Current practices and issues of teaching and learning Biology using English at Pilot International Standard Schools in Indonesia

This study aimed at examining the current practices and issues of Biology teaching and learningusing English at seven Pilot International Standard School (PISS) in South SumatraProvince, Indonesia. The study also focus on language and learning resources, teachersproblems, students perceptions on lea...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Main Author:	Siti Huzaifah
Format:	thesis
Language:	eng
Published:	2019
Subjects:
Online Access:	https://ir.upsi.edu.my/detailsg.php?det=6739
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

id	oai:ir.upsi.edu.my:6739
record_format	uketd_dc
institution	Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris
collection	UPSI Digital Repository
language	eng
topic
spellingShingle	Siti Huzaifah Current practices and issues of teaching and learning Biology using English at Pilot International Standard Schools in Indonesia
description	This study aimed at examining the current practices and issues of Biology teaching and learningusing English at seven Pilot International Standard School (PISS) in South SumatraProvince, Indonesia. The study also focus on language and learning resources, teachersproblems, students perceptions on learning of Biology using English, and application ofeffective Content Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) pedagogy using the Second LanguageAcquisition (SLA) penta-pie tool. This study employed qualitative approach in the formof naturalistic inquiry supported by qualitative and quantitative data. The qualitative datawere obtained from individual and focus group interviews among seven teachers, 21 groups of fivestudents, seven headmasters, and six program coordinators who were selected purposively. Data werecollected from classroom observations on 21 Biology lessons and documents used duringteaching and learning. Interview data on problems of teaching and learning of Biology using Englishwere analyzed using thematic analysis. Quantitative data were collected using the Views ofTeaching Biology Through English (VoTBE) questionnaire administered to 633 students selected by purposive sampling. Questionnaire data were analyzed descriptivelyusing SPSS 16.0.version. The findings showed the average percentage of teachers and studentstalk using English during teaching and learning was 21.7 % and 10.9 % respectively.Additionally, most teachers used Power Point slides followed by videos as learning resources. Thelack of English proficiency and governments support on teachers professionaldevelopment were found as the main problems faced by teachers in implementing the PISS program. Thestudents view that joining English courses, using various teaching strategies and learningresources and also support from parents were strongly needed to learn Biology using English.The teachers were mainly focused on the meaning focused-processing category of the SLApenta-pie. They barely applied the other categories of the SLA penta-pie whenconducting lessons, and hence did not implement an effective CLIL pedagogy. In conclusion,teachers had not fulfilled the requirements specified in the PISS program guideline especiallyEnglish competency and proficiency, as well as the use of Information and CommunicationTechnology (ICT)-based teaching and learning resources. The implication of this study suggests thateffective practice of teaching and learning of Bi logy using English must bethrough continuous teachers professional development.
format	thesis
qualification_name
qualification_level	Doctorate
author	Siti Huzaifah
author_facet	Siti Huzaifah
author_sort	Siti Huzaifah
title	Current practices and issues of teaching and learning Biology using English at Pilot International Standard Schools in Indonesia
title_short	Current practices and issues of teaching and learning Biology using English at Pilot International Standard Schools in Indonesia
title_full	Current practices and issues of teaching and learning Biology using English at Pilot International Standard Schools in Indonesia
title_fullStr	Current practices and issues of teaching and learning Biology using English at Pilot International Standard Schools in Indonesia
title_full_unstemmed	Current practices and issues of teaching and learning Biology using English at Pilot International Standard Schools in Indonesia
title_sort	current practices and issues of teaching and learning biology using english at pilot international standard schools in indonesia
granting_institution	Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris
granting_department	Fakulti Sains dan Matematik
publishDate	2019
url	https://ir.upsi.edu.my/detailsg.php?det=6739
_version_	1747833301990637568
spelling	oai:ir.upsi.edu.my:67392022-02-15 Current practices and issues of teaching and learning Biology using English at Pilot International Standard Schools in Indonesia 2019 Siti Huzaifah This study aimed at examining the current practices and issues of Biology teaching and learningusing English at seven Pilot International Standard School (PISS) in South SumatraProvince, Indonesia. The study also focus on language and learning resources, teachersproblems, students perceptions on learning of Biology using English, and application ofeffective Content Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) pedagogy using the Second LanguageAcquisition (SLA) penta-pie tool. This study employed qualitative approach in the formof naturalistic inquiry supported by qualitative and quantitative data. The qualitative datawere obtained from individual and focus group interviews among seven teachers, 21 groups of fivestudents, seven headmasters, and six program coordinators who were selected purposively. Data werecollected from classroom observations on 21 Biology lessons and documents used duringteaching and learning. Interview data on problems of teaching and learning of Biology using Englishwere analyzed using thematic analysis. Quantitative data were collected using the Views ofTeaching Biology Through English (VoTBE) questionnaire administered to 633 students selected by purposive sampling. Questionnaire data were analyzed descriptivelyusing SPSS 16.0.version. The findings showed the average percentage of