Okky Kusuma Wardhani, Rita Inderawati, Machdalena Vianty


Literature-based approach is also named as a whole language. A whole language is an approach to learn that sees language as a whole entity, and writing, speaking, reading, and listening should be integrated when learned. This study focused on reading and writing as literacy. The aims of this study were to find out whether or not (1) there was a significant difference in literacy achievement before and after the treatment by using a literature-based approach with Tales with Gigi, (2) there was a significant difference in students’ each sub-skill literacy achievement before and after the treatment, (3) there was a significant contribution of each sub-skill of reading comprehension and writing narrative paragraph. This study applied time series design and involved 30 eleventh graders of SMA Negeri 1 Tanjung Batu as the sample. The researchers used test in collecting the data. The finding of the study revealed that 1). The mean differences between pretest and posttest were 22.5 for reading and 20.4 for writing at the significance level of p<0.05. Since t obtained was higher than t table (12.579>2.023) for reading and (18.333>2.023) for writing, it meant that H01 was rejected and there was a significant improvement in literacy achievement after they were taught by using literature-based approach, 2) the mean difference of each sub-skill of literacy achievement between pretest and posttest showed that each sub-skill was improved, and 3) the highest contribution of literacy sub-skills was given by detail (62.8%) in reading and then it was followed by the organization (41.7%) in writing. In short, this study showed a significant improvement and contribution to students’ literacy achievement by using a literature-based approach with Tales with Gigi.


Literacy; literature; application; literature based approach

Full Text:



Aksnes, L. M. (2007). Tid for tale – munnleg norsk i skolen. Oslo, Norway: Cappelen Akademisk Forlag.

Alpha, J. (2009). Utilizing poetry as an ESL teaching tool and resource. Retrieved from

Antoro, B. (2017). Gerakan literasi sekolah: Dari pucuk hingga akar [School literacy movement: From shoots to roots]. Jakarta, Indonesia: Direktorat Jendral Pendidikan Dasar dan Menegah Kementrian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan.

Arikunto, S. (2010). Prosedur penelitian: Suatu pendekatan praktis [Research procedure: A practical approach]. Jakarta, Indonesia: Rhineka Cipta.

Ariyanti. (2016). The teaching of EFL writing in Indonesia. Dinamika Ilmu, 16(2). 263-277

Astuti, E. M. (2010). English zone for senior high school students year X. Jakarta, Indonesia: Erlangga.

Beers, K. (2003) When kids can’t read, what teachers can do: A guide for teachers 6-12. Portsmouth: Heinemann.

Billings, E., & Mathison, C. (2011). I get to use an iPod in school? Using technology-based advance organizers to support the academic success of English Learners. Journal of Science Education Technology, 21(4), 494-503.

Bingham, T., & Conner, M. (2010). The new social learning: A guide to transforming organizations through social media. San Fransisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.

Bisesi, T., Brenner, D., McVee, M., Pearson, P. D., & Sarroub, L. K. (1998). Assessment in literature-based reading programs: Have we kept our promises? Faculty Publications: Department of Teaching, Learning and Teacher Education, 38.

Blake, D., & Hanley, V. (1995). Dictionary of educational terms. Aldershot, UK: Arena.

Caine, R. N. & Caine, G. (1991). Making connections: Teaching and the human brain. Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.

Caine, R., Caine, G., McClintock, C. & Klimek, K. (2005). 12 Mind/brain principles in action. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Carico, K. M., &Logan, D. (2004). A generation in cyberspace: Engaging readers through online discussions. Language Arts, 81(4), 293-302.

Chen, M. L. (2014). Teaching English as a foreign language through literature. Theory Practice in Language Studies, 4(2), 232-236.

Cordes, S. (2009). Broad horizons: The role of multimodal literacy i21scenturyry library instruction, world libra,, y and information congress: 75th IFLA General Conference and Assembly. Milan, Italy: IFLA. Retrieved from

Creswell, J. (2005). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (2nded.). Columbus, OH: Pearson Education, Ltd.

Education First English Proficiency Index (EF EPI). (2017). The world’s largest ranking of English Skills. Retrieved from

Fiderer, A. (1995). Practical assessments for literature-based reading classrooms. New York: Scholastic Professional Books.

Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N.E. (1991). Educational research: A guide to the process. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, Inc.

Gambrell, L. G., Morrow, L. M., & Pennington, C. (2000). Early childhood and elementary-based instruction: Current perspectives & special issues.

Gerot, L. & Wignell, P. (1994). Making sense of functional grammar. Sidney: Antipodean Educational Enterprises.

Gikas, J., & Grant, M. (2013). Mobile computing devices in higher education: Student perspectives on learning with cellphones, smartphones & social media. Internet and Higher Education, 19, 18–26.

Goundouvas, A. (2017). The effects of technology on ELL students writing fluency. Retrieved from

Graddol, D. (1997). The future of English? London, England: The British Council.

Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2003). Students with learning disabilities and the process of writing: A meta-analysis of SRSD studies. New York: Guilford

Hadaway, N. L., Vardell, S. M., & Young, T. A. (2002). Literature-based instruction with English language learners K-12. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Hall, G. (2005). Literature in language education. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Harmer, J. (2004). How to teach writing. London, England: Longman.

Hermida, J. (2009). The importance of teaching academic reading skill firsts year at university courses. The International Journal of Research Review,3, 20-30.

Hornby, A.S. & Crowther, J. (1995). The Oxford Advanced Learner’s dictionary. London, UK: Oxford University Press.

Inderawati, R., & Sofendi. (2018). Creating and innovation English language teaching bdevelopingna g cultural model for literacy. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 174. 166-172.

