Lecturer`s lived experience in public speaking feedback in The ELESP of Sanata Dharma University.

ELESP of Sanata Dharma University. Yogyakarta: English Language Education Study Program, Department of Language and Arts, Faculty of Teachers Training and Education, Sanata Dharma University.

Public Speaking skill holds an important role in everyone’s career, especially in ELESP students’ careers. When ELESP students choose to become teachers, speaking and teaching in front of the class will be their daily tasks. In the process of acquiring good Public Speaking skills, the students need to practice their speaking skills in public. Lecturers are required to provide beneficial and meaningful feedback for students’ learning progress. Their feedback will be the guidance for the students in improving their public speaking skills. Their feedback can be informative and motivational. Then, the feedback could be given immediately after the performance or delayed for later.

This study aims at acknowledging lecturers’ beliefs and experience in providing feedback in Public Speaking classes. Therefore the research problem is “what does giving feedback in Public Speaking mean to the lecturers in the ELESP of Sanata Dharma University?”

This study is a qualitative research. As for the method, phenomenology focusing on lived experience was used in this research. The participants for this study were three Public Speaking lecturers in the ELESP. The data were gathered through some in-depth interviews with the participants.

Based on the interview, it was found that for the lecturers, Public Speaking feedback meant self-improvement, constraints and freedom. First, while giving feedback, they yielded the self-improvement for both the lecturers and the students. However, they also found some obstacles or constraint in the process. Therefore, they had their own preferences in feedback style to encourage self-improvement and diminish constraint.

ELESP of Sanata Dharma University. Yogyakarta: Pendidikan Bahasa Ingris, Jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa dan Seni, Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas Sanata Dharma.

Public Speaking memegang peranan penting dalam pekerjaan seseorang, khususnya mahasiswa PBI ketika mereka lulus dan bekerja. Ketika mahasiswa PBI memutuskan untuk menjadi guru, berbicara dan mengajar di depan kelas merupakan tugas sehari-hari. Dalam proses mendapatkan kemampuan berbicara di depan umum yang baik, para mahasiswa perlu melatih kemampuan berbicara mereka. Dalam proses latihan ini, para dosen diharapkan untuk memberikan umpan balik yang bermakna dan bermanfaat. Umpan balik tersebut berperan sebagai panduan bagi para mahasiswa dalam meningkatkan kemampuan berbicara mereka di depan umum. Umpan balik dari dosen dapat berupa informasi dan motivasi, dan dapat diberikan langsung setelah mahasiswa menunjukkan kemampuannya maupun beberapa waktu setelahnya.

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk memberi pengakuan terhadap pandangan dan pengalaman dosen dalam memberikan umpan balik di PBI. Maka itu, rumusan masalah dalam penelitian ini adalah, “bagaimana dosen memaknai pemerian umpan balik dalam mata kuliah Public Speaking di PBI di Universitas Sanata Dharma?”

Penelitian ini bersifat kualitatif. Peneliti menggunakan metode fenomenologi yang dikhususkan pada pengalaman yang dimaknai oleh partisipan. Partisipan dalam penelitian ini merupakan tiga dosen pengampu Public Speaking di PBI. Data penelitian didapat melalui wawancara mendalam dengan para partisipan.

Berdasarkan wawancara tersebut, peneliti mendeskripsikan bahwa Public Speaking memiliki makna bagi para partisipan sebagai peningkatan, halangan dan kebebasan. Dalam memberikan umpan balik, mereka menghasilkan peningkatan baik bagi para mahasiswa maupun para partisipan. Namun, mereka juga menemukan beberapa masalah yang menghalangi mereka dalam proses peningkatan tersebut. Oleh sebab itu, para partisipan memiliki beberapa teknik umpan balik yang digunakan untuk mendukung peningkatan dan menangani halangan yang mereka hadapi.

LECTURERS’ LIVED EXPERIENCE IN PUBLIC SPEAKING FEEDBACK

IN THE ELESP OF SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain Sarjana Pendidikan Degree

in English Language Education

By

Laurensia Shella Leonita Student Number: 121214119

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA

LECTURERS’ LIVED EXPERIENCE IN PUBLIC SPEAKING FEEDBACK

IN THE ELESP OF SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain Sarjana Pendidikan Degree

in English Language Education

By

Laurensia Shella Leonita Student Number: 121214119

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA

ABSTRACT

Shella, Laurensia. (2016). Lecturers’ Lived Experience in Public Speaking Feedback in the ELESP of Sanata Dharma University. Yogyakarta: English Language Education Study Program, Department of Language and Arts, Faculty of Teachers Training and Education, Sanata Dharma University.

Public Speaking skill holds an important role in everyone’s career, especially in ELESP students’ careers. When ELESP students choose to become teachers, speaking and teaching in front of the class will be their daily tasks. In the process of acquiring good Public Speaking skills, the students need to practice their speaking skills in public. Lecturers are required to provide beneficial and meaningful feedback for students’ learning progress. Their feedback will be the guidance for the students in improving their public speaking skills. Their feedback can be informative and motivational. Then, the feedback could be given immediately after the performance or delayed for later.

This study aims at acknowledging lecturers’ beliefs and experience in providing feedback in Public Speaking classes. Therefore the research problem is “what does giving feedback in Public Speaking mean to the lecturers in the ELESP of Sanata Dharma University?”

This study is a qualitative research. As for the method, phenomenology focusing on lived experience was used in this research. The participants for this study were three Public Speaking lecturers in the ELESP. The data were gathered through some in-depth interviews with the participants.

Based on the interview, it was found that for the lecturers, Public Speaking feedback meant self-improvement, constraints and freedom. First, while giving feedback, they yielded the self-improvement for both the lecturers and the students. However, they also found some obstacles or constraint in the process. Therefore, they had their own preferences in feedback style to encourage self-improvement and diminish constraint.

ABSTRAK

Shella, Laurensia. (2016). Lecturers’ Lived Experience in Public Speaking Feedback in the ELESP of Sanata Dharma University. Yogyakarta: Pendidikan Bahasa Ingris, Jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa dan Seni, Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas Sanata Dharma.

Public Speaking memegang peranan penting dalam pekerjaan seseorang, khususnya mahasiswa PBI ketika mereka lulus dan bekerja. Ketika mahasiswa PBI memutuskan untuk menjadi guru, berbicara dan mengajar di depan kelas merupakan tugas sehari-hari. Dalam proses mendapatkan kemampuan berbicara di depan umum yang baik, para mahasiswa perlu melatih kemampuan berbicara mereka. Dalam proses latihan ini, para dosen diharapkan untuk memberikan umpan balik yang bermakna dan bermanfaat. Umpan balik tersebut berperan sebagai panduan bagi para mahasiswa dalam meningkatkan kemampuan berbicara mereka di depan umum. Umpan balik dari dosen dapat berupa informasi dan motivasi, dan dapat diberikan langsung setelah mahasiswa menunjukkan kemampuannya maupun beberapa waktu setelahnya.

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk memberi pengakuan terhadap pandangan dan pengalaman dosen dalam memberikan umpan balik di PBI. Maka itu, rumusan masalah dalam penelitian ini adalah, “bagaimana dosen memaknai pemerian umpan balik dalam mata kuliah Public Speaking di PBI di Universitas Sanata Dharma?”

Penelitian ini bersifat kualitatif. Peneliti menggunakan metode fenomenologi yang dikhususkan pada pengalaman yang dimaknai oleh partisipan. Partisipan dalam penelitian ini merupakan tiga dosen pengampu Public Speaking di PBI. Data penelitian didapat melalui wawancara mendalam dengan para partisipan.

Berdasarkan wawancara tersebut, peneliti mendeskripsikan bahwa Public Speaking memiliki makna bagi para partisipan sebagai peningkatan, halangan dan kebebasan. Dalam memberikan umpan balik, mereka menghasilkan peningkatan baik bagi para mahasiswa maupun para partisipan. Namun, mereka juga menemukan beberapa masalah yang menghalangi mereka dalam proses peningkatan tersebut. Oleh sebab itu, para partisipan memiliki beberapa teknik umpan balik yang digunakan untuk mendukung peningkatan dan menangani halangan yang mereka hadapi.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First of all, I would like to thank Jesus Christ for all the blessings that I have received in my life. He has surrounded me with good people, provided me with the strength, patience and health that I really need, and stayed with me in every single day.

