1
ED STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION TOWARD THEIR NATIVE AND NON-NATIVE
ENGLISH SPEAKING TEACHERS IN INTERPERSONAL SPEAKING CLASS
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment Of The Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
Kanthi Rusana 112008008
English Department
Faculty of Language and Literature Satya Wacana Christian University
3
COPYRIGHT STATEMENT
This thesis contains no such material as has been submitted for examination in any course or accepted for
the fulfillment of any degree or diploma in any university. To the best of my knowledge and my belief, this contains no material previously published or written by any other person except where due reference
is made in the text.
Copyright@ 2012. Kanthi Rusana and Prof. DR. Gusti Astika, M.A.
All rights reserved. No part of this thesis may be reproduced by any means without the permission of at
least one of the copyright owners or the English Department, Faculty of Language and Literature, Satya Wacana University, Salatiga.
4
PUBLICATION AGREEMENT DECLARATION
As a member of the (SWCU) Satya Wacana Christian University academic community, I verify that: Name : Kanthi Rusana
Student ID Number : 112008008
Study Program : English Department Faculty : Language and Literature
Kind of Work : Undergraduate Thesis
In developing my knowledge, I agree to provide SWCU with a non-exclusive royalty free right for my intellectual property and the contents therein entitled:
ED STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION TOWARD THEIR NATIVE AND NON-NATIVE ENGLISH SPEAKING TEACHERS IN INTERPERSONAL SPEAKING CLASS
along with any pertinent equipment.
With this non-exclusive royalty free right, SWCU maintains the right to copy, reproduce, print, publish,
post, display, incorporate, store in or scan into a retrieval system or database, transmit, broadcast, barter
or sell my intellectual property, in whole or in part without my express written permission, as long as my name is still included as the writer.
This declaration is made according to the best of my knowledge.
Made in : Salatiga
Date : February 6, 2013 Verified by signee,
Kanthi Rusana
Approved by
Thesis Supervisor Thesis Examiner
5
ED STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION TOWARD THEIR NATIVE AND NON-NATIVE
ENGLISH SPEAKING TEACHERS IN INTERPERSONAL SPEAKING CLASS
Abstract
This survey study explores the second year of English Department student‟s perceptions about their native English-speaking teachers (NESTs) and nonnative English-speaking teachers (NNESTs), concerning their competence in the target language skill, cultural aspects, personal aspects, classroom atmosphere and teaching styles that the teachers establish in interpersonal speaking class. The purpose of the study was to examine and extend previous studies' findings concerning the characteristics of NESTs and NNESTs. In this study, the data were gathered from fifty students by using the likert scale questionnaires. The student‟s perceptions were analyzed descriptively. The study revealed that English Department students show favorable attitudes towards both NNESTs and NESTs, and that they do not necessarily prefer NESTs over NNESTs. However, the finding reported competence in the target language skill and cultural aspects as NESTs' strengths over NNESTs, meanwhile NNESTs are preferable when it came to personal aspects.
Keywords: non native English speaking teachers (NNESTs), native English speaking teachers (NESTs), student‟s perception, teaching competence
Introduction
Background of the Study
In English language teaching, there are two kinds of teachers. First, there are native English-speaking teachers (NESTs); the actual users of language that they teach to their students, the one who use the language as their mother tongue. They are the persons who are believed to stand out in teaching their language to anyone who needs help in learning their language. Second, there are non-native English-speaking teachers (NNESTs), the one who learn the language first and then teach to their students. They don‟t use the language on regular basis just like the native teachers; they often use it only when they communicate with other English teachers or when they are required to do so.
6
stress and intonation. Harmer (1991) insists that a teacher whether he/she is native speaker or not should be able to identify, understand and differentiate these three things in his/her teaching. Second is grammar which is the vital point that a language teacher should master. Third is vocabulary, by which teachers should know the lexis of the language they speak although the knowledge will be different for each teacher. Fourth is discourse, by which the teachers should set communicative competence. The last is about language skills, by which the teacher should be able to combine all the skills of speaking, writing, listening and reading at the same time. That is why an English language teacher should master those skills.
Many people believe that NESTs are more capable than NNESTs in teaching. That is why the issue about NESTs and NESTs has been discussed in the literature. Arguments exist even among experts. Alva and Medgyes (2000) showed their finding that since NESTs use real language and speak more confidently compared to the NNESTs, and since most people pay more attention to the communicative skill, many people believe that native speakers will provide the necessary for them to enhance their communicative skills. Medgyes (1994) had a different idea that many people still believe in NESTs because they are more competent than the non native one. However despite this belief, in reality NNESTs are also qualified in teaching English to their student. Medgyes stated that NNESTs have some characters that made them better than the native teachers.
7
globalization, nonnative speakers of English have overwhelmingly outnumbered native speakers; 375 million native English speakers, 375 million second language speakers, and 750 million foreign language speakers (Graddol, 1997).
Thus,the teacher‟s backgrounds being a native or non-native speaker influenced the student‟s perception toward the teachers in learning English. This trend somehow occurs among
ED (English Department) students themselves who have native and non-native teachers. Some students believe that NESTs are better than NNESTs, while some don‟t. As a result, in this
respect, the study aims to investigate student‟s perception toward their native English–speaking teachers and Non-native English Speaking Teacher in interpersonal speaking classes. The present study is a contribution to the field in revealing students perception of the issues related to their competence in the target language, teaching styles, cultural aspects, personal aspects, and classroom atmosphere.
