FORMAT ISIAN LOMBA INOVASI PEMBELAJARAN DI SMP

(Matematika, IPA dan Bahasa Inggris)

Tahun 2005

I. IDENTITAS

1. Nama Peserta lomba : Sri Wuryanti, S. Pd.

2. Jenis kelamin :

a. Pria b. Wanita

3 Tempat Tanggal lahir : Salatiga, 13 Mei 1960

4. Status Kepegawaian :

a. Pegawai Negeri Sipil

b. Pegawai Negeri Sipil diperbantukan

c. Pegawai Tetap Yayasan

d. Pegawai Honorarium

5. Latar Belakang Pendidikan

Program Studi : S1 Bahasa Inggris

Tahun Lulus : 2001

Nama Lembaga Pendidikan : Universitas Negeri Semarang (UNNES)

6. Mata Pelajaran yang diajarkan : Bahasa Inggris

7. Pengalaman mengajar di SMP : 24 tahun

8. Pangkat/Golongan : Pembina/IVa

9. Nama Sekolah : SMP N 6 Salatiga

10. Alamat Sekolah :

Jalan : Tegalreja

Desa : Tegalreja

Kecamatan : Sidomulyo

Kota : Salatiga

Propinsi : Jawa Tengah

11. Alamat/Nomor telepon yang mudah dihubungi

Nomor telepon : 0298 – 324919

Nomor Hp : 08132 57848231

e-mail : Laszielacool@yahoo.com

Alamat : Jalan Kota Baru no. 76 Salatiga

12. INOVASI PEMBELAJARAN

1.Mata Pelajaran : Bahasa Inggris

2.Pokok Bahasan dan/atau Sub

pokok Bahasan : Jenis teks Deskripsi siklus lisan

Skill/keterampilan : Berbicara

3. Inovasi Pembelajaran : Making use of Spotting Differences Strategy to

Facilitate Students in Producing Spoken

Description Text

(Strategi Spotting Differences dalam

Pembelajaran Teks Deskripsi Siklus Lisan)

4. Waktu (atau periode) pelaksanaan inovasi pembelajaran

2 minggu (Minggu pertama dan kedua bulan

November 2004).

5. Uraian singkat tentang inovasi pembelajaran

I. Introduction

A. Background

English instruction in the new curriculum for SMP has significant differences

from the previous one. The differences cover both the material and the strategy. Due

to this new perspective of learning English, problems arouse of how to enable

students to achieve the competence aimed by this curriculum. The new curriculum

bases the achievement on the competency. The competency offered to the students to

achieve is taken from the idea built by Celce-Murcia, Thurrell and Dornyei (1995).

The model seems able to accommodate the need of any communicative competence.

Communicative competence is the ability to communicate using language in various

contexts, both in spoken and written language. (Depdiknas 2005:50).

The theoretical and philosophy background of the new curriculum makes

English teachers find difficulties in finding appropriate strategies to enhance with the 2

target competence that should be achieved by the students. Appropriate strategy

should be found to facilitate the students in learning in English class. So far most

students find difficulties in achieving the communicative competence.

The important competence that should be mastered by the students to be

survived in their future is the competence of using spoken English. It is known that

the competence needed is still far from satisfaction. It happens to my students. Most

of them are poor in using English in communication. This situation will be worse

when the teacher doesn’t have a will to overcome their problem.

I teach at SMP 6 Salatiga. This school is located in the south of Salatiga.

Most of the students are poor students. Their economic background doesn’t support

their success in their study. Thus they have difficulties in achieving the competence.

The problem is caused by the lack of practice in enjoyable and relaxed ways. They

need to have activities to build their potential talent in using English. Trying to

facilitate the students in communicating using English, I try a strategy of learning

English using Spotting Differences Strategy. I choose the strategy because it is in line

with the cause that the students are poor in communication. They need language-

learning strategy that can help them have targeted competence in the new curriculum.

Learning strategies are specific actions taken by the learner to make learning easier,

faster, more enjoyable, more self directed with learning materials and demands

during language use, learners will engage in systematic mental steps to process the

language in order to enhance production, comprehension, learning or retention. (Goh

and Silver, 2004:187). Thus, what the students need is to do easy speaking activities

in long portion. It can be done when they are facilitated with interesting medium. At

the same time, their dependency with the teacher should be reduced. Using Spotting

Differences Strategy, the students will work together with their friends in describing

the pictures. They do not depend upon their teacher in the activity, although before

the activity the teacher has to facilitate them with the ways to say in the activity.

