Action research cycle 2 Teaching and Learning Process throughout the Action Research Cycles
113
had no idea on what to say. He scratched his head and kept looking to the right and left. R FN 8.5
From the field note above, it is seen that Titus was one example of the less active students. Titus was, in fact, aware of his inferiority as it was written in one
of his reflective journal:
I feel like I haven’t done enough speaking practice because I haven’t been able to speak English yet. Translated, Q ST01-REFL 4.4
Throughout the learning process, his biggest hindrance was being able to
formulate utterance spontaneously as he needed more time to think of the vocabulary first and process them into utterances. The same problem sometimes
occurred also to some other students. In order to deal with this problem, the teachers usually appoint students with less contribution directly, which sometimes
also did not work as it is reported in the field note. To respond to this problem, in other speaking opportunities, students were given some time to prepare
themselves and formulate what to say before performing a speech, instead of asking them to do impromptu speech. In another speaking activity in lesson
session 6, the students were to present their results voluntarily in front of the class after interviewing friends within the topic of “predictions on the future of
technology”. The situation is portrayed in the following field note:
Ms. Nora invited the students to share their interview results voluntarily. Some students volunteered themselves: Desta, Yosep, Satria, Ben, and
Vino. Unfortunately, the time was not enough for everyone to speak R FN 9.18
The above field note reports the moment when some students who used to be passive volunteered themselves to speak up. Desta and Satria were two of the
114 bottom tier students who now were confident and brave enough to speak
individually in front of the class. This voluntary speech was a big leap for them. The issue of inferiority and confidence was not only experienced by the
less-competent students. It turned out that inferiority did not occur based on students’ competence. Amin, one of the middle tier students seemed not to talk a
lot during whole-class discussions. When I clarified this during the interview session, here is Amin’s response:
Because I don’t master enough vocabulary, I don’t have enough confidence to speak. Translated, P ST02-INT 22
Similarly, Ben, one of the top tier students frequently wrote about his incapability in speaking performance as well as group interactions in his reflective journal:
I am not to dare to speak to everyone yet. Q ST03-REFL 4.4 I feel like I haven’t been able to help my classmates yet, because my
English is still bad. Translated, Q ST03-REFL 5.4 Not yet. For this meeting, I feel like I was too quiet and I didn’t do a lot
of interactions Translated, Q ST03-REFL 6.4
In fact, the sense of inferiority could lead to demotivation both in individual and collaborative learning process, among which was shown in
students’ low participation during speaking practice activities. In addition to poor speaking practices, students’ demotivation led to their lack of participation in the
process of collaborative learning. The following interview transcript depicts students’ reluctance to contribute in group works:
I haven’t given enough assistance to my friends because first, when I thought that my friend ‘s sentence was incorrect, maybe he did not find
it incorrect as well. So I did not dare to give them inputs on that. Translated, P ST09-INT 26
115 From the data above, it is understood that the student was reluctant to contribute
to peer’s improvement because of his lack of confidence. He was not sure about his capability to correct his peer’s work.
The fact that inferiority could be experienced by any students in any levels of competences made it necessary to raise all students’ confidence as well as
belief in their own capability. Therefore, at the end of the last lesson session in cycle 2, I conducted a whole-class reflection session in the purpose of regaining as
well as increasing students’ motivation. The session episode is portrayed in the
following field note:
In the last ten minutes, I invited the students to do another reflection since this was the end of cycle 2. I invited them to recall our goal and all of
them still remembered it. I asked them reflective questions on what progress they had make. I showed th
em a poem entitled “Be the Best of Whatever You Are” by Douglas Malloch. I encouraged them to be the
best of whoever they were and not to worry about not being able to be as competent as others. The students were all attentive and hopefully, their
willingness to develop improved. R FN 9.20
This effort was hopefully embraced by all students to appreciate their own capability, so that they could be confident with themselves.