Studies on NESTs and NNESTs
The term native English speaking teacher (NESTs) and non-native English speaking teacher (NNESTs) have raised much interest in the field of language teaching (Mahboob 2003). NESTs and NNESTs have centered on investigating the differences between two groups in several domains, including their language skills, self-esteem as English as a foreign language/English as a second language (EFL/ESL) teachers, and teaching practices.
McKay (2002) stated that the term „native speaker of English‟ has created variety of
8
by language professionals comparing to native English speaker which is usually thought of as positive. Non-native is unfortunate because native is supposed to be fortunate.
Nayar (1994) states that non-native speakers are often regarded as language disadvantaged, error prone, unreliable speakers in terms of language competence when compared to native speakers, who have phonological, linguistic, and communicative competence as well as linguistic identity. After reading this article it can be seen that the author was linguistically biased. However, Medgyes (2001) considers non-native English speaking teachers have a „bright‟ side as well. Myint (2002) argued that there are many advantages of NNESTs. They are
more likely to be patient and understanding when students make mistakes, because, in the past, the NNESTs have probably made similar mistakes at one time or another. Moreover, NNESTs bring to an ESL class in their own cultural understanding other than the American or English culture. There is no agreement of both terms, but this is clearly what has been argued in the literature.
In particular, there are problems of using the term native and non-native English speaking teacher. The term Native and Non-native speaker were also often exposed in SLA research where the state of success and failure are associated with them. For example fossilization and errors in L2 users create the failure for achieving native speaker competence (Cook 1999). Moreover, the term non-native English speaking teachers (NNESTs) had created a division among professionals in the ELT profession (Maum, 2002). Suarez (2000) has shown his study that “I‟m-not-a-native speaker” syndrome is common among NNESTs and this has negative
9
However, those terms are commonly used in TESOL and TEFL and it is necessary to distinguish between native and non-native English speaking teachers because of their differences. Teachers themselves believe that each of them has advantages as an English teacher on their own terms. Hence, NESTs is teacher who speaks English as a mother language, while NNESTs is one who speaks English as a second language (Medgyes, 2001).
As more and more NESTs are working in non English speaking countries and NNESTs are expressing their opinions in the profession, an increasing number of study has been conducted on the two cohorts of teachers both internationally and locally. More specifically, previous studies have examined perceptions about preferences for each group from teachers‟ perspectives. Tang (1997) reported a very high percentage of the teacher retraining in Hong Kong believed that native English speaking teachers were superior to non-native English speaking teachers in speaking (100%), pronunciation (92%), listening (87%), vocabulary (79 %) and reading (72%). Seidlhofer (1999) found the majority of English teachers in Austria stated that being a non-native speaker of English make them feel insecure. The anxiety of NNESTs are perhaps even highly felt when these teachers are working in inner circle country.
Samimy and Brutt-Griffler (1999) also found that their NNESTs graduate students in a United States based on TESOL program perceived that NESTs and NNESTs were different in language proficiency and teaching practices. While they perceived NESTs as more competent in language skills than NNESTs, they perceived NNESTs as more responsive to the learners „needs‟. In addition, they did not think that the differences proposed that native English speaking
10
for grammar and testing. While NNESTs perceived their prior language learning experiences and responsiveness to students „needs as their strengths. They perceived foreign accents, low self-image, and lack of cultural knowledge as their weaknesses.
In a recent study, Atay (2007) found that Turkish teacher had concerns about their future careers, especially when it came to compared to NESTs. Analysis of focus-group interviews revealed that the majority of them believed NESTs would be more successful in teaching English than NNESTs because of linguistic and cultural advantages of the NESTs. Thus, it was not possible for them to compete with NESTs.
Research showed that considering NESTs are ideal teachers and they try to prove themselves all the time affect the self-confidence of NNESTs negatively as well. Moussu (2006) found that NESTs were more confident than NNEST about the strengths of their teaching and language skills. In contrast, NNESTs were found to have low self esteem because of their limited knowledge of American culture and native-like accent by comparing themselves to those of NESTs. Rajagopalan (2006), similarly, found that the majority of Brazilian teachers of English participating in the study evaluated that they had low awareness because they saw linguistic competence as the major element in measuring their overall ability. According to Rajagopalan, even though the total amount of NNESTs around 80% in ELT workforce worldwide, they are “typically treated as second class citizens in the world of language teaching”.
11
language teachers they can be as successful as NESTs and this awareness seems to increase their self-esteem.
Student’s Perspective
It was generally assumes that the goal of English language learners is to achieve native-like competence. A commonly held idea in language teaching is that students prefer native English speaking instructors. Kirkpatrick (2007) even said that though nowadays English is used all over the world and varieties of English exist; people tend to believe that only native varieties of English such as American English or British English are authentic, and non-native varieties of English such as Indian English or Chinese English are not. This view toward varieties of English has an impact on people‟s believe of the ideal model for second language (L2) learning is only
NESTs. On the other hand, an ideal teacher is no longer given for native English speaking teachers (Medgyes 2001).
There are more and more NESTs/NNESTs studies have been conducted from students „perspectives. According to Cheung (2002), one of the studies that had examined both students‟ and teachers‟ perception in Hong Kong, the study find that students made good comments on
NEST„s proficiency about their knowledge of the English speaking cultures, and skills in using
English effectively. NNESTs are good at grammar, have understanding towards their students as second language learners, and also have common culture knowledge with them. Similar to that finding, Mahboob (2004) investigated how students enrolled in English program in the United States perceived their NESTs and NNESTs in terms of their strengths and weaknesses. Students didn‟t have clear preference for both types of teacher; since each types of teacher had special
12
statements were also made that NNESTs are better teachers because they had the experience of learning English by themselves. On the contrary, NESTs were perceived as better able to teach oral skills especially pronunciation and somewhat to teach vocabulary and culture.
