Students' perception on Lecturers' positive feedback to improve their teaching performance in microteaching class.

ABSTRACT

Ningrum, Cicilia Dini Setia. (2015). Students’ Perception on Lectures’ Positive

Feedback to Improve Their Teaching Performance in Microteaching Class.

Yogyakarta: English Language Education Study Program, Sanata Dharma University. Feedback is one of the ways to give some comments or suggestion to the students’ performances. Feedback is useful for the students to be better in the next performances. Students’ perception on using the positive feedback influenced the implementation on the use of the positive feedback in Microteaching class. The researcher conducts a research to explore about students’ perception on using the positive feedback in Microtaching class. The researcher arranged three research questions for the research. They were: 1) How is positive feedback given in Microteaching class? (2) What is the students’ perception on using positive feedback in Microteaching class improve their teaching performances? (3) What are students’ suggestions to improve the implementation using positive feedback in Microteaching class?

To get the answers of those three research questions, the researcher conducted a research. The researcher took 58 respondents. The respondents were the students in the sixth semester who were taking Microteaching classes in Sanata Dharna University. The researcher distributed the questionnaire for the respondents. The questionnaire was an alternative questionnaire that was yes no question. There were 22 closed-ended question and 3 open-ended questions. The data from the survey was analysed by using precentage. Then put the result in the table. After that the researcher got the conclusion from the data.

Most of the students had positive perception about the use of positive feedback. The students received oral and written feedback from the lecturers. The feedback was detail feedback and it was constructive feedback. The lecturer gave the feedback after the performances. The feedback included the strengths and the weaknesses of the students’ perfomances. The students used the feedback to set the target for next performances.

ABSTRAK

Ningrum, Cicilia Dini Setia. (2015). Students’ Perception on Lecturers’ Positive

Feedback to Improve Their Teaching Performance in Microteaching Class.

Yogyakarta: English Language Education Study Program, Sanata Dharma University.

Umpan balik adalah salah satu cara untuk memberikan pendapat atau masukan terhadap penampilan siswa-siswa. Umpan balik mencakup kelebihan dan kekurangan siswa dalam melakukan simulasi. Umpan balik berguna bagi para siswa untuk menjadi lebih baik di penampilan selanjutnya. Persepsi siswa terhadap penggunaan umpan balik yang positive memperngaruhi implementasi umpan balik di kelas Microteaching. Peneliti mengadakan sebuah penelitian untuk mengetahui persepsi siswa terhadap penggunaan umpan balik di kelas Microteaching. Peneliti meyusun tiga rumusan masalah. Etiga rumusan masalah tersebut adalah: 1) Bagaimana umpan balik positif diterapkan di kelas Microteaching? 2)Apakah persepsi para mahasiswa terhadap penggunaan umpan balik positif untuk meperbaiki penampilan para mahasiswa? 3) Sugesti apa saja yang mahasiswa berikan terhadap implementasi umpan balik di kelas Microteaching?

Untuk mendapatkan jawaban dari ketiga rumusan masalah tersebut, peneliti mengadakan sebuah penelitian. Peneliti mengambil sample sebanyak 58 orang. Sample tersebut adalah para Mahasiswa angkatan 2012/2013 yang sedang mengikuti kelas Microteaching di Universitas Sanata Dharma Yogyakarta. Peneliti membagikan kuesioner kepada para mahasiswa tersebut. Kuesioner yang digunakan adalah Alternatif kuesioner, yaitu yes no kuesioner. Data yang diperoleh dari survey tersebut dianalisis dengan menggunakan persentase and hasilnya dimasukkan dalam bentuk tabel. Setelah itu peneliti mendapatkan hasil dari data yang diolah tersebut.

Sebegian besar para mahasiswa memiliki persepsi yang positif terhadap penggunaan umpan balik tersebut. Mahasiswa menerima umpan balik tertulis maupun tidak tertulis dari dosen. Umpan balik tersebut adalah umpan balik yang lengkap dan merupakan umpan balik yang membangun. Umpan balik diberikan setelah penampilan mahasiswa. Umpan balik mencangkup kelebihan dan kekurangan mahasiswa pada penampilannya. Mahasiswa menggunakan umpan balik tersebut untuk membuat target untuk penampilan-penampilan selanjutnya.

i

STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION ON LECTURERS’ POSITIVE FEEDBACK TO IMPROVE THEIR TEACHING PERFORMANCE IN

MICROTEACHING CLASS

A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS

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

in English Language Education

By

Cicilia Dini Setia Ningrum Student Number: 111214067

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

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA

iv

I would Like to dedicate my thesis to God and my beloved parents .

vii ABSTRACT

Ningrum, Cicilia Dini Setia. (2015). Students’ Perception on Lectures’ Positive Feedback to Improve Their Teaching Performance in Microteaching Class.

Yogyakarta: English Language Education Study Program, Sanata Dharma University.

Feedback is one of the ways to give some comments or suggestion to the students’ performances. Feedback is useful for the students to be better in the next performances. Students’ perception on using the positive feedback influenced the implementation on the use of the positive feedback in Microteaching class. The researcher conducts a research to explore about students’ perception on using the positive feedback in Microtaching class. The researcher arranged three research questions for the research. They were: 1) How is positive feedback given in Microteaching class? (2) What is the students’ perception on using positive feedback in Microteaching class improve their teaching performances? (3) What are students’ suggestions to improve the implementation using positive feedback in Microteaching class?

To get the answers of those three research questions, the researcher conducted a research. The researcher took 58 respondents. The respondents were the students in the sixth semester who were taking Microteaching classes in Sanata Dharna University. The researcher distributed the questionnaire for the respondents. The questionnaire was an alternative questionnaire that was yes no question. There were 22 closed-ended question and 3 open-ended questions. The data from the survey was analysed by using precentage. Then put the result in the table. After that the researcher got the conclusion from the data.

Most of the students had positive perception about the use of positive feedback. The students received oral and written feedback from the lecturers. The feedback was detail feedback and it was constructive feedback. The lecturer gave the feedback after the performances. The feedback included the strengths and the weaknesses of the students’ perfomances. The students used the feedback to set the target for next performances.

viii ABSTRAK

Ningrum, Cicilia Dini Setia. (2015). Students’ Perception on Lecturers’ Positive Feedback to Improve Their Teaching Performance in Microteaching Class.

Yogyakarta: English Language Education Study Program, Sanata Dharma University.

Umpan balik adalah salah satu cara untuk memberikan pendapat atau masukan terhadap penampilan siswa-siswa. Umpan balik mencakup kelebihan dan kekurangan siswa dalam melakukan simulasi. Umpan balik berguna bagi para siswa untuk menjadi lebih baik di penampilan selanjutnya. Persepsi siswa terhadap penggunaan umpan balik yang positive memperngaruhi implementasi umpan balik di kelas Microteaching. Peneliti mengadakan sebuah penelitian untuk mengetahui persepsi siswa terhadap penggunaan umpan balik di kelas Microteaching. Peneliti meyusun tiga rumusan masalah. Etiga rumusan masalah tersebut adalah: 1) Bagaimana umpan balik positif diterapkan di kelas Microteaching? 2)Apakah persepsi para mahasiswa terhadap penggunaan umpan balik positif untuk meperbaiki penampilan para mahasiswa? 3) Sugesti apa saja yang mahasiswa berikan terhadap implementasi umpan balik di kelas Microteaching?

Untuk mendapatkan jawaban dari ketiga rumusan masalah tersebut, peneliti mengadakan sebuah penelitian. Peneliti mengambil sample sebanyak 58 orang. Sample tersebut adalah para Mahasiswa angkatan 2012/2013 yang sedang mengikuti kelas Microteaching di Universitas Sanata Dharma Yogyakarta. Peneliti membagikan kuesioner kepada para mahasiswa tersebut. Kuesioner yang digunakan adalah Alternatif kuesioner, yaitu yes no kuesioner. Data yang diperoleh dari survey tersebut dianalisis dengan menggunakan persentase and hasilnya dimasukkan dalam bentuk tabel. Setelah itu peneliti mendapatkan hasil dari data yang diolah tersebut.