b Students’ awareness of different personal competences
The second issue emerging in the collaborative learning dynamics was related to students’ higher awareness of their classmates’ competence. As the
process went by, students knew better both their own and each other’s learning
capability. This fact affected the participants in both positive and negative ways. One of the positive impacts was that the students were more reflective as they
understood their own capability. The students who were aware that they lacked competence made more efforts to develop themselves. One of their efforts was
116 done through completing the vocabulary listing task, which was made as the
project of this cycle see section B. 1. b. 1 Planning. This lesson episode is portrayed in the following observation field note:
While waiting for all students to gather in the room, I went around to check their vocabulary project. Each of them had a unique way to list the
new vocabulary. Desta wrote them on a tiny notebook with small letters. He said he liked to make it small since he could bring it everywhere in his
pocket, so he could memorize the words anytime. Amin typed his word list tidily and printed it. He wrote the English words and their meanings
in Greek. He said he did it to make him always remember the words from two foreign languages that he had learned. R FN 8.1
From this field note, it is understood that students were facilitated to learn according to their individual preferences. Students knew the best way to develop
themselves and were willing to make an effort the best that they could. Realizing that they needed to develop their English competence, Titus and
Amin testified how they study outside the class as one of their individual efforts to develop their English competence. It is depicted in the following interview
transcripts:
Yes. I usually discuss with friends outside the class. I read the tenses book. When I don’t understand, I ask Arka or Yosep. So they explain.
Most of the time, Yosep can explain the difficult material. Translated, P ST01-INT 19
This interview transcript describes that Titus had the initiative to learn more from a friend whom he thought was more competent than him. It was impressive that
Titus did not hesitate nor feel inferior to consult his peer for developing himself. Vino and Dony, in fact, performed similar efforts. These following
transcripts present their answers to the question “What kind of efforts have you
made outside the class to improve yourself more?”: PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
117
...sometimes I read one book loudly in my room to push myself to speak. Just a simple book like “The Story of Bear”, for example. If I find new
vocabulary, I underline them. Then when I don’t know how to pronounce particular words, I ask Br. Stefanus or Fr. Bayu. Then, I try to find out the
meanings of the new words that I haven’t known the meanings by myself. Translated, P ST06-INT 13
Well... I practice speaking. I try to speak with friends especially on English day. Translated, P ST07-INT 26.
Usually, I practice conversations with Br. Stefanus, because it feels more relaxed to talk to him. Translated, P ST07-INT 26.
Those students had a remarkable initiative to make extra efforts outside the class to improve their English speaking competence. This indicated that they had
performed independent learning, which made them autonomous learners. Despite this, the fact that they prefer to get assistance from seniors could indicate that
some of the students had a kind of distrust of their classmates, which was also an issue in cycle 1 see section B. 1. 2 d Students’ collaborative attitude outside the
classroom. This could probably happen because those students know their friends’ capability, so they did not trust that their friends were able to help them.
Responding to this matter, I self-reflected on why this kept occurring. Then I decided to find out more from Arka, a student who always preferred to
have his works checked by Br. Stefanus, his senior. In an informal consultation session on August 17
th
holiday, I talked to Arka personally. The episode is depicted in the following field note:
After we finished discussing the role play, I reminded them not to forget to do their homework on information-gap conversation, which they had to
exchange with friends. As the discussion finished, Titus and Dony left, but Arka remained in this room. So I asked his opinion about the
exchanging work activity. From Arka I understood that he preferred his work to be checked by seniors, just as what he used to do. He told me he
simply wanted to be corrected by someone that he thought was capable enough to check his work. R FN 8b.5
118 It was understandable that some students might have wanted to consult
with their seniors or anyone else from outside the class, who were considered more capable. After contemplation, it was realized that they should not be stopped
from doing that action, since it was one of students’ individual efforts to develop themselves, which had to be respected. Therefore, as their teacher, I let them
continue doing that as long as they still respect their friends in the context of their group’s collaborative learning environment.