teachers and studentstalk using English during teaching and learning was 21.7 % and 10.9 % respectively.Additionally, most teachers used Power Point slides followed by videos as learning resources. Thelack of English proficiency and governments support on teachers professionaldevelopment were found as the main problems faced by teachers in implementing the PISS program. Thestudents view that joining English courses, using various teaching strategies and learningresources and also support from parents were strongly needed to learn Biology using English.The teachers were mainly focused on the meaning focused-processing category of the SLApenta-pie. They barely applied the other categories of the SLA penta-pie whenconducting lessons, and hence did not implement an effective CLIL pedagogy. In conclusion,teachers had not fulfilled the requirements specified in the PISS program guideline especiallyEnglish competency and proficiency, as well as the use of Information and CommunicationTechnology (ICT)-based teaching and learning resources. The implication of this study suggests thateffective practice of teaching and learning of Bi logy using English must bethrough continuous teachers professional development. 2019 thesis https://ir.upsi.edu.my/detailsg.php?det=6739 https://ir.upsi.edu.my/detailsg.php?det=6739 text eng closedAccess Doctoral Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris Fakulti Sains dan Matematik Admiraal, W., Westhoff, G., & deBot, K. (2006). Evaluation of bilingual secondary education inthe Netherlands: Students language proficiency in English. Educational Research andEvaluation, 12(1), 75-93.Antaranews. (2013). Sekolah-sekolah berbasis kurikulum Cambridge di Indonesia. Retrived fromhttps://www.antaranews/kurikulum-cambridge/Indonesia.com. on December 2013.Ariyani, Z.D., Bambang S., & Siti N. A. (2013). The Investigation of challenges in teaching andlearning mathematics through English at secondary schools inKepulauan Riau, Indonesia. International Seminar on Quality and Affordable Education, 277-283.Arsyad, A. (2011). Media pembelajaran.Jakarta: PT Raja GrafindoPersada.Artini, D. S. (2013). Penerapan pendekatan contextual teaching and learning untuk meningkatkanpemahaman materi konsep gerak benda dalam mata pelajaran sains pada siswa tunarungu kelas III.Master Thesis, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia: Bandung.Astika, G., & Anton, W. (2012). Studi kasus pembelajaran MIPA bilingual di tiga SMARSBI di Jawa Tengah. Litera Jurnal Penelitian Bahasa, Sastra, dan Pengajarannya, 11(2),Badan Pusat Statistik (BPS). (2015). Sumatera Selatan dalam angka tahun 2015.Sumatera Selatan: BPS Provinsi Sumatera Selatan.Bailey, C. A. (2007). A guide to qualitative field research. Second edition. California: Pine ForgePress.Baker, C. (1993). Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism. Clevedon:Multilingual Matters.Baker, C. (2011). Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism (5??ed.).Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.Baker, C., & Prys Jones, S. (1998). Encyclopedia of bilingualism and bilingualeducation. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Banegas, D.L. (2011). Content and language integrated learning in Argentina 2008 2011. LatinAmerican Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 4(2), 3350.Bruner, J. (1985). Vigotsky: A historical and conceptual perspective. InWangYuanying (Ed), Studies in Literature and Language (pp. 46-48). China:gdao University.Burns, N. & Grove, S.K. (2005). The Practice of Nursing Research: Conduct, critique, andutilization (5th Ed.). St. Louis: Elsevier SaundersBogdan, R. C., & Taylor, S. J. (2002). Introduction to qualitative research method.New York: John Willey and Sons.British Council. (2007). Teaching English. Retrived from http://www.teachingenglish. org.uk.Brown,D.(2000).Teaching by principles: An i n t e r a t i v e approach to languagepedagogy. 2nd ed. White Plains, NewYork: Longman.Cambridge Assessment International Education. (2017). Bilingual learners andbilingual education. Retrieved from www.cambridgeinternational.org/images/271190-bilingual-learners-and-bilingual-education.pdf .Casal, S. (2008). Cooperative learning in CLIL contexts: Ways to improve students competences inthe foreign language classroom. Paper presented at IAIE Conference: Cooperative learning in multicultural societies: Critical reflections ,Turin, Italy.Chamot, A. U., & O'Malley, J. M. (1994). The CALLA handbook: Implementing the cognitive languagelearning approach. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.Chan, R. L. (2007). Context and impact of medium of instruction on attitudes,motivation and academic performance: Secondary school children in Hong Kong. Doctoralthesis, University of Durham, School of Education. Retrieved from http://etheses.dur.ac.ud/2851.Chong, Hin. L. (2007). Penyelidikan pendidikan pendekatan kuantitatif dan kualitatif.Malaysia: McGraw Hill Education.imer A (2004). A study of Turkish biology teachers and students views of effective teaching inschools and teacher education. EdD Dissertation, The University of Nottingham, Nottingham, U.K.Council of Europe. (2001). Common European framework of references for languages:Learning, teaching, assessment. Strasbourg: Cambridge University Press.Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education.London: Routledge-FalmerCole, J., & Gonya, R. (2010). Accuracy of Self-reported SAT and ACT Test Scores: Implication forResearch. Research in Higher Education, 51(4), 305-319.Coleman, H. (2010). Teaching learning in Pakistan: The role of language in education.Retrieved on January 05, 2012.Coyle, D. (2007a). Content and language integrated learning: Motivating learners andteachers. In the CLIL teachers toolkit: A classroom guide. Nottingham: The University ofNottingham.Coyle, D. (2007b). Content and learning integrated learning: Towards a connected researchagenda for CLIL pedagogies. The International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,10(5), 543-562.Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content and language integratedlearning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Coyle , D. (2010). Foreword. In D. Lasagabaster & Y. Ruiz de Zarobe (Eds.), CLIL in Spain:Implementation, Results and Teacher Training (pp. 7-8). Newcastle: Cambridge ScholarsPublishing.Coyle, D. (2011). ITALIC Research report investigating student gains: Content and languageintegrated learning. Edinburgh: University of Aberdeen.Corporation for Public Broadcasting. (2004). Television goes to school: The impact of video on student learning in formal education. Available:http://www.cpb.org/stations/reports/tvgoestoschool/Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches.USA: Sage Publications, Inc.Creswell, J. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among fiveapproaches (2nd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication.Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th Ed). Boston MA: Pearson Education, Inc.Crystal, D. (2003). English as a global language (second edition). Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.Cummins, J. (2009). Bilingual and immersion programs. In M. Long & C. Doughty (Eds.), Thehandbook of language teaching (pp. 161181). Malden: Wiley Blackwell.Dalton-Puffer, C. (2007a). Discourse in content and language integrated learning (CLIL)classrooms. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.Dalton-Puffer, C. (2007b). Academic language functions in a CLIL environment. InD. Marsh, & D. Wolff (Eds.), Diverse contexts-converging goals (201- 210).Frankfurt:Peter Lang.Dalton-Puffer, C., & Smith, U. (2007). Empirical perspectives on CLIL classroomdiscourse. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Dalton-Puffer, C. (2008). Outcomes and processes in content and language integrated learning (CLIL): Current research from Europe. In W. Delanoy, & L. Volkmann (Eds.), Futureperspective for English language teaching (139-157). Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Dalton-Puffer, C. (2011). Content and language integrated learning: From practice to principles?Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 182-204.Dalton-Puffer, C., & Smith, U. (2007). Empirical perspectives on CLIL classroomdiscourse. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Dalton-Puffer, C. (2008). Outcomes and processes in content and language integrated learning (CLIL): Current research from Europe. In W. Delanoy, & L. Volkmann (Eds.),Future perspective for English language teaching (139- 157). Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Dalton-Puffer, C. (2011). Content and language integrated learning: From practice to principles?Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 182-204.Darn, S. (2006). Content and language integrated learning (CLIL): A European overview.ERIC Education Resources Information Center.Daryanto. (2010). Media pembelajaran. Bandung: Satu Nusa (Sarana Tutorial Nurani Sejahtera).De Zarobe, Y. R. (2008). CLIL and foreign language learning: A longitudinal study in the Basquecountry. International CLIL Research Journal, 60-73.De Zarobe, Y. R., & Jimnez Cataln, R. M. (2009). Content and language integrated learning:evidence from research in Europe / edited by Yolanda Ruiz de Zarobe and Rosa MaraJimnez Cataln. Bristol, Buffalo: Multilingual Matters.Dearden, J. (2014). English as a medium of instruction a growing globalphenomenon. University of Oxford: British Council.Denzin, N.K. & Lincoln, Y.S. (2009). Handbook of qualitative research. US: SagePublication, Inc.Departemen Pendidikan Nasional Republik Indonesia.(2005). Rencana Strategis Departemen Pendidikan Nasional 2005-2009. Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.Departemen Pendidikan Nasional Republik Indonesia. (2007a). Panduanpenyelenggaraan rintisan SMA bertaraf internasional. Jakarta: Direktorat Pembinaan SekolahMenengah Atas.Departemen Pendidikan Nasional Republik Indonesia. (2007b). Pedoman penjaminan mutu sekolah/madrasah bertaraf internasional pada jenjang Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah. Jakarta: Badan Penelitian dan Pengembangan Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.Departemen Pendidikan Nasional Republik Indonesia. (2008a). Panduanpenyelenggaraan rintisan SMA bertaraf internasional. Jakarta: Direktorat Pembinaan SMA.Departemen Pendidikan Nasional Republik Indonesia. (2008b). Panduanpenyelenggaraan rintisan Sekolah Dasar bertaraf internasional.Jakarta: DirektoratPembinaan Taman Kanak-Kanak dan Sekolah Dasar.Departemen Pendidikan Nasional Republik Indonesia. (2008c). Panduan pelaksanaan pembinaan rintisanSekolah Menengah Pertama bertaraf internasional (SMP- SBI). Jakarta: Direktorat PembinaanSekolah Menengah Pertama, Direktorat Jenderal Manajemen Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah, Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.Departemen Pendidikan Nasional Republik Indonesia. (2009a). Panduanpenyelenggaraan rintisan SMA bertaraf internasional. Jakarta: Direktorat Pembinaan SekolahMenengah Atas.Departemen Pendidikan Nasional Republik Indonesia. (2009b). Peta kemampuan bahasa Inggrispendidik dan tenaga kependidikan rintisan sekolah bertaraf internasional berdasarkan Testof English for International Communication (TOEIC). Jakarta: Direktorat Tenaga Kependidikan, Direktorat Jenderal Peningkatan Mutu Pendidik dan Tenaga Kependidikan, Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.Departemen Pendidikan Nasional Republik Indonesia. (2009b). Peta kemampuan bahasa Inggrispendidik dan tenaga kependidikan rintisan sekolah bertaraf internasional berdasarkan Testof English for International Communication (TOEIC). Jakarta: Direktorat Tenaga Kependidikan, Direktorat Jenderal Peningkatan Mutu Pendidik dan Tenaga Kependidikan, Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.Djamarah, S. B. (2005). Guru dan anak didik dalam interaksi edukatif: suatu pendekatanteoritis psikologis. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.Dobson, A., Murillo, M. D. P., &Johnstone, R., (2010). Bilingual education project Spainevaluationreport: Findings of the independent evaluation of the Bilingual EducationProjectMinistry of Education (Spain) and British Council (Spain). Ministerio De EducacionInstituto deFormacin del Profesorado, Investigacin e InnovacinEducativa (IFIIE), and BritishCouncil,Spain.Dewdney A. & Ride. P.