I would like to express my gratitude to my thesis advisor, Fidelis Chosa Kastuhandani, S.Pd., M.Hum., for his time, patience, and kindness. He had shown his invaluable support during my thesis progress by providing meaningful feedback and never ending motivation. I would also like to thank him for believing in me and bringing out the best in me.

I would like to thank all the lecturers who have taught me since my first semester, especially Christina Lhaksmita Anandari Ed. M., Laurentia Sumarni S.Pd., M.Trans.St., and Patricia Angelina M.Hum. I am grateful for their assistances during my learning process in the English Learning Education Study Program (ELESP).

My deepest gratitude goes to my parents, Jin Ce and Bofudin, for their unconditional love, affection, support and prayer. I would like to thank them for always being there for me and convincing me that I deserve the best things in my life. I also thank my younger sister, Sherly, and my younger brother, Shandy. They are the reasons why I keep striving and working on my goals.

I also thank the lecturers who became the participants in this study. This thesis would be impossible without them. In their tight schedule, they had spared

their time to help me with my data gathering process. There were a lot of beneficial and meaningful experiences that I could learn from their stories.

Furthermore, I thank my friend, Raka, Agnes, and Ceandy who accompanied, helped, and motivated me when I was working on my thesis. I also thank my classmates, Mita, Iput, Venny, Vita, who encouraged me to keep working on my thesis. Then, I thank the people in my class D group, Penguins. I appreciated the four year of togetherness. I learned a lot of meaningful things from them. They had shown me that family was not limited to the people who shared the same blood.

Finally, I would like to thank all ELESP students and all my friends whose names are not mentioned one by one in this short acknowledgment. I am forever grateful for every help, support, and motivation that they have given to me.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

TITLE PAGE ... i

APPROVAL PAGES ... ii

STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY ... iv

PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI ... v

ABSTRACT ... vi

ABSTRAK ... vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ... x

LIST OF APPENDICES ... xiii

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION 1 A. Research Background... 1

B. Research Problem ... 2

C. Problem Limitation ... 2

D. Research Objectives ... 3

E. Research Benefits ... 3

F. Definition of Terms ... 4

1. Feedback ... 5

2. Lived Experience ... 5

CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 7

A. Theoretical Description ... 7

1. Feedback ... 7

2. Speaking Learning Progress in the ELESP ... 10

3. Public Speaking in the ELESP ... 11

B. Theoretical Framework ... 13

CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY 16 A. Research Method ... 16

B. Research Setting ... 18

C. Research Participants ... 18

D. Instruments and Data Gathering Technique ... 19

E. Data Analysis Technique ... 20

1. Epoche ... 21

2. Phenomenological Reduction ... 21

3. Imaginative Variation... 22

4. Synthesis of Meanings and Essences ... 22

F. Research Procedure ... 22

CHAPTER IV: RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 25 A. Individual Textural Description ... 25

b. Participant 2’s story... 27

c. Participant 3’s story... 29

B. Theme Description ... 31

a. Self-Improvement ... 32

b. Constraint ... 33

c. Freedom ... 35

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 38 A. Conclusions ... 38

B. Recommendations ... 40

REFERENCES ... 43

LIST OF APPENDICES

Page Appendix 1 Construct Mapping ... 46 Appendix 2 Bracketing and Horizonalization

of Participant 1’s interview ... 47 Appendix 3 Bracketing and Horizonalization

of Participant 2’s interview ... 52 Appendix 4 Bracketing and Horizonalization

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

In this chapter, the researcher discusses the introduction of this study. The introduction consists of the research background, research problem, problem limitation, research objectives, research benefits, and definition of terms.

A. Research Background

As a student of English Language Education Study Program, the researcher has acknowledged the importance of speaking ability. Enhancing speaking ability enables the language students to participate more actively in social communication and interaction. Public Speaking is a speaking course in which the language students are trained to speak not only in front of their friends or relatives but also in public. This course was offered in the fifth semester in the ELESP. The ELESP students need to practice their grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation skill. Moreover, they should develop the skills of talking in public, such as audience analysis, body language, construction of the speech, and the appropriate way to deliver the speech.

Since learning Public Speaking covers many materials and takes a lot of practices, it is essential for the lecturers to guide the students through the learning process. Feedback from the lecturers is used for guiding the students to acknowledge their ability and improve their language skill. From the researcher’s experience, the lecturers had a huge influence in assisting the researcher’s public

speaking skill improvement through giving feedback. While giving feedback, the lecturers informed all the students about their language performance, gave some advice for improvement, and encouraged the students to develop public speaking skills.

Feedback given by lecturers plays an important role in improving public speaking skills for the students (Lewis, 2002; London, 2003). Therefore, the researcher sought to understand about the way the lecturers value the feedback itself and their beliefs about feedback in Public Speaking. The researcher also wanted to acknowledge the effective types of feedback for improving public speaking skill according to the lecturers. Then, the lecturers’ experiences that were involved in constructing their beliefs about giving feedback in Public Speaking were also subjects to be comprehended. Hence, this research was designed to gain a deeper understanding of those matters.

B. Research Problem

In order to gain a deeper understanding of the matters mentioned in the research background, a research was carried out to study lecturers’ lived experience in giving Public Speaking feedback in the ELESP of Sanata Dharma University. Thus, the research problem was formulated as: What does giving feedback in Public Speaking mean to the lecturers in the ELESP?

C. Problem Limitation

This study was carried out through investigating the lecturers’ lived experience in giving feedback in Public Speaking class. The participants of this

study were three ELESP lecturers that were assigned to teach Public Speaking classes during their teaching period. In order to investigate each participant’s lived experience effectively, the study was limited only on the lecturers’ beliefs about feedback, public speaking and giving feedback in Public Speaking class. The belief itself was limited only on general understanding, advantages, disadvantages, any problem encountered, any expectation, and the experiences that support them based on the participants’ utterances in the interview process. The result of this study is not aimed to be generalized to other Public Speaking lecturers in other institution or other teaching period.

D. Research Objectives

The purpose of this study is to gain a deeper understanding of the lecturers’ beliefs about giving feedback in Public Speaking class. Therefore, the objective of the study was to describe the lecturers’ beliefs and experiences in giving feedback in Public Speaking class. Another objective of this study was to elaborate those lived experience to find out what giving Public Speaking feedback in ELESP classes really means to the lecturers.

E. Research Benefits

This study of lecturers’ lived experience in giving feedback in Public Speaking class was designed and conducted with the expectation that it would provide some benefits for ELESP students, ELESP lecturers and the researcher herself. ELESP students may have various perspectives about receiving feedback from their lecturers. The researcher expected that after the students acknowledge

the meaning and value of feedback from the lecturers’ points of view, they will have deeper understanding about feedback and make use of feedback more efficiently.

The Public Speaking lecturers who contributed in this research as the participants were also expected to see this study as an opportunity to share their beliefs and experiences about feedback, and acknowledge the other participants’ beliefs and experiences. Since during the interview session they were asked to recall their experiences and elaborate their beliefs about giving feedback, the participants could also see this research as the means of self-reflection. It was also expected that other lecturers, especially Public Speaking lecturers, could reflect on their own lived experience and take the participants’ lived experience as a beneficial lesson.

Finally, the researcher expected that after conducting the research, the researcher could gain a deeper understanding about lecturers’ lived experience in giving feedback in Public Speaking class. Thus, the researcher’s intention in designing this research as mentioned in research background could be fulfilled. Since the researcher is an ELESP student, the result of the study would also be beneficial just in case the researcher becomes a Public Speaking lecturer one day.

F. Definition of Terms

In this study about lecturers’ lived experience in giving public speaking feedback, there are three terms that are elaborated to equalize the perception and prevent any misunderstanding. Those terms are feedback, lived experience, and Public Speaking, which are presented as follows:

1. Feedback

Feedback refers to any information, opinion, or advice about the students’ language performances given by the lecturers. Feedback aims to inform the students about their language learning progress and guide them to improve their language skills and performances (Lewis, 2002; London, 2003). Based on the purpose, there are two types of feedback. They are informative and motivational feedback. Informative feedback focuses on informing the student about the student’s language performance, learning progress, strengths and weaknesses. On the other hand, motivational feedback aims to encourage and motivate the students to keep practicing and not to worry about the mistakes that possibly be made. Based on the timing, feedback is divided into immediate and delayed feedback. In this study, the feedback which was discussed was Public Speaking feedback that was given by Public Speaking lecturers.

