ELESP STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION ON PEER FEEDBACK IN MICROTEACHING CLASS
A THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree
in English Language Education
By
Benidicta Meivita Sari M. Student Number: 061214084
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA
ELESP STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION ON PEER FEEDBACK IN MICROTEACHING CLASS
A THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree
in English Language Education
By
Benidicta Meivita Sari M. Student Number: 061214084
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA
I dedicate this thesis to:
*My beloved parents *My lovely sisters
*My Big family *My beloved partner *All of my great friends
DEDICATION PAGE
GOD has not promised:
Skies always blue
Sun without rain
Joy without sorrow’
Peace without pain
But GOD has promised;
Strength for the day,
Rest for the labor,
Light for the way,
Grace for trails,
Help from above,
Unfailing sympathy,
Undying Love.
ABSTRACT
Muktiningrum, Benidicta Meivita Sari. 2011. ELESP Students’ Perception on Peer Feedback in Microteaching Class. Yogyakarta: English Language Education Study Program, Sanata Dharma University.
Motivation takes an important role in learning activity. There are several kinds of motivation which are derived from the learners themselves or outside the learners as well as the environment. That is why giving motivation to the learners is very important for teachers. One of the effective instruments to motivate students to gain better achievement is feedback because it provides more detailed information than mark or grade. Microteaching is one of the subjects in English Language Education of Study Program that employs feedback in teaching learning activity, both from the lecturer and the students’ peer.
This study investigated students’ perception on peer feedback in Microteaching class. There were two research questions in this study, namely (1) What are the students’ perceptions on peer feedback in Microteaching class? and (2) What are possible suggestions toward the implementation of peer feedback in Microteaching class?
The research on the students’ perception was carried out through survey. The writer conducted the survey to Microteaching students of academic year 2009/2010 who were chosen randomly. The instruments employed in this study were questionnaire and interview. There were 60 questionnaires distributed to the participants. However, only 52 questionnaires were returned. The interviews were conducted to four interviewees.
Based on the data gained, the researcher found that the students of ELESP tend to have positive perception on peer feedback in Microteaching class, both from students as the evaluator and from the students as peer feedback receiver. Peer feedback helped the students to identify their teaching strengths and weaknesses that would help them improve their next teaching performances. However, there were also students who had negative perception on peer feedback. Some students thought that their peers were not serious when doing the peer feedback; hence they perceived that the feedback was not objective. To improve the implementation of peer feedback, the clear background knowledge about peer feedback should be delivered to students clearly. Students need to be given a brief explanation about what they should do during peer feedback.
ABSTRAK
Muktiningrum, Benidicta Meivita Sari. 2011. ELESP Students’ Perception on Peer Feedback in Microteaching Class. Yogyakarta: Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Universitas Sanata Dharma.
Motivasi memiliki peranan yang sangat penting dalam proses pembelajaran. Motivasi dapat berasal dari dalam diri pelajar maupun dari lingkungan sekitar pelajar. Oleh karena itu, memotivasi siswa merupakan hal yang sangat penting bagi guru. Umpan balik dapat digunakan sebagai salah satu instrument yang efektif untuk memotivasi siswa sehingga siswa dapat memperoleh pencapaian yang lebih baik, karena umpan balik memberikan informasi yang lebih detail dibandingkan dengan nilai. Microteaching merupakan salah satu mata kuliah di PBI (Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris) yang menggunakan umpan balik di dalam proses pembelajaran, baik umpan balik dari guru maupun siswa.
Studi ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui persepsi siswa terhadap umpan balik dari sesama siswa dalam kelas Microteaching. Ada dua pertanyaan di dalam studi ini, yaitu (1) bagaimana persepsi siswa terhadap umpan balik dari sesama siswa (peer feedback) dalam kelas Microteaching? dan (2) apa saja saran para siswa terhadap penggunaan umpan balik dari sesama siswa dalam kelas Microtaching?
Studi ini termasuk dalam studi survei mengenai persepsi. Survei ini dilaksanalan terhadap siswa Microteaching tahun ajaran 2009/2010. Partisipan dalam studi ini dipilih secara acak. Sedangkan instrumen yang digunakan dalam studi ini adalah kuesioner dan interview. Ada 60 kuesioner yang dibagikan, namun hanya 52 kuesioner yang kembali. Interview dilaksanakan terhadap 4 partisipan. Partisipan ini dipilih berdasarkan pada dosen pengampu kelas yang berbeda.
Berdasarkan pada data yang diperoleh, peneliti menemukan bahwa siswa – siswa PBI cenderung mempunyai persepsi yang positif terhadap umpan balik dari sesama siswa dalam kelas Microteaching, baik dilihat dari segi evaluator atau dari segi penerima umpan balik. Umpan balik dari sesama siswa dapat membantu para siswa dalam mengidentifikasi kekuatan dan kelemahan mereka dalam mengajar yang dapat membantu mereka untuk meningkatkan pencapaian mereka dalam praktek mengajar berikutnya. Namun demikian, ada juga siswa yang mempunyai persepsi negatif terhadap umpan balik dari sesama siswa. Untuk beberapa siswa, mereka berpendapat bahwa teman mereka tidak serius dan jujur saat memberikan umpan balik, sehingga mereka berpendapat bahwa umpan balik dari sesama siswa tidak cukup objektif. Untuk meningkatkan penerapan umpan balik dari sesama siswa, guru harus memberikan penjelasan yang jelas mengenai latar belakang pengetahuan terhadap para siswa. Siswa perlu diberi penjelasan singkat tentang apa yang harus mereka lakukan selama proses pemberian umpan balik.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all I would like to thank my Greatest God, Jesus Christ, who always guides me in every single step I have made. I also thank Mother Mary who
always listens to my lament.