My 7a students, who undergo the lack practice in using English, have a

target to be able to describe things, persons or places. This text is very important for

students to master. In their daily life, they may face situation in which they have to

describe things in order to make other people understand what they want. Spotting 3

differences strategy will practice the students to be able to describe things, people or

places.

B. Problem Formulation

From the background above I formulate the problem as follows:

Is Spotting Differences Strategy able to facilitate students in Producing Spoken

Description Text?

C. The Innovation Goals

The learning innovation of Spotting Differences Strategy is aimed at:

1. Helping students to describe things, places or people in English that will

be seen through (a) the active use of English, (b) the correct pronunciation

and intonation and (c) the ability to describe pictures that is proved by the

ability to spot the differences between the pictures owned by different

students.

2. Making the English class active and responsive.

C. The Concept of the Spotting Differences Strategy

The idea of Spotting Difference Strategy is as follows:

1. Spotting, from the word spot as a verb means pick out, recognize, see (one

person or thing out of many). (Hornby: 833). In this case, the word

spotting, a gerund means identifying the differences in two almost the

same pictures. (Appendix II, p.10)

2. Spotting differences is a spoken activity to find out a number of

differences in two almost the same pictures through describing the

pictures to each other between pairs of students.

3. Strategy in general means skill in managing any affair. (Hornby, 2000:

1284). In a specific meaning, strategy knowledge is knowledge about

strategies that can facilitate learning in general, as well as those, which are

4

likely to be effective in achieving specific learning and communication

goals. (Goh dan Silver, 2004:189).

4. Description is a genre that is learned by SMP students grade 7-9. It is a

genre that functions to describe particular person, place or things.(Gerot

and Wignell, 1995:208).

In learning genres in this curriculum, I used 2 cycles: spoken and written cycles. In

spoken cycles, students are exposed with speaking and listening. In written cycle,

students are exposed with reading and writing. The following is the four stages I

use to enable the students to produce a spoken or written genre in a cycle.

Tahap Satu - Building the context of field of the topic or text-type

Tahap Dua - Modeling the genre under focus

Tahap Tiga - Joint Construction of the genre

Tahap Empat - Independent Construction of the genre

(Hammond et.al, 1992:19).

I used the spotting differences strategy in the fourth stage, Independent

Construction of the genre. In this stage, the students area hoped to produce their

own spoken genre. They work independently. Before moving on this stage, the

teacher needs to assess if the learners are ready to construct the text independently.

Generally, independent construction occurs only after group pair construction has

shown that learners have gained control of the field and the mode. (Hammond,

1992:22). The teacher, in this stage gives help when the students need it. To

facilitate this stage, I use spotting differences strategy to enhance the students to

produce spoken description genre.

II. The Implementation of the Learning Innovation

A. Setting

5

The study was done in the first semester of the academic year of 2004/2005 in

7A. This class consisted of 42 students; 23 boys and 19 girls. Although a lot of them

have poor achievements in their study, most of them have good motivation to learn

English. It was seen through the interviewed done with them about how they like

English as subject at school.

I did the investigation in the first and second weeks of November 2005. It

consisted of 4 times meeting of 90 minutes each.

B. Steps

In the first meeting, I used the time to teach them utterances that would be

used in describing things, people or places. In the next three meetings I used them

to implement the Spotting Differences Strategy. In the first implementation of the

innovation, we used a picture of Getting on the Bus, then in the second meeting we

used At the Airport and in the last meeting we used Children in the Classroom.

I made the students ready to describe things using guided activities in the

first meeting and free activities the second, third and fourth activities. In the first

meeting, I used modeling and drilling. Then in the implementation of Spotting

Differences Strategy, I asked the students to work in pairs. To each pair of the

students I gave them a set of pictures of almost the same but different. Their task

was to find out a certain number of differences between the two pictures by

describing the pictures to their partners. They were not supposed to show the

pictures to their partners.

C. Assessment

I used a rubric to assess the phenomenon. Each student had a nametag to

enable me to identify him or her. I assessed the students in three aspects as stated

in the purpose of the investigation.

