i
THE PA
RTICIPANTS’ LIVED EXPERIENCE ON
FEEDBACK IN ENGLICIOUS CHATIME
A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree
in English Language Education
By
Gisela Bertiantari Student Number: 121214046
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA
iv
DEDICATION PAGE
Mistakes should be examined,
learned from,
and discarded,
not dwelled upon and stored.
-Tim Fargo-
vii ABSTRACT
Bertiantari, Gisela (2016). The Participants’ Lived Experience on Feedback in Englicious Chatime. Yogyakarta: English Language Education Study Program,
Department of Language and Arts Education. Faculty of Teachers and Training and Education, Sanata Dharma University.
Making mistakes is an evidence that learning process is happening. However, the learning process will not be meaningful if it is stopped at making mistakes. That is why Englicious chooses feedback as the tool to make the process of making mistakes meaningful.
The aim of this research was to find out participants’ lived experience about feedback given at the end of Englicious Chatime. There was only one research question in this research. The question was how do participants give meaning on feedback in Englicious Chatime.
This research used phenomenological approach because it focused on the participants’ lived experience. The instruments of this research were observation and in-depth interview. Then, the participants were three Englicious Chatime participants with three different level of English ability which were low level, middle level, and high level. After that, the data were analyzed using Moustakas’ Modification of the Van Kaam Method of Analysis of Phenomenological Data (1994).
The results of the research were the participants’ story and three emerging themes. The themes were effectiveness, self-confidence, and sufficiency. First, the participants felt that the feedback was effective because it gave them a chance to learn from their own mistakes. Second, the feedback made them feel more confident because when they were using the language, they were not interrupted even though they made a mistake. It helped them to be braver in using the language. Third, the feedback was sufficient for two of the research participants. The other participant felt that the feedback was not really helping nor useless. This aspect depended on the participant’s ability in using English.
viii ABSTRAK
Bertiantari, Gisela (2016). The Participants’ Lived Experience on Feedback in
Englicious Chatime. Yogyakarta: Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris,
Jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa dan Seni. Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas Sanata Dharma.
Membuat kesalahan adalah bukti bahwa proses belajar sedang terjadi. Bagaimanapun juga, proses belajar tidak akan menjadi berarti apabila berhenti pada pembuatan kesalahan. Itulah mengapa Englicious memilih feedback sebagai alat untuk membuat proses membuat kesalahan menjadi berarti.
Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk mencari tahu pengalaman hidup peserta mengenai feedback yang diberikan pada akhir Englicious Chatime. Hanya ada satu pertanyaan pada penelitian ini. Pertanyaannya adalah bagaimana peserta memberi arti pada feedback di Englicious Chatime.
Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan phenomenologi karena pendekatan tersebut fokus pada pengalaman hidup peserta. Instrumen pada penelitian ini adalah observasi dan wawancara mendalam. Kemudian, peserta penelitian ini adalah tiga orang peserta Englicious Chatime dengan tiga kemampuan Bahasa Inggris yang berbeda yaitu rendah, sedang, dan tinggi. Setelah itu, data dianalisa menggunakan Metode Analisis Data Phenomenologi
Van Kaam yang dimodifikasi oleh Moustakas (1994).
Hasil dari penelitian ini adalah cerita masing-masing peserta dan tiga tema yang muncul. Tema tersebut adalah efektivitas, kepercayaan diri, dan kecukupan. Pertama, peserta merasa bahwa feedback efektif karena feedback memberi mereka kesempatan untuk belajar dari kesalahan mereka sendiri. Kedua, feedback membuat mereka merasa lebih percaya diri karena ketika mereka sedang menggunakan Bahasa Inggris, mereka tidak merasa terganggu bahkan ketika mereka membuat kesalahan. Hal tersebut membantu mereka untuk menjadi lebih berani dalam menggunakan Bahasa Inggris. Ketiga, feedback tersebut cukup untuk dua peserta penelitian. Peserta yang lain merasa bahwa
feedback tidak terlalu membantu, namun tidak juga tidak berguna. Aspek ini
bergantung pada kemampuan peserta menggunakan Bahasa Inggris.
ix
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all, I would like to thank Jesus Christ, for the infinite blessings He gives every day. Without His grace, this thesis would have never been done and accomplished.
I would like to thank my parents, F.X. Subarjono and M.I. Sunarti for their supports, love, patience, guidance and prayers for me. I would like to thank
them for the money they collected little by little to send me to English Language Education Study Program and the time they spent to look after me since the time I
was born. Without them, I might be lost in the middle of nowhere. I would also thank my brothers and sisters, Fransiskus Wijakongko, Fransiska Trisna Artianjani, Severinus Yan Bertianto, and Cornelia Larasati for their mean-and-rough-yet-full-of-love supports.
I would like to give my gratitude to my thesis advisor, Fidelis Chosa
Kastuhandani, S.Pd., M.Hum., for helping and guiding me through the process of finishing this thesis. I thank him for always giving his students time to consult, whether it is in the lab, in his office, or even in his house. I would also thank my
academic advisor, Veronica Tripihatmini, S.Pd., M.Hum., M.A. for the advice, guidance, and suggestion during four years of my life in ELESP.
I would like to give my biggest gratitude to Englicious Jogja for giving me a place to learn and idea for my thesis. This thesis would have never been done without this marvelous community. I would like to thank the founders of
x
Englicious, Vega Puruhita, Sherly Rosasenja and Maruta Dewa for giving me
inspirations about teaching and learning English. I would also like to thank all the
coaches and participants in Englicious for sharing a lot of things through the discussion in Englicious Chatime.
I would like to thank all of my friends. For my friends from the very first semester, Maria Vita, Martha Pritzanda, Steffany Dian, Ria Resty, Fransiska
Neny, and Riski Aninda, I thank them for the rough words and jokes during these semesters. Without them all, I would have never been this tough. Then, I would like to thank my super busy and talented friends, Rosalina Puspitarini and
Anthonia Jessy, I thank them for the random discussions and suggestions about life and everything inside it. I would also thank my classmates, PBI A-b, I thank them for being great cheerleaders these four hectic yet amazing years.
