A Study on the Usage of Instructional Tools : Towards Meaningful Teaching and Students' Appreciation in Literature

Literature component have been as an essential and popular components of languages courses in the Malaysia English Second Language (ESL) context. Curriculum Development Centre, Ministry of Education (MOE) has implemented the literature component for English Language Subject in secondary schools. The...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Main Author:	Nor Afiza, Ismail
Format:	Thesis
Language:	eng eng
Published:	2010
Subjects:	LB Theory and practice of education
Online Access:	https://etd.uum.edu.my/3980/1/s800591.pdf https://etd.uum.edu.my/3980/7/s800591.pdf
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

id	my-uum-etd.3980
record_format	uketd_dc
institution	Universiti Utara Malaysia
collection	UUM ETD
language	eng eng
advisor	Mohd Yusof, Fahainis
topic	LB Theory and practice of education
spellingShingle	LB Theory and practice of education Nor Afiza, Ismail A Study on the Usage of Instructional Tools : Towards Meaningful Teaching and Students' Appreciation in Literature
description	Literature component have been as an essential and popular components of languages courses in the Malaysia English Second Language (ESL) context. Curriculum Development Centre, Ministry of Education (MOE) has implemented the literature component for English Language Subject in secondary schools. The incorporation of literature in the curriculum of English Language Teaching (ELT) also has been noteworthy over the last 20 years. Studying literature educates students to appreciate the literature and enhance their English Language Skills in total. In the new era of information and communications technology, teaching and learning English literature can be more meaningful and attract students to participate well in the lessons. Students’ participation is important element in achieving the desire learning outcomes. Therefore, the usage of the instructional tools in teaching literature is an advanced towards in generating students’ participation and learning outcomes. Thus, this study is purposely to determine students’ learning outcomes and their participation when teacher using these technologies in the classroom. Besides that, the researcher also wanted to determine similarities and differences of the learning outcomes when teacher applying any instructional tools in teaching literature. The findings of the study, obtained via qualitative approach are hopefully can further positive impact towards student appreciation in learning literature.
format	Thesis
qualification_name	masters
qualification_level	Master's degree
author	Nor Afiza, Ismail
author_facet	Nor Afiza, Ismail
author_sort	Nor Afiza, Ismail
title	A Study on the Usage of Instructional Tools : Towards Meaningful Teaching and Students' Appreciation in Literature
title_short	A Study on the Usage of Instructional Tools : Towards Meaningful Teaching and Students' Appreciation in Literature
title_full	A Study on the Usage of Instructional Tools : Towards Meaningful Teaching and Students' Appreciation in Literature
title_fullStr	A Study on the Usage of Instructional Tools : Towards Meaningful Teaching and Students' Appreciation in Literature
title_full_unstemmed	A Study on the Usage of Instructional Tools : Towards Meaningful Teaching and Students' Appreciation in Literature
title_sort	study on the usage of instructional tools : towards meaningful teaching and students' appreciation in literature
granting_institution	Universiti Utara Malaysia
granting_department	College of Arts and Sciences (CAS)
publishDate	2010
url	https://etd.uum.edu.my/3980/1/s800591.pdf https://etd.uum.edu.my/3980/7/s800591.pdf
_version_	1747827661403586560
spelling	my-uum-etd.39802014-06-25T07:50:08Z A Study on the Usage of Instructional Tools : Towards Meaningful Teaching and Students' Appreciation in Literature 2010 Nor Afiza, Ismail Mohd Yusof, Fahainis College of Arts and Sciences (CAS) College of Arts and Sciences LB Theory and practice of education Literature component have been as an essential and popular components of languages courses in the Malaysia English Second Language (ESL) context. Curriculum Development Centre, Ministry of Education (MOE) has implemented the literature component for English Language Subject in secondary schools. The incorporation of literature in the curriculum of English