66
second were used to recruit the second sample group for the qualitative case study. Although they were recruited for different purposes of data collection,
these two groups of sample were still from the same research population, as described in the previous section.
3.6.1 Selection criteria and procedure to recruit the sample for the survey
As stated in the previous section, the target population of the research was determined based on predetermined criteria. First, the teacher sample consisted
of English teachers who teach in the four districts and one municipality in Yogyakarta province. Second, those English teachers had to have attended the
Pelatihan Terpadu Berbasis Kompetensi
PTBK or the Competency-based Integrated Training CBIT. This was a training program designed by the
Indonesia Ministry of National Education MoNE to prepare the teachers to implement the newly issued curriculum,
Kurikulum Berbasis Kompetensi
KBK or Competency-based Curriculum CBC.
Competency-based was a concept underpinning the content of the new curriculum in Indonesia, the Curriculum 2006. When viewed from the general
organization and the paradigms of the application, this curriculum was also known as
Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan
or KTSP, the school level curriculum, because of the nature of its application which is school based.
Teachers attending this training, therefore, were expected to be able to understand, and then apply the new curriculum in their schools. Being an
67
integrated training program, it provided materials that were not only related to issues about curriculum change and how to deal with the change, but also
materials related to the efforts of improving the teachers‘ competency and skills
required to teach English, such as their English skills and teaching skills. The CBIT was done at the national and provincial levels, and was followed up with
district level related trainings.
The second criterion of the selection of the sample was accessed directly when the survey was conducted in the district teaching forum meetings. By only
asking participation from those teachers who had attended the CBIT, it was expected that the survey data collection would disqualify those who had not.
Taking a list from the provincial office of the Ministry of National Education could have been easier but it did not seem to be a good idea at that time.
Although there was such a list, the actual number of the teachers could be different from the one in the list. Firstly, this was because some of them had
been promoted as school principals, and secondly it was due to the earthquake that happened in July 2006 that affected a major area of the province. The latter
cause was the main reason for inviting only those who were still active in the teacher forum activities.
The recruitment, therefore, was carried out with no special invitation. Instead, the researcher went to the monthly English Teacher Forum meetings in all the
districts and the municipality. This was once again due to the devastating effect of the 26 June 2006 Earthquake affecting major area in the province of
68
Yogyakarta. It was, therefore, not possible to contact or invite all the teachers either by mail or telephone. The earthquake damaged most of the infrastructure
in the province including the transportation and communication networks. Emailing invitations through the internet was not feasible since very few
teachers had access to the internet. Phone lines or cellular phones were not available to most teachers in this province.
The only feasible way of meeting with the teachers at that time was by going to the teacher forums which were being conducted in each of the districts and
municipality. These teacher forums were conducted regularly once a month, and even in Bantul District and Yogyakarta Municipality teacher forums were
conducted twice a month. To maximize the number of responses, the researcher came to all teacher forums within the periods of December 2006 to February
2007. This was done in case there were teachers that could not attend one of the meeting in one of the meetings.
In the meetings, the researcher explained the research project and asked the teachers to participate in the research by completing a survey. Upon requesting
participation, the researcher explained the purposes of the research, the information required in the research, and the significance of their participation.
Issues on confidentiality were also discussed in the preliminary explanation. Participation, however, was voluntary, signaled by the request to participants to
voluntarily return the completed questionnaire together with the participants‘
consent forms.
69
This first group was required to complete a questionnaire consisting of seven sub-scales that took approximately 30 minutes of their time. The questionnaire
was presented in two versions, the English and Indonesian versions. Participants were asked only to use the Indonesian version to help with their understanding.
They were, however, asked to fill in the English version. This was because they were assumed to understand most of the words in the survey, because they were
English teachers. The translated version, therefore, was given only to provide support to the teachers in case they had difficulties in understanding the survey.
The questionnaire focused on the teachers‘ self efficacy for English and English teaching in general and in relation to the implementation of the new curriculum
in particular. It was also aimed to investigate whether there were changes with respect to the teachers‘ self efficacy beliefs before and after teachers‘
attendance in the CBIT.
As stated in the previous section, teachers in the sample were from different districts and municipality in Yogyakarta province. This was meant to address
whether there were differences in the level of teachers ‘ efficacy beliefs due to
different policy and support from the local government. Besides coming from four different districts and municipality, teachers in the research sample teach in
different types of school, both public and private schools. This was also an important aspect in this research enabling the identification of any differences in
the efficacy level of teachers from different types of schools. The teacher sample also comprised teachers different professional status; some of them were
70
civil servant teachers employed by the government, some were full time private teachers employed by private education foundations, and some other were part
time teachers employed by the schools. This teacher status would probably provide information about the differences in on the level of efficacy among
teachers with different employment status.
Among the first group of sample there were fifty two male and one hundred female teachers. The ages ranged from twenty two to fifty five years old.
Twenty one 13.8 teachers had the teaching experience of less than five years, seventy teachers 46 between five to fifteen years of teaching
experience and sixty one teachers 40.1 had more than fifteen years teaching experience. There were one hundred and twenty two 80 civil servant
teachers, ten 6.6 fulltime private teachers and twenty 13.2 part time teachers. One hundred and nineteen 78.3 teachers taught in public schools and
33 21.7 other teachers in private schools. The sample teachers were from four districts and one municipality in the province, twenty two teachers 15.5
from Yogyakarta City, twenty seven 17.8 from Sleman regency, thirty three 21.7 from Kulonprogo regency, twenty five 16.4 from Bantul regency,
and fourty five 29.6 from Gunungkidul regency. All aspects related to the teachers‘ employment status, the schools where the
teachers taught, gender, ages, working experiences and the districts where the teachers were teaching were designed to be the independent variables of the
71
research that might provide effects on the level of efficacy beliefs of the teachers.
3.6.2 Selection criteria and procedure to recruit the second sample group