The last but not least, I would like to thank my cousins, Yohana Alaya and Catharina Larasati for helping me during the hectic SPD artworks and
assignments. Then, I would like to thank Haryo Bagus Priambodo for the day calls, night calls, and alarm calls. I thank him for supporting from the distance. I would also thank everyone involved in the process of finishing this thesis whom I
cannot mention one by one. May God be with them all.
xi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
TITLE PAGE ... i
APPROVAL PAGE ... ii
DEDICATION PAGE ... iv
STATEMENTS OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY ... v
LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI ... vi
ABSTRACT ... vii
ABSTRAK ... viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS ... xi
LIST OF APPENDICES ... xiv
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION ... 1
A. Researcher Background ... 1
B. Research Problem ... 3
C. Problem Limitation ... 4
D. Research Objective ... 4
E. Research Benefits ... 4
F. Definition of Terms ... 5
CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ... 9
A. Theoretical Description ... 9
1. Englicious Chatime ... 9
2. Comunicative Language Teaching ... 11
xii
4. Feedback ... 16
5. Error Correction ... 18
6. Lived Experience ... 20
B. Theoretical Framework ... 20
CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ... 23
A. Research Method ... 23
B. Research Setting ... 25
C. Research Participants ... 25
D. Research Instrument and Data Gathering Technique ... 27
E. Data Analysis Technique ... 28
F. Research Procedure ... 31
CHAPTER IV. RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ... 33
A. Text Description ... 33
1. Participant L Story ... 33
2. Participant M Story ... 35
3. Participant H Story ... 37
B. Interpretation ... 39
1. Effectiveness ... 39
2. Self-confidence ... 41
3. Sufficiency ... 43
CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ... 46
xiii
B. Recommendations ... 48
REFERENCES ... 50
xiv
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix Page
APPENDIX A Letter of Information and Consent Form ... 54
APPENDIX B Interview Guideline ... 60
APPENDIX C Example of Verbatim ... 62
APPENDIX D Example of Horizonalisation ... 76
1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
This chapter provides the background information of this thesis. It consists
of the research background, research problem, problem limitation, research objective, research benefits, and definition of terms used in this thesis.
A. Research Background
Making mistakes is one of the parts in learning process. When someone is learning something new, especially language, it is very normal for the learner to
make mistakes since there are differences in the grammar, vocabulary and also pronunciation. “Like sin, error is to be avoided and its influence overcome, but its
presence is to be expected” (Brooks, 1960, p. 58).
“Errors are indispensable to the learner himself, because we can regard the making of errors as a device the learner uses in order to learn. It is a way the learner has of testing his hypotheses about the nature of the language
he is learning.” (Corder, 1967, p. 25)
However, the learning process does not stop in making mistakes. The learner should know that he/she is making mistakes and he/she should be able to
find out the correction. Allwright (1975) says that a learner cannot really learn in class without knowing when an error is made, either by him or by someone else. The same thing works when the learner successfully understands the material; the
In teaching language, assessment is one of the most important aspects. Assessment itself is an ongoing process that encompasses a much wider domain
(Brown, 2004). In his book, Brown writes that assessment consists of formal and informal assessment. “Formal assessments are exercises or procedures specifically
designed to tap into a storehouse of skills and knowledge” (p. 6). On the other hand, “informal assessment can take a number of forms, starting with incidental, unplanned comments and responses, along with coaching and other impromptu
feedback to the student. Examples include saying „Nice job!‟ „Good work!‟ „Did you say can or can’t?‟” (p. 50).
Giving feedback was known as correcting learners‟ mistakes. Nowadays,
the term „correcting‟ is rarely used because teachers are not only looking for
learners‟ mistakes. Giving feedback is more often used because it also contains
encouragement and guidance to improve learners‟ ability rather than only correcting their mistakes. However, feedback cannot be separated from correction.
Through feedback, learners can understand what they are good at and what part needs improvement. Krashen and Seliger (1975) conclude that error correction
probably is useful to the adult learner, perhaps because it helps him learn the exact environment in which to apply rules and discover the precise semantic range of lexical items (p. 181).
Giving feedback is easier and more flexible than the other formal assessments because it can be applied both in formal and informal teaching and
English learning community which focuses on speaking ability. Since Englicious focuses on speaking ability, it creates an activity named Englicious Chatime.
There, a certain topic will be discussed every meeting and the participants should state their opinion in English so they can practice their English ability.
However, the learning process in the Chatime will be less effective and meaningful if the participants only use English without knowing whether they use the right or wrong English. Although Englicious is not a formal institution which
has a certain curriculum, Englicious also has its own approach, method, and technique to teach English. In every Chatime, there will be coaches –which are
mostly from English Language Education Study Program (ELESP) of Sanata Dharma University (SDU) that will evaluate the participants‟ English. At the end of the Chatime, they will give feedback by sharing mistakes made by the
participants and then discuss the corrections together.
As one of the coaches, the researcher experienced giving feedback herself
and believes that the feedback given at the end of the Chatime is meaningful.
Thus, this research was designed to know the participants‟ opinion, expectation,
belief and achievement after living the experience of receiving the feedback themselves.
B. Research Problem
This research was designed to seek out Englicious Chatime participants‟
opinion, expectation, belief and benefit about and from feedback given in
“How do the participants give meaning on feedback in Englicious Chatime?”
C. Problem Limitation
This research focused on finding out how participants give meaning on
feedback in Englicious Chatime. Thus, this research is limited in finding out the
participants‟ opinion, feeling, and expectation about feedback in Englicious
Chatime through their lived experience.
