32
1. Feedback from the Lecturer
Feedback from the lecturers dealt with the ways and the time the lecturers gave feedback to the students. The ways mean in what form the feedback was given
spoken or written, in what way the feedback was given orally or written, how the feedback was given personally or to the whole class, and how detailed the
feedback was in detailed or general. Meanwhile, the time means when the feedback was given to the students,
whether directly after the students finished teaching or sometime after the teaching.
To find out the feedback that the lecturers gave to the students, the writer had some observations during the Microteaching classes and the observations, the
writer observed the lecturers from the observation room. The writer also distributed questionnaires to the students to gain deeper information about their
perception on the lecturers’ feedback.
a. Findings and Discussion
Feedback is important for students to improve their teaching performance in class. In Microteaching class, students would get feedback from the lecturers.
Different lecturers had different way in giving the feedback. Through the observation, questionnaire distribution, and the interview, the writer found out
that the three lecturers from three different classes had a different way in providing the feedback.
33
Referring to Appendix 3, the result of the observation and interview would be presented in this part. Woolfolk stated that feedback could be given both in oral
and written form 1987. The result of the observation showed that the lecturers provided the feedback in some ways See Appendix 3. In this part, the writer
presented the result of the survey in three categories based on the students’ class.
1 Feedback in class D
In class D, the feedback was both in spoken and written form. It was given individually and to the whole class directly after the meeting and in one additional
meeting after all of the students have the teaching practice. The feedback was specific and detailed. Further explanation about the feedback given in class D was
presented below. a The form of the feedback
On the interview, some students explained that the feedback was about what the strengths and the weaknesses of the students are. It was given in spoken
form and in the end of the class, they got a piece of paper containing the written feedback on their teaching performance also.
b The Ways the Lecturer Gave the Feedback The result of the questionnaire showed that the majority of the students
stated that the feedback was given individually and only some did not. In addition to that, there were about 32 of the students stated that the feedback
was given in front of the class. In other words, the feedback was given both individually and in front of the class.
34
Through the observation and interview See Appendix 3 and Appendix 5, the students stated that feedback was given individually because after having
the teaching practice or some days after that, added by some students, the lecturer asked the students to go to a room and they gathered together to
discuss their teaching performance. Before that, the lecturer had a brief meeting with three observers who observed the other students’ teaching. The
meeting was to discuss their opinion about their friends’ teaching performance. Afterwards, the lecturer invited the students who had practiced teaching to
gather together with the observers. Those students were asked about their opinion on how their practice teaching was. Following that, the lecturer
responded to it and gave feedback to them one by one. The writer found that the feedback was also given in front of the class. The
three students interviewed by the writer explained in the interview that there was an additional meeting a week after all of the students finished the teaching
practice. In the meeting, the lecturer gave general feedback on the students’ teaching performance to the whole class. Having the general feedback, the
lecturer asked the students to work in a group based on the skill they teach on their teaching practice and shared their experience in teaching a skill. After
that, the lecturer asked the students, one by one, about what they thought about their own performance and commented on each student’s teaching performance
specifically. The groups were to make it easier for the students to learn from others’ mistake in teaching a skill since each group would also tell other groups
about their teaching experience.
35
c The Detail of the Feedback The feedback given by the lecturer was specific. It was clearly seen from the
result of the questionnaire that 100 or all of the students agreed with that statement. It covered every detail of their performance. They stated that it was
specific when it was given individually and general when it was done in the additional meeting as the writer has explained above. Students also wrote that
the lecturer provided affective feedback since the lecturer provided positive encouragement for the students Stone and Nielsen 1982 as cited by Berewot
2001, for example: “You have to work hard in your pronunciation and grammar because someday you will become a language teacher, your skill is
the main aspect to be a teacher.” d The Time the Lecturer Gave Feedback
From the observation, it was obviously seen that the lecturer gave the feedback after the three students have finished teaching. In the interview, they
clarified that they got the feedback directly after the class was over and they got the feedback together with their two other friends.
2 Feedback in class E
In class E, the lecturer had a quite different way of giving the feedback with the previous class. The feedback was frequently given in spoken form. It was given to
the whole class after all the students had the teaching practice. The lecturer gave general feedback to the students. Below was further explanation of the feedback in
class E.
