Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 11

RESULTS REPORT

ANALYZING RPP OF VOCATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL


This task is purposed to fulfill the task of Curriculum and Material Development that is
administered by:
Dr. Entis Sutisna, M.Pd
Dr. Yanti Suryanti, M.Pd.

Arranged by:
Filsya Devara 031115109
Alisya Saraswati Sjamtoto 031116023
Wafa Dwi Zulfa 031116030
Sesil Marsely 031116039
Salma Nabila 031116045
Meninda Surya Nadhifah 031116079
Nuraini 031116094
Bella Vidya Agustine 031117026
Dewi Fortuna 031117029
Tyas Setiawati 031117034
Megasari Sakti 031117038
Ai Nurlailiah 031117041
English Study Program
Faculty of Teacher Training and Education
Pakuan University
2019
ANALYZING RPP OF VOCATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL

Based on Permendikbud (Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan /


Minister of Education and Culture Regulations) No. 65 of 2013 concerning
Process Standards, the Learning implementation Plan (Rencana Pelaksanaan
Pembelajaran) is a face-to-face learning plan for one or more meetings. The RPP
is developed from the syllabus to encourage the learning activities of students to
achieve Basic Competencies. The function of RPP is to make the learning process
effective by what is planned. Here we analyzed 12 RPPs for Vocational Schools,
and what we analyzed are Content Standards and Process Standards; the following
are the results of our analyzing:

1. Filsya Devara
Based on my observation, I have found some corrections in this RPP. Such as,
there are no KI 1 and KI 2, name of school. Besides that, KD and Indikator are
not in the table. Then, for learning purposes is well explained. In this RPP
Media Pembelajaran exist after of the assessment format. The next, Indikator
in this RPP is only a short explanation such as indicator 3.1.1
"Mengidentifikasi ungkapan memberi dan meminta petunjuk arah”. And the
last teacher did not exist exercise, there was only Pengayaan exercise.
2. Alisya Saraswati Sjamtoto
Based on my observation in my RPP, I have found some correction from the
RPP “RECOUNT TEXT”. In the RRP there is no explanation of the time and
this RPP is not explained to be used for compulsory English or specialization.
In the RPP, the source of learning is not explained in detail what book is used
as the source of learning. KI and KD are in accordance with the material. For
assessment rubric there is only attitude assessment. While the assessment of
knowledge and skills is not included in the RPP.
3. Wafa Dwi Zulfa

In this task I analyzed the lesson plan of the 10th grade of SMK PGRI
2 Tuban. The lesson plan has attached nama sekolah, mata pelajaran,
kelas/semester, materi pokok, dan alokasi waktu. However, the time is not
listed specifically so, it can not be seen how long the teaching process will

1
take. It is written 1xTM, it should be 1x45 minutes. There also no topic from
the main material, commonly it will be taken from the book which is used.
There are many parts in the lesson plan. The part A is the Kompetensi
Inti(KI) that is taken from the syllabus which are KI 1-4. All of KI has
matched the syllabus. However, it will be better if KI 1 and KI 2 are written
together. Part B is the Kompetensi Dasar (KD) and indicator which support
KD. The lesson plan has 7 KD and more than 2 indicators. On the other hand,
the lesson plan is made for one meeting, which the amount of KD and
indicators are too many. KD 1 and KD 2 have their own indicators. It will be
better if the indicator of KD 1 and KD 2 are not listed on the lesson plan, it
can immediately to KD 3 and KD 4. KD 3 and KD 4 have many indicators.
There are KD 3.7, 4.8, 4.9, dan 4.10. KD should never be more than 1 for one
meeting. Likewise the chosen indicator. KD 3.7 has 3 indicators which has
the same bloom taxonomy which is identify. KD 4.8 has 3 indicators. KD
4.9 has one indicator. And KD 4.10 has 4 indicators. It can be seen the KD
and indicators are too many for one meeting lesson plan.
Part C is learning purposed. The lesson plan has the learning
purposed that was written in points. It should be better if it is written in a full
sentence, so the purpose hopefully can be achieved in one meeting. Part D is
the learning material. In the lesson plan the learning material is listed clearly
included the material that will be delivered. The lesson plan uses Scientific
Approach with Discovery Learning. In Part F is media, tool, and source, the
lesson has written all of those clearly.
Part G is the steps by steps activity. In the first column there is the time
allocation, It was written 1x40 minutes. It should be 1x45 minutes for SMK
an it should be written at the beginning of the lesson plan. In the opening
section it was written unspecified, for example the second step “melakukan
apersepsi terhadap materi yang akan diajarkan” it should be explained what
kind of apersepsi that will be done. At the opening section there is no general
question activity that can lead to the main activity.
Discovery Learning has steps which are observing, questioning, collecting
data, and generalization. There are incorrect bloom taxonomy, for example
“siswa belajar menentukan…” it should be better to remove “belajar”. On the
other hand at closing activity, the steps has completed, it is written that class
will do reflecting and summarizing material. Part H is assessment. The lesson
plan has attached the assessment technique and the rubric for assessment. It is
not only that but also the assignment is attached at the back of the lesson
plan.
4. Sesil Marsely

