(PDF) MULTINGUAL EDUCATION IN PESANTREN CONTEXT-Saidna Zulfiqar Bin Tahir

Academia.edu uses cookies to personalize content, tailor ads and improve the user experience.
By using our site, you agree to our collection of information through the use of cookies.
To learn more, view our
Privacy Policy.
About
Press
Papers
We're Hiring!
Outline
Title
Abstract
Figures
Introduction
Conclusion
References
All Topics
Sociology
Cultural Sociology
MULTINGUAL EDUCATION IN PESANTREN CONTEXT-Saidna Zulfiqar Bin Tahir
Saidna Zulfiqar Bin Tahir
January 12, 2021
visibility
description
51 pages
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
check
Get notified about relevant papers
check
Save papers to use in your research
check
Join the discussion with peers
check
Track your impact
Abstract
Despite Indonesia is a multilingualism country, multilingual education is still a new issue that must be examined in-depth to explore many sites contribute to multilingual education. Thus, there are many aspects and approaches that must be considered before programming multilingual teaching and learning at pesantren that could be put forth as a model of multilingual education by the Indonesian government to perpetuate the foreign languages teaching and learning in Indonesian through the multilingual approach and strategy to preserve the Indonesian local languages from extinction.
Figures (1)
Related papers
English Language Teaching in Pesantren in Indonesia: Development and Challenges
Umar Lawal Umar
Journal of English Language and Literature (JELL), 2022
Pesantren is a traditional Islamic educational institution that studies religious knowledge (tafaqquh fi al-dîn) with an emphasis on moral formation of students so that they can practice it with the guidance of kiai and make the kitab kuning book as the primary source and the mosque as the center of activity. The growth of Pesantren as a traditional Islamic boarding school in the urban area has demonstrated that there have been changes in the pesantren itself. However, its existence has not been influenced by sociopolitical, economical, or cultural changes, it does not mean Pesantren does not face problems and challenges externally or internally. This article will talk about some issues such as the development of Pesantren: historical point of view, Pondok Pesantren today and of course the challenges which are occurring around.
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
PROBLEMS OF THE TEACHING OF INDONESIAN AS A FOREIGN LANGUAGE
Bambang Yulianto
Indonesian as foreign language (IFL) in this paper is considered as a second language (L2). There are two contexts of IFL learning: (1) within the context of L2 culture and (2) outside of context of L2 culture. Both the contexts, there are similarities and differences in order to achieve success in IFL learning. The barriers are grouped into two parts: learner's external factors and internal factor. According to the first barriers, it is known that a) there is no curriculum for IFL learning; b) the materials are less proper both in the organization and depth; c) teachers prejudiced to learner because of their cultural differences; d) teaching methods are not in suitable for the students; and e) not enough exposure, especially outside of L2 culture context. The second barriers include a) students' attitude that underestimates L2, the teacher, and L2 culture; b) lack of students' positive motivation related to their purposes in learning L2, and c) students' learning style which tends to apply impersonal free cognitive style. Keywords: Indonesian as foreign language (IFL), second language (L2), within the context of a L2 culture, outside of context of a L2 culture, learner's external factors, internal learner's factor internal factors, problem INTRODUCTION The increase of international relations between Indonesia and other nations influences on the dissemination of the use of Indonesian. Indonesia is increasingly in demand by many nations to be studied, either through the provision of education in Indonesian and foreign enthusiasts that come directly to learn Indonesian at various universities in Indonesia. For these learners, Indonesia is seen as a foreign language (Indonesian as a Foreign Language / IFL) and also can be viewed as a second language (L2) because Indonesian is not their mother tongue, which is their first language. Regarding the implementation of the learning process, it is generally seen that there are two learning contexts, namely the context of studying Indonesian in L2 culture and context of learning outside the Indonesian culture L2. The first context is experienced by foreign students who study Indonesian in universities in Indonesia, such as in State University of Surabaya, while the second context is experienced by foreign students who studies Indonesian in outside of Indonesia, as in Hankuk University of Foreign Studies for an instance. In line with the relationship between the culture and context of L2 learning, Brown (2000:130) revealed the presence of two possible learning contexts L2. First, the context which technically refers to the study of L2: (1) in B2 culture, such as learning English for Arabs in America and (2) in culture using L2 as the language of instruction for education or administration, such as learning English in the Philippines or India. Second, the context of which it is technically outside L2 culture, like learning French or German in America. Further observation on the context of Indonesia learning in Surabaya International School shows that the process does not refer to any of both contexts mentioned previously (Yulianto, 1994). In that school, English is learned with English as the instructional language. In their family, the students speak their national languages. When the students are out of their neighborhood they will see the use of Indonesia or more possible is Javanese language. These contexts are necessarily to be added into two contexts stated by Brown.
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
Teachers’ Multilingualism Belief and Practice in Indonesian EFL Classroom
Kristian Adi Putra
AL-ISHLAH: Jurnal Pendidikan
This narrative case study aimed to explore EFL teachers' beliefs and practices regarding multilingualism in Indonesia. The data for this study was collected through observations and interviews with three EFL teachers in a public junior high school in Indonesia who were chosen, based on purposive sampling, who have experience in EFL teaching and have graduated from the relevant study program. The collected data were analyzed using thematic analysis. This study revealed that teachers' beliefs and practices are in line. They used multilingualism in EFL teaching, namely Indonesian, the local language, and English as the language of instruction. They used those languages to make their students easier to understand. Moreover, multi-language is used because not all students have good English, and it also aims to maintain students' indigenous languages. Generally, this study concluded that EFL teachers' beliefs are a factor that influences their classroom language policy, an...
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
Perspectives on the Use of English as the Language of Teaching in Indonesian Schools
International Journal of Scientific Research in Science, Engineering and Technology IJSRSET
After independence from Dutch colonial rule, Indonesia adopted Bahasa Indonesia (BI) as the national language spurred growing nationalistic, political and practical concerns. Consequently, BI has overtaken Javanese and Sundanese as the nation's lingua franca for administrative, education, trade, culture, science, technology, and mass media purposes. However, the dawn of globalization and internationalization has imposed English language on many facets of contemporary Indonesian society. This has raised salient questions about the proliferation of English and by extension the fate of BI in Indonesia. Consequently, the main objective of this paper is to identify, examine and highlight the prospects and challenges of adopting English language as the medium of teaching in Indonesian schools. The paper finds that the challenges of adopting English as a medium of teaching and instruction is hampered by political, socioeconomic and most significantly historical factors due to colonialism and the Sumpar Pemuda proclamation of 28 th October 1928. In spite of this, the author considers English adoption in schools has several Socioeconomic, Cultural and Geopolitical benefits. The paper concludes that training the nation's future leaders in bilingual or multilingual curricula will strongly position Indonesia on the path to greater socioeconomic growth and sustainable development.
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
Policies on language education in Indonesia
Bachrudin Musthafa
Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics
This article discusses policies on language education in Indonesia by covering six major sections. The linguistic make-up and history of languages currently spoken in the country are first introduced as the background to the discussion. Then, building on the background factual information on the language education policies once adopted in Indonesia, a review and critical discussion regarding the design, implementation, and evaluation of the language education policies in the country are put forward. This is then followed by an elaboration of how currently adopted language education policies position different languages and what status and roles each language is accorded, and how these statuses and roles compare with English. Afterward, a prediction for the future status and role of the relevant languages under discussion is brought to light. Finally, a conclusion is made, accompanied by suggestions for further reading which will enable enrichment of knowledge-base on relevant aspec...
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
Prospect and Promise in Integrating Multiliteracy Pedagogy in the English Language Classroom in Indonesia
Shahid Rasool
Eternal (English, Teaching, Learning & Research Journal), 2022
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
Avoiding Maluku Local Languages Death Through Embedded Multilingual Learning Model: Menghindari Kematian Bahasa Daerah Maluku melalui Model Pembelajaran Embedded Multilingual
Aminah Suriaman
Uniqbu Journal of Social Sciences, 2020
The number of local language deaths in Indonesia is a national concern that must be addressed immediately. This study aims to describe and explore how to overcome the death of local languages in Indonesia through multilingual learning models in schools. This study is a library study that analyzes and analyzes the results of previously published studies related to multilingual learning in Indonesia. The results of this study found two learning models, namely the multilingual simultaneous-sequential model and the embedded multilingual model, which are suitable to be adapted and adopted in teaching local Indonesian languages in schools. This research also contributes to the central, provincial, and district governments to apply the laws and regulations that have been developed and implemented.
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
use of translanguaging to facilitate students’ English learning in an Indonesian Pesantren
intan pradita
Communications in Humanities and Social Sciences
This self-observation report aims to investigate the translanguaging practices of teacher-students’ interactions in multilingual classrooms in an International Islamic Boarding School (henceforth: Pesantren). Since Pesantren is a multilingual and multicultural melting pot for Islam-based character building, it is necessary for English teachers in Pesantren to consider some relevant teaching approaches that merit to the needs of multilingual classrooms. Through extensive navigation, we found that translanguaging is one of referred teaching approaches that can accommodate the needs of learning English in multilingual context. However, empirical findings using translanguaging approach in Pesantren is found rare so far. Thus, this study is focused on the use of translanguaging to facilitate English vocabulary learning in a multilingual context. This self-observational report describes the first author’s teaching description about her teaching practices in a Pesantren classroom. She rec...
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
Bilingual Education In Indonesia: Between Idealism and the Reality
Anton Sujarwo
Script Journal: Journal of Linguistic and English Teaching, 2019
Today English plays an important role in the development of education. In response to advances and develops the education in this globalization era, English bridges communication among people around the world. The ability to communicate in English becomes crucial. The development in education as an impact of globalization significantly influence the process of teaching and learning concept. Bilingual education becomes necessary, it can stimulate the cognitive ability especially on cognitive function, it can also motivate the bilingual program. Education as a conscious effort to build and develop the quality of human resources and one popular education system promote bilingual education becomes a choice by parents. Using bilingual education become popular and be needed. Indonesian educational policies see this phenomenon as a new modern solution to be practiced in Indonesia's education system for many years. For these reasons, the purpose of writing this library research article ...
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING IN INDONESIA: A CONTINUOUS CHALLENGE IN EDUCATION AND CULTURAL DIVERSITY
orde koria
The linguistic situations and conditions in Indonesia are quite complex by their own natures as more than seven hundred vernaculars with their various dialects from a great number of ethnic groups have been used as media of communication in the country. Accordingly, the success of English teaching in Indonesia cannot be freed from the students cultural backgrounds, values, customs, and beliefs as well as the political standpoint of the government regarding this foreign language. English language teaching has then undergone more than four changes in its curriculum since the country s independence and brought no significant impact upon the learning outcomes. This study reveals the substantial unconstructive influence of the students cultures and the non-conducive language environment affecting their language acquisition. Other aspects related to the teachers performance and class preparations equally contribute to the ineffective classroom interactions. This study offers some practical suggestions to cope with those problems.
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
MULTINGUAL EDUCATION
IN PESANTREN CONTEXT

UU No 19 Tahun 2002 Tentang Hak Cipta
Fungsi dan Sifat hak Cipta Pasal 2
1. Hak Cipta merupakan hak eksklusif bagi pencipta atau pemegang Hak Cipta untuk
mengumumkan atau memperbanyak ciptaannya, yang timbul secara otomatis
setelah suatu ciptaan dilahirkan tanpa mengurangi pembatasan menurut peraturan
perundang-undangan yang berlaku.

Hak Terkait Pasal 49
1. Pelaku memiliki hak eksklusif untuk memberikan izin atau melarang pihak lain
yang tanpa persetujuannya membuat, memperbanyak, atau menyiarkan rekaman
suara dan/atau gambar pertunjukannya.