D. Research Objectives
This research was conducted to find out how participants give meaning on feedback in Englicious Chatime. By knowing how participants give meaning on the feedback, the researcher could know how important feedback is and how it is
useful for the participants.
E. Research Benefits
Since assessment is important in teaching and learning process and
feedback is one part of the assessment, this study was expected to bring beneficial result for people who work or have an interest in the educational field.
a. Englicious Coaches
As people who directly deal with the feedback, this research will help the coaches to know how important feedback is and what kind of feedback that is
coaches could improve the way they deliver the feedback and the way they evaluate the participants.
b. Englicious Participants
This research will make the participants able to share their expectations
about the learning process in Englicious specifically about the feedback. Through the interview, they could evaluate anything about Englicious Chatime. It will also help the participants to get better feedback and feedback system.
c. Students of ELESP
This research will make students of ELESP know the importance of
feedback. As teacher candidates, students of ELESP should know how to use feedback in teaching and learning activity. In class, they are prepared and trained to teach in a formal class and condition. However, teaching and learning process
is not only done in class. By reading this research, they could learn that teaching and learning process does not only happen in class. They could also know how
feedback is given and used outside the formal teaching and learning activity.
F. Definition of Terms
In this part, the researcher provides definition of terms that is used in this thesis.
1. Englicious
Englicious is an English learning community which focuses on speaking
community. This community is made to facilitate people who want to learn English in a different way.
In this research, Englicious substituted the position of a formal institution such as school, academy, or any other institution which provides classes and
courses. It works just like other formal institutions which shade the students or people who legally join the institution. Though Englicious is an informal learning community, it also has to prepare the place where the activity is going to be done,
the material of the meeting or gathering, as well as the activities.
2. Englicious Chatime
After doing a small research, the founders of Englicious knew that people need place and time to learn and practice English. To facilitate that need,
Englicious Chatime is created. In this research, Englicious Chatime referred to the
learning process of the community. Informal teaching and learning activity is done in this activity. Both the teaching and learning activity is done by the
participants and the coaches of Englicious.
Englicious Chatime is a gathering prepared by Englicious. It is held once
in two weeks. In every Chatime, an issue, phenomenon, or thing will be chosen as the main topic to be discussed both in a big group and small groups. All the participants shall use English in the discussion. The participants themselves come
from different background of education and culture, so their ability in using English is so varied.
may give questions to the group presenting, so it is possible to have a big group discussion on the presentation. Then, at the end of the Chatime, the Person in
Charge (PIC) will conclude the meeting and let the coaches give feedback. This feedback is collected through observing the participants during the discussion.
This session is done by reviewing the discussion, stating mistakes made by the participants and then correcting the mistakes together.
3. Participants
In this research, participants referred to people who joined Englicious
Chatime. The participants are mostly undergraduate students from universities
around Yogyakarta namely Universitas Gadjah Mada, Universitas Islam Indonesia, Universitas Islam Negeri Sunan Kalijaga, Universitas Teknologi Yogyakarta, Universitas Ahmad Dahlan, Akademi Akuntansi Yayasan Keluarga
Pahlawan Negara, Atma Jaya Yogyakarta and from different major such as Law, Veterinary, Medical, Engineering, Accounting, Technology, Biology,
Communication, English, and France. Though most of the participants are undergraduate students, there are some fresh-graduated students, postgraduate
students, and workers as well. Therefore, the ability of each participant in using English is so varied.
Participants in Englicious Chatime hold the role as the students. Since
there are students, coaches then hold the role as the teachers. Though Englicious
Chatime does not have a curriculum, the learning process is still included into the
4. Feedback
In this research, feedback referred to the corrections, comments, questions,
answers, and reviews given at the end of the Chatime. The feedback is specifically referred to indirect oral feedback which was given at the end of the Chatime. The
feedback itself contained correction to the mistakes or errors made by the participants in the process of discussion. Gagne (1961) defines feedback as a closing loop in the learning process which serves to fix the learning result and
makes it permanently available.
Lewis (2002) says that feedback is a way for teachers to describe their
learner‟s language. It also gives the teacher information about individual and
collective class progress. As Lewis also writes in her book that some purposes of feedback are motivational and some others have to do with providing students
with information (p. 3).
5. Lived Experience
In this research, lived experience referred to participants‟ real experience
which was experienced by their own self in Englicious Chatime. Manen (1990)
says that lived experience is the beginning and the end of a phenomenological research. Phenomenological research itself is done to change lived experience to a textual expression of its essence, in a way that the text has effects as a reflexive
9 CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
This chapter will discuss about the related theories about Englicious
Chatime and feedback. There are two sections in this chapter. The first section is
theoretical description and the second is theoretical framework.
A. Theoretical Description
There are six theories which will be described in this section. The first is
Englicious chatime. The second is communicative language teaching. The third is
speaking. The fourth is feedback. The fifth is error correction. Then, the last, the sixth is lived experience.
1. Englicious Chatime
From an interview with the founders of Englicious, it is known that
Englicious is an English speaking community which focuses on speaking fluency.
It was formed spontaneously in January 2013 by two graduates from ELESP of SDU, Daniel Ari Widhiatama (ELESP 2005) and Veronika Swanti (ELESP 2001),
as an English learning portal on Twitter. The founders then did a small survey and found that people nowadays need media, a place, and an opportunity to learn English. However, people are busy with their business and sometimes they do not
Then, Englicious came up with a concept to learn English while having dinner/snacks in a public area such as cafe or restaurant. The purposes are: first, to
give the participants opportunities to speak in English with various topics. Second, to provide guidance and motivation to the participants who think that
learning English is difficult. Third, to shift people‟s paradigm that learning English can be fun. Fourth, to push the participants to speak up and make mistakes because without making ones, the learning process will never take place.
Fifth, to be a community which promotes a new learning style.