Sebegian besar para mahasiswa memiliki persepsi yang positif terhadap penggunaan umpan balik tersebut. Mahasiswa menerima umpan balik tertulis maupun tidak tertulis dari dosen. Umpan balik tersebut adalah umpan balik yang lengkap dan merupakan umpan balik yang membangun. Umpan balik diberikan setelah penampilan mahasiswa. Umpan balik mencangkup kelebihan dan kekurangan mahasiswa pada penampilannya. Mahasiswa menggunakan umpan balik tersebut untuk membuat target untuk penampilan-penampilan selanjutnya.

ix

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Firstly, I want to thank Jesus Christ for the blessing given to me, good luck, health, and life until I could finish my thesis. Without the blessing, I could not finish my thesis.

Secondly, I want to thank Bapak Ag. Hardi Prasetya, S.Pd., M.A. as the supervisor for the guidance, the feedback, the time to read my drafts and the comments which wake me up from the mistakes. I would also thank all lectures in English Language Education Study Program in Sanata Dharma University who have given the knowledge, motivation, and also some opportunities for me to dig my English skills.

I would like to thank Bapak Ag. Hardi Prasetya, S.Pd., M.A., Bapak G. Punto Aji, S.Pd., M.Hum., and Ibu Yuseva Ariyani Iswandari, S.Pd., M.Ed.as the Microteaching lecturers who allowed me to conduct the research in their classes. I thank the lecturers for the opportunity and the time. I could not finish my thesis if I could not conduct the research in the classes. Also thank all students in Microteaching in the academic year 2014/2015 who had the willingness to give the respons of the survey.

I would like to thank my parents Bapak Ignatius Sudiyono and Ibu Parjilah for always staying besides me and always being patient. I thank my parents for the advice and for the encouragement given to me, until I could pass the days with your blessing. I cannot repay all of what you have done to me. I also

x

thank all of my family, my uncle, my aunts, my cousins who always remain me about my thesis and encourage me when I am down.

I would like to thank my idol VIXX who always shines brightly. I thank for being born and thank for being an idol, for the nice songs, and beautiful voice which give me some spirit day by day. I thank my idol for always making me proud of being a Starlight and for the hardwork. I also thank my best friends Inka, Intan, Anita, Prima,and Vivin for the support, encouragement, time, making me laugh when I feel sad, and the craziness I really enjoy the time with them. I would also thank my friends for being my friends in a long time.I would like to thank Sita and Dino who want to listen to my complaint and give me motivation to write this thesis. I thank all off my friend in PBI 2011 class B and Bapak Fidelis Chosa Kastuhandani, M. Hum. for the the hard work, togetherness, support and the valuable time. The last, I would like to thank all people for helping me during the thesis writing process, supported me, prayed for me, and also gave some suggestions for me.

xi

TABLES OF CONTENTS

TITTLE PAGE ... i

APPROVAL PAGES ... ii

DEDICATION PAGE ... iv

STATEMENT OF WORK ORIGINALTY ... v

PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI ... vi

ABSTRACT ... vii

ABSTRAK ... viii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... ix

TABLES OF CONTENTS ... xi

LIST OF TABLES ... xiv

LIST OF APPENDICES ... xv

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ... 1

A. Background of the Study ... 1

B. Research Questions ... 4

C. Objectives of the Study ... 4

D. Limitation of the Study ... 4

E. Research Benefits ... 5

xii

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ... 8

A. Review of Related Studies ... 8

B. Review of Related Theories ... 9

1. Theory of Feedback in Language Teaching ... 9

a) Previous Study on Positive Feedback... 9

b) Positive and Negative Feedback... 10

c) The Purpose of Feedback ... 12

2. Microteaching ... 14

3. Theory of Perception ... 18

C. Theoritical Framework ... 20

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ... 22

A. Research Method... 22

B. Research Setting ... 22

C. Research Participant... 23

D. Instrument and Data Gathering Technique... ... 23

E. Data Analysis Technique... ... 24

F. Research Procedure... 25

CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDING AND DISSCUSSION.... . 26

A. Feedback in Microteaching Class... 26

B. The Implementation of positive feedback, both oral and written, in Microteaching class... 28

C. Students’ Perception on Using Positive Feedback to Improve Their Performance in Microteaching Class... 37 D. Students’ Suggestion of the

xiii Implementation of Feedback

in Microteaching Class... 43

CHAPTER V CONCLUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION.. 46

A. Conclussion... 46

B. Recommendation... 48

REFERENCES ... 50

APPENDICES... 52

xiv

LIST OF TABLES

Table 4.1 The Implementation of Feedback

in Microteaching class ... 28 Table 4.2 The Feedback Given

in Microteaching Classes ... 30 Table 4.3 When the lecturer gives

the feedback for the students... 32 Table 4.4 Feedback for the whole performance... 33 Table 4.5 Students’ perception

on using positive feedback... 38 Table 4.6 Types of feedback that students’ need... 39 Table 4.7. Perception of whether

the feedback is understandable... 40 Table 4.8. Feedback helps the students... 40

xv

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1: Blue Print of Questionnaire... 51 Appendix 2: Questionnaire and Tables analysis………... 52

1

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter consists of five parts. The first part is the background of the study which includes the description of the topic and the reason why the topic is chosen. The second part is the research questions which presents the formulation of problem to be discussed in a form of questions. The third part is the objectives of the study which state clearly and precisely the objectives of the study based on the research questions. The fourth part is the benefits of the study which indentify the contribution of the study to the parties and to the development of knowledge.The fifth part is the definition of term which explains the key words of the study.

A.Background of Study

The researcher wants to conduct a research about students’ perception on giving feedback in Mocroteaching class. Microteaching is one of the courses in the English Language Education Study Program at Sanata Dharma University. Students will learn how to teach in front of class in the Microteaching Laboratory. In this course, the students will do teaching simulation. Some students pretend to be the teachers and the rest of the class will be the students who have to act like the real students in a classroom. By doing this simulation, students will be able to improve their teaching skills. Students learn how to deal with the classroom situation. Later, when they teach students in the real class, they can perform well. There is a correlation between Microteaching and the real class room.

Microteaching performance can be the prediction for teaching in the real class room. However the the correlation only shows that the students who have good performance in Microteaching, will have good performance too in the real class room (Brown, 1975).

Besides teaching in the laboratory, Microteaching students also teach the students in the lower grade. This is useful for them to increase their teaching skills. This activity will be more challenging for Microteaching students, because they should teach the students in lower grade who are the real sudents and they should implement the teaching method that they have learnt before.

The teacher usually gives the feedback for the students after they do their tasks or presentations. In Microteaching class, the lecturer also gives feedback for students’ performances in the classroom. Not only the lecturer but also the students who are being the observer, they give the feedback for their friends’ performances. The students can give the feedback in the space available in the observation sheet. They also can give the feedback orally. Written feedback is given by writing the feedback on observation sheet or on a piece of paper, while oral feedback is given orally.

Feedback needs to be given in a concerned and supportive way and the observer has to include both positive and negative side. Observer has to focus on what they have seen in the performance not only from their assumption. Giving feedback to the performer should be objective and it is not based on emotional or feeling of the observer. In giving the feedback, students have to follow the instruction on how to give the feedback for their friends’ performances. There are

specific social roles associated with providing feedback on goal pursuit. Educators provide feedback that helps individuals monitor the level and direction of their actions to ensure they meet their goals (Fishbach, Eyal & Finkelstein,2010).