My greatest gratitude goes to my sponsor, Caecilia Tutyandari, S.Pd., M.Pd. for her guidance, advice, support, suggestions, patience, and contribution so
that I could finish my thesis.
I also would like to say my biggest gratitude to PBI students academic
year 2007 for their willingness to be my participants, especially for “Wida Wichan”, Oda and Nisa who helped me distributed the questionnaire.
I dedicate this thesis to my beloved family: my parents, Bapak Ignasius
Iskandar and Ibu Christiana Mujilah who never feel tired to give love, guidance, support, and prayer to me since the beginning of my life in this world. I thank my
parents for not forcing me and trusting me in every single thing I have done. For my beloved elder sisters, Theresia Dhita Puspitaningrum and Yusta Dwi Novita Rini, who become my alert to finish this thesis as soon as possible. Thank for their
help, support and motivation given to me every day.
My special gratefulness goes to my beloved boyfriend Andreas Jeffri
Okavianto who always gives his shoulder to cry on. Thank for always listening to my lament and giving me solution in each problem I met. I would like to thank my
partners in “Seeing and enjoying the Greatness of God”. Satrio, Bang Gutur, Ade and Yuki for their willingness to be my proof reader. Nonok, Anneis, Sarce and
Sari for their suggestions and supports. Thank for Riski, Tata, Vika for being my companion during thesis consultation, and Tiwi for helping and supporting me
before and after my thesis defense.
I would like to reveal my gratitudes to the big family of Ceria Kindergarten and Playgroup: Ms. Dyah, Ms. Dewi, Ms. Komang, Ms. Oni, Ms.
Rina, Ms. Catrine, Mr. Didit, Mbak Ratmi, Mbak Mar, Mbak Tami, Mas Prono,
Pak Parno, Mas Dirman, Mas Sugi, Mbak Timtim, Ester, Josua, Rista, Citra, and
Santi for giving me chance to grow together to take care of beautiful little angels. The last but not the least, I would like to say my gratitude to everybody, whose name I cannot mention one by one, for your support, guidance, advice, and
motivation.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE... i
APPROVAL PAGES ... ii
DEDICATION PAGE... iv
STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY ... v
ABSTRACT ... vi
ABSTRAK ... vii
LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSTUJUAN PUBLISKASI KARYA ILMIAH UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS ... viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS ... xi
LIST OF TABLES ... xiv
LIST OF FIGURE ... xv
LIST OF APPENDICES ... xvi
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION A. Research Background ... 1
B. Problem Formulation ... 5
C. Problem Limitation ... 5
D. Research Objectives ... 6
E. Research Benefits ... 6
F. Definition of Terms ... 7
CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE A. Theoretical Description ... 10
1. Perception ... 10
a. Definition of Perception ... 10
b. The Perceptual Process ... 11
2. Microteaching ... 15
3. Feedback ... 20
a. The Definition of Feedback ... 20
b. The Purposes of Feedback ... 20
c. The Sources of Feedback ... 22
B. Theoretical Framework ... 23
CHAPTER III. METHODOLOGY A. Research Method... 26
B. Research Participants... 27
C. Research Instruments... 27
D. Data Gathering Technique ... 31
E. Data Analysis Technique ... 32
F. Research Procedure... 33
CHAPTER IV. RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION A. Research Findings ... 35
1. The Result from the Questionnaire ... 35
a. The Perception from the Participants as Evaluators ... 36
b. The Perception from the Participants as the Peer Feedback Receivers ... 39
2. The Result from the Interview ... 42
B. Discussion ... 44
C. Students’ Suggestions on the Use of Peer Feedback in Microteaching Class ... 53
CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS A. Conclusions... 56
B. Suggestions ... 59
LIST OF TABLES
Tables
Table 3.1. The Questionnaire Blueprint ... 29
Table 3.2. The Interview Guide ... 30 Table 3.3. The Questionnaire Result of the Participants’ Perception on Peer
Feedback... 32
Table 4.1. The Questionnaire Result of the Perception of Participants who
Gave Feedback to Their Peer... 36
Table 4.2 The Questionnaire Result of the Perception of Participants as
LIST OF FIGURE
FIGURE
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendices
Appendix 1. Permission Letter ...65
Appendix 2. Questionnaire Blueprint ...66
Appendix 3. Questionnaire ...68
Appendix 4. Raw Data of the Questionnaire ...70
Appendix 5. Interview Guide ...82
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
This chapter includes research background, problem formulation, problem
limitation, research objectives, research benefits, and definition of terms that are going to be discussed as follows.
A. Research Background
The learning process cannot be separated from human’s life. Every day,
even, in every minute people can learn something new. People can learn from small things around them. Human beings have the same chance to learn. However, there are differences between one to another in the achievement. There are several factors influencing people’s achievement in learning process; two of them are
human intelligence and motivation in learning.
Human intelligence can help people learn something new. People who have high intelligence tend to learn faster than people who have low intelligence.
However, intelligence is not enough in the learning process. According to Prayitno (1989: 3), motivation also takes a big part in teaching learning activity. People who are very smart or who have high intelligence can fail in learning
process if they do not have motivation to learn. That is why motivation takes an important role in learning process.
(1987: 48), there are two kinds of motivation namely instrumental motivation and
integrative motivation. Instrumental motivation is a motivation that comes from
external factors. Students learn something because they need to learn it, not because they want to learn it. For example, students study hard in order to pass the
examination. Integrative motivation is a motivation that comes from inside of the learners. They learn something because they really want to learn it. When students have integrative motivation, they will really enjoy doing the activity. For example,
students who really like dancing will be very pleased to join dancing exercise.