2
The RPP that I ‘ve analyzed, there are several things that I think did not
suitable. First is on KI (Kompetensi Inti), teacher attached all of the KI, but
it should be attached Kompetensi Inti 3 and 4. The second is from KD
(Kompetensi Dasar), it because there are KI 1 and 2, on the KD form,
teacher arranged KD 1 and 2 that directed to KI 1 and 2.

Next is Purposes of Learning, on this section the teacher should not attached
point, I think that’s better teacher explained it. I have the example for the
purposes of learning that teacher have to conduct: “Siswa dapat
menggunakan ungkapan yang digunakan dalam dialog pemaparan jati diri,
untuk memperkenalkan jati diri dengan menunggunakan simple present dan
berbagai kosa kata.”

5. Salma Nabila

The leasson plan that i analyzed come from SMK Ma’arif NU 1 metro. The
first, leasson plan consist of severals part, there are;

a. School Name (Satuan pendidikan)


b. Grade/ semester (Kelas/ semester)
c. The Material (Mata pelajaran)
d. Topic ; however, in this part the writer do not write the material specifically
she only write“keteladanan tentang prilaku terbuka, menghargai perbedaan,
dan perdamaian” based on the purpose and the material the material is
greeting.
e. Meeting ; the writer write 1x, it is better for her to fill the meeting in to
alokasi waktu. It becomes 1x2JP (2x45menit).
Then, Kompetensi Inti suitables with syllabus but the writter only
write the number of KI without adding KI 1 until 4. In this part, the writter do
not serve table for KI and Indicator, it is better for her to use table for making
her easy to anlyze between KI and Indicator it self. However, when i analyzd
between KI is not suitable with indicator. The writer write KI 2.1 means that
the indicator fill like 2.1.1.

3
the writer write the aim with the number until five, actually the aim is
the KI summary. It means the aim is a sentence. The writer used Cognitive
Code Learning but in the next part the writer do not mention kind of media
alat dan bahan pembelajaran; media, tools and book. lastly, the writter
mention steaching learnin step, but in my personal opinion it is better for her
to make the sentence simply, for opening the she do not need to write
greeting with assalamualaikum wr.wb.
6. Meninda Surya Nadhifah
I have found the lesson plan of SMK Bantul, here are the results of the
analysis on this lesson plan:

1) There is an identity of school, it is a complete identity. The first part of the


lesson plan is good.

2) The second part of lesson plan is Kompetensi Inti. It is written completely.

3) The next part Kompetensi Dasar and Indikator Pencapaian Kompetensi, 1.


KD on knowledge KI: Analyzing social functions, text structure, and
linguistic elements of several oral and written recount texts by giving and
requesting information related to events / experiences in accordance with
the context of their use. 2. KD on KI skills Arrange oral and written
recount texts, short and simple, related to events / experiences, taking into
account social functions, text structures, and linguistic elements, correctly
and in context. 1. KD indicators on KI knowledge a) determine the social
function, text structure, and linguistic elements of some oral and written
recount texts by giving and requesting information related to events /
experiences in accordance with the context of their use. b) Identifying
social functions, text structure, and linguistic elements of several oral and
written recount texts by giving and requesting information related to
events / experiences in accordance with the context of their use. 2. KD
indicators on KI skills a) Rearrange the recount text written and oral, short
and simple, related events / experiences, taking into account social
functions, text structure, and linguistic elements, correctly and in context.

4
b) Completing oral and written recount texts, short and simple, related to
events / experiences, taking into account social functions, text structure,
and linguistic elements, correctly and in context.