Furthermore, another study showed the unclear student‟s preference toward both types of teachers. For instance, Filho (2002) conducted qualitative research investigating ESL students‟ perceptions of non- NESTs at a U.S. university. Sixteen ESL students in an intensive English program were observed in their classrooms, given an open-ended survey, and subsequently interviewed. It reported no overall preference for NESTs over non-NESTs. However, they showed a preference for NESTs in teaching specific skill areas like pronunciation, American culture, and communication. The reasons are due to the „right‟ model of English with regard to appropriacy, accuracy and naturalness; provide many current words or expressions, and communication experiences (Zacharias, 2003).
Additionally, the study of student‟s perceptions conducted by Moussu (2002) examined
the perceptions of university ESL students in the U.S who generally expressed positive attitudes toward NNESTs teachers at beginning of the semester (although Korean and Chinese students were more negative than others), and by the end of the semester student opinions were more positive. Most of researchers observe the strengths and weaknesses toward both types of the teachers. Even though students seem to be aware of the strengths and weaknesses of both NESTs and NNESTs, they tend to perceive the NEST as a more competent teacher. According to Moussu (2002) the results showed that NNESTs who sounded and looked more like NESTs were better appreciated by their students.
13
asked for responses on a questionnaire about teaching behaviors of NESTs and NNESTs, and advantages/ disadvantages of NESTs and NNESTs. The results of this study showed that each of the two groups had differing teaching behaviors. From students‟ perspectives, NESTs tend to focus on speaking skills, improve the lessons, and give cultural information to students. Yet, NNESTs tend to assign a lot of homework, stick to the lesson plans, and focus on forms. Each of them has advantages and disadvantages as a teacher, and both of them are important on their own terms. Similar to Liu and Zhang (2007) who identified the differences between these two groups of teachers in terms of attitude, means of instruction and teaching results as perceived by the students. The result is there is no significant difference found between the two groups. The students at the top level enjoy foreign teachers‟ classes more than the low level students who
enjoy Chinese teachers‟ class more. The latter reported that they felt nervous in foreign teachers‟
classes because of their inability to express themselves properly. In Chinese teachers‟ classes
they could use Chinese when they were not able to find the English equivalents. The students perceive both groups as hardworking and competent. The teachers were patient when presented with the students‟ problems. Students‟ study sent by emails and telephone messages were replied
to in a timely mode and homework was carefully corrected and graded.
The NES/NNES teacher was also studied from the perspective of language learners and studies, mostly carried out in ESL settings, and generate controversial results. For example, Thomas (1999) described her own experience as a NNEST teacher who constantly noticed some disappointments in students‟ attitudes when they realized they were going to have English
14
native and non-native speakers of English easily, and the students favor native English speaker for the development of their skills and that their perception strongly influenced the attitudes towards them. Moreover, researchers also found that teachers are perceived by students to be native speakers were judged to have higher levels of education and training. On the other hand, Liang (2002) in a study with 20 ESL students found that although students rated pronunciation in the ESL teacher speech as very important, this did not affect their attitudes toward their teachers.
The brief reviews of the relevant literature above show that there were just a small number of studies which examined this issue in the field of EFL where the development of English as an international language has been approach. In this sense, we should become more critical regarding the parameters with NESTs and NNETs´ competences have been traditionally measured: linguistic expertise versus teaching skills (Medgyes 1994) .In addition, those studies didn‟t investigate in particular subject. In this sense, the purpose of the study is to examine about
ED 2010 students perception who were supposed to have some experience with both NESTs and NNESTs in interpersonal speaking classes. Yamanouchi (2010) suggested investigating students‟ perceptions about the qualifications of teachers as the models of oral production. In the
context of speaking, students need to practice their pronunciation, vocabulary, conversation, fluency, and etc. The mastery of speaking skills in English is the priority for language learners. Liu Jun (1999) has presented that teachers should be proficient in four major areas which are language; instruction; culture; and assessment. Therefore, this study specifically looked at student‟s perspective of five aspects in interpersonal speaking class such as the target language,
15
their NEST and NNESTs with regard to their competence in the target language, teaching styles,
personal aspects, cultural aspects and classroom atmosphere in interpersonal speaking?
Finally, the result of this study hopefully helps the readers to understand more about the student‟s perception toward NESTs and NNESTs in five aspects. Therefore, the readers may
have comprehensible sight toward both of teachers. The result will also help the readers especially students to adapt characteristics between native and non-native teachers accordance with their learning styles for their present or future language studies.
Method
This study used a descriptive method in order to collect and analyze numerical data of the students „perceptions toward NESTs and NNESTs with regard to their competence in the target
language, teaching styles, personal aspects, cultural aspects and classroom atmosphere in interpersonal speaking class.
Participants
16
had three teachers, one was NEST and the others were NNESTs. Each class had capacity of 16 students, thus the total number of participants in this study were around 48 students.