2. Lived Experience

Lived experience is the combination of someone’s belief and experience. In other words, it means that someone’s belief is achieved from some experiences or applied to some experiences. Lived experience is an object of phenomenological study that aims to gain a deeper understanding about what it is like to be someone in a particular situation based on his/her belief and experience (Tesch, 1990; Manen, 1990). The participants’ lived experiences in this study include their general understanding, their beliefs, and their experiences that are related to the topic that is studied.

3. Public Speaking

Public Speaking does not merely mean speaking in public. It is the means to express and deliver the speaker’s notion or opinion to public (Lucas, 2009). Therefore, the speaker should possess the good public speaking skills in order to make sure that the audience acquire and understand the speaker’s idea or opinion. Those are the goals that most public speaking courses aim to achieve. Public Speaking course in this study is offered for the students on their fifth semester in the ELESP in Sanata Dharma University. The course covers some lesson materials such as audience analysis, speech outlines and drafts, body language while delivering a speech, and the techniques to inform and persuade people. Those are some skills that are required to possess in order to be a good public speaker.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

In this chapter, the researcher describes the theories of feedback used as the backbone of this study and Public Speaking in the English Language Education Study Program in Sanata Dharma University. Furthermore, the researcher’s preunderstanding for lecturer’s feedback in public speaking based on the theories and the researcher’s experience is discussed in theoretical framework.

A. Theoretical Description

In theoretical description, three terms that become the backbone of this study are going to be discussed and elaborated. Each term will be supported by previous theories or related information. Those three terms are feedback, speaking learning progress in the ELESP, and public speaking course in the ELESP of Sanata Dharma University.

1. Feedback

In learning a second language, the role of feedback for the students is essential. Feedback is described as the process of informing the students about their learning progress as well as guiding them for their language skills improvement (Lewis, 2002; London, 2003). The students’ learning progress includes what the students have done well and what they have not done well yet in their language performance.

There are many benefits that the students can draw from feedback. Feedback enables the students to acknowledge what performance aspects are important, the standards of performance expected and how they are doing to fulfill these requirements. It also motivates the students by showing which part of their behavior that contributes to successful performance. In addition, feedback increases the students’ awareness to assess their own performances (London, 2003).

In Public Speaking course, the students are encouraged to learn the skills through a lot of practices. They need to understand that the goal of their learning is to use the language as a means of communication (Irfani, 2014). In these practices, the students are likely to make mistakes as those mistakes are inevitable in the learning process. Irfani believes that “making errors is a process to make progress.” However, he thinks that the students should not do the same mistakes twice. Pollard mentions that the feedback which corresponds to the students’ speaking errors can be used to bolster students’ knowledge of speaking skills. It also helps the students become more aware of their speaking performance skills (as cited in Irfani, 2014).

According to Zamel (1981), there are two kinds of feedback based on its purpose. Those types are informative and motivational feedback. Informative feedback is given by providing the students about the result of their language performance, including the mistakes or errors that the students still need to work on. On the other hand, motivational feedback is given to the students to encourage the students to keep practicing and take the mistakes and errors as the part of

learning progress. Zamel argues that the feedback which is only informing whether the students’ language performance is correct or incorrect does not really have a distinctive impact on students’ learning improvement.

Based on its timing, feedback is distinguished into immediate and delayed feedback. Immediate feedback is given to a student or the whole class right after the performance. King, Young, and Behnke (2000) mentions in their article that students who receive immediate feedback would still remember the behavior that is discussed. Therefore, they are aware of their language performances and what part of their performances that should be improved. Immediate feedback also helps the students develop their Public Speaking skills by reflecting their mistakes right away and correcting their mistakes. On the other hand, immediate feedback may result in distraction and disruption in learning process. The second type is delayed feedback which is given after some time since the students performed. It enables the students to process the information, correction or suggestion from the lecturer and practice it. Delayed feedback also results in more “long-term memory storage of the changes in behavior” (King, Young, Behnke, 2000).

Feedback is an art which involves both the lecturers and the students. To give feedback, the lecturer should practice continuously to find what kind of feedback that will be useful for the students. In her book, Lewis (2002) defines four criteria of good feedback in which the lecturers should have in order to optimize students’ language performance. They are “variety, clarity, motivation, and cooperative learning.” The lecturers should have some varieties of giving feedback. Therefore, the students will not get bored and think that the lecturers

give the same comment to everyone all the time. The lecturers also need to make sure their comments have clear and not ambiguous meaning. Furthermore, learning is not about getting a high mark only. The lecturers should value progress and improvement higher than the result. The feedback given should be motivating that the students are encouraged to perform better. It also needs to encourage the students to learn from one another.

2. Speaking learning progress in the English Language Education Study Program (ELESP) in Sanata Dharma University

Speaking is one of the most important skills a language student should have and learn. It serves as an underlying part of talking and meaningful interaction in social activity (Luoma, 2004). Therefore, speaking is one of the main language skills that is learned in language learning study program. In the ELESP curriculum, the progress of achieving speaking skill is divided into five compulsory courses. The courses are Speaking I, Speaking II, Critical Listening and Speaking 1, Critical Listening and Speaking 2, and Public Speaking. The learning progress takes place gradually since the first semester to the fifth semester.

Speaking 1 is the first course that the students should take in their first semester in the ELESP. Throughout the semester, the students are encouraged to practice some expressions such as greeting, leave taking, introducing and other common communicative functions. They also learn how to keep a conversation going. The second course is Speaking 2, which should be taken in the second semester. The focus of this course is to encourage the students to express their

personal feelings and opinions. The students are expected to enrich their vocabulary words, technical terms and expressions and be able to use them appropriately.

The students are required to take Critical Listening and Speaking 1 in their third semester. This course aims to improve the students’ listening and speaking skills and also develop their strategic skills. In terms of speaking ability, the students are required to utilize the strategic skills and present the spoken response to the given topics. Students should integrate what they have learned in structure, vocabulary and pronunciation class into their speaking ability. Their grammar, diction, and pronunciation will be some of the scoring criteria. The Critical Listening and Speaking 2 that should be taken in the fourth semester is a continuation of Critical Listening and Speaking 1 in the previous semester. This course still deals with improving the students’ strategic skills, but the given topics are more complicated than the previous ones. The students are expected to response to these topics using the strategic skill. In this course, the students’ grammar, diction and pronunciation also become some criteria of a good speech.

In the fifth semester, the students are to take Public Speaking. Public speaking in general and public speaking course in the ELESP will be discussed further in the next section.

3. Public Speaking in the ELESP of Sanata Dharma University

Speaking can be distinguished into chatting and information-related talk. Chatting is a conversational exchange between two or more people who take turn to talk. It aims at maintaining social interaction or contact to other people.

Chatting is like an unplanned speech. On the other hand, information-related talk is like a planned speech. It focuses on delivering an information or message to other people. Hence, the speaker should make sure that the message is transferred well and understood by the listener (Brown, 1984). Public speaking belongs to information-related talk. The communication mostly happens one way and formally from the speaker to the audience. Public speaking is also described as a means to express your ideas to public (Lucas, 2009).

Davidson (2003) mentions that “the ability to powerfully and persuasively impact audiences is an important part of your career and your life.” Even though the technology has developed rapidly, he also emphasizes that “the need to improve Public Speaking ability seems to be greater than ever.” Public speaking has a lot of advantages for those who learn and develop their public speaking skill. Grice and Skinner (1995) suggest that there are at least three benefits of public speaking which are “personal benefit, professional benefit and public benefit.” Personal benefit includes the knowledge and the confidence. When someone brainstorms an idea, develops it into sequential main points and delivers them to the audience, he has gained more knowledge. The progress of preparing the material and practicing speaking in public also help someone build his confidence. By learning and practicing effective public speaking, someone will develop their quality, increase the chances to get a job and improve the success in his career. Those are the professional benefit of public speaking. Public speaking also provides public benefit by creating an active, well-informed and quality society.

According to Hamilton (2012), there are three steps to be prepared before performing public speaking. The first one is analyze the audience. The speaker needs to acknowledge the target audiences. The second one is determine the topic, the purpose, and the main points of the speech. The speaker should select the topic in which he interests and has the abilities, knowledge and experience. Then, the purpose and the main points should be carefully prepared. The third one is draft the main points of the speech. After determining the main points, the speaker should make a rough draft of main points. The speaker can refer to this draft while delivering his ideas to audience, so he can produce an organized and effective speech.

