39
shared in front of the class, was basically the latest issue which was chosen by the lecturer. The lecturer gave the students freedom to choose the topic, therefore it was
based on their interest and their knowledge over the theme. It was expected that the students would improve their speech in the limited time given by the lecturer.
After doing the Hot Seat activity, students would get the feedback from the lecturer. The lecturer would give some comments and evaluation on their Hot Seat
performance directly after they finished talking. Usually the lecturer gave comment on their eye contact, content of their speech, and gesture. If there was time left, the
lecturer would give chances for other students in the class to give their friend who have performed the Hot Seat a feedback. After giving out the evaluation for the
students, the lecturer would give them correction and suggestion to improve their performance in the future.
B. Student’s Perception on the Speaking Anxiety through Hot Seat Game
In finding the students’ perception of the speaking anxiety, the researcher made a questionnaire which was divided into two parts. The questionnaires were
related to the Hot Seat Game and anxiety. In the first part, there were 22 items which had to be answered by giving a check √ on the box provided. In constructing the
questionnaire items, the researcher used Likert Scale. For one item, there were four options: Strongly Disagree SD, Disagree D, Agree A, Strongly Agree SA for
which the students had to fill the answers according to their experiences and feelings. The focus of this part one was to investigate the type of anxiety which was
40
experienced by the students while doing the Hot Seat. The 22 items of the questionnaire were adapted from Horwitz’s Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety
Scale FLCAS;1986. The statements in the questionnaire were slightly changed and modified in the relation with Hot Seat activity.
The second part was in the form of essay. The total of question was three questions where the students had to fill in the space provided to retell their
experiences and feelings. The focus of this part was also to investigate the indication of feeling anxious when they experienced Hot Seat activity and how they overcame
their own anxious indication. After retelling their experiences, in the third question, the participants were also asked to give their opinions about the improvement in Hot
Seat activity. The questionnaire sheets were distributed to the Critical Listening and
Speaking II classes. The researcher got permission to do the research in four classes. Lecturer 1 taught 3 classes: A6, B6, C6 and lecturer 2 taught 1 class: F6. In which,
the total of participants whom participated in filling the questionnaire were 100 participants.
In the modified FLCAS given to the participants, it consisted of two kinds of statement which were positive and negative. The positive statement scale ranged
from 1-4 with answer “Strongly Agree” to “Strongly Disagree”. While, the negative statement would be ranging from 4-1 with answer “Strongly Agree” to “Strongly
Disagree”. There were 9 positive statements in the questionnaire which are number 4,
