The Perception from the Participants as the Evaluators

40 No Statements Frequency Percentage SD D A SA SD D A SA participant. 13. Participant was motivated to teach better after hisher read the feedback. 4 26 22 7.7 50 42.3 14. The use of peer feedback helped participant evaluate hisher teaching practice. 1 27 24 1.9 52 46.15 15. The use of peer feedback helped participant improve hisher teaching skills. 1 29 22 1.9 55.8 42.3 16. Participant was able to identify hisher teaching strength after reading the feedback given to hisher. 3 33 16 5.77 63.46 30.77 17. Participant was able to identify hisher teaching weaknesses after reading the feedback given to himher. 2 35 15 3.85 67.3 28.85 It could be clearly seen from this point of view the participants as peer feedback receivers that the participants also had positive perception. Most of the participants have experienced on receiving feedback from their peer 98.09. After they received the feedback, they also read the feedback carefully 96.15 and kept the feedback after they read it 86.6. For those who saw feedback as one of the instruments of evaluation, they would see that the comment given was not a criticism but a kind of suggestion for their improvement 34.61. Criticism 41 refers to negative comments while suggestions refer to positive comments and it usually provides solutions for the problems. Furthermore, they felt that the feedback given to them was objective 94.23. They were satisfied with their friends’ feedback 79.6 and they stated that the feedback was very useful for them 94.23. They were motivated to teach better after they read the feedback 92.3 because it helped them to evaluate their teaching practice 98.15. Moreover, through the evaluation they could identify their teaching strengths 94.23 and weaknesses 96.15. Most of the participants said that they could improve their teaching skills after reading the feedback. Although most of the participants had positive perception, there were also some participants who had negative perception. There was one participant or 1.91 of the participant who had no experience of receiving peer feedback. Two participants admitted that they did not read the feedback 3.85 and 11.5 participants did not keep the feedback after reading it. There were 69.39 participants who saw peer feedback as mere criticism and the feedback was not objective 5.77. Twelve participants 23.1 were not satisfied with the feedback and thought that the feedback was not useful for them 5.77 in both helping them to motivate to teach better 7.7 and helping them to evaluate their teaching practice 1.9 while one participant said that peer feedback could not help hisher to improve his or her teaching skills. There were 5.77 of the participants were not able to identify their teaching strengths and 3.85 were not able to identify their teaching weaknesses. 42 To support the data gained from the closed-ended questions, the researcher provided open-ended questions. From open-ended questions, the participants also showed their positive perception. Most of the participants said that peer feedback in Microteaching class was very important, useful, and good to be implemented. They said that peer feedback really helped them to improve and enrich their teaching skills. Besides, they could discover their strengths to be maintained and weaknesses to be corrected through peer feedback. From their point of view, more people who give comment toward their performance were better. The more comments the better because it would give detailed information. Peer feedback also motivated them to learn more and helped them to prepare their next teaching practices. In addition, some participants had negative perception. They stated that the feedback made them depressed because of their not being ready to receive bad comments from their peer. Furthermore, they thought that sometimes their peer were not serious in giving feedback so that the feedback were not objective.

2. The Result from the Interview

To clarify the data gained through questionnaire, the researcher conducted interview to four participants. The researcher divided the questions into three groups; the first was the questions to collect the data from the participants as the evaluators, the second was the questions to confirm information from the 43 participants as the peer feedback receivers, and the last question was to dig out their suggestions towards the better implementation of peer feedback in ELESP. All of the interviewees had positive perception toward peer feedback. Participant 1 said that through peer feedback, she would know how far her skills improved. Peer feedback also motivated her to teach better. Besides, it helped her to develop her self-confidence and find her mistakes during her teaching. When she was asked about her perception on peer feedback as an evaluator, she said that she always tried to be serious, honest, and objective in giving comments to her peer. She did this because she thought that feedback would affect her friends’ score. She added that by doing peer feedback she could learn something from her peer being observed. She said that she could adopt teaching methodology or teaching instruments from her peer performance. When she asked about the level of significance between lecturer feedback and peer feedback, she preferred peer feedback because it would be more thorough. Just about the same as participant 1, participant 2 said that peer feedback was useful for her to make reflection of her teaching and it helped her to evaluate her teaching. Peer feedback gave benefits for both the participants as evaluators and the participants being observed. She said that although we have prepared everything perfectly, in the performance something could always go wrong. That is why peer feedback was needed to evaluate one another. Positive perception could also be seen from participant 3. She agreed that peer feedback was useful in teaching learning activity, especially in the