Sanksi Pelanggaran Pasal 72
1. Barangsiapa dengan sengaja dan tanpa hak melakukan perbuatan sebagaimana
dimaksud dalam pasal 2 ayat (1) atau pasal 49 ayat (2) dipidana dengan pidana
penjara masing-masing paling singkat 1 (satu) bulan dan/atau denda paling
sedikit Rp 1.000.000,00 (satu juta rupiah), atau pidana penjara paling lama 7
(tujuh) tahun dan/atau denda paling banyak Rp 5.000.000.000,00 (lima miliar
rupiah).
2. Barangsiapa dengan sengaja menyiarkan, memamerkan, mengedarkan, atau
menjual kepada umum suatu ciptaan atau barang hasil pelanggaran Hak Cipta
sebagaimana dimaksud dalam ayat (1), dipidana dengan pidana penjara paling
lama 5 (lima) tahun dan/atau denda paling banyak Rp 500.000.000,00 (lima ratus
juta rupiah)

ii

MULTINGUAL EDUCATION
IN PESANTREN CONTEXT

Saidna Zulfiqar Bin Tahir

Deepublish
glorify and develop the intellectual of human's life

iii

deepublish |
Jl.Rajawali, G. Elang 6, No 3, Drono, Sardonoharjo, Ngaglik, Sleman
Jl.Kaliurang Km.9,3 - Yogyakarta 55581
Telp/Faks: (0274) 4533427
Website: www.deepublish.co.id
www.penerbitdeepublish.com
E-mail:
[email protected]
Katalog Dalam Terbitan (KDT)

ZULFIQAR, Saidna
Multilingual Education in Pesantren Context/oleh Saidna Zulfiqar Bin
Tahir.--Ed.1, Cet. 1--Yogyakarta: Deepublish, Oktober-2015.

viii 172 hlm.; Uk:14x20 cm

ISBN 978-Nomor ISBN

1. Education I. Judul
370

Desain cover : Unggul Pebri Hastanto
Penata letak : Dian Nur Rachmawati

PENERBIT DEEPUBLISH (Grup
Penerbitan CV BUDI UTAMA)
Anggota IKAPI (076/DIY/2012)
Copyright © 2015 by Deepublish Publisher All
Right Reserved

Isi diluar tanggung jawab percetakan
Hak cipta dilindungi undang-undang
Dilarang keras menerjemahkan, memfotokopi, atau
memperbanyak sebagian atau seluruh isi buku ini
tanpa izin tertulis dari Penerbit.

iv

Acknowledgement

I would like to thank, first and foremost, Prof. Dr.
Haryanto, M.Pd, and Dr. Syarifuddin Dollah, M.Pd of the State
University of Makassar for pushing for its being undertaken and
completed in a relatively short time frame. I also like to grateful
the director of pesantren IMMIM, Dr. Taufan, M.A., Head of
Pondok Madinah, Ust. Herman, Lc.,MA., the head of Pesantren
Gombara, Ust. Ridwan, Lc.,M.Ag, and all teachers and students
in those pesantrens who gave contribution to finish this writing. I
thankful to all my friends at the State University of Makassar for
stepping in mid-stream to shepherd the book to completion and
for all the support they have given to this writing since taking it
on. I would also like to thank Dr. Muhammad Amri for answering
specific questions that arose during the writing of the book and
for Fikri Sulaiman, P.hD and Yulini Rinantanti, M.Ed for
facilitating the reading of the manuscript, as well as my wife
Syarifah Lulu Assagaf, S.Psi, my daughters; Gadysa Saidna Bin
tahir and Gelbina Saidna Bin tahir for their strengthening and
supporting and all my families.
Any errors or omission are, of course, those of the author
alone. The material in this book represents the opinion of some
experts theoretically, the author and the pesantren teachers and
employees practically.

vi

Table of Content

Acknowledgement ......................................................................v
Table of Content .....................................................................vii
INTRODUCTION .....................................................................1
PART I MULTILINGUAL ......................................................9
A. What is Multilingual? ................................................9
B. Factors Affecting Multilingual ................................13
C. Multilingual Competence (Degree of
Proficiency) .............................................................20
D. The Advantages of Multilingualism ........................26
E. Multilingual Attitude and Behavior .........................33
F. Multilingual Spoken in Society ...............................36
G. Multilingual in Educational Context .......................40
H. Languages Teaching and Learning in
Multilingual Class ...................................................42
I. Approaches in Teaching Multilingual .....................48
J. Strategies of Multilingual Teaching and
Learning ...................................................................56
PART II PESANTREN .........................................................61
A. What is Pesantren? ..................................................61
B. Types of Pesantren ..................................................63
C. Curriculum of Modern Pesantren ............................68

vii

D. Multilingual Behavior in Pesantren ........................ 70
E. The Attitude of Santri and Ustadz toward
Multilingual Education ........................................... 85
F. Multilingual Teaching and Learning in
Pesantren ................................................................. 92
G. Multilingual Teaching Approach in
Pesantren ................................................................. 98
H. Multilingual Instructional Model in
Pesantren ............................................................... 108
PART III DEVELOPING MULTILINGUAL
COMPETENCE IN PESANTREN ................... 119
A. Developing Multilingual Education in
Pesantren ............................................................... 119
B. Developing Multilingual Listening and
Speaking Competence .......................................... 121
C. Developing Multilingual Writing
competence in Pesantren ....................................... 123
D. Developing Multilingual Reading
Competence in Pesantren ...................................... 125
CONCLUSION ..................................................................... 127
Bibliography .......................................................................... 133
Appendixes ............................................................................ 157
Notes on Author .................................................................... 171

viii

INTRODUCTION

Multilingual has played an important role in globalization
era as a tool to drive competitiveness among people or countries
over the world, such in economic, trade, policy, culture, and also
education. It was defined ordinarily as the ability to speak or to
communicate using three or more languages (McArthur, 1992:
673; Edwards, 1994: 33; Vildomec, 1963: 28; Kemp, 2009: 11).
The benefits of being multilingual exhibit over monolinguals and
not restricted to linguistic knowledge only but extend outside the
area of language. The substantial long-lived cognitive, social,
personal, academic, and professional benefits of enrichment
multilingual context have been well
documented (Cummins, 1981: 3; Cook, 2001; Diaz R, Klingler,
1991: 167; Lam, Wan Shun Eva and Rosario-Ramos, Enid, 2009:
171).
The advantages of multilingual inspired the United Nation
(UN) to take into conscious account of the multilingual existence
by carrying out the contest of essay writing on multilingual in six
official languages of the United Nations: Arabic, Chinese,
English, French, Russian and Spanish. The essay contest
organized by ELS Educational Services, Inc. and the United
Nations Academic Impact (UNAI), and in conjunction with
Adelphi University, was created to bring global-minded
young

people from all over the world together to engage in dialogue
about UNAI principles that could be carried back to their
universities and institutions (UN, 2013).
In 2015, The Association of Southeast Asian Nations
(ASEAN) will become ASEAN Economic Community (AEC), so
that, each country of ASEAN must prepare their individual
competence to compete in this era. Although the ASEAN
Community is based on the three pillars (Political-Security
Community, Economic Community and Socio-Cultural
Community), languages appear to be a cross cutting element that
support a successfully and stability formation of the ASEAN
Community. According to the ASEAN Charter, launched in 2007,
a closer cooperation in education and human resource
development will empower the people and strengthen the ASEAN
Community (Umezaki, 2012: 303).
Indonesia is a multilingualism society which consisted of
726 languages in this country (Crystal, 2000: 4; and Marti at.al,
2005: 48). It means that Indonesian has 23 million native speakers
and 140 million second language speakers who speak it alongside
their local language or mother tongue. It is used extensively as a
first language by Indonesian citizen in urban areas and as a
second language by those residing in more rural parts of
Indonesia. Beside those languages, the Indonesian educational
policy permitted some foreign languages to be taught as second or
third language at secondary school up to university level,

they are; English, Arabic, German, Mandarin, etc. which aimed to
prepare the students‘ skill in foreign languages.
Indonesia is one country amongst the ASEAN members
who has provided their students‘ foreign languages competence in
the early of students‘ age or in the primary school through the
program called bilingual school or RSBI (Rintisan Sekolah
Bertaraf Internasional) class. Unfortunately, the program was
unsuccessful because of the lack of the readiness of the school
and also the lack of students-teachers competence in mastering
English (Mariati, 2007: 566; Haryana, 2007: 152; Widowati et al,
2013). While there were many schools managed by the social
foundation in Indonesia including Pesantrens. These schools do
possess the students-teachers‘ multilingual competence which is
required by the Indonesian Government to implement the
program successfully.
Pesantren or Islamic boarding school is an educational
institution that has its roots on the Hinduism-Islamic educational
system which was founded by Ki Hajar Dewantara as the
indigenous education system of Indonesia since 1062 (Yasmadi,
2002: 99; Daulay, H.P, 2009: 61; Madjid, 2013: 3; Nizar, et al,
2013: 85; Engku, et al, 2014: 107). After the colonalization era,
this educational institution‘s learning system was modernized and
developed by applying two foreign languages, besides,
Indonesian and local languages, those are, Arabic and English in
teaching and learning process and also use in daily
communication inside of pesantren. The obligation to

use the foreign languages in this school was intended to improve
the students‘ knowledge of Islamic study and science through
their languages skill.
Nowadays, there are 27.218 pesantrens in Indonesia
including 240 pesantrens in South Sulawesi/Makassar. The
number of pesantrens will increase from day to day based on its
graduate who intends to build the branch or the new one (Depag:
Direktori Pondok Pesantren, 2014: 173). The discussion of the
book will focus on Modern Pesantrens in Makassar which
implement two foreign languages such as English and Arabic in
teaching and learning process and also used them in daily
communication; Pesantren of IMMIM, Pondok Madinah, and
Pesantren of Darul Arqam Muhammadiyah Gombara.
Those pesantrens have been chosen as object of study by
the consideration that these schools have very interesting
linguistic tradition. There are two intensive foreign languages that
have been taught at the schools, namely Arabic and English.
Besides, the students generally come from various tribes in the
eastern of Indonesia with different ethnics and languages, namely
Bugis, Makassar, Mandar, Palu, Kendari, Gorontalo, Kalimantan,
Maluku, Papua and Java. Those diversities made pesantren
became a multilingualism community.
Based on preliminary observation at these pesantrens, there
is an interesting problem of diglossia phenomenon that is how the
pattern of language selection is accordance to the function at the
school. In daily language use, students are

generally exposed to use variety of patterns in language activities:
(1) Indonesian, (2) Arabic, (3) English, and (4) the local
languages. The choice of language is of course depended on
several factors such as the participants, interlocutors, the
atmosphere, topics, and teachers who have the ability to speak
English and Arabic.
Most pesantrens have complicated curriculum, where they
adopted two or three kind of curriculums; DIKNAS (Minister of
National Education) curriculum, DEPAG (Ministry of Religion
Affairs) curriculum, and pesantren curriculum. The three
curriculums were implemented separately in certain day, different
schedule, and with different teachers. Likewise in language
curriculum of pesantren, the students were compelled to learn
hard in fulfillment the need of the curriculums. It means that the
students were dazed to learn languages such as Indonesia, Arabic,
English, and local languages based on the three curriculums in
different schedule with different teacher and different book. The
schools also faced some obstacles in arranging the schedule and
they needed more teachers to teach those languages, whereas
most of their teachers have multilingual competence to be
empowered in languages teaching to fulfill the need of pesantrens.
Some previous studies involved to pesantren still focused
on method of languages teaching and learning (Melor, et al, 2012:
87; Bin Tahir, S, 2011: 81), some researchers studied about
linguistics and sociolinguistic related to the speech style,
bilingual, code-mixing and code-

switching at pesantren (Hanidah, 2009; Rhohmatillah, 2013;
Tantri, 2013: 37), and some others who discussed on teaching
morality, teaching Kitab Kuning, and religious learning (Lukens-
Bull, 2000: 27; Van Bruinessen, 1994: 121; Zakaria, 2010: 45).
But those studies didn‘t consider in-depth yet on multilingual
education that occurred at pesantren. These reasons awaken the
writer‘s heart to conduct a research and write on multilingual
education at pesantrens. This study is crucial to problematisize
and to solve the problems faced by pesantren in maintaining its
quality through mastery of foreign languages, arranging
multilanguages teaching and learning, minimizing the recruitment
of languages teachers, improving their students‘ competence in
spoken multilingual, and economizing the cost that will be spent
by students.
Further, in the last of three years, Nugrahenny T. Zacharias
(2012) did a research entitled ―EFL Students‟ Understanding of
Their Multilingual English Identities‖ to explore how 30 students
in a pre-service teacher education frame their multilingual
English identities as written in response journals, part of a course
requirement in a Cross-cultural Understanding (CCU) course. The
findings illustrate that many of the participants negotiated their
identities based on a core identity derived from their assumed first
language (L1) culture. With regard to the English use, encounters
with native speakers appeared to magnify their linguistic
insecurity, viewing their nonnative status as a drawback. All of
the participants appeared to be

fully aware that the use of English in public spaces would project
negative identities as Indonesian national. Nevertheless, this study
also considers as the preliminary study in multilingualism field
which not focusing on multilingual education in Indonesia.
Despite Indonesia is a multilingualism country,
multilingual education is still a new issue that must be examined
in-depth to explore many sites contribute to multilingual
education. Thus, there are many aspects and approaches that must
be considered before programming multilingual teaching and
learning at pesantren that could be put forth as a model of
multilingual education by the Indonesian government to
perpetuate the foreign languages teaching and learning in
Indonesian through the multilingual approach and strategy to
preserve the Indonesian local languages from extinction.
The phenomenon of language diversity currently in
Indonesia and the whole world is an important issue that is
growing to the surface because of the presence of multilingual
will determine the survival in a multicultural society. With the
multilingual resource roles in a variety of fields it is easier to be
taken in various areas of life. Wisely, the Indonesian government
should be serious to foster a multilingual school because the
interest of the nation is closely related to various activities of the
international language. There are four language suggested,
namely Arabic as the language of religion, English as a language
of science and technology and global communication, China

language to take part in the field of economy and trade, the local
language as the first language of Indonesian, and of course they
need to understand the local language to be appreciate their local
culture.