Englicious‟ most influential activity is Englicious Chatime. That is the time when the participants and coaches gather to have conversation or chat using English. So far, the participants are college students from universities around Yogyakarta and from various majors. The coaches are mostly from ELESP, so
they have good teaching ability and good basic English competence. The topic is changed every meeting, but it usually talks about something close to the
participants‟ and coaches‟ life. They usually discuss about everything they know
without any guideline. There is no writing activity except taking or making notes.
There are two focuses of Englicious Chatime. The first focus is on the development of speaking fluency and grammar accuracy through group discussion. The second focus is on the public speaking skill development; because
being able to present ideas in front of audiences is a significant competence that people should have in order to face this competitive world.
and find the correction together. The feedback can be given personally or in the big group.
2. Communicative Language Teaching
Most of Englicious‟ activities use the concept of Communicative
Language Teaching (CLT). This method focuses on how to communicate with others. Grammar mistake and mispronunciation will be corrected later. So, the participants can still learn on the right track of English.
Richards (2005) states that CLT creates new roles for teachers and learners in the classroom or learning-teaching process. Learners now have to participate in
classroom activities that are based on a cooperative rather than individualistic approach to learning. Students have to become more comfortable with listening to their peers in group work or pair work tasks, rather than relying on the teacher for
a model. Teachers now have to assume the role of facilitator and monitor. Teachers have to develop a different view of learners‟ errors and of their own role
in facilitating language learning.
“This led to the emergence of a „fluency first‟ pedagogy in which students‟
grammar needs are determined on the basis of performance on fluency tasks rather than predetermined by a grammatical syllabus. We can distinguish two phases in this development, which we will call classic communicative language teaching and current communicative language
teaching” (Brumfit, 1979, as cited in Richards, 2005, p. 8)
Lubis (1988) writes that there are fourteen types of communicative
activities. They are guessing games, situational practice, the self-directed dialogue, a “mixer”, dialogues, improvisations, plays, readings, compositions,
The first activity, guessing game is aimed to make students use numbers, expressions of time, colors, and other adjectives, verbs, and nouns in a realistic
way. The second activity, situational practice is aimed to make students be able to ask and answer questions in real conversation. The activity is giving the students a
situation and letting them to explain what they would do in that particular situation.
The third activity, the self-directed dialogue is similar with the situational
practice. What makes these two activities different is the number of the participants. In this type of activity, the students are also given situation to be
discussed, but they are to work in pairs. This activity is aimed to make the students responsible to the conversation they make. The fourth activity, a mixer is aimed to promote conversation. This activity is called mixer because it requires
the students to talk with a lot of people in the class to find a partner for each student. The fifth activity, dialogue is a short conversation between two people. It
can be used as the stepping stone to free communication and presented as a language model in the manipulative phase of language learning. The sixth activity,
improvisation is aimed to make the students able to have conversation spontaneously without any rehearsal or fixed dialogue line. In this activity, the teacher should not interrupt or correct the students during the performance
because it may make the students shy and failed in continuing the performance. To correct the students‟ performances, teacher may take notes while the students
students to use their English through role-play. In doing a role-play, everyone has to listen, not only reading. So, when one speaker is done with the line, the other
knows who should continue the line. To be a good actor, one has to listen to the other person talking and the way he/she talks to you. It works in real
conversations as well. The eighth activity, reading is aimed to stimulate students to have conversation based on the readings given. By having readings, the students can collect new information that can be used as references in the
discussions and conversations. The ninth activity, composition is an activity where the students make a written text about anything. The written texts can lead
the students to have conversation practice by sharing the content of the text and let the other students ask questions related to the text. The tenth activity, speech is aimed to make students speak English for reasonably long periods of time in front
of audience. The eleventh, small-group discussion is aimed to give students chance to speak, especially in a big class. The twelfth, debate is aimed to let
students practice to defend their opinion. This activity is better to be applied in a class where the students have reached advanced level of English. The thirteenth,
group project involves hobbies, crafts, physical exercise, sports, etc. which are
related to students‟ life. It is aimed to make the students feel more familiar with
the topic so that they will use English more. The fourteenth, game is aimed to give
fun and variety in speaking practice.
There are four activities that are usually used in Englicious Chatime. They
situation. In this activity, students are given stimulus in a form of condition such as: “you are in the middle of your vacation in England and you meet a little girl
who lost her mother. What would you do to help the little girl?” After that, the students are asked to present or share their answer to the condition. This activity
helps the students to think as creative as possible and as soon as possible. Moreover, students can practice making question, answer and conversation in real life.
Small-group discussion is usually used in a class which has a lot of students. In this activity, students are asked to form small groups consist of three
to six students. The aim is obviously to give students more chance to speak. After forming the groups, they are given time to discuss a certain topic in the group. To control the process of the discussion, the teacher can walk around and stop by to
take a look or even ask some questions related to the discussion. Then, one person from each group is to be chosen as the representative of the group to share the
result of the discussion in front of the other groups.
Group project involves discussion as well. In this activity, students are
asked to produce one observable final product such as painting, video, recording, or demonstration of how something is made. In the process of making the final product, students are expected to have a lot of discussion in English because they
can choose what topic gets their interest the most and decide what product they will make.
professional preparation, easy to play but intellectually challenging, be able to be filled in the middle of the main activity, be able to entertain the students but cause
no uncontrolable situation, and not require a lot of time to correct and to give responses afterward.
3. Speaking
Speaking is the main skill to communicate especially in direct communication. Bygate (1987) states that speaking is a skill which needed to be
given attention as much as literary skills, both in first and second languages (p. vii). It is also written that in order to be able to speak a foreign language, it is very
important for someone to know certain amount of grammar and vocabulary (p. 3).
“We do not merely know how to assemble sentences in the abstract: we
have to produce them and adapt them to the circumstances. This means making decisions rapidly, implementing them smoothly, and adjusting our conversation as unexpected problems appear in our path” (p. 3).