Public Speaking course in the ELESP encourages the students to apply the strategic skill and communicative function they have learned when they speak in public. This course also supports the students to develop their skills to speak formally and successfully by providing the artificial public situation. This course is designed to cover the related public speaking requirements such as audience analysis, speech outlines, body language while giving a speech, and the ways to inform and persuade people.

B. Theoretical Framework

In every aspect of life, speaking is an essential skill that works as an underlying part of communication. Speaking in public is a requirement for all workers despite whatever their jobs are. As for ELESP students, whether they decide to become a lecturer, a tour guide, or an interpreter, the skills of speaking

in public are needed. Public Speaking is learned through practicing. The students will try and experiment with various Public Speaking skills and conditions. Unsurprisingly, in their practices, there is the tendency for making mistakes. Therefore, the assistance in students’ learning process is an essential need. Lecturer’s role in giving feedback is essential to inform the students about what techniques that work well and on them what techniques that do not, to facilitate their creativity in learning, and to support the learning progress. The feedback given should guide the students in their learning process, make the students aware of their mistakes without threatening them not to make other mistakes.

The lecturers can give the feedback to the students right after the performance or later. Those choices depend on the lecturers’ preferences and methods. The feedback that is given right after the performance is supposed to maintain the students’ memory. On the other hand, the feedback is given after some days or weeks to remind the students about their performances or to give the students some times to reflect their performances.

Lecturers’ feedback should be informative and motivational. These two types of feedback complement each other. Feedback which is informative but not motivational has a tendency to grow students’ fear of making mistakes. It will also inhibit the learning progress and reduce students’ creativity in experimenting with various public speaking techniques. On the other hand, motivational feedback which is not informative will lose its very own purpose which is informing the students about their performance as guidance for their learning improvement. The lecturers should figure out the feedback that covers both informative and

motivational aspect. Hence, the students are encouraged to improve their language abilities and experiment with various public speaking techniques without fears of making mistakes. Then, the lecturers need to explain it to the students that those errors should be reduced gradually as they learn from their mistakes.

During the process of giving feedback, the lecturers are likely to experience both encouraging and discouraging moments. Both of them help the lecturers to improve themselves personally and professionally. They will learn how to deal with students’ learning problems, students’ different levels of understanding and other difficult circumstances.

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter focuses on the methodology which was employed in the research to answer the research questions stated in the first chapter. This chapter consists of six major sections. They are research method, research setting, research participants, instruments and data gathering technique, data analysis technique and research procedure. Each section is elaborated and presented as follows.

A. Research Method

Not many phenomena in human lives can be measured in quantities. In this study about the essence of Public Speaking feedback for the lecturers, the writer used qualitative research. Qualitative research covers all the data that cannot be expressed in numbers. Therefore, the answers for the research questions are in the form of words (Tesch, 1990). Instead of the calculation of numbers, the result of the qualitative research is the description of what really happened in some people’s lives. Qualitative research aims at the findings of the phenomena in a natural settings that result in new understanding of human’s world (Sherman and Webb, 1988). Neuman (2006) proposes that qualitative research is a precise, adequate, and meaningful research, because the researchers obtain the ideas from the participants of the study and process them to suit the context of a natural setting.

This study aimed to acknowledge the lecturers’ belief about giving feedback in public speaking based on their experience. In order to get a deeper understanding of those beliefs and experiences which cannot be measured quantitatively, the qualitative method was used. The qualitative research enabled the researcher to dig deeper into the participants’ fundamental beliefs and distinctive experiences that were related to the study. Thus, the result of the research that answered to the research problem would really mirror the contextual situation.

There are many types of qualitative research, such as action research, case study, ethnography, and phenomenology. Which type is used in a research depends on the area or topic of the study. This study discussed the lecturers’ beliefs of feedback in Public Speaking. Since the study included their perspectives, preferences and experiences in giving feedback in public speaking, the phenomenological research was selected. The phenomenological research focuses on the individual and the essence of subjective experience. It does not study the impact of a program implemented in a certain situation, the culture of a circumstance or the interaction between people in a society. Instead, phenomenology would emphasize what the experience of being someone in a particular situation is like. (Tesch, 1990; Manen, 1990) It also aims to gain deeper understanding about how a person perceives the experience she/he has had and maintain to provide the “comprehensive description” of it (Moustakas, 1994).

In his book, Manen (1990) suggests that “phenomenological research is the study of lived experience.” He also describes lived experience as the essence of

humanity through which we draw the meaning into our thought, belief and action. The experiences themselves are related into each other, which then should be “studied as a whole” which means that it is closely associated with past or present (Sherman and Webb, 1988). That is the reason why lecturers’ educational background and personal motivation were counted and taken into consideration.

B. Research Setting

The research was conducted in the form of in-depth interviews in the English Language Education Study Program (ELESP) of Sanata Dharma University. In order to make the participants comfortable to share their stories, the interview for each participant was conducted twice. The first one was an initial interview where the participants were asked to share their educational background, teaching background, and their beliefs in Public Speaking in the ELESP. The second one was an in-depth interview which focused on their beliefs and experiences in giving feedback in Public Speaking in the ELESP. The interview for each participant took place in each participant’s office. The interviews with these three participants were conducted on late February until March, 2016. The progress from making the interview blueprint, conducting the interview, analyzing the result until drawing the conclusion was ranging from November, 2015 to April, 2016.

C. Research Participants

In the qualitative research, the sample is chosen based on their relevance to the topic studied rather than their representativeness (Neuman, 2006). In this

research, purposive sampling was chosen. Therefore, the researcher needed to identify and determine the participants who had sufficient knowledge or experiences of the discussed phenomenon (Cresswell and Clark, 2010). This research aimed to elaborate the lecturers’ lived experience in feedback in Public Speaking course. Therefore, the participants who were closely related to this study were three lecturers who had taught Public Speaking in the ELESP in Sanata Dharma University.

Because the study included a research about some people’s experiences that could be sensitive, the researcher paid a great attention to confidentiality. The participants were asked to sign a consent form stating that they agreed to be interviewed voluntarily and audio-recorded during the interview. They were also asked if they would prefer using real name or pseudonym. In this study, two of the participants agreed to go by their real names when the other one preferred to go by her initial. Therefore, the researcher decided to use numbers to address all participants. All the participants’ names that were mentioned in the interview were changed into their initials in the interview transcript. Thus, the participants were mentioned as Participant 1, Participant 2, and Participant 3.

D. Instruments and Data Gathering Technique

The field interview was selected as a means to conduct the research. Contradictory to survey interview, the field interview uses “unstructured, nondirective, and in-depth questions”. The purpose of in-depth interview is not to test hypothesis or to assess or judge other people’s experiences, but to “understand their experiences and the meaning they make of those experiences”

(Seidman, 1991). The interview involves asking and answering questions, listening and speaking, expressing opinion, belief and interest. The conversations of asking and answering are then recorded (Neuman, 2006). Sometimes, the data needed for phenomenological research “may only consist of no more than one interview.” (Tesch, 1990) In this research, there were three interviews conducted by the researcher nevertheless. These interviews had the same basic questions that were elaborated based on the interview blueprint so that the answers could really answer to the research problem. The interview blueprint was attached as Appendix 1.

There are an advantage and a disadvantage in using field interview in a research. An interview enables the researcher to ask follow-up questions, which let the researcher to gain deeper and clearer data. On the other hand, when it comes to sensitive and negative aspects toward the participants or other people, that particular information would not be unlikely to be revealed in the face-to-face interview (Borg and Gall, 1983). This situation were overcome when the researcher created the comfortable and relaxed atmosphere during interview, built trustworthiness between the researcher and the participants, and ensured the participants that the researcher would strive for the confidentiality of the study. Therefore, the each participant was given one copy of her consent form.

