lecturers` lived experience in public speaking feedback in the elesp

Transcription

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
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
2016
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
2016
i
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 selfimprovement and diminish constraint.
Keywords: lecturer’s feedback, Public speaking, phenomenology
vi
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.
Kata kunci: lecturer’s feedback, Public speaking, phenomenology
vii
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
viii
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.
Laurensia Shella
ix
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
3. Public Speaking.............................................................
6
x
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
a. Participant 1’s story.......................................................
25
xi
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
APPENDICES ............................................................................................
45
xii
LIST OF APPENDICES
Page
Appendix 1
Construct Mapping ..............................................................
Appendix 2
Bracketing and Horizonalization
of Participant 1’s interview .................................................
Appendix 3
47
Appendix 4
46
52
xiii
55
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
1
2
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
3
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
4
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:
5
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.
6
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.
7
8
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
9
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
10
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
11
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.
12
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.
13
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
14
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
15
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.
16
17
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
18
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
19
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”
20
(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
21
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
22
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
23
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
24
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
25
26
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, 133135). 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
27
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.
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
28
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-toface 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
29
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 (2:8990, 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.
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.
30
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. (3:916).
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).
31
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.
32
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.
33
“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.
34
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)
35
“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
36
done well yet, and the errors that occurred during the performance. They did not
interfere much with the learning process to avoid the students’ being afraid of
making mistakes. Then, they gave some motivation to encourage the students to
improve their performance using the provided feedback. That motivation was
given by emphasizing what they had already done well, mentioning the existent
potentials to be developed, reducing the anxiety of making mistakes and providing
motivational quotes from famous public speaker. They expected that after
receiving both the informative and motivational feedback, the students could be
secure and aware of the errors they made, correct them, and improve their public
speaking skills.
