Article Sidebar

Submitted
Dec 5, 2025
Published
Dec 26, 2025
Download
pdf
Statistic
Read Counter : 291 Download : 181

Main Article Content

Abstract

This research aimed to enhance students' morphology by using painting with Letters strategy for the secondary level. A literature review has been done in this study; the present study employed George's (2008) model of library research. As the main argument, the present study adopted the concept of differentiated instruction from Tomlinson (1999, 2001, 2014), Tomlinson and Imbeau (2010), and Tomlinson and Moon (2013) to answer the present study's research questions, supported by other relevant sources. The data were collected from the students of secondary level related to the study. The results showed that the characteristics of students' paintings can stimulate the enhancing of students' morphology and have a profound impact on art. The development of their vocabularies has important implications for the secondary level and certainly for secondary learners who are on the budding edge of propelling themselves from the task of learning to read into the realm of reading to learn. The student's paintings at the secondary level can increase and also improve the creativity of their learning process in morphology.

Keywords

enhancing morphology painting with letters secondary level

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Daulay, S. H., & Asmawati, A. (2025). Enhancing Students’ Morphology by Using Painting with Letters for Secondary Level. ELITE JOURNAL, 7(1), 83-88. Retrieved from https://elitejournal.org/index.php/ELITE/article/view/273

References

  1. Brown, D.F., & Knowles, T. (2014). What every middle school teacher should know (3rd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
  2. Daulay, S. H., Niswa, K. (2021). Basic Morphology. Medan: UMSU Press.
  3. George M.W. (2008). The Elements of library research: what every student needs to know. Princeton University Press.
  4. Goodwin, A.P., Gilbert, J.K., & Cho, S. (2013). Morphological contributions to adolescent word reading: An item response approach. Reading Research Quarterly, 48(1), 39–60. doi:10.1002/rrq.037
  5. Graves, M.F., Juel, C., Graves, B.B., & Dewitz, P. (2011). Teaching reading in the 21st century: Motivating all learners (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
  6. Griffin, R.A., Martinez, J., & Martin, E.P. (2014). Rosetta Stone and language proficiency of international secondary school English language learners. Engaging Cultures and Voices, 6(2), 36–73.
  7. Hendrix, Rebecca. (2017). Developing Enhanced Morphological Awareness in Adolescent Learners. Article in Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315058233.
  8. Kieffer, M.J., & Lesaux, N.K. (2010). Morphing into adolescents: Active word learning for English-language learners and their classmates in middle school. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 54(1), 47–56. doi:10.1598/JAAL.54.1.5
  9. Luo, Na. (2022). Transformation of Children’s Paintings into Public Art to Improve Public Spaces and Enhance People’s Happiness. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.
  10. Manik, N., & Daulay, S. H. (2024). Word matrixs in ELT: Student and teacher perception. Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan (JIP) STKIP Kusuma Negara, 16(1), 78-89.
  11. Nagy, W., Berninger, V.W., & Abbott, R.D. (2006). Contributions of morphology beyond phonology to literacy outcomes of upper elementary and middle-school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1), 134–147. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.134.
  12. Nesin, G., & Brazee, E. (2013). Developmentally responsive middle grades schools: Needed now more than ever. In P.G.
  13. Pacheco, M.B., & Goodwin, A.P. (2013). Putting two and two together: Middle school students’ morphological problem solving strategies for unknown words. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 56(7), 541–553. doi:10.1002/JAAL.181.
  14. Pate, P.E. (2013). Academically excellent curriculum, instruction, and assessment. In P.G. Andrews (Ed.), Research to guide practice in middle grades education (pp. 165–186). Westerville, OH: Association for Middle ini Level Education.
  15. Roberts, G., Torgesen, J.K., Boardman, A., & Scammacca, N. (2008). Evidence-based strategies for reading instruction of older students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 23(2), 63–69. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2008.00264.x.
  16. Tomlinson, C. A. (2001). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms. In Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  17. Tomlinson, Carol Ann. (1999). Mapping a Route Toward a Differentiated Instruction. Educational Leadership, 57(1), 12.
  18. Tomlinson, Carol Ann. (2014). The Differentiated Classroom Responding to the Needs of All Learners (2nd edition). Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  19. Tomlinson, Carol Ann, & Imbeau, M. B. (2010). Leading and managing a differentiated instruction. In Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  20. Tomlinson, Carol Ann, & Moon, T. R. (2013). Assessment and student success in a differentiated classroom. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.