臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究採行動研究以探討在台灣學業與職業取向的印尼語言
課程設計。透過調查學生在學習印尼語的歷程中，同時收集質性
與量化的學業與職業取向印尼語言課程的資料。質性資料主要來
自課堂觀察、學生回饋與深度訪談。而量化資料主要來自學生學
習成績（例如：課堂活動、作業、測驗、期中考試、期末考試以
及TIBA 的模擬考試）。此外，研究者透過當地印尼人對學生溝
通技巧的評估，進行三角測量技術以降低誤差。本研究對象包括
兩個班級，共有七名學生。第一班有三名學生（106 班）於2018
年1 月至6 月進行課程 ; 第二班有四名學生（107 班）於2018
年7 月至12 月進行課程。本研究結果如下：教師身兼研究者可
以更深入地了解學生，並通過行動研究了解學生需求，進而有效
地解決並改進問題、關於教學設計的改進包括：（1）創造更多
與印尼人進行對話練習的機會（2）創建具有不同難度級別作業
讓學生練習（3）製造線上印尼語對照中文字典。以及，學生們
在學業成績皆有進步。

This proposed study takes an action research approach to explore and examine the instructional design of an Indonesian language course for academic and occupational purposes in Taiwan, and then outline the modified/improved
instructional design of Indonesian language courses in the future according to the action research results in this study. In addition, this study also intends to investigate the students' academic achievement in Indonesian language learning. This study collected data, both quantitative and qualitative data, from Indonesian language classes for academic and occupational purposes taught by the teacher-researcher. The qualitative data was obtained from class observation, students' feedback, an in-depth interview with students. Meanwhile, the quantitative data was derived from students' academic performances (e.g., in-class activities,
assignments, quizzes, mid-term exam, final exam, and the MOCK test of TIBA). In addition, the teacher-researcher obtained data from several Indonesian people who acted as evaluators of students' communication skills. This study utilized the triangulation technique to minimize bias. Furthermore, this study also applied technology integration in the classroom to support teachers and students. The
sample included two classes consist of a total of seven students. The first class of three students (Class 106) was carried out in January – June 2018, while the second
class of four students (Class 107) was conducted in July – December 2018. First, the finding of this study was that the teacher-researcher could understand students more in-depth and identify their needs through action research that led to more effective problem-solving and improvements. Second, the major improvements from Class 106 to Class 107 and from Class 107 to a future class in the instructional
design included: (1) more conversation practices with native speakers, (2) creation of optional specific assignment with different difficulty levels, (3) creation of an online Indonesian - Chinese dictionary. Third, students revealed their improvement in academic performances.

1. Introduction 1
1.1 Background and Motivation 1
1.2 Study Context 2
1.3 Definition of Terms 3
1.3.1 Instructional design 3
1.3.2 Educational technology 3
1.3.3 Action Research 3
1.3.4 Bahasa Indonesia untuk Penutur Bahasa Asing (BIPA) 4
1.3.5 Tes Bahasa Indonesia sebagai Bahasa Asing (TIBA) 4
1.4. Significance of the study 4
2. Literature Review 5
2.1. Teaching the Indonesian Language as a Foreign Language 5
2.2. Instructional Design 8
2.3 Educational technology in Indonesian Language Learning 10
2.4 Action Research 12
2.5 Research Questions 13
3. Methodology 15
3.1 Participants 15
3.2 Action Research Process 16
3.3. Data Collection 17
3.3.1 Teaching Materials 19
3.3.2 Activities/assignments 20
3.3.3 Tests 22
3.3.4 Educational technology 23
3.3.5 In-depth interview 25
3.4 Teaching strategies 25
3.5 Data analysis 28
4. Results 29
4.1 The improvement of instructional design of language learning course by using action research 30
4.1.1 The action research process and its results 30
4.1.1.1 Cycle 1 Planning: Overall teaching design 30
4.1.1.2 Cycle 1 Implementation: Teaching approaches 33
1. Lecture 33
2. Modeling 34
3. Scaffolding 35
4. Task-based learning 35
5. Collaborative learning 36
6. Skills teaching 36
7. Mother tongue mirroring 36
