Abstract

This study aimed at finding out the students’ perception on the implementation of English Language Teaching. The subjects of this research were 70 students of SMK Muhammadiyah 3 Bumiayu, Brebes with the total number was two (3) teachers. The subjects were determined by the intention to obtain information through interviews and observations. Considering the responses from the questionnaire, It can be summed up that the students’ perceptions to English teaching learning process are positive. However, it was noted that there are almost 50 % of the students who have difficulties in mastering English and they are also still less-autonomy in learning English by themselves before the lesson given. On the other hand, the students also think that the time duration for English teaching learning process is inadeguate

There is no Figure or data content available for this article

References

• Alkin, M.C. (2011). Evaluation Essentials : From A to Z. NY: The Guilford Press
• Allport, GW. (1996). Pattern and Growth in Personality. London: William Clowes and Sons,Ltd.
• Allwright, D & Bailey, M. Kathleen. (2004) Focus on the Language Classroom: An
• Introduction to Classroom Research for Language Teachers. 10thEd. Cambridge:
• Cambridge University Press.
• Arık, I. A (1998). Psikolojide Bilimsel Yöntem. Çantay Kitabevi: Ä°stanbul.
• Brown, J.D. (1995). The element of language curriculum :A Systematic approach to program development. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
• Cizek, G. J. (2009). An introduction to formative assessment: History, Characteristics, and
• Challenges. In H. Andrade & G. Cizek, (eds..) Handbook of formative assessment (pp.3-17). New York: Taylor and Francis.
• Ellis, Rod. (2008). Classroom Second Language Development. 4th Ed. UK: Prentice Hall.
• Karasar N (2003). Bilimsel AraÅŸtırma Yöntemi. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
• KarataÅŸ H, Fer S (2009). Evaluation of English Curriculum at Yıldız Technical University Using CIPP Model. Educ. Sci. 34(153):47-60.
• KarataÅŸ H, Fer S (2011). CIPP Evaluation Model Scale: Development, Reliability and Validity. Proc. Soc. Behav. Sci. 15:592-599.
• Lynch, B. K. (1996). Language program evaluation : Theory and Practice. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
• Huitt, W. (2003). A Transactional model of the teaching/learning process. Educational
• Psichology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta state Unoversity. Retrieved January 25,2011, From http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/material/tchlrnmd.html.
• Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. (2002). Phenomenology of Perception. New York: Routledge
• Nunan, David & Bailey, M. Kathleen. (2009). Exploring Second Language Classroom Research. USA: Heinle.
• Ogle, G. J. (2002) Toward a Formative Evaluation Tool. Unpublished Ph.D Dissertation. Virginia: Faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, USA.
• Ornstein, A. C. & Hunkins, F. P. (1998). Curriculum : Foundations, Principles, and Issues. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
• Rea-Dickins, P & Germaine, K. (1992). Evaluation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Richards, Jack C. & Lockhart, Charles. (2007). Reflective Teaching in Second Language Classrooms. 15 th Ed. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Rivers, Wilga M. (2000). Interactive Language Teaching. 10 th Ed. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Scheerens, J., Glas C., & Thomas, S. M. (2005). Educational Evaluation, ssessment and Monitoring. A Systemic Approach. Lisse : Swets & Zeitlinger Publishers.
• Stipek, Deborah J. (2003). Motivation to Learn; from Theory to Practice. Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon.
• Stufflebeam, D. L. (2002). CIPP Model , in Stafflebeam, D. L., Madaus, G. F. & Kellaghan, T. (eds.) Evaluation Models : View points on Educational and Human Service Evaluation,2nd Edition, (PP. 287 317). Boston: Kluwe Academic Publishers.
• Trochim W (2002). What is the Rsearch Methods Knowledge Base? Retrieved from http://www.anatomyfacts.com/research/researchmethodsknowledgebase.pdf

There is no Supplemental content for this article.

How to Cite This

Article Metrics

Copyright and permissions information is unavailable

Data Availability