Further, it was evidenced that despite any students’ efforts to consult their seniors, they still kept the values of collaborative learning very well. From the
classroom dynamics, it was found that students were still caring and collaborative with each other. Particularly, the higher competent students were more responsive
and helpful to those less competent peers. The condition is depicted in the following observation field notes:
... During this vocabulary building activity, all students were attentive, except Titus. While other students were taking notes, he did not. Titus did
not seem to focus on the lesson. Responding to this, the teacher asked him the English word for ‘kutub selatan’. Titus could not answer, even
the answer was written on the board. Yosep, who sat across him kept blinking his eyes to Titus while pointing his finger to the board, trying to
give a clue on the answer, which actually was written on the board. R FN 7.4
The students were divided into 4 groups, in which they had to pick their own partner... It was interesting to see that Arka came to Titus and Satria
and volunteered to be one group with them. R FN 7.13
From the field notes above, it is depicted that the more capable students, Arka and Yosep had a high initiative to help less competent peers. Additionally, Arka’s
behavior in the grouping activity really indicated that he was aware of the fact that his weaker friends needed a stronger partner like him. Thus, he volunteered
119 himself to collaborate with his less-competent peers. His willingness to volunteer
himself, therefore, indicated that his sense of collaboration has grown stronger. After all, it was found out in three lesson sessions that whenever students
were asked to determine their own group members, the group composition was always in mixed-competence. Here, it was indicated that the students were aware
of their own capability as well as situation, and they knew how to deal with that situation positively. The mutual tolerance among students demonstrated that they
had built emphatic understanding among each other, which was manifested in equal distribution of competence variance in spontaneous accidental grouping.
The awareness of personal competence has led one of the students to notice that he was regularly put in a group of low competence students, which
made him feel uncomfortable. An interview result with one of the bottom tier students revealed this discomfort. The following interview transcript portrays this
student’s response toward the question “Which learning activity do you dislike most?”.
Well... I don’t like when I have to do a task in a group with Titus and Desta. I hope that the three of us are put in separate groups, so we could
get more assistance from more competent friends. I mean, yes, please change the group members. Translated, P ST09-INT 16
The information from this interview transcript signals that students did not feel comfortable being grouped with similar competence students. In fact, they felt
discouraged. In addition, they found it difficult to develop when they study with the same low competent peers.
Students’ disapproval on homogenous grouping might have been the expression of “more negative attitudes about themselves”
Matavire, Mukavhi, Sana, 2012, p.284. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
120 Similarly, another student shared his aspiration regarding the need to
group higher competent students with lower competence students, as presented in the following interview transcript:
... what I see is that when we are having a group discussion, some more capable friends need to be put in different groups. For example, Yosep,
he is capable. So, he needs to be grouped with those who are less capable. P ST06-INT 18
After all, findings show that there were forms of rejection addressed to the homogeneous grouping strategy from both bottom tier and top tier students. These
findings, thus, support the notion that grouping students based on ability brings more negative effects than positive effects Adodo Agbayewa, 2011; Matavire,
et al. 2012. This is because ability grouping could potentially deprive students’
opportunity to learn better, particularly those who are placed in low ability level. Consequently, the students become “unmotivated to learn because of peer,
personal, and teachers’ expectations of poor performance” Adodo Agbayewa, 2011, p.49. Embarking from this finding, the ability-based grouping strategy was
discontinued starting from the third meeting of action research cycle 2.
c Promotion of s
tudents’ learning autonomy The
previous reports on students’ inferiority as well as increasing awareness of learning have produced some indications. One of which showed that
students were found to have become more aware of their individual learning progress as they could remark their learning habits and deficiencies, and they had
attempted to overcome those. Here, the collaborative learning process was found to facilitate students to perform different ways of learning English, which implied
121 that they became more autonomous in learning. Collaborative learning strategies
which were adopted throughout the action in cycle 2, were also intended to solve the problems by making
students able to “take responsibility for their own learning” Bremner, 2008, p.8, so that they could achieve learning autonomy.
In the purpose of building learning autonomy, at the beginning of each lesson session in cycle 2, the students were in
vited to find out that day’s lesson objectives, in the hope that they could take control of their learning process in
order that the course goal could be achieved. The following field note portrays a lesson episode concerning the respective matter.