There are two basic ways in which something we do can be seen as a skill. They are motor-perceptive skills and interaction skills. Motor-perceptive skills
consist of perceiving, recalling, and articulating in the correct order sounds and structures of the language. Mackey (1965) says that oral expression is not only
about using the right sound in the right patterns of rhythm and intonation, but also about word choice and inflection correctly to produce correct meaning (p.266). Interaction skills engaged with decisions-making about communication such as
what to say, how to say it, and whether to develop it related to someone‟s intention while maintaining relations with others.
patterns of rhythm and intonation, the right word choice, and the right inflection to produce correct meaning is like learning to drive without ever going out on the
road. It is because those goals influence the type of exercises used in the learning process like model dialogues, pattern practice, oral drill tables, look-and-say
exercises, and oral composition.
Ten years after, David Wilkins (1974) says that those exercises cannot solve some learning problems. One of the most important problems is making
sure that the material learnt in class is successfully transferred to real-life use.
This transition is often called as the „transfer of skills‟. Wilkins also says that if all
the process of producing the language in the class is controlled by the teacher, the students or the learners should be protected from the fear of making their own choices. Wilkins adds:
“As with everything else he will only learn what falls within his experience. If all his language production is controlled from outside, he will hardly be competent to control his own language production. He will not be able to transfer his knowledge from a language-learning situation to a language-using situation.” (p. 6)
4. Feedback
To gain the goals of Englicious Chatime‟s focuses, there are some ways that are used by Englicious. Englicious tries to be consistent in giving the
participants stimulation to speak up and providing corrective feedback in each error that they make. Since the focus is on the speaking skill development, the activities are designed to enable participants to build their fluency, pronunciation,
written and oral test to assess the participants. That is why, in this case, the coaches should have good basic English competence to work as the teachers in
order to be able to correct and give feedback to the participants.
Since there is no test to assess the participants, feedback from the coaches
is highly needed to correct and improve the participants‟ English. Lewis (2002)
writes that there are five purposes of feedback. The first is that feedback provides information for teachers and students. For the learners, feedback is a way for
teachers to describe their ability in using language. For teachers, it gives teachers information about the progress happens in class, both for individual and the whole
class and, indirectly, is a form of evaluation on their own teaching. For the learners, feedback is an ongoing form of assessment which is more focused than marks of grades. By highlighting strengths and weaknesses, the comments provide
information about individual progress, unlike marks or grades, which tend to compare one student with another. The comments can also give direct information
about language, by stating a rule or by giving examples.
Second, feedback provides students with advice about learning. Teachers
can give students more than simply descriptions of their ability in using language.
Comments can also be made on the students‟ learning process. A way that is
usually used for this to happen is through learning journals.
Third, feedback provides students with language input. The teacher‟s written and spoken feedback provides students with meaningful and personal
language input. The teacher‟s words, both in their form and their purpose, show
why it is important to extend students‟ language by writing comments in language
at a level slightly higher than students‟ own current language use. From this way
students can learn new vocabularies and structures in context.
Fourth, feedback is a form of motivation. Feedback can be more
motivating than marks or grades. It can encourage students to study and to use language as good as possible by keeping whatever the teacher knows about the
learners‟ attitudes. Encouragement is needed by both hardworking and
underworking students but it should be given in different ways. During a course, as teachers find out more about their students, the encouragement can be more
detailed and acceptable for each student.
Fifth, feedback can lead students towards autonomy. One long-term purpose of feedback is to lead students to the point where they can find their own
mistakes. For example, one teacher sat with a student reading his work, stopping each time there was some minor error of form (a singular for a plural and so on).
In each case the student could find the mistake himself. He realized that all he needed to do was to take a few minutes at the end to proofread his own work.
Another way of describing what the teacher did is to compare it with scaffolding. While a building is going up it needs scaffolding, but once it is finished the scaffolding can be taken away (pp. 3-4).
5. Error Correction
Error is unavoidable in learning process. Hendrickson (1981) writes that
second and foreign language learning. By giving chance to communicate freely, teachers are building students‟ confidence in practicing and applying their
knowledge of the foreign language. Corder (1973) writes that learning new language involves a trial and error approach, and errors are proof that the learner
is trying to apply and analyze the rules, categories, and systems.
Walker (1973) says that students think that frequent correction makes them feel less confident and that communicating is more important than error-free
speech. Fanselow (1977) says that telling the students the correct answer blocks them from building a pattern for long term memory. Lucas (1976) also says that
correcting an error needs cognitive operations on the part of the student that are as complex as the processes of making the error. Giving the correct answer does not mean that these operations will happen. Burt (1975) says that it is easy to break
students‟ confidence with too many interruptions. Burt and Kiparsky (1972) say
that too many corrections cut off students‟ sentences, stop their train of thought,
and hold them from making new sentences.
Hendrickson made an article in 1978 which shows an overview of a
research about error correction. He writes in his article that study in area is actually insufficient and inclonclusive, but some important thing still can be concluded from it. He tries to answer five questions: should errors be corrected,
and, if so, which ones, when, how, and y whom? As cited from Walz‟ book, Error Correction Techniques for the FL Classroom, Hendrickson says that from the
research, he knows that correcting errors is useful.
“He finds that correcting errors does improve the proviciency of second
the learner, and appear frequently. There is no consensus as to when errors should be corrected, but the manner in which it is done should be supportive rather than critical. Many ways of correcting have been suggested, but none has been shown superior to any other. Finally,
teachers should not dominate this aspect of classwork.” (p. 3)
Berwald (1979) believes that correction does help, but it is only based on his class with a small group of students for five hours or more per day. Students want to be corrected and will be disappointed if they are not given feedback. However,
deciding which errors need to be corrected and how the correction is done effectively is necessary.