Similarly, Woolfolk (1995: 332) classifies motivation into two, namely
intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Intrinsic motivation is the motivation that
comes up from inside of the learners. This is the same as integrative motivation.
When people do something to avoid punishment or to please their parent, their motivation is called extrinsic motivation or it is the same as instrumental motivation.
Motivation that comes from outside the learners can be from the teacher, parent, friends, and so forth. At school, teacher takes important role in teaching
learning activity. One of the teacher’s roles is to motivate the students. The way teachers transfer their knowledge to the learners may affect the learners’ motivation.
Based on the researcher’s experience in learning, sometimes it is difficult to find motivation. It will be easier to study if the motivation comes from external
teacher digs out students’ potentials so that their potentials can be realized in a
form of action. In this concept, a teacher should establish students’ self
-motivation. Meanwhile, pull is a concept when a teacher motivates students so that students have willingness to learn. In this concept, the teacher needs to give
external appreciation such as giving reward, compliment or reinforcement, and assessment. Compliment or reinforcement can be given through gestures and spoken reinforcement and assessment can be done through many ways such as
test, quiz, and feedback.
This study emphasizes on feedback. Feedback is one instrument used by
teachers to motivate their students to improve their knowledge and their ability. Lewis (2003: 4), states that “feedback can encourage students to study and to use
language to the best of their ability by taking into account whatever the teacher knows about learners’ attitudes”. Feedback can be given by teachers, peers, and
from students themselves (Lewis, 2003: 15-23).
In English Language Education Study Program, feedback is commonly used. One of the subjects that use feedback is Microteaching class. In Microteaching, students are trained to be real teachers. Students are placed in a
certain situation, which is similar to a real class. In Microteaching class, students are also trained to do teachers’ work by making lesson plans, teaching, and
assessing. In conclusion, students are not only trained to teach but also to assess their peers. The concept of assessing here is that some students observe their peer
feedback. Peer feedback in Microteaching class functions as an instrument to evaluate students, an instrument to motivate students to achieve good
achievement, and function as an instrument to train students to evaluate each other. The researcher also had an experience of doing peer feedback when joining
Microteaching class. Based on the researcher’s experience and sharing with the researcher’s peers, the researcher believed that peer feedback was important
during teaching learning activities because it helped the researcher improved the
teaching performances.
In Microteaching class, there are two kinds of feedback, namely oral and
written feedback. The lecturers usually give oral feedback to students after they have practiced teaching. Moreover, written feedback can be given by the lecturers or by classmates or usually called peer feedback. As stated before, in
Microteaching class, peer feedback is given in written form. It consists of some comments from the observers about the performance of the teacher practitioner.
The comments from the observers are expected to help the practitioners (who have performed as teacher) to improve their teaching capability and to motivate them to achieve the better achievement. However, do the students also have the
same perception about it? Do they also perceive that peer feedback can help them to improve their teaching capability?
This study is going to investigate the students’ perception on peer feedback in Microteaching class. Each person may have different perception
conducted to the students who take Microteaching class in academic year 2009/2010.
B.Problem Formulation
Based on the research background, the problems were formulated as follows:
1. What are the students’ perceptions on peer feedback in Microteaching class?
2. What are the possible suggestions toward the implementation of peer feedback in Microteaching class?
C.Problem Limitation
Since motivation becomes one of the crucial factors in learning process,
the researcher is interested in finding out the way to motivate students in learning process. There are some possible ways to motivate the students in learning; one of
them is feedback.
This study is going to dig out the students’ perception on peer feedback in
Microteaching class. However, this study has some limitation. First, this study focuses on ELESP students of Sanata Dharma University, especially for those who have joined Microteaching class. Second, this study is limited to the students
who took Microteaching class in academic year 2009/2010. Third, this research focuses on written feedback that is given by students to their peers in
Microteaching class.
D.Research Objectives
This study aims at answering the research questions formulated in the
problem formulation. The objectives are as follows:
1. To know the students’ perception on the use of peer feedback in Microteaching
class.
2. To provide some possible suggestions for the improvement on the implementation of using peer feedback in Microteaching class.
E.Research Benefits
This study is conducted to find out the students’ perception on peer feedback in the Microteaching class. The result of this research is expected to give some contributions to the English Language Education of Study Program,
especially for:
1. The lecturers
The study aims at knowing students’ perception on peer feedback in the Microteaching class. The perception can be negative or positive. If the findings of the study show that the students have positive perception towards peer feedback,
the lecturers can use the result of this study as a consideration to apply peer feedback in other subjects. If the result shows negative perception, it can also
become one consideration for the lecturers to improve the implementation of peer feedback in Microteaching class. The result of the study might also help lecturers
2. The students of ELESP
The findings of this study might help the ELESP students to give feedback
to their friends, especially in Microteaching class. Some provided suggestions are related to what the students should do during peer feedback. It will help the
students to improve their capability in giving feedback in Microteaching class. Besides, it will also motivate them to achieve good achievement in Microteaching class.
3. Future researcher
The researcher admits that this study is far from perfect. That is why the
researcher would be very pleased whenever a new study related to this study is going to be conducted by others. The researcher hopes this study can inspire other researchers to conduct deeper studies related to this topic.
F. Definition of Terms
This section presents several definitions dealing with the study. It aims to avoid misconception between the researcher and the reader. The researcher defines the terms as follows.
1. Perception
According to Leontieve (1981: 31), “perception is the process whereby the external tokens of objects and phenomena are reflected in man’s consciousness”.