In the English Language Education Study Program in Sanata Dharma University, the lecturer gives the instruction in giving the feedback. The students have to mention the good things in the performers and the things that need to be improved. By using this kind of method in giving feedback, it can help the students to be better in the next performances. It happens because the students feel confident when they know that their friends mention the good things of their performances. They will not feel intimidated when they receive the feedback from their friend. They can improve or more confident in their next performances and they will be motivated by the feedback. At the best, the students can be encouraged and keep trying (Lewis, 2002)

In this study the researcher sees the important of feedback to improve students’ performances in Microteaching. Feedback is important to give some motivation for the students to perform better in their teaching performances. In this research, the researcher wants to find out the implementation of giving positive feedback in Microteaching class, how the students’ perception on positive feedback in Microteaching class, and the students’ suggestion toward the implementation of positive feedback.

B. _{Research Questions}

According to the background above, the researcher arraged some research question for this study. The research questions are:

a. How is positive feedback given in Microteaching class?

b. What is the students’ perception on using positive feedback in microteaching class to improve their teaching performances?

c. What are students’ suggestions to improve the implementation of using positive feedback in Microteaching class?

C. _{Objective of the Study}

The objective of the study is the researcher wants to gather some information of the students’ perception on lecturers’ positive feedback in Microteaching class. The second is the researcher gets information about how positive feedback is given in Microteaching class and the last is the researcher gets suggestions from the students about how to improve the implementation of using positive feedback in Microteaching class.

D. _{Limitation of the study}

The researcher wants to focus on the students’ perception on using positive feedback in microteaching class. This study will focus on the students in microteaching class of Sanata Dharma University in the academic year of 2014/2015. The researcher wants to focus on how positive feedback is given in

Microteaching class and focus on the students’ suggestions to improve the implementation of using positive feedback in Microteaching class.

E. _{Research Benefit}

The finding of this study can give some benefits for: 1. For Microteaching students

This research can be valuable for students in Microteaching class. Students will understand that positive feedback can support them. Students can get some motivation from the positive feedback. In the end they can improve their performances after they receive the positive feedback.

2. For Microteaching lecturer

The finding of this study can help the lecturers of Microteaching in Sanata Dharma University in giving the positive feedback for the students. The lecturers will know the students’ perspectives of the positive feedback of their teaching performances. It will help the lecturers to find the way to give feedback for the students.

3. For other researchers

For other researchers, the result of this study can be the reference in the next research. The researcher hopes this research can help other researcher to conduct the further research about using feedback in Microteaching class.

4. Definition of Term

Researcher provides the definition of term to avoid misunderstanding in this research:

1. Feedback

According to Lewis (2002:3), feedback is a way for teacher to describe their learner language. Lewis says (2002) that feedback is used to give information for the teacher about individual and collective class progress. Moreover, feedback is offered in order to improve the learner’s language ability (Brown, 2004). After teaching simulation, some students and also the lecturer will give some feedback for the performer. Giving feedback means telling students about the progress they are making and the things that should be improved (Lewis, 2002).

According to McNamara (2000) there are two types of teacher feedback. Those are positive feedback and negative feedback. Positive feedback can be verbal, non-verbal or body language, and written. Positive feedback has positive reinforcement, while the negative feedback has negative reinforcement. In this research, positive feedback can encourage the students to show better performances in microteaching. In this research, feedback is a way for the teacher to get information about individual and class progress in order to improve the learners’ language ability.

2. Microteaching

According to Allen and Ryan as cited in Gregory (1972), Microteaching is an idea, at the core in which lie five fundamentals proportions, those are real

teaching, lessens the complexities of normal classroom, focusing on training, increased control of the practice, and focus on the feedback.

Sanata Dharma University has Microteaching course for the English Language Education Study Program. The main objective of Microteaching course is to provide the learners with an environment for practice-based teaching to encourage self-evaluative skills on their teaching competence and performance (Buku Panduan Akademik, 2011). In this research, students learn in microteaching class and they do some teaching simulations then they receive some feedback from the lecturer and their friends.

3. Perception

Perception is defined as the process of how the stimuli are selected and grouped by a person up to create a meaningful interpretation (Altman, et al 1985: 85). Altman also says that perception can be defined as a person’s view of reality or the way people perceive something.

8

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

This chapter presents the theoretical description and the theoretical framework based on the previous chapter. The theoretical description and the theoretical framework will be used to discuss the topic further. The theoretical description consists of the definition of feedback, definition of positive feedback, and the purpose of using positive feedback.

A. Review of Related Studies

In this part, the researcher will review the result of some studies about students perception on using positive feedback to improve students’ performances in Microteaching class from other researchers.

The first study had been conducted and the researcher found that the lecturers in Microteaching classes gave the feedback in different way. Some lecturers gave the feedback direcly, both oral and written feedback. However, other lecturers gave the feedback indirectly and occasionally. When the lecturers gave the feedback directly, the students got the detailed feedback, but when the lecturers gave the students indirectly feedback, the students did not get the detailed feedback. There was also a lecturer who gave the written feedback directly and in written form. From this study the researcher found that the feedback gave them motivation to improve their teaching skills. The feedback also

helped the students to see their strength to be developed and the weaknesses to be improved. In this study the students also suggested that the feedback should be given directly after the performance in written or orally.

The second study was about the use of observation sheet to give the feedback in Microteaching class. In this study, the researcher focused on written feedback. The result of this study was the same as the first study. Generally, students had good perception toward the use of observation sheet as the feedback for them. The feedback helped them to find their strength and weaknesses. The students also got motivation from the observation sheet as feedback. The feedback helped the students to improve their teaching skills.

In this study, the researcher conducted a research about students’ perception on the use positive feedback to improve their teaching skills in Microteaching. To support the research, the reseacher used some theories that are related to the topic of study. The theories will be explained in the sections below.

B. Review of Related Theories

In this part, the researcher will review the theory of feedback, theory of microteaching class, and also the theory of perception.

1. Theory of Feedback in English Language Teaching a) Previous Studies on Positive Feedback

Before this study was conducted, there were other researchers who had conducted the research about positive feedback. The first research was conducted in Sanata Dharma University in 2009 by Dionisia Novianti Suyana. In this study

the researcher focused on the use of observation sheet as the media to assess students’ performance in Microteaching class. The researcher found the result of the study that most the students in Microteaching classes had positive responses on the use of observation sheet as the media to give the feedback. The observation sheet was helpful to help the students indentify their strengths and weaknesses. There were also some students who gave negative responses toward the use of observation sheet. The students received the feedback about their teaching performance, the feedback that can motivate students, and the general scores of the performance. The students gave some recomendation about the use of observation sheet. The recomendations were the observation sheet should have bigger columns for the comment and it should have detailed points about the indicators of teaching skills.

The second research was conducted on 2010 in Sanata Dharma University by Riskisari Restuningtyas. This research focused on the students’ perception on supervisors’ feedback. The researcher found that the lecturers gave the feedback in different ways. The students were motivated and they could develop their strength and improved their weaknesses. The students suggested that the feedback should be given directly after the performance, both oral and written feedback.

b) Positive and Negative Feedback

There are two kinds of feedback that is positive feedback and negative feedback. Positive feedback gives positive reinforcement, while negative feedback gives negatives reinforcement to the students. According to Fishbach, Eyal, and

Finkelstein (Fishbach, Eyal & Finkelstein,2010) positive feedback increases people’s confidence that they are able to pursue their goals, leading people to expect successful goal. While the negative feedback decreases people’s confidence in their ability to pursue their goals and their expectations of success. However in some cases, negative feedback can be more effective rather than positive feedback (Fishbach et al, 2010). According to Skinner as cited at Schunk (2008) the reinforcements are the stimuli for the students and it has consequences for the students. Positive reinforcement is used to make students work productively in classroom or sustain their effort at a high level. Negative feedback gives negative reinforcement and it may have punishment.

