Translate

Senin, 15 Maret 2010

Linguistics

IINTRODUCTION

Linguistics, the scientific study of language. It encompasses the description of languages, the study of their origin, and the analysis of how children acquire language and how people learn languages other than their own. Linguistics is also concerned with relationships between languages and with the ways languages change over time. Linguists may study language as a thought process and seek a theory that accounts for the universal human capacity to produce and understand language. Some linguists examine language within a cultural context. By observing talk, they try to determine what a person needs to know in order to speak appropriately in different settings, such as the workplace, among friends, or among family. Other linguists focus on what happens when speakers from different language and cultural backgrounds interact. Linguists may also concentrate on how to help people learn another language, using what they know about the learner’s first language and about the language being acquired.

II DESCRIPTIVE AND COMPARATIVE LINGUISTICS

Although there are many ways of studying language, most approaches belong to one of the two main branches of linguistics: descriptive linguistics and comparative linguistics.

A Descriptive Linguistics

Descriptive linguistics is the study and analysis of spoken language. The techniques of descriptive linguistics were devised by German American anthropologist Franz Boas and American linguist and anthropologist Edward Sapir in the early 1900s to record and analyze Native American languages. Descriptive linguistics begins with what a linguist hears native speakers say. By listening to native speakers, the linguist gathers a body of data and analyzes it in order to identify distinctive sounds, called phonemes. Individual phonemes, such as /p/ and /b/, are established on the grounds that substitution of one for the other changes the meaning of a word. After identifying the entire inventory of sounds in a language, the linguist looks at how these sounds combine to create morphemes, or units of sound that carry meaning, such as the words push and bush. Morphemes may be individual words such as push; root words, such as berry in blueberry; or prefixes (pre- in preview) and suffixes (-ness in openness).

The linguist’s next step is to see how morphemes combine into sentences, obeying both the dictionary meaning of the morpheme and the grammatical rules of the sentence. In the sentence “She pushed the bush,” the morpheme she, a pronoun, is the subject; push, a transitive verb, is the verb; the, a definite article, is the determiner; and bush, a noun, is the object. Knowing the function of the morphemes in the sentence enables the linguist to describe the grammar of the language. The scientific procedures of phonemics (finding phonemes), morphology (discovering morphemes), and syntax (describing the order of morphemes and their function) provide descriptive linguists with a way to write down grammars of languages never before written down or analyzed. In this way they can begin to study and understand these languages.

B Comparative Linguistics

Comparative linguistics is the study and analysis, by means of written records, of the origins and relatedness of different languages. In 1786 Sir William Jones, a British scholar, asserted that Sanskrit, Greek, and Latin were related to one another and had descended from a common source. He based this assertion on observations of similarities in sounds and meanings among the three languages. For example, the Sanskrit word bhratar for “brother” resembles the Latin word frater, the Greek word phrater, (and the English word brother).

Other scholars went on to compare Icelandic with Scandinavian languages, and Germanic languages with Sanskrit, Greek, and Latin. The correspondences among languages, known as genetic relationships, came to be represented on what comparative linguists refer to as family trees. Family trees established by comparative linguists include the Indo-European, relating Sanskrit, Greek, Latin, German, English, and other Asian and European languages; the Algonquian, relating Fox, Cree, Menomini, Ojibwa, and other Native North American languages; and the Bantu, relating Swahili, Xhosa, Zulu, Kikuyu, and other African languages.

Comparative linguists also look for similarities in the way words are formed in different languages. Latin and English, for example, change the form of a word to express different meanings, as when the English verb go changes to went and gone to express a past action. Chinese, on the other hand, has no such inflected forms; the verb remains the same while other words indicate the time (as in “go store tomorrow”). In Swahili, prefixes, suffixes, and infixes (additions in the body of the word) combine with a root word to change its meaning. For example, a single word might express when something was done, by whom, to whom, and in what manner.

Some comparative linguists reconstruct hypothetical ancestral languages known as proto-languages, which they use to demonstrate relatedness among contemporary languages. A proto-language is not intended to depict a real language, however, and does not represent the speech of ancestors of people speaking modern languages. Unfortunately, some groups have mistakenly used such reconstructions in efforts to demonstrate the ancestral homeland of a people.

Comparative linguists have suggested that certain basic words in a language do not change over time, because people are reluctant to introduce new words for such constants as arm, eye, or mother. These words are termed culture free. By comparing lists of culture-free words in languages within a family, linguists can derive the percentage of related words and use a formula to figure out when the languages separated from one another.