Another definition defined by Altman, Valensi, and Hodgetts (1985: 85),
From those definitions, it can be concluded that each person has his/her own perception toward something. In this study, perception refers to the way
students see, feel, and think about the use of peer feedback in Microteaching class. 2. Microteaching
Microteaching is one of the compulsory subjects in English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University which belongs to KPE 368. The purpose of this course is to prepare the students to be real teachers. It
provides students with atmosphere as if they are in the real teaching environment (Lesson Unit Plan of Micro teaching, 2009).
3. Feedback
According to Wiggins (1998: 46), “feedback is information about how a person did in light of what he or she attempted-intent versus effect, actual versus
ideal performance. In the more formal language of systems theory, feedback is evidence that confirms or disconfirms the correctness of actions.” Feedback is
also defined as the reaction from another person of your work in order to help you in assessing or giving comment to your work (Sherman, 1994). The feedback in this study is in the form of written feedback consisting of comments about the
performance of the practitioner in Microteaching class.
4. Peer feedback
According to Lewis (2003: 20), peer feedback is feedback that is given by students to one another. In this study, the researcher intends to investigate students’ perception on peer feedback in Microteaching class. The feedback in
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
This chapter consists of two sections. The first section is the presentation
of the theoretical description, which includes the theory of perception, Microteaching, and feedback. The second section is the presentation of the theoretical framework.
A. Theoretical Description
In this section, some theories about perception, feedback, and Microteaching are presented.
1. Perception
a. Definition of perception
Definition of perception is important to be discussed in this study since
this study deals with the students’ perception. In this section, the researcher will discuss not only about the definition of perception but also the related theory on
perception. There are so many definitions of perception. According to Gibson, Donnelly, and Ivancevich (1985: 65), perception is the process that includes cognitive domain when an individual values what he or she sees from their
surroundings. They explain that perception is formed based on some factors. Therefore, each person may have different perception because he or she has
selected and grouped stimuli, so that the stimuli can be interpreted meaningfully. Similar to the definition of Altman et al. (1985), George and Jones (2005 : 105)
define perception as the process by which individuals select, organize, and interpret the input from their senses (vision, hearing, touch, smell, and taste) to
give meaning and order to the world around them. According to George and Jones (2005: 105), there are at least three components in the process of forming perception, namely: the perceiver (the person who tries to interpret some
observation that he or she has just made or the input from his or her sense), the
target of perception (whatever the perceiver is trying to make sense of), and the
last is the situation (the context in which perception takes place).
From those definitions, it can be concluded that each person has his or her
own perception toward something because the factors that influence the perception may be different for each person. “Each person gives his or her own meaning to stimuli; different individuals will “see” the same thing in different
ways” (Gibson et al., 1985: 60). In this study, perception refers to the way the
students see, feel, and think about the use of peer feedback in Microteaching class.
b. The Perceptual Process
As stated previously, each person will see the same thing or object
differently. It depends on how they organize the stimuli they have received. There are some aspects in the process of forming a perception, namely receiving stimuli,
To create perception in our thought, it should be stimulated with stimulus. Perception occurs whenever stimuli comes and activates the sense. Then the data
should be selected to be interpreted into meaningful information. The way people interpret information depends on several factors such as the clarity and familiarity
of the stimuli, our physical characteristics, our needs and values, knowledge, feeling, and past experience (Altman, et al. 1985).
After the perception was formed, it will lead people to take response based
on their perception. For example, for a student who sees chemist as the easiest subject in his school, he will enjoy to follow the class. While for the student who
sees chemist as a difficult subject, she will hate it and have no passion to follow the class. From the example, although the stimuli is the same, the behavior
resulted from the perceptual process may be different.
In conclusion, perception will lead people to the different attitudes or responses. In this study, the researcher is eager to know students’ perception on
peer feedback in Microteaching class. If the students have positive perception toward peer feedback they will show positive attitude toward it and vice versa.
This following figure is the summary of the perceptual process.
c. Factors Influencing the Perception
There are some factors influencing people’s perception. According to
Altman, et al. (1985: 86-90), there are four important factors determining the formation of perception, those factors are:
1) Selection of Stimuli
According to Altman et al. (1985: 85) selection is the process when we focus on a particular subject from a number of subjects around us. The selection
of the stimuli is the process when we focus on a particular number of stimuli. In this process, our mind absorbs and selects stimuli, then we interpret or give
meaning to the data selected. Each person will select stimuli differently. For example, you are a teacher of 40 students and each of your students has different
style in learning. For some of your students, they can only study in a very silent condition so that they will be very frustrated when they face a noisy condition. The other, however, can still study in a noisy situation. For these students,
distractions will not bother the process of learning because they can focus only on what they learn.
This selection of stimuli is one reason why people see something differently because each person selects and filters information differently.
2) Organization of Stimuli
The second factor influencing perception is how people organize the stimuli. Some specific cues that we have received should be arranged into
3) The Situation
Another factor influencing perception is situation. The background
knowledge or past experience of someone will help people to understand the situation. If people are familiar with the information that they obtain they will
interpret and absorb easily. For example, a fresh graduate bachelor who has no experience in working world would find difficulties to adapt with new atmosphere. They often find difficulties in the work time and rules compared to
their behavior in college.
4) Self-concept
According to Altman et al. (1985: 90), self-concept is the way people know and understand about themselves. Self-concept is very important for us
because it will influence us in perceiving or doing something. However, individual self-concept changes in line with the growth of the person.
