Student team achievement divisions technique to improve students’ behaviour engagement

Fajar Arif Herjayanto

Abstract


Student Team Achievement Divisions (STAD) is a teaching strategy where students work together in small groups on a structured activity and it is presumably able to improve students’ behaviour engagement and learning outcome. Collaborative learning and engagement (specifically behaviour engagement) are something considered important in learning, especially in language learning as they can promote the effectiveness of learning via active participation of students in the learning process. The data of this study were collected by using questionnaire, observation, interview and diary which used successively. The data analysis revealed that (1) STAD can improve students’ behaviour engagement (2) Difficulties of STAD when it was applied in enhancing students’ behaviour engagement. Taking sample of twenty one students divided into five small groups, the research was conducted by using classroom action research design. The results indicates that students in a class with caring atmosphere and supportive interaction managed by the teacher; who played active roles as prompter, participant, and/or tutor as well as addressed the students autonomy via group work activity, are engaged behaviourally to the instructional. In conclusion, the student team achievement divisions technique can be applied to enhance students’ behaviour engagement on the english class successfully.

 

Keywords: Student Team Achievement Divisions, Students’ behaviour engagement.


Keywords


Student Team Achievement Divisions, Students’ behaviour engagement.

References


Brown, H. Douglas. (2001). Principle of Language Learning and Teaching. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc.

Burns, A. (1999). Collaborative Action Research for English Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Chen, P., Gonyea, R., Kuh, G. (2008). Learning at a distance: Engaged or not. Innovative: Journal of Online Education, 4(3)

Dornyei, Z. (2003). Questionnaires in Second language Research. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Finn, J. D., and Voelkl, K. E. (1993). School characteristics related to school engagement. Journal of Negro Educa-tion, 62, 249–268.

Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept: State of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59–119. doi: 10.3102/00346543074001059.

Harper, S.R. and Quaye, S.J. (2009a) Beyond Sameness, with Engagement and Outcomes for. In: Student Engagement in Higher Education. New York and London: Routledge, pp. 1–15.

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K.A. (1991). Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company

Klem, A. M., and Connell, J. P. (2004). Relationships matter: linking teacher support to student engagement and achievement. Journal of School Health, 74, 262–273.

Lincoln, Y. S., &Guba, E. G. 1985. Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Marks, H. M. (2000). Student engagement in instructional activity: patterns in the elementary, middle, and high school years. American Educational Research Journal, 37(1), 153–184.

Michaelsen, L. K. & Sweet, M. 2008. The Essential Elements of Team-BasedLearning .New Directions for Teaching and Learning, no. 116, Winter 2008 Published online in Wiley Inter Science. Available at:(www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI: 10.1002/tl.330 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How College Affect Students: Finding and Insights from Twenty Years of Research. San Fransisco, California, USA: Jossey-Bass.

Schlechty, P. (2004). Working on the work. Jossey-Bass Publishing, San Francisco, CA.

Skinner, E. A., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in The Classrroom: Reciprocal Effects of Teacher Behaviour and Students Engagement Across The School Year. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(4), 571-581.

Skinner, E. A., Kindermann, T. A., & Furrer, C. J. (2009). A Motivational Perspective on Engagement and Disaffection :. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69(3), 493-525.

Slavin, E. Robert. (2009). Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research, and Practice. Massachusetts: Needham Heights.

Steinberg, L. D., Brown, B. B., & Dornbush, S. M. (1996). Beyond the classroom: Why school reform has failed and what parents need to do. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Wallace. 1998. Training Foreign Language Teacher. Cambridge: Cambrige University Press.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.26486/jele.v4i2.380

Article Metrics

Abstract view : 240 times

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright of  JELE (Journal of English Language and Education), ISSN 2541-6421 (online)ISSN 2460-7142 (print) Gedung LPPM Universitas Mercu Buana Yogyakarta

Kampus I  : Jl. Wates Km. 10 Yogyakarta 55753. Telp: 0274-6498212, 6498211, Fax. 0274-6498213 

Email: [email protected]

 

tumblr counter
Jele View My Stats

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.