Research Instrument
The present study modified the student questionnaire from the former study by Kasai, Ah Lee and Kim (2011) to examine students‟ perceptions of NESTs and NNESTs. The questionnaire which concerned on each group„s strengths and weaknesses, with multiple choices consisting of: Strongly Agree, Agree, Somewhat Agree, Somewhat Disagree, Disagree, and Strongly Disagree are converted into 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, and 1 respectively. The format of six-level item is to measure either agreement or disagreement to a statement. The questionnaire„s statements reflect the findings of the previous studies about student perceptions of NESTs/NNESTs. This was done because I was interested in exploring the second year ED students‟ perceptions of their NESTs and NNESTs in interpersonal speaking classes where the
students learn basic speaking skill of foreign language. The questionnaire used in this study was written in English. The first part of questionnaire dealt with the students‟ perspective toward NNESTs, the second part dealt with the students‟ perspective toward NESTs. There were 25 items in each part which fell into the following five categories: (a) competence in the target language skill, (b) cultural aspects, (c) personal aspects, (d) classroom atmosphere and (e) teaching styles.
Data Collection and Analysis
17
Their responses were divided into 5 categories based on the research question (competence in the target language skill, cultural aspects, personal aspects, classroom atmosphere and teaching styles). Then, the choices from each category were counted in percentage to show the proportions of the students who chose each option provided. Then, for each subcategory using collapsed likert scale rating with 1-2 representing disagree , 3-4 representing undecided, and 5-6 representing agree . This analysis of the data served as a general overall pattern appearing in the data. For further note, the choices from each part of the questionnaire concerning the students‟ perspectives toward NNESTs and NESTs were compared and interpreted.
Finding and discussions
I. Competence in the target language
One of the aspects for the issue competence in the target language skill is reflected in the nine statements, the students were asked to respond to nine items regarding their perceptions about their NESTs‟ and NNESTs„English proficiency. More specifically, they were asked to what degree they thought their respective teachers were a fluent English speaker (item 1), ideal Table 1
Competence in the target language
Item NNEST NEST
18
model for pronunciation (item 2), confidently answer students’ questions(item 3),explain the
material clearly(item 4), deliver the instruction fluently(item 5), use conversation in speaking
class well(item 6), explain vocabulary effectively and without difficulty(item 7), able to answer the students’ questions(item 8), their abilities to address question is good(item 9). As shown in
the Table 1, a majority of the respondents presented positive perceptions of their NEST and NNEST concerning their competence in the target language. It is clear that from the results of nine questionnaire items about competence in the target language skill, the number of the respondents who agreed to the statements for NNEST was 65.96% and 76.85% for NEST.
According to the finding, the students demonstrated significant differences on NEST-NNEST Item 1, NEST-NEST-NNEST Item 2, and NEST- NEST-NNEST Item 7, while they showed no significant differences on the other items in this category. It was found that the respondents showed significant differences in their perceptions of their NEST„s and NNEST„s English
language fluency and pronunciation, demonstrating preferences toward NESTs. It proves that 85% of the respondents agreed that their NEST was a fluent English speaker, but only 69 % NNEST did so( item 1). Moreover, talking about the student‟s opinion about their ideal model
for pronunciation (item 2), the students showed more positive perception toward their NEST than NNEST for this statement. More than three quarters of the respondents favored NEST as their ideal model for pronunciation (79 %), but when it comes to the NEST, only 50% who did. This result was in accordance with previous studies of student‟s perception of NESTs/NNESTs that reported oral skill competence as NESTs „asset (Arva & Medgyes, 2000; Reves & Medgyes,
19
Moreover, as for the statement which the respective teachers explained vocabulary effectively and without difficulty (table 7), it was found that students showed significant differences in their perceptions of their NEST and NNEST. There were 77, 08% of students who gave positive perception to NEST and only 54,16% to NNEST for this statement. There were more students who felt unsure toward NNEST (33,33%). In other words, students tended to think that their NESTs were more competent in teaching vocabulary. This finding was supported by previous studies that reported NESTs were more capable to teach vocabulary ( Mahboob ,2004; Lasagabaster and Sierra„s ,2002)
However ,it was found that student‟s perceptions of their NEST and NNEST in using conversation (NNEST6 – NEST6) and addressing question (NNEST9 – NEST9) in speaking class proved that the two groups of teachers were perceived similarly in terms of teaching using conversation and addressing questions, which did not corroborate with the previous studies. In other words, the students thought that both teachers had the same competence. The technique used by both teachers perceived positive perception. It stated that 81% agreed that both NNEST and NEST used conversation in speaking class well, also 69 % agreed that the way NNEST and NEST to address the question is good.
20
Hongkong students that they understood NNESTs better, and found it was hard to comprehend NESTs‟ in explaining materials.
II. Teaching Styles
Students „perceptions of their NEST‟s and NNEST‟s teaching styles were investigated by
asking to what extent they thought their respective group of teachers gave the homework most time (item 21), often gave quizzes or exams in the class (item 22), used various materials other than textbooks in the class (item 23), used attractive visual aids (item 24) and had many group/pair activities in class (item 25). General finding from the five questionnaire items in term of teaching style showed that both of teachers were perceived positively by nearly 50 percent of the students. It means that there was no significant difference about teachers‟ style in teaching speaking.
