Improving Students’ Tenses Mastery through Tenses Symbol Technique (TST) in Class X4 at SMA Negeri 1 Pekanbaru
Student’s Tenses mastery is an important competence to support the major English skills, listening, speaking, reading, and writing. Beside, the tenses mastery is also important to have another grammar materials that need Tenses mastery as the basic knowledge. However, in reality, students’ tenses mastery is very minimal that they are not able to call out the names of the tenses, mention the formulas, let alone to understand meaning and the usage in sentences. To solve this problem the resercher has created a teaching technique, namely, Tenses Symbols Technique (TST) that covers four steps of tenses mastery: memorizing tenses names, formulating tenses patterns, understanding tenses meanings, dan applying in context. Clasroom Action Research is the research method applied in this research because the aim of this research merely to solve the problem the researcher has in her own class. From the two cycles of Classroom Action Research that consists of planning, acting, observing, and reflecting, and from data analyzing , it was proven that Tenses Symbols Tecnique (TST) could improve the students’ tenses mastery as 81% in cycle 1 and 95% in cycle 2 because the application of symbols in this technique could simplify of the process of decoding the meaning of each tenses. So, the result of this research is TST could improve students’ tenses mastery.
Deacon, T.W. (1997) The Symbolic Species: The Co-Evolution of Language and the Brain, Norton
Gay. L. R. and Peter Airasian. 2000. Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and Application (6th ed.) Saddle River, New Jersey. Prentice Hall.
Gokhale, Madhuri. (2010). Research Paper: „A Pragmatic Approach to the Teaching of Grammar in Indian Context‟. Elt Weekly, Vol. 2 Issue 75 November http://eltweekly.com ISSN 0975-3036
Graver, B.D. (1986). Advanced English Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Harmer, J. How to Teach English: An Introduction to the Practice of English Language Teaching. Essex, Pearson Education Limited, 2007.
Kemmis. S. and Taggart. R. 1999. The Action Research Planner. Deakin University Press.
Madya. Suwarsih. 2007. Teori dan Praktik Penelitian Tindakan.Action Research. Alfabeta Bandung.
Nunan, D., Practical English Language Teaching, McGraw-Hill, New York, 2003.
Radford, L. (2000) Signs and meanings in students’emergent algebraic thinking: a semiotic analysis. Educational studies in mathematics, 42: 237-268.
Robotti, E. (2002) Functions of natural language in the resolution of a plane geometry problem, Institutoper le Tecnologie Didattiche-CNR of Genova; University of Genova.
Salomon, G. (1979). Interaction of Media, Cognition, and Learning. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass.
Sidney Greenbaum and Randolph Quirk, Students’ Grammar of the English Language, London : Pearson Education Limited, 1990
Thornbury, S., How to Teach Grammar. Pearson Education Limited, Malaysia, 2002.
Ur, P., Grammar Practice Activities: A Practical Guide for Teacher, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2006.
Uttal, D.H. et al. (1999) Taking a hard look at concreteness: do real objects help children learn? In Child Psychology: A Handbook of Contemporary Issues (Tamis-LeMonda, C. and Balter, L., eds),pp. 177–192, Garland, Hamden Connecticut
Vygotsky, L. (1962) Thought and Language, MIT Press
Zainil. 2008. Classroom Action Research. Sukabina Offset. Padang.