E. Data Analysis Technique

In analyzing the research data, the researcher used Moutakas’ phenomenological data analysis techniques (1994). In his book, Moustakas proposes some steps which are necessary to be applied in order to arrive at the

valid description of meanings and essences of one’s lived experience. Those steps are epoche, phenomenological reduction, imaginative variation, and synthesis.

a. Epoche

Epoche is the first step in phenomenological data analysis process. It means that the researchers should put aside their biases, tendencies, and prejudices about the things which are studied. The researchers also need to eliminate their previous knowledge and everyday supposition since those things tend to bias the researchers about the truth and reality. The purpose of epoche is to derive the new knowledge without influencing it. Therefore the experiences could be retrieved as it expresses itself and perceived to be just like it appears.

b. Phenomenological Reduction

There are four steps in phenomenological reduction. The first step is bracketing which limits the focus of the interview result only to the research topic and questions. The interview data that are not related to the research topic or questions should be eliminated. The second step is horizonalizing in which the redundant and overlapping statements as well as the fillers are removed. However, these statements are treated equally in horizonalizing. This process left the essential statements that are called the Horizons. These horizons are then gathered and placed in brackets. Brackets in this second step differ from bracketing that was mentioned in the first step. The third step is creating some themes out of those Horizons. The themes extracted from those brackets should cover all the participants’ beliefs. Then the last one is elaborating those themes and Horizons

into individual textural description. In individual textural description, the themes extracted earlier are elaborated more personally based on each participant’s belief and experience.

c. Imaginative Variation

Imaginative variation aims to find out some factors that were underlying the experiences. The factors could be “possible structures of time, space, materiality, causality, and relationship to self and to others (Moustakas, 1994). Those factors raise the awareness that there are infinite possible factors which are closely related to the meanings of experiences. Through imaginative variation, the researchers are able to achieve the structural description of experience from the textural description that is gained through phenomenological reduction.

d. Synthesis of Meanings and Essences

The phenomenological data analysis technique is ended by integrating the textural description and structural description. Then, more general and reflective themes are extracted for summarizing the participants’ beliefs and experiences. From these themes, the description about the meanings or essences of the experiences should be generated.

F. Research Procedure

The researcher started the research process by designing a research plan including the blue print, the questions and the participants. Then the participants’ were asked to participate in the research and decide the date and time for the interview together with the researcher. Before conducting the research, the

researcher eliminated her prejudice, bias, and supposition about the research topic. It is also called Epoche. After that, the interviews were held and the data were recorded.

According to Tesch (1990) and Moustakas (1994), there are some steps to be taken in analyzing the data of phenomenological research. First, the researcher reads the entire data right after they are gathered. Tesch (1990) emphasizes that the researcher does more than taking notes during the reading. “The researcher immerses her/himself in the data, reads and rereads, and dwells with the data, so s/he may achieve closeness to them and a sense of the whole.” Second, the researchers would look at the entire interview transcription of each participant and decide what answers are meaningful and relevant to the research questions. The data which are meaningful and relevant should be the expressions that are considered necessarily related to the experience. This process is known as bracketing. Third, the expressions which are redundant, “overlapping”, unclear, and irrelevant to the experience are eliminated. It is also called horizonalizing. (Moustakas, 1994).

Fourth, some themes or meaning units are developed from the meaningful and relevant data or Horizons of each participant. The participant’s experience is then elaborated into “individual textural description” which is placed in those meaning units. The description includes verbatim expressions used by the participants that are taken from research transcript. Fifth, the structural description of experience is constructed based on the textural description and influenced by the participant’s background. Sixth, the textural and structural descriptions are

integrated and elaborated into descriptive form, from which the meaning and new knowledge are drawn.

In the process of describing and elaborating the themes, the researcher mentioned some participants’ utterances that could support the description. The code of each utterance was also mentioned in order to ease the readers in finding the utterances in the interview bracket. The interview bracket for each participant can be found in Appendix 2, Appendix 3 and Appendix 4. The code consisted of the number of each participant and the lines those utterances were taken from. For example, code (1:2-4) meant that the utterances belonged to Participant 1 and were taken from line two to four in Participant 1’s interview bracket.

CHAPTER IV DATA ANALYSIS

In this chapter, the researcher presents the findings of the study about lecturer’s lived experience in giving feedback in Public Speaking. The term “data analysis” used in the title does not refer to the process of interpretation. Instead, it refers to the process of understanding the phenomena, drawing the essential themes, and describing their meaning and essence. Thus, this chapter is divided into text description and theme description.

A. Individual Textural Description

This section consists of the summary of each participant’s lived experience that is obtained through the interview. The process of summarizing included epoche which eliminated the researcher’s previous knowledge and prejudice, reading the Horizons carefully, and drawing the essential subthemes out of them. Then, the description of the participant’s lived experience was composed based on those essential subthemes.

1. Participant 1’s story

The first participant was Participant 1. She is 42 years old and comes from Bantul. She started learning English formally in Junior High School. However, she was already interested in English language since she was a kid. In 2000, she began teaching as a temporary lecturer in the ELESP, and became a permanent lecturer in 2008. She liked teaching adult since she could also learn something

from the students. She started teaching Public Speaking (used to be Speaking 5) in 2003. She thought that Public Speaking is essential for ELESP students with various possible professions. According to her, the main focus in Public Speaking is learning the knowledge of the content, the English language, the organization of the speech and the delivery.

During her teaching Public Speaking period, she had encountered some encouraging and discouraging experiences. She mentioned that she was excited when the students took her feedback seriously and improved their performance by avoiding the same mistakes. However, there were some times when the students neither listened to nor carried out her feedback (1:11-15). She admitted that those types of students both existed in ELESP (1:22-24).

According to her, feedback was an essential part of a learning process. Even though it was not always nice to hear, it made the students stronger. It also worked as second opinion for the students. Therefore, she analogized feedback as herbal medicine and rearview mirror (1:116-117, 129-130). She thought that feedback aimed for learning improvement through information and encouragement. It was lecturers’ role to provide those information and encouragement using their existing knowledge and experiences (1:124-126, 133-135). An example of the encouragement was the terms that she used in her feedback. Instead of using strength and weakness, she chose to use strength and room for improvement (1:127-128).

Despite its useful roles, feedback in Public Speaking also had some disadvantages. Participant 1 said that the tendency to provide incomplete feedback

and lack of time allocation as two of those disadvantages of feedback could affect the assessment validity (1:142-143, 156-158). She also mentioned that she had some problems in multi-tasking in composing her feedback. The requirement to look at the performance, listen to the speech, document the score in her computer, and write her feedback down really tired her. She should carefully divide her focus into scoring and giving feedback (1:147-153).

As for feedback’s advantages for her, she explained that giving feedback had helped her in scoring documentation and students’ skills diagnosis. By acknowledging what the students still lack for, she could design the next meeting material that met the students’ needs (1:161-168). She expected that students would listen to her feedback, take it seriously, and recognize their strength and chances to improve. She also hoped that they would be grateful for their current abilities (1:177-181, 186-186).

2. Participant 2’s story

The second participant was Participant 2. She is 38 years old and comes from Yogyakarta. When she was 8 years old, she moved to America for two years. It influenced her English language learning process which went from listening, speaking, reading and then writing, just like learning a mother tongue. Many years later, she took her bachelor’s degree in 1996 and started to work as a temporary lecturer in 2002. Her passion in teaching began when she was in her third semester in her bachelor’s degree as she worked part time as an English tutor in some institutions. After graduating from her master’s degree in 2010, she was challenged to teach Public Speaking. She has taught Public Speaking for almost

every year then. She thought that PS was important for everyone. It prepares someone’s mentality and flexibility in speaking. She aimed to teach the language elements such as language, content, and organization and delivery elements which are expression, eye contact, body language, and costume.

It has been six years since she first taught Public Speaking and there was not any discouraging experience that she had. However, she mentioned that some students had not responded very well to her feedback. “They were resisting the information that I gave since no one else had said something about it to them. They were surprised,” she said. (2:1,3-4) On the other hand, she was excited when her feedback made the students acknowledge their abilities and be willing to improve themselves. It meant that she had successfully given them insight about their performances (2:19-20, 23-24).

She mentioned that feedback in Public Speaking course was important since performing Public Speaking skills produced neither document nor record, unlike writing courses. Therefore, the students’ opinion about their performances could be different from how they really performed. It was the feedback of their friends and lecturer which could bridge the information gap (2:24-28, 31-32). However, peer feedback was limited due to their understanding level. In this case, the lecturers were required to give more detailed feedback. (2: 33-35)

Feedback had some disadvantages and advantages. One of its disadvantages was time consuming because giving feedback in Public Speaking required face-to-face meeting and real time assessment. She had tried to have the performance recorded which saved a lot of time. Unfortunately, she found it difficult to feel the

class atmosphere. Another problem was the importance to highly concentrate during the 100 minute performances so she could analyze it well and write her notes down. “It was so tiring.” (2:65-74) The students’ enthusiasm to take the feedback was also one of her problems. However, she overcame it by asking the students to share their experience, so she could give some meaningful input (2:89-90, 95-98).