Language Teaching (ELT) also has been noteworthy over the last 20 years. Studying literature educates students to appreciate the literature and enhance their English Language Skills in total. In the new era of information and communications technology, teaching and learning English literature can be more meaningful and attract students to participate well in the lessons. Students’ participation is important element in achieving the desire learning outcomes. Therefore, the usage of the instructional tools in teaching literature is an advanced towards in generating students’ participation and learning outcomes. Thus, this study is purposely to determine students’ learning outcomes and their participation when teacher using these technologies in the classroom. Besides that, the researcher also wanted to determine similarities and differences of the learning outcomes when teacher applying any instructional tools in teaching literature. The findings of the study, obtained via qualitative approach are hopefully can further positive impact towards student appreciation in learning literature. 2010 Thesis https://etd.uum.edu.my/3980/ https://etd.uum.edu.my/3980/1/s800591.pdf text eng validuser https://etd.uum.edu.my/3980/7/s800591.pdf text eng public http://lintas.uum.edu.my:8080/elmu/index.jsp?module=webopac-l&action=fullDisplayRetriever.jsp&szMaterialNo=0000801874 masters masters Universiti Utara Malaysia Algozzine, B,. Spooner, F,. and Karvonen, M,. (2002). Preparing special education research articles in APA Style. Remedial and Special Education, 23(3), 24-30. Amare, N. (2004). Technology for Technology‟s sake: The proliferation of PowerPoint. Proceedings of the International Professional Communication Conference (pp.61-3). Mimmeapolis. Axtell, K., Maddux, C., & Aberasturi, S. (2008). The effect of presentation software on classroom verbal interaction and student retention of higher education lecture content. Journal of technology in Teaching and Learning, 4(1), 22-33. Baker, E.A., & Kinzer, C.K. ( 1998).Effects of technology on process writing: Are they all good? Forty-seven Yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp.428-440). Chicago: National Reading Conference. Bean, J.C., Peterson, D (1998). New Directions for Teaching and learning. Educational Conference. Beliaeva, N.B. (2009). Raising the quality of the teaching of literature. Russian Education and Society, 51(7), 58-72. Blake, R. J. (2009). Brave new digital classroom technology and foreign language learning. Language Learning and Technology, 22(8), 22-28. Brualdi, Amy C (1998). Classroom questions ERIC/AE digest Retrieved from http://tesl-ej.org/ej04/al.html Retrieved at 10 October 2009. Brown H.D. (2001). Teaching in principles. An interactive approach to language pedagogy.(2 nd Ed). New York: Longman. Brown, T.L.G. (2003). Seminar on Teachers‟ Instructional Conceptions: Assessment‟s relationship to learning, teaching, curriculum and teacher efficacy. Join Conference of the Australian and New Zeland Associations for Research in Education. Carlson, S., & Gadio, C.T. (2003). Teacher professional development in the use of technology. Technologies for Education. Carr, Dorothy (1995). Improving student reading motivation through the usage of oral reading strategies. http://www.ericdigests.org/1997-1/low.html. Retrieved at 14 November 2009. Carter, R. (1988). The integration of language and literature in the English curriculum. A narrative on narratives. Literature and Language. Oxford: Modern Language Publication. Chan Fong-Mae (2002). Seminar on the promotion of ICT Education to Narrow the Digital Divide. Tokyo: Educational Technology Division, Ministry of Education. Chan Fong-Mae. (2002). ICT in Malaysian schools: Policy an strategies. Educational Technical Division, Ministry of Education Malaysia. Chickering, A.W,& Gamson, Z. F. (1991). Applying the seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. Michigan: Jossey Boss Inc. Creswell. J.W. (2008) . Educational research: Planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. New Jersey: Merrill Prentice Hall. Cronbach, L.J.(1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of test. