cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
Yunika Upa
Contact Email
y.upa@sanagustin.ac.id
Phone
+6285705751605
Journal Mail Official
joeel@sanagustin.ac.id
Editorial Address
Jl. Ilong, Dusun Gasing Pal 4, RT 01 RW 04, Desa Amboyo Utara, Kecamatan Ngabang, Kabupaten Landak, Kalimantan Barat
Location
Kab. landak,
Kalimantan barat
INDONESIA
JOEEL: Journal of English Education and Literature
Published by Sekolah Tinggi Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan Pamane Talino
ISSN : 27233103     EISSN : 2723309X     DOI : https://doi.org/10.38114
Core Subject : Education,
Education
Journal of English Education and Literature (JOEEL) embodies research articles including: language teaching or learning literature related to language studies or learning language studies related to language learning other relevant fields
Arjuna Subject : Umum - Umum
Articles 5 Documents
 1 
Search results for , issue "Vol 1, No 1 (2020)" : 5 Documents clear
An Analysis of Students’ Pronunciation Errors Masfa Maiza
JOEEL: Journal of English Education and Literature Vol 1, No 1 (2020)
Publisher : English Language Education Study Program

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.38114/joeel.v1i1.27

Abstract

This study deals with students’ pronunciation errors in English consonants. It was conducted under the consideration that pronouncing English words played an important role. A descriptive qualitative was used as the research method. The subject of this research was forty seven students of first year of English Language Education Study Program at Pamane Talino College of Education, Landak Regency, West Kalimantan. Pronunciation test and interview were used to collect data. The result reveals that the students got difficulties in pronouncing /θ/, /ð/, /ʃ/, /ʒ/, /tʃ/ and /dʒ/. Then, the factors affecting the students’ pronunciation are interference, phonological system and motivation.
Textbook Evaluation on Curiculum 2013-Based Textbook “When English Rings A Bell” for the Seventh Grade Monika Widyastuti Surtikanti
JOEEL: Journal of English Education and Literature Vol 1, No 1 (2020)
Publisher : English Language Education Study Program

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.38114/joeel.v1i1.22

Abstract

Textbook is one of the essential parts of teaching and learning process. Textbook evaluation, therefore, is important to be carried out in order to get better quality in teaching and learning process. In the recent curriculum, curriculum 2013, the government assigned to use the course book “When English Rings A Bell” (WERB). However the textbook has some weaknesses. This article is aimed at describing the result of textbook evaluation done by the researcher based on the construct of criteria of good textbook derived from some experts of textbook evaluation. The findings show that WERB does not cover all of the English skills namely reading and writing. Second, WERB is not in accordance with the principles of scientific approach teaching procedures. Third, WERB does not provide authentic materials for the students. WERB contains very simple tasks. Based on the result of textbook analysis, it revealed that it is necessary to have supplementary materials in order to give additional materials.Keywords:textbook, textbook evaluation, Curriculum 2013
AN ANALYSIS ON THE DIFFICULTIES LEVEL OF THREE ONLINE WRITTEN TEXTS Wanda Giovani
JOEEL: Journal of English Education and Literature Vol 1, No 1 (2020)
Publisher : English Language Education Study Program

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.38114/joeel.v1i1.36

Abstract

This research aims to elaborate the difficulty levels of three different texts that bring the same topic. This research is a discourse analysis which was done by analyzing the lexical density, nominalization, and the finiteness of the texts. The three texts that have been analyzed were taken online from Wikipedia and two personal blogs for English research. The results show that the first text can be taken as the most complex text for high level readers, the second text for the intermediate level readers, and the third text for the elementary or low level readers. In terms of lexical density, the first text gains very high percentage which is up to 60%, this shows that the text is the most informative of all. Whereas, the second text and the third text’s lexical density are both 50%, which indicates that there are lack of contents in them.  Regarding to nominalization, the first text is still on the highest level with 12 nominalizations, the second text is on the intermediate level with 10 nominalizations, and the third text is on the lowest level, without any nominalization. The last is from the finiteness side. The first text has the lowest number of finiteness; the second text has the second highest number of finites, whereas the third text has the highest number of finites of all. This is the result of the highest number of lexical density and nominalization of the first text that decreases the frequency of sentences in it. The results of this research can be useful for online readers to decide what kind of reading materials which are suitable for their English levels.
ERROR ANALYSIS OF CONDITIONAL SENTENCES Wilna Kristina; Albert Rufinus; Masfa Maiza
JOEEL: Journal of English Education and Literature Vol 1, No 1 (2020)
Publisher : English Language Education Study Program

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.38114/joeel.v1i1.35

Abstract

Making mistakes when using conditional sentences is common for foreign language learners. Errors in this study are in accordance with the error classification surface strategy taxonomy, namely omission, addition, misform ation and misordering. The purposes of this study are to identify and to classify the types of error and to find the factors causing errors in the use of conditional sentences. The research method used is descriptive qualitative research method that is a case study with taxonomic analysis. Data collection techniques were carried out using test and interview. The research subject was third semester students of the English Language Education Study Program 2018/2019 of Pamane Talino College of Education in Landak Regency, West Kalimantan. The results show that 30.27% of students make omission errors, 21.11% addition errors, 34.86% misformation errors and 13.76% misordering errors. The factors that cause errors are found from the system's own target language (intralingual). The main error factors classified as intralingual errors in this study are: incomplete knowledge in verb forms, incomplete application of rules and false concept hypothesis.
The Effectiveness of Teachers’ Corrective Feedback in Enhancing Students’ Ability to Recount Text Writing Irra Wahidiyati
JOEEL: Journal of English Education and Literature Vol 1, No 1 (2020)
Publisher : English Language Education Study Program

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.38114/joeel.v1i1.24

Abstract

Most junior high school students get some difficulties in recount text writing. The purpose of this research is to explain the kind of corrective feedback that is more effective for high achievers’, for low achievers, and for mixed groups of high and low achievers in enhancing their ability in recount text writing and explain the interaction between corrective feedback, students’ prior achievement, and ability in recount text writing. The samples are eighth-graders of SMP Agus Salim. The experiment group receives direct corrective feedback while the control group receives indirect corrective feedback. And from both groups, the researcher divides again into two groups of high and low achievers. Finally, direct feedback is more effective for mixed groups of high and low achievers. The sum of means score of the experimental group is 63.75. While the total means score of the control group is 63.50. The mean score of the high achievers that received direct corrective feedback is 62.00, while the low achievers were 65.5. And from the control group, the high achiever group mean is 66.00 while the low achiever group means is 61.00. So direct corrective feedback is better used for low achievers. 

Page 1 of 1 | Total Record : 5

 1 

Filter by Year

2020 2020


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol 4, No 2 (2023) Vol 4, No 1 (2023) Vol 3, No 2 (2022) Vol 3, No 1 (2022) Vol 2, No 2 (2021) Vol 2, No 1 (2021) Vol 1, No 2 (2020) Vol 1, No 1 (2020)