Those are four main factors influencing perception according to Altman et
al., Gibson et al. (1985: 64-67) adds three other factors influencing people perception. They are:
1) Stereotyping
Stereotyping is one of the factors that can influence perception. Altman et al, (1985: 91), state that “stereotyping is the process of categorizing people or
things based on a limited amount of information”. The limited information can be from family, society, or from books that influence people in drawing conclusion.
prestigious than working in a small town. Stereotyping is a kind of judgment and it helps the decision maker simplifies the situation.
2) Needs
Perception is also influenced by needs. It means that people will see or
understand something if they want to really see it. People must have positive perception if they need something. For example, there is a student who really wants to get a scholarship to study abroad. One of the requirements is having the
ability to speak English fluently. However, she is not into English. In order to fulfill the requirement, she has to practice her English everyday and try to like
English. 3) Emotion
Strong emotion may change perception. For example, when a student hates math, she or he will create negative perception toward math. She or he will perceive that math is difficult so that she or he is not motivated to learn it.
2. Microteaching
Microteaching is one of the compulsory subjects in the Faculty of Teacher Training and Education which belongs to KPE 368. Microteaching belongs to
MKB which stands for Matakuliah Keahlian Berkarya.. This subject is conducted
to prepare teacher candidates in order to be well prepared when they do their real teaching in school. In Microteaching, they are set in a small amount of students in
class, one student becomes the teacher practitioner while the others become the students of the teacher practitioner. Microteaching class of English Language
Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University uses feedback in the teaching learning activity in order to provide the students about their progress and
also train them to evaluate their friends.
Another definition is proposed by Allen and Ryan (1969: 1). They state that “Microteaching is a training concept that can be applied at various pre-service
and in-service stages in the professional development of teachers”. There are five essential propositions in Microteaching:
1. Microteaching is a real teaching.
In Microteaching, students experience a real teaching. It is real because
they teach some amount of the students in a situation created as a real class and they really do teacher’s works such as making lesson plans and doing evaluation.
2. Microteaching lessens the complexities of normal classroom teaching.
According to Allen and Ryan (1969), in Microteaching class students teach a small group of students (less than a normal class) in a shortened time too.
For example, they teach 15 students in 30 minutes and the material conveyed in the teaching is lessened
3. Microteaching focuses on training for accomplishment of specific tasks.
In Microteaching, students are still learning to be real teachers so that in this class they only focus on particular things. For example, in their first teaching
second teaching, they are asked to focus on their mastery of certain curricular materials.
4. Microteaching allows the increased control of practice.
It means that in Microteaching, we can manipulate or set the setting,
number of students, time, and people who are going to be involved in the observation. We can also manipulate some other factors related to Microteaching so that the situation and the atmosphere are the same as a real class. Those
manipulations could help student and supervisor to control teacher practitioner’s performance.
5. Microteaching greatly expands the normal knowledge-of-results or feedback dimension in teaching.
After practicing their teaching, the students are given a chance to make evaluation of their performances. It aims at making them recognize their strengths and weaknesses. They can make evaluation from the lecturers and peer feedback
given to them. They can also learn from their video during their teaching practice. From the evaluation, students are expected to improve their skills in their next
teaching practice.
In addition, according to Borg, Kelly, Langer, and Gall (1970: 33), there are four basic characteristics in Microteaching, namely:
In Microteaching, the students are introduced to some skills that should be mastered as a teacher. They can practice the skills through teaching practice in
Microteaching class.
2. The teacher practices the skill in a short lesson (about five to ten minutes) with
only a few pupils.
3. The lesson is recorded on a videotape and subsequently the teacher views the videotape to analyze critically how he or she applies the skill.
4. To obtain further practice and benefit from the videotape feedback, the teacher practices the same skill again with another small group of pupils. This lesson is
also videotaped and critiqued.
Based on those four basic characteristics, it can be concluded that
Microteaching is a flexible approach because it can be adjusted based on the purposes and resources of the user. Some of the variables which can be adjusted include lesson length, number of pupils, types of pupils, number of teachers, the
amount and kind of supervision and the use of videotape.
The similarity can be found from both theories above, Allen & Ryan
(1969) and Borg et al. (1970). Both theories reveal that students teach in a situation that is similar to a real class. However, the number of the students is lessened and the duration of the time is also shortened. Both theories also define
information and confirmation about students’ performance. They can improve their teaching practice through feedback. The feedback can be in the form of
teacher’s feedback (lecturer feedback), peer feedback, or self-evaluation.
McKnight (1971) as cited by Brown (1978: 14) defines Microteaching as a
subject designed to develop new skills and to develop the old ones. In Microteaching class, the teacher practitioner teaches small group of people and the other observe him. According to Allen and Ryan(1969) as cited by Brown
(1978: 15), the original Microteaching cycle was developed at Stanford in the early 1960s. It consisted of the sequences Plan – Teach – Observe – Re-plan –
Re-teach – Re-observe. In this cycle, each cycle was used to practice one component skill (set and closure, pupil reinforcement, and pupil participation.
The Microteaching in Sanata Dharma University combines the theories above. Every week, about three students are chosen to be teachers. During their performance, three observers and one lecturer will observe them. Those observers
will give written feedback to the teacher practitioner about the practitioner’s performance. The feedback is employed as an instrument of evaluation,
motivation and as an instrument to help students evaluate each other. It is an instrument of evaluation because students can see what they had done during their teaching through feedback. It can also motivate and reinforce students to teach
3. Feedback
a. The Definition of Feedback
According to Sherman (1994: 57), “feedback is a response or reaction from another person to something you do that can be used to help you assess and
improve on your performance in the future”. He says that after getting feedback, people are tending to improve their performance or their work based on the comment given. Hyland (2006) has another definition. He defines feedback as the
response given to the students based on their work. Feedback can be given in the form of oral and/or written. It can be given by peers, teachers, or computers.
b. The Purposes of Feedback
Feedback is used as an instrument in teaching learning activity. Feedback
is used for several purposes. Here are some purposes of using feedback in teaching learning activity by Lewis (2003: 3-4):
1) Feedback provides information for the teachers and students
Feedback can provide information both for the teachers and students. For the teachers, feedback provides information about the learners’ progress in
teaching learning activity. For example, the teachers may observe the students’ progress in their speaking fluency. The next, feedback also provides information about their teaching. It helps them evaluate their own teaching; what went well
and what went wrong.
