yuyun rosliyah
Pendidikan Bahasa Jepang, Bahasa dan Sastra Asing Fakultas Bahasa dan Seni Universitas Negeri Semarang

Published : 3 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search

KEEFEKTIFAN METODE MEMORY STORY DALAM MENINGKATKAN KEMAMPUAN KOSAKATA BAHASA JEPANG hasyyati elian; yuyun rosliyah; dyah prasetiani
Chi'e: Journal of Japanese Learning and Teaching Vol 4 No 1 (2015)
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/chie.v4i1.8423

Abstract

Memorizing the vocabulary is the important thing in learning Japanese. If the students couldn’t memorize it, it will make the learning process don’t run smoothly. This condition was found in SMAN 15 Semarang. The teacher use picture card to teach vocabulary, but the student still couldn’t remember all the vocabulary well. The memory story method will help students memorizing the vocabulary. The idea is, by making an imaginary story of each word, students will remember the vocabulary for a long time. This research was an experiment study. The purpose of this study is to find the effectiveness of memory story in enhancing the student vocabulary. The sample of the experiment class was 28 students from XII IPS 2, and the control class was 28 students from XII IPS 3. The data gathered by using a post-test. The result of pos-test shows that the average score of experiment class was 84.14, higher 4.71 points than the control class (which is only 79.43). The t-test result, prove that memory story was effective to enhance student’s ability in memorizing the Japanese vocabulary.
THE COHERENCE BETWEEN THE TEACHING PLOT WRITTEN IN LESSON PLAN WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION IN THE CLASSROOM OF JAPANESE SUBJECT Musdalifah Yuliati Putri; Yuyun Rosliyah; Andy Moorad Oesman
Chi'e: Journal of Japanese Learning and Teaching Vol 4 No 1 (2015)
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/chie.v4i1.8438

Abstract

To achieve a learning goal, in the teaching learning activity there is a component that must interact one another. Those components are lesson material, teaching learning activity, media and evaluation. Therefore, the teacher must plan a teaching plot in the lesson plan. There are many things causing the learning goal was not achieved. One of them is the teaching plot that is not coherence with the implementation in the classroom. As what happen in the Japanese subject in SMA N 14 Semarang. According to the researcher’s observation which is conducted during PPL there are 3 of 38 students that were able to confirm or able to use the sentence pattern that was taught. In the introductory study, the teaching plot written in lesson plan was coherence with the teaching goal. Based on the problems above the researcher conducted a study in the coherence between the teaching plot written in the lesson plan and in the implementation in a classroom. This study was aimed to know the coherence between the teaching plot written in the lesson plan and in the implemetation in the classroom for Japanese subject in SMA N 14 Semarang. This study was a descriptive qualitative study. The technique of data collection was using documentation and observation. The observation was conducted by observing and equipped with the observation sheet in a form of checklist. The observation was done in three meetings in class XI IS 2. However, in the implementation it can be seen from the analysis result of this study about the coherence of the teaching plot consisted of three categories which is coherence, coherence with the note, and incoherence. The coheerence step is step which explained the learning goal, basic training, closing. The activity which is coherence with the note step is the greeting, drill, conclusion. The activity which is incoherence is the activity in the step of giving motivation, games, training application, and reflecting of the activity.
PERBANDINGAN PELAKSANAAN PENGAJARAN BAHASA JEPANG KELAS XI SMA N 1 SUKOHARJO Renita Candra Dewi; Rina Supriatnaningsih; Yuyun Rosliyah
Chi'e: Journal of Japanese Learning and Teaching Vol 4 No 1 (2015)
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/chie.v4i1.8439