CONCLUSION

Pesantren or Islamic boarding school is an educational
institution which was founded by Ki Hajar Dewantara as the
indigenous education system of Indonesia since 1062 is a
direction toward multilingual education in Indonesia. There are
two intensive foreign languages that have been taught at the
schools, namely Arabic and English. Besides, Indonesian and the
local languages that made pesantrens became a multilingualism
community.
The phenomenon of the current diversity of language use is
an important issue that is growing to the surface because of the
presence of multilingual will determine the survival in a
multicultural society. With multi language resources, the role in
various fields easier to be taken in various areas of life. Indonesia
should be serious to foster a multilingual school because the
interest of the nation is closely related to various activities of the
international languages. There are four languages suggested,
namely Arabic as the language of religion, English as a language
of science and technology and global communication, Chinas to
take part in the field of economy and trade, the local language of
Indonesia because they speak the first language of Indonesia, and
of course they need to understand the local language to be
appreciate their local culture, and also

127

to avoid those local languages from extinction or destruction.
Some European countries such as the Netherlands,
Denmark, and Sweden implement a multilingual education since
high school, foreign language of choice is English and German.
Additionally, Singapore, Malaysia, and Brunei, and the
Philippines much earlier (1960) have English as a second
language in their country. Therefore, it is not surprising that they
are more advanced in accessing global information on the
progress of their country than Indonesia. English-speaking
countries have surrounded the State of Indonesia and Indonesia
should educate multilingual discussed with Indonesian and
English. Now in Indonesia started a multilingual school opened,
there is a kindergarten, elementary, junior, and senior multilingual
better known as the stub international school (RSBI) but it all
looks like trials only.
Wisely, Indonesia should be serious to foster a multilingual
school because the interest of the nation is closely related to
various activities of the international language. For Muslims they
are in desperate need to understand the Arabic language as they
read the holy Quran in Arabic and regular worship (prayers) in
Arabic. Furthermore, in acquiring knowledge and science,
learners cannot be separated from the English because some
references offered many lecturers or teachers in English. In our
trade is actually in desperate need China because the Chinese
language more actively in the fields of economic

128

and trade. Instead, Indonesian students who live in the city no
longer know the local language because they speak the first
language of Indonesia, and of course they need to understand the
local language to be able to live up to their regional culture.
Multilingual importance is also related to the results of
studies showing the significance effects on children. Various
studies as stated Hoff (2005) shows that if students are taught
properly for multilingual learning at an early age as a whole can
spur the development of the competence. Other studies have
shown that children who learn multilingual in the early age are
usually more successful in life because it was used to dealing with
a variety of languages and the languages into communication
media when children become adults and enter the workforce.
Cenoz study reported that the benefits of learning a second or
third language at the early age include everything from increasing
the ability of creativity and children have a greater understanding
of the culture.
It is fundamental motivation to learn various languages. In
addition, a foreign language is an investment as well as provisions
for the child's future career. It also makes many parents who
introduce foreign languages from an early age. With hope
children can compete in the global market and can fill future jobs.
Hopefully with the presence of the book will arouse the
Indonesian government intention in formulating new policies
related to multilingual teaching and learning in

129

Indonesia and to make the new regulation to existing schools such
pesantrens as an official institution of the implementation of
multilingual education in Indonesia.
The present study in this book aimed at investigating the
multilingual education in the modern pesantrens in Makassar.
Some implications can be concluded as follows:
First, based on the qualitative result of the study, it can be
found that the in-depth consideration of language function,
language selection, the factors affecting the languages selection,
multilingual teaching approach and strategy, and multilingual
instruction model is essential to strengthen the designing of needs
analysis and situational analysis before developing multilingual
education for pesantrens. It is also beneficial to further
researchers who aim at designing needs analysis to consider in
great depth the sociological, psychological, and linguistic
approaches.
Second, the study contributes to understanding the case of
language selection that occurred at pesantren such as
monolingual, bilingual, multilingual, code-switching, code-
mixing, diglossia, interference, peslanglish,
transferring of the features from the first language to the foreign
languages, and multilingual approaches, strategies and
instructional model in pesantrens as information and reference in
developing multilingual instructional model of pesantren.
However, the result of the present study in this book is not
intended to be generalized to all contexts/schools of multilingual
education since the design of this study was

130

qualitative approach in three of modern pesantrens in Makassar
and the aim of this study was to investigate the language function,
language selection, the factors affecting the languages selection,
multilingual approach and strategy in modern pesantrens in
Makassar and how it can benefit the researcher to design needs
analysis and situational analysis accurately before developing
multilingual education for pesantren in Indonesia in the next step
of this multisite study.

131

132

Bibliography

Abbot, Barbarra. 1999. The Formal Approach to Meaning,
Semantics and its recent Developments. Journal of
Foreign Languages.
Ajzen, I. 2002. Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus
of control, and the theory of planned behavior, Journal of
Applied Social Psychology, vol. 32, no. 4, p. 683.
A'la, Abdul, 2006. Pembaruan Pesantren (Yogyakarta: Pustaka
Pesantren).
Allen, Harold B. Ed. tt. Teaching English as a second. New York:
McGraw-Hill Book Company.
Allwright, R.L. 1981. What do we want teaching materials for?
ELT Journal 36, 1: 5–18.
Andrade, Carolyn, Richard R. Kretschmer Jr. & Laura W.
Kretschmer. 1989. Two Languages for All Children:
Expanding to Low Achievers and the Handicapped. In
Müller, Kurt E. (Ed.)Languages in the Elementary
Schools. New York: The American Forum for Global
Education, 177-203.
Arikunto, Suharsimi. 2006. Prosedur Penelitian. Suatu
Pendekatan Praktik. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.
Armstrong, Penelope W. & Jerry D. Rogers. 1997. Basic Skills
Revisited: The Effects of Foreign Language Instruction
on Reading, Math and Language Arts. Learning
Languages 2/3: 20-31.

133

Aronin, L. & O Laoire, M. 2004. Exploring multilingualism in
cultural contexts: Towards a notion of multilinguality. In
Trilingualism in Family, School and Community, C.
Hoffmann & J. Ytsma (eds), 11-29. Clevedon:
Multilingual Matters.
Athanasopoulos, Panos. 2001. L2 acquisition and bilingual
conceptual structure. Unpublished MA thesis, University
of Essex.
Azyumardi Azra, ‖Surau di Tengah Krisis: Pesantern dalam
Perspektif Masyarakat‖,dalam Pergulatan Dunia
Pesantern: Membangun dari Bawah (Jakarta: P3M,
1985).
Baetens-Beardsmore, H. 1995. The European school experience
in multilingual education. In Multilingualism for All, T.
Skuttnab-Kangas (ed.), 21-68. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Bao Dat. 2003. Materials for Developing Speaking Skills. In
Tomlinson, B (Ed.). Developing Materials for Language
Teaching. London: Cromwell Press.
Bastian, Terry R. 1980. An investigation into the effects of
second language learning on achievement in English.
English Language Arts Skills in Instruction. Urbana:
Clearinghouse on Reading and Communication Skills,
1979. ERIC ED 189 646. DA, 40, 12-A, Pt 1. Boise, ID:
University of Idaho, 6176-7.
Basturk and Gulmez. 2011. Multilingual Learning Environment
In French and German Language Teaching Departments.
TOJNED: The Online Journal of New Horizons in
Education - January 2011, Volume 1, Issue 2. 2011.

134

Ben Zeev, Sandra. 1977. The influence of bilingualism on
cognitive strategies and cognitive
development. Child Development 48/3: 1009-18.
Berger, K, S. 2006. The developing person. Through childhood
and adolescence. (7th ed.) New York: Worth.
Bialystok, Ellen. 1986. Children‘s concept of word. Journal of
Psycholinguistic Research 15/1: 13-32..
Bin Tahir, S. Z. 2011. English Teaching Method at Pesantren
IMMIM of Makassar. JUPITER Journal UPT Lib of
University of Hasanuddin. Vol IX No. 1. November tahun
2011. No. ISSN: 1693-5535.
Bin Tahir, S. Z. 2013. Pengajaran Bahasa Inggris –Teaching
English as World Language. ISBN.978-602-97144-9-4,
Jakarta: Penerbit Media Pustaka Qalam.
Bin Tahir, S. Z. 2015. The Attitude of Santri and Ustadz
toward Multilingual Education at Pesantren. International
Journal of Language and Linguistics. Vol. 3, No. 4, 2015,
pp. 210-216. doi: 10.11648/j.ijll.20150304.13.
Bin Tahir, S. Z. 2015. Multilingual Behavior of Pesantren
IMMIM Students in Makassar. The Asian EFL Journal/
Professional Teaching Articles/ August 2015, Issue 86.
Pp. 45-64.
Bloomfield, L. 1933. Language. New York NY: Holt, Rinehart
and Winston.
Borg, W. R. & Gall, M.D. 1983. Educational research: An
introduction (4th ed.). New Yorg: Longman.
Borg, W.R. & Gall, M.D., Gall, J.P. 1989. Educational research:
An introduction, (5th Ed.). Boston-USA: Allyn and
Abcon.

135

Bourlard, John Dines, Mathew Magimai-Doss, Philip Garner,
David Imseng, Petr Motlicek, Hui Liang, Lakshmi Saheer
and Fabio Valente. 2011. Current trends in multilingual
speech processing. Journal Sadhana. Vol. 36, Part 5,
October 2011, pp. 885–915. c Indian Academy of
Sciences.
Bourlard. H, John. D, Mathew. M, Garner. P, Imseng. D,
Motlicek, Hui Liang, Saheer, and Valente. 2011. Current
trends in multilingual speech processing. Sadhana
Journal, Indian Academy of Sciences, Vol. 36, Part 5,
October 2011, pp. 885–915.)
Breen, M. P. 1984. Process syllabuses for the language
classroom, in C.J. Brumfit (Ed.). General English
Syllabus Design, Curriculum and Syllabus Design for the
General English Classroom. ELT document 118. Oxford:
Pergamon Press and British Council.
Breidbach, Stephan and Viebrock, Britta. 2012. CLIL in
Germany: Results from Recent Research in a Contested
Field of Education. International CLIL Research Journal.
Volume 1 (4): 6-16.
Brown, G and Yule, G. 1983. Teaching the Spoken language; An
Approach based on the analysis of conversation English.
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, J. D. 1996. The elements of language curriculum: A
systematic approach to program development. Boston:
Heinle & Heinle Publisher.
Bruck, Margaret, Wallace E. Lambert & Richard Tucker. 1974.
Bilingual Schooling through the Elementary Grades: the
St. Lambert Project at Grade Seven. Language Learning
24/2: 183-204.

136

Bullock, B.E. and Toribio, A.J. (eds). 2009. The Cambridge
Handbook of Linguistic Codeswitching. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Burridge, K. 2010. Linguistic cleanliness is next to godliness:
Taboo and purism. English Today 26 (2), 3_13.
Bygate, M. 1987. Speaking. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Byram, Michael. 1997. Teaching and Assessing Intercultural
Communicative Competence. Clevedon: Multilingual
Matters.
_____ . 2012. Language awareness and (critical)
cultural
awareness-relationships, comparisons and
contrasts. Language Awareness 21(1-2): 5-13.
Campbell, William J. 1962. Some effects of teaching foreign
language in the elementary schools. NY Hicksville Public
Schools: Dec. [ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. ED 013 022].
Carpenter, John A. & Judith V. Torney. 1974. Beyond the
Melting Pot. In Markun, Patricia Maloney (Ed.)
Childhood and Intercultural Education: Overview and
Research. Washington DC: Association for Childhood
Education International.
Cazden, C. B. 1990. Cultural capital in the preschool: Teacher
education for language and literacy. Presentation at the
annual meeting of the National Association of Early
Childhood Teacher Educators. Washington, DC.

137

Cenoz, J. & Genesee F. (eds). 1998. Beyond Bilingualism:
Multilingualism and Multilingual Education.
Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Cenoz, J. 2000. Research on multilingual acquisition. In English
in Europe: The Acquisition of a Third Language, J. Cenoz
& U. Jessner (eds), 39–53. Clevedon: Multilingual
Matters.
Cenoz, J. 2009. Towards Multilingual Education: Basque
Educational Research in International Perspective.
Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Cenoz, J., & Gorter, D. 2011. A holistic approach to multilingual
education: Introduction. The Modern Language Journal,
95(3), 339-343.
Clarke, D.F. 1989. Materials adaptation: Why leave it all to the
teacher? ELT Journal 43, 2: 133–141.
Cohen, L, Lawrence Manion and Keith Morrison. 2007. Research
Methods in Education. Sixth edition. New York:
Routledge.
Cook, Vivian J. 1999. Going beyond the native speaker in
language teaching. TESOL Quarterly33/2: 185-209.
Cook, Vivian J. 2001. Requirements for a multilingual
model of language production. (Online) Accesed on
23 December 2014 from
homepage.ntlworld.com/vivian.c/Writings/Papers
/RequirementsForMultilingualModel.htm.
Creswell, W. John. 2008. Educational Research: Planning,
conducting, and evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative
Research. Third Edition. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice
Hall.

138

Cruz-Ferreira, M. (ed.). 2010. Multilingual Norms. Frankfurt:
Peter Lang.
Crystal, David. 2000. Language Death. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Cummins, James P. 1981. The Role of Primary Language
Development in Promoting Educational Success for
Language Minority Students. In Leyba, F. C. (Ed.)
Schooling and Language Minority Students: A
Theoretical Framework. Los Angeles, CA: Evaluation,
Dissemination, and Assessment Center, California State
University, 3-49.
Cummins, James P. 1981. The Role of Primary Language
Development in Promoting Educational Success for
Language Minority Students. In Leyba, F. C. (Ed.)
Schooling and Language Minority Students: A
Theoretical Framework. Los Angeles, CA: Evaluation,
Dissemination, and Assessment Center, California State
University, 3-49.
Cunningsworth, A. 1995. Choosing your Course book. Oxford:
Heinemann.
Curtain, Helena & Carol Ann Dahlberg. 2004. Languages and
Children: Making the Match: New Languages for Young
Learners, Grades K-8 [3rd Ed.] New York: Longman.
Daniela Elsner. 2011. Developing Multiliteracies,
Plurilingual Awareness and Critical Thinking in the
Primary Language Classroom with Multilingual Virtual
Talkingbooks. Online Journal Encuentro. 20, 2011, ISSN
1989-0796, pp. 27-38.