She gained her working satisfaction by giving her best to do her duty of giving detailed feedback. Thus, giving feedback in Public Speaking was tiring, but not burdensome (2:101-102, 106-107). She expected that the students would remember her feedback and apply it in their learning process, even though those expectations depended on their personal choices. She also hoped that the students had the willingness to do personal reflection. “Overall, Public Speaking was a long process,” she said (2:107-110, 115).

3. Participant 3’s story

The third participant was Participant 3. She is 30 years old. She was born in Jakarta but moved to Yogyakarta in 1999. She had learned English language since kindergarten and took the ELESP in Sanata Dharma in 2004. She did not enjoy her teaching practice program. However, after she graduated, she enjoyed working as temporary lecturer in the ELESP. She took her master’s degree in Kajian Bahasa Inggris in Sanata Dharma in 2010 and became a permanent lecturer in the ELESP in 2015. During her teaching period in the ELESP, she has taught Public Speaking for about several times. She thought that Public Speaking was fundamental since first impression is usually judged by the way people speak.

Moreover, ELESP students are supposed to teach in front of their students. In teaching Public Speaking, she emphasized the learning process on delivery and language aspects. Delivery aspect covers gesture and body language, while language aspect covers the appropriate way to open and close a speech.

During her teaching period, she was happy when the students took her feedback seriously and were willing to improve themselves (3:59-61). She also found it exciting when the student she appointed could be the real example for his/ her classmates. “The other students saw his/her performance, so they really understood my feedback,” she said (3:6-9). However, she also had some discouraging experiences. There were some students who chose to ignore her feedback and stayed in their comfort zones. She emphasized that they would not improve their skills and performances by doing so. Thus, she encouraged those students personally by telling them that it was okay to make mistakes. Because they could learn from their mistakes as they try to be a better public speaker. (3:9-16).

In her opinion, feedback still played an important role in Public Speaking learning process. Unless the students recorded their performances, it would be hard for them to acknowledge how well they did it. Therefore, the opinion from other people could fill them in. It was more meaningful than mere score was (3:33-37). That was lecturers’ essential role. As the ones who were assumed to have adequate knowledge of the theory, the lecturers should provide essential input and advice. The additional feedback from their classmates would also be beneficial (3:40-44).

From her experience, there were some weaknesses of feedback. The criteria that were in assessment rubric were already fixed and some aspects were not covered in that rubric. On the other hand, if those criteria included too many aspects, the feedback would not be discussed thoroughly. However, when she noticed an aspect to be commented on and she could not find it in those criteria, she had found it difficult to deliver that feedback to the students. Then, she had to give an example from her past experience that was related to her intended feedback. (3:50-57)

She said that she had gained some benefits during her teaching period. By giving feedback, she had learned about a lot of possibilities that could happen while giving speech. Beside, her feedback worked as a reflection for her as well. She could learn from the students’ performances and also her feedback, so she could do better in her public speaking (3:78-84). She expected that the students would take her feedback seriously and they would improve in their next performances. She also hoped that the students would be more confident while speaking in public (3:75-78).

B. Theme Description

In this section, some general themes were extracted from the interview data. There are three general themes that cover all the subthemes described in the previous section. Those themes are self-improvement, constraint and freedom. These themes are the results of this study which answer to the research problem.

1. Self-Improvement

Feedback in Public Speaking course yielded the improvement for both the students and the lecturers. However, since the study focuses on how the lecturers give meaning to Public Speaking feedback, the researcher emphasizes the improvement for the lecturers. The participants thought of the process of providing feedback in Public Speaking course as self-improvement. Giving Public Speaking feedback brought some benefits for the them.

“[While giving feedback] I acknowledge the students’ skills and what aspects they still lack of. So, feedback helps me prepare the materials that meet the student’s needs. It also gave me an idea whether I have succeeded in teaching them.” (1:163-168)

“The benefit from giving feedback is that I feel satisfied. I have done my work as best as I can.” (2:101-102)

“I learn many possibilities that could happen in the stage. Thus, I could give feedback in more specific aspects. I can also learn from my feedback about what I should and should not do the next time I speak in public.” (3:80-84)

Even though providing feedback helped the participants improve in different areas, it headed in the same direction. Providing feedback for the students helped the participants improve themselves personally as public speakers and professionally as lecturers. Moreover, the participants also stated that Public Speaking feedback brings a lot of benefits for students’ learning improvement.

Feedback was essential for the students’ learning process in Public Speaking course. All participants mentioned that unless the students were willing to record their performances and analyze them, they were likely to miss important points from their performances. Therefore, feedback acted as a second opinion that could help the students learn their strengths and weaknesses in Public Speaking skills.

“Criticism is a second opinion. When we think that we are doing just fine or we are doing great, there is something that we cannot see.” (1:103-132) “In speaking course, we do not produce any document. When we are talking, we look at the audience, not the mirror. So, what other people see would be different from what we feel.” (2:25-26, 30-32)

“Seldom do the students record their performances and watch them. Therefore other people’s opinions are important to acknowledge their performance in Public Speaking.” (3:33-36)

All participants also combined the information of students’ performances with encouragement, so the students were encouraged and motivated to do better in the future. They motivated their students by changing the term “weakness” into “room for improvement”, providing quotes and examples of speech from famous public speakers, and also reducing the students’ anxiety of making mistakes. By doing so, they hoped that the students would comfortably improve their performance using the information they had provided before. Therefore, feedback given in Public Speaking course by the lecturers gave beneficial impacts for both the students and the lecturers in term of improvement.

2. Constraints

The previous section discusses the improvement experienced by the lecturers and the students in the process of providing and receiving feedback in Public Speaking. However, the improvement did not just happen smoothly in the learning process. There were some obstacles faced by the lecturers that constrained them from achieving the improvement goals. These obstacles included the ones that emerged from outside and the ones that emerged from oneself.

The obstacles that emerged from outside were the students’ responses in receiving feedback and weaknesses of feedback itself. All participants had experienced teaching some students who did not respond to their feedback seriously. They also faced some problems related to the limited criteria in assessment rubric, lack of time allocation, and the time required in giving feedback.

“The problem is a lot of students [performing] when the time for observing their performance and composing the feedback is limited. It affects the assessment validity.” (1:156-158)

“The obstacles are the consumed time and students’ willingness to take the feedback seriously.” (2:89-90)

“The aspects assessed in the rubric are fixed and limited. So, there are some aspects that were not covered in the rubric criteria. Meanwhile, additional aspects might result in superficially discussed feedback.” (3:54-58)

The obstacles that emerged from the lecturers included the inability to provide complete feedback, tiredness, and the difficulty to deliver the feedback. The inability to provide complete feedback is also affected by the absence of documents or record of the performances. Therefore, it was limited only to what the lecturers could observe while watching the performances. There were a lot of aspects to be observed, so a few details could be missing from the lecturer’s observation. As for the tiredness, it resulted from the time and concentration that were required in composing and delivering the feedback.

“The problem in giving feedback, especially in Public Speaking is incomplete feedback. Sometimes our feedback does not exactly represent what really happened in the stage.” (1:142-147)

“I need to concentrate for 100 minutes in order to analyze the performance and take notes. It is very tiring.” (2:68-70)

“Sometimes there are some aspects that I want to comment on, but they are not on the rubric criteria. So, it is hard to deliver those aspects to the students. I need to find the examples from my past experiences. (3:50-54) All of those obstacles might constrain the lecturers in providing beneficial and professional feedback. It might also affect the assessment validity. All participants were aware of those possibilities. Therefore, they applied some solutions to overcome those constraints. When the students did not take the feedback seriously, the lecturers posted the written feedback on Exelsa and approached the students personally. As for the time consuming process of feedback, the lecturers chose to give some particular input orally and in general. To reduce the possibilities of incomplete feedback, the lecturers wrote down the notes about the performance, arrange them in a good composition, and then inform them to the students.

3. Freedom

While giving the feedback and overcoming the obstacles, the participants were able to choose the types of feedback freely to be applied in their teaching process. This section discusses those types of feedback used by the participants in order to achieve the improvement for both the students and the lecturers. The types of feedback are distinguished by its purpose and timing. The lecturers can choose to give informative and/or motivational feedback. They can also choose to give immediate and/or delayed feedback.

All participants provided both informative and motivational feedback in their teaching process. They informed the students about how well the students performed, what aspects they had already done well, what aspects they had not

181 182 183 184 185 186 187

mereka itu sebenernya udah bisa. Tapi kan itu bikin kita sombong kalo cuma tau kehebatan kita. Jadinya aku kasih room for improvement. “However to be a good public speaker, you need to improve in this areas.” Kalau aku tau kebetulan ada video bagus, link-link bagus, buku bagus, itu aku tulis. Kemudian (harapanku mereka) mau mendengarkan atau melakukan saranku. Agar mereka bisa mencapai tujuan, yaitu menjadi a good public speaker.