“To some extent, that is to say, students do not simply learn the linguistic
structures and grammar rules. Rather, they should be actively making meaning through activities such as collaborative problem solving, writing for a purpose, discussion of topics of genuine interest, and reading,
viewing and responding to authentic materials” (Murphy, 2000).
6. Lived Experience
Dilthey (1985) says that lived experience involves our immediate,
pre-reflective consciousness of life: a reflexive or self-given awareness which is, as awareness, unaware of itself. Gadamer (1975) observes that the word
“experience” has a condensing and intensifying meaning: “If something is called
or considered an experience its meaning rounds it into the unity of a significant
whole” (p. 60).
B. Theoretical Framework
The formulated problem in this research is how participants give meaning on feedback in Englicious Chatime. To answer that problem, important points
researcher as the theoretical framework. This theoretical framework is used as the guideline to analyze the phenomena in the research.
The researcher wants to know Englicious Chatime participants‟ opinion, expectation and feeling about activities done in Chatime especially feedback
given in the end of the Chatime. However, most of Englicious‟ activities use the concept of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT). This method focuses on how to communicate with others. Grammar mistake and mispronunciation will be
corrected later. In Englicious Chatime, mistakes are also corrected later after the participants practice in the feedback session. According to Lubis (1988), there are
fourteen types of communicative activities. They are guessing games, situational practice, the self-directed dialogue, a “mixer”, dialogues, improvisations, plays, readings, compositions, speeches, small-group discussions, debates, group
projects, and games. In Chatime, only four communicative activities are used. They are situational practice, small-group discussion, group project, and game.
The mentioned activities are aimed to improve participants‟ speaking
ability, especially speaking in context of real life. Bygate (1987) says that people
do not always know how to make sentences all in a sudden: they have to produce them and adapt them to the circumstances. This means making decisions quickly, implementing them smoothly, and adjusting their conversation as unexpected
problems appear in their path” (p. 3). To gain those goals, participants should be given time to practice their speaking ability freely, that is why the feedback which
Kiparsky (1972) says that too many corrections cut off students‟ sentences, stop
their train of thought, and hold them from making new sentences.
The researcher believes that correcting participants‟ mistakes after the practice session is beneficial. According to Lewis (2002), feedback has five
benefits which are providing information for teachers and students, providing students with advice about learning, providing students with language input, giving motivation, and leading students towards autonomy.
One part of feedback, is error correction. The researcher also believes that error correction which is contained in the feedback helps the participants to
improve their language. Berwald (1979) believes that correction does help. Students want to be corrected and will be disappointed if they are not given feedback. However, deciding which errors need to be corrected and how the
23 CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter provides description of the methodology used in this research
in order to answer the research question stated in Chapter I. The objective of this research is to find out how participants give meaning on feedback in Englicious
Chatime. This chapter is divided into six sections, which are research method,
research setting, research participants, instrument and data gathering technique, data analysis technique, and research procedure.
A. Research Method
In Kockelmans’s book (1967, p. 24), it is written that Hegel states that
phenomenology referred to knowledge as it appears to consciousness, the science of describing what one perceives, senses, and knows in one’s immediate
awareness and experience. The process leads to an unfolding of phenomenal consciousness through science and philosophy “toward the absolute knowledge of
the absolute”.
Moustakas (1994) outlines five stand out qualitative inquiries in his book which are Ethnography, Grounded Research Theory, Hermeneutics, Duquesne University’s Phenomenology (Empirical Phenomenological Research), and
Research because the focus of this research was to investigate someone’s feeling by obtaining descriptions of the person’s feeling.
To answer the research question, the researcher designed a phenomenological research. Merleau-Ponty (1962) says that phenomenology is
the study of essences. This research also tried to find out the essence of feedback given in Englicious Chatime for the participants. Phenomenology is also regarded as “a study of people’s conscious experiences of their life-world’ (Merriam, 2009,
p. 25). Since the participants directly experienced receiving the feedback, this methodology matched the formulated problem which dealt with conscious, direct
and real experiences.
In collecting the data, the researcher used qualitative method. Qualitative method was used because the researcher wanted to collect detailed personal
answer from each participant. Bogdan & Biklen (1982) writes that the data collected from qualitative research can be considered as soft because it has rich
description of people, places, and conversations which cannot be easily gained by statistical procedures. Besides, qualitative research also concerned with understanding behavior from the subject’s own frame of reference.
This research focused on gaining Englicious Chatime participants’ opinion and feeling about the feedback given in Englicious Chatime. “The best known
representatives of qualitative research and those that most embody the characteristics we just touched upon are participant observation and in-depth
the participants’ lived experience which included understanding, belief, feeling,
intention, and action about feedback given in Englicious Chatime.
Before deciding the research participants, the researcher did an observation to find Englicious Chatime participants who matched the criteria. The
criteria was having three different levels of English which were low, middle, and high according to Common European Framework of References for Language (2001).
B. Research Setting
The research took four different places. The observations were done in two different places and time where and when two Englicious Chatimes were held. The first observation were done on December 2015 and the second was done on
March 2016. Then, the in-depth interviews were also done in two different places and dates. The first two in-depth interviews were done at a coffee shop on April
2016 for participant L and M and the last in-depth interview for participant H was done at participant H’s office on April 2016.
C. Research Participants
The participants of this research were three chosen Englicious members
who had ever joined at least one Englicious Chatime. Those three chosen participants had different level of ability in using English which was observed
The observations were done in two different times because the participants joined two different Englicious Chatimes. Two of the participants joined the same
Chatime, and then the other one participant joined different Englicious Chatime.
The observations were done by paying attention to the target participants’
language during the discussion in Englicious Chatime. The observed things were the participants’ vocabulary, fluency, accuracy, and confidence in using English.
Those participants were then labelled or mentioned as L, M, and H to
represent the low, middle, and high ability in speaking English. To decide the participants’ level of ability in using English, the researcher used the Common
Reference Levels: global scale in Common European Framework of References
for Language (2001).