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297-334. Diana Hwang & Mohamed Amin Embi (2007). Approaches employed by secondary school teachers to teaching the literature component English. Journal Pendidik dan Pendidikan, 22, 2007, 1-23. De Vaus, D. (2002) Analyzing social science data: 50 key problems in data analysis. London: Sage. D. Leat & Mei Lin. (2003). Developing a pedagogy of metacognition and transfer: some signposts for the generation and use of knowledge and the creation of research partnership. British Educational Research Journal, 29(3), 383-415. Duffy, J. L., & McDonald, J. B. (2008). Teaching and learning with technology (p. 60-61). Pearson: New York. Gagne‟, R. M. (1992). Principle of Instructional Design(4th Ed.).Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Gardner, R.G., & Lambert, W.E. (1972). Attitudes and motivation in second language learning. Rowley Mas: Newbury House Publisher. Griffee, D.T. (2005). Research tips: Classroom observation data collection, part II. Journal of Developmental Education, 29(2), 36-39. Greenlee-Moore, M.E & Smith, L. L.( 1996). Interactive computer software the effect on young children‟s reading achievement. Reading Psychology: An International Quaterly, 17, 43-64. Hishammuddin Tun Hussein. (2005). A vision of the future ICT and the challenges facing Malaysia schools, in 11 January 2005, at Annual BETT Exabition, London. Hopkins, D. (2008). Teacher guide to classroom research.(p. 105-111). Glasgow: McGraw Hill. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R.T., & Smith, K. A. (1991). Active Learning: Cooperation in the college classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book. Jordan, A., Crlile. O & Stack. A. (2008). Approaches to Learning: A Guide for Teachers. Glassgow: McGraw Hill. Jonassen, D. (1995). Supporting communities of learners with technology: A vision for integrating technology with learning in schools. Educational Technology, 35(4), 60-63. Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. (2003). Huraian Sukatan Pelajaran Bahasa Inggeris Sekolah Menengah. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka. Kinder, J. S.(1942).Visual aids in education. Review of Educational Research, 12(2), 336-344. Kong, L. (2010). DPM: Read more local literature. http://thestar.com.my/news/story Retrieved at 19 January 2010. Krathwohl,D. R., Bloom, B.S., & Bertram, B.M (1973). Taxonomy of educational objectives, the classification of educational objectives, the classification of educational goals Handbook II: Affective Domain. New York: David McKay Company Inc. Lawrenz, F., Huffman. D., & Appeldoorn, K. (2002). Classroom observation handbook. A CETP Core Evaluation, University of Minnesota. Mahathir Mohamad.(2001). The Eight Malaysia Plan. www.parlimen.gov.my/.../ AUM20DR2025. Retrieved at 23 April 2010. Mai Neo, & Ken Neo T.K.(2002). Building a constructivist using multimedia design project A-Malaysian Experience. Journal of Educational Multimedia and hypermedia, 1(11). Mager, R. F. (1962). Preparing Instructional Objectives. Palo Arto, CA: Fearon. Mayer, E. R., & Moreno, R. (2002). Animation as an Aid to multimedia learning. Educational Psychology Review, 14(1), 87-99. Morais, C., & Kay, G. (2007). Selected Poems & Short Stories: Light on Lit. Selangor: Pearson. Moreno, R., & Ortegano-Layne, L. (2007). Do classroom exemplars promote the application of principles in teacher education? A comparison of videos, animations, and narratives. Education Technology Research Development, 56, 449-465. Morgan, N., & Saxton, J. (1991). Teaching, questioning, and learning. New York: Routledge. Naresh Kumar, Raduan Che Rose, & Jeffrey Lawrence D‟Silva (2008). Teachers‟ readiness to use technology in the classroom: An Empirical study. European Journal of Scientific Research, 21(4), 603-616. Nunnally, J.C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd Ed). New York: McGraw-Hill. Omrod,J. E., Omrod, R. K., Wagner, E. D., & McCalin, R.C. (1988). Reconceptualizing Map Learning. The American Journal of Psychology, 101(3), 425-433. Orlich, D. C., Harder, R. J., Callahan, R. C., Trevisan, M.S., and Brown, A. B. (2007).Teaching Strategies: A Guide to Effective Instruction. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company Othman Talib, Matthews, R., & Secombe, M. (2005). Constructivist animations for conceptual change: An effective instructional strategy in understanding complex, abstract and dynamic science concepts. Malaysia Online Journal of Instructional Technology, 2(3), 78-97. Pailliotet, A. W., & Mosenthal, P. B. ( 2000). Reconceptualizing Literacy in the Age of Media, Multimedia, Multimedia, and Hypermedia. JAJ/Ablex: New Jersey. Parkey, F.W., & Hass,G.