Genre-Based Instruction Technique for Teaching English Writing Skill
Since the implementation of 2004 up to nowadays curriculum, the pedagogy of English as a foreign language in Indonesia has been undertaken on the main basis of teaching reading and writing skill. It does not achieve up to 30 percent of teaching and learning materials which are oriented towards listening and speaking skill. What generates this curriculum design accounts for the primary source in the form of government regulation which accentuates that the language education including English pedagogy must be running on the route of maintaining reading and writing culture (Chapter III, Article 21, Point 2). The paradigm underlying this regulation leads to the material design of English language pedagogy in Indonesia dominated by mostly reading and writing materials. Those materials range into the extent of a variety of genres. As a consequence, the students need to cope with various kinds of English genres, and the teacher’s pedagogical competence in teaching English genres is expected to be sufficient. Concerning with this issue, the so-called genre-based instruction (hereafter as GBI) technique gains its popularity to be applied. This technique seems relevant to teaching reading and writing skill. This essay highlights the ideal application of GBI in teaching writing skill. According to Derewinka (1990), there are four phases of teaching writing through applying GBI technique. They encompass context exploration, text exploration, joint construction, and individual application.
Context exploration is the act of teaching where the teacher establishes an interaction with students vis-a-vis the context of genre which is learned. In this regard, the teacher asks students some questions to trigger their reasoning ability to detect any essential elements of the context. The interaction built up here really resembles one commonly stimulated in the pre-teaching of communicative language teaching (hereafter as CTL). The interaction is developed as naturally as possible to help students understand the function of the genre, when the learned genre is used, and other related factors or the components of context as required in comprehending the genre. To put it simply, the basic function of context exploration is to engage students in the process of comprehending general information pertinent to the context of a particular learned genre.
Concerning with text exploration, the teacher lets students learn the whole needed elements of text as relevant to the genre being learned. This activity implies the notion proposed by Vygotsky (1978) corresponding to the zone of proximal development (ZPD) specifically for the idea of object-regulation. Here, the text which is explored becomes the natural manifestation that students use to learn. The teacher also helps students with giving some required guides so that they can easily catch the learned points. In this sense, when the teacher makes an effort to provide students with some guidance, it implicitly depicts the act of others-regulation as postulated by Vygotsky (1978). The elements which are explored in the text cover both text organization and linguistic features with respect to the context of the learned genre. In this phase, the interaction which is established is different from CLT at which CLT promotes the stimulus of a natural language use in a real communication, but GBI develops interaction where students can cooperatively solve problems for the sake of being capable of producing a functional text conforming to the ideal social purposes. For the element of linguistic features, the classroom activities commonly vary in order to be more creative and meaningful. The activities can extend to doing grammatical exercises, filling the given gaps of a complete text, and other relevant activities which are essential.
In respect of joint construction, this activity is focused on cooperative learning which incorporates all students into creating a text on the basis of the learned genre along with the teacher’s help. This phase really works according to Vygotsky's (1978) notion regarding others-regulation. The interaction plays a blended role amid the students as well as between the teacher and students. Here, the learning activities may vary in which the teacher can sometimes guide students in front of the class, or at some point, the teacher can manage students to work in groups to write a text. While students are working in groups, the teacher can walk around the class to control alongside to give a hand in case some students face a number of obstacles. Cooperative learning and teacher’s control become the key essence of this phase.
The last, in individual application, the teacher instructs students to individually write a text based on the learned genre. This activity really fits the notion about self-regulation as theorized by Vygotsky (1978). In this activity, the learning process can be made as creative as possible to enrich students’ interest and motivation to capably work independently. The teacher can ask them to interview some people around their residence and then write a recount text (for instance) if the learned genre is oriented towards a recount text. Occasionally, the teacher can ask students to observe some public places and then individually write the description of those places if the material that is learned is a descriptive text. That the students are successful in producing a written text individually is the main expectation of GBI.
Anchored in the four stages of GBI technique as presented above, the application of GBI technique in teaching English writing skill is really beneficial to students. The four stages of GBI technique lead students to learn English writing skill based on the exact social and communicative purposes; GBI technique engages students in an authentic learning process of writing skill; and GBI technique promotes students to acquire critical thinking skill. This essay really encourages English teachers in Indonesia to apply GBI technique in their classroom especially for teaching writing skill.
- The concept of teaching and learning English in my regency 90
- Individual Learning Management Determines the Success of EFL Mastery 100
- Planning Teaching English Course Activities 90
- Genre-Based Instruction Technique for Teaching English Writing Skill 100
- My TEFL Perception and Endless Homework as an English Teacher 97
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 383, Rule ID: USE_TO_VERB[1]
Message: Did you mean 'used'?
Suggestion: used
...the natural manifestation that students use to learn. The teacher also helps studen...
^^^
Line 11, column 593, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... especially for teaching writing skill.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, may, really, regarding, so, then, well, while, for instance, as well as, with respect to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 29.0 15.1003584229 192% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 9.8082437276 122% => OK
Conjunction : 22.0 13.8261648746 159% => OK
Relative clauses : 19.0 11.0286738351 172% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 43.0788530466 74% => OK
Preposition: 143.0 52.1666666667 274% => Less preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 44.0 8.0752688172 545% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 5156.0 1977.66487455 261% => Less number of characters wanted.
No of words: 941.0 407.700716846 231% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.47927736451 4.8611393121 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.53856689951 4.48103885553 124% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.08012375474 2.67179642975 115% => OK
Unique words: 390.0 212.727598566 183% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.414452709883 0.524837075471 79% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 1574.1 618.680645161 254% => syllable counts are too long.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 9.59856630824 125% => OK
Article: 26.0 3.08781362007 842% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 5.0 3.51792114695 142% => OK
Conjunction: 7.0 1.86738351254 375% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 11.0 4.94265232975 223% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 40.0 20.6003584229 194% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.1344086022 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.1820021206 48.9658058833 121% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.9 100.406767564 128% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.525 20.6045352989 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.575 5.45110844103 47% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.53405017921 132% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 23.0 11.8709677419 194% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.85842293907 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 17.0 4.88709677419 348% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.279397075282 0.236089414692 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0777347053815 0.076458572812 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0967713953575 0.0737576698707 131% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.1745634306 0.150856017488 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.163338372253 0.0645574589148 253% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.1 11.7677419355 137% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 58.1214874552 68% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 10.1575268817 132% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.8 10.9000537634 136% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.45 8.01818996416 105% => OK
difficult_words: 219.0 86.8835125448 252% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 10.002688172 155% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.0537634409 111% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.247311828 156% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.4 Out of 6.0
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.