28 After the lesson plan was analyzed, the researcher conducted an interview.
According to Best 1981, interview is just like oral questionnaire. However, by conducting the interview the interviewer could clarify the questions if there was
misinterpretation and clarify the verbal information given by the interviewee p. 165. In this study, the aim of conducting the interview was to confirm the
researcher ’s understanding about the lesson plan with the participant as the writer.
Therefore, the interview questions depended on what information the researcher wanted to know more, dealing with the design of learning activities and the
formulation of the objectives. All of the questions delivered were open ended. The result would be recorded by note taking and using recorder. This instrument
would provide the qualitative data.
E. Data Gathering Technique
The data gathered in this study was microteaching students’ lesson plan. In
microteaching class, the students would have two chances to practice their teaching practice. It meant that the students were also required to make two lesson
plans as their guidance before they practice their teaching. In order to answer the research questions, the researcher would use the
first lesson plan which was designed by the students for their first teaching practice. The consideration was that the students still remembered the theory of
designing a lesson plan which they learned in the previous semester so that the lesson plan designed was expected to be better. To limit the study, the researcher
would use the lesson plans which were designed to teach writing skills.
29 To obtain the data, the researcher asked permission from the
microteaching lecturer first to conduct document analysis on students’ lesson plans. Then, the researcher would collect the student
s’ lesson plans. After obtaining the data of the research, the researcher would read carefully the lesson
plans to see the whole teaching planning. Since this study was mainly to see the coherence of learning objectives and learning activities designed by the students,
the researcher would pay attention more on those two aspects.
F. Data Analysis Technique
The researcher would see the detailed activities one by one and then classified them based on the list of the learning objectives. Here, the researcher
tried to think and interpret the goal of each activity first. Then, the researcher would again look back to the learning objectives to see whether that activity met
one of the objectives listed or not. To confirm the result of the analysis, the
researcher would conduct the interview.
According to Kemp 1977, “there is no formula for matching activities to objec
tives” p.56. It was because different situations would require different needs. Therefore, the researcher would determine the coherence of both based on
the researcher’s observation which later would be confirmed trough the interview. To answer the first research question, the researcher would see the
formulation of learning objectives first; whether it had been derived from the basic competence and had fulfilled the criteria of clearly learning objective
proposed by Pasch et al. 1991. Then, the design of learning activities would be
30 seen whether it had applied the principles of designing learning activities as
proposed by Pasch et al. 1991. The researcher also used the theory of Bloom Taxonomy which would help the researcher identify the students’ performance
which should be reflected later in students learning activities. After analyzing the formulation of learning objectives and the design of
learning activities, the researcher would come to the conclusion about the coherence of learning objectives and learning activities. If all of the learning
objectives formulated have been reflected both the performance behavior and the level of learning in the design of learning activities, it meant that the student has
designed coherent learning objectives and learning activities. In contrast, if there was learning objective which were not reflected in the design of learning
activities, it meant that microteaching students failed to design coherent learning objectives and learning activities.
To answer the second research question, the researcher would study deeper the formulation of learning objectives and the design of learning activities
written in lesson plans. The researcher used the checklist to determine the problems found in every lesson plan. The lesson plan would be analyzed whether
it has fulfilled every criterion or not. If the lesson plan did not fulfill the criteria written in the checklist, it would be considered that the lesson plan was in trouble.
Then, total number of every problem would be counted in percentage using the formulation as follows:
x: total percentage of every problem
31 a: number of lesson plans which did not fulfill the criterion
b: total number of lesson plans
G. Research Procedure
