15 professional preparation, easy to play but intellectually challenging, be able to be
filled in the middle of the main activity, be able to entertain the students but cause no uncontrolable situation, and not require a lot of time to correct and to give
responses afterward.
3. Speaking
Speaking is the main skill to communicate especially in direct communication. Bygate 1987 states that speaking is a skill which needed to be
given attention as much as literary skills, both in first and second languages p. vii. It is also written that in order to be able to speak a foreign language, it is very
important for someone to know certain amount of grammar and vocabulary p. 3. “We do not merely know how to assemble sentences in the abstract: we
have to produce them and adapt them to the circumstances. This means making decisions rapidly, implementing them smoothly, and adjusting our
conversation
as unexpected problems appear in our path” p. 3. There are two basic ways in which something we do can be seen as a skill.
They are motor-perceptive skills and interaction skills. Motor-perceptive skills consist of perceiving, recalling, and articulating in the correct order sounds and
structures of the language. Mackey 1965 says that oral expression is not only about using the right sound in the right patterns of rhythm and intonation, but also
about word choice and inflection correctly to produce correct meaning p.266. Interaction skills engaged with decisions-making about communication such as
what to say, how to say it, and whether to develop it related to someone‟s
intention while maintaining relations with others. According to Bygate,
Mackey‟s theory which says that in speaking someone should do everything correctly such as using the right sound, the right
16 patterns of rhythm and intonation, the right word choice, and the right inflection
to produce correct meaning is like learning to drive without ever going out on the road. It is because those goals influence the type of exercises used in the learning
process like model dialogues, pattern practice, oral drill tables, look-and-say exercises, and oral composition.
Ten years after, David Wilkins 1974 says that those exercises cannot solve some learning problems. One of the most important problems is making
sure that the material learnt in class is successfully transferred to real-life use. This transition is often called as the „transfer of skills‟. Wilkins also says that if all
the process of producing the language in the class is controlled by the teacher, the students or the learners should be protected from the fear of making their own
choices. Wilkins adds: “As with everything else he will only learn what falls within his
experience. If all his language production is controlled from outside, he will hardly be competent to control his own language production. He will
not be able to transfer his knowledge from a language-learning situation to a language-
using situation.” p. 6
4. Feedback
To gain the goals of Englicious Chatime ‟s focuses, there are some ways
that are used by Englicious. Englicious tries to be consistent in giving the participants stimulation to speak up and providing corrective feedback in each
error that they make. Since the focus is on the speaking skill development, the activities are designed to enable participants to build their fluency, pronunciation,
and also grammar accuracy. However, Englicious is not a formal learning institution. So, there is no formal teaching and learning activities in class, nor
17 written and oral test to assess the participants. That is why, in this case, the
coaches should have good basic English competence to work as the teachers in order to be able to correct and give feedback to the participants.
Since there is no test to assess the participants, feedback from the coaches is highly needed to correct and improve the participants‟ English. Lewis 2002
writes that there are five purposes of feedback. The first is that feedback provides information for teachers and students. For the learners, feedback is a way for
teachers to describe their ability in using language. For teachers, it gives teachers information about the progress happens in class, both for individual and the whole
class and, indirectly, is a form of evaluation on their own teaching. For the learners, feedback is an ongoing form of assessment which is more focused than
marks of grades. By highlighting strengths and weaknesses, the comments provide information about individual progress, unlike marks or grades, which tend to
compare one student with another. The comments can also give direct information about language, by stating a rule or by giving examples.
Second, feedback provides students with advice about learning. Teachers can give students more than simply descriptions of their ability in using language.
Comments can also be made on the students‟ learning process. A way that is usually used for this to happen is through learning journals.
Third, feedback provides students with language input. The teacher‟s
written and spoken feedback provides students with meaningful and personal language input. The teacher‟s words, both in their form and their purpose, show
the image of how language is used in person-to-person communication. That is PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
18 why it is important to extend students‟ language by writing comments in language
at a level slightly higher than students‟ own current language use. From this way students can learn new vocabularies and structures in context.
Fourth, feedback is a form of motivation. Feedback can be more motivating than marks or grades. It can encourage students to study and to use
language as good as possible by keeping whatever the teacher knows about the learners‟ attitudes. Encouragement is needed by both hardworking and
underworking students but it should be given in different ways. During a course, as teachers find out more about their students, the encouragement can be more
detailed and acceptable for each student. Fifth, feedback can lead students towards autonomy. One long-term
purpose of feedback is to lead students to the point where they can find their own mistakes. For example, one teacher sat with a student reading his work, stopping
each time there was some minor error of form a singular for a plural and so on. In each case the student could find the mistake himself. He realized that all he
needed to do was to take a few minutes at the end to proofread his own work. Another way of describing what the teacher did is to compare it with scaffolding.
