Selasa, 08 November 2011

A CRITICAL REVIEW OF A RESEARCH JOUNAL “Parents’ Attitudes Towards Bilingual Kindergartens” By Z. Muge Tavil and Korkut U. Isisag (2008)


A CRITICAL REVIEW OF
A RESEARCH JOUNAL
“Parents’ Attitudes Towards Bilingual Kindergartens”
By Z. Muge Tavil and Korkut U. Isisag (2008) 

Written by:
Luh Ketut Sri Widhiasih


Z. Muge Tavil and Korkut U. Isisag (2008). Parents’ Attitudes Towards Bilingual Kindergartens. Dr. Gazi Universitesi, Gazi Egitim Fakultesi, Yabanci Diller Bolumu.

Nowadays, some schools that have bilingual programs are built. They serve the parents with golden promise to teach their children solely in English. As a result, parents send their children to such schools in the hope that doing so will give these children the edge in a very competitive educational environment (Oladejo, 2006 in Shang, -). Hence, more and more children’s English educational institutions have been established to compete in the potential market, and the number of kindergartens teaching English has continued to grow in the past few decades. As reported by Shang (-), in Taiwan, there are three reasons for parents to enroll their children in such English-learning schools. First, parents are convinced by the rationale that they should let children learn a foreign language as early as possible, and they hope that early exposure to English could enhance children’s skills in this language for academic achievements or better career opportunities. Second, in 1998, the Ministry of Education in Taiwan promulgated a new policy, which started English-language learning as early as the third grade of elementary school. Third, with the international requirement for global competition, parents and education authorities in Taiwan are faced with the need to increase length of exposure to English in order to raise students’ English communicative competence. Those reasons made some researchers want to know how exactly attitude of the parents toward the bilingual school.
The debate about the appropriate age, the way of starting to learn a foreign language and the importance of special language program that strive to develop dual language proficiency in students also inspired Tavil and Isisag to do a research upon the parents’ attitude towards bilingual kindergartens. This research answered the parents’ attitudes towards bilingual kindergartens, the parents’ attitudes towards their children’s immersion of a second language in kindergartens where all the subject matters are in the target-language, the parents’ opinion about the effects of bilingual education on the native language, and the parents’ opinion about the importance of starting learning a second language in kindergartens.
In the beginning Tavil and Isisag introduced the hottest issues that in debate on bilingualism field; that is the importance of having more than one language to involve in the rapid globalization era. The debate pointed to the importance of bilingualism which has been a topic of the language program in school.  
In the journal, Tavil and Isisag reviewed about what bilingualism is, what the bilingual education programs are and the parents’ attitudes towards bilingual education. First, they restated Rosenberg’s concept of bilingualism. Then they continued to describe a little bit about the reason of the parent choosing to raise kids with two or more language. Also, Tavil and Isisag identified kind of bilingualism that mostly conducted in child period. Second, Tavil and Isisag reviewed about the kind of bilingual education programs. They explained Transitional Bilingual Programs, ESL Pull-Out Immersion Bilingual Programs, Early-exit and Late-exit Bilingual Programs and Two-way Bilingual Programs. Third, Tavil and Isisag reviewed several researches about parents’ attitude towards bilingual education. Saucedo’s research reported that the majority of parents had positive attitude toward dual language immersion program. Also, Tavil and Isisag reviewed Craig’s about parents’ reasons for enrolling their children in the bilingual programs. Young supported Craig’s idea by saying that most parents believe that high level of bilingualism could lead to practical career related advantages. Others positive response toward the implementation of the two way program also came from Ramos’s research.
After reviewing some research, Tavil and Isisag came to the methodology of their research. First, they stated their purpose of the research, that was to find parents’ attitudes towards bilingual kindergartens, to find parents’ attitudes towards their children’s immersion of a second language in kindergartens where all the subject matters are in the target-language, to find parents’ opinion about the effect of bilingual education on the native language, and to find parents’ opinion about the importance of stating learning a second language in kindergartens. Second, Tavil and Isisag stated about the data collection instrument used in the research was a questionnaire. The questionnaire was conducted in two sections. First section was to determine the validity and the reliability of the questionnaire, by administering pilot study. The pilot study conducted in Neseli Adimilar Kindergarten and the participants were 25 parents who have different background. The second section questionnaire applied to collect the data. The setting was in the same kindergartens but the participants were 50 parents.