There are four kinds of positive reinforcement from the teacher (Lewis, 2002). The first reinforcement is positive verbal reinforcement in which the teacher immediatelly gives the comment for the students, for example good, excellent, correct, and fine. The second reinforcement is positive nonverbal reinforcement in which the teacher gives the respond in some movement or gesture, for examples nodding the head, smiles, keeps the eyes in the student, and move toward the student. The third one is called positively qualitified reinforcement in which the teacher differentially reinforces. The last reinforcement is delayed reinforcement when the teacher emphasiszes positive aspect of students responses by redirecting class attention to earlier contributions by a student. Both positive and negative reinforcements will influence the improvement and the performance of the students.

c) The purpose of feedback

There are five purposes of feedback according to Lewis (Lewis, 2002: 3,4):

1. Feedback provides information for teacher and students

By focusing on the strength and the weakness of the performers, feedback gives information about the improvement of the students’ performances to the teacher and also the students themselves.

2. Feedback provides students with advice about learning

Teacher can give comment based on the students’ performances. The teacher do not only give them some comments, teacher also can use journal to give some advices to the students.

3. Feedback provides students with language input

Teacher can use feedback to give the students language input. Teacher gives the feedback, it can be written or oral, using English language that higher than what the students’ own current language use. It may help students to improve their vocabulary.

4. Feedback is a form of motivation

Feedback helps students to encourage themselves. It motivates students to study and use language to the best of their ability by taking into account whatever the teacher knows about the learners’ attitudes.

5. Feedback can lead students towards autonomy

This is the long-term purpose of feedback. Teacher can lead the students to the point where they make the mistakes. Teacher gives the students to think about the mistakes and revise their mistake.

Mostly feedback only focuses on the errors of students performances. Giving feedback is not only about giving some comments of the mistakes from students. As what Lewis says that feedback is not limited to commenting errors. One of the purposes of giving feedback towards the students’ performances is to motivate the students. It is good for students to know what the good things that they have done during their performances. It is important for the students to motivate them to be better in their next performance. Lewis (2002) also says that it is important for the students to comment on their ability to express meaning despite incorrect form of the language.

Lewis (2002) explains that there are three types of feedback based on the source of the feedback.

1. Teacher feedback

In some situation, teachers are the source of feedback. They give feedback of the students performances orally and written. Teacher feedback has some variation. There are some variations of teacher feedback: traditional marking, conferencing, collective feedback.

2. Peer feedback

The idea of peer feedback is that the students give the feedback of one to another. In the first time, peer feedback is something strange because some

students think that feedback comes from the teacher instead of the students. It gives some advantages for the students and the teacher if they give peer feedback to the other students. The advantages of peer feedback are the teacher has a greater variety of suggestion, peer feedback is an instant feedback, and peer feedback is fun, so students will not be bored. There are some suggestions of giving peer feedback. The suggestions are role-play, pair work in a moving circle, feedback question, multiple feedback, read / listen / respond, summarize and photocopy advice.

3. Self-correction

The last type of feedback is self-correction. Self-correction feedback allows students correct and evaluate themselves. It gives some advantages for the students. The advantages are students can increase their independent of the teacher, students will remember better if they have discovered their own mistakes, and using self-correction will save time. Teacher can help students by giving the guidance for the students. The guidance from the teacher will make the students understand how to do self-correction. The next explanation is about Microteaching.

1. Microteaching

According to Allen and Ryan as cited in Gregory (1972), Microteaching is an idea, at the core in which lie five fundamentals proportions, those are real teaching, lessons the complexities of a real classroom, focusing on training, increased control of the practice, and focus on the feedback. Sanata Dharma

University has Microteaching course for all study programs in education department, includes in the English Language Education Study Program

The main objective of Microteaching course is to provide the learners with an environment for practice-based teaching to encourage self-evaluative skills on their teaching competence and performance (Buku Panduan Akademik, 2011). According to McKnight as cited in Brown (2004), Microteaching has been described as a scaled down teaching encounter designed to develop new skills and refine the old ones. The trainee in Microteaching teaches a small group of students in five to ten minutes. Usually, it will be recorded in a video and subsequently observed and analysed by the trainee with the supervisor.

Allen and Ryan (1969) say that Microteaching is a training concept that can be applied at various pre-service, and in service stages in the professional development of teacher. It provides teacher with a practice setting for instruction in which the normal complexities of the classroom are reduced and the teacher receives a great deal of feedback on the performance.

Microteaching is used to train teachers. There are particular areas of training to which it is uniquely fitted and microteaching is put. The areas are: a. Safe practice

Practice is the prerequisite of learning activities. A teacher’s day is devoted to activities that are learned and can be improved through practice. Almost of the practices in teaching happens in the work place. In practicing teaching skill in Microteaching class, students should pay attention to some aspects. The situation of Microteaching class is made like the real classroom on a

school, one student will be the teacher and the other students will be the students. In practicing their teaching skill, they need to consider that the students are in the classroom to be skillfully taught.

They need to think about the teaching method for the students. The technique practice must fit in well with the lesson. They need to take responsibility of the successfully teaching and they have to use their teaching skills and techniques. Microteaching is designed to provide teachers with a setting for improving the techniques and skills of their profession. Microteaching can develop professional competencies of the teacher.

b. A focused instrument

The practice environment on Microteaching allows teachers to work on acquisition of specific skills and the extraneous concerns can be shut out. During the practice, students can use a particular method to increase students’ participation. After the practice, the teacher and the others students give some feedback to the performance.

c. A vehicle for continuous training d. Modelling instructional skill

In Microteaching, students can practice their teaching skills and be recorded in a video. The natural setting of Microteaching class can develop the teaching skills and teaching techniques. Teaching skill can be isolated and their performance highlighted so that the viewer can more easily identify the behavior that make up the skill.

There are some benefits of well-executed models of instructional skills: they can be used as examples to be imitated, they can be used to show the instructional alternatives available to the teacher, they can be used to stimulate discussion about teaching and the last benefit is they can be used as a major of instructional component in a Microteaching clinic.

e. A new approach to supervision

Microteaching class can provide both a good setting for and a positive approach to supervision or observer. The approach is entirely non-evaluative. The fact in Microteaching class, the number of the students, the durations, and the scope of the lesson are all reduced, also seems to lessen the pressure on the teacher. One of the key principles of Microteaching is to focus on a particular teaching skill or some very clear objective. There will be some observers or supervisors in Microteaching class. They help the performer (teacher) to improve the teaching skills.

f. A research tool

Microteaching is born of an experiment. From the beginning, it has been used as a means of research. The aspects of Microteaching that render it valuable as a training technique also render it valuable as a research tool. Many of the complexities in the classroom teaching can be reduced.

Students who join Microteaching class will practice how to teach the students using their teaching skills and the teaching methods in Microteaching laboratory. After they teach or do teaching simulation in Microteaching laboratory, they have to teach the real students. In Sanata Dharma University,

students who are participating in Microteaching class have to teach their junior before they teach the real students in some school. This kind of process in called clinic model in Microteaching.

As the teacher candidated, the students in Microteaching have to learn how to teach the students. As a trainee, a student of Microteaching class learns the skills of teaching. These skills can be applied in different level of education and different subjects of study. The skills are: stimulus variation, set induction, closure, silent and norverbal cues, reinforcement of student participation, fluency in asking questions, probing question, higher-order questions, divergent questions, recognizing attending behavior, illustrating and use of examples, lecturing, planned repetition, and completness of communication (Allen and Ryan, 1969).

2. Theory of Perception

Perception is defined as the process of how the stimuli are selected and grouped by a person until create a meaningful interpretation (Altman, 1985: 85). Altman (1985) also says that perception can be defined as a person’s view of reality or the way people perceive something. In this research, the researcher uses the theory of perception to answer the research question number 2. In this research, the students in Microteaching classes perceive the use of positive feedback based on their experiences in Microteaching class.