By the 1960s comparativists were no longer satisfied with focusing on origins, migrations, and the family tree method. They challenged as unrealistic the notion that an earlier language could remain sufficiently isolated for other languages to be derived exclusively from it over a period of time. Today comparativists seek to understand the more complicated reality of language history, taking language contact into account. They are concerned with universal characteristics of language and with comparisons of grammars and structures.

III SUBFIELDS OF LINGUISTICS

The field of linguistics both borrows from and lends its own theories and methods to other disciplines. The many subfields of linguistics have expanded our understanding of languages. Linguistic theories and methods are also used in other fields of study. These overlapping interests have led to the creation of several cross-disciplinary fields.

A Sociolinguistics

Sociolinguistics is the study of patterns and variations in language within a society or community. It focuses on the way people use language to express social class, group status, gender, or ethnicity, and it looks at how they make choices about the form of language they use. It also examines the way people use language to negotiate their role in society and to achieve positions of power. For example, sociolinguistic studies have found that the way a New Yorker pronounces the phoneme /r/ in an expression such as “fourth floor” can indicate the person’s social class. According to one study, people aspiring to move from the lower middle class to the upper middle class attach prestige to pronouncing the /r/. Sometimes they even overcorrect their speech, pronouncing an /r/ where those whom they wish to copy may not.

Some sociolinguists believe that analyzing such variables as the use of a particular phoneme can predict the direction of language change. Change, they say, moves toward the variable associated with power, prestige, or other quality having high social value. Other sociolinguists focus on what happens when speakers of different languages interact. This approach to language change emphasizes the way languages mix rather than the direction of change within a community. The goal of sociolinguistics is to understand communicative competence—what people need to know to use the appropriate language for a given social setting.

B Psycholinguistics

Psycholinguistics merges the fields of psychology and linguistics to study how people process language and how language use is related to underlying mental processes. Studies of children’s language acquisition and of second-language acquisition are psycholinguistic in nature. Psycholinguists work to develop models for how language is processed and understood, using evidence from studies of what happens when these processes go awry. They also study language disorders such as aphasia (impairment of the ability to use or comprehend words) and dyslexia (impairment of the ability to make out written language).

C Computational Linguistics

Computational linguistics involves the use of computers to compile linguistic data, analyze languages, translate from one language to another, and develop and test models of language processing. Linguists use computers and large samples of actual language to analyze the relatedness and the structure of languages and to look for patterns and similarities. Computers also aid in stylistic studies, information retrieval, various forms of textual analysis, and the construction of dictionaries and concordances. Applying computers to language studies has resulted in machine translation systems and machines that recognize and produce speech and text. Such machines facilitate communication with humans, including those who are perceptually or linguistically impaired.

D Applied Linguistics

Applied linguistics employs linguistic theory and methods in teaching and in research on learning a second language. Linguists look at the errors people make as they learn another language and at their strategies for communicating in the new language at different degrees of competence. In seeking to understand what happens in the mind of the learner, applied linguists recognize that motivation, attitude, learning style, and personality affect how well a person learns another language.

E Anthropological Linguistics

Anthropological linguistics, also known as linguistic anthropology, uses linguistic approaches to analyze culture. Anthropological linguists examine the relationship between a culture and its language, the way cultures and languages have changed over time, and how different cultures and languages are related to one another. For example, the present English use of family and given names arose in the late 13th and early 14th centuries when the laws concerning registration, tenure, and inheritance of property were changed.

F Philosophical Linguistics

Philosophical linguistics examines the philosophy of language. Philosophers of language search for the grammatical principles and tendencies that all human languages share. Among the concerns of linguistic philosophers is the range of possible word order combinations throughout the world. One finding is that 95 percent of the world’s languages use a subject-verb-object (SVO) order as English does (“She pushed the bush.”). Only 5 percent use a subject-object-verb (SOV) order or verb-subject-object (VSO) order.

G Neurolinguistics

Neurolinguistics is the study of how language is processed and represented in the brain. Neurolinguists seek to identify the parts of the brain involved with the production and understanding of language and to determine where the components of language (phonemes, morphemes, and structure or syntax) are stored. In doing so, they make use of techniques for analyzing the structure of the brain and the effects of brain damage on language.

IV HISTORY OF LINGUISTICS

Speculation about language goes back thousands of years. Ancient Greek philosophers speculated on the origins of language and the relationship between objects and their names. They also discussed the rules that govern language, or grammar, and by the 3rd century bc they had begun grouping words into parts of speech and devising names for different forms of verbs and nouns.

In India religion provided the motivation for the study of language nearly 2500 years ago. Hindu priests noted that the language they spoke had changed since the compilation of their ancient sacred texts, the Vedas, starting about 1000 bc. They believed that for certain religious ceremonies based upon the Vedas to succeed, they needed to reproduce the language of the Vedas precisely. Panini, an Indian grammarian who lived about 400 bc, produced the earliest work describing the rules of Sanskrit, the ancient language of India.