(2000). Curriculum Planning (7th Ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Pendidikan di Malaysia. (2005). Memartabatkan Kecemerlangan Negara. Putrajaya: Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia. Peterson & Bean (1998) Grading classroom participation. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 74, 33-40. Piaget, J (1977). The role of action in the development of thinking. Advances in research and theory. New York: Plenum Press. Rajaletchumi Thaliah. (2009). Exploring the dimension of autonomy supportive teacher: Their influence on ESL classroom engagement and help seeking behavior. PHD dissertation. Universiti Utara Malaysia. Unpublished. Razlan Sharif (2003). The Eight Malaysian Plan. The Star, 3-5. Reeve, J. & Halusic, M.(2009). How K-12 teachers can put self determination theory principles into practice. Theory and Research in Education, 7, 145-155. Rezan Bapoo Hashim. (2005). Transformation of Malaysia Education. http://www.icseimalaysia.org/index.php.Retrived at 14 January 2010. Roblyer, M.D. (2003). Integrating Educational Technology into Teaching (3rd Ed). New Jersey: Merril Prentice Hall. Roschelle, J., Penuel. W.R., & Abrahamson, L. (2004). Classroom Response and Communication Systems: Research Review and Theory. American Educational Research: San Diago. Rosli Talif.(1995). Teaching literature in ESL the Malaysian context. Kuala Lumpur: Universiti Pertanian Malaysia. Sawyer. W., Watson. K., & Gold. E. (1998). Growth through English. Reviewing English. Sydney: St Clair Press. Seedhouse, P. (1995). L2 Classroom transcripts: Data in search of a methodology. http://tesl-ej.org/ej04/a1.html. Retrieved at 24 April 2010. Seels, N.M. , Darabi, A.A. & Nelson, D. W. (2006). A dynamic mental model approach to examine schema development in performing a complex troubleshooting task; retention of mental models. Technology Instruction Cognitive Learning, 4(4), 273-299. Sekaran, U. (1992). Research methods for business: A skill building approach 2nd Edition. New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc. Shambaugh, R.N., & Magliaro. S.G. (1997). Mastering the possibilities. A process approach to instructional design. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Sharmini Ghanaguru, Ng Hee Liang & Ng Lee Kit (2002). An initial study of reading problems and strategies: A teacher learning guide, 3(1), 1-39. Shelly, G. B., Cashman, T.J., Gunter, G., & Gunter, R.E. (2006). Integrating technology and Digital media in the classroom. (4th Ed). Boston: Thomson Learning Inc. Skinner, B. (1972). Utopia through the control of human behavior. Philosophy of Education. Belmont: Wadsworth. Slavin , R.E.(1990). Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research and Practice. Eaglewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Smaldino , S.E., Russell, J. D., Heinich, R., & Molenda, M. (2005). Instructional Media and Technologies for Learning. Upper Saddle River NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall. Smith, P. L. & Ragan, T. J. (2005). Instructional Design (3rd Ed).USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Sourabh Gupta. (2009).Attribution theory of social psychology. http://www.buzzle.com/articles/attribution-theory-of-social-psychology.html. Retrieved at 22 April 2010. Statement in newspaper of Minister of Ministry of Education. Newspaper Statement by Muhyiddin Yasin about Allocated English Lesson by the year 2012. 24 April 2009. Stronge, J.H. (2007). Qualities of effective teachers. (p. 67-121). USA: Association for supervision and curriculum development. Stolovitch, H.D., & Thiagarajan, S. (1980). Frame Games. Educational technology publication. New Jersey: Eaglewood Cliffs. Subramaniam, G., & Vethamani, M. (2003). Teaching of literature in ESL/EFL context. Petaling Jaya: Sasbadi. Supyan Hussin, Nooreiny Maarof, & D‟Cruz, V. (2000). Sustaining an Interest in Learning English and Increasing the Motivation to Learn English: An enrichment program. Malaysia International Conference for English language teaching: Univeristi Kebangsaan Malaysia. Young. D.J.,& Bush, J. (2004). Affect in foreign language and second language. Technology Enhanced Language Learning (121-163).

A Study on the Usage of Instructional Tools : Towards Meaningful Teaching and Students' Appreciation in Literature

Similar Items