There are six classes which then classified into three levels. The lowest
level is Basic User and had two more specific classes namely A1 and A2. The higher level is Independent User with two more specific classes namely B1 and
B2. Then, the highest level is Proficient User with two more specific classes namely C1 and C2. Classes with number (2) behind are higher than classes with
number (1) behind. After deciding the standard, the potential participants were observed and classified according to the matched points in the scale. The aim of choosing participants with different level of English was to know whether or not
D. Research Instrument and Data Gathering Technique
To answer the question of this research, the researcher needed the participants’ detailed answers and stories. To get those detailed answers and
stories, the most possible and suggested way was to hold in-depth interviews
which became the main data gathering technique used in this research.
Interview was the main technique to gather data in qualitative research. Bogdan & Biklen (1982, p. 135) writes that interview is used to gather descriptive data in the subject’s own words so that the researcher can develop insights on how
subjects interpret some piece of the world. In this research, each participant was
interviewed for about twenty to thirty-five minutes. The interview took a long time because in a phenomenological research, the most important thing is the participants’ experience. As stated by Geertz (1973), what phenomenologists
emphasize is the subjective aspects of people’s behavior. Then, it was also used to seek out participant’s understanding, belief, feeling, intention, and action about
feedback given in Englicious Chatime which will be the main data in this research.
The interviews were done in Bahasa Indonesia as the native language of the participants and the researcher. The aim was to avoid misunderstanding and to make the participants feel more comfortable in expressing their feelings and
opinion. During the interview, the researcher used a tape recorder to record the conversation. “Long interviews are difficult to recapture fully. When a study
In order to keep the interview in line, the researcher made an interview guideline which consisted of list of questions for the participants. “The
phenomenological interview involves an informal, interactive process and utilizes open-ended comments and questions” (Moustakas, 1994, p. 114). Although there
was interview guideline, the questions were not asked serially to let the participants share as much as possible and to dig deeper information about the latest point shared by the participants.
E. Data Analysis Technique
Bogdan & Biklen (1982) writes that data analysis is the process of systematically searching and arranging the interview transcripts, fieldnotes, and other materials that are accumulated to increase the researcher’s understanding
about those data and to make the researcher able to share and elaborate things found in the research. Analysis involves working with data, organizing it,
breaking it into manageable units, synthesizing it, searching for patterns, discovering what is important and what is to be learned, and deciding what is
going to be shown to the readers of the research.
Moustakas’ Modification of the Van Kaam Method of Analysis of
Phenomenological Data (1994) then was chosen to analyze the data. In Moustakas’ Modification of the Van Kaam Method of Analysis of
Phenomenological Data, there are seven steps to analyze the data which are
Constituents and Themes by Application: Validation, Constructing an Individual Textural Description for each Co-researcher, Constructing an Individual Structural
Description for each Co-researcher, and Constructing Textural-Structural Description for each Research Participant.
In a phenomenological research, research participants are called as co-researchers because they are also involved in investigating their own feelings and experiences. They are not only the objects of the research because in the
interview, they are also invited to dig deeper meaning of their own feelings and experiences. However, in this research, co-researchers were called as participants
as they also called as participants in Englicious.
The very first step of the analysis was making transcription of the interview. To make the transcripts, the researcher used the recording of the
interview to avoid missing parts of the interview. In this step, the researcher wrote everything mentioned in the interview, including greeting, questions from the
researcher, answer from the participants, jokes, and even answer that had no relation with the research. Everything written in the transcription should not be
given addition or reduction.
After making the transcriptions, Modification of the Van Kaam Method of Analysis of Phenomenological Data was used. The first step was Listing and
horizons. This step was aimed to arrange participants’ answer line by line and to number every line to make the analyzing process easier.
The second step was Reduction and Elimination. In this step, unnecessary, overlapping, repetitive, and vague expressions such as filling words and
unfinished sentences should be omitted from the table of horizonalization. The remaining horizons should be the important points related to the research.
The third step was Clustering and Thematizing the Invariant Constituents.
In this step, the horizonalized answer was classified into themes. The themes then were given codes to be interpreted as the core themes of the experience.
The fourth step was Final Identification of the Invariant Constituents and Themes by Application: Validation. In this step, the data were to be checked again, whether the chosen answer in the horizonalization and the theme were
matched or not. If the themes were not explicitly or compatibly stated, they were not relevant to the participants’ experience and should be omitted.
The fifth step was constructing each participant’s Individual Textural Description. In this step, clear report of the main dynamics of the experience,
themes and qualities that appear for how feelings and thoughts connected with the experience should be provided.
The sixth step was constructing Individual Structural Description of the
experience based on the Individual Textural Description and Imaginative Variation. Imaginative variation itself required us to find out possible meanings
positions, roles, or functions. This process was aimed to describe the essential structures of a phenomenon.
The last step was constructing a Textural-Structural Description of the meanings and essences of the experience. This step was the merger of fifth and
sixth step.
F. Research Procedure
This research was conducted because the researcher saw an interesting
phenomenon in Englicious Chatime particularly about feedback. Feedback was believed to help participants developed their English ability. However, every
participant must have their own opinion about feedback given in Englicious
Chatime. From that reason, a problem formulation than formulated to find out
how the participants give meaning to the feedback.
Finding out someone’s detailed opinion was included into qualitative
research. Then, phenomenological was chosen as the approach since it also focused on someone’s experience. To collect detailed and deep opinion, in-depth
interview was the most possible data gathering technique which then became the
main way to collect the data. Besides, observations were done before the interview to find out the suitable Englicious Chatime participants to be interviewed. Thing that was observed was the participants’ ability in using
English. The criteria were taken from Common Reference Levels: global scale in
Common European Framework of References for Language (2001). Then, three
In a phenomenological research, a researcher should do the Epoche process. Epoche is given by Husserl (1970) to name freedom from suppositions.