There are some factors that influence people to perceive something. The factors are external and internal factors:

a. External factors

According to Robbins (2005), the internal factors come from the perceivers, target, and the situation. Robbins (2005) explains that the factors that come from the perceivers include attitudes, motives, interests, past experiences, and expectation. The factors that come from the target include novelty, motion, sound, size, background, proximity and similarity. And the last factors come from the situation that includes time, work setting and social setting (Allen, Ryan 1969: 15)

b. Internal factors

According to Altman (1985:86), there are three important factors that influences someone’s perception. The factors are:

1) The selection of stimuli

People perceive things differently because they choose the specific cues and filter or screen. They use cues or filter when they found some distractions. Everyone has different way to overcome the distraction.

2) Organization of the stimuli

After they get the stimuli, people will organize the stimuli in their mind. People should organize the information that they have got. The purpose of organization the information is to make the information become meaningful. The mind will organize the information and collect them based on the experience.

3) Self-concept

It is the way one feels about and perceives himself. Altman, et al explains that the way of somebody see themselves affects the perception of the world

around them. Self-concept is important because the concept in our mind provides mind influence on how we perceive something.

d) Theoretical Framework

To analyse the data of the research question number one in which the question is about the implementation of positive feedback, the researcher uses the theory of feedback by Skinner as cited in Schunk (2008). There are positive and negative feedback. Positive feedback gives positive reinforcement, while negative feedback gives negatives reinforcement to the students. According to Skinner as cited at Schunk (2008), the reinforcements are the stimuli for the students and it has consequences for the students.

McNamara (2000) says, feedback is the tool for describing the information about performance to the performer. Feedback provides some information about the improvement progress of the students. Lewis (2002) say that by focusing on the strength and weakness, the comment provides information about individual progress. Feedback is offered in order to improve the learner’s language ability (Brown, 2004). Feedback here are both oral and witten feedback from the teacher. In this study, the teacher gives the feedback after the students’ performace on their progress test 1 and progress test 2.

To analyse the research question number 2, that is the students’ perception on using positive feedback to improve their performance in Microteaching class, the researcher used theory from Altman et al (1985) and Robbins (2005). The students perceived the implmentatio of feedback based on their experiences when

they received the feedback. Self-concept has inportant role for the students to perceive the implementation of feedback (Altman et al, 1985) The researcher also used the theory form Allen and Ryan. The teacher gives the feedback on students’ preparation, general teaching competences, basic teaching skills and time allocation. Allen and Ryan (1969: 15) says that the basic teaching skills include stimulus variation, set induction, closure, silent and norverbal cues, reinforcement of student participation, fluency in asking questions, probing questions, higher-order questions, divergent questions, recognizing attending behavior, illustrating and use of examples, lecturing, planned repetition, and completness of communication.

22

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents methodology that is employed in this research. It includes the description of the research method, research participant, research setting, data gathering techniques and the instrument, data analysis techniques, and research procedure.

A.Research Method

The research method that was used in this study was survey. The researcher conducted a research at Microteaching classes in the English Language Education Study Program Sanata Dharma University and did the survey. By conducting this survey, the researcher wanted to dig the information about the students’ perception on lecturers’ positive feedback to improve their teaching performances in Microteaching class.

B.Research Setting

The research was conducted in Microteaching classes in the sixth semester. The researcher chose three classes randomly. This research was conducted in the end of the semester since the researcher wanted to get the data from the students who got the feedback after progress test 1 and progress tes 2. The researcher asked for the permission to the Microteaching lecturers to do the

research in their classes. The students in the classes, should have some experience on giving and receiving the feedback.

C.Research participant or Subject:

The research participants in this research were the students of the English Language Education Study Program in Sanata Dharma University who were joining Microteaching classes in academic year 2014/2015. The participants were from some classes of Microteaching class. The researcher took the samples of students in Microteaching class. There were maximum 25 students in Microteaching class. The researcher took the samples from three classes of Microteaching class. Therefore, there were 58 participants of this study who came from the three classes of Microteaching class.

D.Instrument and Data Gathering Techniques

In this survey the researcher used the self-administered questionnaire and group-administered questionnaire (Brown, 2001). The researcher used self-administered questionnaire when the researcher conducted the survey in which the respondents brought the questionnaire to their house and they could complete the questionnaire not in the classroom. Then they submitted the questionnaire to the researcher in the time and the place that had been decided before.

The researcher used group-administered questionnaire which the researcher asked the lecturers to give ten up to fifteen minutes to distribute the questionnaires and the students completed the questionnaire. The students

completed the questionnaire in the classroom then submited the questionnaire in the same day after they finished completing the questionnaire.

The researcher distributed the questionnaire to the Microteaching students. There were 22 close-ended questions and 3 open-ended questions. The respondents had to select the answer “yes” or “no” that had been provided. For the open-ended question, the researcher used short-answer question. In short-answer question usually required a view phrases or sentences (Brown, 2001). The researcher distributed the questionnaire for 58 students in three classes in Microteaching classes.

E.Data Analysis Technique

After distributing the questionnaire and gathering the data the researcher analyzed the data. The researcher classified the answer on the questionnaire. The students who had positive perception about positive feedback would answer yes, while the students who had negative perception about positive feedback would answer no. From the classification of the data, the researcher knew their perceptions on giving positive feedback. Researcher used descriptive statistics to analyse the data. The purpose of descriptive statistics was to describe or characterize the answer of the group of respondents to numerically coded questions (Brown, 2001). Later the researcher described the result in frequencies or percentages of various answer.

Frequencies was used to count the number of the respondents in this survey. The researcher needed to know the number of participants and then the

data would be converted into percentages. There were some steps to convert the frequences data into percentages. Step 1 was to figure out how many people there are total in the survey. Step 2 was to divide the number, in this survey the researcher divided the number of participant into their classes. Step 3 was to multiply the result into 100. The last step was round to the result to two places as in conventional in the social sciences (Brown, 2001).

F. Research Procedure

Firstly, researcher decided the subject of the study. The subject of the study or the research participants were the students in Microteaching class. The researcher took the sample from the population of students in Microteaching. There are 58 participants who came from three Microteaching classes. After deciding the subject or the participants, the researcher arranged the questionnaire. After that, the researcher distributed the questionnaire to the participant. Then the data from the questionnaire would be analyzed based on the theories.

26

CHAPTER IV

RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter provides the research findings and the data analysis. The data are based on the questionnaire that has been explained in chapter 2. The analysis based on the theories which have been presented in chapter 2.

A. Feedback in Microteaching Class

In this research, the researcher conducted a survey to get the data. The survey was conducted in Microteaching classes in Sanata Dharma University. There were three classes in Microteaching class and there were 58 students. There were 58 questionnaire sheets and each student received one questionnaire sheet, however there were 3 students who did not return the questionnaire to the researcher. Therefore, there were 55 participants in this research. According to the previous chapter, there are 22 close-ended questions and 3 open-ended questions. The students had to give check mark () in the column “yes” or “no” which had been provided in the questionnaire. The analysis of the data is provided in the table analysis.

The first class which had been chosen was class B. There were 19 participants in this class; however in the end there were 3 students who did not submit the questionnaire. Therefore, in the end, there were 16 participants from this class. The research was conducted on Thursday, 4th July 2015. In this class the lecturer gave feedback for the students after the teaching simulation. The

feedback was given orally and also in written feedback. The written feedback was in a form of observation sheet. The observer gave the score to the performer in the observation sheet, which included the preparation, general teaching competence, basic teaching skills, and time allocation. The oral feedback also included those aspects and it was given after the performance orally.

The researcher conducted a survey in Microteaching Class C. This survey was the same survey as the class B. In this class, the feedback was given in a conference. After performing, the lecturer gave the oral feedback after the students had done their performance. The written feedbak was given in a conference. The lecturer invited the students whom had perform and the observers. They did the conference outside the classroom. The survey was conducted in the same day with class B. The participants in this class were 20 students. Each student had to do the same questionnaire. All of students in this class submitted the questionnaire.