(2006). The new media handbook. New York:Routledge.Dugger, J.R., William, E. & Naik, N. (2001). Clarify misconceptionsbetweentechnology education and educational technology. Technology teacher,61(1);31-36.Durmaz B (2007). The Effects of the Concept Cartoons to the Success of the Students and Sensory Features in the Constructivist Science Teaching (Mu?la Provincial, AdministrativeDistrict Sample), Masters Dissertation, Mu?la University, Mu?la, Turkey.Education Sector Analytical and Capacity Development Partnership (ACDP). (2013).Evaluation of International Standard Schools in Indonesia. Jakarta: ACDP.Ekici G (2010). An examinaation of the high school students perceptions about biologylaboratory environment education. E-Journal of New World Sci. Acad., 5(3): 180-186.Ericson, K.A., Oliver, W,.(2002). Cognitive skills, In: Learning and Skills,Mackintosh N.J. & Colman A.M(ed.),Zysk i S-Ka, Poznan.Essay, UK. (2013). Theories of Perception. Retrieved fromhttp;//www.ukessay.com/essays/psychology/theories-perception 2618. php? vref=1 .Eurydice. (2006). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) at school in Europe.Brussels: Eurydice.Fisch, S.M. (2003). The impact of Cyberchase on childrens mathematical problemsolving: Cyberchase Season 2 executive summary. Teaneck, NJ: MediaKidz.Fitriati. (2010). Community participation in education: Does decentralisationmatter? an Indonesian case study of parental participation in schoolmanagement.Thesis. Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand.Fledderus, W., Ron, K. & Floor, S. (2011). Teaching with CLIL: Learning and language come together. Retrieved November, 28, fromhttp://dspace.library.uu.nl/bitstream/1874/208325/1/Teaching+with+CLIL++Language+and+Learning+Come+Together.pdfFlew, T. (2004). New media an introduction. Oxford University Press.Floris, F. D. (2014). Learning subject matter through English as the medium ofinstruction: students and teachers perspectives. Asian Englishes, 16(1), 47- 59.Fontana, A., & Frey, J.H. (2000). The interview: From structure questions to negotiatedtext. in Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research (2nd ed.).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research ineducation. New York: Magrew-Hill.Fraser BJ (1998). Classroom environment instruments: Development, validity andapplications. Learn. Environ. Res., 1:7-33.Freeman, D. (1994). Educational linguistics and the knowledge base of language teaching.In J. E. Alatis (Ed.), Georgetown University round table on languages andlinguistics (pp. 180-198). Washington, DC: Gearogetown University Press.Friedel, J., Marachi, R., &Midgley, C. (2002). Stop embarrassing me! Relations amongstudent perceptions of teachers, classroom goals, and maladaptive behaviors. Paper presentedat the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.Garcia, M. A. (2009). Looking at CLIL: Teachers views, learners attitudes andvocabulary outcomes (Unpublished masters thesis), Universidad de La Roja: Spain.Garcia, O. (2009). Bilingual education in the 21st Century: A global perspective.West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell Publishing.Gay, L. R., & Airasian, P. (2003). Educational research, competencies for analysis andapplications (7??ed). New Jersey: Merrill Prentice Hall.Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airaisian, P. W. (2011). Educational research.competencies for analysis and applications, tenth edition. New Jersey: Pearson.Genesee, F. (2002). What do we know about bilingual education for majority languagestudents? In T. K. Bhatia, & W. Ritchie (Eds.), Handbook of multilingualism andmulticulturalism (pp. 547-576). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Gibbons, P. (2003). Mediating language learning: Teacher interactions with ESL students ina content-based classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 37(2), 247-273.Gill, Saran K.: 2005, Language policy in Malaysia: Reversing direction, Language Policy,4(3), 241-260.Gonzlez, M. B. (2007). Good practice in content and language integrated learning.Spain: BeCLIL Project.Graaff de, R., Koopman, G. J., & Westhoff, G. (2007). Identifying effective L2 pedagogyin Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL). Vienna English Working Papers, 16(3),12-19.Graaff de, R., Koopman, G. J., Anikina, Y., & Westhoff, G. (2007). An observation tool foreffective L2 pedagogy in Content and Language-Integrated Learning (CLIL). International Journal ofBilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 603-624.Graddol, D. (2006).Why global English may mean the end of English as a foreign language. UK:British Council.Hadisantosa, N., Huong, T. T., Johnstone, R., Keyuravong, S., & Lee, W. (2010).Learning through English: Policies, challenge, and prospect, insights from Asia. Jakarta:British Council.Hamers, J., & Blanc, M. (2000). Bilinguality and bilingualism. Cambridge, UK: CambridgeUniversity Press.Hammond, J. 2001. Scaffolding and language. In J. Hammond (ed.), Scaffolding: Teaching and learning in language and literacy education. Newtown,Australia:Primary English Teaching Association.Han, J. & Singh, M. (2014). Internationalizing education through english mediuminstruction: Key theoretic-pedagogical ideas. Research project report. Kingswood:University of Western Sydney.Hand, B. M., Prain, V., & Yore, L. D. (2001). Sequential writing tasks influence on sciencelearning. In P. Tynjala, L. Mason, & K. Lonka (Eds.), Writing as a learning tool:Integrating theory and practice.Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.Hapsari, A.M. (2011). Prose pembelajarandi RintisanSekolahBertarafInternasional (RSBI) kotadan kabupatenSukabumiberdasarkanpersepsisiswa:Studi di SMA N 3 kota Sukabumidengan SMA N 1CibadakkabupatenSukabumi. (skripsi), Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung.Harsuciningsih, R. (2009). A descriptive study at a designated international standard school SMPNegeri 1 Sukoharjo in the 2008/2009 academic year. Thesis.UniversitasSebelasMaret,Surakarta.Hartoyo. (2011). Curriculum and material development: Syllabus/course outline. (ProgramPascaSarjana), UniversitasMuhammadiyah Professor DR. Hamka, Jakarta.Haryanto, E. (2011). Implementation of the international standard school in Jambiprovince, Indonesia: Implication for policy reforms(doctoraldissertation),Central Luzon State University, Philippine.Haryanto, E. (2012). Listening to students voice: A survey of implementation of Englishas medium