“Both informative and motivational [feedback]. I divide my feedback into
the things that are already good and the things that still require
improvement. I always start my feedback with the good ones.” (3:22-24)
“You are tall. Usually tall man gives a great first impression. It was based
on science of psychology and sociology. So, walk like a man.” (2:21-22, 3843)
For the timing of giving feedback, feedback is divided into immediate and
delayed feedback. Participant 1 mentioned that she gave her feedback
immediately in speaking practice. As for the exam, she composed the feedback
based on the rubric, input the scores in Microsoft Excel, and distributed it to the
students at the next meeting. The benefit of multi-tasking while providing
feedback was to ease her job when it came to grading. So, the grade could really
reflect the students’ performances. However, she admitted that the providing
feedback and grading at the same time made it more difficult for her to maintain a
complete and valid assessment. Another participant, Participant 3 gave her
37
feedback immediately on that performance day. The purpose was to keep the
performance clear in the students’ mind so they could understand her feedback
easily. Another reason was so they could move on to the next material. Participant
2 had different preference. After taking notes of the students’ performance, she
would formulate her feedback in sequence and detail based on those notes. Then,
she delivered her feedback a week after the performance. She thought that by
doing so, the feedback for the students could be well organized. Therefore, the
students could understand the points of the feedback more easily.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
In this chapter, the researcher presents the conclusions and the
recommendations of the study. The first section is the conclusions of the study
that were extracted from the previous chapter. The conclusions answer the
research problem “what does giving feedback in Public Speaking mean to the
lecturers in the ELESP of Sanata Dharma University.” The second section is the
recommendations for ELESP students, Public Speaking lecturers and future
researchers.
A.
Conclusions
Public Speaking is an essential course for ELESP students, since they will
speak in front of the class whenever they teach. Public Speaking lecturers had an
important role in supporting students’ learning process through feedback.
Therefore, this study was conducted to acknowledge what giving feedback in
Public Speaking means for the lecturers. The data gathered from the in-depth
interviews were clustered into three essential themes. Then these themes were
described and elaborated to answer the research problem.
The first theme was self-improvement. The lecturers saw the feedback in
Public Speaking as a means of self-improvement for both the students and the
lecturers. Since the students could not observe their own performances,
informative feedback acted as second opinion that helped them acknowledge their
public speaking abilities. Meanwhile, motivational feedback encouraged them to
38
39
develop their skills without feeling anxious of making mistakes. The errors should
be seen as a means to acknowledge the better choice of using language in
communicating in public. Motivational feedback also motivated them to be the
better public speakers.
As for the lecturers, the process of providing feedback for Public Speaking
students allowed them to do some diagnoses of the students’ skills and reflection
about how successful their teaching was. Then, they used those data to prepare the
next material. The diagnosis and reflection resulted in self-improvement as a
professional lecturer. The lecturers could also learn from their own feedback and
the students. The experience about the students’ performance, their errors, the
possibilities that could happen in the stage broaden the lecturer’s knowledge and
experience. That new knowledge helped them to improve personally as public
speakers.
The second theme was constraints. However, in the process of providing
essential and beneficial feedback, the lecturers experienced some constraints.
Those obstacles emerged from outside and inside the lecturers. The outside
obstacles consisted of students’ lack of willingness to take the feedback seriously,