Appendix 3

Bracketing and Horizonalization (Participant 2) 1

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42

Kalau buruk tidak ada. Tapi agak resisting informasi yang saya berikan, awalnya. Jadi ketika saya mengatakan, kamu tuh kalau jalan, jangan terlalu melambai. Pokoknya tegak. Dan at some point, itu mungkin karena tidak pernah ada yang mengatakan seperti itu. Jadi lebih pada kaget. Dan ekspresinya agak „hah, kok ngomongnya malah kesitu‟. Iya harus ke situ. Karena itu masalah public speakingnya, bukan bahasanya. Bahasa itu lain perkara. Jadi lebih pada responnya. Karena ternyata perkataan saya itu hal yang tidak mereka sadari, tapi saya bisa melihat. Waktu itu pernah juga saya mengatakan, “saya sempet menghitung berapa kali kamu mengatakan oke.” Nah itu kan unconscious. Bahkan saya pun kadang seperti itu, which is ok. Hanya kan ada satu saat dimana saya harus mengatakan itu kepada mahasiswa tersebut. “Kamu selama 5 menit ini bilang oke nya 10 kali.” „Ah masa sih, Miss‟. “Iya tadi ini saya hitung loh satu persatu.” The next week after that itu malah berkurang. Berarti dia sudah mulai sadar. Ketika ngomong itu nggak hanya langsung ngomong, tapi dipikir. Mereka memproses informasi baru itu beda-beda. Ada yang langsung ngeh. Ada yang it takes ya beberapa minggu. (Kejadiannya) sekitar 1 tahun yang lalu. 2013 berarti. Tapi saya agak lupa kelasnya yang mana. Yang exciting lebih pada ketika saya berhasil membuat mahasiswa itu sadar dan mereka mengamini itu. „Iya miss saya itu selalu merasa kayak gitu tapi nggak pernah ada yang berani ngomong kaya gitu‟. Ya contohnya itu, “walk like a man.” Karena gesture itu sangat menentukan bagaiman cara orang melihatmu. Jadi lebih ke revelation. Kaya insight, ilham. Dan dia mau berusaha (berubah). Itu yang menyenangkan bagi saya. Menurut saya (feedback itu) penting. Entahlah untuk mahasiswa. Karena kalau speaking itu tidak ada dokumennya. Kalau kelas writing itu pasti ada dokumennya. Bisa dicorat-coret, bisa di delete, bisa di tambah. Kalau speaking itu kan real time. Jadi apapun yang keluar dari mulut kita, itulah yang akan didengarkan oleh pendengar. Dan kita tidak mungkin menghapusnya. Yang bisa kita lakukan adalah mengkoreksinya. Dan ketika kita ngomong, kita tidak melihat mirror. Kita melihat orang lain. Jadi apa yang dilihat orang lain itu akan berbeda dengan apa yang saya rasakan. Peer feedback itu juga penting. Hanya kadang-kadang level pemahamannya itu masih agak kurang. Jadi feedbacknya ya „its good‟, „thats good‟, tapi how do you define good? Itulah tugas dosen. Memberikan feedback yang sedetail mungkin. Memang capek karena harus one on one. Makanya kadang-kadang feedbacknya personal, kadang-kadang in general di dalam kelas, supaya saya tidak terlalu capek. Both (informational and motivational). Contohnya itu tadi, mahasiswa yang jalannya terlalu santai. Saya bilang, “kamu sudah tinggi. Biasanya orang tinggi itu memberikan impresi pertama yang bagus. Karena semua orang akan mempunyai ekspektasi tinggi terhadap orang yang berperawakan tinggi. Dan itu sesuai dengan ilmu psikologi dan ilmu

43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88

sosiologi.” Itu motivational. Tentu saya harus membahas tentang pronunciation-nya, grammar-nya, organization of ideas-nya, flow-nya. Itu tetap saya harus kasih tau. Biasanya (feedback diberikan) a week after. Karena katakanlah ada dua kloter, saya tidak mungkin memberikan feedback pada saat itu. Jadi biasanya saya lihat dulu. Coretan-coretan saya saya formulasi ulang dengan tidak merubah isinya. Kemudian baru saya bisa bercerita sccara detail dan runut. Karena kalau hanya berdasarkan notes, kadang-kadang saya lupa. Saya pernah (menggunakan) love letter. Ada scoresnya dan komentar. Itu sangat efektif dan penting menurut saya dan banyak mahasiswa. Hanya itu takes time and energy. Jadi semester kemarin saya gagal melakukan itu. Jadi saya lebih pada memberikan oral feedback dengan scorenya. Kemudian sambil saya cerita, mereka mencatat. Itu juga sama-sama efektif. (Feedback diberikan secara) personal. Karena tiap orang berbeda. Di kelas Public Speaking kita dulu ada sekitar 28-30 anak. Berarti ada 30 characteristics dan kemampuan. Kalau (feedbacknya) itu saya rangkum, akan tidak efektif dan tidak meaningful untuk kedua belah pihak. Menurut saya personal akan jauh lebih baik. General iya, tapi lebih pada yang umum terjadi aja. Tapi kalo yang detail-detail itu mendingan personal aja. Karena mungkin ada beberapa yang tidak nyaman kalau diomongkan di dalam kelas. Biasanya kalau setelah ujian itu kan kita agak relaks. Baru pada saat itu one on one di dalam kelas, sambil yang lain tetep diberi tugas, melakukan atau mempersiapkan (sesuatu). Tetap ada kegiatan selama saya ngasih feedback. Kalau saya pribadi kekurangannya itu lebih ke time consuming. Karena harus real time, bertemu. Kalau kelas writing kan saya bisa lakukan dimana saja, tidak harus bertemu dengan orang yang bersangkutan. Yang kedua, konsentrasi saya harus tinggi selama 100 menit itu untuk menganalisa dan untuk menulis catatan-catatan. Untuk 10 orang itu sangat melelahkan. Pernah (penampilannya) direkam. Itu efisien dari sisi waktu, dan mahasiswa pun tidak harus berada di dalam kelas. Mereka bisa melakukannya di luar kelas. Bisa latihan beberapa kali sebelum di shoot. Tapi di saat bersamaan, agak susah bagi saya untuk mengalami atmosfir yang muncul di dalam kelas itu. Karena atmosfir itu diciptakan oleh pembicara. Kalau dari kamera, everything looks perfect. Tapi kalo di dalam kelas, ketika ada suara, terus dia gimana kan keliatan. Ekspresinya keliatan. Itu memang positif negatifnya ya. Kalau pakai video itu efektif, tapi saya kurang bisa menikmati dan mencoba memahami prosesnya di dalam kelas. Tapi kalau di dalam kelas, bagus saya bisa melihat apa yang terjadi pada saat itu, sehingga nilainya itu detail, tapi capek. Saya 2011 pernah pakai (video). Final projectnya mereka mendemonstrasikan bagaimana cara membuat media (untuk) mengajar siswa bahasa inggris. 2013 ini belum tau. (Cara ini) bagus, dalam arti mahasiswanya pun menikmati. Karena mereka bisa nyambi tugas sana sini sambil bikin videonya, which is okay. Membebani? At some point iya, tapi it‟s part of my job. Memang itu resikonya kalo mengajar speaking dan pengen idealis dalam hal pemberian feedback. Hanya kadang-kadang saya realistis. Jadi instead of making love letter, yaudah face to face aja biar