1. The use of English in describing things

2. The correct use of intonation and pronunciation

3. The ability to find certain number of differences between the two pictures.

To know whether they class are active or responses, I observed the phenomena and

made notes. .

III. Result of the Learning Innovation 6

The following is the phenomena happened during the learning innovation.

1. In the first meeting of the innovation, we used the picture Getting on the Bus.

Almost all students were actively involved in the activities in using English. Only

two pairs found difficulties in expressing ideas in English. Instead of using

English, they used Javanese Language. They also made mistakes in pronunciation

and intonation. In general, most students still made mistakes in pronunciation and

intonation when they communicate to each other. In finding the differences, only

two pairs were successfully found the differences

2. In the second meeting of the implementation of Spotting Differences, there was a

slight change. It seemed they began to be aware of what they had to do in the

activity. The two pairs who used Javanese tried to use English after I trained them

to do so. The number of students who made mistakes in pronunciation and

intonation decreased. But I admit I found difficulties in changing their

pronunciation and intonation. They were OK when I asked them to imitate my

pronunciation but they made mistakes when they did the free practice. Then the

number of pairs who were able to find the differences increased.

2. In the last meeting we used the strategy; there was a significant changes. They

admitted they liked the pictures. Yet the misused of pronunciation and intonation

did not improve. The number of students who were able to find the differences

increase

IV. Closing

A. Conclusion

Using Spotting Differences in describing things, people and places was able to

increase the students in actively using English and finding the differences

7

between two almost the same pictures but it did not accommodate with the use

of pronunciation and intonation.

B. Suggestion

I should give my students more proportion in practicing the students’

pronunciation and intonation.

References

Diknas. 2004. Landasan Filosofis Teoretis Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris. Jakarta: Direktorat Jenderal Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah, Direktorat Pendidikan Lanjutan Pertama.

Diknas. 2003. Standar Kompetensi Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Inggris Sekolah Menengah Pertama dan Madrasah Tsanawiyah. Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.

Gerot, Linda dan Wignel, Peter. 1995. Making Sense of Funtional Grammar. Sidney: Gerd Stabler Antipodean Educational Enterprises (AEE).

Diknas. 2005. Materi Pelatihan Terintegrasi Bahasa Inggris buku 2. Jakarta: Direktorat Jenderal Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah, Direktorat Pendidikan Lanjutan Pertama.

Hammond Jenny et.al. 1992. English for Social Purposes. Sidney: National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research Macquire University.

Goh, Christine & Silver R E. 2004. Language Acquisition and Development. Singapore: Prentice Hall Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd.

8

Appendixes

7A List of StudentsSMP Negeri 6 Salatiga Academic Year of 2004/2005

No. Urt NIS Nama Siswa1 4359 Aditya Perdanatika2 4361 Ahmadi3 4362 Aini Yanuar Ts.4 4141 Andi Anggar Prasetyo5 4363 Andri Cahyadi6 4364 Azima Ruhaelati7 4365 Bunga Maharani8 4366 Canggih Satriyo W.9 4367 Cendea Dyna H.10 4368 Dadang Santosa11 4369 Desta Aryani12 4370 Dewi Kumalasari13 4371 Dion Samuel14 4372 Dody Darmawan H.15 4373 Dwi Rahayu16 4374 Eki Gumilar P.17 4375 Eko Nur Cahyono18 4376 Elsalitasari I.19 4377 Estri Panoto Jati20 4378 Feny Yunita21 4379 Galih Istiarini22 4380 Ika Mutiara23 4381 Indri Yulian24 4382 Irfan Setyo Nugraha25 4383 Iwan Cahyono26 4384 Joko Hadi Prayitno27 4385 Jujur Pitanto28 4386 Lukfi Sarifudin39 4387 Margareta Christina30 4388 Mariana Desy W.31 4389 Nandi Baskoro S.32 4390 Panji Jatmiko33 4391 Puput Ayu W.34 4392 Redi Setyawan35 4393 Retnowati36 4394 Rita Wulandari37 4395 Roi Jato Suwasono 38 4396 Wahyu Adhi Prasetyo39 4397 Widita Retno P.