Table 2 also showed some the differences in individual subcategories. Indicated by the item for homework load (Item 21), in-class quizzes (Item 22), materials used other than textbooks (Item 23) and used attractive visual aids (Item 24). These four items indicated that there were differences in the student‟s perceptions of their NEST and NNEST. Starting from
item 21 and 22 proved that the students felt NNEST gave them more homework and quizzes. Table 2
Teaching Styles
Item NNEST NEST
21
This finding was consistent with Benke & Medgyes‟s (2005) study of Hungary EFL students and
corroborated Lee and Kim‟s (2011) study of Korean student‟s perceptions of their NEST and
NNESTs on homework load. The biggest differences occurred in the used of other materials than textbook (item 23). More than half of the students (55%) believed that their NEST used varieties materials. Native English Speaking teachers applied more varied materials (Liu & Zhang, 2007; Sung, 2010). Conversely, the students found out that their NNEST use more visual aids (item 24) than the counterpart. Visual aid defines as any object that relates to the subject being taught. This is a common technique in teaching used by NNEST. NNEST employed more media in teaching including the Internet, PowerPoint, flash, etc. (Liu & Zhang, 2007)
III. Personal Aspects
Regarding personal aspects of the teachers, the students were asked to what extent they thought they felt comfortable talking with respective teacher (item 14), the teachers used Indonesian in class (item 15), the teacher„s English learning experience was helpful to improve
their speaking skill (item 16), and they wanted to be as good as their teachers in English (item 17). As shown in the table 3, both groups of teachers were perceived positively in term of personal aspect. However, it was obviously showed in the table 3 that the participants Table 3
Personal Aspects
Item NNEST NEST
22
demonstrated more positive agreement (58.85%) toward NNEST than NEST (55.36%) in personal aspect issue. This result in this category support NNESTs„strengths as emphasized in previous studies. (e.g., Arva & Medyes, 2000; Llurda & Huguet, 2003; Mahboob, 2004; Sung, 2010).
In terms of comfort level (item 14), the student‟s responses indicated that they perceived a high degree of comfort level as one of the strongest traits of their NNESTs over their NEST. While 72,91% of the respondents felt at ease with their NNEST, 56,66% did so with their NEST. It showed that the students felt more relaxed with their NNESTs over their NEST. Moreover, the use of Indonesian or Bahasa Indonesia in class, both groups of teachers were rarely used that language (item 15). Only 27,07 % who agreed that NNEST used Bahasa Indonesia in teaching interpersonal speaking. Surprisingly, the students also confirmed the same perspective toward their NEST (16,66%). It showed that both groups of teachers still used Bahasa Indonesia even just a little since they taught new students.
As for sharing English learning experience (item 16), the students presented neutral stances, there were 72,91% agreed that NNESTs experiences were helpful, 68,75% did so with their NEST. It is an evident that the students appeared to have the same value for their NNEST‟s and NEST‟s English language learning experiences as their tool to improve the student‟s
23
documented the sharing of language learning experience as an NNEST„s strength over the NEST (Maboob, 2004; Medgyes, 2001).
As for their perceptions of NESTs/NNESTs concerning their role models (Item 17), students demonstrated positive attitudes toward both groups of teachers. More than three quarters of the respondents agreed that they wanted to be as good as their NEST (79,36%). More than half of them also demonstrated that NNEST were their good role models (62,5 %). This indicates that our respondents agreed that both groups of teachers could equally become their role models in their language learning. Meanwhile, it noticed that their perceptions of NESTs were more positive than those of the NNESTs. In other words, students perceived their NESTs as better role models. The results in this item did not support NNEST‟s strengths which stressed in previous studies. Relatively, the participants seemed to indicate that both NESTs and NNESTs could be equally equipped in terms of the personal factors discussed in this section.
IV. Cultural Aspects
In this aspect, the students were asked about the perceptions of their teacher‟s knowledge
of the target culture in interpersonal speaking class. Specifically, the students responded to what extent they thought their NESTs and NNESTs were knowledgeable about the cultures of Table 4
Cultural Aspects
Item NNEST NEST
24
English-speaking countries (item 10), provided cultural information of English speaking countries in class (item 11), provided Indonesian own cultural information in class (item 12) and encouraged students to look for cultural similarities and differences with the target culture in comparison with their own culture (item 13). This study included two cultures which are English and Indonesian to be asked toward the students since there were two different types of teachers. The result showed that NEST got a higher degree of positive perception. The findings supported previous students‟ and teachers „perception studies by reporting NESTs more positively than NNESTs in terms of cultural aspects (Arva & Medgyes, 2000; Lasagabaster & Sierra, 2002;Benke&Medgyes,2005; Cheung,2002).
Table 4 also provides evidence from individual subcategories. Concerning about their teacher‟s knowledge about the cultures of English speaking countries(item 10) , less than half of
the respondents (47,91 % ) gave positive perceptions that their NNESTs were knowledgeable about the target culture, and the other half felt unsure (49,99%) with the statement on NNEST. On the other hand the students gave more positive opinion toward their NEST. There were more than three quarters of respondents (85,41 %) perceived their NEST as more knowledgeable about the target culture .Undoubtedly, it indicated that the students still regard their NEST as the one who master the cultures of English speaking countries.
Moreover, pertaining to the teachers who provide two cultural information of English and Indonesian in the class, surprisingly respondents presented positive perceptions in terms of their NNEST‟s awareness to provide English culture (item 11: 54,16 %) and Indonesian cultural
25
72,91%). While only 39,61% of the students agreed that NEST provide Indonesian cultural information(item 12). Regarding this, NNESTs were the one who can provide both cultural information about English speaking countries and Indonesian culture. This can be seen as NNEST strength. In addition, the students were asked regarding to the teachers who encourages students to look for cultural similarities and differences with the target culture in comparison with their own culture (item 13). More than half of the respondents 62,5 %believed that NNEST persuaded the students to understand the similarities and differences between culture of English speaking countries and Indonesian in interpersonal speaking class. In the case of NEST, less than half of respondents gave positive opinion (43,75%) and a greater number of the respondents chose undecided(49,99%).