4) Then, the goal of learning is provide with the last point explained in the
form of paragraphs.

5) The next is learning material; the teacher explains the social function of
the recount text, the structure in the recount text and the linguistic
elements of the recount text. Actually the material written in the lesson is
right. However, I think it should have been more explanation about the
main material.

6) Then, the method of learning is Scientific Thinking Process (Scientific).


The Learning Model is Discovery Learning. The Learning Strategies is
Group work, discussion, question and answer.

7) The next is media/tool, and material media are video and text write a
conversation about introduction. Tools are LCD, Laptop, and Speaker. The
ingredients are Folio Paper, written interaction text.

8) Sumber belajar (learning resources) are all sources in the form of data,
people and certain forms that can be used by students in learning, both
separately and in combination so as to facilitate students in achieving
learning goals or achieving certain competencies.

9) The next is learning activity here are a few points in the introduction of the
initial activity should be enough teachers greeting, checking student
absences and explaining learning strategies. Then, the other is not a matter.

10) The next is here are assessment instruments and only two, Multiple Choice
Questions and Essay Questions.

The conclusion is the lesson plan is more focused on writing and speaking.
There are no examples of questions such as essays and multiple choices.

5
7. Nuraini
In the analysis of RPP all points contained in RPP I think are pretty good and
complete starting from the name of the school, class, time allocation, topic,
and the name of the subject but in the basic competencies and indicators
should be included in the table to make it look more presentable but, the
teachers should able to pay attention in time allocations in the learning
activities, especially in the core activities.
In the RPP also there is no enrichment material for students who are not good
in grades, in my opinion enrichment material (pengayaan) is also good enough
for students and able to help them really understand about the material in the
class.
8. Bella Vidya Agustine
According to Standar Isi and Standar Proses that I have read before, I found
some lack when I analyze the Lesson Plan from SMK Negeri 1 Bogor.
First, there is no more spesific information about major, the lesson plan just
mention the class without mention the major (for example : English for Office
Administration, English for Accounting, etc)
Second, the lesson plan doesn't tell about the name of material
Third, no spesific explanation about Kompetensi dasar
Fourth, the goal of the lesson plan is too short (no spesific explanation) and it's
too general
Fifth, in the activity steps, there's no spesific information of time for each
session (for example: Pre-activity : 15 minutes, Main activity : 60 minutes,
Post-activity: 15 minutes)
9. Dewi Fortuna

Based on my observation, I have found some corrections from the RPP


‘’Suggest and

Offers”. Such as they are not putting the name of the school. This belongs to
the standard of

6
the process. Furthermore, they are not putting the KI and KD side to side in
the table. According to

Standar isi they must be put side by side in the table. Besides, they are forget
to put the lesson goal.

The lesson goal is a very important part of RPP. They must be put the lesson
goal because this

component has a very important function in the learning system. A learning


process is said to be

successful when students can achieve the goal optimally. The success of
achieving the goal is

an indicator of a teacher's success in designing and performing the learning


process. So, that is the

reason why lesson goal is important, but sadly they do not put the lesson goal
in the RPP. They do not only forget to put the lesson goal but also forget to
put the competence achievement

indicator (IKD) in the RPP. Achieving competence indicators that is the

bookmark that the student has understood the lesson. The accomplishment
indicator/IKD is

formulated using a specific operational verb that can be measured, which


includes knowledge,

attitude, and skill. It is very important to put them in RPP. They also not
putting the due time of

each main activity. However, it is a necessity to put time in every activity to


make our

activity more systematic and organizable. There are no points 1 and 2 about
the religion aspect and

7
social aspect. Furthermore, there is no example of questions in the end. There
are also no points to collect information and associate points. Actually, the
teachers can just explain what objects/tool that can be used for gathering
information points.

In conclusion there are few mistakes in ‘’Suggest & Offer’’ RPP.