9

Appendix I

40 4398 Yerri Setiyawan41 4399 Yohana Puji Astuti42 4400 Yulio Ardy Saputro

10

LAMPIRAN II

Pictures Used in Spotting Differences StrategyGetting On The Bus

(LOOK AGAIN PICTURES © 1984 by The Alemany Press. Hayward, CA)

11

Appendix II

Appendix II

Pictures Used in Spotting Differences StrategyAt the Airport

(LOOK AGAIN PICTURES © 1984 by The Alemany Press. Hayward, CA)Pictures Used in Spotting Differences Strategy

Children in the Classroom

12

Appendix II

RubricRubric for Assessing the Phenomenon in using Spotting Differences Strategy

13

Appendix III

Class 7a of SMP N Salatiga.

Name of Students :Meeting :

Scores Activity in Using English

Pronunciation and Intonation

Finding out the Differences Average

50 - 6061 – 7071 – 8081 – 9091 – 100

Notes:

1. Activity in Using English a. Score 50 – 60 = passive,

b. Score 61 – 70 = using another language c. Score 71 – 80 = using English but not fluentd. Score 81 – 90 = using English all the time with limited mistakes e. Score 91 – 100 = using English perfectly

2. Pronunciations and Intonationa. Score 50 – 60 = doing many mistakesb. Score 61 – 70 = 60-70% correct. c. Score 71 – 80 = 70-80% correctd. Score 81 – 90 = 80-90% correcte. Score 91 –100 = perfect

3. Findind out differencesa. Score 50 – 60 = cannot find any differencesb. Score 61 – 70 = finding out 25% differencesc. Score 71 – 80 = finding out 25%-50%d. Score 81 – 90 = finding out 50%-75%. e. Score 91 –100 = finding out 75%-100%

Scores Achieved 14

Appendix IV

In Using Spotting Differences Meeting 1

No. NIS Name of Students Activity Int. Pro Finding diff. Average1 4359 Aditya Perdanatika 75 70 75 73.32 4361 Ahmadi 77 70 75 74.03 4362 Aini Yanuar Ts. 95 91 75 87.04 4141 Andi Anggar Prasetyo 80 70 80 76.75 4363 Andri Cahyadi 78 65 70 71.06 4364 Azima Ruhaelati 95 70 70 78.37 4365 Bunga Maharani 55 78 65 66.08 4366 Canggih Satriyo W. 95 95 90 93.39 4367 Cendea Dyna H. 75 70 75 73.310 4368 Dadang Santosa 75 65 70 70.011 4369 Desta Aryani 75 65 75 71.712 4370 Dewi Kumalasari 75 60 80 71.713 4371 Dion Samuel 55 60 75 63.314 4372 Dody Darmawan H. 70 60 70 66.715 4373 Dwi Rahayu 71 62 65 66.016 4374 Eki Gumilar P. 95 63 75 77.717 4375 Eko Nur Cahyono 95 90 90 91.718 4376 Elsalitasari I. 93 85 80 86.019 4377 Estri Panoto Jati 76 70 75 73.720 4378 Feny Yunita 78 70 70 72.721 4379 Galih Istiarini 55 50 65 56.722 4380 Ika Mutiara 80 70 75 75.023 4381 Indri Yulian 83 70 75 76.024 4382 Irfan Setyo Nugraha 85 65 80 76.725 4383 Iwan Cahyono 79 65 75 73.026 4384 Joko Hadi Prayitno 76 65 70 70.327 4385 Jujur Pitanto 75 70 70 71.728 4386 Lukfi Sarifudin 75 71 65 70.339 4387 Margareta Christina 78 72 60 70.030 4388 Mariana Desy W. 76 65 60 67.031 4389 Nandi Baskoro S. 76 65 75 72.032 4390 Panji Jatmiko 70 67 80 72.333 4391 Puput Ayu W. 95 67 75 79.034 4392 Redi Setyawan 70 70 75 71.735 4393 Retnowati 75 75 80 76.736 4394 Rita Wulandari 75 60 75 70.037 4395 Roi Jato Suwasono 70 75 70 71.738 4396 Wahyu Adhi Prasetyo 70 70 65 68.339 4397 Widita Retno P. 95 95 90 93.340 4398 Yerri Setiyawan 55 70 50 58.341 4399 Yohana Puji Astuti 78 75 75 76.0