I invited the students to answer teaser questions on conditional sentences and expressions of agreementdisagreement based on the previous
vocabulary building activity. This was done to help students figure out today’s objective. The first teaser question was “If it is raining, what will
you do?”. There were three alternative answer that students could choose. Vino
answered “I will go out and play in the rain.”, while Ben and Desta answered “I will go to sleep.” I asked the next question to Satria “Do you
agree or not with Ben?” Then Satria said he did not agree. He said he would stay in the room and pray if it is raining. From this discussion, I
asked the whole class what they were about to study. They then stated today’s objectives, pioneered by Yosep, which were to be able to use
conditional sentence within the topic of natural phenomena and give responses using the expressions of agreementdisagreement. R FN 7.6
The process of involving students in formulating lesson objectives as described in the field note above was a form of building students’ sense of
responsibility as well as encouraging them to take an active part in making decisions in their learning. When students had understood their own goal, it was
expected that they were able to determine how to learn and how to achieve it as well. In the attempt to seek their contribution to determine their own learning, the
students were given selections of activity with equal difficulty level, as a manifestation of differentiated instruction principle. They were given the freedom
122 to choose the task as well as topic they preferred in order to achieve the lesson
objectives. Field notes taken from lesson session 4 captured the respective lesson episodes.
Following the listening passage, the students were given different projects to accomplish in the attempt to achieve today’s objectives.
Project A = Identifying conditional sentences. Project B = Identifying expressions of agreement disagreement. Project C = Giving responses
using the expressions of agreementdisagreement. Each student was allowed to choose which project he would prefer to accomplish. They had
to finish the project individually within 5 minutes. They were still allowed to consult their peers. R FN 7.9
The students were divided into 4 groups, in which they had to pick their own partner. Each group chose a debate notion and decided to support or
go against the notion. Then, they prepared notions according to whether they were pro or con in their group... R FN 7.13
The first debate notion was “If there is an earthquake, people must go out of the buildings quickly”. Group 1 and group 2 chose this notion. Group
1: Yosep and Dony was the “Pro” group, while group 2, Ben, and Vino, was the “Con” group. Group 3 and 4 chose the second debate notion “If
there is a lightning thunder, we must not use the telephone.” Group 3: Amin and Desta, was the “Pro”, meanwhile group 4: Arka, Titus and
Satria was the “Con” group. R FN 7.14
The lesson episode above represents how the learners were involved in determining how to achieve the lesson objectives according to their interests as
well as preferences. Letting them select their own preferred task and topic was, in fact, found to be an effective way to encourage students to take responsibility on
the tasks that they had chosen themselves. By having a task according to individual preferences, they could be more motivated to accomplish it.
Autonomy in language learning, according to Benson 2013, p.840, refers to “learning practices involving learners’ control over aspects of their learning or,
more broadly, learning that takes place outside the conte xt of formal instruction.”
A number of data entries supported this notion as well, especially those obtained from students’ interview, among which have been elaborated in the previous sub-
123 section see section B. 1. b
. 2 b Students’ awareness of different personal competences. During the interview, some students testified their own or other
peer’s efforts that represent autonomous learning attitudes. The interview transcripts below present their testimony:
Maybe it depends on the assignment. If I can do it myself, then I’d better do it independently. But if I can’t do the assignment or it takes some
people to do the task, then I prefer to do it collaboratively. For example the last role-
play task or vocabulary task. I couldn’t do those by myself. Translated, P ST03-INT 29
Well... it’s like...errr...Titus. He studies. Sometimes he studies also and he has an English tense guidebook, then he actively asks Arka about new
vocabulary. He also learns reading with Arka. These past 2 weeks, he started to be confident to express himself during the English day. For
example with Father Sussanto. Something like that. Translated, P ST06- INT 14
From the interview transcript above, it is understood that the students performed independent learning outside the class. In this case, they could take
control over their own learning even without teacher’s assistance. They could
have an initiative in determining what, when, and how to learn using their individual capacity and responsible for their own learning. This indicated that
some students had gained learning autonomy. However, there has only been small number of evidence showing autonomy in studen
ts’ learning. Therefore, a lot more efforts need to be performed to grow s
tudents’ learning autonomy in the upcoming action research cycle.