139

Daulay, H, Putra. 2009. Sejarah Pertumbuhan dan Pembaruan
Pendidikan Islam di Indonesia. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada
Media Group.
Debin, F., and Olshtain, E. 1986. Course Design: Developing
Programs and Materials for Language Learning.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
DeGaetano, Y., Williams, L, & Volk, D. 1998. Kaleidoscope: A
multicultural approach for the primary school classroom.
Upper Saddle-River, NJ: Pearson.
DeMaria. 2003. College Students Interesting Their Major. Journal
of the American College of Cardiology, (Online journal),
(http://findarticles.com/p/articles/miMOFCR/ Accessed
on May 1, 2014).
Depag: Bagian Perencanaan dan Data Setditjen Pendidikan
Islam Departemen Agama R.I. 2014. Daftar Jumlah
Pesantren, Santri dan Kyai 2010. (Online) Accesed on
March, 11, 2015 from
Depag: Direktori Pondok Pesantren, 2014. Data statistik jumlah
Pondok Pesantren di seluruh Indonesia. (Online) Accesed
on March, 11, 2015 from
Diaz R, Klingler. 1991. Towards an explanatory model of
the interaction between bilingualism and cognitive
development. In: Bialystok E, editor. Language
processing in bilingual students. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press; 1991. pp. 167–192.
Diaz, Rafael M. 1983. The impact of second-language learning
on the development of verbal and spatial

140

abilities. DA, 43, 04-B. New Haven, CT: Yale University,
1235.
Diebold, A. R. 1961. Incipient bilingualism. Language Journal
37: 97–112.
Dorota Szczesniak. 2013. Developing Multilingual
Competence in Academia: Teaching German as L3 to
Polish Students of English Department. Online Journal
EXEDRA; Educacao e Formacao Axedra Revista
Cientifica ESEC Número 7 de 2013.
Dumas, Lynne S. 1999. Learning a second language: Exposing
your child to a new world of words boosts her
brainpower, vocabulary and self-esteem. Child: 72, 74,
76-7.
Edwards, J. 1994. Multilingualism. London: Routledge.
Engku, I & Zubaidah, S. 2014. Sejarah Pendidikan Islami.
Bandung; PT Remaja Rosdakarya.
Ewert, Anna. 2006. Do they have different L1s? Bilinguals‘ and
monolinguals‘ grammaticality judgements. Paper
delivered at the 9th Nordic Conference on Bilingualism,
Joensuu.
Farrant, J. S. 1980. Principles and Practice of Education. Harare:
Longman Zimbabwe.
Galambos, Sylvia Joseph and Susan Goldin-Meadow. 1990. The
effects of learning two languages on metalinguistic
awareness. Cognition 34/1: 1-56.
Garfinkel, Alan & Kenneth E. Tabor. 1991. Elementary
school foreign languages and English reading
achievement: A new view of the
relationship. Foreign Language Annals 24/5: 375-82.

141

Gay, L. R, Mills, G, and Airasian, P. 2006. Educational
Research; Competencies for Analysis and Applications.
Eight Edition. New Jersey; Pearson Prentice Hall.
Genesee, F. 1998. A case study of multilingual education in
Canada. In Beyond Bilingualism: Multilingualism and
multilingual education, J. Cenoz & F. Genesee (eds),
243–258. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Genesee, F. 2001. Brain research: Implications for second
language learning. The ACIE Newsletter, 5 (1).
Glatthorn, A. 1987. Curriculum Leadership. Glenview, Illinois:
Scott, Foresman.
Graves, K. 2000. Designing Language Courses: A Guide for
Teachers. Boston: Heinle and Heinle.
Grosjean, François. 1989. Neurolinguists, beware! The bilingual
is not two monolinguals in one person. Brain and
Language 36: 3-15.
Gumper, J. John and Hymes, 1972. Dell, Direction in
Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of Communication,
New York, Holt, Rinehart, and Wingston. Inc.
Halliday, M, A, K. 1989. Spoken and Written Language. Second
edition. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hanidah, S. 2009. The Speech Styles Used By Multilingual
Speakers in Pesantren Putri Al-Mawaddah
Ponorogo. (Online) Accesed on December, 12, 2014
from
Harmers, John. 1991. The Practice of English Language
Teaching. London: Longman.

142

Hary, B. H. 1992. Multiglossia in Judeo-Arabic: With an Edition,
Translation and Grammatical Study of the Cairene Purim
Scroll. Leiden: BRILL.
Haryana, K. 2007. Sekolah Bertaraf Internasional. Jurnal
Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan, 13 (II), 152-175.
Haugen, E. 1953. The Norwegian Language in America: A study
in Bilingual Behaviour. Philadelphia PA: University of
Pennsylvania Press.
Heaton, J.B. 1988. Writing English Language Test. London:
Longman.
Herdina, P. & Jessner, U. 2002. A Dynamic Model of
Multilingualism: Perspectives of Change in
Psycholinguistics. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
Herdina, Phillip; Jessner, Ulrike. 2000. The dynamics of third
language acquisition‖. In: Cenoz, Jasone; Jessner, Ulrike
(eds.) English in Europe. The Acquisition of a Third
Language. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters 84-98.
Hidi & Renninger, K. 2006. The four-phase model of
interest development. Educational Psychologist,
(online), 41, 111-127.
(http://jlls.org/Issues/Volume1/No.2/nazligundu z.pdf,
Accessed on 16, Accessed on June, 10, 2014).
Hidi. 2001. Interest, reading, and learning: Theoretical and
practical considerations. Educational Psychology
Review, (online), 13(3), 191-209.
(http://jlls.org/Issues/Volume1/No.2/nazligundu z.pdf,
Accessed on 16, accessed on June, 10, 2014).

143

Hong, Kyungsim & Alexandra G. Leavell. 2006. Strategic
reading awareness of bilingual EFL readers. Paper
delivered at the 40. Annual TESOL Convention, Tampa,
FL.
Horstmann, C. C. 1980. The effect of instruction in any of three
second languages on the development of reading in
English-speaking children. DA, 40, 07-A, 3840.
House, Juliane & Gabriele Kasper. 2000. How to remain a
non-native speaker. In Riemer, Claudia
(Ed.) Kognitive Aspekte des Lehrens und Lernens von
Fremdsprachen [Cognitive Aspects of Foreign Language
Teaching and Learning]. Festschrift für Willis J.
Edmondson zum 60. Geburtstag. Tübingen: Gunter Narr
Verlag, 101-18.
Hughes, R. 2011. Teaching and Researching Speaking, 2nd edition
(Applied linguistics in action series). London; Pearson
Education Limited.
Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. 1992. English for specific purposes:
A learning centered approach. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Jamal, G. 2013. Pesantren Moderen: Kasus Gontor. In Nizar (ed.).
2013. Sejarah Sosial dan Dinamika Intelektual
Pendidikan Islam di Nusantara. Jakarta: Kencana
Prenada Media Group.
Jessner, U. 2008. Teaching third languages: Facts, trends and
challenges. Language Teaching 41(1): 15–56.
Johnson, Charles E., Joseph S. Flores & Fred P. Ellison. 1963.
The effect of foreign language instruction on basic

144

learning in elementary schools. Modern Language
Journal 47: 8-11.
Johnson, D. M. 1992. Approaches to Research in Second
Language Learning. New York: Longman Publishing
Group.
Jordan, R. R. 1997. English for academic purposes: A guide and
resource book for teachers. Cambridge England ; New
York: Cambridge University Press.
Jos Hornikx, Frank van Meurs and Marianne Starren. 2007. An
Empirical Study of Readers‘ Associations with
Multilingual Advertising: The Case of French, German
and Spanish in Dutch Advertising. Journal of
Multilingual and Multicultural Development. Vol. 28, no.
3, 2007. 0143-4632/07/03 204-16.
Kathory, C. R. 2004. Research Methodology: Method and
Technique, Second Revised Edition. New Delhi: New
Age International (P) Ltd., Publishers.
Kaye, A. S. 1994. Formal vs. informal in Arabic: Diglossia,
triglossia, tetraglossia, etc., polyglossia-multiglossia
viewed as a continuum. Zeitschrift fur arabische
Linguistik 27: 47–66.
Kemp, C. 2009. Defining multilingualism. In L. Aronin & B.
Hufeisen (Eds.), The exploration of multilingualism.
Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins. (pp. 11-
26).
Krahnke, Karl. 1987. Approaches to Syllabus Design for Foreign
Language Teaching. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall
Regents.

145

Krapp. 1989. Interest, learning, and academic achievement.
In P. Nenniger (Chair.), Task motivation by interest,
Symposium conducted at the meeting of the Third
European Conference of Learning and Instruction
(EARLI), (online): Madrid, Spain.
(http://jlls.org/Issues/Volume1/No.2/nazligundu z.pdf,
Accessed on 16, 10, 2014).
Labov, W. 1972. Some principles of linguistic methodology.
Language in Society 1 (1), 97_120.
Lado, Robert. 1964. Language Teaching. A Scientific Approach.
New York: McGraw-Hill.
Lam, Wan Shun Eva and Rosario-Ramos, Enid. 2009.
Multilingual illiteracies in transnational digitally
mediated contexts: an exploratory study of immigrant
teens in the United States', Journal of Language and
Education, 23:2,171 — 190.
Le Page, R. B. 1998. You can never tell where a word comes
from: Language contact in a diffuse setting. In The
Sociolinguistics Reader, Vol. 1: Multilingualism and
Variation, P. Trudgill & J. Cheshire (eds), 66–89.
London: Arnold.
Li Wei and Moyer (Eds). 2008. The Blackwell Guide to Research
Methods in Bilingualism and Multilingualism. Victoria:
Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Lukens-Bull. 2000. Teaching Morality: Javanese Islamic
Education in a Globalizing Era. Journal of Arabic and
Islamic Studies. Vol. 3 (2000).
Mackey, W. F. 1962. The description of bilingualism. Canadian
Journal of Linguistics 7: 51–85. (Also in The

146

Bilingualism Reader, Li Wei (ed), 26–56. London:
Routledge).
Madjid, N. 2013. Bilik-Bilik Pesantren; Sebuah Potret
Perjalanan. Jakarta: Penerbit Dian Rakyat.
Malone, S. 2005. Education for Multilingualism and Multi-
literacy in Ethnic Minority Communities: the situation in
Asia. In First Language First: Community-based literacy
programmes for minority language context in Asia.
Bangkok: UNESCO, pp.71-86.
Malone, S. 2009. Planning mother tongue-based education
programs in minority language communities. SIL
International. ABD (Asian/Pacific Book
Development). Vol. 34 no. 2.
Mariati. L. 2007. Menyoal Profil Sekolah Bertaraf Internasional.
Jurnal Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan, 13 (067), 566-597.
Martí, Felix, et.al. eds. 2005. Words and Worlds: World
Languages Review. Vol. 52. Bilingual Education and
Bilingualism. Clevedon England; Buffalo N.Y:
Multilingual Matters.
McArthur, T. (ed). 1992. The Oxford Companion to the English
Language. Oxford: OUP.
Melor, Yunus & Hadi Salehi. 2012. The Effectiveness of
Facebook Groups on Teaching and Improving Writing:
Students‘ Perceptions. International Journal of Education
and Information Technologies, Issue 1, Volume 6, 2012.
Pp. 87-96.
Met, M. 1993. Foreign language immersion programs. ERIC
Digest. ED363141.

147

Miles, M. B. and Huberman, A. M. 1994. Qualitative Data
Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. London: Sage.
Milroy, Lesley. 1998. Observing and Analyzing Natural
Language, t.t., Georgetown University.
Mitchell. 1993. Situational interest: Its multifaceted
structure in the secondary school mathematics
classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 424-
436.(http://jlls.org/Issues/Volume1/No.2/ nazligun
duz.pdf, Accesed on 16, 10, 2014).
Moughamian, C, Rivera. M, Francis, D. 2009. Instructional
Models and Strategies for Teaching English Language
Learners. The Center on Instruction at RMC Research
Corporation
Muijs, D. 2004. Doing Quantitative Research in Education with
SPSS. London: SAGE Publications Inc.
Munby, J. 1978. Communicative syllabus design: A
sociolinguistic model for defining the content of purpose-
specific language programmes. Cambridge, Eng.; New
York: Cambridge University Press.
Nata, A. 2003. Pemikiran Para Tokoh Pemikiran Pendidikan
Islam Seri Filsafat Pendidikan Islam. Cetakan ke-3.
Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persasada, h, 206.
Nation and John Macalister. 2010. Language curriculum design.
New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Publisher.
Nichols, B., Shidaker, Gene Johnson & Kevin Singer. 2006.
Managing curriculum and assessment: a practitioner's
guide. Worthington, Ohio: Linworth Publishing, Inc.

148

Nieto, S. 2004. Affirming diversity. The sociopolitical context of
multicultural education (4th ed.), Boston, MA: Allyn and
Bacon.
Nizar, S. 2013. Sejarah Sosial dan Dinamika Intelektual
Pendidikan Islam di Nusantara. Jakarta: Kencana
Prenada Media Group.
Nugrahenny T. Zacharias. 2012. EFL Students‘
Understanding of Their Multilingual English Identities.
Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 2012,
Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 233–244.
Null, W. 2011. Curriculum: from theory to practice. New York:
Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
Nunan, D. 1989. Syllabus Design. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Olivia, P.F. 1997. 4th Developing the Curriculum edition. New
York: Longman
Oxford, R. L. 2002. Sources of variation in language learning. In
R. B. Kaplan (ed.), The Oxfor handbook of applied
linguistics (3rd edn). New York: Oxford University Press,
245–252.
Paradowski, M.B. 2015. The benefits of multilingualism. To
have another language is to possess a second soul.
Accessed on October, 2015 from
benefits-of-multilingualism/ 2015.
Portes, A., & Rumbaut, R. G. 2001. The story of the immigrant
second generation. Berkeley, CA: University of
California Press.