15

42 4400 Yulio Ardy Saputro 75 65 70 70.0Scores Achieved

In Using Spotting Differences Penerapan Strategi Spotting Differences Meeting 2

No. NIS Name of Students Activity Int. Pro Finding diff. Average1 4359 Aditya Perdanatika 80 70 85 78.32 4361 Ahmadi 80 70 80 76.73 4362 Aini Yanuar Ts. 95 91 80 88.74 4141 Andi Anggar Prasetyo 80 75 90 81.75 4363 Andri Cahyadi 85 70 75 76.76 4364 Azima Ruhaelati 95 70 70 78.37 4365 Bunga Maharani 55 78 65 66.08 4366 Canggih Satriyo W. 95 95 90 93.39 4367 Cendea Dyna H. 75 70 75 73.310 4368 Dadang Santosa 75 65 70 70.011 4369 Desta Aryani 75 65 75 71.712 4370 Dewi Kumalasari 75 60 80 71.713 4371 Dion Samuel 65 60 80 68.314 4372 Dody Darmawan H. 70 60 70 66.715 4373 Dwi Rahayu 71 62 65 66.016 4374 Eki Gumilar P. 95 63 75 77.717 4375 Eko Nur Cahyono 95 90 90 91.718 4376 Elsalitasari I. 93 85 80 86.019 4377 Estri Panoto Jati 76 70 75 73.720 4378 Feny Yunita 78 70 70 72.721 4379 Galih Istiarini 65 60 75 66.722 4380 Ika Mutiara 80 70 75 75.023 4381 Indri Yulian 83 70 75 76.024 4382 Irfan Setyo Nugraha 85 65 80 76.725 4383 Iwan Cahyono 79 65 75 73.026 4384 Joko Hadi Prayitno 76 65 70 70.327 4385 Jujur Pitanto 75 70 70 71.728 4386 Lukfi Sarifudin 75 71 65 70.339 4387 Margareta Christina 85 72 85 80.730 4388 Mariana Desy W. 76 65 60 67.031 4389 Nandi Baskoro S. 76 65 75 72.032 4390 Panji Jatmiko 70 67 80 72.333 4391 Puput Ayu W. 95 67 75 79.034 4392 Redi Setyawan 70 70 75 71.735 4393 Retnowati 80 75 80 78.336 4394 Rita Wulandari 75 60 75 70.037 4395 Roi Jato Suwasono 70 75 70 71.738 4396 Wahyu Adhi Prasetyo 70 70 65 68.339 4397 Widita Retno P. 95 95 90 93.3

16

Appendix IV

40 4398 Yerri Setiyawan 55 70 50 58.341 4399 Yohana Puji Astuti 78 75 75 76.042 4400 Yulio Ardy Saputro 80 65 80 75.0

Rekapitulasi Nilai Penerapan Strategi Spotting Differences

Meeting 3No. NIS Name of Students Activity Int. Pro Finding diff. Average1 4359 Aditya Perdanatika 80 70 85 78.32 4361 Ahmadi 80 70 80 76.73 4362 Aini Yanuar Ts. 95 91 80 88.74 4141 Andi Anggar Prasetyo 800 75 90 321.75 4363 Andri Cahyadi 85 70 75 76.76 4364 Azima Ruhaelati 95 70 80 81.77 4365 Bunga Maharani 55 78 75 69.38 4366 Canggih Satriyo W. 95 95 90 93.39 4367 Cendea Dyna H. 90 70 75 78.310 4368 Dadang Santosa 80 65 70 71.711 4369 Desta Aryani 85 65 75 75.012 4370 Dewi Kumalasari 80 60 80 73.313 4371 Dion Samuel 80 60 80 73.314 4372 Dody Darmawan H. 75 60 70 68.315 4373 Dwi Rahayu 80 62 75 72.316 4374 Eki Gumilar P. 95 63 75 77.717 4375 Eko Nur Cahyono 95 90 90 91.718 4376 Elsalitasari I. 93 85 80 86.019 4377 Estri Panoto Jati 76 70 75 73.720 4378 Feny Yunita 78 70 70 72.721 4379 Galih Istiarini 70 60 75 68.322 4380 Ika Mutiara 80 70 75 75.023 4381 Indri Yulian 83 70 75 76.024 4382 Irfan Setyo Nugraha 85 65 80 76.725 4383 Iwan Cahyono 79 65 75 73.026 4384 Joko Hadi Prayitno 76 65 70 70.327 4385 Jujur Pitanto 75 70 70 71.728 4386 Lukfi Sarifudin 75 71 75 73.739 4387 Margareta Christina 85 72 85 80.730 4388 Mariana Desy W. 80 65 70 71.731 4389 Nandi Baskoro S. 76 65 75 72.032 4390 Panji Jatmiko 90 67 80 79.033 4391 Puput Ayu W. 95 67 80 80.734 4392 Redi Setyawan 80 70 80 76.735 4393 Retnowati 80 75 80 78.336 4394 Rita Wulandari 75 60 75 70.037 4395 Roi Jato Suwasono 70 75 70 71.7