For learners, feedback can be seen as a form of assessments. Yet, it is
their improvements they did during the learning process. Through feedback, students may know their strengths and weaknesses that they cannot obtain from
grades or marks during teaching learning activity.
2) Feedback provides the students with advice about learning
In the learning process, the learners need to be given feedback to measure their achievement during the teaching learning activity. Through feedback, the learners get advice from their teacher and/or their peers. The advice they obtain
can be used to evaluate and improve their skills.
3) Feedback provides the students with language input
The feedback from teacher, whether it is written or spoken, provides meaningful and individual language input. The students can learn structure or
vocabulary in context. Through feedback, they can learn what vocabularies that are usually used. That is why it is very crucial for teachers to give feedback with language at a level slightly higher than the students’ ability.
4) Feedback is a form of motivation
Each student in a classroom needs motivation to learn. Sometimes grades
or marks make them down because they will make comparison with their friends and find who better than the other is. In this case, feedback can be the solution. Feedback can be more motivating than marks or grades. Through feedback, the
teacher can give motivational feedback or comments for their students. Lecturers or teachers may also give the students solution from the problem occurred during
5) Feedback can lead students toward autonomy
When students are accustomed to using of feedback, they will be more
critical. They are led toward autonomy. If they are accustomed to using feedback, they can evaluate their performance by their own and they can also find their
strengths and weaknesses.
In addition, according to Anderson as cited by Hyland in his book
Feedback in Second Language Writing (2006: 1), feedback is widely seen in
education as crucial for both encouraging and consolidating learning.
c. The Sources of Feedback
In teaching learning activity, not only teacher who has the chance to give feedback to students but also the students can also take part in giving feedback in
teaching learning activity. There are three sources of feedback according to Lewis (2003: 15-23). They are:
1) Teacher feedback
This kind of feedback is given by teacher to students. Teachers can give feedback in oral or written forms. Some expert said that teacher feedback is
considered as the most effective feedback compared to the others. 2) Peer feedback
Peer feedback is the idea of students giving feedback to one another. Peer
feedback is good to implement in class for some reasons, such as:
a. Proofreading other people’s work prepares students for proofreading their own
work.
c. It will be boring if the students always receive feedback from their teacher every day.
3) Self-correction
The students themselves make this kind of feedback. They can correct
their own works. It has some advantages:
a. It reduces students’ dependency on the teacher.
b. Students remember better if they have discovered their own mistakes.
c. It saves time in large classes.
The focus of this study is on the use of peer feedback in Microteaching
class. This study is going to investigate the students’ perception on the use of peer feedback in Microteaching class. Peer feedback, so far, is used to evaluate,
reinforce students and give suggestions for students during their teaching practice.
B. Theoretical Framework
In learning process, motivation takes a very important role. That is why the way to motivate students becomes one of the most crucial things for teachers. This
is supported by Woolfolk (1995: 329). He says that “most educators agree that motivating students toward appropriate goals is one of the crucial tasks of teaching”. There are some ways that can motivate learners to learn. One of them is
through feedback.
In Microteaching class, feedback takes an important role. Feedback is one
students’ work has more effect on students’ achievement than any other
instruments. Learners will be able to recognize their ability through feedback they
have obtained. They can receive feedback from their teacher, their partner, or even from their reflection.
This study focused on investigating students’ perception on peer feedback in Microteaching class. Microteaching is one compulsory subject in Faculty of Teachers Training and Education. In Microteaching class, students are trained to
be real teachers. The class is set as the real class. Students are asked to practice their ability in teaching. Moreover, they also learn how to assess and evaluate
their friends. Those can be done through giving comment and score to their friends. Those activities are considered as giving peer feedback.
To answer the questions in this study, the researcher divided the perception into perception from the participants as evaluators and the perception from the participants as peer feedback receivers. The researcher emphasized on the theory
of perception by Altman et al. (1985) and Gibson et al. (1985) which state that perception affects people’s attitude or behavior. Altman et al (1985) state that
perception is influenced by some factors, namely: 1) selection of the stimuli, 2) organization of stimuli, 3) the situation and 4) self-concept. Furthermore, Gibson et al. (1985) adds more factors, namely: 1) stereotyping 2) needs and 3) emotion.
The researcher also used the theory by Lewis about the purpose of feedback (2003), which are 1) Feedback provides information for teachers and students. 2)
can lead students towards autonomy, to answer the questions. Those theories were used to help the researcher answering the research problems.
It is important to know the students’ perception toward peer feedback in
Microteaching class because perception will affect the way they think about the
subject. If they have positive perception toward peer feedback, they will use it appropriately to improve their skills. However, if they have negative perception, they will not use peer feedback as an instrument to foster their teaching skills.
Black and William as cited by Harmer (2007: 137) believe that peer feedback has an extremely positive effect on students’ achievement. It helps students to monitor
each other and as a result, it helps students to become better at self-monitoring. This research was going to investigate how the students of Microteaching class
CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY
This chapter presents detailed information about the research methodology
to answer the problems in this research. The discussion involves the research method, research participants, research instruments, data gathering technique, data analysis technique, and research procedures.