Abstract

Sekolah Menengah Atas di JawaTengah yang mengajarkan bahasa Jepang disetiap programnya adalah SMA N 1Sukoharjo, di sekolah tersebut bahasa Jepang diajarkan diprogram IlmuPengetahuan Alam (IPA), Ilmu Pengetahuan Sosial (IPS), dan Bahasa. OlehkarenabahasaJepangdiajarkandiseluruhprogramnya,sehingga memerlukan lebih dari satu pengajar. SMA N 1 Sukoharjo mempunyai duapengajar bahasa Jepang. Mengajar bahasa Jepang di kelas berbeda dan diajarkanoleh pengajar yang berbeda tentunya memiliki perbedaan kalau tidak menggunakanteori alur pengajaran bahasa Jepang.Berdasarkan angket pada studi pendahuluanyang diberikan kepada kedua pengajar,  terdapatperbedaan dalam melaksanakan alur pengajaran anatar guru tersebut. Tujuanpenelitian ini adalah untuk mendeskripsikan persamaan dan perbedaan pelaksanaanpengajaran guru bahasa jepang di SMA N 1 Sukoharjo. Pendekatan penelitian yangdigunakan dalam penelitian ini yaitu pendekatan deskriptif kualitatif. Deskriptrifkualitatif digunakan untuk mendeskripsikan hasil data dari lembar observasi mengenaipersamaan dan perbedaan perlaksanaan pengajaran bahasa Jepang di SMA N 1Sukoharjo yang dilakukan dua pengajar. Teknik pengumpulan data menggunakan teknikobservasi dan dokumentasi.Persamaan pelaksanaan pengajaranantara guru A dan guru B adalah pada bagian pengantar adalah, keduanya memulaidengan salam, mempresensi siswa, mengulang materi, dan guru A dan B tidakmenyampaikan tujuan pembelajaran. Pada latihan dasar pengenalan kosakata keduanya melakukan latihan pengulangan, tidak melakukan latihan pengubahan bentukdanlatihan tanya jawab. Padalatihan pengenalan pola kalimat, keduanya melakukan latihan pengulangan dan latihantanya jawab, kadang melakukan latihan mengembangkan kalimat,tetapitidak melakukan latihan penggantian. Pada tahap akhir keduanyamemberikan simpulan tentang pembelajaran.Perbedaan antara guru A dan guru Badalah pada penggunaan media, guru A menggunakan media hampir disetiap tahappengajaran, guru B tidak menggunakan media. Guru A melakukan latihanpenerapan/kegiatan,tetapi guru B tidak melakukan latihan penerapan/kegiatan.Senior HighSchool in Central Java that teach Japanese in every program is SMA N 1Sukoharjo, in this school Japanese is taught in Science, Social Science, andLanguage program. Because of Japanese is taught in every program, so more thanone teacher is needed. SMA N 1 Sukoharjo has two Japanese teachers. TeachingJapanese in a classroom is different and that there will always a difference ifit is taught by different teacher if it does not using Japanese teaching plottheory. Based on thequestionnaire in the introductory study that is given to the two teachers,there is a difference in the implementation of the teaching plot between theteachers. The purpose of this study is to describe the similarity and thedifference of the teaching implementation of Japanese teachers in SMA N 1Sukoharjo. The approach of the study used in this study was a descriptivequalitative method. Descriptive qualitative was used to describe the result ofthe observation sheet about the similarity and the difference of the Japaneseteaching implementation in SMA N 1 Sukoharjo that was conducted by the twoteachers. The data collection technique was using observation and documentationtechnique.            The similarity of the teachingimplementation both teacher A and teacher B was that in the introduction, theybegin with greeting, checking the attendance, reviewing the material, and bothteacher A and B did not convey the lesson goal. In the basic training of vocabularyintroduction both of them did a repetition practice, did not conducting a formchanging and question and answer practice. In the introduction of sentencepattern, they did a repetition and question and answer practice, sometimesconducting a sentence developing practice, but did not conduct a substitutingpractice. In the final step both of them gave a conclusion about the lesson.The difference between teacher A and B was in the media using, teacher A usedmedia in almost all teaching steps, teacher B did not use media. Teacher Aconducted an application/activity practice, but teacher B did not.