While a building is going up it needs scaffolding, but once it is finished the scaffolding can be taken away pp. 3-4.
5. Error Correction
Error is unavoidable in learning process. Hendrickson 1981 writes that errors in s
tudents‟ speech and writing should be expected by foreign language teachers. It should be accepted as a natural phenomenon in the process of learning
19 second and foreign language learning. By giving chance to communicate freely,
teachers are building studen ts‟ confidence in practicing and applying their
knowledge of the foreign language. Corder 1973 writes that learning new language involves a trial and error approach, and errors are proof that the learner
is trying to apply and analyze the rules, categories, and systems. Walker 1973 says that students think that frequent correction makes them
feel less confident and that communicating is more important than error-free speech. Fanselow 1977 says that telling the students the correct answer blocks
them from building a pattern for long term memory. Lucas 1976 also says that correcting an error needs cognitive operations on the part of the student that are as
complex as the processes of making the error. Giving the correct answer does not mean that these operations will happen. Burt 1975 says that it is easy to break
students‟ confidence with too many interruptions. Burt and Kiparsky 1972 say that too many corrections cut off
students‟ sentences, stop their train of thought, and hold them from making new sentences.
Hendrickson made an article in 1978 which shows an overview of a research about error correction. He writes in his article that study in area is
actually insufficient and inclonclusive, but some important thing still can be concluded from it. He tries to answer five questions: should errors be corrected,
and, if so, which ones, when, how, and y whom? As cited from Walz‟ book, Error Correction Techniques for the FL Classroom, Hendrickson says that from the
research, he knows that correcting errors is useful. “He finds that correcting errors does improve the proviciency of second
language learners, if they are errors that inhibit communication, stigmatize PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
20 the learner, and appear frequently. There is no consensus as to when errors
should be corrected, but the manner in which it is done should be supportive rather than critical. Many ways of correcting have been
suggested, but none has been shown superior to any other. Finally,
teachers should not dominate this aspect of classwork.” p. 3 Berwald 1979 believes that correction does help, but it is only based on his class
with a small group of students for five hours or more per day. Students want to be corrected and will be disappointed if they are not given feedback. However,
deciding which errors need to be corrected and how the correction is done effectively is necessary.
“To some extent, that is to say, students do not simply learn the linguistic structures and grammar rules. Rather, they should be actively making
meaning through activities such as collaborative problem solving, writing for a purpose, discussion of topics of genuine interest, and reading,
viewing and responding to authentic materials” Murphy, 2000.
6. Lived Experience
Dilthey 1985 says that lived experience involves our immediate, pre- reflective consciousness of life: a reflexive or self-given awareness which is, as
awareness, unaware of itself. Gadamer 1975 observes that the word “experience” has a condensing and intensifying meaning: “If something is called
or considered an experience its meaning rounds it into the unity of a significant whole” p. 60.
B. Theoretical Framework
The formulated problem in this research is how participants give meaning on feedback in Englicious Chatime. To answer that problem, important points
fro m experts‟ theories explained on the previous part are compiled by the
21 researcher as the theoretical framework. This theoretical framework is used as the
guideline to analyze the phenomena in the research. The researcher wants to know Englicious Chatime pa
rticipants‟ opinion, expectation and feeling about activities done in Chatime especially feedback
given in the end of the Chatime. However, most of Englicious ‟ activities use the
concept of Communicative Language Teaching CLT. This method focuses on how to communicate with others. Grammar mistake and mispronunciation will be
corrected later. In Englicious Chatime, mistakes are also corrected later after the participants practice in the feedback session. According to Lubis 1988, there are
fourteen types of communicative activities. They are guessing games, situational practice, the self-
directed dialogue, a “mixer”, dialogues, improvisations, plays, readings, compositions, speeches, small-group discussions, debates, group
projects, and games. In Chatime, only four communicative activities are used. They are situational practice, small-group discussion, group project, and game.
The mentioned activities are aimed to improve participants‟ speaking ability, especially speaking in context of real life. Bygate 1987 says that people
do not always know how to make sentences all in a sudden: they have to produce them and adapt them to the circumstances. This means making decisions quickly,
implementing them smoothly, and adjusting their conversation as unexpected problems appear in their
path” p. 3. To gain those goals, participants should be given time to practice their speaking ability freely, that is why the feedback which
contains correction is given at the end of the practice session. Burt 1975 says that i
t is easy to break students‟ confidence with too many interruptions. Burt PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
22 Kiparsky 1972 says that too many corrections cut off students‟ sentences, stop
their train of thought, and hold them from making new sentences. The researcher believes that corre
cting participants‟ mistakes after the practice session is beneficial. According to Lewis 2002, feedback has five
benefits which are providing information for teachers and students, providing students with advice about learning, providing students with language input,
giving motivation, and leading students towards autonomy. One part of feedback, is error correction. The researcher also believes that
error correction which is contained in the feedback helps the participants to improve their language. Berwald 1979 believes that correction does help.