A.Research Method
This study was categorized as descriptive research. This study belongs to descriptive research because this study was going to observe the students’
perception on peer feedback in Microteaching class. Ary, Jacobs , and Razavieh
(1990: 380) state:
“Descriptive research studies are designed to obtain information concerning the current status of phenomenon. They are directed toward determining the nature of a situation as it exists at the time of the study. As with casual-comparative research, there is no administration or control of a treatment as is found in experimental research…The aim is to describe “what exists” with respect to variables or conditions in a situation.
To answer both research questions, the researcher would conduct survey. Ary et al. (2002: 374) state that, “survey is a research technique in which data are gathered by asking questions of a group of individuals called respondents.” There
are two instruments that are usually employed in a survey research, namely questionnaire and interview. This study used both questionnaires and interview as the instruments. This study was going to find out students’ perception on peer
B.Research Participants
This study was conducted in English Language Education Study Program
in Sanata Dharma University. The researcher chose the students who took Microteaching class in academic year 2009/2010 as the participants. The
researcher took the participant from that academic year because the study was conducted at the same time with the academic year. There were 60 questionnaires distributed. There were 52 participants filled in and returned the questionnaires.
The Participants of this research were chosen randomly from seven Microteaching classes. For the interview, there were 4 participants who were chosen randomly
with different lecturers. Those four participants with different lecturers were expected to represent the perception of the whole class. It was expected that the participants would share their experience in giving and receiving peer feedback to
the researcher.
C. Research Instruments
In order to gather the data, the researcher used questionnaires and interview as the instruments. The instruments were used to gather the data from
the participants as the evaluators and the participants as peer feedback receivers. The first instrument was questionnaire. According to Ary et al. (2002: 566),
questionnaire is an instrument in which participants give written answers or responses. The questionnaire was used to answer both of the research questions.
answers so that participants only need to choose their answer from the answers provided. Meanwhile open-ended questions are questions that do not provide
fixed response so that participants can answer the questions freely (Ary et al. 2002). The closed-ended questions were aimed at investigating participants’
perception on peer feedback in Microteaching class, while open-ended questions were aimed at knowing both participants’ perceptions and participants’ suggestions on peer feedback in Microteaching class. This study employed Rating
Scale in closed-ended questions. Cohen explains in his book Research Method in
Education (fifth ed. 2000) that we can see degrees of response, intensity of
response, and the move away from dichotomous questions has been managed in
Rating Scales.
In this study, the researcher used Likert scale in the questionnaire. Likert
scale belongs to rating scale. Ary et al., (2002: 562) state that “Likert scale is a measurement scale consisting of a series of statements followed by response
categories, typically ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree”. There were four choices of response to the statement on the questionnaire used in this research. There were SD (Strongly Disagree), D (disagree), SA (Strongly Agree),
and A (Agree). There were 18 closed-ended questions and three open–ended questions in the questionnaire.
The purpose of the questions in the questionnaire was aimed at knowing the participants’ perception both from the participants as the evaluators and from
number 2, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17 were statements that were used to know participants’ perception as peer feedback receivers. The table below
is the blueprint of the questionnaire. The researcher made the blueprint mainly based on the theory of purposes of feedback by Lewis (2003) and the theory of
perception by Altman et al. (1985) and Gibson et al. (1985). The following are the questionnaire blueprint. Statement number 1 up to 11 are related to the theory by Altman et al. (1985) and Gibson et al. (1985) and the statement number 12 – 18
are related to the theory by Lewis (2003).
Table 3.1 1 You had experienced of giving feedback to your peer.
3 You gave feedback to your peer seriously. 4 You gave feedback to your peer honestly. 5 You gave feedback to your peer objectively.
6 Time to do peer feedback in Microteaching class was sufficient for you.
18 You could be more critical to your peer performance by doing peer feedback.
NO Questions Items
Number QUESTIONS FOR PARTICIPANTS AS PEER FEEDBACK
RECEIVERS
12 2 You had experienced of obtaining feedback from your peer.
7 You read the feedback after you got it from your peer. 8 You felt that the feedback given to you was mere criticism. 9 You felt that the feedback given to you was objective. 10 You keep the feedback.
11 You were satisfied with your friends’ feedback. 12 The feedback is very useful for you.
13 You were motivated to teach better after you read the feedback.
NO Questions Items Number QUESTIONS FOR PARTICIPANTS AS PEER FEEDBACK
RECEIVERS
15 The use of peer feedback helped you improve your teaching skills.
16 You were able to identify your teaching strength after reading the feedback given to you.
17 You were able to identify your teaching weaknesses after reading the feedback given to you.
The second instrument was interview. Interview is an instrument to collect the data through direct verbal interaction between individuals (Borg and Gall.
1983). Interview was used to make clarification about students’ answer in questionnaire. The following was the interview guide.
Table 3.2 The Interview Guide
No Questions
Dari segi pemberi feedback (Perception from the participants as peer feedback receivers)
1. Menurutmu waktu untuk melakukan peer feedback cukup atau tidak? Apa
alasanmu? (What do you think about the time provided to do peer
feedback in Microteaching class? Is it sufficient? What is your reason?) 2. Dari segi si pemberi feedback, apakah kamu serius, jujur, dan objektif saat
memberi komentar/ feedback terhadap teman anda? Apa yang mendasari kamu melakukan itu? (From the evaluator side, Did you give comments to
your peer seriously, honestly, and objectively? What is your reason doing that?)