The Romans used Greek grammars as models for their own, adding commentary on Latin style and usage. Statesman and orator Marcus Tullius Cicero wrote on rhetoric and style in the 1st century bc. Later grammarians Aelius Donatus (4th century ad) and Priscian (6th century ad) produced detailed Latin grammars. Roman works served as textbooks and standards for the study of language for more than 1000 years.

It was not until the end of the 18th century that language was researched and studied in a scientific way. During the 17th and 18th centuries, modern languages, such as French and English, replaced Latin as the means of universal communication in the West. This occurrence, along with developments in printing, meant that many more texts became available. At about this time, the study of phonetics, or the sounds of a language, began. Such investigations led to comparisons of sounds in different languages; in the late 18th century the observation of correspondences among Sanskrit, Latin, and Greek gave birth to the field of Indo-European linguistics.

During the 19th century, European linguists focused on philology, or the historical analysis and comparison of languages. They studied written texts and looked for changes over time or for relationships between one language and another.

A The 20th Century

In the early 20th century, linguistics expanded to include the study of unwritten languages. In the United States linguists and anthropologists began to study the rapidly disappearing spoken languages of Native North Americans. Because many of these languages were unwritten, researchers could not use historical analysis in their studies. In their pioneering research on these languages, anthropologists Franz Boas and Edward Sapir developed the techniques of descriptive linguistics and theorized on the ways in which language shapes our perceptions of the world.

An important outgrowth of descriptive linguistics is a theory known as structuralism, which assumes that language is a system with a highly organized structure. Structuralism began with publication of the work of Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure in Cours de linguistique générale (1916; Course in General Linguistics, 1959). This work, compiled by Saussure’s students after his death, is considered the foundation of the modern field of linguistics. Saussure made a distinction between actual speech, or spoken language, and the knowledge underlying speech that speakers share about what is grammatical. Speech, he said, represents instances of grammar, and the linguist’s task is to find the underlying rules of a particular language from examples found in speech. To the structuralist, grammar is a set of relationships that account for speech, rather than a set of instances of speech, as it is to the descriptivist.

Once linguists began to study language as a set of abstract rules that somehow account for speech, other scholars began to take an interest in the field. They drew analogies between language and other forms of human behavior, based on the belief that a shared structure underlies many aspects of a culture. Anthropologists, for example, became interested in a structuralist approach to the interpretation of kinship systems and analysis of myth and religion. American linguist Leonard Bloomfield promoted structuralism in the United States.

Saussure’s ideas also influenced European linguistics, most notably in France and Czechoslovakia (now the Czech Republic). In 1926 Czech linguist Vilem Mathesius founded the Linguistic Circle of Prague, a group that expanded the focus of the field to include the context of language use. The Prague circle developed the field of phonology, or the study of sounds, and demonstrated that universal features of sounds in the languages of the world interrelate in a systematic way. Linguistic analysis, they said, should focus on the distinctiveness of sounds rather than on the ways they combine. Where descriptivists tried to locate and describe individual phonemes, such as /b/ and /p/, the Prague linguists stressed the features of these phonemes and their interrelationships in different languages. In English, for example, the voice distinguishes between the similar sounds of /b/ and /p/, but these are not distinct phonemes in a number of other languages. An Arabic speaker might pronounce the cities Pompei and Bombay the same way.

As linguistics developed in the 20th century, the notion became prevalent that language is more than speech—specifically, that it is an abstract system of interrelationships shared by members of a speech community. Structural linguistics led linguists to look at the rules and the patterns of behavior shared by such communities. Whereas structural linguists saw the basis of language in the social structure, other linguists looked at language as a mental process.

The 1957 publication of Syntactic Structures by American linguist Noam Chomsky initiated what many view as a scientific revolution in linguistics. Chomsky sought a theory that would account for both linguistic structure and for the creativity of language—the fact that we can create entirely original sentences and understand sentences never before uttered. He proposed that all people have an innate ability to acquire language. The task of the linguist, he claimed, is to describe this universal human ability, known as language competence, with a grammar from which the grammars of all languages could be derived. The linguist would develop this grammar by looking at the rules children use in hearing and speaking their first language. He termed the resulting model, or grammar, a transformational-generative grammar, referring to the transformations (or rules) that generate (or account for) language. Certain rules, Chomsky asserted, are shared by all languages and form part of a universal grammar, while others are language specific and associated with particular speech communities. Since the 1960s much of the development in the field of linguistics has been a reaction to or against Chomsky’s theories.