the limited criteria in assessment rubric, lack of time allocation, and the time
required in giving feedback. The constraints that emerged from the lecturers were
the inability to provide complete feedback, tiredness, and the difficulty to deliver
the feedback. Those obstacles could prevent the lecturers from providing
beneficial feedback and valid assessment. It could also restrain the improvement
that was expected to happen in the learning process.
40
The third theme was freedom. The term freedom here referred to the
lecturers’ choices of the types of feedback to be applied in their teaching process.
The types of feedback were divided into informative and motivational feedback,
and immediate and delayed feedback. All participants used both informative and
motivational feedback to support the students’ learning process. However, for the
timing of feedback, they had a different opinion. The first participant, Participant
1, gave the feedback right after the performance. However, for the exam, the
feedback was given in the next meeting. The feedback was also posted in Exelsa,
just in case the students did not listen to what she said in the class. Participant 3
preferred to give feedback for the students right away, so the memory of the
performance was still fresh and they could understand the feedback easily. As for
Participant 2, she chose to give her feedback a week after the performance. After
taking notes, she would formulate the feedback sequentially and thoroughly and
deliver the feedback to the students. Those types of feedback lecturers chose were
expected to increase the self-improvement and decrease the constraint.
B.
Recommendations
Providing feedback in Public Speaking course could really help the students
and the lecturers improve themselves. For Public Speaking lecturers, the
researcher recommends that they keep giving both informative and motivational
feedback to the students. They should use the types of feedback that are suitable
for each Public Speaking topic and the ones they are comfortable with. Giving
feedback in Public Speaking requires face-to-face meeting and a lot of time. Thus,
they need to consider some alternative and effective ways in giving feedback that
41
require less time. For example, having the students’ performances recorded could
result in less required time, less tiredness, and more valid assessment. Another
obstacle for the lecturers is the students’ willingness to take the feedback
seriously. There are various characteristics of the students. Some of the students
cannot take feedback seriously. However, the lecturers are expected to help all of
the students improve their public speaking skills. Personal feedback and personal
approach can be used to try dealing with these students. The lecturers need to keep
motivating these students in their learning process. If personal approach does not
work, the lecturers can post the written feedback in communication media, for
example Exelsa.
For the students, receiving feedback brings a lot of benefits, i.e. additional
and essential information about their performance, support and motivation.
Feedback was so essential to learning Public Speaking skills. In Public Speaking,
the students will be talking in front of public, not a mirror. What they think or feel
they are doing can be different from what they actually did. Therefore, the
students should take the feedback the lecturers seriously, since the lecturers could
give them the information they need. Then, the students need to learn from the
feedback, and try to avoid doing the same mistakes in the future. Only by doing
so, could the students keep practicing and improving to be better public speakers.
The next recommendation is for the future researchers. This study discussed
the lecturers’ lived experience in giving feedback in Public Speaking in ELESP.
However, feedback is an inseparable part of learning development. Every leaning
process requires feedback as a means of learning development. The lecturers who
42
provide the beneficial feedback play an important role. What they experience,
believe, and feel could affect the essence of feedback itself. The researcher
encourages the future researchers to conduct the research about lecturers’ lived
experience in giving feedback in other ELESP courses.
