse Markers with total number of occurrences 169 times (36.50%), and Inferential Discourse Markers with total number of occurrences 94 times (20.30%). The researcher found that Elaborative Discourse Markers are most frequently employed by students to elaborate the ideas. Furthermore, there are some errors in student’s articles related to Kao and Chen's theory (2011) about the six types of misuse patterns. Turns out three of six misuse patterns occur in students’ articles such as distraction, wrong relation, and semantic incompletion. There are no surface logicality, non-equivalent exchange, and overuse occurred in students’ articles.","PeriodicalId":301632,"journal":{"name":"Journal of English Education Forum (JEEF)","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128129217","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：