instructions in an international standard school in Indonesia. Journalof Education and Practice, 3(15), 111-119.Haryanto, E. (2013). Language policy: Administrators and teachers view English as medium ofinstruction implementaion in Indonesia. Journal of Education and Practice, 4(2), 48-56.Hashimah, Z. (2003). Dilemma of form one students in learning science in English: My personal experience. Paper presented at the TED-ELTC ETeMS Conference: Managing Curricular Change. Retrievedfromhttp://www.eltcm.org/eltc/Download/conferences/8_Abstracts.pdfHenderson, J., & Wellington, J. (1998). Lowering the language barrier in learning and teachingscience. School Science Review, 79(288), 35-46.Hidayat, R. G. & Mirjam, A. (2012). The use of English in the teaching of mathematics and science at R-SMA-BI 1 Situbondo. English Language Education Universitas Negeri Malang, 2(2).Retrieved fromhttp://jurnalonline.um.ac.id/artikel/do/detail-article/1/7/71Hoyle, P., & Stone, C. (2000). Developing the literate scientist. In J. Sears, & P.Sorensen (Eds.), Issues in science teaching. London, UK: Routledge Falmer.Howell, K.W., &Nolet, V. (2000). Curriculum-based evaluation: Teaching and decisionmaking (3??ed.). Belmont, CA:Wadsworth.Ibrahim, J. (2001). The implementation of EMI (English Medium Instruction) in IndonesianUniversities: Its opportunities, its threat, its problems, and its possible solutions.Sastra Inggris, 3(1), 121-138.Indiana Departemnt of Education. (2010). Indian academic standards, assements, and IDOEsSupport foreducators. Retrieved from http://www.doe.in.gov/standardsIpnugraha. (2013). Pioneering of schools with international standard to respond theglobalization. Journal of Education and Learning, 7 (3), 153-158.Isahak, H. Abdul Latif, H. G. MdNasir, M. Abdul Halim, I & Mariam, M. N. (2008). Kesan dasarpengajaran matematik dan sains dalam bahasa Inggris di sekolah rendah [the effects of using English as the medium of instruction for mathematics and science in primary school],(UPSI Research Code 03-12-95- 03), Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris , Perak, Malaysia.Jacobs, M., Gawe, N. & Vakalia, N.C.G. (2002). Teaching-learning dynamics: Aparticipativeapproach for OBE 2nd edition. Johannesburg : Heinemann.Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2000). Educational research. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Johnson, B..(2004). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixedapproaches (2nd ed.). USA: Pearson Education Inc.Jones, C. (2004). The role of language in the learning and teaching of science. In M. Monk, & J.Osborne (Eds.), Good practice in science teaching: What research has to say (pp. 88-103).Buckingham: Open University Press.Kementerian Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional/BAPPENAS. (2010). Ringkasan jalan percepatan pencapaian tujuan pembangunan milenium di Indonesia.Jakarta, Indonesia: Kementerian Perencanaan PembangunanNasional/BAPPENAS.Kimball, J. (1996). What are we doing when we Talk Science?.The Internet TESL Journal, 2,8.Kirkpatrick, A. (2011). English as a medium of instruction in Asian education [from primary totertiary]: Implications for local languages and local scholarship. Applied Linguistics, 2,99-120.Kirkpatrick, A. (2012). English in ASEAN: Implications for regional multilingualism.Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 33(4), 331-344.Koul, Rekha B &Fisher, Darell L. (2006). Students perceptions of teachersinterpersonal behavior andidentifying exemplary teachers. Retrieved fromclt.curtin.edu.au/events/conferences/tlf/tlf2006/refereed/koul.html.Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition.Hertforshire: Phonex ELT.Kubiatko, M. (2006). How do teachers use information andcommunicationtechnology in biology teaching: Information & communication technology in naturalscience education.Bratislava, Slovakia: Comenius University,Kustulasari, A. (2009). The international standard school project in Indonesia: A policydocument analysis(masters thesis), Columbus, Ohio, Ohio State University.Kvale, S., & Svend, B. (2008). Interviews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing.USA: Sage Publication.Lantolf, J.P. (2000). Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford:OxfordUniversity Press.Lasagabaster, D. (2008). Foreign language competence in content and language integratedlearning courses. The Open Applied Linguistics Journal, 1(1), 31-42.Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. (2009). Immersion and CLIL in English: More differencesthan similarities. ELT Journal, 6(4), 367-375.Lasagabaster, D., & de Zarobe, Y. R. (2010). CLIL in Spain: Implementation, results and teachertraining. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Lo, Y. Y. & Lin, A. M. Y. (2015). Special Issue: Designing Multilingual and MultimodalCLIL Frameworks for EFL Students. International Journal of Bilingual Education andBilingualism. 18(3), 261-269.Maljers, A., Maarsh, D., & Wolff, D. (2007). Windows on CLIL: Content and languageintegrated learning in the European spotlight. The Hague: European Platform for Dutch Education.Marfuah, D. (2012). The implementation of ICT based learning in English teaching and learningprocess at SMP RSBI (A qualitative study at SMP Sukoharjo in the academic year 2011/2012)(masters thesis), Sebelas Maret University, Surakarta.Marsh, D. (Ed.). (2002). CLIL/EMILE The European Dimension: Actions, Trends andForesight Potential. Brussels: European Commission.Marsh, D., & Lang, G. (2000). Using languages to learn and learning to use languages.Jyvskyl, Finland: UniCOM.Marsh, D., Maljers, A., & Hartiala, A.