17

LAMPIRAN IV

38 4396 Wahyu Adhi Prasetyo 70 70 65 68.3

39 4397 Widita Retno P.

95 95 90 93.3

40 4398 Yerri Setiyawan 60 70 50 60.041 4399 Yohana Puji Astuti 78 75 80 77.742 4400 Yulio Ardy Saputro 80 65 80 75.0

Lesson Plan

Tahun/Semester : 2004/2005 – 1Alokasi Waktu : 4 x 90 menitJenis Teks : DeskripsiSiklus : LisanSkill : Berbicara

A. Tujuan : Siswa mampu mendeskripsikan gambar tentang orang, benda atau tempat secara akurat dengan bantuan gambar yang serupa tetapi tak sama.

B. Indikator : 1. Siswa secara aktif dalam bahasa Inggris mendeskripsikan gambar keapda teman.

2. Siswa melakukan percakapan dengan pengucapan dan intonasi yang benar.

3. Siswa dapat menemukan 8 perbedaan pada gambar 1, 8 perbedaan pada gambar ke-dua dan 5 perbedaan pada gambar ke tiga dengan cara mendeskripsikan dengan menggunakan bahasa Inggris.

B. MateriTeks deskripsi lisan.Generic structure : Identification - descriptionLexicogrammar : The use of ‘be’, ‘has, have. Contoh Ungkapan : I have a picture of some people near a bus. There is a label

‘local’ on the bus. Can you see it? Oh, you cannot? So we find the first difference. Express? Oh, I don’t see the label on my picture. There are eleven people around the bus. There is a policeman. He is wearing a jacket with three buttons. Yes, three buttons. Oh… you can only see two buttons? I guess this is the second difference. ….

Kompetensi strategis : Asking for repetition Pardon? You know? What I mean is … Let me make it clear …

C. Langkah-langkah1. 2 Jam 1 :

15 menit : Kegiatan awal60 menit : Modeling dan drilling ungkapan yang diperlukan untuk

mendeskripsikan gambar kepada teman.18

Appendix V

15 menit: Refleksi dan kegiatan akhir

2. 2 Jam 2 : Siswa secara berpasangan mendeskripsikan 15 menit: Kegiatan awal60 menit: Siswa mendeskripsikan gambar secara berpasangan: Getting on

the Bus15 menit: Refleksi dan kegiatan penutup

3. 2 Jam 3 : Siswa secara berpasangan mendeskripsikan 15 menit: Kegiatan awal60 menit: Siswa mendeskripsikan gambar secara berpasangan: At the

Airport15 menit: Refleksi dan kegiatan penutup

4 Jam 4 : Siswa secara berpasangan mendeskripsikan 15 menit: Kegiatan awal60 menit: Siswa mendeskripsikan gambar secara berpasangan: Children in

the Classroom.15 menit: Refleksi dan kegiatan penutup

D. Media : Gambar

E. Strategi : Spotting Differences

E. Evaluasi : Penilaian proses dengan rubrik.

Salatiga, November 2004

MengetahuiKepala SMP N 6 Salatiga, Guru Mata Pelajaran,

Drs. Bambang Subyakto Sri Wuryanti, S. Pd. NIP. 131 783 427 NIP. 130921907

19

Appendix V

Curriculum Vitae

1. NAMA/NIP : Sri Wuryanti, SPd./ 130921907

2. TEMPAT/TANGGAL LAHIR : Salatiga, 13 Mei 1960

3. PANGKAT/GOL.RUANG : Pembina/IVA/1 Oktober 2005

4. JABATAN/TMT : Guru Pembina /1 Juli 2005

5. PENDIDIKAN TERAKHIR : Strata 1 (Sarjana Pend. Bahasa Inggris)

6. SERTIFIKAT/STTPL/SEMINAR :

No Nama Diklat/Seminar Thn. No. Sertifikat Predikat1 Penataran Guru Bidang Studi

Bahasa Inggris di Semarang, tg. 13 s/d 22 September 1987

1987 P.44.072/In/Um/87 Baik

2 Pendidikan dan Pelatihan Guru melalui Sanggar Pemantapan Kerja Guru (SPKG) Bahasa Inggris SMP di Karangjati, tg. 24 Juli 1990 s/d 27 Okt. 1990