36
a The form of the feedback The result of the questionnaire showed that the percentage of the students
who agreed that the feedback was given in spoken or written form was the same 81 each. In other words, the feedback was not only in a spoken form
but also in a written one. It confirms the theory of Woolfolk 1987: 539 which stated that feedback could be conveyed in two ways; oral and written form.
From the observation, it could be seen that after having the general feedback orally, the lecturer distributed students’ portfolio during the semester. Based on
the observation and explanation from the students in the interview, it was a compilation of what they have made during the course like lesson plans,
materials, teaching reflections, and observation sheets which consisted of the written feedback from their friends and the lecturer.
b The Ways and the Time the Lecturer Gave the Feedback From the observation, students did the teaching practice for couple of
weeks and during those weeks, the way the lecturer gave feedback was different in one to another meeting. The result of the questionnaire showed that
there were only 29 percent of the students stated that the feedback was given individually. In contrast, the 42 of the students stated it was given in front of
the class. The explanation that could be drawn from the observation and interview was that in some meetings, the lecturer gave the feedback directly
after the class and discussed some points related to the students’ performance in teaching, and in another meeting the lecturer did not. Having the feedback
directly, one of the students stated in the interview that not all of the students
37
got the same feedback after the teaching practice because the lecturer only gave the feedback if there was serious mistake made by some students. The lecturer
showed one’s mistake to the whole class so that other students, who had not had the teaching practice yet, would not do the same mistake like their friend
did. However, the lecturer also gave the feedback in an additional meeting,
which was specially arranged to discuss all students’ teaching performance and to give the feedback to the students. From the observation, the writer observed
that the lecturer kept the written feedback and gave it to each student in that meeting. It was a week after all students have finished the teaching practice. In
the meeting, the lecturer gave the general feedback to all students. The lecturer explained the general problem that the most of the students had. The feedback
was also given to each student. c The Detail of the Feedback
The feedback given in front of the class was quite specific. The lecturer discussed the problem that the students mostly had in their teaching and
pointed to some students’ weaknesses to let other students knew how the teaching should be done. It was informational feedback for the students as it
referred to correction, evaluation, and incorrect response as explained by Stone and Nielsen 1982 as cited by Berewot 2001. In contrast, in the written form,
the feedback was not that specific because the lecturer only stated simple feedback for example very good, well done, good, etc. Some of the
interviewees revealed that having a simple feedback, they could not catch
38
clearly what the ‘very good’ or ‘bad’ mean and in what case their good or bad at.
3 Feedback in class G
In class G, the feedback was mostly given in written form. It was given individually directly after the meeting. The feedback was specific and detailed.
Below, the writer attempted to explain the feedback the students got in class G. a The Form of the Feedback
From the result of the questionnaire, it was obviously seen that 70 of the students stated agree that the feedback given individually. The feedback was
given individually that every student got a piece of paper from the lecturer consisting of the feedback for them. It also clarified that about 90 of the
students stated they got written feedback. The result of the questionnaire also showed that there were about 40 of the students stated that the feedback was
given in front of the class. Based on the interview, one of the students explained that the oral feedback was given in some practices before they
practiced the class teaching. b The Detail of the Feedback
The written feedback they got was specific. It was clearly seen in the questionnaire that 90 of the students agreed with that. The lecturer mentioned
all the strengths and weaknesses of the students in detail and specific. One of the interviewees gave details that the lecturer did not only give a simple
comment, but made clear all the point he wrote in the observation sheet. However, there were 70 of the students assumed that the feedback was given
39
in general. From the questionnaire, some students gave explanation that when the lecturer gave the feedback orally; he only gave feedback about more
general things. In other words, the feedback was in general if it was given orally in front of the class and it was specific and contained individual things if
it was given in written form see Appendix 2 for the general overview of the result
c The Time the Lecturer Gave Feedback From the observation, the writer noticed that the feedback was given
directly after the students practiced teaching or after the three students finished teaching. It was all the same with the result of the questionnaire which showed
that almost all of the students 90 stated that the feedback was given directly. The rest of the students stated they were neutral in responding to the
statement. On the contrary, in item 2 which stated the feedback was given indirectly, about 72 of the students stated they agreed with that.
2. The Microteaching Students’ Perception on the Supervisor’s Feedback in
Kategori