REFERENCES
Borg, W., & Gall, M. (1983) Educational research: An introduction (4th ed.). New
York (White Plains): Longman Inc.
Brown, G., Anderson, A., Sillcock, R. & Yule, G. (1984) Teaching talk:
Strategies for production and assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Cresswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2010). Designing and conducting mixed
method research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publication, Inc.
Davidson, J. (2003). The complete guide to public speaking. Hoboken: John
Wiley & Sons Inc.
Grice, G., & Skinner, J. (1995) Mastering public speaking. Boston: Allyn &
Bacon.
Haminton, C. (2012). Essentials of public speaking (5th ed.). Boston: Wadsworth.
Irfani, B. (2014). Proceedings of ICEL ’02: The international conference of
education and language. Lampung: Bandar Lampung University.
King, P. E., Young, M. J., Behnke, & R. R. (2000). Public speaking performance
improvement as a function of information processing in immediate and
delayed feedback interventions. Communication education, 49(4), 365-374.
Lewis, M. (2002). giving feedback in language classes. Singapore: SEAMEO
Regional Language Center.
London, M. (2003). Job feedback: Giving, seeking, and using feedback for
performance improvement (2nd ed.). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Inc.
Lucas, S. (2009). The art of public speaking (10th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Luoma, S. (2004) Assessing speaking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Manen, M. V. (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action
sensitive pedagogy. New York: State University of New York Press.
Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks:
Sage Publication, Inc.
43
44
Neuman,W. (2006). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative
approaches (6th ed.). New York: Pearson.
Seidman, I. E. (1991).Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for
researchers in education and the social sciences. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Sherman, R., & Webb, R. (1988). Qualitative research in education: Focus and
methods. New York: The Falmer Press.
Tesch, R. (1990). Qualitative research: Analysis types and software tools. New
York: The Falmer Press.
Zamel, V. (1981). A Model for Feedback in the ESL Classroom. TESOL
Quarterly, 15, 139-150.
APPENDICES
45
46
Appendix 1
Construct Mapping
Lecturers
of Public
Speaking
Lecturer‟s educational
background
Personal motivation
Feedback
Belief about feedback
Advantage
Lecturers‟
lived
experience in
giving
feedback in
Public
Speaking in
ELESP in
USD
Disadvantage
Types of feedback
Criteria of good
feedback
Belief about PS
Advantage
Disadvantage
Public
Speaking
Criteria/ requirements
of good PS
Belief about
PS in ELESP
(PS)
PS in ELESP
The coverage
of PS in
ELESP
Belief about giving
feedback in PS
Lecturer‟s role
Giving
feedback in
Public
Speaking
Advantage
Disadvantage
Problems encountered
Experience
Any expectation
Encouraging
experience
Discouraging
experience
47
Appendix 2
Bracketing and Horizonalization (Participant 1)
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
(Pengalaman) yang menyenangkan itu kalau didengarkan. Kemudian di
tindak lanjuti. Feedback ada dua. Satu oral, satu tertulis. Yang oral itu
biasanya aku sampaikan setiap kali abis ada yang presentasi itu. Aku beri
secara spesifik. Saya mengundang teman-teman (memberi) komentar what
is good and what needs to be improved. Kemudian saya juga memberi
masukan. Biasanya masukan saya terdiri dari tiga. Yaitu tentang content,
oranganisasi, sama bahasa. Plus yang lain-lain, kaya delivery, body
language, dan sebagainya. Yang tertulis juga seperti itu. Manfaatnya kalo
oral itu semua dengar, bisa belajar dan aktual ya, tadi barusan liat.
Kemudian kalo tertulis, anak bisa menyimpan karna kadang diberi oral
feedback tapi gak nyatet. Yang menyenangkan adalah kalo didengarkan
kalo kita memberi oral feedback, terus anak-anaknya mencatat, gitu.
Kemudian tidak melakukan kesalahan yang sama lagi di masa depan. Yang
tidak menyenangkan tentu saja kalau tidak didengarkan, tidak
ditindaklanjuti. Kaya kemarin saya memberi feedback di mata kuliah
translation. Di kelas sebelumnya, pas saya memberi oral feedback, anakanak nyatet, kemudian bertanya. Sedangkan yang ribut sendiri dan gigi saya