1990 104/SPKG/07.B.Ing./X.90 Baik

3 Penataran Bendaharawan Dana Penunjang Pendidikan (DPP), Rutin dan Sumbangan Pembinaan Pendidikan (SPP) di Salatiga, tg. 6 s/d 8 Agustus 1990

1990 1011/I03.e2/P.B./1990

4 Pelatihan Guru melalui Sanggar Pemantapan Kerja Guru (SPKG) Bahasa Inggris SMP di Karangjati, tg. 17 Des. 1990 s/d 16 Maret 1991

1991 136/SPKG/07.B.Ing./IV.91 Amat Baik

5 Banquet, Table Manner Course & Cooking Demonstration di Hotel Ambarukmo, Yogyakarta tg. 1 Maret 1992

1992

6 Seminar Sehari Pengajaran Bahasa Inggris pada Pendidikan Dasar di Semarang, tg. 8 Nopember

1992

20

Appendix VI

19927 Lokakarya Pengelolaan Proses

Belajar Mengajar Dalam Rangka Pengumpulan Angka Kredit Bagi Guru di Salatiga, tg. 3 Mei 1992

1992 20/PD II/V/92

8 Seminar TEFLIN (Teaching English as a Foreign Language in Indonesia di Semarang, tg. 10 Sept. 1992

1992

9 Pendidikan dan Pelatihan Guru melalui Latihan Kerja Guru Inti PKG Bahasa Inggris SMP di Semarang 31 Okt. S/d 13 Nop. 1993

199313/LKGI Ing./St.I/ VI/93

Baik

10 Seminar Sehari Kurikulum 94 Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Inggris, Strategi Pembelajaran dan Evaluasinya di Bawen, tg. 10 April 1994

1994

11 Pendidikan dan Pelatihan Guru melalui Latihan Kerja Guru PKG (Pemantapan Kerja Guru) Bahasa Inggris SMP di Karangjati, tg. 25 Nop. 1993 s/d 13 Pebr. 1994

1994 002/MGMP Bhs. Ing./C1/94 Baik

12 Pelatihan Peningkatan Ketrampilan Dalam Pengelolaan Supervisi Pendidikan di Salatiga, tg. 12 s/d 21 Agustus 1996

1996 1025/I03.a/U/96 Baik

13 Pendidikan dan Pelatihan Guru melalui MGMP di Salatiga, tg. 23 Nop. 1995 s/d 8 Pebr. 1996

199611/I03.32/

MGMP ING/II/96

Baik

14 Pendidikan dan Pelatihan PKG Sekolah Dekat (MGMP) di Salatiga, tg. 23 Sept. s/d 31 Des 1997

1997 3250/I03.07/U/98

Sangat Baik

15 Pendidikan dan Pelatihan Guru Tingkat Kabupaten/Kodya di Salatiga, tg. 27 Agust. 1996 s/d 7 Jan. 1997

1997 67/I03.07/U/97 Baik

16 Pendidikan dan Pelatihan Instruktur Bahasa Indonesia dan Bahasa Inggris SLTP di Jakarta, tg 18 s/d 25 Juli 1999

1999 381/C12/PP/99 Amat Baik

17 Workshop Pengembangan Program Action Research di

2000 1219b/C3/MN/2000

21

LAMPIRAN VIAppendix VI

Yogyakarta, tg. 9 – 13 Juli 200018 Simposium Guru ke III tahun

2000 di Cipayung-Bogor, tg. 12 s/d 16 Nopember 2000

2000

19 Workshop Persiapan Latihan Kerja Guru Inti (LKGI) di Semarang, tg. 10 s/d 13 Mei 2000

2000

20 Training of Trainers (ToT) Contextual Teaching and Learning (CTL) di Malang, 27 Sept. s/d 6 Okt. 2002

2002 Baik Sekali

21 Item test and Data Survey Analysis Seminar With LERTAP di Semarang, tg. 2 Juli 2002

2002

22 Training of Trainers (ToT) Contextual Teaching and Learning (CTL) di Malang, 20 s/d 27 April 2003

2003 Amat Baik

23 Training of Trainers (ToT) ke-1 Pelatihan Terintegrasi Berbasis Kompetensi Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Inggris di Sawangan - Jabar, tg. 31 Okt s/d 20 Nopember 2003

