46 the others to make noise. She was also hastily in discussing the exercises and she
did not make sure that every student had already understood to the topic or not. Furthermore, there were 10 of respondents who should improve the
clarity of question skill and distributing question skill. For example, the fourth respondent did not maintain good clarification toward the question answer, she
directly moved on to the next discussion without explaining and clarifying the answer from the question given. Thus, the students would think that the answer
was already correct although they have not known whether it was correct or not. Moreover, the first respondent had poor distributing question skill since she only
used a technique that was directly mentioning the name of the students to discuss the question. It was poor because she did not let the student to show their
participation maximally. So there was no competition in the class which could create boringness.
f. Set Closure Skill should be Improved
Teaching Skills Respondent
Perc enta
ge 1
st
2
nd
3
rd
4
th
5
th
6
th
7
th
8
th
9
th
10
th
Set closure skill
√ √ √
√
40 Table 6. Set Closure Skill should be Improved
The next skill that had to be repaired by the 40 of respondents was set closure skill. Allen and Ryan 1969, p.19 argued that set closure skill is achieved
when the major purposes and principles of the lesson or a portion of it is judged to have been learned, so that new knowledge can be related to past knowledge.
47 Teacher could prove that the students have already understood with the teaching
content by asking students to tell or make review about the teaching content currently studied. However, it was said that there were 40 of respondents had
poor closing activity. The main factor of the existing problem was because of poor time management skill. Micro teaching students tended to spend most of the time
for conducting set induction activity and main activity. Thus, they were lack of time and conducted closing activity hastily. Even they have no time to made
review. So it could be said that they failed in handling set closure activity. Based on the first observation, it was found that the first, second, seventh,
and eighth respondent had poor set closure skill. The first respondent had no time to conduct closing activity. She reviewed the lesson hastily. Moreover, the second
respondent also closed the lesson hastily and did not have review session. In addition, the seventh and the eighth respondent also had same problem that was
lack of time to conduct set closure skill. In responding to the significant improvement that were going to be done
by micro teaching students, the researcher designed a table of significance improvement to make easier in reading the result of the second teaching practice.
The researcher assumed that the micro teaching students will make improvement after being reflective practitioner and writing weekly reflection. As stated by
Ghaye 1998 that reflective practice is fuelled and energized by experience that teacher has to reflect on their experience and the things that it comprises.
Learning through experience interest: reflection on past actions. It is an active exploration on teachers ‘own and others’ experiences. This requires practitioner to
48 value their own experiences and have an openness that enables them to learn from
the experiences of others. Kolb: 1984. Therefore, micro teaching students are hoped to have improvement after having first teaching practice, watching other
teaching practice, and being reflective practitioner.
2. The Significant Improvements