Tavil and Isisag reported the data collection and analysis that showed if most of the children speak Turkish at home, the parents believe in the importance of high level of bilingualism, the parents think that the children should start learning a second language in the kindergartens, the parents think that it is not a must to have native teacher in a second language learning in kindergartens, most of the parents want their child to be in a bilingual kindergartens, the parents think that their child’s native language will not develop in a bilingual kindergartens, the parents think that their child will develop their communicative skills in the second language in  a bilingual kindergarten, the parents think that their child’s native language will be influenced negatively in bilingual kindergarten, the parents think that the children should start to learn a second language as early as possible, the parents think that the children need to develop their native language at school, the parents think that a bilingual kindergarten will enhance positive exposure to cultural diversity, the parents believe that a bilingual kindergarten will develop the cognitive skills of their child, the parents believe that bilingualism can provide better career opportunities, the parents think that being a student of a bilingual kindergarten their children may have difficulty in understanding their own culture, and the parents want their children to be a student in a bilingual kindergarten. Most of the results of Tavil and Isisag, also supported by Shin (2000) that more than 50% of the parents in his study agreed that developing literacy in the primary language is necessary in order to facilitate the acquisition in English. Also, an average of 88% of all the parents surveyed agreed that bilingualism can lead to practical, career-related advantages.
In finding, Tavil and Isisag only review the data analysis in briefly by showing the presentation of the answer of every point in the questionnaire and give brief information about it. Further, Tavil and Isisag discussed some points about the result of their research in the discussion section. One of the point that was stated is about the need of to be bilingual is not a matter of learning other language but also to maintain their own cultures, identities, heritages, and languages in this rapid globalization era. The anxiety of the parent about their child’s native language when they learn a second language can be reduced by involving the parents in the planning of that language programs, so that the parents can add their input to their child’s improvement in leaning a second language. the worry of their parents about the lost of their child’s native language also can be reduce by showing some evidence if until now there is not strong result of research that proof the worry of the parents. Moreover, Tavil and Isisag stated the goal of bilingual education is to develop both English and the native language. Tavil and Isisag also recommended to the school to start the exposure of the teaching English in the early age, based on the expectation of the parents based on the result of the questionnaire. When the foreign language is teaching, the school should be considered to minimize the negative perception of the parent about bilingual programs, by giving overview about the importance of bilingualism is not merely to learn the new language but also maintain the native language. Finally, Tavil and Isisag conclude that it is better for the children to start learning a foreign language in the beginning of their age or the kindergarten.
This journal is very important to the reviewer as a student of post graduate. This journal inspired the reviewer to do the research in the same field. The reviewer thinks that there is not a research about this yet in her area.  It will be interesting to know the parents attitude toward the bilingual kindergartens in Bali, as people know Bali is tourism area that really need English as their foreign language to have a good career in tourism. Also, by looking the rapid increasing of school that use bilingual language programs in their school, it is maybe caused by the expectation of the parents to bring their children in bilingual school. To proof the reviewer prediction about that phenomena, further the reviewer will do some research about it.
Besides for the reviewer as the post graduated student, this journal will be benefit for the school that serve bilingual programs in their school curriculum. The result of the study can be the reference for the school to know parents’ attitude towards bilingual kindergartens. They can learn about the negative assumption of the parent about the lost of the native language of the children after learning a foreign language. After knowing that fact, the school should find the solution to overcome the problem, such as by involving the parents in the curriculum planning and give them introduction if the bilingual programs will not make the children lost their native language by showing some evidences. Involving parents to solve students’ problems in school also supported by Ramirez and Hinman (2009). They said that sharing with students’ family is important to maintain students’ development in learning. For the parents, this result of the study will became the answer of their hesitance about the lost of their child’s native language after learning in bilingual school.
Tavil and Isisag can therefore be criticized here in term of their journal’s structure. The reviewer found some mistake in Tavil and Isisag’s way of presenting their journal. It is starting from the abstract until the conclusion. Further, the reviewer will describe below.
Tavil and Isisag have already constructed their abstract well, but in the end of the abstract they forgot to put interpretations of their finding. As stated in criteria of a good abstract, your abstract should clearly state the implication of the answers tour results gave you. This mistake makes their abstract does not summarize the majoring aspect of the journal. The Abstract helps readers decide whether they want to read the rest of the paper. Therefore, enough key information (e.g., summary results, observations, trends, etc.) must be included to make the Abstract useful to someone who may to reference your work.