B Recent Developments

At the end of the 20th century, linguists used the term grammar primarily to refer to a subconscious linguistic system that enables people to produce and comprehend an unlimited number of utterances. Grammar thus accounts for our linguistic competence. Observations about the actual language we use, or language performance, are used to theorize about this invisible mechanism known as grammar.

The orientation toward the scientific study of language led by Chomsky has had an impact on nongenerative linguists as well. Comparative and historically oriented linguists are looking for the various ways linguistic universals show up in individual languages. Psycholinguists, interested in language acquisition, are investigating the notion that an ideal speaker-hearer is the origin of the acquisition process. Sociolinguists are examining the rules that underlie the choice of language variants, or codes, and allow for switching from one code to another. Some linguists are studying language performance—the way people use language—to see how it reveals a cognitive ability shared by all human beings. Others seek to understand animal communication within such a framework. What mental processes enable chimpanzees to make signs and communicate with one another and how do these processes differ from those of humans?

Teaching and Learning

In this essay, British education theorist Peter Newsam describes two contrasting approaches to education. The traditional approach assumes there is a predetermined body of knowledge that the teacher should pass on to the student. This approach uses testing and competition to evaluate and motivate students. In the progressive approach, the child, rather than a set body of knowledge, is the frame of reference. The teacher’s role is to be conscious of the development stage and the capacity of each child. The progressive method stresses cooperation rather than competition. Newsam suggests that an effective teaching system can incorporate elements of each approach.

Teaching and Learning

By Peter Newsam

The relationship between teaching and learning, what and how teachers teach, and how and what learners learn has long been a subject of controversy. The two, sometimes extreme, positions adopted by those who engage in it can be loosely described as, on the one hand, “traditional” and, on the other, “progressive.”

The traditional position starts from the assumption, taken to be so obvious as not to be open to question, that the purpose of teaching is to ensure that those taught acquire a prescribed body of knowledge and set of values. Both knowledge and values are taken to reflect a society’s selection of what it most wants to transmit to its future citizens and requires its future workforce to be able to do.

An important characteristic of this traditional view is that it seeks to convey what is already known and, at some level, approved. The relationship between teacher and learner is determined thereby. The learner is seen as the person who does not yet have the required knowledge or values and the teacher as the person who has both and whose function it is to convey them to the learner.

From the nature of this relationship, a number of things follow: the systematic transmission of knowledge and values from teacher to learner needs to proceed smoothly. That requires well-behaved learners and a disciplined environment, if necessary externally imposed with sanctions for failures in compliance. Teaching and learning also benefit from carefully designed syllabuses and prescribed curriculum content. Furthermore, as what has to be learned can be set out in full, stage by stage, from the start of the educational process to its conclusion, it follows that what is taught can be regularly tested and that each stage of teaching and learning can best be seen as a preparation for the next. It also follows that, as individual learners learn at different speeds and are capable of reaching different levels of achievement, it seems sensible to arrange learners in groups of similar abilities, either at different schools or in graduated classes within schools. Finally, so far as human motivation is concerned, competition is seen to be the predominant way to encourage learners or institutions to strive to improve their performance in relation to that of others.

The opposed view, broadly described as “progressive” or “child-centered,” starts from the learner rather than from any predetermined body of knowledge. On this view, the function of the teacher, from parent in the earliest years right through the years of school attendance, is to be aware of each child’s capacity and stage of development. The primary importance of children’s learning, which in turn is taken to depend on that stage of development, requires each of those stages to be seen as important in its own right rather than as a preparation for some later stage. An eight-year-old child, for example, is seen as an eight year old to be developed to his or her full potential as an eight year old, rather than as a future nine or fifteen year old. The curriculum itself tends to be seen, in the words of the Report of the Consultative Committee on the Primary School as open-ended and inquiry-based: “the curriculum is to be thought of in terms of activity and experience rather than of knowledge to be acquired and facts to be stored.”

So far as values are concerned, the progressive approach tends to see attempts to teach or improve these directly as less effective than creating schools which exemplify values of greatest relevance to the young. Hence the importance placed on the way individuals, adults and learners alike, are encouraged to behave towards each other. A disciplined environment, rather than being externally imposed, is a direct consequence of that process. Social values, cooperation rather than competition and equal value given to the efforts of the least as well as the most able, are emphasized. Finally, as a point of principle, it is assumed all can succeed at some level in some aspects of learning. As one 19th-century educator insisted: “All can walk part of the way with genius.” Sharply differentiated forms of education, with children attending schools or classes confined to those with particular levels of aptitude, however assessed, are thought to conflict with this principle. By inducing a sense of failure in children allocated to what are seen, by others and themselves, as schools or classes with lower standards than others, general levels of achievement are thought to be depressed and an unmotivated and under-achieving group of children unnecessarily created.