-K. (2001). Profiling European CLILclassrooms: Language opendors. Jyvskyl: University of Jyvskyl.Marsh, D., Mehisto, P., Wolff, D., & Frigols, M. J. (2010). European framework for CLIL teachereducation: Aframework fortthe professional development of CLIL teachers. Graz: European Centrefor Modern Languages.Martin, J.R. & White, P.R.R. (2005).The language of evaluation, appraisal in English:Palgrave Macmillan, London & New York.Masruroh, K. R. (2012). Inventarisasi kendala guru biology RSBI dan upayapenyelesaianya dalam pembelajaran biologi serta hubungannya dengan hasil belajar biologi dikabupaten Jember. (Skripsi),Universitas Negeri Jambi, Jambi.Mayer, R.E. (2001). Multimedia learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. MacBeath J, SchratzM, Meuret D, Jakobsen L (2000). Self-Evaluation in EuropeanSchools: A Story of Change, London: Routledge.McBrien, J. L., Brandt, L., & Brandt, R. S. (1997). The language of learning: A guide to education terms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and CurriculumDevelopment.Mehisto, P. (2008a). CLIL Counterweights: Recognising and decreasing disjuncture in CLIL.International CLIL Research Journal, 1(1), 93-119.Mehisto, P. (2008b). Uncovering CLIL: Content and language integrated learning in bilingual andmultilingual education. Oxford: Macmillan Education.Mehisto, P., Marsh, D., & Frigols M. J. (2008). Uncovering CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning in Bilingual and Multilingual Education. Oxford: MacmillanPublishers Ltd.Mercer, N. 1994. Neo-Vygotskian theory and classroom education. In B. Stierer & J. Maybin (Eds),Language, literacy and learning in educational practice. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual MattersLtd.Merriam, S. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education(2??Ed). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Meyer, O. (2010). Towards quality CLIL: successful planning and teaching strategies.Puls, 33. 11-29.Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook(3?? Ed.). USA: Sage Publications Inc.Miller, P. (1998). The holistic curriculum. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Mochammad, J. Z. A. (2012). ELF students attitude towards learning English language :The case Libyan secondary school student. Asian Social Science, 8(2), 119-134.Mohammad, F. (2009). Teaching mathematics and science in English: The teachersvoices. English Language Teaching, 2(2), 141-147.Mohan, B. A. (2001) The second language as a medium of learning, in English as a second languageinthe mainstream: Teaching,learning and identity (eds B. A. Mohan, C. Leung, and C. Davison).Longman: New York.Moleong, L. J. (2004). Metode penelitian kualitatif. Bandung: PT. RemajaRosdakarya.Morgado, M., & Coelho, M. (2013). CLIL vs English as the medium of instruction: The Portuguesehigher education polytechnic context. Egitania Sciencia (12), 123 - 145.Mulyasa. (2006). Kurikulum berbasis kompetensi. Bandung: PT. Remaja Rosdakarya. Muslich, M.(2011). KTSP: Pembelajaran berbasis kompetensi dan kontekstual.Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.Nelson-Smith, Kenyetta Q. (2008). Learning styles and students perception of teachersattitudes and its relation to truancy amongAfrican American students in secondaryeducation. LSU Doctoral Dissertation:Louisiana State University.Nikula, T. (2007). Speaking English in Finnish content-based classrooms. World Englishes,26(2), 206-223.Nilawati, H. T.-T., Richard, J., Sonthida, K., & Wonkey, L. (2010). Learning through English:Policies, challenges and prospects. Malaysia: British Council East Asia.Nordin bin Aziz (2005). Students perception on teaching and learning mathematics inEnglish.Retrieved from http://eprints.utm.my/1507/1/KERTASINT.pdfNunan, D. (2003). The Impact of English as a global language on educational policies and practicesin the Asia- Pacific region. TESOL Quarterly, 37(4), 589-613.Nykiel, A. (2007). Handbook of marketing research methodologies.Binghamton, NY: The HaworthHospitality and Tourism Press.OECD. (2010). PISA 2009 results: What students know and can do. Studentperformance in reading, mathematics, and science (Volume 1). Paris: OECD.OECD. (2016). Insights from The Talis-Pisa Link Data Teaching Strategies forInstructional Quality. Paris: OECD.OECD/Asian Development Bank. (2015). Education in Indonesia: Rising to the challenge.Paris: OECD Publishing.Ohta, A. S., (2000). Rethinking interaction in SLA: Developmentallyappropriateassistance in the zone of proximal development and the acquisition of L2 grammar. InJ. P. Lantolf (ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning.Oxford:Oxford University Press.Osborne J, Collins S, (2001). Pupils' views of the role and value of the sciencecurriculum. Int. J. Sci. Educ., 23(5): 441-467.Othman,Talib., Wong S-L., Shah C. A., & Nabilah A. (2009). Uncovering Malaysian studentsmotivationv to learning scienceEuropean Journal of Social Science, 8(2), 266-276.Parsons, T. & Edward Shils, eds. (1951). Toward a general theory of action.Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Pasela, W.P. (2016). Penerapan pendekatan Somatik, Auditori, Visual, dan Intelektual (SAVI)berbantuan media animasi terhadap hasil belajar pada materi siste respirasi kelas XI SMANegeri 6 Palembang. Skripsi, Universitas Sriwijaya.Patton, M. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: SagePublication.Perraton, H. (2000). Open and distance learning in the developing world. London:Routledge.Phan, L.H., Joyce, K.&Brendan, C. (2013). Nation building, English as aninternational language, medium of instruction, and language debate: Malaysia and possible waysforward. International and Comparative Educations, 2(2), 58-72.Phoenix DA (2000). Looking towards reform - the student focus, J. Biol. Educ., 34(4): 171.Potyrala, K. (2002). Computer-aided biology teaching in Biologycal andenvironmental Education No 1 (1).Puffer, C. (2007). Discourse in CLIL classrooms. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Puspitaningsih, D. J.N. (2013). A descriptive study on bilingual method in teaching biology at theseventh grade of SBI class in SMP N 1 Boyolali in 2011/2012. (Skripsi), Universitas Muhammadiyah,Surakarta.Puslitjaknov. (2010). Laporan studi evaluasi penyelenggaraan RSBIpadajenjangpendidikan dasar dan menengah. Jakarta: Pusat Penelitian Kebijakan danInovasi Pendidikan Balitbang Kemdiknas.Radcliffe, R., Caverly, D., Hand, J., & Franke, D. (2008). Improving reading in the middleschool science classroom. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51(5), 398-408.Raguenaud, V. (2009). Bilingual by choice: Raising kids in two (or more!) languages.Boston : Nicholas Brealey Publication.Rahmadini, R.S. (2014). Pengaruh media animasiterhadaphasilbelajarsiswapadamaterisistemekskresi di SMP Negeri 1 Palembang.Skripsi. Universitas Sriwijaya.Rahman, T. (2007). Language planning in higher education:A case study ofPakistan.Pakistan: Oxford University Press.Republik Indonesia. (1945). Undang-Undang dasar negara republik Indonesia tahun 1945.SekretariatNegara:Jakarta.Republik Indonesia. (2003). Undang-Undang No.20 tahun 2003 tentang sistem pendidikannasional. Sekertariat Negara: Jakarta.Republik Indonesia. (2004). Undang-Undang No. 32 tahun 2004 tentang ekonomi daerah.Sekretariat Negara: Jakarta.Republik Indonesia. (2005). Undang-Undang No 14 tahun 2005 tentang guru dan dosen.Sekretariat Negara: Jakarta.Republik Indonesia. (2005). Permendiknas RI No. 19 tahun 2005 tentang standar nasionalpendidikan. Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.Republik Indonesia. (2006a). Permendiknas RI No. 23 tahun 2006 tentang standar kompetensilulusan. Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.Republik Indonesia. (2006b). Permendiknas RI No. 22 tahun 2006 tentang standar isi.Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.Republik Indonesia. (2007a). Permendiknas RI No 26 tahun 2007 tentang kerja sama perguruan tingginegeri di Indonesia dengan perguruan tinggi negeri atau lembaga lain di luar negeri.Jakarta: Dikdasmen.Republik Indonesia. (2007b). Permendiknas RI No. 16 tahun 2007 tentang standarkualifikasi akademik dan kompetensi guru. Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.Republik Indonesia. (2009a). Permendiknas RI No. 78 tahun 2009 tentangpenyelenggaraan sekolah bertaraf internasional pada jenjang pendidikan dasar dan menengah.Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.Depdiknas. (2009b). Peta Kemampuan Bahasa Inggris Pendidik dan Tenaga KependidikanRintisan Sekolah Bertaraf Internasional Berdasarkan Test of English for Internationalcommunication (TOEIC). Jakarta : Direktorat Tenaga Kependidikan, Direktorat Jenderal PeningkatanMutu Pendidik dan Tenaga Kependidikan, Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.Republik Indonesia. (2010). Peraturan pemerintah RI No. 17 Tahun 2010 tentang pengelolaandan penyelenggaraan pendidikan. Sekretariat Negara: Jakarta.Rizzuto, M. (2008). A teachers perspective: Science talks. In A. S. Rosebery, & B. Warren (Eds.),Teaching science to English language learners: Building on students strengths (pp. 13-20).US: National Science Teachers Association.Rosebery, A. S., & Ballenger, C. (2008). Essay: Creating a foundation through studentconversation. In A. S. Rosebery, & B. Warren (Eds.), Teaching science to English languagelearners: Building on students strengths (pp. 1- 12). Arlington: NSTA Press.Ross, K., Lakin, L., & Callaghan, P. (2004). Teaching secondary science, 2?? Ed.London: David Fulton Publisher.Ruswenda, Uus. (2011). Berbaga faktor dalam supervisi akademik pengawas sekolah menengah kejuruan (SMK) di Kabupaten Kuningan. (Thesis tidak dipublikasikan). Jakarta:Universitas Indonesia.Sabri, A.(2005). Strategi belajar mengajar. Jakarta: QuantumTeaching.Saidi, S. and Zurida, H. I.: 2004, Masalah pembelajaran bahasa bukan saintifik dalam pembelajaransains, Diges Pendidik, 4(1), 32-43.Saka, A (2006). The effect of 5 model on removing science student teachers'misconceptions about genetics, PhD Dissertation, Karadeniz Technical University,Trabzon Turkey.Sanjaya, W. (2008). Strategi pembelajaran berorientasi standar proses pendidikan.Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group.Saragih, Erikson. (2014). The practice of bilingual instruction of math and naturalsciences at international standard schools in Medan Indonesia [Education Supplement].Research Gate, p. 286-296.Sari, D. N. (2010). SebuahpenelitiandeskriptifterhadappenggunaanbahasaInggrissebagaisebuah media pengajarandalam prosesbelajarmengajar matematika, fisika, dan biologi di kelas RSBI di SMP Negeri 1 Bondowoso.Skripsi. UniversitasNegeri Malang, Malang.Setiawan, J.E. (2013).Teacher's beliefand student's perception regarding content and language integrated learning: A case studyatSMAYPVDPBontang(Unpublished masters thesis),MulawarmanUniversity, Kalimantan Timur.Setyorini, A.&Ahmad, S. (2011). Teaching mathematics and sciences in English in pilotinternational standard high schools in Indonesia. Journal of Language and Literature, 2,82-87.Shrum, J. L., & Glisan, E. W. (2000). Teacher's handbook: Contextualized language instruction.Boston: Beth Kramer.Silva, D. M. (2006). O impacto dos estilos de aprendizagem no ensino decontabilidade(doctoraldissertation), University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brasil.Silverman, D. (2004). Qualitative research theory, method and practice. London: SAGEPublications.Slameto. (2010). Belajar dan faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhinya. Jakarta: PT Rineka Cipta.Skinner, B.F. (1974). About behaviourism. In Francisco J.L. (Ed.), The Spanish Journalof Psychology (pp. 178-187). Spain: University Complutense of Madrid.Smith, R. G. (1990). Thinking and practice in primary science classrooms: A casestudy(Doctoral dissertation), University of Leeds, United Kingdom.Sopia, Md Yassin, OngEngTek.,Alimon, H., Baharom, S., & Ying, L. Y. (2010). TeachingScience through English: Engaging pupils cognitively. International CLIL Research Journal, 1(3).Retrieved from http://www.icrj.eu/13-744Sopia. Md Yassin., Ong Eng Tek, Sadiah B.&Hasinah A. (2011). Monograph CLIL (content, language, integrated) research project Malaysian. Sultan Idris Education University, TanjungMalimMalaysia.Sopia. Md Yassin., Marsh, D., Tek, O.E.T., & Ying, L.Y. (2009). Learnersperceptions towards the teaching of science through English in Malaysia: A quantitativeanalysis. International CLILResearch Journal, 1(2), 5469.orgo, J., Ver?kovnik, T., & Kocijan?i?, S. (2010). Information and Communication Technologies(ICT) in biology teaching in Slovenian secondary schools. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics,Science & Technology Education, 6(1), 37- 46.Stake, R. E. (2000). Case studies. In N. K. Denzin, Lincoln, & S. Yvonna (Eds.),Handbook of qualitative research second edition (pp. 134-164). Thousand Oaks, CA: SagePublications, Inc.Stohler, U. (2006). The acquisition of knowledge in bilingual learning: An empirical study on therole of language in content learning. VIEWZ: Vienna English Working Papers, 15(3), 41-46.Stoller, F. L. (2008). Content-based instruction. In N. Van Deusen-Scholl & N. H.Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education. Vol. 4: Second and foreignlanguage education (pp. 5970). New York: Springer.Sudhanshu, Y. (2014). Effect of multi media teaching on achievement inbiology.International Journal of Education and Psychological Research (IJEPR), 3(1)41-45.Sugiyono. (2009). Metode Penelitian pendidikan kuantitatif, kualitatif dan R&D. Bandung:Alfabeta.Sultan, S., Helen B & Bill E. (2012). English medium of instruction (EMI) inIndonesian public junior secondary school: Students language use,attitudes/motivation and foreign language outcomes. ACTA International TESOLConference, Cairns Australia. Victoria University, Australia.Sumintono, B., Zunia, D.A. & Siti, N.A. (2013). The Investigation of challenges in teaching and learningmathematics through English at secondary schools inkepulauan Riau, Indonesia.International Seminar on Quality and Affordable Education (ISQAE 2013). Universiti TeknologiMalaysia, Malaysia.Sundusiyah, A. (2010). 'Teachers in international-standard schools: What is missing? What can beimproved? What does it take?'.International Conference of Indonesian Students (KIPI),Melbourne.Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook, & B.Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principles and practice in applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Swanborn, P. (2010). Case study research. London: Sage Publiser.Tan, May. (2011). Mathematics and science teachersbeliefand practices regarding the teachingoflanguageincontentlearning.Language Teaching Research,15(3),325-342.Trianto. (2011). Mendesain model pembelajaran inovatif-progresif: Konsepl andasan dan implementasinya pada kurikulum tingkat satuan pendidikan. Jakarta: Kencana PrenadaMedia Group.Troncale, C. (2002). Content based instruction, cooperative learning, and CALPinstruction: Addressing the whole education of 7-12 ESL students. Working Papers in TESOL& Applied Linguistics, 2(3).Turner, T., & Broemmel, A. (2006). 14 writing strategies. Science Scope, 30(4), 27-31. Turner, T.,& Dimarco, W. (1998). Learning to teach science in the secondary school.London: Routledge.UNESCO. (2010). Education policy and reform,secondary information regionalinformation base: Indonesia. Bangkok, Thailand: UNESCO Asia and Pacific Regional Bureau forEducation.University of Cambridge. (2007). Cambridge syllabus-international examination.Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press.Van de Craen, P., Mondt, K., Allain, L., & Gao, Y. (2007). Why and how CLIL works. an outline for aCLIL theory. Vienna English Working Papers, 16(3), 70-78.Viera, A.J, Joanne, M, Garrett. (2005). Understanding interobserver agreement: the Kappastatistic. Research Series, 37(5), 360-363.Vizconde, C. J. (2006). Attitudes of students teacher towards the use of English aslanguage of instruction for science and mathematics in the Philippines. The LinguisticsJournal, 1(3), 7-33.Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychologicalprocesses. USA: The President and Fellows of Harvard College.Walqui, A. 2006. Scaffolding instruction for English language learners: A conceptual framework. TheInternational Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 9(2): 159-180.Walqui, A. & L. van Lier. 2010. Scaffolding the academic success of adolescent Englishlanguage learners. San Francisco: WestEd.Wellington, J., & Osborne, J. (2001). Language and literacy in science education.Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.Westhoff, G. J. (2004). The art of playing a pinball machine. Characteristics ofeffective SLA-tasks. Babylonia, 12(3), 58-62.Widyaningrum, D. (2012). An analysis of students perceptions on the use of English in theteachers teaching of some subjects in RSBI first year classes at Kesatrian I Senior High School(masters thesis), Fakultas BahasaUniversitasKatolikSoegijapranata, Semarang.Wiersma, W., & Jurs, S. G. (2009). Research method in education: An introduction (9thed.). Mexico City: Pearson.Wilkinson, R. (2004). Integrating content and language: Meeting the challenge of a multilingualhigher education. The Netherlands: Maastricht University.Wisudawati & Agustina, A. (2009). Code Switching in The Biology Teaching Learning ofImmersion Program of RSBI SMP N 1 Wates Kulon Progo Grade VIII F Yogyakarta. Retrieved fromhttps://repository.usd.ac.id/9634/Wojtowicz, L., Mark, S., Thomas C., &Thomas H. (2010). The Impact of ICT andgames based learning on content and language integrated learning:Internationalconference ICT for language learning 4th edition. Scotland: University of the West ofScotland.Xanthou, M. (2011). The impact of CLIL on L2 vocabulary development and content knowledge. EnglishTeaching: Practice and Critique, 10(4), 116-126.Xiaoping, L. (2012). Teaching language and content: Instructure straregiesin abiligual scienceclass at a Chinese University. Higher Education,1(2), 92-102.Yamauchi, L. G. (2008). Effect of multimedia instructional material on students learningand their perceptions of the instruction(mastersthesis), Lowa State Univesity, Ames Lowa.Ya, C. S. (2006). Taiwan case: EFL teachers perceptions of English language policyat the elementary level in Taiwan. Educational Studies, 32(3), 265-283.Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and method (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SagePublications.Yip, D. Y., Tsang, W. K., & Cheung, S. P. (2003). Evaluation of the effects of medium ofinstruction on the science learning of Hong Kong secondary students: Performance on thescience achievement test,Bilingual Research Journal: The Journal of the National Association forBilingual Education, 27(2), 295-331.Yore, L. (2003). Examining the literacy component of science literacy: 25 years oflanguage arts and science research. International Jurnal of Science Education, 25(6), 689-725.Yumiko, Y. (2007). A study of billigual education in the Philippines. InternationalStudies, 9, 175-201.Yushau, B. &Bokhari M., (2004) Language and mathematics: The case of bilingual Arabs.Second UAE math day. United Arab Emirates: American University of Sharjah.Zamjani, I. (2011). Penyelenggaraan rintisan sekolah bertaraf internasional: Sebuahkajian kebijakan. BalitbangKemendikbud.

Current practices and issues of teaching and learning Biology using English at Pilot International Standard Schools in Indonesia

Similar Items