Rina ’s use of English Rina ’s uses of instructional strategy

170 form of four rows of desks consisting of five desks in each row with two chairs at each desk.

5.2.3.3.1 Rina ’s use of English

From both observations, the researcher gained the impression that Rina was highly confident in speaking English in front of her students. She spoke English most of the time in both building interpersonal relationships with the students and in conducting the instruction, particularly in explaining and giving examples. She spoke Indonesian on some occasions when complication emerged while she was trying to develop concepts or illustration with the students. Sometimes she also used some translation in helping students with their understanding. In general, however, English seemed to be identified with her classes.

5.2.3.3.2 Rina ’s uses of instructional strategy

Rina gave the researcher the impression that she was supportive in the implementation of the newly introduced genre-based approach. This could be seen from the preparations she made before coming to the class and through to the implementation of the teaching approach she used in her classrooms. In terms of the instructional planning, she was well equipped with the syllabus and the lesson plans she had written up. Those preparations were so detailed that she theoretically anticipated most occurrences could possibly happen in her classroom. 171 With respect to her effectiveness Rina appeared to have made consistent efforts in helping students with problems or difficulties. She tried to cover the whole class by exercising high level of mobility in the classroom. She worked with groups and helped them solve their problems or questions. On the other hand, Rina used a great number of q uestions either to prompt the students‘ responses or to facilitate students‘ understanding. However, there was no strong indication that such questions were deliberately planned. They appeared to be spontaneous without systematic planning. Rina did not seem to use variety of measurement to gauge students‘ comprehension. She used questions and answers, pair work and group discussion, but they did not seem to function as means of assessing students‘ achievement. She did not seem to make notes to contribute to the rapport of the students ‘ achievement. In responding to the differences in individual levels or individual needs of the students, Rina seemed to relay on her intuition. She did not seem to systematically anticipate such individual differences. However, there was also indication that she was emotionally available for those students having difficulties. In responses to these students, she often provided additional or alternative explanations. In general, however, it appeared that there was only one single design of instruction regardless of individual differences among the students. 172

5.2.3.3.3 Classroom Management