The opposed concepts implicit in “traditional” and “progressive” attitudes to teaching and learning reflect approaches regarded by those holding one or other of them as self-evident: that it must be right to start from what needs to be taught or, conversely, that it must be right to start from the learner whose success in learning it is the purpose of teaching to ensure.

The virtual impossibility of reconciling these two diverse approaches, at least in their extreme forms, has led to each being caricatured, often in metaphorical terms. Traditional education’s perception of children, in an extreme form, was described by Charles Dickens in Hard Times as seeing them as: “little vessels arranged in order, ready to have imperial gallons of facts poured into them until they were full to the brim.” In short, like a kettle that has to be filled from a tap, the traditional learner is taken to be a passive recipient of whatever is being taught. Further, because the traditional approach to education requires a degree of memorization, the ability to recall with precision what has been taught in the terms in which it has to be reproduced by the learner, this feature is disparagingly described as “learning by rote.” The implication is that the learner’s mind has not been required to be engaged in the process. Finally, the assumption that, to the traditionalist, knowledge is something that already exists, causes this approach to be seen as backward-looking at a time when new knowledge is being created and reshaped at a bewildering rate.

Criticisms of progressive education, particularly in its extreme forms, have concentrated on the folly, as this is perceived, of allowing children to decide when and how they are to learn anything. Lack of externally imposed discipline has led to some schools where, as one inspector of schools described it, “it is like a wet play-time all day.” The emphasis on growth and development, with analogies to the way plants move naturally through their lives without constantly being told what to become, has been particularly criticized. The simple notion of growth carries with it no implication as to the direction that growth is taking. Growth, progressives are thought to ignore, may as easily be in an unwholesome direction as a healthy one. This leads to values being seen to be relative, with no one set of values inherently to be preferred to any others. Yet what ought to be, values of any kind, cannot be derived from what is; and it is a naturalistic fallacy to suppose otherwise. Finally, because the teacher is not seen as at the center of the educational process, he or she is reduced to becoming a “facilitator” of children’s learning; in extreme cases unprepared even to answer simple questions or directly to teach anything at all, on the assumption that the only things a learner really learns are those things which he or she has “discovered for himself.”

Between the two extreme positions, reconciliation has proved difficult. Historically, the traditional approach has been dominant and continues to be held particularly firmly by those who themselves were able, well-motivated learners and as such required little more of their teachers than specific instruction. Progressive approaches have tended to be favored by teachers or theoreticians whose concern has been with the education of all children, including the able and the well-motivated but with particular attention to the needs of those with little interest in or apparent aptitude for learning and little confidence in its relevance to their own lives.

In practice, neither of the two extreme approaches to teaching and learning has proved generally satisfactory. In its starkest form, traditional education has often served able pupils well but has been less successful with others. On the other hand, progressive education has tended to work well enough in the early years of schooling, in the hands of able and committed teachers, but has had less success when attempted in other circumstances.

The need to develop systems which incorporate the best of traditional and progressive approaches to teaching and learning has long been evident. Fortunately, what good schools and good teachers actually do has suggested ways forward. Increasingly, the approach adopted places the teacher in authority, as traditionally has been the position, but the absolute necessity of engaging learners in their own learning, as progressive educators have argued, is seen as equally important. Teaching, on this view, requires skillful questioning of pupils by the teacher, rather than undue reliance on direct instruction. The purpose of that questioning is to encourage the minds of the learners to understand, to arrange, and to act on the material with which they are required to engage. In this sense, learning is active; indeed it is interactive, with the teacher responsible for ensuring the direction that this learning takes but with the learner consistently being challenged to shape it to his or her needs. Education of this kind has increasingly become a feature of effective schools and school systems worldwide. In the process, the long-standing conflict between traditional and progressive approaches to teaching and learning, with the time-consuming controversies to which this gives rise, has a real prospect of being resolved.

About the author: Sir Peter Newsam is an educationalist and former director of the Institute of Education, University of London.

Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2009. © 1993-2008 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Sabtu, 20 Februari 2010

PENGEMBANGAN MODEL PEMBELAJARAN YANG EFEKTIF

[Direktorat Jenderal Manajemen Pendidikan Dasar Dan Menengah Departemen Pendidikan Nasional]

I. PENDEKATAN KONTEKSTUAL

A. Latar belakang

Ada kecendrungan dewasa ini untuk kembali pada pemikiran bahwa anak akan belajar lebih baik jika lingkungan diciptakan alamiah. Belajar akan lebih bermakna jika anak mengalami apa yang dipelajarinya, bukan memgetahuinya. Pembelajaran yang berorientasi pada penguasaan materi terbukti berhasil dalam kompetisi menggingat jangka pendek tetapi gagal dalam membekali anak memecahkan persoalan dalam kehidupan jangka panjang