sakit waktu itu. Jadi sangat tidak menyenangkan. Tapi saya maklum.
Biasanya saya tindak lanjuti dengan nulis feedback saya secara keseluruhan.
Saya rangkum, lalu saya tulis di exelsa. Biasanya sih ada yang baca, tapi
lebih banyak yang tidak baca. Sering (terjadi di) kelas Public Speaking, tapi
tidak di semua kelas. Karakter kelas kan beda-beda ya. Jadi ada kelas yang
nyatetan, terus rajin konsultasi. Tapi ada kelas yang senengnya ribut sendiri.
Semuanya ada di PBI. Kalo misalnya mereka ribut sendiri paling saya tepuk
tangan, terus “mau dengerin gak?” Karna kadang-kadang itu saya harus
tegas. Tahun lalu itu saya ngajar dua kelas. Dua kelas itu karakternya beda.
Yang satu itu bagus di style, tapi bahasanya mawut. Yang satunya
bahasanya bagus tapi stylenya terlalu pakem, Tapi gakpapa saya suka
kedua-duanya. Masing-masing itu ada kelebihan dan kelemahannya. Saya
pernah marah dulu kelas Public Speaking. Itu ada hubungannya dengan
esensi Public Speaking itu sendiri. Jadi tahun 2012 itu saya pertama datang
ke Sanata Dharma ya, setelah saya studi. Itu saya ngajar Public Speaking
angkatan 2010. Di kelas itu, anaknya bagus-bagus, tapi ada anak yang tidak
committed di kelas. Suatu hari itu, hari ulang tahun saya, saya sedang
menstruasi, dan anak saya sakit. Jadi ada tiga faktor personal yang
mempengaruhi. Tujuan saya kalo ngajar, saya pengen kita ada interaksi.
Kemudian kita saling diperkaya oleh interaksi itu. Kamu bisa belajar
menguasai skill Public Speaking dengan baik, saya bisa membantu kamu
mencapai tujuan itu. Jadi kita itu saling membantu. Bagaimana mungkin
saya membantu mereka kalo mereka tidak mau dibantu. Jadi suatu hari, saya
menjelaskan tentang how to be moderator. Ketika saya ngomong itu, saya
sadar nobody was listening. Saya ngukuti buku dan computer. Saya keluar
48
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
ke ruangan saya. Anak-anak itu nggak sadar. Maka saya sudah sampe di
ruangan itu baru disusul. Mereka itu datang nyusul saya, „Miss, Ms. M
marah ya?‟ “Iya, marah, tau nggak aku ngomong aja kalian nggak dengerin.
Aku pergi aja kalian nggak tau kan. Terus bagaimana mungkin kalian bisa
mempelajari pelajaranku itu, kalo kalian memperhatikan aja tu nggak.” Aku
bilang gini, “kalian boleh ngomongin dulu sana, aku di ruanganku, kalian
ngobrol dulu, kamu tetep mau aku yang ngajar gak. Karena aku merasa
kalian tidak mencintaiku. Kalo misalnya kalian menginginkanku, kalian
pasti mendengarkan aku. Ternyata mereka minta ketemu. Terus aku datang
ke kelas. “Kalo kamu pengen jadi public speaker tapi kamu tidak mau
belajar tentang Public Speaking, what are you going to be?” Public speaking
is one hundred percent attention. Kalo kita mau ngomong ke orang, kita
harus tau audience kita itu siapa. Kita gak mungkin menyambi Public
Speaking. Mahasiswa dan saya belajar hari itu tentang if you want
something, if you want a change, then you have to make it. Saya memilih
waktu itu untuk berbenturan dengan mereka, dan ternyata berhasil. Sejak
itu, they were the nicest students. Kalo kita bener-bener mau membantu,
kita harus bener-bener mau nampar. Aku bilang ke mereka, I do this
because I do love you. Kalo aku tidak sayang sama kalian, I don‟t care.
Jangan sampe proses ngajar itu nggak ada gunanya, wasted. Orang tuanya
udah bayar tapi mereka nggak dapat ilmu. Aku emang dapat gaji tapi aku
nggak dapat kepuasan kerja. Itu pengalamanku how to deal with students
who are noisy. Ada yang saya diamkan. Kaya semester ini, saya masih
menunggu. Karena anak-anaknya itu baik sebenarnya. Cuma memang ribut.
Ya udahlah. Toh ketika saya memberi mereka tugas, mereka bisa
melakukannya dengan baik. Makanya treatment saya ke kelas ini beda
dengan treatment saya ke kelas lain. Jadi saya nggak bisa menerapkan
metode yang sama ke dua kelas yang berbeda. Kalo practice biasanya
langsung oral (feedback). Kita langsung komentari kurang apa, apa yang
masih harus diperbaiki. Misalnya openingnya nggak catchy, terus endingnya
nggak bang! Kalo ada yang bang! itu aku tunjukan. Misalnya pake quote
yang sangat strong. Tapi ada juga yang tertulis. Kalo ujian, ada rubriknya.
Aku masukin ke excel jadi langsung ketauan dia nilainya berapa. Terus
pertemuan berikutnya itu saya bagi. Ada nilai angka sama strength and
weakness, terus peluang apa yang masih bisa kamu lakukan untuk hal itu.