4.1.1.3 Cycle 1 Observation: Classroom Observation and Students’ feedback 37
1. Teaching Handouts 40
2. Teaching strategies 41
3. Problem-solving 41
4. Class Activities and Assignments 42
4.1.1.4 Cycle 1 Reflection: Teacher’s insights 44
4.1.1.5 Cycle 2 Planning: Overall teaching design 45
4.1.1.6 Cycle 2 Implementation: Teaching approaches 50
4.1.1.7 Cycle 2 Observation: Classroom Observation and Students’ feedback 50
1. Teaching handouts 52
2. Teaching strategies 52
3. Problem-solving 53
4. Class Activities and Assignments 54
4.1.1.8 Cycle 2 Reflection: Teacher’s insights 55
4.1.2 The modified instructional design of the Indonesian language course for academic and occupational purposes for future class 57
4.2 Students’ academic performances in learning language through the implementation of action research 58
5. Discussion 64
5.1 Action research 64
5.2 Improvement of the Instructional Design 65
5.2.1 Improvements from Class 106 to Class 107 66
5.2.2 Improvements from Class 107 for future class 66
5.3 Students’ Academic Performances 68
5.4 Teacher-researcher’s insights 69
5.4.1 Essential factors for succeeding to learn Indonesian 69
5.4.2 Indicators of successful learning 71
5.4.3 Benefits of doing action research as a teacher 72
5.5 Limitation of this study and suggestions for future research and educational practices 73
References 75
Appendix A: Instruction designs of Class 106 and Class 107 79
A.1 Class 106 79
A.2 Class 107 82
Appendix B: Teaching Contents of the Indonesian Language Course for Academic and Occupational Purposes 85
Appendix C: Example of Handouts for Class 106 89
Appendix D: Example of Handouts for Class 107 92
Appendix E: The modified instructional design and materials of the Indonesian language course for academic and occupational purposes 95

Allwright, D. & Bailey, K.M. (1991). Focus on classrooms. An introduction to classroom research for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Badan Pengembangan dan Pembinaan Bahasa, Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan, Republik Indonesia. (2012, June 25). Bahasa Indonesia bagi Penutur Asing (BIPA). Retrieved from http://badanbahasa.kemdikbud.go.id/lamanbahasa/info_bipa
Borgia, Eileen T, Schuler, Dorothy. (2003). Action Research in Early Childhood Education. ERIC Digest [ED401047].
Bums, A. (1999). Collaborative action research for English teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chun, D. M., & Brandl, K. K. (1992). Beyond form‐based drill and practice: Meaning‐enhancing CALL on the Macintosh. Foreign Language Annals, 25(3), 255–267.
Dick, W. (1996). The Dick and Carey model: Will it survive the decade? Educational Technology Research and Development, 44(3), 55-63.
Galavis, B. (1998). Computers and the EFL class: Their advantages and a possible outcome, the autonomous learner. English Teaching Forum, 36(4), 27–28.
Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. (2009). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
Glanz, G. (2003). Action Research: An educational leader’s guide to school improvement. 2nd ed. Massachusetts: Christopher-Gordon Publishers, Inc.
Godwin-Jones, R. (2011). Emerging technologies mobile apps for language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 15(2), 2-11.
Higgins, C. (1993). Computer-assisted language learning: Current programs and projects. ERIC Digest [ED355835].
Houghton, C., Casey, D., Shaw, D., and Murphy, K. (2013). Rigour in qualitative case-study research. Nurse Researcher, 20(4), 12-17.
Jee, M., & Park, M. (2009). Livemocha as an online language-learning community. CALICO Journal, 26(2), 448-456. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/calicojournal.26.2.448
Johnson, R.T., & Johnson, D.W. (1986). Action research: Cooperative learning in the science classroom. Journal of Science and Children, 24(2), 31-32.
Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan, Republik Indonesia. (2018, July 24). Badan Bahasa petakan 652 bahasa daerah di Indonesia. Retrieved from https://www.kemdikbud.go.id/main/blog/2018/07/badan-bahasa-petakan-652-bahasa-daerah-di-indonesia
Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (1988). The Action Research Planner. Geelong, Victoria.: Deakin University Press.
Kusmiatun, A., Suyitno, I., Widodo, H.S., & Basuki, I.A. (2017). Identifying features of Indonesian for speakers of other languages (Bipa) learning for academic purposes. International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies, 3(4), 197-207.
Lai, C. C., & Kritsonis, W. A. (2006). The advantages and disadvantages of computer technology in second language acquisition. National Journal for Publishing and Mentoring Doctoral Student Research, 3(1).
Lembaga Bahasa Internasional, Fakultas Ilmu Pengetahuan Budaya Universitas Indonesia (n.d.). Indonesian proficiency tests (Tes Bahasa Indonesia sebagai Bahasa Asing/TIBA). Retreived from http://lbifib.ui.ac.id/beta/archives/category/bipa/indonesian-proficiency-test
Liu, M., Moore, Z., Graham, L., & Lee, S. (2002). A look at the research on computer-based technology use in second language learning: A review of the literature from 1990–2000. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(3), 250–273.
Mann, S. (2005). The language teacher’s development. Language Teaching, 38(3), 103–118.
Mills, N. (2011). Situated learning through social networking communities: The development of joint enterprise, mutual engagement, and a shared repertoire. CALICO Journal, 28(2), 345-368.
O'Donoghue, T., & Punch, K. (2003). Qualitative educational research in action. London, UK: Routledge.
O'Malley, J.M., & Chamot, A.U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Ovando, C., Collier, V., & Combs, M. (2003). Bilingual and ESL classrooms: Teaching multicultural contexts (3rd ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Office of Trade Negotiations, Executive Yuan. (2016, September 5). "New Southbound Policy" Guidelines and Action Plan. Retrieved from https://www.ey.gov.tw/otnen/64C34DCA8893B06/9c560855-1ecd-4f58-9c3f-c065d9e58f89
Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (Ed.) (2001). Handbook of action research: Participative inquiry and practice. London, UK: Sage Publications.
Reigeluth, C.M. (Ed.) (1999). Instructional-design theories and models, Volume II: A new paradigm of instructional theory. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.
Riasati, M. J., Allahyar, N., & Tan, K.E. (2012). Technology in language education: Benefits and barriers. Journal of Education and Practice, 3(5), 25–30.
Richey, R. C., Silber, K., & Ely, D. (2008). Reflections on the 2008 AECT definitions of the field. TechTrends, 52(1), 24–25.
Rowland, G. (2008). Design and research: Partners for educational innovation. Educational Technology, 48(6), 3–9.
Saddhono, K. (2016). Teaching Indonesian as foreign language in Indonesia: Impact of professional managerial on process and student outcomes. Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, 14, 263-266.
Shyamlee, S. D., & Phil, M. (2012). Use of technology in English language teaching and learning: An analysis. International Conference on Language, Medias and Culture, 33, 150-159.
Smith, L. C. (2005). The impact of action research on teacher collaboration and professional growth. In D. J. Tedick (Ed.), Second language teacher education international perspectives (pp. 199-215). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Suparsa, I. N., Mantra, I. B. N., & Widiastuti, I. A. M. S. (2017). Developing learning methods of Indonesian as a foreign language. International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 1(2), 51-57.
Totten, S. (1991). Cooperative Learning: A Guide to Research. Sills, T., Digby, A. & Ross, P. (Eds.), New York; USA, Garland Publishing.
Vesselinov, R. & J. Grego, 2012, Duolingo Effectiveness Study, http://static.duolingo.com/s3/DuolingoReport_Final.pdf
Walker, L. (2015). The impact of using Memrise on student perceptions of learning Latin vocabulary and on long-term memory of words. Journal of Classics Teaching, 16(32), 14-20.