149

Prabhu, N.S. 1987. Second Language Pedagogy. Oxford: OUP.
Prabhu, N.S. 1989. Materials as support: Materials as constraint.
Guidelines 11, 1: 66–74.
Prem P. Poudel. 2010. Teaching English in Multilingual
Classrooms of Higher Education: The Present Scenario.
Online Journal of NELTA. Vol. 15 No. 1-2 December
2010.
Print, M. 1993. Curriculum Development and Design. Second
Edition. Sydney: Allen & Unwin Pty Ltd.
Rhohmatillah, S. 2013. The use of code mixing used by male
and female students of Ar-Raudlatul Hasanah
Islamic Boarding School Medan. (Online) Access on
December, 12, 2014 from
8116111017%20.
Richards, J. C. 2001. Curriculum development in language
teaching. Cambridge, U.K.; New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Richterich, R., & Chancerel, J.-L. 1980. Identifying the needs of
adults learning a foreign language. Strasbourg: Council
of Europe.
Riduwan & Akdon. 2009. Rumus dan Data dalam Analisis
Statistik. Bandung. Alfabeta.
Ringbom, Håkan. 2001. Lexical transfer in L3 production. In:
Cenoz, Jason; Hufeisen, Britta; Jessner, Ulrike (eds.).
Cross-linguistic Influence in Third Language Acquisition:
Psychological Perspectives. Clevedon: Multilingual
Matters; 59-68.

150

Robertson, C & Acklam, R. 2000. Action Plan for Teachers.
London WC2B 4PH: British Broadcasting
Corporation, 2000.
Rodgers, T. 1984. Communicative syllabus design and
implementation: Reflection on a decade of experience. In
J. Read (ed.), Trends in Language syllabus design.
Singapore: Regional Language Center (RELC). 28-53.
Sabes and Acls. 2008. Lesson Planning Resource Guide;
Developed by SABES and ACLS. (Online) Accessed on
December, 12, 2014 from http://www.sabes.org.
Salsbury, D and Schoenfeldt, M. 2008. Lesson Planning: A
Research-Based Model for K-12 Classrooms. Alexandria,
VA: Prentice Hall.
Saridjo, M, et al. 1982. Sejarah Pendidikan Pesantren di
Indonesia. Jakarta: Penerbit Dharma Bhakti.
Sasmedi, Darwis. 2004. Improving the Students‘ Ability to Speak
English Using Their Own Pictures Through Pair Work.
Unpublished Theses. Makassar. Graduate Program of
UNM.
Saville-Troike, M. 2006. Introducing second language
acquisition. UK.: Cambridge University Press.
Schubert, W.H. 1986. Curriculum: Perspective, Paradigm, and
Possibility. New York: Macmillan.
Sheldon, L.E. 1988. Evaluating ELT textbooks and materials.
ELT Journal 42, 2: 237–246. [11].
Singh, Y. 2006. Fundamental of Research Methodology and
Statistics. New Delhi: New Age International (P) Ltd.,
Publishers.

151

Skowron, Janice. 2006. Powerful Lesson Planning: Every
Teachers Guide to Effective Instruction. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Corwin Press.
SLO. 2009. Curriculum in development. Netherlands Institute for
Curriculum Development (SLO), Enschede, the
Netherlands.
Snow, C. 1997. The myths around bilingual education. NABE
News, 21 (4), 197-200.
Soriano, F. I., & University of Michigan. School of Social Work.
1995. Conducting needs assessments: A multidisciplinary
approach. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Soto, L. D. 1991. Research in review: Understanding
bilingual/bicultural young students. Young Students, 46
(2), 30-36.
Steenbrink, A, Karel. 1994. Pesantren Madrasah Sekolah.
Jakarta: LP3ES. h. 20.
Stevens & Olivárez, A. 2005. Development and evaluation of the
Mathematics Interest Inventory. Measurement and
Evaluation in Counseling and Development, (online), 38,
141-152. (http://www.Usao.Edu/-fachsaferi/ team
th
teaching.Html. Accessed on 5 August 2014).
Strickland, B. (ed.). 2001. Gale encyclopedia of psychology.
Second edition. Farmington Hills: Gale Group. p. 56.
Sugiyono, 2013, Metode Penelitian Kombinasi (Mixed Method).
Bandung. Penerbit Alfabeta.

152

Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. 1985. Evaluating bilingual education: A
Canadian case study. Clivedon, England: Multilingual
Matters.
Swain, Merrill. 1996. Discovering successful Second Language
teaching strategies and practices: From program
evaluation to classroom experimentation. Journal of
Multilingual and Multicultural Development 17; 89-104.
Tabors, P. T. 1997. One child, two languages. Baltimore, MD:
Paul Brookes Publishing Company.
Tantri. 2013. English as a Global Language Phenomenon and the
Need of Cultural Conceptualizations Awareness in
Indonesian ELT. International Refereed & Indexed
Journal of English Language & Translation Studies.
ISSN: 2308-5460 April-June, 2013, pp 37-49.
Tay, M, WJ. 1988. Teaching Spoken English in the non-native
context: considerations for the material writer. In B. K.
Das (Ed). Materials for Language Learning an Teaching.
Anthology Series, 22. Singapore: SEAMEO Regional
Language Centre, pp.30-40.
Tokuhama-Espinosa, Tracey. 2008. Living languages:
multilingualism across the lifespan. Westport: Praeger
Publishers, Library of Congress Catalog Card
Number: 2007036497.
Tomlinson, B. (ed.). 1998. Material Development in Language
Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tomlinson, B. (ed.). 2003. Developing materials for language
teaching. London: Continuum.

153

Umezaki, S., 2012. ―Building the ASEAN Economic
Community: Challenges and Opportunities for Myanmar.‖
In Economic Reforms in Myanmar: Pathways and
Prospects, edited by Hank Lim and Yasuhiro Yamada,
BRC Research Report No.10, Bangkok Research Center,
IDE-JETRO, Bangkok, Thailand.
Un.org, 2013. ‗Many languages, one world‘: UN launches
essay contest to celebrate multilingualism. (Online)
accessed on June, 11, 2014 from
one-world-un-launches-essay-contest-to-celebrate-
multilingualism.
Unruh, G.G. dan Unruh, A. 1984. Curriculum Development:
Problems, Processes, and Progress. Berkeley,
California: McCutchan Publishing Corporation.
Ur, P. 1996. A Course in Language Teaching: Practice and
Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Van Bruinessen. 1994. Pesantren and Kitab Kuning: Continuity
and Change in a Tradition of Religious Learning', in:
Wolfgang Marschall (ed.), Texts from the islands: Oral
and written traditions of Indonesia and the Malay world
[Ethnologica Bernensia, 4], Berne: The University of
Berne Institute of Ethnology, 1994, pp. 121-146.
Van de Craen, Piet, Katja Lochtman, Katrien Mondt & Evy
Ceuleers. 2006. The contributions of multilingual
language pedagogy to linguistic theory. Paper delivered at
the conference on Multilingualism & Applied
Comparative Linguistics, Vrije Universiteit Brussel.

154

Vildomec, V. 1963. Multilingualism. Leyden: A.W. Sythoff.
Walgito. B. 2003. Psikologi Sosial Suatu Pengantar. Yokyakarta:
Andi
Weatherford, H. Jerold. 1986. Personal Benefits from Foreign
Language Study. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse
on Languages and Linguistics. [ERIC Digest, EDRS 276
305].
West, R. 1997. Needs analysis: state of the art. In R. Howard &
G. Brown (Eds.), Teacher education for language for
specific purposes (pp. 68-79). Clevedon: Multilingual
Matters LTD.
Widowati, Tutut, Rini Budiharti, Elvin Yusliana Ekawati.
2013. Evaluasi Proses Pembelajaran Fisika di Kelas X
RSBI SMA N 3 Surakarta. Online; Accessed on
December 12, 2014 from
Wiles, J. & Bondi, J. 1989. Curriculum Development. Colombus,
Ohio: Merill.
Witkin, B. R., & Altschuld, J. W. 1995. Planning and conducting
needs assessments: A practical guide. Thousand Oaks:
Sage Publications.
Wolff, Dieter. 2006. Bilingualism and foreign language
learning: Some reflections on a neglected topic.
Paper delivered at the XVIIIth International
Conference on Foreign/Second Language
Acquisition, Szczyrk.
Yalden, J. 1987. Principles of Course Design for Language
Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Yasmadi. 2002. Modernisasi Pesantren. Jakarta: Ciputat Press.

155

Yelland, Gregory W., Jacinta Pollard & Anthony Mercuri. 1993.
The metalinguistic benefits of limited contact with a
second language. Applied Psycholinguistics 14: 423-44.
York, S. 2003. Roots and Wings. Affirming Culture in Early
Childhood Programs (Revised. ed). St. Paul, MN:
Redleaf Press.
Yungzhong, L. 1985. Writing versus speech in foreign language
teaching. Wai Guo Yu. 3(37): 12-15.
Zakaria. 2010. Pondok Pesantren: Changes and Its Future.
Journal of Islamic and Arabic Education, 2.(2). 2010. 45-
52.
Zhaohong, H, and Odlin (Eds.). 2004. Studies of Fossilization
in Second Language Acquisition. Clevedon:
Multilingual Matters Ltd and MPG Books Ltd.

156

NOTES ON AUTHOR
Saidna Zulfiqar Bin Tahir is a
lecturer of English Education
Department of the University of
Iqra Buru Indonesia. He is a
doctoral candidate in English
Education Program from the State
University of Makassar and
attended doctoral short course
program at Northern Illinois University, USA. His areas
of interest and research include teaching media, TEFL,
Arabic and Linguistics, and Multilingual Education. He is
the author, reviewer and editor of more than 11
international journals, including of American Journal of
Educational Research, International Journal of Language
Teaching Research, International Journal of Language and
Applied Linguistics, International Journal of Language and
Linguistics, English Language Teaching, English Language
and Literature Studies, International Journal of Applied
Linguistics and Translation, editor member of
Communication and Linguistics Studies, and editor of
International Journal of Language and Linguistics. His
book publications include Cara Praktis Belajar Bahasa
Arab-At-Taysiir Fi Ta’liim al-Lughah Al-Arabiyah
(Pustaka Qalam, 2008), A Stepping Stone toward
Mastering English Grammar (Pustaka Qalam, 2010),
Teaching English as World Language (Pustaka Qalam,
2012), Teaching Speaking (English) through Yahoo
Messenger (Pustaka Qalam, 2013), and Obat Penawar
Galau-Painkillers of Confusion (Pustaka Qalam, 2014). His
article publications include English Teaching Method at
Pesantren IMMIM in Makassar (Jupiter Journal, 2010),
Humor in “Bukan 4 Mata” Talk Show (Jupiter Journal,
2011), Improving Students’ Writing Skill through
Facebook at University of Iqra Buru (ICT4LL Journal,
2014), Improving Students’ Speaking Skill through Yahoo
Messenger at University of Iqra Buru (International
Journal of Language and Linguistics, 2015), Students’
Speaking Skill through Voice Chat at University of Iqra
Buru (Journal of Modern Education Review, 2015),
Multilingual Behaviour of Pesantren IMMIM Students in
Makassar (Asian EFL Journal, 2015), The Attitude of
Santri and Ustadz Toward Multilingual Education at
Pesantren (International Journal of Language and
Linguistics, 2015), and Multilingual Teaching and
Learning at Pesantren (Asian EFL Journal).

