Type of Data Source of Data

53 University considering that they can be generated as non-English students major. Moreover, completed four levels of General English for four semesters and finally attended the ESP especially Medical English for Medical students and Law English for Law students, both groups were considered to master the same level of English proficiency. Accordingly, Medical and Law students were in Intermediate level, hence, had developed their English skill to cope with the higher level of English which was English based on their specializations or fields. However, all classes have the same chance to be observed, therefore here the researcher applied random sampling in collecting the data. Type of random sampling applied in this study was simple random sampling. Randolph and Myers 2013:51 infer “random sampling refers to sampling technique in which each element of the population has a known and equal chance of being selected”. In other words, a simple random sampling gives each member of the population an equal chance to be chosen. Constructively, Gorard 2004:67 contends that random sampling has two keys advantages, namely: it is free of the systematic bias that might stem from choices made by the researcher, and, it enables the analyst to estimate the probability of any finding actually occurring solely by chance. To know whether the different background of study fields affect the strategies and modifications employed by the non-English students, here the writer designed Discourse Completion Tasks for various situational contexts for two different groups, the Medicine group and the Law group. It is obvious that in deciding the number of the participants or the respondents of each groups in a quantitative study, there is also a determination. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI 54 The sample taken for the research has to fulfill requirement of the basic standard to make the study become valid. Gorard 2004:62 mentions that the number of sample of respondents have to meet 30 to fully complete the responses of the analysis. This number is the good number for a correlational study where in this study the researcher focused on finding the relation of difference between the two groups. In fact, one English class in Batam University had not more than 20 students, hence, the researcher took two classes for each field of study using random sampling method. As a result, there were four classes assessed in this research. After distributed the research instruments, the researcher found that there were students who did not attend the class at the day the research was conducted, and, on the other hand, there were students who had no complete responses on 9 situations provided in DCTs. Since this research took only 30 students for each study field or faculty, the researcher only selected the complete ones. In turns, the researcher had 60 samples from the total DCTs distributed with complete answers and responses to avoid missing data used for t-test, afterwards, the t-test procedure could be conducted. These DCTs were divided into two groups: 30 DCTs of Medicine students and 30 DCTs of Law students. This research is a single-moment study wherein the researcher emphasized merely on finding the difference between Medical and Law students, but not about the development of their request strategies that signified the progress of their pragmatic competence. Finally, the details of the data gathering conducted by the researcher are explained below. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI 55 Time of research: 18 – 21 October 2016 Place of research: Batam University, Jl. Abulyatama No.5, Batam Centre, Batam, Riau Islands, Indonesia.

3. Instrument of Data

As the instrument to collect the data, the researcher utilized Discourse Completion Tasks DCTs. This study employed a Discourse Completion Test or often termed as Discourse Completion Task to gather the data of speech acts. O’keeffe, Clancy Adolphs 2011:91 note that DCT was first used by Blum- Kulka in 1982 to examine pragmatic speech acts realization. They add that DCT has been widely and succesfully used as the data instrument in studies of speech acts. As Schauer and Adolphs 2006:120 put their concern that the aim of DCT research is to investigate a linguistic act within highly predefined parameters, further, Boxer and Cohen 2004 emphasize that DCT is used particularly when researching speech acts that readily occur but which are difficult to capture on recorded data for example: request, complaints, or apologies and looking at speech acts comparatively and it may be difficult to find corresponding acts that readily occur in the data. Moreover, this sort of research instrument became one of the most frequently used data elicitation tools in pragmatic research. This instrument assisted the researcher in highlighting particular functions of the language and analyzing how this fuctions were realized linguistically through the speech acts employed by the speakers. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI 56 Practically, DCT can be either written tasks or presented orally. In gathering the data using DCT, it constructs a type of language questionnaire whereby it is able to elicit what the speakers thought they would say in such situation. Basically, the way to gain the data is through setting a scenario which is presented and the informants or the respondents have a choice to give their responses spontaneously by referring to the speech acts they opt for, that are for requests. As the attempt to enhance the result of the DCT, Yoon and Kellogg 2002 propose to add a feature by using a cartoon picture to provide pictorial context allowing the respondents to elaborate the speech acts naturally. Before tested to the research’s subjects, the DCTs as the research instrument had to meet the validity and reliability of the instruments. Kraska-Miller 2014:18 unde rlines that “validity and reliability are the key psychometric properties related to measurement instruments”. At this point, validity extends to which an instrument used to measure what it is supposed to measure. Therefore, in this study, the researcher measured the validity and reliability of the DCT as the data elicitation instrument. It has been mentioned above that basically validity referred to the degree to which an instrument appears to measure what it purports to measure. Thus, the researcher first assessed the validity in terms of construct validity which covers also the face and content validity as well as instrument reliability. Kraska-Miller 2014:19 defines that “face validity is a qualitative decision related to the appearance, relevance, and representativeness of the items on a written instrument”. By taking four member panel as judges or raters, the researcher assured that the