Kemudian ada lagi yang oral tapi general. Jadi abis midtest itu biasanya
saya bikin refleksi satu lembar. Itu isinya tentang overall. Misalnya
outlining itu opening, body, closing. Ada anak yang kalo speaking itu
openingnya banyak, kemana-mana, isinya nggak ada, closingnya juga
kelamaan. Kaya dulu di kelasnya student E, teknik itu masih salah. Tapi
kalo imaginasi, mereka kreatif. Stylenya itu juga macem-macem. Ada yang
question, ada yang story telling. Kalau kelasnya student A, format tu
menang. Tapi mereka kurang kreatif karna mereka terlalu terpaku pada
pakemnya. Aku komentari itu dua-duanya. Satu lembar itu untuk dua kelas
yang berbeda. Kelas ini begini, kelas itu begitu. Biar mereka itu bisa melihat
di kelas lain itu seperti apa, dan mereka bisa belajar dari kelas lain. Dua-
49
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
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
duanya (informational and motivational). Saya dulu pernah nulis taun lalu,
“I know that you have done your best, but there are still things you need to
learn. I know that you can do it. I have high hopes for you, guys.” Jadi saya
memang menyebutnya sebagai refleksi. Kemudian di akhir itu saya
memberi motivasi sama quotes dari public speaker terkenal (seperti) Oprah
Winfrey. Intinya supaya mereka encouraged karena ada hasilnya yang dapat
C juga. Bagi yang (dapat) A, itu bukan artinya bahwa kamu terus berhenti
belajar. Bagi yang (dapat) B itu bukan artinya kamu cuma average. Dan
buat yang (dapat) C itu bukan artinya ini final. Masih banyak kesempatan,
saya sebutkan kesempatan apa. Public speaker itu proses. Tidak berhenti.
Sekarang itu baru introduction to Public Speaking. Jadi Public Speaking
yang sebenarnya itu nanti. Jadi kamu masih tetep bisa develop yourself. Ku
kasih link-link video di youtube buat referensi kalo mau bikin pidato yang
baik. Internet tu udah kaya sekali. Saya tinggal copy paste linknya di situ.
Bagi yang rajin dia langsung melihat. Kalo yang nggak ya itu pilihan
mereka. Tapi aku pikir mereka belajar dari temennya (di) Public Speaking
dan kalopun mereka tidak improve Public Speakingnya, setidaknya mereka
become aware. Awarenessnya itu kalo public speaker yang baik harus
begini, harus begitu, mereka tau meskipun belum sampe bisa
melakukannya. Kupikir tidak masalah karna Public Speaking mereka kan
nggak berhenti sampe saat ini. Justru malah karir Public Speaking mereka
itu nanti. Setelah berkerja, setelah mereka mungkin berkeluarga, bergabung
dengan gereja. Baru nyadar Public Speaking itu penting. Sebagai seorang
guru, Public Speaking is like everday thing. Bagiku (peran feedback)
penting banget. Karena apalah gunanya kuliah kalau nggak ada feedback.
Maksudku kalo mahasiswa itu masuk, mau berproses. Kemudian endingnya
kalau bisa tuh lebih baik hasilnya. Road to perfection is paved to be
perfection. Aku percaya bahwa kritik itu seperti jamu yang bikin badan kita
kuat. Kalau denger itu mungkin nggak enak, tapi itu bikin kita kuat. Untuk
menjadi lebih baik dari posisi A menjadi posisi B, itu bukan jalan yang
mudah. Mereka harus secara kognitif belajar teorinya bagaimana. Terus
secara conscience, mereka menyerap nilai-nilai yang harus dipegang kalo
menjadi public speaker. Terus compassion juga. Apa yang bisa aku
sumbangkan pada orang lain ketika aku ngomong. Jadi pemilihan topik juga
harus disesuaikan. Ketika orang lain ngomong kita juga harus
mendengarkan. Kemudian, anak-anak itu tau aku baik apa nggak itu dari
mana kalo dosennya nggak ngomong. Itu tanggung jawab seorang dosen,
seorang guru untuk memberi feedback. Feedback itu tujuannya bukan untuk
menjudge tapi untuk memberi encouragement. Jadi (feedback) saya itu
bukan strength sama weakness, tapi strength sama room for improvement.
Kritik itu seperti spion. Kita kan nggak tau di belakang kita itu apa, tapi
begitu ada spion, kita jadi tau. Kritik itu adalah second opinion. Ketika saya
berpikir, „kayanya tadi aku baik-baik saja, aku tadi bagus,‟ ada yang tidak
kita lihat. Itulah gunanya kita denger orang lain, yang dalam hal ini dosen
yang memberi feedback. Dosen yang teorinya, prakteknya udah tau. Ketika
melihat anak berlatih, maka dengan pengetahuan dan pengalaman, (dosen)
50
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
itu harusnya bisa melihat anak ini kurang apa, harus bagaimana. Itu tugas