3 Reflecting
The classroom dynamics of the cycle 2 of action research was colored with diverse findings. Some improvements were identified, yet some stagnation
124 remained. Reflecting as one of the most important elements in action research
undertakings was performed in order to continually evaluate as well as improve the situations existing in mixed-competence English speaking class. This
reflecting section, again, is divided into two parts. The first one elaborates the improvements achieved during cycle 2, while the second part discusses some
points to improve in the upcoming cycle. a
Students’ improvements during action research cycle 2 A number of improvements have been implicitly elaborated in the sub-
section of acting and observing. The improvements took place in students’ both learning process and learning achievement. In terms of learning process, the first
obvious improvement was the emergence of learning autonomy, as it has been discussed in the previous section see section B. 1. b. 2 c Promotion of students’
learning autonomy. Students’ autonomy in learning was seen through their
personal willingness to keep up with other peers as well as develop themselves on their own ways. Some students like Arka, Vino and Dony loved to practice
speaking outside the class and consult with seniors whenever they had difficulties. Some others enjoyed studying independently, just like Ben. All in all, different
learning preferences are welcomed in mixed-competence environment as individual learner’s diversity is embraced towards learning success.
The emergence of learning autonomy among students had made them able to give more contributions in the collaborative learning process. A finding from
researcher’s field note depicts how autonomous learning attitude was demonstrated in an out-class group work in preparation for a role-play
125 performance. The respective field note script taken in an informal consultation
session on August 17
th
is presented as follows:
The second group showed up. They were Ben, Satria, and Amin. They had a clear initial idea on the role-play story overview as they could
explain the story concept well. Their role- play topic was “Magic book”.
The flow of the story was clear and they had started writing their draft, although it was not complete yet. The three of them could explain well
when I asked them one by one things related to the story flow. This could indicate that they built the story together so everyone had a good
understanding of it. Then, I asked them to continue their good work since they did not have more questions to ask me about. R FN 8b.3
The outstanding progress of group 3 in role-play preparation indicated that they did excellent collaboration within the group. This was inseparable from their
individual capacity of learning autonomously since the process was carried out without teacher’s assistance. Here, student’s autonomous learning had led to their
group’s success. The second improvement was that some students who used to be passive
and reserved became more contributive in collaborative learning process. One distinct example was experienced by Satria. As one of the bottom tier students, he
was usually passive and receptive. However, in cycle 2, he made significant improvement as what he wrote in his reflective journal.
I made improvements in terms of group discussions. I stated some ideas. I can already participate in group discussions and try to correct friends’
works Translated, Q ST09-REFL 6.3-4
Satrias reflection was in line with what Amin testified in the interview
session. In the interview session with Amin, he was asked if any of his group mate in the role-play group was not contributive enough, and he said yes. The
following transcript shows Amin’s further elaboration on his effort to help Satria become more contributive in his group dynamics.
126
... An example is when we were working on the role-play dialog. When Satria was quiet, I started to tease him with some jokes. because if I
didn’t, he would have remained quiet. Well, with a few jokes first, then he will involve himself in the discussion. He could eventually express his
ideas. Translated, P ST02-INT 28
Both Satria and Amin demonstrated remarkable example of collaboration skills. They both support each other to gain mutual benefits in the attempt of achieving
the same goal: being able to create a role-play dialog. Further, a number of
findings indicate students’ various improvements in learning achievement, as it has also been presented in the acting and observing
discussion part. It was obvious that both bottom and middle tier students made significant improvements in terms of speaking skills. The following field note
describes the respective issue when students were performing a debate.
The groups started to go on the debate round. All the students stated their arguments based on what was prepared in their notes. However, some
students like Amin, Desta and Arka were willing to deliver arguments beyond what was written in their notes. During the debate, Amin and
Desta seemed to be the toughest competitors who continually state their argument to win the debate. They kept building new arguments whenever
the opposing group conveyed rebuttal. However, they had to stop because the time was up. R FN 7.16
In a debate competition to practice making arguments and expressing agreement or disagreement, Amin and Desta were successful in conveying their arguments as
well as rebutting opponents’ statements without relying much on the notes they had prepared. Here, their impromptu speaking skill had developed.
In another activity in the form of role-play, again, a bottom tier student showed significant improvement. Satria, who used to be a quiet and reserved
student, performed laudably in a role-play activity, as described in the following field note.
