3. The Researcher as Research Instrument
According to Poggenpoel and Myburgh 2003, researcher as research instrument means that the researcher is the key in obtaining data from the
respondents. Furthermore, the researcher facilitates interaction with the respondents so that they can share data regarding to their experiences. In this
study, the writer as the researcher became the one who obtained the data, which were subsequently interpreted into meaningful information.
D. Data Gathering Technique
To answer the first research question, the writer gathered the data from the students of Microteaching class, a subject offered in the even semester of the
20082009 academic year. The writer collected the data by transcribing their recorded performance while doing their teaching practice.
As an attempt to answer the second research question, the writer conducted an interview to discover the causes for the errors that the participants encountered
in forming English questions. To answer the third question, which is to give possible recommendations to improve the production of grammatical English
question forms, the writer made use of the data from the interview as well as supporting references and theories.
E. Data Analysis Technique
The writer analyzed the errors in English question formations found on the data that had been collected. According to Dulay et al. 1982: 150, learners may
omit necessary items or add unnecessary ones; they may misform items or misorder them. Thus, surface strategy taxonomy, which highlights the ways
surface structures are altered, was seen to be relevant in categorizing the errors. The surface strategy taxonomy can further be divided into four categories of error,
namely 1 omission, 2 addition, which consists of double marking, regularization, and simple addition, 3 misformation, which consists of
regularization error, archi-form, and alternating form, and 4 misordering. In addition, the writer also considered uninverted form of questions as deviant forms
in question formations. After analyzing the errors, the writer interviewed five students who were
considered to make errors most frequently and variously. The writer then found out why the students made errors in English question formations. The data from
the interview were also useful for the writer to propose possible recommendations that would help the participants to improve the production of grammatical English
questions.
F. Research Procedure
The research was conducted in the even semester of 20082009 academic year. The first step in conducting the research was obtaining the video recordings
of the participants’ performance. Considering the time constraint, the writer obtained the data recorded on March 2, 3, 6, 10, 13, and 16, 2009 from four
different Microteaching classes. The video recordings were then transcribed into written form. By means of the transcriptions, the writer analyzed the errors that
the participants made in forming English questions. The questions which were analyzed were merely those made by the participants performing their teaching
practice, not by all class members. Afterward, the writer classified the errors into the types based on surface strategy taxonomy. For each type of error, the writer
described and explained it. Having done with the previous steps, the writer interviewed five participants
who were regarded as those making errors most frequently with diverse types of error. The interview aimed to gain the participants’ opinions on the causes for
their errors in forming English questions. At last, the writer drew conclusion including possible recommendations to improve the production of grammatical
English question forms. The research procedure is depicted through Figure 3.1 overleaf.
Figure 3.1. Research Procedure Transcribing the video
recordings of participants’ performance
Identifying the errors in the English question
formations
Describing and explaining the errors
Classifying the errors
Finding out the causes for the errors through
interview
Proposing possible recommendations to
improve the production of grammatical English
questions
32
CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter consists of both the presentation and the discussion of the research findings. There are three sections presented in this chapter. The first
section A, which is the answer to the first research question, concerns itself with the errors found in the English question formations that the participants made. The
second section B discusses the causes why the participants made the errors, which also answers the second research question. As the answer to the third
research question, the last section C deals with possible recommendations in order to improve the production of grammatical English questions.
A. The Errors in the English Questions
1. Data Presentation
As an attempt to obtain errors in forming English questions, the writer analyzed the transcripts of the video recordings of 40 participants while they
practiced teaching in Microteaching class. The questions analyzed were only the questions asked by the participants who were performing as teachers. Hence,
although some other participants made errors when they were pretending as students, the writer did not analyze them since there was a possibility that the
participants intentionally made errors to test their teachers whether they were aware or not of the errors.
32
Kategori