50 even though the answer is not correct or as the teacher expected. So, according to
this participant, reinforcement is not simply for those who answer the teacher’s question correctly.
In the FGD results consisting of comments in the view of the student, the teachers who practice teaching have implemented reinforcement as a basic
teaching skill in Microteaching. However, there are many weaknesses showed by the teachers such as using verbal form rather than non-verbal reinforcement to
appreciate the students, having repetition in some verbal expression and emphasizing also on non-verbal form to vary the reinforcement given. The
students who respond to the teacher’s question incorrectly also need reinforcement to encourage the expected behavior occur again in the classroom.
2. The Result of Students’ Perception as the Teacher
This part will view the perception of Microteaching students who play role as the teacher in the classroom. The way of presenting the data has same structure
as the previous part. The table 4.2 presents the results of close-ended data of the questionnaire.
Table 4.2 The Result of Perception as the Teacher Close-ended
Frequency No.
Statement SD
D A
SA
1. I praise the student who
responds to a question in discussion class or question
and answer session. 2
3.7 25
46.3 27
50
51
Frequency No.
Statement SD
D A
SA
2. I give positive comment to a
group of students when they complete a difficult task in a
group discussion to encourage the other groups to perform
expected student behavior. 34
62.96 20
37.04
3. I give brief response such as
‘Good’, ‘That’s right.’, ‘Excellent’ to respond to the
students’ behavior that is expected so it can occur again.
21 38.89
33 61.11
4. I give corrective feedback to
students’ response to help them understand the material.
37 68.52
17 31.48
5. I use the students’ idea to
attract students’ participation for further discussion.
4 7.40
40 74.08
10 18.52
6. I maintain eye contact with the
students to indicate the interaction between the teacher
and students during the lesson. 2
3.70 37
68.52 15
27.78
7. I nod when students share their
idea to approve what they are saying.
5 9.26
32 59.26
17 31.48
8. When a student responds to my
explanation, I direct my attention to the student to show
my curiosity. 3
5.56 36
66.67 15
27.77
9. I deliver reinforcement to the
students honestly and naturally. 38
70.37 16
29.63
10. Reinforcement can lose its
meaning for students if it is given too often.
1 1.85
4 7.41
22 40.74
27 50
As seen in the table 4.2, the researcher found that 25 participants 46.3 agree with the first statement. Half of the total participants strongly agreed with
the first statement. However, there were 2 3.7 participants disagreed with
52 statement number 1. From the result in the first statement, it shows positive
response because as many as 96.3 of the total participants are in the level of agreement, obtained from the sum of agree and strongly agree percentage.
In the second statement, all the participants gave positive comments to a group of students when they complete a difficult task in a group discussion to
encourage the other groups to perform expected student behavior. It is proved that the percentage of disagree and strongly disagree showed 0 in the result. There
were as many as 34 62.96 participants agreed and the rest of them, 20 37.04 participants, strongly agreed with the statement that they give positive
comments to a group of students when they complete a difficult task in group discussion to encourage the other groups to perform good student behavior. By
seeing the percentage in agree and strongly agree scale, Microteaching students had a positive perception of this second statement.
In the next statement, the question deals with verbal form of reinforcement that is given by the teacher. Shown from the result, there were 21 38.89
participants agreed that the teachers give brief response to respond the students’ behavior that is expected so it can occur again. The students’ behavior refers to
Turney, et al. 1973 theory stated in chapter II. There were as many as 33 students 61.11 strongly agreed with the statement. There were no 0
participants strongly disagreed and disagreed with the statement. In conclusion, there was positive response to the third statement when Microteaching students
perform as the teachers because 100 of them have reached level of agreement. They give brief response such as ‘Good’, ‘That’s right.’, ‘Excellent’ to respond
53 to the students’ behavior that is expected so it can occur again when they perform
as the teachers. Going to the fourth question, it deals with corrective feedback that is given
to the students. The results showed not much different view from the previous statement because there was no 0 participant chose disagree and strongly
disagree with the statement. There were 37 68.52 participants agreed and 17 31.48 participants strongly disagreed with the corrective feedback to students’
response to help the students understand the material. All of the participants agreed that they have corrective feedback as their technique in teaching so they
have positive perception to this fourth statement because it reached level of agreement.
The fifth statement in the second part is about the use of students’ idea. From the questionnaire result, 7.40 of the total participants disagreed to use
students’ idea to attract students’ participation for further discussion. However, most of the participants as many as 74.08 agreed and 18.52 strongly agreed
with the use of students’ idea. There were 92.6 of the total participants using the students’ idea to attract students’ participation for further discussion so they have
positive perception of this statement. The next three statements are to dig up the students’ perception as the
teacher related to the use of non-verbal reinforcement including facial cues and gestural movement. The sixth statement is to investigate whether the student who
was assigned as the teacher uses facial cues including eye contact and facial expressions to make the students more attentive to the classroom activity. From
54 the result, there was no 0 participant strongly disagreed with the sixth
statement. There were 2 3.70 participants disagreed with the statement. The statement says that maintaining eye contact the students is to indicate the
interaction between the teacher and students during the lesson. However, there were 37 68.52 participants agreed and 15 27.78 participants strongly
agreed with the statement. From the sum of agree and strongly agree scores, there was a point of level agreement as much as 96.3.