The last survey that had been conducted by the researcher is in Class D. The survey was conducted on Friday, June 26th, 2015. Before the students started their simulations the lecturer made sure who would perform in front of the class. After that, the lecturer went to the observation room and he let the students to finish their simulation. The lecturer gave the feedback after one student finished his/her performance. The feedback given included the strengths and the weaknesses of the performers. There were 19 participants in this class. The first part of the questionnaire was close ended question, which consisted of 22 statements. The second part of the questionnaire was open-ended question, which

consisted of 3 questions. This questionnaire was the same questionnaire to the previous classes.

The researcher divided this chapter in to three parts based in the research questions. The research questions are the implementation of feedback in Microteaching class, the students’ perception on the use positive feedback in Microteaching class and the last research question is students’ suggestion on the implementation of giving feedback in Microteaching class. In this chapter, the researcher will present the result of the survey.

B. The Implementation of positive feedback, both oral and written, in Microteaching class.

The researcher provided some statements that were related to the research question about the implementation of positive feedback in Microteaching class. The statements were in close-ended form and also in open-ended form. In close ended form, there were 10 statements and in open-ended form there was one question.

Table 4.1 The Implementation of Feedback in Microteaching class Question

number

1 2 5

Class Yes No Yes No Yes No

B 14

(25.5%) 2 (3.6%) 5 (9.1%) 11 (20%) 14 (25.5%) 2 (3.6%)

C 18

(32.7%) 2 (3.6%) 17 (30.9%) 3 (5.5%) 19 (34.5%) 1 (1.8%)

D 16

(29.1%) 3 (5.5%) 15 (27.3%) 4 (7.3%) 19 (34.5%) 0 (0%)

Total 48

(87.3%) 7 (12.7%) 37 (67.3%) 18 (32.7%) 52 (94.5%) 3 (5.5%)

The first statement was about the way of feedback was given, the lecturer gave the detail written feedback or not. Most of students agreed that the lecturer gave the detail feedback for them. The detailed feedback was that the feedback not only about the teaching skills, but also from the preparation, general teaching competence, and time alocation. From 55 students, there were 48 students chose “yes” and there were 8 students who disagreed with the statements. From class B there were 14 students who agreed with the statement, from class C there were 18 students, and from class D there were 16 students who agreed with the statement. In total from those three classes, there were 48 students. In total percentage, there were 83.7% chose “yes” and 12.7% chose “no”.

The second question was about the oral feedback given by the lecturer. It was the same case with the written feedback, the lecturer gave the detailed oral feedback. From the survey, the researcher found that most of the students agreed that the lecturer gave detail oral feedback. There were 37 students who agreed with the statement and 18 students disagreed with the statement. From class B there were 5 students who agreed with the statement. From this class, most of students disagreed with the statement. However, from the other two classes, most of the students agreed with the statement. There were 17 students in Class C who agreed with the statement and there were 15 students in Class D who also agreed with the statement. In total from those three classes there were 37 students agreed with the statement. The total percentage for the answer is 67.3% for “yes” and 32.7% for “no”. The detail feedback was that the feedback included not only

some comments but also the explanation of the strength and weaknesses. Lewis (2002) says that the feedback is not only limited on commenting errors.

The question number five is about whether the observer or lecturer gives the constructive feedback or not. From the survey, the researcher found that the lecturers gave constructive feedback to the students. Most of the students received constructive feedback from the lecturers. From class B there were 14 students who agreed that the lecturer give the constructive feedback, there were 19 students in Class C, and there were 19 students from Class D. In total, there were 52 students who received the constructive feedback from the lecturers and the other 3 students disagree with the statement. The next table shows the result of the question number nine up to eleven about the form of feedback which is given.

Table 4.2 The Feedback Given in Microteaching Classes Question

number

9 10 11

Class Yes No Yes No Yes No

B 0 16

(29.1%) 8 (14.5%) 8 (14.5%) 9 (16.4%) 7 (12.7%)

C 0 20

(36.4%) 1 (1.8%) 19 (34.5%) 20 (36.4%) 0

D 2

(3.64%) 17 (30.9%) 3 (5.5%) 16 (29.1%) 19 (34.5%) 0

Total 2

(3.64%) 53 (96.4%) 12 (21.8%) 43 (78.2%) 48 (87.3%) 7 (12.7%)

The questions numbers 9 up to 11 were about the form of feedback which the students received after their performances. From the question number nine, the lecturer did not only give the oral feedback. Most of the students in those three classes agreed that the lecturers not only gave them the oral feedback. All students

in class B and class C did not only receive the oral feedback from the lecturer. In class D, most of the students did not only receive the oral feedback. From those three classes, there were 53 students who agreed that the lecturers did not only give oral feedback, while 2 students disagreed with it. In the precentage, there were 96.4% students who chose “no” and there were 3.64% students who chose “yes”. The result was similar with the statement number ten. The lecturers did not only give them the written feedback. Most of the students disagreed that the lecturers only gave them the written feedback. The result of the surveys showed that 43 students disagreed with the statement and 12 students agreed with the statement. The percentage for the answer of the question number ten were 78.2% students chose “no” and 21.8% students chose “yes”.

The lecturers not only gave them the oral feedback or written feedback, but the lecturers gave oral and written feedback. Statement number 11 showed that the students received both oral and written feedback. There were 48 students who agreed with the statement and 7 students disagreed with the statement. All students in class C and class D agreed that the lecturer gave both oral and written feedback. From class B most of the students agreed with the statement. There were 9 students who chose “yes” and there were 7 students who disagreed with the statement and chose “no”. the total percentage there were 87.3% who chose “yes” and 12.7% who chose “no”.

The table 4.3 showed the result of the questions number thirteen and fourteen. It was about the time when the lecturers gave the feedback for the students. The result can be seen in the table below.

Table 4.3 When the lecturer gives the feedback for the students Question

number

13 14

Class Yes No Yes No

B 13

(23.6%) 3 (5.5%) 10 (18.2%) 3 (5.5%)

C 16

(29.1%) 4 (7.3%) 1 (1.82%) 2 (3.6%)

D 5

(9.1%) 14 (25.5%) 14 (25.5%) 15 (27.3%)

Total 34

(61.8%) 21 (38.2%) 25 (45.5%) 30 (54.5%)

The question numbers thirteen until fifteen were the questions about the moment for the lecturer to give the feedback for the students. The lecturer gave the feedback after all performances in one day. The question number thirteen showed the result that the lecturers gave the feedback after the performance in one day. There were 34 students agreed that the lecturers gave the feedback after all performances in one day. The number were from the students in class B there were 13 students who agreed with the statement, there were 16 students from class C, and the last class, class D, there were only 5 students who agreed with the statement. The other 21 students disagreed with the statement. In total, there were 61,8% students chose “yes” and 38,2% students chose “no”.

For statement number fourteen, most of students disagreed that the lecturers gave the written feedback directly after one students performed in front of class. There were 30 students who chose “no” and 25 students chose “yes”. It also happened to the statement number 15 about oral feedback. The lectures did not give oral feedback directly after one performance. The result showed that most

students disagreed that the oral feedback was given after one performance. There were 29 students disagreed with the statement and 26 students agreed with the statement. The total percentage for the question number fourteen is 54.5% for “no” and 45.5% for “yes”. The total percentage for the question number fifteen is 52.7% for “no” and 47.3% for “yes”.

