39 “Nilai lebih dari pedagogi ignasian itu terstruktur. Kita itu tau apa yang
kita nilai. Kita tau siklus-siklusnya. Maksudnya, eee, sekarang itu otomatis, mbak.”
Plus point from Ignatian Pedagogy is that it has good structure. We clearly know what aspects to be evaluated. We know the cycles. It means
that, mmm, now it is automatic.
Ignatian Pedagogy also helped the lecturer to overcome certain problems
in the class. For example, there were some students who had bad attitude or not discipline. The lecturer then chose those students as her target in the class. The
lecturer started to improve the students‟ conscience through certain activities. “Nah itu saya milih targetnya, misalnya si –menyebutkan salah satu
nama murid- nih, kayaknya dia kok kurang percaya diri ya, dia ngga berani ngomong. Dia yang aku targetin di conscience nyaa, supaya dia
lebih percaya diri, gitu.” Then I chose the target. For example, -
mentioning one of the students‟ name who seems like having a lack of confidence. She is not brave
enough to speak. I chose the conscience as the target so that she becomes more confident.
4.1.2 Students’ Data
In order to gain the students‟ data, the researcher distributed the
questionnaires and conducted an interview. The questionnaires were used to get the quantitative data from the students. The questionnaires covered students‟
experiences and feelings toward the Ignatian Pedagogy implementation in the interpreting class. The questionnaire consisted of twenty close-ended statements
and two open-ended questions. Meanwhile, the interview aimed to have some detailed and additional information about the students‟ opinion on the issues
discussed in the questionnaires. There were two big themes which were exposed in this close-ended part.
The first one was students‟ perceptions on Ignatian Pedagogy implementation in
40 the interpreting class
. The second theme was about the students‟ attitudes toward the Ignatian Pedagogy implementation. The students as respondents were
expected to give their responses towards each statement. The researcher provided five choices for each statement. They were SD Strongly Disagree, D Disagree,
U Undecided, A Agree and SA Strongly Agree. The data of the close-ended statements would be presented in a form of percentage.
On the other hand, the open-ended questions in the questionnaire were used to confirm students‟ understanding toward the Ignatian Pedagogy
implementation. There were two questions provided by the researcher. The first question asked the students about what activities which represented the Ignatian
Pedagogy in the interpreting class. The second question asked the students about the role of Ignatian Pedagogy implementation in supporting their interpreting
skills.
4.1.2.1 Students’ Perception on Ignatian Pedagogy Implementation
This part presents the data about the students‟ perception on the Ignatian
Pedagogy implementation. The researcher obtained the students‟ perception on
the general introduction and the lecturer‟s act in implementing the Ignatian
Pedagogy. The data results on this topic would be presented in Table 4.1 and Table 4.2.
Table 4.1 General Introduction of Ignatian Pedagogy Implementation in Interpreting Class
No Statements
SD DA
U A
SA 1
The lecturer introduced you Ignatian Pedagogy or 3C
Competence, Conscience, and Compassion.
7 4
53 36
41
No Statements
SD DA
U A
SA 2
The lecturer explained the goal of implementing Ignatian
Pedagogy in the interpreting class
19 29
38 14
3 The lecturer used Ignatian
Pedagogy as the competency standard on the syllabus of
interpreting class 24
50 26
4 The lecturer explained the
grading system of interpreting class which use the Ignatian
Pedagogy 2
10 38
43 7
SD: Strongly Disagree; DA: Disagree; U: Undecided; SA: Strongly Agree; A: Agree
Table 4.1 presents the students‟ perception towards the general
introduction of Ignatian Pedagogy implementation in the interpreting class. The first statement investigated
the lecturer‟s role in introducing the Ignatian Pedagogy to the students. From the table 4.1, it shows
that none of the students chose strongly disagrees and 7 of the students disagrees that the lecturer
introduced the class about Ignatian Pedagogy. The table also showed 53 of the students chose agree, 36 of the students chose strongly agree while another 4
of the students chose undecided. It meant that most of the students 89 agreed
that lecturer had mentioned about Ignatian Pedagogy in the interpreting class. It was also proved by some statements that the student gave in the
interview. Most of the interviewees mentioned that Ignatian Pedagogy was a learning model that dealt with 3C.
“Eee,setau saya pedagoginya itu meliputi tiga hal yaitu competence, conscience sama compassion.
” Interviewee 1
Mmm.. as far as I know, this pedagogy covered three things which are competence, conscience and compassion. Interviewee 1
The second statement was about students‟ perception about the reason of
implementing Ignatian Pedagogy in the interpreting class. From the table 4.1, we