Pendekatan kontektual(Contextual Teaching and Learning/CTL) merupakan konsep belajar yang membantu guru mengaitkan antara materi yang diajarkan dengan situasi dunia nyata siswa dan mendorong siswa membuat hubungan antara pengetahuan yang dimilikinya dengan penerapannya dalam kehidupan mereka sebagai anggota keluarga dan masyarakat. Dengan konsep itu, hasil pembelajaran diharapkan lebih bermakna bagi siswa. Proses pembelajaran berlansung alamiah dalam bentuk kegiatan siswa bekerja dan mengalami, bukan mentransfer pengetahuan dari guru ke siswa. Strategi pembelajaran lebih dipentingkan daripada hasil

Dalam kelas kontektual, tugas guru adalah membantu siswa mencapai tujuannya. Maksudnya, guru lebih banyak berurusan dengan strategi daripada memberi informasi. Tugas guru mengelola kelas sebagai sebuah tim yang bekerja bersama untuk menemukan sesuatu yang baru bagi anggota kelas (siswa). Sesuatu yang baru datang dari menemukan sendiri bukan dari apa kata guru.Begitulah peran guru di kelas yang dikelola dengan pendekatan kontekstual

B. Pemikiran tentang belajar

Pendekatan kontekstual mendasarkan diri pada kecendrungan pemikiran tentang belajar sebagai berikut.

1. Proses belajar

· Belajar tidak hanya sekedar menghafal. Siswa harus mengkonstruksikan pengetahuan di benak mereka sendiri

· Anak belajar dari mengalami. Anak mencatat sendiri pola-pola bermakna dari pengetahuan baru, dan bukan diberi begitu saja oleh guru

· Para ahli sepakat bahwa pengetahuan yang dimiliki sesorang itu terorganisasi dan mencerminkan pemahaman yang mendalam tentang sesuatu persoalan

· Pengetahuan tidak dapat dipisah-pisahkan menjadi fakta-fakta atau proposisi yang terpisak, tetapi mencerminkan keterampilan yang dapat diterapkan.

· Manusia mempunyai tingkatan yang berbeda dalam menyikapi situasi baru.

· Siswa perlu dibiasakan memecahkan masalah, menemukan sesuatu yang berguna bagi didrinya, dan bergelut dengan ide-ide

· Proses belajar dapat mengubah struktur otak. Perubahan struktur otak itu berjalan terus seiring dengan perkembangan organisasi pengetahuan dan keterampilan sesorang.

2. Transfer Belajar

· Siswa belajar dari mengalami sendiri, bukan dari pemberian orang lain

· Keterampilan dan pengetahuan itu diperluas dari konteks yang terbatas (sedikit demi sedikit)

· Penting bagi siswa tahu untuk apa dia belajar dan bagaimana ia menggunakan pengetahuan dan keterampilan itu

3. Siswa sebagai Pembelajar

· Manusia mempunyai kecenderungan untuk belajar dalam bidang tertentu, dan seorang anak mempunyai kecenderungan untuk belajar dengan cepat hal-hal baru

· Strategi belajar itu penting. Anak dengan mudah mempelajari sesuatu yang baru. Akan tetapi, untuk hal-hal yang sulit, strategi belajar amat penting

· Peran orang dewasa (guru) membantu menghubungkan antara yang baru dan yang sudah diketahui.

· Tugas guru memfasilitasi agar informasi baru bermakna, memberi kesempatan kepada siswa untuk menemukan dan menerapkan ide mereka sendiri, dan menyadarkan siswa untuk menerapkan strategi mereka sendiri.

4. Pentingnya lingkungan Belajar

· Belajar efektif itu dimulai dari lingkungan belajar yang berpusat pada siswa. Dari guru akting di depan kelas, siswa menonton ke siswa akting bekerja dan berkarya, guru mengarahkan.

· Pengajaran harus berpusat pada bagaimana cara siswa menggunakan pengetahuan baru mereka.Strategi belajar lebih dipentingkan dibandingkan hasilnya

· Umpan balik amat penting bagi siswa, yang berasal dari proses penilaian yang benar

· Menumbuhkan komunitas belajar dalam bentuk kerja kelompok itu penting.