89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115

gampang. Kalo ada pertanyaan saya bisa langsung menjawab. Hambatannya itu lebih pada waktu sama kemauan mahasiswa untuk menerima feedback. Ada yang dikritik itu „yayaya‟ ada yang cuma diem aja, flat expression. It takes two people to do conversation. Kalo hanya sekedar menerima, gampang di saya tapi saya juga bertanya, “kamu dong gak sih sebenernya? Apakah ini membantu atau tidak?” Gak tiap saat (saya) harus bertanya seperti itu. Biasanya saya kasih pertanyaan awal dan saya suruh cerita pengalamannya gimana. “Kamu nggak pedenya pas kapan selama proses 7 menit ngomong di depan itu?” Dari situ saya bisa memasukan informasi yang saya dapat,. (Pertanyaan tersebut) hanya ke beberapa (mahasiswa) yang sepertinya tidak terbiasa untuk mengekspresikan diri. Itu suatu kendala ketika mau memberikan feedback tapi org lain gak merespon. Lebih keuntungan kepuasan. Bahwa saya sudah melakukan tugas saya dengan semaksimal mungkin. Karena saya berkewajiban untuk memberikan input sebanyak mungkin. Karena selama ini kalo speaking, as long as you‟re doing good in front of the class, that‟s good. Tapi ada kalanya mahasiswa pengen tau apa yang bagus, apa yang gak bagus, mana yang harus saya perkuat, mana yang sudah harus dipertahankan. Itu penting Burden? Not really. Paling tidak diingat. Kalau bisa diaplikasikan, that would be great. Hanya itu kan lebih ke personal choice. Kalau udah diingat, itu akan secara otomatis terintregasi setiap kali dia ngomong di depan orang. Itu lebih ke personal reflection juga. Jadi tidak hanya sekedar memberikan feedback, tapi saya ingin juga mahasiswa itu mempunyai kemauan untuk selalu berefleksi. Sesimple apapun. Ketika orang (berpikir) „eh ini bener nggak‟, itu sudah refleksi. Berarti dia mengingat sesuatu yang pernah dibahas di Public Speaking. That‟s more than enough for me. Karena it‟s a long process ya.

Appendix 4

Bracketing and Horizonalization (Participant 3) 1

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42

Kalau (kejadian) menyenangkannya sih beda-beda tiap angkatan. Dan tiap kelas itu kan anaknya beda-beda. Jadi yang dikasih feedback juga aspeknya pasti ada yang biasa aja, tapi ada yang butuh banyak improvement. Dan kadang dari situ, kita bisa belajar banyak. Kalo aspek yang dinilai itu sama untuk setiap kelas. Hanya depth of the feedbacknya itu beda-beda untuk setiap anak. Setiap anak yang bisa ku ambil jadi contoh itu menyenangkan, karena kita punya real example. Semua temen-temen yang lain juga liat dia peerformnya gimana. Jadi pas kita kasih feedback itu semua nyangkut, mudeng. Yang nggak menyenangkan kalo mahasiswanya itu nggak mau mencoba. Jadi dia bermain aman aja. Kalo misalnya dia nggak mau berusaha meningkatkan kemampuan Public Speaking nya, penampilannya akan biasa-biasa aja gitu. Jadi cuma kita sendiri yang bisa menganggap itu hal yang menyenangkan atau nggak menyenangkan. Kalo aku nemu anak yang seperti itu, aku try to encourage them that it‟s okay to make mistakes. Karena dari kesalahan itulah kita bisa belajar jadi Public Speaker yang lebih baik, (Anak seperti itu) pasti ada, at least dalam setiap kelas. Beberapa anak yang masih kurang PD harus di boost supaya maju, dan berani berbicara. Itu yang butuh ekstra attention. Tapi ada juga disisi lain anak yang over confident. Jadi dia tu senang sekali maju. Setiap di tanya “any volunteer?” dia pasti tunjuk tangan terus. Tapi jadinya kelas tu udah bosen duluan. Karena tau kalo ditanyain pasti dia maju. Jadi kita pinter-pinternya aja balance antara yang minder sama yang over. Dua-duanya (informational dan motivational. Jadi feedback tu aku bagi dua. Yang sudah bagus sama yang masih perlu improvement. Selalu aku mulai dari yang bagus dulu. “Kamu tadi bagusnya ini, tapi masih ada beberapa hal yang masih perlu ditingkatkan.” Jadi dua-duanya komplit. (Feedback diberikan) hari itu juga. Misalnya hanya tiga orang, berarti nunggu tiga tiganya maju baru aku ngasih summary. Tapi kalo cuma kaya hot seat, yang biasanya cuma satu sampe dua orang per meeting, itu langsung. Setelah dia perform, aku kasih feedback, baru kelas. Karena pertimbanganku sih itu warming up activity, belum main activity di kelas. Jadi aku sengaja kasih feedbacknya langsung. Biar bisa segera move on ke main activity-nya. Ngga keburu lupa. Kalau menurutku sih, (feedback) masih penting sekali. Kecuali kita rajin ngerekam performance kita sendiri dan kita bisa liat. Tapi kan jarang ada yang mau seperti itu. Jadi ya pendapat orang lain tu penting sekali untuk mengetahui seberapa bagus kita di Public Speaking. Jadi feedback itu lebih berguna daripada sekedar angka. Karena (kalau angka saja) kamu nggak tau bagusnya di mana, apakah masih ada yang perlu ditingkatkan? Jadi lebih ke prosesnya aja. Dulu ada beberapa topik yang aku juga minta feedback dari temennya, jadi bukan cuma aku. Cuma (feedback) dosen penting ya. Karena dosen yang mengajar, diasumsikan bahwa dosen tu yang mengetahui teorinya, bagusnya kaya gimana, dan bisa memberi saran dan

43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84

masukan yang essential. Kalo (feedback) yang dari temen-temen yang lain bisa sebagai tambahan. Tapi yang utama itu yang dari dosen. Kalau Public Speaking, biar gayeng kita harus kasih modelling dulu. Kita harus share experience. Apakah dulu kita udah pernah kasih pidato, pidatonya kaya gimana, rasanya kaya gimana. Bukan beban ya, tapi maksudnya bikin deg-degan. Kalo untuk ngasih feedback, karena kriterianya udah jelas di rubric, nggak terlalu membebani. Cuma yang membebani mungkin kalo misalnya gak tau apa lagi yang harus (dikasih feedback.) Kadang ada performance yang pengen kita kasih feedback, tapi itu ngga ada di rubrik. Jadi susah membahasakannya. Itu yang kadang kadang susah. Karena kita harus.. mencari past experience supaya mereka juga tau maksudnya kita mau ngomong apa sih. Kekurangannya mungkin aspek yang dinilai di rubrik itu udah fix dan terbatas. Karena kalau kita masukan terlalu banyak aspek, nanti kita jadi ngga bisa eksplor masing masing aspek. Nggak bisa ngasih feedback yang mendalam. Jadi ada beberapa hal yang tidak ter-cover di dalam aspek rubrik penilaian Public Speaking. (Kelebihannya) buat mereka perform lebih bagus. (Hambatannya) mungkin lebih ke anaknya. Kalo misalnya anaknya itu mau menerima feedback dan improve himself or herself, aku seneng. Tapi kadang ada juga anak yang cuman „ini kewajibanku, jadi misalnya aku perform, ini hanya untuk dapat nilai.‟ Jadi yaudah, dia tampil ala kadarnya. Mungkin tampil sebaik mungkin, tapi dia nggak peduli dengan feedback. Karena pikirnya dia kan „yaudah giliranku udah selesai. Buat apa aku belajar lagi dari feedback yang diberikan?‟ Itu harus personal approach. Dulu aku udah pernah nyoba metode preaching di depan kelas. Tapi kayanya itu hanya dianggap angin lalu. Yaudah, akhirnya lebih ke personal aja. Jadi setelah kelas, misalnya pas selama berproses di dalam kelas itu, kita ngedeketin, terus membahas yang tadi itu. “Tadi kok kamu gini sih? Kamu sebenernya bisa lebih bagus lagi loh kalo kaya gini. Tadi kok kamu gini kenapa? Apakah kurang tidur? Biasanya kalo dideketin secara personal, mereka lebih appreciate daripada di address ke semuanya, kan mereka juga nggak suka. Tapi kan kadang ada yang perlu mereka semua tau, ada juga yangcuma orangnya ini aja yang tau. (Kejadiannya) dulu pas kelas Public Speaking, tapi lupa precisenya. Harapannya jelas, mereka itu menerima saran dan kritik. Dan next time they perform, mereka sudah bisa improve aspects yang masih kurang kemarin. Sama lebih PD lagi ketika ngomong. Pastinya aku juga belajar. Jadi dari performance anak-anak, banyak hal yang bisa kupelajari. Jadi nggak cuma mereka doang yang belajar, tapi aku juga bisa belajar. Aku bisa belajar berbagai kemungkinan yang bisa terjadi di atas panggung atau di depan. Jadi lebih banyak aspek yang bisa dikasih feedback dan dengan sendirinya itu juga ngasih feedback ke diri sendiri. Jadi misalnya next time aku kasih speech, harus kaya gini, jangan begini. Jadi sama sama belajar aja keuntungannya.