34 this sampling, the researcher selected a group of people as the research samples
without having to access to list the respondent one by one to be the research samples. In this research, the researcher selected 19 respondents belonging to a
single Micro Teaching class to be the representatives of the whole population of Micro Teaching students of the academic year 20102011. It was expected that the
result of the samples could holistically represent accurately the picture or understanding of the population and the generalization based on the data obtained.
In addition, cluster sampling is a more convenient tool to save time and energy for the researcher to collect samples.
The background reason for the selection of the population was the fact that the respondents had conducted Micro Teaching. Through this Micro Teaching
experience, it was expected that they act as seemingly a native or near-native speaker before entering actual teaching practices in schools, known as Program
Pengalaman Lapangan PPL.
3.4 Instruments and Data Gathering Technique
This research employed three main instruments to gain the data, namely human as instrument and the transcript. They were as follows.
1. Human as instrument According to Ary, Jacob, and Razavieh 2002, “human investigator is the
primary instrument for the gathering and analyzing of data” p. 424. Ary et al. 2002 write that human instrument is the only one who is capable in the inquiry;
that is talking with people in the setting, observes their activities, reads their
35 documents and written records, and records their information in field notes and
journals p. 424. In this case, the researcher played an important role in the process of data gathering; that was listening to the Micro Teaching students’
speech and transcribing it into written form. From the written from, the researcher found the syntactical and morphological errors to be analyzed.
2. The transcripts Bogdan 2003 has mentioned document to refer to materials such as
photographs, videos, films, memos, letters, diaries, clinical case records, and memorabilia of all sorts that can be used as either supplementary or primary
source of data p. 57. Collecting data through analyzing the document which were Micro Teaching students’ speech’ transcripts aimed at obtaining detailed
evidence of the morphological and syntactic errors production in spoken English. Their recorded teaching performances were in the natural setting on how they
conducted Micro Teaching. These were taken without the presence of the researcher, thus Micro Teaching students were not disturbed and they were not
aware that their performances were being observed and analyzed.
3.5 Data Analysis Technique
The data was described and interpreted to obtain result of the research. The analysis technique was through various steps. They were as follows.
1. Transcription To start analyzing the data, the researcher first transcribed the recording into
written form. The transcription was carried out in order to help the researcher
36 observe the errors. The transcribed data were emphasized on the respondents’
speaking production. Nevertheless, it did not exclude the simulated students’ speaking production. Through the transcripts, the researcher then identified and
highlighted the observable errors to be processed further. 2. Classification
It included two classifications. Firstly, the researcher sorted the error into categories according to the type it belonged, such as word formation, preposition,
the auxiliary systems, transformation, the English structure pattern, passive sentences, gerund and infinitives, and also conjunctions. Afterwards, it was
subdivided into smaller categories, for example word formation was subcategorized into incorrect simple past, incorrect past participle, incorrect third
person singular, and so forth. These categories of errors mentioned earlier were decided from the presence of errors that Micro Teaching class students produced.
The more obvious example of morphological and syntactical errors classification can be seen in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1 The Classification of Errors and Their Examples
Types Subtypes Example of
Learners’ errors Percentage
per subtype Percentage
per type Word
Formation Simple past
tense incorrect Progressive
misformation
Preposition Superfluous
use of preposition
Omission of preposition
etc.
Total
37 Secondly, the researcher employed checklist as a tool in the classification
of sources of errors. Richard 1974 proposed four kinds of sources of errors. They are overgeneralization, incomplete application of rules, ignorance of rules
restriction, and falsely hypothesized concepts. The checklist can be seen in Table 3.2.
Table 3.2 Sources of Errors Checklist
No Errors Sources of Errors
Overgeneralization Incomplete
Application of Rules
Ignorance of Rules
Restriction Falsely
Hypothesized Concepts
1.
A
2.
B
3.
C
Etc In the process of classifying errors into the four categories of sources of
errors, the researcher made use of certain criteria adapted from Richard 1974. The first is overgeneralization. Errors belonging to this category are those which
the construction comes from the application of a previously learned rule for a new situation which it does not apply. Any incorrect construction which is influenced
by another similar construction belongs to this category. Errors belonging to this category are as follows.