2003 Sangat Baik

24 Seminar dan Lokakarya Pendalaman Kurikulum 2004 Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Inggris di Semarang, tg 15 s/d 16 Mei 2004

2004 326/C32/PP/2004

25 Training of Trainers (ToT) ke-2 Pelatihan Terintegrasi Berbasis Kompetensi Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Inggris di Sawangan - Jabar, tg. 25 April s/d 4 Mei 2004

2004 Sangat Baik

7. PIAGAM PENGHARGAAN / SURAT KETERANGAN:

No. Diberikan oleh Tahun Nomor Kegiatan1 Kepala

Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Kantor Kotamadya Salatiga

1991 047/I03.32/HPN/91

Penguji Pemilihan Pelajar Teladan Tingkat SLTP pada Peringatan Hardiknas tahun 1991 di Salatiga, tg.3 s/d 5 Juni 1991

22

2 Kepala Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Kantor Kotamadya Salatiga

1995 1134/I03.32/U/95

Penguji Pemilihan Pelajar Teladan Tingkat SLTP pada Peringatan Hardiknas tahun 1995 di Salatiga, tg.13 s/d 15 Juni 1995

3 Kepala Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Kantor Kotamadya Salatiga

1996 1065/I03.32/U/96

Penilai/Panitia Pemilihan Pelajar Teladan Tingkat SLTP/SLTA tahun 1996 di Salatiga, tg. 12 s/d 14 Juni 1996

4 Kepala Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Kantor Kotamadya Salatiga

1997 811/I03.32/U/97

Penguji Pemilihan Pelajar Teladan Tingkat SLTP/SLTA tahun 1997 di Salatiga, tg. 16 April s/d 16 Juni 1997

5 Kepala Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Kantor Kotamadya Salatiga

1998 1523/403.52/U/98

Penguji Pemilihan Pelajar Teladan Tingkat SLTP/SLTA tahun 1998 di Salatiga, tg. 17 April s/d 17 Juni 1998

6 Kepala Lembaga Penjamin Mutu Pendidikan (LPMP) Jawa Tengah

2003 274/C32/PP/2004

Menyajikan Materi pada Diklat Guru SMP Mapel. Bahasa Inggris untuk Kabupaten Purworejo tg. 25 s/d 28 Maret 2003

7 Kepala Lembaga Penjamin Mutu Pendidikan (LPMP) Jawa Tengah

2004 274/C32/PP/2004

Menyajikan Materi pada Diklat Guru SMP Mapel. Bahasa Inggris untuk Kabupaten Jepara tg. 12 s/d 16 Januari 2004

8 Kepala Lembaga Penjamin Mutu Pendidikan (LPMP) Jawa Tengah

2004 274/C32/PP/2004

Menyajikan Materi pada Diklat Guru SMP Mapel. Bahasa Inggris untuk Kabupaten Jepara tg. 23 s/d 27 Pebruari 2004

9 Kepala Lembaga Penjamin Mutu Pendidikan (LPMP) Jawa Tengah

2004 451/C32/PP/2004

Menyajikan Materi pada Diklat Guru SMP Bidang Studi Bahasa Inggris untuk Kabupaten Kebumen tg. 1 s/d 15 Juni 2004

10 Walikota Salatiga 2004

4/4.4/2551

Guru Berprestasi Pencipta Inovasi Pembelajaran Kwartet Word Card Simulation Bahasa Inggris

23

LAMPIRAN VI

8. Lain- Lain

1. Menjadi ketua Dewan Juri Lomba Pidato Bahasa Inggris Siswa SMP se Jateng tahun 2005 di LPMP Jawa Tengah.

2. Menjadi juri Simposium Guru Bahasa Inggris tingkat Propinsi Jawa Tengah tahun 2005 di MAN Magelang.

24