V. Classroom Atmosphere
In this category, the students were asked to what extent they thought that they were expected to be attentive (Item 18), the class atmosphere tended to be quite flexible (Item 19) and interacted with the students (item 20) in their respective teacher„s class.
As shown in the table 5, more than half of the respondents agreed that they were expected to be attentive by both teachers; 62,49% by NNEST and 68,74% by NEST. It seemed that the Table 5
Classroom Atmosphere
Item NNEST NEST
26
students felt that their NNEST and NEST required their attention in interpersonal speaking class. Next, concerning the class atmosphere, more than half of respondents (56,24%) gave positive perceptions that NNEST‟s class atmosphere tended to be quite flexible. NEST‟s class obtained
higher positive responses (60,41%) than NNEST from the students in this aspect. It indicated that the respondents noticed the classroom atmosphere was more flexible in their NEST„s class than their NNEST. This flexibility related to the next aspect on item 20; teacher always interacted with the students. 79,16 % of the students regard their NNEST always interact with them, while 79,16 % did so to NEST. The students demonstrated equal stances in this case. As a result, though the students felt that the NEST‟s classroom atmosphere was more flexible than NNEST they still regard both of teachers were friendly to them. It means that the students didn‟t necessarily prefer NEST over NNEST in this aspect. This kind of interaction built by students and teachers is one of the methods used by the teachers to get their student‟s attention in the class. It was supported by the literature that flexibility has been recognized as one of the NEST„s strengths while the ability to get attention from students has been considered one of the NNEST„s strengths (Reves & Medgyes, 1994; Li& Meng, 2005; Liu & Zhang, 2007).
Conclusion
27
the same class. Overall, the results of the study are not significantly different with the previous study on student‟s perspective toward their NNEST and NEST even if this study took a
particular class which is interpersonal speaking class.
From those five aspects, in terms competence in the target language and cultural aspects, this study corroborated the studies that reported these aspects as NESTs„assets. Meanwhile, our respondents felt their NESTs were more fluent English speakers and better models for their pronunciation, they also agreed that their NNESTs were fluent as well. However, concerning explaining on the material, it has been recognized as NNEST‟s strength, the respondents preferred their NEST over the NNEST. Furthermore, the responses of the students, concerning their NEST„s knowledge about the target culture supported the previous studies „findings: They
think that the NEST was well equipped for teaching culture and pronunciation. It could possibly be recognized to the fact that the NEST was an American; her race and ethnicity might have impacted the student‟s perceptions rather than her actual ability (Kasai, Lee & Kim, 2011).
Moreover, in personal aspects issue showed that ED students demonstrate favorable attitudes towards NNESTs. It was found that the students recognize the strengths of NNESTs in teaching English, especially in their learning experiences were very helpful to improve the student‟s speaking skill. Also, the students felt more comfortable with NNESTs. Possible reasons
due to this case are students are afraid to talk to them as the students think their English is not good enough to engage in a conversation with NESTs. Besides, students think that since the NESTs are from different cultures, they sometimes may not understand their situations and do not share similar topics to talk about with the students. Student‟s anxiety and cultural differences
28
Concerning teaching styles and classroom atmosphere, this study revealed that the students regard both group of teacher has similar teaching styles in interpersonal speaking class. There were no significant differences in this aspect except for the use of materials in teaching. As far as the way of giving an instruction is concerned, NESTs applied more variety of the materials. But NESTs used considerably more media. In addition, classroom atmosphere created by NEST and NNEST got positive responses from the ED students.
As was found in this study, competent English teachers, who trained and educated from their own country or English speaking countries whether its NESTs or NNESTs were share many of the same expertise, personality traits, strengths as well as weaknesses. As NNESTs and NESTs complement each other with their strength and weaknesses (Matsuda & Matsuda, 2002), the two groups of teachers who teach the same class may communicate more and exchange their ideas on how to teach the same group of students more effectively. It was noteworthy that the results of the study also draw attention to the variety of perceptions by students about NESTs and NNESTs, thereby it emphasized on the complexities of the issues surrounding NNESTs.
However, the present study is merely a small‐scale research project, with a small student
sample size (N=50) which was drawn from English Department faculty. It would be worth investigating students‟ perspectives on NNESTs and NESTs with a larger sample size. Another limitation of the present study is that questionnaires, although they could be a great help in exploring the beginning of the study, it may not be the most useful tool in questioning into students‟ views and perceptions in greater depths. It is suggested that other research instruments,
such as semi‐structured interviews can be used to expand the findings. Despite the shortcomings,
29
can be properly recognized and valued, so that cases of undeserved opinion toward NNESTs may be reduced in the years to come.
30
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
First and foremost, I am grateful to The Almighty Allah SWT for blessing and establishing me to accomplish my thesis. I would like to express my sincerest gratitude for my supervisor, Prof. Dr. Gusti Astika, M.A. who gives me valuable guidance, persistent help, and encouragement in regard to my thesis. My deepest appreciation to my charming examiner Petrus Ari S, M.A. who is willing to examine my thesis became satisfactory. Also, my big thankfulness dedicate to Wemmy Prayogo and Andrew Thren for their advices and helps during my study in English Department. As always, it would be not enough to say thanks toward my parents who continually conveyed a spirit, moral, excitement and unceasing support. Special thanks are due to my extraordinary friends, Annisa, Arum, Ardiyani and Mega who gave me great inspirations, input and enlightenment on my paper. Moreover, I‟m deeply indebted to my beloved partner Indhi
31 References:
Arva,V. & Medgyes P. (2000) Native and Non-native teacher in the classroom. System-An International Journal of Educational Technology and Applied Linguistics (28),355-272.