Kementrian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan. (2016). Panduan gerakan literasi sekolah [Guide to school literacy movement]. Jakarta: Direktorat Jendral Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan.

Kincaid, F. (2014). Readability tools. Retrieved from

Kirin, W. (2010). Effects of extensive reading on students’ writing ability in an EFcla. . The Journal of Asia TEFL, 7(1), 285-308.

Kiyici, B. F. & Kiyici, M. (2007). Science, technology, literacy. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 6(2), 1-51.

Knapp, P., & Watkins, M. (2005). Genre, text, grammar; technologies for teaching and assessing writing. New South Wales, Australia: University of New South Wales Press Ltd.

Larson, L. C. (2008). Electronic reading workshop: Beyond books with new literacies and instructional technologies. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52(2), 121-131.

Larson, L.C. (2009). Reader response meets new literacies: Empowering readers in online learning communities. The Reading Teacher, 62(8), 638-648.

Lester, C. L. (1993). A literature-based approach to reading. (Master Thesis). Grand Valley State University.

Luke, A., & Freebody, P. (2000). Literate futures: Report of the literacy review for Queensland state schools. Brisbane, Australia: Education Queensland.

Luppescu, S. & Day. R. R. (1993). Reading dictionaries and vocabulary learning. Language Learning, 43. 263–287.

Martono, K. T., & Nurhayati, O. D. (2014). Implementation of android based mobile learning application as a flexible learning media. IJCSI International Journal of Computer Science, 11(3), 168-174.

Mascott, A. (2013, July 29). Help kids to P.I.C.K. the right books. Retrieved from

Massey, j. & Koziol, S. (1978). Research on creative dramatics. English Journal, 67, 92-95.

Mehdipour, Y., & Zerehkafi, H. (2013). Mobile learning for education: Benefits and challenges. International Journal of Computational Engineering Research, 03(6), 93-101. Retrieved from,%20Issue%206,(Version%20III)%20June,%202013.pdf

Morrow, L. M. (1992). The impact of a literature-based program on literacy achievement, use of literature, and attitudes of children from minority backgrounds. Reading Research Quarterly, 27,250-275.

Morrow, L. M. (1996). Motivating reading and writing in diverse classrooms: social and physical contexts in a literature-based program. NCTE Research Report No. 28. National Council of Teachers of English.

Murphy, E. (2009, October 5th). Against slogging: Engaging poetry in the classroom. Retrieved from

Neo, E. (2005). The Narrative for ‘O’ level. Kuala Lumpur: Longman.

Nodelman, P. (1996). The pleasures of children’s literature (2nd Ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman.

Ontario Ministry of Education. (2006). Facilitators guide to literacy for learning: the report of the expert panel on literacy in grades 4 to 6 in Ontario. Toronto, Canada: Ministry of Education.

Ontario Ministry of Education. (2016). 2016 Student achievement literacy planning resource: Grades 7-12. Toronto, Canada: Ministry of Education.

Ozdemir, E., & Aydin, S. (2015). The effects oa f wiki on motivation in EFL writing. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 191, 2359 – 2363.

Patzelt, K. E. (1995). Principles of whole language and implications for ESL learners. Educational Resource Information Center (ERIC).

Pearman, C. (2003). Effects of electronic texts on the independent reading comprehension second grade students. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), University of Arkansas.

Proud to be Primary. (2018, March 14). Why teach poetry: 5 reasons to teach poetry in the classroom. Retrieved from

Quality children’s literature at the heart of all learning. (2018). A poetry classroom. Retrieved

Ravitch, D. (2010). The death and life of the great American school system. New York: USA. Basic Books.

Reyhner, J. (2008). The reading wars: Phonic is the whole language. Unpublished manuscript. Arizona: Department of Educational Specialities, Northern Arizona University.

Richards, J. C. & Renandya.W. A. (2002). Methodology in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ruddell, R. B., & Unrau, N. J. (2004). Reading as a meaning-construction process: The reader, the text and the teacher. In R. B. Ruddell & N. J. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading (5th ed., pp. 1462–1521). Newark, DE: International Reading Association

Simmons, A. (2014, April 08). Why teaching poetry is so important. Retrieved from

Simpson, A. (2010). Integrating technology with literacy: Using teacher-guided collaborative online learning to encourage critical thinking. ALT-J: Research in Learning Technology, 18(2), p.119-131.

Stark Jr., M. J. (1981). A group informal reading inventory: An instrument for other assessment of ESL students’ reading performance. Doctoral thesis. Oregon State University. Retrieved from

Sudarwati, T., & Grace, E. (2007). Look ahead an English course 3. Jakarta, Indonesia: Erlangga.

Sung, Y., Chang, K., & Liu, T. (2016). The effects of integrating mobile devices with teaching and learning on students’ learning performance: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. Computers & Education, 94, 252–275.

Tonne, I. (2015). Grammatikk i lese- og skriveopplæringa. I: Budal, B. (red.): Språk i skolen. Oslo: Fagbokforlaget.

UNESCO. (2005). EFA global monitoring report: Literacy for life, Paris, France: UNESCO Publishing.

UNESCO. (2006). Education for all global monitoring report: Understanding literacy. Paris, France: UNESCO Publishing. Retrieved from http//

UNESCO. (2015). Adult and youth literacy. UIS Fact Sheet. Paris, France: UNESCO Institute for Statistics.

Vishwakarma, A. (2016). Benefits and challenges of mobile learning in Education. Human-Computer Interaction: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications, 1919-1931.

Wallen, N. E., & Fraenkel, J. R. (2003). Educational research: A guide to the process (2nd Ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

Wang, P. (2015). Effects of an automated writing evaluation program student experiences and perceptions. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 12(1).



  • There are currently no refbacks.