172
References (186)
Abbot, Barbarra. 1999. The Formal Approach to Meaning, Semantics and its recent Developments. Journal of Foreign Languages.
Ajzen, I. 2002. Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, vol. 32, no. 4, p. 683.
A'la, Abdul, 2006. Pembaruan Pesantren (Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pesantren).
Allen, Harold B. Ed. tt. Teaching English as a second. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.
Allwright, R.L. 1981. What do we want teaching materials for? ELT Journal 36, 1: 5-18.
Andrade, Carolyn, Richard R. Kretschmer Jr. & Laura W. Kretschmer. 1989. Two Languages for All Children: Expanding to Low Achievers and the Handicapped. In Müller, Kurt E. (Ed.)Languages in the Elementary Schools. New York: The American Forum for Global Education, 177-203.
Arikunto, Suharsimi. 2006. Prosedur Penelitian. Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.
Armstrong, Penelope W. & Jerry D. Rogers. 1997. Basic Skills Revisited: The Effects of Foreign Language Instruction on Reading, Math and Language Arts. Learning Languages 2/3: 20-31.
Aronin, L. & O Laoire, M. 2004. Exploring multilingualism in cultural contexts: Towards a notion of multilinguality. In Trilingualism in Family, School and Community, C. Hoffmann & J. Ytsma (eds), 11-29. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Athanasopoulos, Panos. 2001. L2 acquisition and bilingual conceptual structure. Unpublished MA thesis, University of Essex.
Azyumardi Azra, ‖Surau di Tengah Krisis: Pesantern dalam Perspektif Masyarakat‖,dalam Pergulatan Dunia Pesantern: Membangun dari Bawah (Jakarta: P3M, 1985).
Baetens-Beardsmore, H. 1995. The European school experience in multilingual education. In Multilingualism for All, T. Skuttnab-Kangas (ed.), 21-68. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Bao Dat. 2003. Materials for Developing Speaking Skills. In Tomlinson, B (Ed.). Developing Materials for Language Teaching. London: Cromwell Press.
Bastian, Terry R. 1980. An investigation into the effects of second language learning on achievement in English. English Language Arts Skills in Instruction. Urbana: Clearinghouse on Reading and Communication Skills, 1979. ERIC ED 189 646. DA, 40, 12-A, Pt 1. Boise, ID: University of Idaho, 6176-7.
Basturk and Gulmez. 2011. Multilingual Learning Environment In French and German Language Teaching Departments. TOJNED: The Online Journal of New Horizons in Education -January 2011, Volume 1, Issue 2. 2011.
Ben Zeev, Sandra. 1977. The influence of bilingualism on cognitive strategies and cognitive development. Child Development 48/3: 1009-18.
Berger, K, S. 2006. The developing person. Through childhood and adolescence. (7 th ed.) New York: Worth.
Bialystok, Ellen. 1986. Children's concept of word. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 15/1: 13-32..
Bin Tahir, S. Z. 2011. English Teaching Method at Pesantren IMMIM of Makassar. JUPITER Journal UPT Lib of University of Hasanuddin. Vol IX No. 1. November tahun 2011. No. ISSN: 1693-5535.
Bin Tahir, S. Z. 2013. Pengajaran Bahasa Inggris -Teaching English as World Language. ISBN.978-602-97144-9-4, Jakarta: Penerbit Media Pustaka Qalam.
Bin Tahir, S. Z. 2015. The Attitude of Santri and Ustadz toward Multilingual Education at Pesantren. International Journal of Language and Linguistics. Vol. 3, No. 4, 2015, pp. 210-216. doi: 10.11648/j.ijll.20150304.13.
Bin Tahir, S. Z. 2015. Multilingual Behavior of Pesantren IMMIM Students in Makassar. The Asian EFL Journal/ Professional Teaching Articles/ August 2015, Issue 86. Pp. 45-64.
Bloomfield, L. 1933. Language. New York NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Borg, W. R. & Gall, M.D. 1983. Educational research: An introduction (4th ed.). New Yorg: Longman.
Borg, W.R. & Gall, M.D., Gall, J.P. 1989. Educational research: An introduction, (5th Ed.). Boston-USA: Allyn and Abcon.
Bourlard, John Dines, Mathew Magimai-Doss, Philip Garner, David Imseng, Petr Motlicek, Hui Liang, Lakshmi Saheer and Fabio Valente. 2011. Current trends in multilingual speech processing. Journal Sadhana. Vol. 36, Part 5, October 2011, pp. 885-915. c Indian Academy of Sciences.
Bourlard. H, John. D, Mathew. M, Garner. P, Imseng. D, Motlicek, Hui Liang, Saheer, and Valente. 2011. Current trends in multilingual speech processing. Sadhana Journal, Indian Academy of Sciences, Vol. 36, Part 5, October 2011, pp. 885-915.)
Breen, M. P. 1984. Process syllabuses for the language classroom, in C.J. Brumfit (Ed.). General English Syllabus Design, Curriculum and Syllabus Design for the General English Classroom. ELT document 118. Oxford: Pergamon Press and British Council.
Breidbach, Stephan and Viebrock, Britta. 2012. CLIL in Germany: Results from Recent Research in a Contested Field of Education. International CLIL Research Journal. Volume 1 (4): 6-16.
Brown, G and Yule, G. 1983. Teaching the Spoken language; An Approach based on the analysis of conversation English. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, J. D. 1996. The elements of language curriculum: A systematic approach to program development. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publisher.
Bruck, Margaret, Wallace E. Lambert & Richard Tucker. 1974. Bilingual Schooling through the Elementary Grades: the St. Lambert Project at Grade Seven. Language Learning 24/2: 183-204.
Bullock, B.E. and Toribio, A.J. (eds). 2009. The Cambridge Handbook of Linguistic Codeswitching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Burridge, K. 2010. Linguistic cleanliness is next to godliness: Taboo and purism. English Today 26 (2), 3_13.
Bygate, M. 1987. Speaking. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Byram, Michael. 1997. Teaching and Assessing Intercultural Communicative Competence. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
_____ . 2012. Language awareness and (critical) cultural awareness-relationships, comparisons and contrasts. Language Awareness 21(1-2): 5-13.
Campbell, William J. 1962. Some effects of teaching foreign language in the elementary schools. NY Hicksville Public Schools: Dec. [ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 013 022].
Carpenter, John A. & Judith V. Torney. 1974. Beyond the Melting Pot. In Markun, Patricia Maloney (Ed.) Childhood and Intercultural Education: Overview and Research. Washington DC: Association for Childhood Education International.
Cazden, C. B. 1990. Cultural capital in the preschool: Teacher education for language and literacy. Presentation at the annual meeting of the National Association of Early Childhood Teacher Educators. Washington, DC.
Cenoz, J. & Genesee F. (eds). 1998. Beyond Bilingualism: Multilingualism and Multilingual Education. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Cenoz, J. 2000. Research on multilingual acquisition. In English in Europe: The Acquisition of a Third Language, J. Cenoz & U. Jessner (eds), 39-53. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Cenoz, J. 2009. Towards Multilingual Education: Basque Educational Research in International Perspective. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Cenoz, J., & Gorter, D. 2011. A holistic approach to multilingual education: Introduction. The Modern Language Journal, 95(3), 339-343.
Clarke, D.F. 1989. Materials adaptation: Why leave it all to the teacher? ELT Journal 43, 2: 133-141.
Cohen, L, Lawrence Manion and Keith Morrison. 2007. Research Methods in Education. Sixth edition. New York: Routledge.
Cook, Vivian J. 1999. Going beyond the native speaker in language teaching. TESOL Quarterly33/2: 185-209.
Cook, Vivian J. 2001. Requirements for a multilingual model of language production. (Online) Accesed on 23 December 2014 from homepage.ntlworld.com/vivian.c/Writings/Papers /RequirementsForMultilingualModel.htm.
Creswell, W. John. 2008. Educational Research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Third Edition. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Cruz-Ferreira, M. (ed.). 2010. Multilingual Norms. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Crystal, David. 2000. Language Death. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cummins, James P. 1981. The Role of Primary Language Development in Promoting Educational Success for Language Minority Students. In Leyba, F. C. (Ed.) Schooling and Language Minority Students: A Theoretical Framework. Los Angeles, CA: Evaluation, Dissemination, and Assessment Center, California State University, 3-49.
Cummins, James P. 1981. The Role of Primary Language Development in Promoting Educational Success for Language Minority Students. In Leyba, F. C. (Ed.) Schooling and Language Minority Students: A Theoretical Framework. Los Angeles, CA: Evaluation, Dissemination, and Assessment Center, California State University, 3-49.
Cunningsworth, A. 1995. Choosing your Course book. Oxford: Heinemann.
Curtain, Helena & Carol Ann Dahlberg. 2004. Languages and Children: Making the Match: New Languages for Young Learners, Grades K-8 [3rd Ed.] New York: Longman.
Daniela Elsner. 2011. Developing Multiliteracies, Plurilingual Awareness and Critical Thinking in the Primary Language Classroom with Multilingual Virtual Talkingbooks. Online Journal Encuentro. 20, 2011, ISSN 1989-0796, pp. 27-38.
Daulay, H, Putra. 2009. Sejarah Pertumbuhan dan Pembaruan Pendidikan Islam di Indonesia. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group.
Debin, F., and Olshtain, E. 1986. Course Design: Developing Programs and Materials for Language Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
DeGaetano, Y., Williams, L, & Volk, D. 1998. Kaleidoscope: A multicultural approach for the primary school classroom. Upper Saddle-River, NJ: Pearson.
DeMaria. 2003. College Students Interesting Their Major. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, (Online journal), (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/miMOFCR/ Accessed on May 1, 2014).
Depag: Bagian Perencanaan dan Data Setditjen Pendidikan Islam Departemen Agama R.I. 2014. Daftar Jumlah Pesantren, Santri dan Kyai 2010. (Online) Accesed on March, 11, 2015 from http://pendis.kemenag.go.id/file/dokumen/.
Depag: Direktori Pondok Pesantren, 2014. Data statistik jumlah Pondok Pesantren di seluruh Indonesia. (Online) Accesed on March, 11, 2015 from http://pendis.kemenag.go.id/file/dokumen/.
Diaz R, Klingler. 1991. Towards an explanatory model of the interaction between bilingualism and cognitive development. In: Bialystok E, editor. Language processing in bilingual students. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1991. pp. 167-192.
Diaz, Rafael M. 1983. The impact of second-language learning on the development of verbal and spatial abilities. DA, 43, 04-B. New Haven, CT: Yale University, 1235.
Diebold, A. R. 1961. Incipient bilingualism. Language Journal 37: 97-112.
Dorota Szczesniak. 2013. Developing Multilingual Competence in Academia: Teaching German as L3 to Polish Students of English Department. Online Journal EXEDRA; Educacao e Formacao Axedra Revista Cientifica ESEC Número 7 de 2013.
Dumas, Lynne S. 1999. Learning a second language: Exposing your child to a new world of words boosts her brainpower, vocabulary and self-esteem. Child: 72, 74, 76-7.
Edwards, J. 1994. Multilingualism. London: Routledge.
Engku, I & Zubaidah, S. 2014. Sejarah Pendidikan Islami. Bandung; PT Remaja Rosdakarya.
Ewert, Anna. 2006. Do they have different L1s? Bilinguals' and monolinguals' grammaticality judgements. Paper delivered at the 9th Nordic Conference on Bilingualism, Joensuu.
Farrant, J. S. 1980. Principles and Practice of Education. Harare: Longman Zimbabwe.
Galambos, Sylvia Joseph and Susan Goldin-Meadow. 1990. The effects of learning two languages on metalinguistic awareness. Cognition 34/1: 1-56.
Garfinkel, Alan & Kenneth E. Tabor. 1991. Elementary school foreign languages and English reading achievement: A new view of the relationship. Foreign Language Annals 24/5: 375-82.
Gay, L. R, Mills, G, and Airasian, P. 2006. Educational Research; Competencies for Analysis and Applications. Eight Edition. New Jersey; Pearson Prentice Hall.
Genesee, F. 1998. A case study of multilingual education in Canada. In Beyond Bilingualism: Multilingualism and multilingual education, J. Cenoz & F. Genesee (eds), 243-258. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Genesee, F. 2001. Brain research: Implications for second language learning. The ACIE Newsletter, 5 (1).
Glatthorn, A. 1987. Curriculum Leadership. Glenview, Illinois: Scott, Foresman.
Graves, K. 2000. Designing Language Courses: A Guide for Teachers. Boston: Heinle and Heinle.
Grosjean, François. 1989. Neurolinguists, beware! The bilingual is not two monolinguals in one person. Brain and Language 36: 3-15.
Gumper, J. John and Hymes, 1972. Dell, Direction in Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of Communication, New York, Holt, Rinehart, and Wingston. Inc.
Halliday, M, A, K. 1989. Spoken and Written Language. Second edition. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hanidah, S. 2009. The Speech Styles Used By Multilingual Speakers in Pesantren Putri Al-Mawaddah Ponorogo. (Online) Accesed on December, 12, 2014 from http://lib.uinmalang.ac.id/?mod=th_detail&id=053 20108.
Harmers, John. 1991. The Practice of English Language Teaching. London: Longman.
Hary, B. H. 1992. Multiglossia in Judeo-Arabic: With an Edition, Translation and Grammatical Study of the Cairene Purim Scroll. Leiden: BRILL.
Haryana, K. 2007. Sekolah Bertaraf Internasional. Jurnal Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan, 13 (II), 152-175.
Haugen, E. 1953. The Norwegian Language in America: A study in Bilingual Behaviour. Philadelphia PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Heaton, J.B. 1988. Writing English Language Test. London: Longman.
Herdina, P. & Jessner, U. 2002. A Dynamic Model of Multilingualism: Perspectives of Change in Psycholinguistics. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
Herdina, Phillip; Jessner, Ulrike. 2000. The dynamics of third language acquisition‖. In: Cenoz, Jasone; Jessner, Ulrike (eds.) English in Europe. The Acquisition of a Third Language. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters 84-98.
Hidi & Renninger, K. 2006. The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, (online), 41, 111-127.
Hidi. 2001. Interest, reading, and learning: Theoretical and practical considerations. Educational Psychology Review, (online), 13(3), 191-209. (http://jlls.org/Issues/Volume1/No.2/nazligundu z.pdf, Accessed on 16, accessed on June, 10, 2014). learning in elementary schools. Modern Language Journal 47: 8-11.
Johnson, D. M. 1992. Approaches to Research in Second Language Learning. New York: Longman Publishing Group.
Jordan, R. R. 1997. English for academic purposes: A guide and resource book for teachers. Cambridge England ; New York: Cambridge University Press.