C. Hakekat Pembelajaran Kontekstual

Pembelajarn kontekstual (Contextual Teaching and learning) adalah konsep belajar yang membantu guru mengaitkan antara materi yang diajarkannya dengan situasi dunia nyata siswa dan mendorong siswa membuat hubungan antara pengetahuan yang dimilikinya dengan penerapannya dalam kehidupan mereka sehari-hari, dengan melibatkan tujuh komponen utama pembelajaran efektif, yakni: konstruktivisme (Constructivism), bertanya (Questioning), menemukan ( Inquiri), masyarakat belajar (Learning Community), pemodelan (Modeling), dan penilaian sebenarnya (Authentic Assessment)

D.Pengertaian CTL

1. Merupakan suatu proses pendidikan yang holistik dan bertujuan memotivasi siswa untuk memahami makna materi pelajaran yang dipelajarinya dengan mengkaitkan materi tersebut dengan konteks kehidupan mereka sehari-hari (konteks pribadi, sosial, dan kultural) sehingga siswa memiliki pengetahuan/ keterampilan yang secara fleksibel dapat diterapkan (ditransfer) dari satu permasalahan /konteks ke permasalahan/ konteks lainnya.

2. Merupakan konsep belajar yang membantu guru mengkaitkan antara materi yang diajarkannya dengan situasi dunia nyata dan mendorong pebelajar membuat hubungan antara materi yang diajarkannya dengan penerapannya dalam kehidupan mereka sebagai anggota keluarga dan masyarakat

Menyandarkan pada memori spasial (pemahaman makna)

Menyandarkan pada hapalan

E. Perbedaan Pendekatan Kontekstual Dengan Pendekatan Tradisional

NO.

CTL

TRADISONAL

1.

Menyadarkan pada memori spasial (pemahaman bermakna)

Menyadarkan pada hafalan

2.

Pemilihan informasi berdasarkan kebutuhan siswa

Pemilihan informasi di-tentukan oleh guru

3.

Siswa terlibat secara aktif dalam proses pembelajaran

Siswa secara pasif menerima informasi

4.

Pembelajaran dikaitkan dengan kehidupan nyata/-masalah yang disi-mulasikan

Pembelajaran sangat abstrak dan teoritis

5.

Selalu mengkaitkan informasi dengan pengetahuan yang telah dimiliki siswa

Memberikan tumpukan informasi kepada siswa sampai saatnya diperluka

6.

Cenderung mengintegrasikan beberapa bidang

Cenderung terfokus pada satu bidang (disiplin) tertentu

7.

Siswa menggunakan waktu belajarnya untuk menemukan, menggali, berdiskusi, berpikir kritis, atau mengerjakan proyek dan pemecahan masalah (melalui kerja kelompok)

Waktu belajar siswa se-bagian besar dipergu-nakan untuk mengerja-kan buku tugas, men-dengar ceramah, dan mengisi latihan yang membosankan (melalui kerja individual)

8.

Perilaku dibangun atas kesadaran diri

Perilaku dibangun atas kebiasaan

9.

Keterampilan dikembangkan atas dasar pemahaman

Keterampilan dikem-bangkan atas dasar latihan

10.

Hadiah dari perilaku baik adalah kepuasan diri

Hadiah dari perilaku baik adalah pujian atau nilai (angka) rapor

11.

Siswa tidak melakukan hal yang buruk karena sadar hal tsb keliru dan merugikan

Siswa tidak melakukan sesuatu yang buruk karena takut akan hukuman

12.

Perilaku baik berdasar-kan motivasi intrinsik

Perilaku baik berdasar-kan motivasi ekstrinsik

13.

Pembelajaran terjadi di berbagai tempat, konteks dan setting

Pembelajaran hanya terjadi dalam kelas

14.

Hasil belajar diukur melalui penerapan penilaian autentik.

Hasil belajar diukur melalui kegiatan akademik dalam bentuk tes/ujian/ulangan.

II. PENERAPAN PENDEKATAN KONTEKSTUAL DI KELAS

CTL dapat diterapkan dalam kurikulum apa saja, bidang studi apa saja, dan kelas yang bagaimanapun keadaannya. Pendekatan CTL dalam kelas cukup mudah. Secara garis besar, langkahnya sebagai berikut ini.

1. Kembangkan pemikiran bahwa anak akan belajar lebih bermakna dengan cara bekerja sendiri, dan mengkonstruksi sendiri pengetahuan dan keterampilan barunya

2. Laksanakan sejauh mungkin kegiatan inkuiri untuk semua topik

3. kembangkan sifat ingin tahu siswa dengan bertanya

4. Ciptakan masyarakat belajar

5. Hadirkan model sebagai contoh pembelajaran

6. Lakukan refleksi di akhir pertemuan

7. Lakukan penilaian yang sebenarnya dengan berbagai cara

A. Tujuh Komponen CTL

1. KONSTRUKTIVISME

· Membangun pemahaman mereka sendiri dari pengalaman baru berdasar pada pengetahuan awal

· Pembelajaran harus dikemas menjadi proses “mengkonstruksi” bukan menerima pengetahuan