Atay,D (2007). EFL learners‟ interaction with native and non-native efl teachers. Journal Article. Retrieved from www.eab.org.tr/eab/oc/egtconf/.../pdf/15.pdf
Atay,D & Ozturk,U (2010). Challenges of being a non-native English teacher. Educational Research Vol. 1(5) .
Benke, E. & Medgyes P. (2005). Differences in teaching behaviour between native and non native speaker teachers: As seen by the learners. In Llurda (ed.), 195–216.
Cheung, Y. L., 2002. The Attitude of University Students in Hong Kong towards Native and Nonnative Teachers of English. MA thesis. The Chinese University of Hong Kong.
Cook V (1999). Going beyond the native speaker in language teaching, TESOL Quarterly ,33(2),185-209.
Harmer, J. (1991). The practice of English language teaching New York: Longman
Filho,E(2002). Students‟ Perceptions of Nonnative ESL Teachers. MA thesis, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia.
Kasai, M., Lee, J.-A., & Kim, S. (2011). Secondary EFL Students‟ Perceptions of Native and Nonnative English-Speaking Teachers in Japan and Korea. Asian EFL Journal (13), 272-293.
Kelch, K. & E. Santana-Williamson (2002). ESL students‟ attitudes toward native and non-native speaking. Journal Article.
Kirkpatrick, A. (2007). World Englishes: implications for international communication and English language teaching. Cambridge University Press.
Liang K (2002). English as a second language (ESL) students attitudes towards nonnative English speaking teachers’ accentedness. MA thesis. California State University Los Angeles.
Liu Jun (1999). „Nonnative English-speaking professionals in TESOL.‟ TESOL Quarterly 33(1), 85-102.
Liu, M., & Zhang, L. (2007). Student Perceptions of Native & Non-native English Teachers‟ Attitudes,. Asian EFL Journal(9), 157-166.
32
Mahboob, A. (2003). Beyond the Native Speaker in TESOL. Journal Article. Retrieved from www.moussu.net/nnest/articles/Mahboob.pdf
Mahboob, A. (2004). Native or non-native: What do the students think? In L. Kamhi-Stein (Ed.), Learning and teaching from experience: Perspectives on non-native English-speaking professionals (pp. 121-148). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Matsuda, P. K. (2002). Keeping the NNEST Movement Alive A Letter From the Chair. NNEST NEWSLETTER, Vol. 4, No. 2 , 1.
Maum,R.,December(2002). Nonnative-English-Speaking. Center for Applied Linguistics. Retrieved from www.cal.org/resources/digest/0209maum.html
Maum, R. (2003). A comparison of native and nonnative English-speaking teachers’ beliefs about teaching English as a second language to adult English language learners. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Louisville.
Mckay, S. L. (2002). Teaching English As an International Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Medgyes, P. (2001). When the teacher is a non-native speaker. Journal Article.
Moussu, L. (2002). English as a second language students' reactions to non-native English speaking teachers. M.A. thesis. Brigham Young University, Utah instructors‟ accents. CATESOL Journal 14.1, 57–72.
Moussu, L. (2006). Native and non-native English-speaking English as a second language teachers: Student attitudes, teacher self-perceptions, and intensive English program administrator beliefs and practices. Ph.D. dissertation, Purdue University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 492 599.)
Myint, M. K. (2002). A Strong Case For Non-Native. NNEST NEWSLETTER, Vol. 4, No. 2 , 9.
Nayar, P. B. (1994). Whose English is it?. The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language,1. Retrieved from http://www.tesl-ej.org.
Rajagopalan K (2006). Nonnative speaker teachers of English and their anxieties: Ingredients for an experiment in action research. In E Llurda (ed.), (pp. 283-303). New York: Springer.
Reves, T. & Medgyes, P. (1994). The non-native English speaking EFLIESL teacher's self image: An international survey. System, 22 (3), 353-367.
Samimy, K. & J. Brutt-Griffler (1999). To be a native or non-native speaker: Perceptions of „non-native‟ students in a graduate TESOL program. In Braine (ed.), 127–144.
33
Suárez J (2000). Native and non-native: Not only a question of terminology. Humanizing Language Teaching. 2(6): Available at: www.hltmag.co.uk/nov00/martnov001.rtf
Sung, Matthew Chit Cheung (2010). Native or non‐native? Exploring Hong Kong students‟
perspectives. Papers Lancaster University postgraduate conference in linguistic and language teaching (4),243-262.
Tang, C. (1997). On the power and status of non-native ESL teachers. TESOL Quarterly 31, 577–580. Thomas J (1999). Voices from the periphery: Non-native teachers and issues of credibility. In G. Braine
(Ed.), Non-native Educators in English Language Teaching. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. pp. 5-13.TESOL Q. 33(2):185-209
Yamanouchi, K. ( 2010 ). Teachers‟ Classroom Language Choice and Its Relation toStudents‟ Perceptions toward Nonnative English Speaking. Jurnal TEKNOSASTIK, Vol 8 No. 1 , 26-35. Zacharias, N. T.,(2003). A survey of tertiary teachers’ beliefs about English Language Teaching in
34 Appendix 1
Questionnaire
Name / NIM:
Read each statements concerning how you feel about the class with your Indonesian teacher of English (non-native English-speaking teacher). Please circle the number that best describes the degree of your agreement with each statement. Please refer to the below box in order to know the level of agreement that each number represents.
