A Multi-Level Collaborative and Cooperative Writing Class in Inducing Character Building (A Model of An Integration Between Teaching Writing and Character Education)

  • TEDI ROHADI IAIN Syekh Nurjati Cirebon
Keywords: cooperative learning and collaborative writing, multilevel, character building, integration

Abstract

Character education should not plainly implicate socially-authorize pattern for such character as honesty and perseverance, but also and perhaps more importantly it should provide the ways in which the students believe of their own conception selves, and their essential qualities that will back the actualization of those selves. This conceit may require a more personalized or less formulaic appropriate to inscribe instruction, but the compensation of such transformations   of instructive goals and methods might well be the revitalization of democratic society in Indonesia. Taking that into account, a multi-level collaborative and cooperative writing class,  in a more specific context and scope, classroom practices, provides one of breakthroughs toward this direction. This model of writing class is either implicitly or explicitly integrated  with character education. The paper is a report of a research and development. Theories and concepts supporting the study will initiate the paper. The next part of the paper will explore the so called

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Bloom, B.S. & D.R. Kratwohl. (1965). The Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, The Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain New York: D. McKay.

Cockburn, B. & Ross, A. (1978) Working Together. Teaching Higher Education Series: 3. School of Education, University of Lancaster.

Elbow,Peter. Using the Collage for Collaborative Writing. In Everyone Can Write: Essays Toward a Hopeful Theory of Writing and Teaching Writing. Oxford University Press: 2000 (pp 372 -378).

Howard, Rebecca Moore. Collaborative Pedagogy, in A Guide to Composition Pedagogies, Gary Tate et al., eds. Oxford University Press: 2000.

Johnson, David. W et.al. (1991). Cooperative Learning: Increasing College Faculty Instructional Productivity. Washington: George Washington University.

Johnson,D,. Johnson, R & Smith, K.A. (1991). Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom, Edin, Minn.; Interaction Book Companya.

King, P and Kithener, K. (1994). Developing Reflective Judgement. Jossey-Bass, San Fransisco.

McCrindle, A. And Christensen, C. (1995. The Impact of Learning Journal on Metacognitive Processes and Learning Performance, Learning and Instruction, 5 (3): 167-185

Mulvey, B. (1999) A Myth of Influence: Japanese University Entrance Exams and Their Effect on Junior and Senior High School Reading Pedagogy. JALT Journal 21, (1), 125- 142.

Nunan, David. (2003). Practical Language Teaching. New York: McGraw Hill.

Prabhu, N.S. (1987) Second Language Pedagogy. Oxford: OUP.

Richards, Jack C and Willy A Renadya. (2002). Methodoly in Language Teaching: an Anthology of Current Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Richards, J.C. & Rodgers, T.S. (1986) Approaches And Methods In Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wetherell, J. And Mullins, G. (1996). The Use of Student Journal in Problem Based Learning, Medical Education, 30:105-11

White, R.V. (1988) The ELT Curriculum: Design, Innovation and Management. Oxford: Blackwell.

White, R. and Arndt, V. (1991) Process Writing. Essex: Addison Wesley Longman Ltd.

Widdowson, H.G. (1978) Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford: OUP.

Widdows, S. & Voller, P. (1991) PANSI: a survey of the ELT needs of Japanese University students. Cross Currents 18, (2), 127-141.

Wilkins, D.A. (1976) Notional Syllabuses. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Yalden, Janice. (1987). The Communicative Syllabus: Evolution, Design, and Implementation. New Jersey: Prentice- Hall International.

Yalden, J. (1987) Principles of Course Design for Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Published
2019-03-30