Jos Hornikx, Frank van Meurs and Marianne Starren. 2007. An Empirical Study of Readers' Associations with Multilingual Advertising: The Case of French, German and Spanish in Dutch Advertising. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development. Vol. 28, no. 3, 2007. 0143-4632/07/03 204-16.
Kathory, C. R. 2004. Research Methodology: Method and Technique, Second Revised Edition. New Delhi: New Age International (P) Ltd., Publishers.
Kaye, A. S. 1994. Formal vs. informal in Arabic: Diglossia, triglossia, tetraglossia, etc., polyglossia-multiglossia viewed as a continuum. Zeitschrift fur arabische Linguistik 27: 47-66.
Kemp, C. 2009. Defining multilingualism. In L. Aronin & B. Hufeisen (Eds.), The exploration of multilingualism. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins. (pp. 11- 26).
Krahnke, Karl. 1987. Approaches to Syllabus Design for Foreign Language Teaching. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.
Krapp. 1989. Interest, learning, and academic achievement. In P. Nenniger (Chair.), Task motivation by interest, Symposium conducted at the meeting of the Third European Conference of Learning and Instruction (EARLI), (online): Madrid, Spain. (http://jlls.org/Issues/Volume1/No.2/nazligundu z.pdf, Accessed on 16, 10, 2014).
Labov, W. 1972. Some principles of linguistic methodology. Language in Society 1 (1), 97_120.
Lado, Robert. 1964. Language Teaching. A Scientific Approach. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Lam, Wan Shun Eva and Rosario-Ramos, Enid. 2009. Multilingual illiteracies in transnational digitally mediated contexts: an exploratory study of immigrant teens in the United States', Journal of Language and Education, 23:2,171 -190.
Le Page, R. B. 1998. You can never tell where a word comes from: Language contact in a diffuse setting. In The Sociolinguistics Reader, Vol. 1: Multilingualism and Variation, P. Trudgill & J. Cheshire (eds), 66-89. London: Arnold.
Li Wei and Moyer (Eds). 2008. The Blackwell Guide to Research Methods in Bilingualism and Multilingualism. Victoria: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Lukens-Bull. 2000. Teaching Morality: Javanese Islamic Education in a Globalizing Era. Journal of Arabic and Islamic Studies. Vol. 3 (2000).
Mackey, W. F. 1962. The description of bilingualism. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 7: 51-85. (Also in The Bilingualism Reader, Li Wei (ed), 26-56. London: Routledge).
Madjid, N. 2013. Bilik-Bilik Pesantren; Sebuah Potret Perjalanan. Jakarta: Penerbit Dian Rakyat.
Malone, S. 2005. Education for Multilingualism and Multi- literacy in Ethnic Minority Communities: the situation in Asia. In First Language First: Community-based literacy programmes for minority language context in Asia. Bangkok: UNESCO, pp.71-86.
Malone, S. 2009. Planning mother tongue-based education programs in minority language communities. SIL International. ABD (Asian/Pacific Book Development). Vol. 34 no. 2.
Mariati. L. 2007. Menyoal Profil Sekolah Bertaraf Internasional. Jurnal Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan, 13 (067), 566-597.
Martí, Felix, et.al. eds. 2005. Words and Worlds: World Languages Review. Vol. 52. Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. Clevedon England; Buffalo N.Y: Multilingual Matters.
McArthur, T. (ed). 1992. The Oxford Companion to the English Language. Oxford: OUP.
Melor, Yunus & Hadi Salehi. 2012. The Effectiveness of Facebook Groups on Teaching and Improving Writing: Students' Perceptions. International Journal of Education and Information Technologies, Issue 1, Volume 6, 2012. Pp. 87-96.
Met, M. 1993. Foreign language immersion programs. ERIC Digest. ED363141.
Miles, M. B. and Huberman, A. M. 1994. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. London: Sage.
Milroy, Lesley. 1998. Observing and Analyzing Natural Language, t.t., Georgetown University.
Mitchell. 1993. Situational interest: Its multifaceted structure in the secondary school mathematics classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 424- 436.(http://jlls.org/Issues/Volume1/No.2/ nazligun duz.pdf, Accesed on 16, 10, 2014).
Moughamian, C, Rivera. M, Francis, D. 2009. Instructional Models and Strategies for Teaching English Language Learners. The Center on Instruction at RMC Research Corporation
Muijs, D. 2004. Doing Quantitative Research in Education with SPSS. London: SAGE Publications Inc.
Munby, J. 1978. Communicative syllabus design: A sociolinguistic model for defining the content of purpose- specific language programmes. Cambridge, Eng.; New York: Cambridge University Press.
Nata, A. 2003. Pemikiran Para Tokoh Pemikiran Pendidikan Islam Seri Filsafat Pendidikan Islam. Cetakan ke-3. Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persasada, h, 206. Nation and John Macalister. 2010. Language curriculum design. New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Publisher.
Nichols, B., Shidaker, Gene Johnson & Kevin Singer. 2006. Managing curriculum and assessment: a practitioner's guide. Worthington, Ohio: Linworth Publishing, Inc.
Nieto, S. 2004. Affirming diversity. The sociopolitical context of multicultural education (4th ed.), Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Nizar, S. 2013. Sejarah Sosial dan Dinamika Intelektual Pendidikan Islam di Nusantara. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group.
Nugrahenny T. Zacharias. 2012. EFL Students' Understanding of Their Multilingual English Identities. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 2012, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 233-244.
Null, W. 2011. Curriculum: from theory to practice. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
Nunan, D. 1989. Syllabus Design. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Olivia, P.F. 1997. 4th Developing the Curriculum edition. New York: Longman
Oxford, R. L. 2002. Sources of variation in language learning. In R. B. Kaplan (ed.), The Oxfor handbook of applied linguistics (3rd edn). New York: Oxford University Press, 245-252.
Paradowski, M.B. 2015. The benefits of multilingualism. To have another language is to possess a second soul. Accessed on October, 2015 from http://www.multilingualliving.com/2010/05/01/t he- benefits-of-multilingualism/ 2015.
Portes, A., & Rumbaut, R. G. 2001. The story of the immigrant second generation. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Prabhu, N.S. 1987. Second Language Pedagogy. Oxford: OUP.
Prabhu, N.S. 1989. Materials as support: Materials as constraint. Guidelines 11, 1: 66-74.
Prem P. Poudel. 2010. Teaching English in Multilingual Classrooms of Higher Education: The Present Scenario. Online Journal of NELTA. Vol. 15 No. 1-2 December 2010.
Print, M. 1993. Curriculum Development and Design. Second Edition. Sydney: Allen & Unwin Pty Ltd.
Rhohmatillah, S. 2013. The use of code mixing used by male and female students of Ar-Raudlatul Hasanah Islamic Boarding School Medan. (Online) Access on December, 12, 2014 from http://digilib.unimed.ac.id/public/UNIMED-29258- 8116111017%20.
Richards, J. C. 2001. Curriculum development in language teaching. Cambridge, U.K.; New York: Cambridge University Press.
Richterich, R., & Chancerel, J.-L. 1980. Identifying the needs of adults learning a foreign language. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Riduwan & Akdon. 2009. Rumus dan Data dalam Analisis Statistik. Bandung. Alfabeta.
Ringbom, Håkan. 2001. Lexical transfer in L3 production. In: Cenoz, Jason; Hufeisen, Britta; Jessner, Ulrike (eds.). Cross-linguistic Influence in Third Language Acquisition: Psychological Perspectives. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters; 59-68.
Robertson, C & Acklam, R. 2000. Action Plan for Teachers. London WC2B 4PH: British Broadcasting Corporation, 2000.
Rodgers, T. 1984. Communicative syllabus design and implementation: Reflection on a decade of experience. In J. Read (ed.), Trends in Language syllabus design. Singapore: Regional Language Center (RELC). 28-53.
Sabes and Acls. 2008. Lesson Planning Resource Guide; Developed by SABES and ACLS. (Online) Accessed on December, 12, 2014 from http://www.sabes.org.
Salsbury, D and Schoenfeldt, M. 2008. Lesson Planning: A Research-Based Model for K-12 Classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Prentice Hall.
Saridjo, M, et al. 1982. Sejarah Pendidikan Pesantren di Indonesia. Jakarta: Penerbit Dharma Bhakti.
Sasmedi, Darwis. 2004. Improving the Students' Ability to Speak English Using Their Own Pictures Through Pair Work. Unpublished Theses. Makassar. Graduate Program of UNM. Saville-Troike, M. 2006. Introducing second language acquisition. UK.: Cambridge University Press.
Schubert, W.H. 1986. Curriculum: Perspective, Paradigm, and Possibility. New York: Macmillan.
Sheldon, L.E. 1988. Evaluating ELT textbooks and materials. ELT Journal 42, 2: 237-246. [11].
Singh, Y. 2006. Fundamental of Research Methodology and Statistics. New Delhi: New Age International (P) Ltd., Publishers.
Skowron, Janice. 2006. Powerful Lesson Planning: Every Teachers Guide to Effective Instruction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
SLO. 2009. Curriculum in development. Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development (SLO), Enschede, the Netherlands.
Snow, C. 1997. The myths around bilingual education. NABE News, 21 (4), 197-200.
Soriano, F. I., & University of Michigan. School of Social Work. 1995. Conducting needs assessments: A multidisciplinary approach. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Soto, L. D. 1991. Research in review: Understanding bilingual/bicultural young students. Young Students, 46 (2), 30-36.
Steenbrink, A, Karel. 1994. Pesantren Madrasah Sekolah. Jakarta: LP3ES. h. 20.
Stevens & Olivárez, A. 2005. Development and evaluation of the Mathematics Interest Inventory. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, (online), 38, 141-152. (http://www.Usao.Edu/-fachsaferi/ team teaching.Html. Accessed on 5 th August 2014).
Strickland, B. (ed.). 2001. Gale encyclopedia of psychology. Second edition. Farmington Hills: Gale Group. p. 56.
Sugiyono, 2013, Metode Penelitian Kombinasi (Mixed Method). Bandung. Penerbit Alfabeta.
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. 1985. Evaluating bilingual education: A Canadian case study. Clivedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
Swain, Merrill. 1996. Discovering successful Second Language teaching strategies and practices: From program evaluation to classroom experimentation. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 17; 89-104.
Tabors, P. T. 1997. One child, two languages. Baltimore, MD: Paul Brookes Publishing Company.
Tantri. 2013. English as a Global Language Phenomenon and the Need of Cultural Conceptualizations Awareness in Indonesian ELT. International Refereed & Indexed Journal of English Language & Translation Studies. ISSN: 2308-5460 April-June, 2013, pp 37-49.
Tay, M, WJ. 1988. Teaching Spoken English in the non-native context: considerations for the material writer. In B. K. Das (Ed). Materials for Language Learning an Teaching. Anthology Series, 22. Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre, pp.30-40.
Tokuhama-Espinosa, Tracey. 2008. Living languages: multilingualism across the lifespan. Westport: Praeger Publishers, Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 2007036497.
Tomlinson, B. (ed.). 1998. Material Development in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tomlinson, B. (ed.). 2003. Developing materials for language teaching. London: Continuum.
Umezaki, S., 2012. -Building the ASEAN Economic Community: Challenges and Opportunities for Myanmar.‖ In Economic Reforms in Myanmar: Pathways and Prospects, edited by Hank Lim and Yasuhiro Yamada, BRC Research Report No.10, Bangkok Research Center, IDE-JETRO, Bangkok, Thailand.
Un.org, 2013. ‗Many languages, one world': UN launches essay contest to celebrate multilingualism. (Online) accessed on June, 11, 2014 from http://www.un.org/youthenvoy/2013/10/many-languages- one-world-un-launches-essay-contest-to-celebrate- multilingualism.
Unruh, G.G. dan Unruh, A. 1984. Curriculum Development: Problems, Processes, and Progress. Berkeley, California: McCutchan Publishing Corporation.
Ur, P. 1996. A Course in Language Teaching: Practice and Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Van Bruinessen. 1994. Pesantren and Kitab Kuning: Continuity and Change in a Tradition of Religious Learning', in: Wolfgang Marschall (ed.), Texts from the islands: Oral and written traditions of Indonesia and the Malay world [Ethnologica Bernensia, 4], Berne: The University of Berne Institute of Ethnology, 1994, pp. 121-146.
Van de Craen, Piet, Katja Lochtman, Katrien Mondt & Evy Ceuleers. 2006. The contributions of multilingual language pedagogy to linguistic theory. Paper delivered at the conference on Multilingualism & Applied Comparative Linguistics, Vrije Universiteit Brussel.
Vildomec, V. 1963. Multilingualism. Leyden: A.W. Sythoff.
Walgito. B. 2003. Psikologi Sosial Suatu Pengantar. Yokyakarta: Andi Weatherford, H. Jerold. 1986. Personal Benefits from Foreign Language Study. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics. [ERIC Digest, EDRS 276 305].
West, R. 1997. Needs analysis: state of the art. In R. Howard & G. Brown (Eds.), Teacher education for language for specific purposes (pp. 68-79). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters LTD.
Widowati, Tutut, Rini Budiharti, Elvin Yusliana Ekawati. 2013. Evaluasi Proses Pembelajaran Fisika di Kelas X RSBI SMA N 3 Surakarta. Online; Accessed on December 12, 2014 from http://download.portalgaruda.org/article.php.
Wiles, J. & Bondi, J. 1989. Curriculum Development. Colombus, Ohio: Merill.
Witkin, B. R., & Altschuld, J. W. 1995. Planning and conducting needs assessments: A practical guide. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Wolff, Dieter. 2006. Bilingualism and foreign language learning: Some reflections on a neglected topic. Paper delivered at the XVIIIth International Conference on Foreign/Second Language Acquisition, Szczyrk.
Yalden, J. 1987. Principles of Course Design for Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Yasmadi. 2002. Modernisasi Pesantren. Jakarta: Ciputat Press.
Yelland, Gregory W., Jacinta Pollard & Anthony Mercuri. 1993. The metalinguistic benefits of limited contact with a second language. Applied Psycholinguistics 14: 423-44.
York, S. 2003. Roots and Wings. Affirming Culture in Early Childhood Programs (Revised. ed). St. Paul, MN: Redleaf Press.
Yungzhong, L. 1985. Writing versus speech in foreign language teaching. Wai Guo Yu. 3(37): 12-15.
Zakaria. 2010. Pondok Pesantren: Changes and Its Future. Journal of Islamic and Arabic Education, 2.(2). 2010. 45- 52.
Zhaohong, H, and Odlin (Eds.). 2004. Studies of Fossilization in Second Language Acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd and MPG Books Ltd.
Saidna Zulfiqar Bin Tahir
University of Iqra Buru, Post-Doc