seorang namanya supervisor. Jadi lebih ke komunikasi. Ketika ada
perjumpaan di classroom, harus ada perubahaan untuk hal yang baik.
Bedanya lebih ke teknisnya. Kalau di Public Speaking yang dikomentari itu
content, organization, language, sama delivery. Kalau mata kuliah
translation, ada yang process oriented, product oriented. Jadi kupikir
naturenya sama. Ada oral and written feedback. Ada yang online feedback
juga. Kekurangannya feedback terutama di Public Speaking adalah tidak
lengkap. Kadang-kadang itu pas dengerin Public Speaking, menikmati terus
nggak sempat nulis. Atau dia saking nggak jelasnya, saya nggak tau dia
ngomong apa sehingga (tidak tahu) apa yang harus dikomentari.
Kekurangannya adalah kadang-kadang feedback kita tidak benar-benar
menggambarkan apa yang terjadi gitu ya. Kendalanya itu multi tasking
ketika kita mendengarkan Public Speaking, apalagi kalo langsung
dimasukan ke excel. Kalo langsung dimasukan ke excel itu enaknya adalah
nilai langsung selesai. Kalau tidak dimasukan ke excel, tertunda, itu udah
geseh nanti. Kita pengen sevalid mungkin memberi feedback, tapi
multitasking nulis, computer (excel), dengerin, lihat, itu kadang-kadang
konslet sendiri otak saya. Konsentrasi penuh. Terus kadang-kadang
mahasiswa terlalu cepat. Belum saatnya naik udah naik. Jadi kita tinggalkan
yang giliran tadi, terus kita fokus ke yang ini. Itu yang kewalahan. Jadi saya
bilang nanti ya, belum siap saya. Itu kendalanya kalo jumlah pesertanya
banyak tapi waktu sedikit. Kekurangan waktu dan akhirnya mungkin
berdampak pada validitas assessment. Atau setidaknya feedbacknya tidak
lengkap. Harusnya saya bisa ngomong banyak (feedback) konstruktif, tapi
nggak (bisa), karena saya lebih fokus ke angka. Begitu saya fokus ke sini,
angka lewat. Kalo (keuntungan di) aku jelas dokumentasi nilai. Kalau udah
akhir semester itu gampang. Meringankan pekerjaan, tidak pikiran, terus
kita juga tau mahasiswa kita itu seberapa (kemampuannya). Kita udah
sukses belum, dan yang jelas adalah diagnosa mereka kurang apa. Misalkan
katakanlah di kelas banyak anak yang gesturenya nggak begitu (bagus).
Berarti materi berikutnya yang harus aku berikan adalah teori tentang body
language, kemudian prakteknya. Jadi feedback itu berguna bagiku untuk
(mengetahui) apa yang perlu aku siapkan. Dari feedback itu, aku juga
belajar. Mereka grammarnya kok parah, abis will kok V-ing. Jadi aku harus
nambah bahas (materinya). Terus setiap kali mereka ngomong, aku
perhatikan, aku catet. Biasanya ada anak yang nggak berani natap mata.
Terus saya selalu bilang di feedback saya, kita tantang ya student H. Abis
mid tes1 udah berani natap. Udah berani natap kemaren. Pokoknya ada
masalah apa dengan mahasiswa, kita bisa langsung address aja. Terus
treatmentnya apa. Itu yang membahagiakan kalo mereka ada di posisi A ke
posisi B ada perubahan. Kalo dari A yo tetep wae ora berubah, berarti dia
nggak ikut berproses. Harapanku adalah mereka mensyukuri dan menyadari.
Mensyukuri bahwa mereka sudah bisa. Karena banyak mahasiswa yang
terlalu negative. Aku mau feedbackku yang strength itu membuat mereka
tau, „oh ternyata aku spesifik apa itu udah bagus,” dan mensyukuri nek
51
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.
52
Appendix 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 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
53
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
54
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.
55
Appendix 4
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
56
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 degdegan. 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 anakanak, 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.

lecturers` lived experience in public speaking feedback in the elesp

Transcription

Similar documents

Penjajabantah,-baya,ranbil` air

issue1 2016 - UiTM Pulau Pinang

Teacher Resource Packet - Culturally

Pengurusan Landskap oleh Pihak Berkepentingan

KerajaanSelangoFmahuse[llq`fPBTgOnabahan`,bol

Dasar Jaringan Komputer

A. Long Kontak 10 March 2009 20.FH11

SOLT I Indonesian Module 5 Lesson 3 Student Manual - fsi-dli

Sdara Newsletter Nov 2007

78 pelajarsekolahserta`iPertandinganKaligrafiSeniKhat

THE DEVELOPMENTAL PATTERN OF ENGLISH

- University of Huddersfield Repository