The seventh statement deals with a facial expression especially nodding at the students to show their approval. As seen in the table 4.2, there was no 0
participant strongly agreed with this statement. There were 9.26 of the total participants disagreed with the use of nod to approve what the students say. More
than half of the participants, as many as 59.26, of the total, agreed with the statement. As many as 17 31.48 participants strongly agreed with the
statement. It is clear that Microteaching students have positive perception of the use of nod to approve what the students say when they perform as the teacher in
the classroom activity. The eighth statement has two different elements of non-verbal form
within. It is to investigate the students’ perception of the condition when a student responds to teacher’s explanation, the teacher directs the attention to the student to
show curiosity. It involves two different elements, facial expressions and gestural movements body position. The result showed that there were no 0
participants strongly agreed and 3 5.56 participants disagreed with the statement. However, there were 36 66.67 participants agreed and 15 27.77
55 participants strongly agreed with the idea of directing attention to show teacher’s
attention. From the total percentage of agreement level, the students who perform as the teachers in Microteaching class had positive perception.
The ninth statement is related to the way of delivering reinforcement. It should be natural and honest to the students. Natural means when delivering
reinforcement, the teacher does it relaxed and spontaneously as immediate as possible Fontana, 1985. The teacher also needs to be sincere praising the
students. From the questionnaire data result, the participants who agreed with the statement are as many as 38 70.37 participants. The rest of them, 29.63 of
the total participants, strongly agreed with the statement that they deliver reinforcement to the students honestly and naturally. There was no participant
chose neither disagree nor strongly disagree. The result showed positive response to the ninth statement.
The last statement in this part is about giving too frequent reinforcement can lead to ineffectiveness to the students. As stated by Brown 1975 ‘too
frequent verbal praise results in loss its rewarding properties’ p. 122. The result showed one 1.85 participant strongly disagreed and 4 7.41 participants
disagreed with the statement. However, there were 22 40.74 participants chose agree and half of them 50 choosing strongly agree in the last item. Referring
to the result of level agreement in the tenth statement, the students had positive perception that reinforcement can lose its meaning for students if it is given too
often.
56 Those are the data report from close-ended part consisting of 10
statements followed by Likert scale of agree and disagreement. Besides that, the researcher also provided an open-ended question about Microteaching students
who perform as the teachers have implemented reinforcement skill as one of the basic teaching skills. The participants had positive response that they have
implemented reinforcement skill when they practice teaching. As many as 18 students said that they used verbal at the most especially when praising the
students such as ‘very good’, ‘excellent’, ‘wonderful’. There was a participant who used students’ idea or comment in further explanation of the topic. There
were Microteaching students who applied non-verbal reinforcement such as listening to the students’ explanation, maintaining eye contact, giving applause,
nodding and smiling when their students shared ideas. Eight participants said that they considered reinforcement could affect the students’ motivation and interest.
The students felt comfortable after getting reinforcement from the teacher candidate who practiced. There was a student writing in the form that giving
reinforcement can appreciate the students who actively participated in the class. Through the positive response, it can strengthen their right answers and correct
the wrong ones so it can reduce confusion during the lesson. However, there were students who have not implemented reinforcement
skill in Microteaching class well. There was a participant saying that the participant gave reinforcement not from the heart. It is because the students of
Microteaching class were smart already. This participant commented whether it was really needed or it was merely as a formality to conduct a basic teaching skill
57 in teaching practice. However, the participant added, the way of delivering
reinforcement would be more natural when facing the real classroom and students. There were 7 participants who forgot using reinforcement because they
were nervous and they tend to focus on delivering the material. The participants still needed a lot of practices to apply the skill and one of them gave a comment
that the participant gave reinforcement simply by saying ‘o.k.’ The students in Microteaching class were too smart, if the reinforcement was given too often, it
would be useless. The researcher provided FGD results to perceive further information from
the participants about students’ perception as the teacher. Here, the participants gave their comments when they used reinforcement skill in their teaching practice.
Student A and B stated that the form of reinforcement used when teaching in the class was mostly verbal form. Student A had a reason choosing verbal especially
praise for the reinforcement because this participant had asked to the lecturer whether the use of reward in form of gift was effective or not. The lecturer
conveyed that there would be possible conditions as the effect such as loss of self- confidence to the lower students who did not actively participate in the class
activity. It is because the gift was only for those who actively participated during the class activity.
Student C had different experience when using reinforcement skill. In the real classroom and real students in progress test 2, teaching lower semester, this
participant felt that giving reinforcement for them was more meaningful. The reinforcement was not only in verbal praise form but also non-verbal such as eye
58 contact and smile. In that class, Microteaching students were expected to deepen
students’ understanding about the lesson so they were to give not only reinforcement but also feedback for the students’ response. According to student
C, the characteristic of students affected the way of the teacher delivered reinforcement and how the students defined the reinforcement.
Similar to student C, student F had experience in teaching lower semester. This participant gave a task to be finished and approached some students to ask
the chosen topic. Then, student F told them the curiosity about the result. After finishing their work, they told the participant and said ‘Sir, I finish, please listen
to me.’ They should have reward in return. This condition allowed the teacher and students to have good interaction. Based on student D’s experience, reinforcement
is not always delivered by the teacher. Other students could be a means to deliver the reinforcement. When a student shared their idea in the classroom, the teacher
did not need to respond as immediate as possible but rather ask another student to approve or respond to the previous student’s idea. From the answer or response of
another student, the first student would feel appreciated. Student E said that using rainbow clap to appreciate students who
answered correctly. All of the students would get involved doing the clap and the atmosphere of the class became active. It encouraged the students to be more
enthusiastic in class activity. Student J shared indicator of reinforcement effect. This participant applied reinforcement skill when teaching practice and the
students became active in answering teacher’s question, paying attention to the
59 lesson and following classroom activity because they felt appreciated after getting
reinforcement. In conclusion, all of the participants in FGD have implemented
reinforcement skill when were assigned as the teachers in Microteaching course. There are many different ways in delivering reinforcement to the students.
Reinforcement resulted in positive effect to the learning process based on the participants’ experiences.
B. Microteaching Students’ Suggestions on the Use of Reinforcement Skill in Microteaching Class