Epoche itself came from Greek word meaning to stay away from abstain. In this
research, the Epoche process was done in the interview. In the interview, all
participants were able to share anything without any command or request from the researcher. The researcher was only able to give questions that would stimulate the participants to share more. Schmitt (1968) states that in the Epoche,
prejudgements, biases, and preconceived ideas about things should be ignored. So, the researcher was not allowed to lead the research participants in answering the
questions.
The interview was recorded to be transcripted. The transcripted interview then being analyzed using Moustakas’ Modification of the Van Kaam Method of
33 CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter consists of two parts which are text description and
interpretation. Text description presents information and story from the participants which then become the reason of this research. Then, interpretation presents interpreted things shared by all of the participants in the observation and
in-depth interview which are called as themes.
A. Text Description
This part shows the summary of the participants‟ lived experience gained from the in-depth interviews. This part presents each participant‟s personal
information, English ability, reason or motivation of joining Englicious Chatime, preferred learning environment, and opinion about feedback in Englicious
Chatime.
1. Participant L story
The first participant was labeled as L to represent his low ability in using
English. He is a 23-year-old student in Atma Jaya Yogyakarta University, Faculty of Social and Politics, Communication Study Program. He is now in the 8th semester.
L joined Englicious Chatime once. He was classified in low level because he used simple vocabulary and often made mistakes in organizing his sentences.
opinion 95% in English. As written in Common European Framework of
References for Language‟s global scale, people in level A2 are called Basic User
for having the ability to understand sentences and frequently used expressions related to areas of most immediate relevance; the ability to communicate in simple
and routine tasks requiring a simple and direct exchange of information on familiar and routine matters; the ability to describe in simple terms aspects of his/her background, immediate environment and matters in areas of immediate
need. (p. 24)
L joined Englicious Chatime because he needs and wants to learn English.
He realizes that he is not good in speaking though he has been learning English since he was in elementary school. His friend who learns language told him that in
learning a language, practice of using the language is highly neededthat only learning the theories is not enough. L feels that he needs to improve his speaking skill, not only his reading skill which usually taught at school through theories and exercises. Then, from his friend who is involved in Englicious as the coach, L
knows that Englicious focuses on speaking practice. L says that he needs the chance to practice using English directly, so Englicious matches his need.
L knows that Englicious Chatime usually takes place in a cafe or a food court, so the atmosphere of the activity will be more relaxed and fun. For L, this kind of environment will make the learning process more enjoyable. When he is
a large amount of money. Moreover, he is not sure whether he can enjoy the learning process or not. In a formal English course, he imagines that the learning
process will be formal, tense, and bounded by walls. For that, he does not think it worth the money he paid. On the opposite, Englicious does not ask the
participants to pay except for the food they order.
For L who really wants to learn English, feedback is really precious for him. He feels so happy because he gets a lot by only spending a little money in
Englicious. He says that feedback is the important lesson in Chatime or the part
that really educates the participants. When he was given feedback, he felt happy
because he felt that someone was paying attention on him and by given feedback, he could learn from it and improve his skill.
2. Participant M story
The second participant was labeled as M to represent her middle ability in
using English. She was a 22-year-old student in Atma Jaya Yogyakarta University, Faculty of Social and Politics, Communication Study Program. She is
now in the 8th semester.
M joined Englicious Chatime twice. She was classified in middle level because in the discussion, she used varied vocabulary. When presenting her ideas
and opinion, she used correct pronunciation with only small number of mispronunciations. Moreover, she was fluent enough with good organization of
the words and correct grammar. According to Common European Framework of
which is included as Independent User. People in this level have the ability to understand the main ideas of complex text on both concrete and abstract topics,
including technical discussion in his/her field of specialization. Then, they can interact with a degree of fluency and spontaneity that makes regular interaction
with native speakers quite possible without strain for either party. They can also produce clear, detailed text on a wide range of subjects and explain a viewpoint on a topical issue giving the advantage and disadvantage of various options. (p. 24)
M joined Englicious Chatime because she wants to learn English. She was looking for an activity which can help her to improve her English and then her
friend suggested her to join Englicious Chatime. M checked Twitter to find out about Englicious and Englicious Chatime before she decided to join it. After knowing that Englicious focuses on speaking and fun learning, she feels that it
matches her need. She realizes that in daily life, the ability to speak is needed more than the ability to write. She says that she is looking for the chance to speak
and practice her English.
M says that she likes fun things and she cannot enjoy formal activities. She
feels burdened every time she joins formal activities like formal courses. The other thing that makes her prefers Englicious than formal courses is because in formal courses, she has to learn everything step by step theoretically though she
can choose the program she wants to join (basic class or conversation class or TOEFL preparation or IELTS preparation). Moreover, she has to pay a large
Englicious Chatime because she feels that everyone there welcomes her. She also
feels relaxed because she can share freely, speak and learn from others as much as
possible. The atmosphere is so enjoyable because the activity is just like having daily conversation.
For M, feedback is a kind of reminder. She already has a good basic of English, but she rarely uses and practices that. Hence, she needs someone to refresh her knowledge. She always feels happy and satisfied after given feedback
because she loves the process and feels that her mistakes are corrected. From that, she could learn from her own mistakes and it will be easier to be memorized.
Furthermore, she always takes notes when the coaches give feedback at the end of the Chatime to help her remember the feedback.
3. Participant H story
The third participant was labeled as H to represent his high ability in using English. He is a 36 year-old businessman who owns a tour and travel agent to
Singapore and Malaysia in Yogyakarta. He was graduated from Nanyang Technological University Singapore and worked there for eight years.
H joined Englicious Chatime for more than three times. He was classified as high because of his fluency and accuracy in using English. His ability in using English was high because he studied abroad where English was used almost every
time and everywhere. As written in Common European Framework of References
for Language‟s global scale, people with this ability were included into level C2