Table 4.4 Feedback for the whole performance Question

number

15 22

Class Yes No Yes No

B 4

(7.3%) 12 (21.8%) 13 (23.6%) 3 (5.5%)

C 4

(7.3%) 16 (29.1%) 18 (32.7%) 2 (3.6%)

D 18

(32.7%) 1 (1.8%) 19 (34.5%) 0

Total 26

(47.3%) 29 (52.7) 50 (90.9%) 5 (9.1%)

The last question of close-ended question was about whether the lecturer gave feedback on the students’ performance as a whole or not. From the survey the result was the lecturer gave feedback on the students’ performance as a whole. Most of the students agreed with the statement. There were 50 students who agreed with the statement, while the other 5 students disagreed with the statement. Those are the result from the close-ended questions about the implementation of positive feedback, both oral and written. The percentage for this statement were 90.9% for “yes” and 9.1% for “no”.

From the result above number fourteen showed that the lecturer gave the feedback in different way to one a”no”ther. This result wass similat to the

previous research (Restuningtyas, 2010). The oral feedback was not be given directly after the performance. The students received the feedback in other occasions.

Question number one in the open-ended question was the question for the implementation of using positive feedback in Microteaching class. In open-ended question, the researcher provided a question to dig deeper about the implementation of feedback. The lecturer gave the feedback in different way. According to the opinion of the students, the researcher found that the lecturer gave them detail feedback. It was not only orally but also written feedback.

“The lecturer gives clear feedback (oral and written) directly after we do our performance. The lecturer gives us feedback about our lesson plan and also the performance” (student class D no. 5)

The feedback was clear; it was given directly after the students did their performance one by one. The lecturer gave the oral feedback after the performance and the written feedback in the end of the class.

“Oral feedback is given right after the performance. Written feedback is given after all students on one day finish teaching simulation (given in the end of the class).”( student class D no. 8)

From this question the researcher found that the feedback was given by the lecturer in a conference. The lecturer invited the observer and the teacher to have the conference and then they shared the feedback. The feedback were given orally and the written feedback. The lecturer did not give the feedback in the class, but outside the class. “Usually we did conference after Microteaching class and got feedback both oral and written feedback”(students class C, no. 20). The conference made the students could understand and catched the feedback easily.

“She makes a conference for the teacher and the observer, so it is helpful to catch the feedback clearly”( students class C, no. 9). Only the lecturer, the observers and also the student teachers who knew the feedback. The lecturer did a conference to give the feedback for the students. Lewis (2002) says that the one off the variation of teacher feedback is conference. The lecturer in this class used this conference to discuss the feedback.

Some students said that the lecturer only gave them the written feedback. For the oral feedback the lecturer gave for the whole class. The lecturer gave the feedback based on the appearance, teaching method, lesson plan, and material mastery. The lecturer also gave the feedback about grammar, learning method, and teaching techniques.

“He only gave me written feedback. I think that written feedback is enough because he wrote all the comment in detail. The oral feedback from the lecturer only for a whole class, not individual comment” (student class B no. 4).

“The lecturer gives feedback on my Microteaching class after all the students (in one meeting) finished the performance. The feedback is kind of written one. In the lecturer’s feedback he gives the suggestions on my teaching based on my appearance, teaching method, lesson plan, material mastery, etc. He doesn’t give the students the oral feedback in the class, except for the whole (student class B no. 5).”

“The lecturer gives feedback on my performance by commenting on my teaching technique, grammar, learning method, and the mastery of learning materials”. (student class B no. 2)

From the answer of the question, the lecturer gave detail written feedback. The lecturer gave the feedback based on the whole performances which was included the appearance, teaching method, lesson plan, teaching technique, grammar, learning method and also material mastery. The lecturer also gave them

the oral feedback. The lecturer gave some comments about what went well and also what things need to be improved “...the lecturer explained what already worked well and not well.” The oral feedback is not only for the performers at that day, but also for the whole class “The lecturer only gives the oral feedback for the whole class.” (student class B no. 15)

The lecturer also gave the negative feedback beside the positive feedback. In this research, the student agreed that the feedback from the lecturer is constructive feedback. However, here the student said that most of the feedback given is negative. The negative feedback that the student said in this case means the feedback about the side which need to be improved during the performance.

“He gives us detailed written feedback and most of the feedback is contructive feedback, but there are too much negative feedback than the positive one. For the oral, my lecturer always highlights the most important thing found that day.” (Student B no. 16).

Feedback was given to make the students know their strengths and their weaknesses. Feedback focus on the weakness and the strength of the performers as Lewis says (Lewis 2002). By focusing to the aspects, strengths and weaknesses, the teacher could see the improvement of the students. Besides focusing on the strengths and weaknesses, the lecturer also gave some comments as the feedback of students’ performances. The comment could be in written and also orally. “The lecturer gives feedback by giving a comment on a slice of paper, in the paper there are a lot of suggestion from the performance.”

In Microteaching class, the comment was given in written by the lecturer. The lecturer gave the comment about what done well and what aspects need to be improved. The comment was also be given orally, “The lecturer wrote down the

comments on a piece of paper and then after the class was finished, the lecturer explained what already worked well and not well.”(student class B, no. 7) The comment is for the general. The lecturer not only focused on the performers, but also the comment was given for the whole class.

After getting the data of the implementation of positive feedback, both oral and written feedback, the researcher got the data of the students’ perception on using positive feedback to improve their performance in Microteaching class. The data was found based on the survey that have been conducted.

C. Students’ Perception on Using Positive Feedback to Improve Their Performance in Microteaching Class.

Students’ perception in this survey was how the students perceive the use of positive feedback to improve their performance in Microteaching class. The perception in this study means whether the feedback given by the lecturer could help them to indentify their strengths and the weaknesses or not. The feedback should be understandable. Students also perceived whether the feedback was understandable or not. The students also perceived how their feeling after they got the feedback from their lecturer. In close-ended questionnaire there were twelve questions and one question in open-ended question about students’ perception on the lecturers’ positive feedback in Microteaching class. Here was the result of the survey.

Table 4.5 Students’ perception on using positive feedback Question

number

3 4 6

Class Yes No Yes No Yes No

B 16

(29.1%)

0 16 (29.1%)

0 5

(9.1%)

11 (20%)

C 20

(36.4%)

0 20 (36.4%)

0 9

(16.4%)

11 (20%)

D 19

(34.5%)

0 19 (34.5%)

0 15 (27.3%)

4 (7.3%)

Total 55

(100%)

0 55

(100%)

0 29

(52.7%)

26 (47.3%)

The first statement was about whether feedback could help them to identify their teaching strengths (statement number 3). In those three classes all students agreed that the feedback helps them to identify their teaching strengths. The next question was about their perception of feedback helped them to identify their teaching weaknesses (statement number 4). The answer for this statement was all students agreed that the feedback also helped them to identify their teaching weaknesses. All of the students chose “yes”, none of them chose “no”. Both written and oral feedback helped them to identify their teaching strengths and teaching weaknesses.

The next statement was about what kind of feedback the students chose, written or oral feedback. Statement number six was about whether the students prefered to choose oral feedback rather than written feedback. From 55 students, there were 29 students who chose oral feedback rather than written feedback and there were 26 students who disagreed with the statement. For statement number seven about whether the students preferred written feedback rather than oral feedback. Most of the students preferred written feedback rather than oral

feedback. There were 30 students preferred written feedback and 26 students did not preferred written feedback. However in the next question, most of the students need both oral and written feedback. The students did not only need oral or written feedback, but they need both oral and written feedback.

Table 4.6 Types of feedback that students’ need Question

number

7 8 12

Class Yes No Yes No Yes No

B 11

(20%) 5 (9.1%) 13 (23.6%) 3 (5.5%) 4 (7.3%) 12 (21.8%)

C 4

(7.3%) 16 (29.1%) 19 (34.5%) 1 (1.8%) 5 (9.1%) 15 (27.3%)

D 15

(27.3%) 4 (7.3%) 16 (29.1%) 3 (5.5%) 2 (3.6%) 17 (30.9%)

Total 30

(54.5%) 25 (45.5%) 48 (87.3%) 7 (12.7%) 11 (20%) 44 (80%)

There were two kinds of feedback in Microteaching based on the provider who gave the feedback. There were teacher feedback and peer feedback. Teacher feedback is a feedback from the teacher or the lecturer, while the peer feedback is a feedback from the other observers (Lewis, 2002). Here the researcher also found that most of the students did not prefer teacher or lecturer feedback (statement number 12). There are 11 students who chose “yes”, while the other 44 students chose “no”.