2. INQUIRY

· Proses perpindahan dari pengamatan menjadi pemahaman

· Siswa belajar menggunakan keterampilan berpikir kritis

3. QUESTIONING (BERTANYA)

· Kegiatan guru untuk mendorong, membimbing dan menilai kemampuan berpikir siswa

· Bagi siswa yang merupakan bagian penting dalam pembelajaran yang berbasis inquiry

4. LEARNING COMMUNITY (MASYARAKAT BELAJAR)

· Sekelompok orang yang terikat dalam kegiatan belajar

· Bekerjasama dengan orang lain lebih baik daripada belajar sendiri

· Tukar pengalaman

· Berbagi ide

5. MODELING (PEMODELAN}

· Proses penampilan suatu contoh agar orang lain berpikir, bekerja dan belajar

· Mengerjakan apa yang guru inginkan agar siswa mengerjakannya

6. REFLECTION ( REFLEKSI)

· Cara berpikir tentang apa yang telah kita pelajari

· Mencatat apa yang telah dipelajari

· Membuat jurnal, karya seni, diskusi kelompok

7. AUTHENTIC ASSESSMENT (PENILAIAN YANG SEBENARNYA)

· Mengukur pengetahuan dan keterampilan siswa

· Penilaian produk (kinerja)

· Tugas-tugas yang relevan dan kontekstual

B. Karakteristik Pembelajaran CTL

o Kerjasama

o Saling menunjang

o Menyenangkan, tidak membosankan

o Belajar dengan bergairah

o Pembelajaran terintegrasi

o Menggunakan berbagai sumber

o Siswa aktif

o Sharing dengan teman

o Siswa kritis guru kreatif

o Dinding dan lorong-lorong penuh dengan hasil kerja siswa, peta-peta, gambar, artikel, humor dan lain-lain

o Laporan kepada orang tua bukan hanya rapor tetapi hasil karya siswa, laporan hasil pratikum, karangan siswa dan lain-lain

III. MENYUSUN RENCANA PEMBELAJARAN BERBASIS KONTEKSTUAL

Dalam pembelajaran kontekstual, program pembelajaran lebih merupakan rencana kegiatan kelas yang dirancang guru, yang berisi skenario tahap demi tahap tentang apa yang akan dilakukan bersama siswanya sehubungan dengan topik yang akan dipelajarinya. Dalam program tercermin tujuan pembelajaran, media untuk mencapai tujuan tersebut, materi pembelajaran, langkah-langkah pembelajaran, dan authentic assessmennya.

Dalam konteks itu, program yang dirancang guru benar-benar rencana pribadi tentang apa yang akan dikerjakannya bersama siswanya.

Secara umum tidak ada perbedaan mendasar format antara program pembelajaran konvensional dengan program pembelajaran kontekstual. Sekali lagi, yang membedakannya hanya pada penekanannya. Program pembelajaran konvensional lebih menekankan pada deskripsi tujuan yang akan dicapai (jelas dan operasional), sedangkan program untuk pembelajaran kontekstual lebih menekankan pada skenario pembelajarannya.

Atas dasar itu, saran pokok dalam penyusunan rencana pelaksanaan pembelajaran (RPP) berbasis kontekstual adalah sebagai berikut.

1. Nyatakan kegiatan pertama pembelajarannya, yaitu sebuah pernyataan kegiatan siswa yang merupakan gabungan antara Standara Kompetensi, Kompetensi dasar, Materi Pokok dan Pencapaian Hasil Belajar

2. Nyatakan tujuan umum pembelajarannya

3. Rincilah media untuk mendukung kegiatan itu

4. Buatlah skenario tahap demi tahap kegiatan siswa

5. Nyatakan authentic assessmentnya, yaitu dengan data apa siswa dapat diamati partisipasinya dalam pembelajaran.

http://www.dikdasmen.org/files/KTSP/SMP/PENGEMMODEL%20PEMBEL%20YG%20EFEKTIF-SMP.doc. G o o g l e membuat versi HTML dari dokumen tersebut secara otomatis pada saat menelusuri web. Untuk menautkan atau menandai situs ini, gunakan URL berikut: http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:ZyAp6OcOoOgJ:www.dikdasmen.org/files/KTSP/SMP/PENGEMMODEL%2520PEMBEL%2520YG%2520EFEKTIF-SMP.doc+%22strategi+menumbuhkan+kreativitas+anak%22&hl=id&ct=clnk&cd=114&gl=id

DASAR-DASAR BERMAIN DRAMA

I.   PENDAHULUAN Drama adalah kisah hidup dan kehidupan manusia yang diceritakan di atas pentas dengan media  percakapan(dialog), gerak da...