Use of Teaching Aids Mastery of the Materials

9 In teaching practicum, the student-teachers are given feedback from mentor teacher both written and oral. The feedback is based on the student-teacher s’ performance when they do the teaching, by looking at the rubric of each aspect. The study Context of the study The setting of this research is Satya Wacana Christian High School which is a well- known school located in Salatiga, Central Java, Indonesia. Satya Wacana Christian High School is one of teaching practicum sites for student-teachers of the English Department of Satya Wacana Christian University. The students of this high school are familiar with English. Furthermore, in English class, the students are not allowed to use other languages besides English. This school is one of teaching practicum sites for the student- teachers of the English department. The student-teachers are obliged to teach all the classes of the first grade and the second grade. Method of Research This study was a descriptive qualitative study to find out the weakness of the student- teachers of the English Department at Satya Wacana Christian University in teaching. Participants The participants of the study were selected from student-teachers of the English Department at Satya Wacana Christian University and the mentor teacher of Satya Wacana Christian High School. All of the student-teachers were students who did the teaching practicum in Satya Wacana Christian High School in the second semester of 20122013. This study involved 9 student-teachers. The student-teachers should do at least 6 teaching. The 10 first two teaching were done in pairs and for the third until sixth teaching were done individually. Their performance was assessed by the mentor teacher. Data Collection In order to answer the research question, the data was collected through the written feedback given by the mentor teacher to the student-teachers for the third until sixth teaching. The reason of choosing the written feedback for the third until sixth teaching was that in the third until sixth teaching, the student-teachers did the teaching individually. The problems from each student-teacher could be seen clearly when they did the teaching individually. The reason of choosing written feedback was that written feedback was the only feedback that the mentor teacher could give while the student-teachers were teaching. Moreover, not all the student-teachers got oral feedback from mentor teacher. The feedback was based on student- teachers’ performance when they were teaching the students. The feedback contained all the teaching practicum evaluation aspect: preparation, teaching materials, language use, communication skills, lesson presentationteaching technique, classroom management, use of teaching aid, and mastery of the materials. In order to enrich the data, I observed the performance of the student-teachers when they were teaching. The observation was based on teaching practicum evaluation aspects which was excluded the preparation since it could not be observed in class. Analysis This study used qualitative data. The data were collected by copying the written feedback from the mentor teacher from the third until the sixth teaching. After collecting the data, the next step was coding. In coding, the data was analyzed by focusing at the weakness of every student-teacher and categorized based on eight aspects of teaching evaluation; 1 Preparation, 2 Teaching Materials, 3 Language Use, 4 Communication skills, 5Lesson 11 Presentation Teaching Technique, 6 Classroom Management, 7 Use of Teaching Aids, and 8 Mastery of the Materials. The next step was done by looking at the common weakness from all the student-teachers which came up when the student-teachers did their teaching. Findings and Discussion This section discusses the student- teachers’ weaknesses. The analysis showed that the student-teachers still had some weaknesses in some aspects. The aspects were based on the teaching evaluation in the teaching practicum.

1. Classroom Management

According to teaching evaluation rubric, a good classroom management means that the teacher gives attention and opportunity to all students equally, including the students who sit at the back row. The teacher also should give the students a lot of opportunity to get involved in the lesson and motivate them to follow the lesson enthusiastically. Since classroom management is seen as high priority for teachers to promote academic success Rubio, 2010; Rosas West, 2009, the student-teachers were supposed to have good classroom management when they are teaching. From the mentor teacher’s written feedback, it can be seen that almost all of the student-teachers of English department were still weak in classroom management. They still had weaknesses in monitoring, giving attention to students, and dealing with noisy students. According to the data in Gürbüz 2006, the same weakness was also done by student-teachers in Turkey in which the student-teachers in Turkey were also regarded as non-native speaker teachers.

a. Monitoring

The English Department student-teachers have weakness in monitoring the students when teaching. It can be seen from the mentor teacher written feedback that suggested that 12 student-teachers moved around the class. She wrote, “Move around the class and monitor your students when they were doing the fill in the blank activity. ” Student-teacher G A similar written feedback was also given to student-teacher B, E and I. The mentor teacher here asked the student-teachers to move around the class to make sure that the students really worked on the exercise and motivated them. From the feedback given, it can be seen that the student-teachers did not move around the class and monitor the students like they were supposed to do. It also happened when I observed one of the student-teachers of the English Department when teaching. I noticed that the student-teachers only stood in front of the class instead of moving around the classroom to monitor the students. Even, there was a student-teacher who only sat all the time like what the mentor teacher wrote as the feedback. She wrote, “Don’t sit all the time.” Student-teacher F These data were contrary to what teacher should do. According to Kyriacou 2009, teacher should monitor their students to see the progress of the lesson to ensure its success. With monitoring, the teacher knows if their students have some difficulties or if their students understand with the lesson.

b. Giving attention

In teaching evaluation rubric, the student-teachers were supposed to give their attention to whole students in the class equally. But in reality, it was contrary to what was expected. She wrote, “Pay more attention to your students who sat in the back row and unmotivated ones.” Student-teacher I A similar feedback was also given for student- teacher E. From the mentor teacher’s written feedback above, it can be seen that the student-teachers of English Department had weakness in giving attention to their students equally. Some of them only gave their attention to a group of students or only some students in the class.