Saidna Zulfiqar Bin-Tahir is a lecturer at English Education Department of Universitas Iqra Buru, Indonesia. His areas of interest and research include teaching media, TEFL, Arabic and Linguistics, and Multilingual Education. He graduated from Al-Azhar University of Cairo in Arabic Language and Linguistics and graduated his master and doctoral degree from the State University of Makassar in English Education Department and got the short course at Northern Illinois University, USA. He has published some books and many articles in TEFL, ICT in language learning, and Multilingual teaching and learning. He had become a member of Asia TEFL, Asian EFL, International Forum of Researchers in Education (IFORE), and ADRi. He is a reviewer and editor in some local and international journals, and a head of the language center at the Universitas Iqra Buru, Indonesia.http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=6xerYvQAAAAJ
Papers
164
Followers
3,381
View all papers from
Saidna Zulfiqar Bin Tahir
arrow_forward
Related papers
Multilingual Teaching and Learning at Pesantren Schools in Indonesia_Saidna Zulfiqar Bin Tahir
Saidna Z Bin Tahir
Pesantren or Islamic boarding schools are the foundation of the indigenous education system of Indonesia. They have roots in a long-standing Hindu-Islamic tradition prioritizing the use of two foreign languages, Arabic and English, besides Indonesian and local languages, both as the medium of instruction in teaching/learning and in daily communication. Thus, this study aims to determine; 1) the approach of multilingual teaching and learning used by language teachers at pesantren; and 2) the implementation of a multilingual teaching approach at pesantren. From a larger study applying multi-method design, this article uses a qualitative descriptive approach. The subjects were a group of 15 language teachers, including 6 English teachers and 9 Arabic teachers at Pesantren IMMIM, Pondok Madinah, and Pesantren Darul Arqam Muhammadiyah Gombara in Makassar who were purposively selected to participate in this study. The instruments used to collect data for the study included observation, interview, and documentation of the language teaching process inside or outside the classroom at the pesantrens. The data were analyzed descriptively through a three-stage model, namely data display, data reduction and data verification/presentation. The researcher showed that; 1) the teachers were not conscious of the approach that they used in multilingual teaching at pesantrens, but the findings of observation show a combination of approaches were used including immersion, transitional approach, dual language, and pullout; 2) The implementation of multilingual teaching at pesantrens consisted of four main specific teaching strategies, namely teacher-student communication, student-student relationships, daily routines, and language-group time activities.
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
Multilingual Instructional Model of Pesantren Schools in Indonesia
Saidna Zulfiqar Bin Tahir
—The study investigated the multilingual instructional model of pesantren schools. It employed qualitative study by applying grounded theory. This study was conducted at the three of pesantren schools in the city of Makassar, Indonesia (Pesantren IMMIM, Pondok Madinah, and Pesantren Darul Arqam Muhammadiyah Gombara). The respondent of the current study were four non-native speakers of English, Arabic, and Mandarin teachers who have the ability to speak and to communicate in three or more languages. In collecting the data, the researchers employed three primary data collection techniques, they are observation, interview, and examining the record. The results found that the multilingual instructional model of pesantren schools applied simultaneous-sequential model with some phases to generate the students changed from monolingual to multilingualism and at the end, they become mono multilingualism.
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
Multilingual Material Development for Pesantren Students
Saidna Zulfiqar Bin Tahir
Indonesia is one country amongst the ASEAN members who has provided their students’ foreign language competence in the early of the students’ age or in the secondary school through the program called bilingual school or Rintisan Sekolah Bertaraf Internasional (RSBI) class. Unfortunately, the program has been unsuccessful due to unpreparedness of the school and also the lack of students-teachers competence in mastering English (Mariati, 2007: 566; Haryana, 2007: 152; Widowati et al, 2013). While there were many schools managed by the social foundation in Indonesia including Pesantrens. These schools do possess the students-teachers’ multilingual competence which is required by the Indonesian Government to implement the program successfully.
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
Language in education: The case of Indonesia
dimas hartono
International Review of Education, 1991
Although over 400 languages are spoken in Indonesia, by 1986 60% of the population had some competence in the Indonesian national language, a substantial increase over 1971. Bahasa Indonesia was declared the state language in the 1945 constitution, and reformed spelling was agreed in 1972. It is the sole medium of instruction, except in the first three grades of elementary school in nine regions, where vernaculars may be used transitionally. Thereafter vernaculars are taught as school subjects. Bilingualism, and even multilingualism in Indonesian and one or more vernaculars and/or foreign languages is increasing, and despite the use of Indonesian for official documentary purposes at all levels it does not appear that vernaculars are dying out, although their spheres of use are restricted. Bahasa Indonesia fulfils the four functions: cognitive, instrumental, integrative and cultural, while vernaculars are only integrative and cultural. The curriculum of Indonesian, established centrally, is pragmatic or communicative. It is expressed in a standard syllabus for course books. This approach equally applies to foreign languages, which are introduced at secondary level, although here receptive reading is given more weight than productive skills. A full description of the syllabus organization of the various languages is given. Nonformal language learning also takes place, in the national basic education and literacy programme, which teaches Bahasa Indonesia, and in vocational courses in foreign languages for commerce. Obwohl in Indonesien über 400 Sprachen gesprochen werden, beherrschten 1980 60% der Bevölkerung die indonesische Nationalsprache, wesentlich mehr als 1971. In der Verfassung von 1945 wurde Bahasa Indonesia zur Staatssprache erklärt, und 1972 einigte man sich auf eine reformierte Schreibweise. Es ist die einzige Unterrichtssprache mit Ausnahme der ersten drei Grundschuljahrgänge in neun Regionen, wo die Muttersprache übergangsweise benutzt werden darf. Danach werden Muttersprachen als Schulfach unterrichtet. Zweisprachigkeit oder sogar Mehrsprachigkeit sind in Indonesien auf dem Vormarsch, ebenso das Beherrschen einer oder mehrerer einheimischer Sprachen und/oder einer Fremdsprache, und obwohl Indonesisch auf allen Ebenen für offizielle dokumentarische Zwecke benutzt wird, scheinen die einheimischen Sprachen trotz ihres begrenzten Anwendungsgebietes nicht auszusterben. Bahasa Indonesia erfüllt die vier Funktionen: kognitiv, instrumental, integrativ und kulturell, während die Dialekte nur integrativ und kulturell sind. Das indonesische Curriculum, zentral festgelegt, ist pragmatisch oder kommunikativ. Es wird in Form eines Standardlehrplans als Grundlage für Lehrbücher genommen. Ähnlich zentral wird der ab Sekundarstufe gelehrte Fremdsprachenunterricht gelenkt, wobei mehr Wert auf rezeptives Lesen als auf produktive Fähigkeiten gelegt wird. Die Organisation der Lehrpläne für die verschiedenen Sprachen wird beschrieben. Auch das nicht formale Erlernen einer Sprache wird praktiziert, und zwar auf nationaler Grundschulebene und in Literaturprogrammen, die Bahasa Indonesia lehren, sowie in Handelsfremdsprachenkursen. Bien que 400 langues soient parlées en Indonésie, 60% de la population maîtrisaient la langue nationale indonésienne en 1980, ce qui représente une augmentation substantielle par rapport à 1971. Le bahasa indonesia a été déclaré langue de l'etat par la constitution de 1945, et une réforme de l'orthographe a été adoptée en 1972. C'est le seul médium d'instruction, excepté dans les trois premières classes de l'école élémentaire de neuf régions, où les langues vernaculaires peuvent être utilisées pour marquer la transition. Après cela celles-ci deviennent des matières d'étude. Le bilinguisme, voire même le multilinguisme en indonésien avec une ou plusieurs langues vernaculaires et/ou étrangères, prend de plus en plus d'importance, et, malgré l'emploi de l'indonésien à tous les niveaux dans les documents officiels, il ne semble pas que les langues vernaculaires soient en voie de disparition, bien que leurs sphères d'utilisation soient restreintes. Le bahasa indonesia remplit les fonctions cognitive, instrumentale, assimilatrice et culturelle, tandis que les langues vernaculaires ne remplissent que ces deux dernières. Le curriculum d'enseignement de l'indonésien est conçu centralement, il est pragmatique ou communicatif. Ses lignes directrices sont spécifiées dans un programme et dans un guide. On procède de la même manière pour les langues étrangères, qui sont introduites dans le secondaire, bien qu'on accorde ici plus d'importance à la lecture réceptive qu'aux compétences pratiques. L'organisation du programme d'enseignement des différentes langues est presentée en détail. Un enseignement non formel des langues est également proposé dans l'éducation de base nationale et par le programme d'alphabétisation, qui enseigne le bahasa indonesia, ainsi que dans les cours de langues étrangères dispensés dans le cadre de l'enseignement professionnel commercial.
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
Foreign language teachers' attitudes towards multilingual pedagogy in Indonesia: an explanatory sequential study
Gyöngyi Fábián
2021
Failasofah, F. Foreign language teachers' attitudes towards multilingual pedagogy in Indonesia: an explanatory sequential study. Supervisor: Dr. Habil Fábián Gyöngyi In a multilingual classroom, teachers play an essential role in encouraging and fostering multilingual behavior as their actions can considerably influence their students. Teachers' attitudes to educational policy and teaching are such a strong predictor that will undoubtedly affect their performance in the classrooms. This study is intended to explore the teachers' attitudes towards multilingual pedagogy in Indonesia regarding the context of multilingualism, language policy, and multilingual pedagogy practices. Therefore, theories on multilingualism, language education policy, and multilingual pedagogy are discussed as guidance. This study employs a mixed-method with sequential explanatory research design by collecting and analyzing data from the quantitative and qualitative research approaches. For the quantitative approach, the questionnaires were distributed online to gather the numerical data. The statements were developed on a five-point Likert scale from level 1 (strongly disagree) to level 5 (strongly agree). The participants were 100 foreign language teachers who teach at high schools in one Indonesian province. The data findings were analyzed descriptively to find the average mean of teachers' attitudes and inferentially using T-test and MANOVA to investigate the difference between variables. For the qualitative approach, interviews were carried out with ten foreign language teachers to explore their perception of multilingual pedagogy in Indonesia more in-depth. The descriptive and inferential analyses revealed that the attitudes towards multilingual pedagogy implemented in Indonesia were almost uniform across different foreign language teachers, positive attitude. The qualitative analysis also showed their positive attitude. However, two emerged themes from the interview transcriptions indicated that the foreign language teachers experience some problems implementing multilingual pedagogy at schools.
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
PRACTICE MULTILINGUALISM INDONESIAN TEACHER PREPARING FOR TEACHER QUALITY IN INDONESIAN
Rio Rinaldi
In the practice of learning the Indonesian language, students as prospective teachers in addition equipped with a maturity in Indonesian language, also need to be equipped with the maturity of a foreign language. The notion of the ability to master multiple languages are called multilingualism. With a multilingual , such as mother tongue, national, and international well and correctly, students can be called multilingualis. Placing a language appropriate to the context, usability, and background can improve the competence level of graduates to compete in the AEC. Not only students, teachers Indonesian it is possible to master a foreign language in order to link the interests of the science of language to enhance the students' competence in the field of language. Indonesian teachers can ideally provide insight to students by establishing a link with the Indonesian foreign languages, such as English language learning. How to link learning to provide reinforcement of the concept at the level of linguistics, especially syntactic (phrases, clauses and sentences), which exist in the Indonesian and English in general. First, the arrangement patterns of phrases in Indonesian are two general patterns, the patterns of DM and MD. Has an element axis and descriptive or explanatory and axes. When compared with the arrangement of phrases in English, generally, a phrase in English using a MD pattern. Second, structure Indonesian simple sentence patterns are not much different from English. However, in English, familiar with the different uses of the verb showing the time so the patterns based on the timing of the event, known as tenses. In the Indonesian language, the use of the verb is the same for all the time the event occurred (before, being, after the occurrence of the event). In addition, the concept of types and syntax in Indonesian with English almost as based on the type of predicate. In Indonesian, the sentence based on the type of predicate consists of two, namely nominal sentence and verbal sentence.
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
Related topics
Multiculturalism
Bilingualism and Multilingualism
Multilingual Education
Mother Tongue Based Multilingual...
Explore
Papers
Topics
Features
Mentions
Analytics
PDF Packages
Advanced Search
Search Alerts
Journals
Academia.edu Journals
My submissions
Reviewer Hub
Why publish with us
Testimonials
Company
About
Careers
Press
Content Policy
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104