Table 4.7 Perception of whether the feedback is understandable Question

number

16 17 18

Class Yes No Yes No Yes No

B 11

(20%) 5 (9.1%) 15 (27.3%) 1 (1.8%) 16 (29.1%) 0

C 20

(36.4%)

0 20

(36.4%)

0 20

(36.4%) 0

D 18

(32.7%)

1 (1.8%)

19 (34.5%)

0 19

(34.5%) 0

Total 49

(89.1%) 6 (10.9%) 54 (98.2%) 1 (1.8%) 55 (100%) 0

Question number sixteen and seventeen were used to find the perception of whether the feedback is understandable or not. Question number sixteen was about the oral feedback. Students understood the feedback from the lecturers. They could catch the meaning and the knowledge from the feedback. There were 49 students who chose “yes” and there were 6 students who chose “no”. In the total percentage there was 89.1% students chose “yes” and 10.9% chose “no”. Question number seventeen was about written feedback. The written feedback from the lecturer was also understandable. There were 54 students chose “yes” and the other one chose “no”. In total percentage there were 98.2% chose “yes”.

Table 4.8 Feedback helps the students Question

number

19 20 21

Class Yes No Yes No Yes No

B 16

(29.1%)

0 11 (20%) 5 (9.1%) 6 (10.9%) 10 (18.2%)

C 20

(36.4%)

0 19 (34.5%) 1 (1.8%) 2 (3.6%) 18 (32.7%)

D 19

(34.5%)

0 17 (30.9%) 2 (3.6%) 1 (1.8%) 18 (32.7%)

Total 55

(100%)

0 47

(85.5%) 8 (14.5%) 9 16.4%) 46 (83.6%)

Appendix 2

Table Analysis Open-Ended Questions

Class: C Participant 20 Lecturer: Y

Question 3: In your opinion, how and when should feedback be given?

No Answer

1 After doing teaching practice (not directly is okay), oral ad written are

needed.

2. I think it is better if the feedback is given in both form, written and oral feedback. Besides, it is better to be givven after our performances.

3. One day after the performance.

4. Feedback is given after the performance, both oral and written. So, we can

get detail feedback to improve the skill in teaching.

5. Feedback should be given after we have done our performance but not in a

direct time. Don’t be too long to from the performance.

6. It should be given directly after done teaching. It should also be done

cinfidentally, not in front of the class.

7. Written and oral between the teacher, observers, and lecturer.

8. As I say before we have a conference and it is better we get a feedback after the performance.

9. It should be given directly and only when needed.

10 Soon, after the performance by doing conference.

11 In my opinion, the feedback should be given directly or after the Micro

teaching has done. The feedback should be given in both written and oral forms to make us get the idea what we should improve.

12. I think feedback should be given like the way my lecturer gives and it can

be done directly after the performance.

13. In my opinion what has done by my lecturer is already good. So, the

lecturer gives the feedback as soon as possible after we do the performance. Then, she tells us everything that has already good and has to be improved.

14. After we perform and not in front of the class. It is better if the feedback is

given when there is only the observer.

15. Should be given right after the performance both oral and written.

16. In both oral and written form, and not long after the performance, so both

the performance and observer stil can remember.

17. Not too long after the teaching. So the observers and the teachers still

remember the teaching process.

18. Directly after the performance, so that the students could still recall their performances and easily related the feedback with their performance.

Appendix 2

Table Analysis Open-Ended Questions

Class: D Participant: 19 Lecturer: Z

Question 1: How does the lecturer give feedback on your performance in Microteaching class?

No Answer

1 He gives feedback clearly, he gives comments on my lesson plan, my

performance when teaching and my appearence. He gives constructive feedback.

2. He gives feddback on my lesson plan first then class activity in the next. He

gives clear explanation and feedback.

3. He gives the feedback really well without intimidating.

4. The lecturer gives both oral and written feedback on my performance; oral

feedback is given directly after my performance, written feedback is given at the end of the day.

5. The lecturer gives clear feedback (oral and written) directly after we do our

performance. The lecturer gives us feedback about our lesson plan and also the performance.

6. The lesturer gives detail feedback on both oral and written after the one

done the teaching simulation.

7. He gives me both oral and written . the whole aspects are being assessed

and I could make myself improve through the feedback given by my lecturer.

8. Oral feedback is given right after the performance. Written feedback is

given after all students on one day finish teaching simulation (given in the end of the class).

9. He gives constructive feedback and detail explanation.

10 The lecturer gives honest feedback that can help to improve my teaching

ability.

11 Oral and written feedback after I finished my performance. Not only

commenting my performance but also my lesson plan.

12. Oral and written. He gives me the oral and written feedback after I have finished the teaching performance.

13. The lecturer gives me feedback clearly regarding my teaching performance

after I did it.my lecturer gives real feedback and I know that the feedback needs to be done on the next perfformance. He gives a clear and meticulous explanation about my performance.

18. He gives me both oral and written. The whole aspects are beig assessed and I could make myself improve through the feedback given by my lecturer.

Appendix 2

Table Analysis Open-Ended Questions

Class: D Participant 19 Lecturer: Z

Question 2: What kind of information do you get from the feedback?

No Answer

1 My strength and my weakness.

2. Usually he gives me the weakness of my performance and my lesson plan.

3. I get the information about my strength and weaknesses in the lesson plan

and teaching simulation.

4. My weaknesses and my strength, so I can improve my teaching skill and so

I can be able to make a good lesson plan.

5. About RPP and activities in the class.

6. The positive and the negative things from my performance.

7. The format of lesson plan and the element of it is already conect or not. The teaching performance and the activity.

8. The strength and the weakness of my teaching performance.

9. About the way to be a good teacher, such as comments about RPP,

performance, and everything. It very helps me

10 I get some comments about my performance, about my lesson plan, about

the whole activity.

11 About my strength, weakness, and also his suggestion for a better teaching

performance.

12. Oral and written about my strength and my weakness.

13. The information related to my teaching performance, set induction, and my

lesson plan.

14. About my teaching performance and also about the lesson plan. He gives

me the clear feedback.

15. My performance and my lesson plan.

16. The information about lesson plan, material mastery, and teaching

strategies.

17. My gesture, the way I teach, my material, my activity.

18. My strength and weakness. How can I improve my teaching.

Question 3: In your opinion, how and when should feedback be given?

No Answer

1 Right after the performance, so we know how to improve our weaknesses.

2. Directly after student’s simulation.

3. I think it is better to gibe feedback after we have done our performance.

4. The feedback should be given directly after the performance. Both oral and

written feedback are good.

5. After the performance, so the students and lecturer did not forget about

what they would talking about and also to make the other students did better and learned the other weakness and strength.

6. In my opinion feedback should be given after the students have finished

their performance because the students / the one who give the feedback will not forget anything about the performance.

7. After the teaching performance.

8. Everytime we have done our performance so we can improve the good

things and throw the bad things away.

9. Oral feedback is better given directly after the performance, but the written

feedback can be given after all the performance.

10 I think feedback should be given after we finish our performance in the

same day.

11 After I have done teaching performance.

12. The feedback should be constructive. It’s beter if it’s delivered after one teaching performance (in one meeting) so that the performer still remember clearly how she / he has taught before.

13. Directly after the students have done their performance.

14. After the class with oral and written.

15. Face to face

16. I think feedback should be given in written form, so it will be private. If it

is done orally, I think it should be done not in front of the class.

17. Directly after the performance.

18. Directly after the performance so we can feel relief and use it for better performance.

19. Directly after I performed in the class.