THE EFFECTIVENESS OF GRAMMAR TUTORING PROGRAM BASED ON STUDENTS FEEDBACK BATCH 2016 ELESP

Maria Vincentia Eka Mulatsih

Abstract


There were two major aspects of English Language Education Study Program students of Sanata Dharma University that needed to be improved when they spoke and wrote in English. First was their grammar and the second was their pronunciation. For solving these problems, there were two tutoring programs. As one of those two programs, grammar tutoring program needs to be evaluated. Knowing its effectiveness in helping students improvement is crucial. Based on that reason, the analysis of the result of observation and questionnaire including students feedback is one of the media to measure the effectiveness of this tutoring program. Not only does this paper deal with the qualitative result of observation, questionnaire and students feedback, it also contributes the good practices that can be applied and some aspects that are needed to improve for future tutoring programs. The result shows that 84% of the students agreed that this program helped them to improve their skill and to understand more about the grammar materials.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Ander, R., Guryan, J., & Ludwig, J. (2016). Improving academic outcomes for disadvantaged students: Scaling up individualized tutorials. Report prepared for the Brookings Institute. Washington DC: Brookings Institute.

Angelova, M., Gunawardena, D., & Volk, D. (2006). Peer teaching and learning: Co-constructing language in a dual language first grade. Language and Education, 20(3), 173-190.

Astuti, F. K., Cahyono, E., Supartono, S., Van, N. C., & Duong, N. T. (2018). Effectiveness of elements periodic table interactive multimedia in Nguyen Tat Thanh high school. International journal of Indonesian education and teaching (IJIET), 2(1), 1-10.

Brockbank, A., & McGill, I. (2007). Facilitating reflective learning in higher education. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).

Briggs, S. (2013). How peer teaching improves student learning and 10 ways to encourage it. Retrieved on 1st March 2017 from http://www.opencolleges.edu.au/informed/features/peer-teaching/

Brockbank, A., & McGill, I. (2007). Facilitating reflective learning in higher education. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).

Chism, N. V. N. (1999). Peer review of teaching. A sourcebook. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing Company, Inc.

Colvin, J. W. (2007). Peer tutoring and social dynamics in higher education. Mentoring & tutoring, 15(2), 165-181.

Crouch, C. H., Watkins, J., Fagen, A. P., & Mazur, E. (2007). Peer instruction: Engaging students one-on-one, all at once. Research-Based Reform of University Physics, 1(1), 40-95.

Harper, J., & Schmidt, F. (2016). Effectiveness of a group-based academic tutoring program for children in foster care: A randomized controlled trial. Children and Youth Services Review, 67, 238-246.

Hock, M. F., Pulvers, K. A., Deshler, D. D., & Schumaker, J. B. (2001). The effects of an after-school tutoring program on the academic performance of at-risk students and students with LD. Remedial and special education, 22(3), 172-186.

Isrokijah, I. (2016). Developing problem-based learning (PBL) worksheets for the eighth grade students at junior high school. LLT journal: A Journal on language and language teaching, 18(2), 99-106.

Kapp, K. M. (2012). The gamification of learning and instruction: Game-based methods and strategies for training and education. John Wiley & Sons.

King, A. (2002). Structuring peer interaction to promote high-level cognitive processing. Theory into practice, 41(1), 33-39.

Mulatsih, M. I. (2018). Learning poetry as a strategy to develop teaching skill among students. International journal of Indonesian education and teaching (IJIET), 2(2), 1-8.

Narayan, J., & Sharma, S. (2016). Peer mentoring program as a student support tool: A conceptual approach. Instructional technology, 3.

O'Donnell, A. M., & King, A. (Eds.). (2014). Cognitive perspectives on peer learning. Routledge.

Osguthorpe, R. T., & Scruggs, T. E. (1986). Special education students as tutors: A review and analysis. Remedial and special education, 7(4), 15-25.

Sax, L. (1997). The benefits of service: Evidence from undergraduates. Educational record, 25.

Skinner, E. A., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher behavior and student engagement across the school year. Journal of educational psychology, 85(4), 571.

Wu, E., & Yang, S. C. (2016). Examining the impact of online labeling on tutoring behavior and its effect on the English learning and motivation of low-achieving university students. Computer assisted language learning, 29(2), 316-333.

Wulandari, M. (2016). Moodle-based learning model for paragraph writing class. LLT journal: A Journal on language and language teaching, 18(2), 73-90.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.24071/llt.v21i2.937

Article Metrics

Abstract view : 2604 times
PDF view: 502 times

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2018 Maria Mulatsih



Indexed and abstracted in:

    

 

LLT Journal Sinta 2 Certificate (S2 = Level 2)

We would like to inform you that LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching has been nationally accredited Sinta 2 by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research and Technology of the Republic of Indonesia based on the decree  No. Surat Keputusan 158/E/KPT/2021. Validity for 5 years: Vol 23 No 1, 2020 till Vol 27 No 2, 2024

  

 

This work is licensed under CC BY-SA.

Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License

 

Free counters!


 LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching, DOI: https://doi.org/10.24071/llt, e-ISSN 2579-9533 and p-ISSN 1410-7201, is published twice a year, namely in April and October by the English Language Education Study Programme of Teacher Training and Education Faculty of Sanata Dharma University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.