Incorrect use of hashave, areis, thisthesethose, anthe, dodoes
Wrong selection of verbs i.e. infinitive, past, or past participle to suit with the tense aspect
Overgeneralized affixation of -s for singular noun, noncount noun, and for
verb after singular third person.
38 The use of double verbs
The use of declarative word order for question word order or vice versa The second is incomplete application of rules. Any errors belonging to this
category are those which were not constructed completely. There was a missing of a linguistic element which should exist in a correct construction of Standard
English. The incomplete construction is regarded as an error since it deviates from standardized English rules of syntax and morphology. Errors belonging to this
category are as follows.
A missing of functional categories, such as suffix -s, auxiliary,
determiners, etc A missing of lexical categories, such as noun as subject or verb
The third one is ignorance of rules restriction. These errors occurred because the respondents did not thoroughly understand about the restriction of rules in
English. In other words, there is a specific case where a particular strategy does not apply for common situations. In this case, overgeneralization and ignorance of
rules restriction have a slight difference in its definition. However, errors which do not belong to the category of overgeneralization are categorized into ignorance
of rules restriction. Errors belonging to this category are as follows. The use of article before particular nouns such as name of streets, name of
people, most of countries, plural nouns and noncount nouns. Wrong use of possessive pronoun or subject pronoun
Wrong use and double use of preposition Redundancy
39 Wrong application of conjunctions, passive structures, subjunctives, etc.
The last one is false hypothesized concept. Errors belonging to this category occur because the respondents made such errors because of their
miscomprehension in the process of acquiring the English rules. This miscomprehension results in a deviant morphological and syntactical construction
from Standard English. One example of this category is a wrong understanding of
the word happen as transitive verb.
Table 3.3 The Frequency Distribution of the Sources of Errors
By using such criteria, the errors were sorted out to what possible source of errors it belonged. Through the checklist, the researcher got the frequency
distribution of sources of errors. This calculation showed the majority sources of errors, which answer the research second question. The frequency distribution of
the sources of errors is seen in Table 3.3. 3. Counting
Having organized into tables as seen in Table 3.1 and Table 3.2, the data then were calculated into percentage. Since there were two problems formulated
in chapter 1, the calculation included two; 1 the classification of error types; and 2 the calculation of the frequency distribution of sources of errors. The
No Sources of Errors
Percentage
1. Over-generalization 2.
Incomplete Application of Rules 3.
Ignorance of Rules Restriction 4. Falsely
Hypothesized Concepts
Total
40 frequency was calculated per error in the categories. The errors were calculated in
percentage as follows:
∑
Where n is the total number of errors in one category, and n is the total
number of errors produced by Micro Teaching students. It was derived from the calculation of total errors of all types of errors. By adding the number of errors in
one category and dividing it by the total number of errors and was multiplied by 100, the researcher obtained the frequency of a categorized errors in percentage.
From the calculation of the frequency distribution, the researcher then discovered the biggest frequency of errors and the lowest frequency of errors. The researcher
then ranked the percentage from high to low to help interpret the findings. Table 3.4 shows the example of the percentage rank from high to low.
Table 3.4 The Percentage Rank from High to Low
Category Percentage P
A B
C Etc
34 27
20
From the rank, the researcher took only the top three which percentage exceed 10 to be called as the most problematic feature of grammar in spoken
English. These showed that the respondents have quite a difficulty with such categories. And thus, the application of such categories in speaking was less not
mastered. In contrast, the researcher simply ignored those which were under 10 since they were found in a small number. Apart from that, as the reference to
41 answer the second question, the researcher selected those which percentage
exceed 25 to explain the global source of errors. This number showed the degree of difficulty the respondents have. The respondents had quite high
difficulty toward a criterion if the percentage is above 25. However, if the number is under 25, the respondents had less difficulty toward such criterion.
4. Description and Analysis After following the various steps as described above, the researcher then
described the finding by analyzing the data based on the percentage calculated. The analysis elaborated reasons of why the utterances deviated from formal
Standard English. To help the researcher analyze the error, in some cases, the analysis included the process of meaning interpretation, which was translating the
wrong utterances in English into Indonesian as the respondents’ second language.
3.5 Research Procedure