Moreover, Tavil and Isisag began their journal with unclear introduction. The introduction does not give any overview about what will be talked in the next part of this journal. The way Tavil and Isisag presented their introduction also not so smooth. The idea jumps from one to another without any intention to it. Ideally, an introduction should give a brief information about the problems that will be discussed in the content and what the purpose of conducting that research. In this journal, Tavil and Isisag do not success do bring those two points in their introduction. The reviewer suggests that begin your Introduction by clearly identifying the subject area of interest. Do this by using key words from your title in the first few sentences of the Introduction to get it focused directly on topic at the appropriate level. This insures that you get to the primary subject matter quickly without losing focus, or discussing information that is too general. Also it is better to establish the context by providing a brief and balanced review of the pertinent published literature that is available on the subject. The key is to summarize (for the reader) what we knew about the specific problem before you did your experiments or studies. This is accomplished with a general review of the primary research literature (with citations) but should not include very specific, lengthy explanations that you will probably discuss in greater detail later in the Discussion. The judgment of what is general or specific is difficult at first, but with practice and reading of the scientific literature you will develop e firmer sense of your audience. Further, the reviewer also put a critic on the way Tavil an Isisag put their aim of the study. Why they do not put it in front after the introduction, so that it will make the reader easier to see what the purpose of the research is. It is important to know the purpose of something in the introduction. It is most usual to place the statement of purpose near the end of the Introduction, often as the topic sentence of the final paragraph.
Tavil and Isisag wrote their review of literature in unbalance portion. For example, they do not give the same portion to explanation about kind of Bilingualism Programs; it seems that they will talk about the point that has the biggest portion of explanation, although the fact is not. Also, they forgot to add some empirical review that related with their study. It is important to review some empirical study about the same topic, so that the researcher can have hypothesis about what they will research. As a result of this, Tavil and Isisag did not have any hypothesis in their study. It makes their study poor.
In the part of Methodology, Tavil and Isisag have already stated where the setting is and who the participants are. Moreover, Tavil and Isisag only used questionnaire as their data collection device. The reviewer suggests that it is better for the researcher to use more than one instrument to make the data valid and reliable. Also, they did not put a sequence of their steps in collecting data as a picture for the readers to ease them understands the flow of the research. About how the data were analyzed should be under the methodology point, not stand alone as independent point as what Tavil and Isisag wrote. In the data analysis that Tavil and Isisag had shown, the reviewer feels that it is better to present the result of the study in the Findings point, not in Data Collection and Analysis. It is because in the data collection and analysis the writer should present what types of descriptive statistics were used and which analyses were employed to answer each of the questions or hypotheses tested and determine statistical significance. The reviewer thinks that Tavil and Isisag found some misunderstanding of the term Data Collection and Analysis and the term Findings/Results.
As the reviewer cited in http://abacus.bates.edu, the function of the Results section is to objectively present your key results, without interpretation, in an orderly and logical sequence using both illustrative materials (Tables and Figures) and text. Summaries of the statistical analyses may appear either in the text (usually parenthetically) or in the relevant Tables or Figures (in the legend or as footnotes to the Table or Figure). The Results section should be organized around a series of Tables and/or Figures sequenced to present your key findings in a logical order. The text of the Results section follows this sequence and highlights the answers to the questions/hypotheses you investigated. Important negative results should be reported, too. Authors usually write the text of the results section based upon this sequence of Tables and Figures. Meanwhile, Tavil and Isisag did not show the same like what the nature function of Result/Findings section. They presented what should be presented in Results in Data Collections and Analysis. This should be revised further by Tavil and Isisag. Also, they did not present negative findings in this research. They only talked about positive result. It is important to investigate the negative result f the research to know the limitation of the research.
Finally, Tavil and Isisag only put a sentence to conclude their journal. The reviewer thinks that it is better to add some sentences to conclude their journal. They can write the same idea like what they had written in the abstract but in different way. Moreover, Tavil and Isisag also did not put some literature cited or references in their journal. This will be entrusted journal if it does not have any references.
Overall, Tavil and Isisag result of study is really significant for some elements of community, such as parents, schools, governments, and others researchers. Meanwhile, they have some mistakes of the way they presented their work. It should be revised by them, so that this journal can be the best source for other researchers.

References
Shang, Hui-Fang et al. -. Taiwanese Parental Perceptions toward English Learning in Bilingual Kindergarten. I-Shou University. Kaohsiung.
Shin, Fay H. 2000. Parent Attitudes Toward the Principles of Bilingual Education and their Children’ s Participation in Bilingual Programs. California State University. USA

------. 2002. The Structure, Format, Content, and Style of a Journal-Style Scientific Paper. http://abacus.bates.edu

Ramirez, A.Y. Fred and Hinman, Ivannia Soto. 2009. A Place for All Families. Association for Supervision & Curriculum.

Tidak ada komentar:

Posting Komentar