Students want to be corrected and will be disappointed if they are not given feedback. However, deciding which errors need to be corrected and how the
correction is done effectively is necessary. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
23
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter provides description of the methodology used in this research in order to answer the research question stated in Chapter I. The objective of this
research is to find out how participants give meaning on feedback in Englicious Chatime. This chapter is divided into six sections, which are research method,
research setting, research participants, instrument and data gathering technique, data analysis technique, and research procedure.
A. Research Method
In Kockelman s’s book 1967, p. 24, it is written that Hegel states that
phenomenology referred to knowledge as it appears to consciousness, the science of describing what one perceives, senses, and knows in one’s immediate
awareness and experience. The process leads to an unfolding of phenomenal consciousness through science and philosophy “toward the absolute knowledge of
the absolute”. Moustakas 1994 outlines five stand out qualitative inquiries in his book
which are Ethnography, Grounded Research Theory, Hermeneutics, Duquesne University’s Phenomenology Empirical Phenomenological Research, and
Heuristics. This research was included into the Empirical Phenomenological PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
24 Research because the focus of this research was to
investigate someone’s feeling by obtaining de
scriptions of the person’s feeling. To answer the research question, the researcher designed a
phenomenological research. Merleau-Ponty 1962 says that phenomenology is the study of essences. This research also tried to find out the essence of feedback
given in Englicious Chatime for the participants. Phenomenology is also regarded as “a study of people’s conscious experiences of their life-world’ Merriam, 2009,
p. 25. Since the participants directly experienced receiving the feedback, this methodology matched the formulated problem which dealt with conscious, direct
and real experiences. In collecting the data, the researcher used qualitative method. Qualitative
method was used because the researcher wanted to collect detailed personal answer from each participant. Bogdan Biklen 1982 writes that the data
collected from qualitative research can be considered as soft because it has rich description of people, places, and conversations which cannot be easily gained by
statistical procedures. Besides, qualitative research also concerned with understanding behavior from the subject’s own frame of reference.
This research focused on gaining Englicious Chatime participants’ opinion
and feeling about the feedback given in Englicious Chatime. “The best known
representatives of qualitative research and those that most embody the characteristics we just touched upon are participant observation and in-depth
interviewing ” Bogdan Biklen, 1982, p. 2. Therefore the data were collected by
interviewing the participants one by one. In-depth interview was used to seek out PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
25 the participants’ lived experience which included understanding, belief, feeling,
intention, and action about feedback given in Englicious Chatime. Before deciding the research participants, the researcher did an
observation to find Englicious Chatime participants who matched the criteria. The criteria was having three different levels of English which were low, middle, and
high according to Common European Framework of References for Language 2001.
B. Research Setting
The research took four different places. The observations were done in two different places and time where and when two Englicious Chatimes were held.
The first observation were done on December 2015 and the second was done on March 2016. Then, the in-depth interviews were also done in two different places
and dates. The first two in-depth interviews were done at a coffee shop on April 2016 for participant L and M and the last in-depth interview for participant H was
done at participant H ’s office on April 2016.
C. Research Participants
The participants of this research were three chosen Englicious members who had ever joined at least one Englicious Chatime. Those three chosen
participants had different level of ability in using English which was observed through the previous Englicious Chatimes; one participant with low ability, one
with middle ability and one with high ability.
26 The observations were done in two different times because the participants
joined two different Englicious Chatimes. Two of the participants joined the same Chatime, and then the other one participant joined different Englicious Chatime.
The observations were done by paying attention to the target participants’ language during the discussion in Englicious Chatime. The observed things were
the participants’ vocabulary, fluency, accuracy, and confidence in using English. Those participants were then labelled or mentioned as L, M, and H to
represent the low, middle, and high ability in speaking English. To decide the par
ticipants’ level of ability in using English, the researcher used the Common Reference Levels: global scale in Common European Framework of References
for Language 2001. There are six classes which then classified into three levels. The lowest
level is Basic User and had two more specific classes namely A1 and A2. The higher level is Independent User with two more specific classes namely B1 and
B2. Then, the highest level is Proficient User with two more specific classes namely C1 and C2. Classes with number 2 behind are higher than classes with
number 1 behind. After deciding the standard, the potential participants were observed and classified according to the matched points in the scale. The aim of
choosing participants with different level of English was to know whether or not the feedback had meaning to all level of the participants.