127
Group 2, Ben, Satria, and Amin showed great entertaining performance in the topic of “Magic book” technology. Their acting was
also impressive. Outstanding teamwork, everyone had balanced portion of talking. The language focuses required were well included in the
dialogs. Satria’s performed all his dialogs without reading the script. He did not make frequent pauses as well in his speech... R FN 9.6
From the field note, it is depicted how Satria, who used to be a timid students had gained confidence in speaking as he could perform his dialogs smoothly without
looking at the scripts. The success of group 2’s performance was inseparable from
everyone’s contribution in a series of collaborative preparation. The outstanding speaking performance demonstrated by previously less
competent students signaled that every student could excel in the task and learning environment that suits their preferences. Amin and Desta were good at building
arguments in debates, while Satria was excellent at performing role-play. The extensive speaking activities did not only benefit the bottom and middle tier
students. In fact, they also benefited the top tier students, as students like Arka, Yosep, and Vino usually excelled at delivering impromptu thoughts during the
classroom and group discussions, as they were usually standing at the front line when no other students were willing to volunteer to speak in the discussion. Here,
learning in differentiated instruction environment had benefited different students in different ways. Thus, the extensive variations of speaking activities were
effective in developing students’ speaking proficiency as it could provide broader opportunities to the diverse needs of learners.
128 b
Points to improve in the next cycle Based on the findings throughout the cycle 2 of action research, there were
some reflection points that needed improvements. Firstly, responding to students’
inferiority in collaborative learning environment, there was a need to boost their self-esteem. Always giving students opportunities for prepared speeches instead
of impromptu speeches could be one alternative to solve this problem. In addition, regularly putting students in mixed-competence group was the suitable alternative
to solve this problem since lower competent students could get more assistance and therefore confidence when learning together with higher competent peers.
This heterogeneous grouping strategy could also be the solution to improve the situation complained by students regarding their discomfort of being
grouped with the same competence peers. Giving students the freedom to select their group partners was undertaken, as students had been aware of
each other’s competence and they were always able to form well-balanced mixed-competence
groups, which was noticeable in every free-grouping opportunity. The regularly changed seating arrangement was usually effective in helping students form their
own group more flexibly. The homogeneous competence grouping strategy, on the other hand, had better be discontinued as it did no longer benefit the students.
In fact, some students reported that homogenous competence grouping strategy deterred them from developing optimally.
The second reflection point was related to the need of developing learners’
autonomy. It has been reported that the students gained learning autonomy throughout the two cycles, which was presumably impacted by studying in a
129 collaborative learning environment. As a response to this, there was a bigger
necessity to help students become more autonomous in learning. This is because the action dealing with growing learning autonomy in the cycle was not optimal
enough since there had not been major evidence of significant improvements shown in students’ autonomy. In fact, only a small number of students
demonstrated autonomous learning, yet the others had not. This notion was supported by some interview results obtained throughout cycle 2. In one of the
interviews, Ben, one of the top tier students, stated that he had difficulty in constructing long sentences, especially transferring his ideas into English
sentences because he sometimes could not find appropriate translations after looking up in the dictionary. Then he was asked what efforts he had done to
overcome that. The following transcript presents his answer:
I usually find... other words to replace them. Well... asking for friend’s help... maybe I have never done that yet. Well I’m not sure about that. If I
study without the teacher, I feel reluctant. Translated, P ST03-INT 23- 24
From the interview transcript above, it was understood that the student felt
under motivated in learning independently. Also, he did not seem to try other ways to solve his personal problem related to studying English. This indicated that
there still existed a problem hindering the student from taking an active part toward his own learning. In other words, this problem hampered him from
achieving autonomous learning. Similar to Ben, Amin also experienced a problem that retarded his learning
autonomy, as captured in these following interview transcripts:
Well... take-home assignments are not annoying, but there is laziness inside me. giggles. Well probably... something like that. I ran out of
130
time, so I did the reflection late at night as well. Translated, P ST02-INT 15-16
The interview transcript implies that time limitation was an obstacle which made Amin dislike take-home assignments besides the fact that he was also
demotivated. As a reflection from this finding, it was necessary to provide students with take home tasks that raised students’ motivation and did not
consume too much time, yet still effective in promoting learners’ autonomous and collaborative learning, as well as improving their English proficiency.