1 = Strongly Disagree (SD) 2 = Disagree (D)
3 = Somewhat Disagree (SWD) 4 = Somewhat Agree (SWA) 5 = Agree (A)
6 = Strongly Agree (SA)
I think SD D SWD SWA A SA
1. My Indonesian teacher is a fluent speaker of
English. 1 2 3 4 5 6 2. My Indonesian teacher is my ideal model for
pronunciation. 1 2 3 4 5 6 3. My Indonesian teacher, most times, can
confidently answer students‟ questions. 1 2 3 4 5 6
4. My Indonesian teacher explains the material
clearly. 1 2 3 4 5 6
5. My Indonesian teacher delivers the instruction fluently.
1 2 3 4 5 6
6. My Indonesian teacher uses conversation in
speaking class well. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7. My Indonesian teacher explains vocabulary
effectively and without difficulty. 1 2 3 4 5 6 8. Most times, my Indonesian teacher is able to
answer the students‟ questions. 1 2 3 4 5 6 9. My Indonesian teacher abilities to address
question is good.
35 10. My Indonesian teacher is knowledgeable about the cultures of English speaking countries.
1 2 3 4 5 6
11. My Indonesian teacher often provides cultural information of English speaking countries in class.
1 2 3 4 5 6
12. My Indonesian teacher often provides
Indonesian own cultural information in class. 1 2 3 4 5 6 13. My Indonesian teacher encourages
students to look for cultural similarities and differences with the target culture in comparison with their own culture.
1 2 3 4 5 6
14. I feel comfortable talking with my
Indonesian teacher. 1 2 3 4 5 6
15. My Indonesian teacher often uses
Indonesian in class. 1 2 3 4 5 6 16. My Indonesian teachers‟ learning
experience is helpful to improve my speaking. 1 2 3 4 5 6 17. I want to be as good as my Indonesian
teacher. 1 2 3 4 5 6 18. I am expected to be attentive in my
Indonesian teachers‟ class. 1 2 3 4 5 6 19. The class atmosphere tends to be quite
flexible in my Indonesian teachers‟ class. 1 2 3 4 5 6
20. My Indonesian teacher always interact with
the students 1 2 3 4 5 6 21. Most times, my Indonesian teacher gives
homework. 1 2 3 4 5 6 22. I often have quizzes or exams in the class
with my Indonesian teacher. 1 2 3 4 5 6 23. My Indonesian teacher uses various
36 24. My Indonesian teacher uses attractive visual aids.
1 2 3 4 5 6 25. I have many group/pair activities in class
37
Name / NIM:
Read each statements concerning how you feel about the class with your native English-speaking teacher. Please circle the number that best describes the degree of your agreement with each statement. Please refer to the below box in order to know the level of agreement that each number represents.
1 = Strongly Disagree (SD) 2 = Disagree (D)
3 = Somewhat Disagree (SWD) 4 = Somewhat Agree (SWA) 5 = Agree (A)
6 = Strongly Agree (SA)
I think SD D SWD SWA A SA
1. My native English-speaking teacher is a
fluent speaker of English. 1 2 3 4 5 6 2. My native English-speaking teacher is my
ideal model for pronunciation. 1 2 3 4 5 6 3. My native English-speaking teacher, most
times, can confidently answer students‟ questions.
1 2 3 4 5 6
4. My native English-speaking teacher explains
the material clearly 1 2 3 4 5 6 5. My native English-speaking teacher delivers
the instruction fluently 1 2 3 4 5 6 6. My native English-speaking teacher uses
conversation in speaking class well. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7. My native English-speaking teacher explains
vocabulary effectively and without difficulty. 1 2 3 4 5 6 8. Most times, my native English-speaking
teacher is able to answer the students‟ questions.
1 2 3 4 5 6
9. My native English-speaking teacher abilities to address question is good
38 10. My native English-speaking teacher is knowledgeable about the cultures of English speaking countries.
1 2 3 4 5 6
11. My native English-speaking teacher often provides cultural information of English speaking countries in class.
1 2 3 4 5 6
12. My native English-speaking teacher often provides Indonesian own cultural information in class.
1 2 3 4 5 6 13.My native English-speaking teacher
encourages students to look for cultural similarities and differences with the target culture in comparison with their own culture.
1 2 3 4 5 6
14. I feel comfortable talking with my native
English-speaking teacher. 1 2 3 4 5 6 15. My native English-speaking teacher often
uses Indonesian in class 1 2 3 4 5 6 16. My native English-speaking teacher‟s
learning experience is helpful to improve my speaking.
1 2 3 4 5 6
17. I want to be as good as my native
English-speaking teacher in English. 1 2 3 4 5 6 18. I am expected to be attentive in my native
English-speaking teacher‟s class. 1 2 3 4 5 6 19. The class atmosphere tends to be quite
flexible in my native English-speaking
teacher‟s class. 1 2 3 4 5 6
20. My native English-speaking teacher always
interacts with the students 1 2 3 4 5 6 21. Most times, my native English-speaking
teacher gives homework. 1 2 3 4 5 6 22. I often have quizzes or exams in the class
with my native English-speaking teacher 1 2 3 4 5 6 23. My native English-speaking teacher uses
39 class.
24. My native English-speaking teacher uses
attractive visual aids. 1 2 3 4 5 6 25. I have many group/pair activities in class