10. Tyas Setiawati


The RPP that I analyzed KI and KD were not combined in the table. In the
implementation of preliminary learning activities the teacher does not
motivate students to learn contextually, the teacher must motivate students so
that students are enthusiastic in learning activities, not only that in the
preliminary activities the teacher does not give questions that link previous
knowledge with the material to be given. For assessment of student learning
outcomes remedial is not listed for students whose grades do not reach KKM,
whereas remedial is important for students whose grades do not reach KKM.
11. Megasari Sakti
I have analyzed the RPP of SMK Ma’arif NU Metro, and the writer of the
RPP is Ms. Lina Rahmawati. According to what I had analyzed, I found some
parts inappropriate. Firstly, the numbering on core competencies is incorrect
because the writer did the numbering only 1, 2, and 3. Meanwhile, the
numbering on RPP should be written as 1.1, 2.1, and so on. The writer did the
same numbering for the Indicator, she kept numbering 1, 2, and 3 and so on.
However, the basic numbering in RPP should be written as if the Basic
Competencies (KD) is 3.1, so the Indicator must be 3.1.1. Even though the
writer used Operational Verbs (KKO), I still found inappropriate KKO on the
RPP, on the KD the writer used “Mensyukuri” that does not belong to any
class of KKOs, so it means that the writer did not pay more attention to the
use of KKO. The Indicator of each points must be fulfilled the KD, yet in this
RPP, the Indicators went away from the KD, for instance on the point 1.1 of
KD it is written “Mensyukuri kesempatan dapat mempelajari bahasa Inggris
sebagai bahasa pengantar komunikasi internasional yang diwujudkan dalam

8
semangat belajar”, yet on the indicator it is written as “Ungkapan-ungkapan
yang digunakan untuk menyapa seseorang (greeting) dalam dialog-dialog
merespon jati diri”, even the indicator of greeting can be fulfilled the point
where the writer wrote “Bahasa inggris sebagai pengantar komunikasi
Internasional or English as the introduction of International Communication”,
she used the wrong KKO which “Mensyukuri” is used it can be reached by
greeting, it would be appropriate if she replaced the word “Mensyukuri” with
“Menerapkan”, the writer also forgot to use KKOs on her Indicator. The
Learning Goals should be written in the form of narration, yet the writer did
not do that, the writer wrote the goals using point by point. The writer also put
out that she attached worksheets and assessment sheets, yet in this RPP can be
found the worksheets only, which is relevant to the materials. Unfortunately,
the teacher did not put the specific materials, evaluation, and the assessment
rubric and answer keys.
12. Ai Nurlailiah

I analyzed RPP (Rancangan Pelaksanaan Pembelajaran) or Learning


Implementation Plan on Vocational School. Based on the process standards, I
found some mistakes in the components of RPP. The components of RPP are
incomplete. I didn't find the Identity of School or name of the education unit,
maybe the teacher doesn't put it. Furthermore, based on Permendikbud
Number 21 the year 2016 KI (kompetensi Inti) or the core cometence is
inappropriate. On RPP, the teacher doesn't write KI 1 (religion) and KI 2
(social), but the teacher just writes KI 3 (knowledge) and KI 4 (skills).
However, the teacher must write KI 1 and KI 2 on RPP, because of one unity.
Then, the placement of KD and IPK is not appropriate, yet it must be written
side by side. Besides, I found the mistake writing of IPK. IPK is arranged not
using operational verbs or KKO (Kata Kerja Operasional). It also is arranged
not using the point. For instance, KD 4, 4.1. So, in IPK must be written 4.1.1.
Meanwhile, the goals of learning didn't write in the form of narration, but the
teacher wrote it point by point. Yet the learning objectives must be written in
the form of narration. Besides, one of the learning objectives is not to use the

9
KKO or operational verbs. Learning methods and learning media do not fit
the sequence. On RPP, those are written in the last components of RPP. Yet
those write after the material coverage. Then, The teacher doesn't attach the
rubric, the questions and key answers for assessment. Meanwhile, the teacher
doesn't attach the material on RPP. Furthermore, I don't find the name of the
principal and the name of the subject teacher on RPP.

Overall, the common mistakes were found on RPP is incorrect placement for
Process Standards, such as KI and KD are not formed as a table, meanwhile KI
and KD must be next to each other. KKO (Kata Kerja Operasional / Operational
Verbs) is not often be used by the teachers on RPPs, however, the KKOs are the
signs to show the achievement of KI and KD. Also, some of the Learning Goals
are written point by point, yet the correct writing of Learning Goals must be
written in the form of narration. The mistakes in writing a RPP are mostly made
by the teacher’s inscrutability and lack of eager to learn and to find out the ways
how to write a good RPP because they only take the source on unclear websites.

10