3. Apakah dengan melakukan peer feedback membantu kamu mempersiapkan
diri menjadi guru yang sebenarnya? Dalam hal apa? (Do you think by
doing peer feedback helps you preparing yourself to be a real teacher? In what aspect?)
4. Menurutmu, keuntungan apa saja yang kamu peroleh dengan melakukan
peer feedback?(What advantages did you obtain from peer feedback?)
5. Kesulitan apa saja yang kamu temukan selama melakukan peer feedback?
No Questions
Dari Segi penerima feedback (From the peer feedback receiver) 6.
Menurutmu mana yang lebih membantu kamu, peer feedback atau teacher feedback, dalam meningkatkan kemampuan anda dalam mengajar? Apa alasannya? (Which one is more helpful, peer feedback or lecturer feedback
in increasing your ability in teaching? What is your reason?)
7. Berguna atau tidak bergunakah penggunaan / penerapan peer feedback
bagi anda khususnya di kelas Microteaching? Apa alasan anda? (What do
you think about the use of peer feedback in Microteaching class? Is it beneficial or not? What is your reason?)
8. Keuntungan apa saja yang kamu peroleh melalui peer feedback? (What
were the advantages that you obtained through peer feedback (as a person who received peer feedback) ?)
9. Apakah kamu merasakan ada peningkatan dalam mengajar setelah
menerima feedback dari teman – teman? Dalam hal apa? (Is there any
improvement after receiving peer feedback? In what aspect?) Suggestions
10. Apa usulmu terhadap penerapan peer feedback di PBI? (What is/are your suggestion/s toward the implementation of peer feedback?)
a. Usul untuk siswa (For the students) b. Usul untuk dosen (For the lecturers)
c. Usul tentanng prosedur penggunaan / penerapan peer feedback
di PBI pada umumnya dan di microteaching pada khususnya
(For the implementation of peer feedback)
D.Data Gathering Technique
The data in this study was gathered through questionnaire and interview.
As stated previously, questionnaire is one of the basic instruments in survey research (Ary et al. 2002: 381). The questionnaire was distributed to those who
had taken Microteaching class. Students who had taken Microteaching class were expected to have experience of giving and receiving feedback.
The questionnaire was distributed on July 14th, 2010. There were 60 questionnaires distributed to 60 participants that were chosen randomly. However, the researcher only received 52 questionnaires and there were 8 participants who
the researcher gave a brief explanation about the questionnaires. After analyzing the data gathered from questionnaire, the researcher conducted interview to four
participants in order to clarify the data from the questionnaires. The interview conducted to 4 interviewees. They were chosen randomly but with different
lecturers. During the interview, the researcher recorded the process of the interview with cell phone in order not to lose any single information from the interviewee.
E.Data Analysis Technique
The first step in analyzing the data gathered was analyzing the questionnaire in order to know participants’ perception on peer feedback in Microteaching class. The questionnaire consisted of open-ended and closed-ended
questions. The data gathered from closed-ended questions were presented in the form of table. There were four choices of response to the statement on the
questionnaire; there were SD (Strongly Disagree), D (disagree), SA (Strongly Agree), and A (Agree). The table was the summary of participants’ answers. After that, the writer calculated the percentage of each response.
Table 3.3.
The Questionnaire Result of the Participants’ Perception on Peer Feedback
No of statements
Frequency Percentage (%)
SD D SA A SD D SA A
1.
The percentage would describe participants’ perception on peer feedback. The formula used to calculate the data into percentage was as follows.
∑X
____ X 100% ∑n
In which:
∑X = The number of participants based on the degree of agreement. ∑n = The number of all participants
The next step was analyzing the open-ended questions in the
questionnaire. The researcher would summarize the answers and draw conclusion of the open-ended questions. Then, the researcher would transcribe the result of the interview. After that, the researcher would also summarize the data gathered
from the interview. The open-ended questions and interview were aimed at finding out the participants’ perception and some suggestions toward the
implementation of peer feedback in Microteaching class.
F. Research Procedure
There were some steps taken by the researcher in conducting the study. The first step was preparation. In preparation step, the researcher determined the
topic, the goals, the general purposes of the research, and gathered review of the related literature or library study. Library study was aimed at gathering all
information related to peer feedback, perception, and Microteaching. The sources would be from books and articles. The researcher would use the information that had been gathered to arrange questionnaire. After the questionnaire was done, the
researcher would distribute the questionnaire to the chosen participants. The questionnaire would be distributed to students who took Microteaching class in
academic year 2009 / 2010. The participants were chosen randomly.
After the participants returned the questionnaire, the researcher would
analyze it. There were two kinds of data from the questionnaire. The first was from closed-ended questions and the second was from open-ended questions. The data from closed-ended questions would be presented in the form of percentage.
The data from open-ended questions would be summarized by the researcher. The next step, the researcher would conduct interview to 4 participants to
make clarification of the data from the questionnaires which were unclear.
The last step was presenting the data gathered. The data presented was expected to have contribution to English Language Education Study program of
35
CHAPTER IV
RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter consists of two parts. They are the research findings and
discussion. The research findings present the data obtained from the questionnaire and interview. It describes the participants’ perception on peer feedback in Microteaching class. The discussion presents the answers to the two research
questions.
A. Research Findings
To answer the research questions, the researcher used questionnaire and interview to gain the data. The researcher distributed questionnaire to 60
participants. However, only 52 questionnaires were returned. The interview was conducted to 4 participants which were chosen randomly. In this research, the
researcher divided the perception into two parts. The first is the perception from the participants as the evaluators (a person who gives comments/ feedback to their peers), and the second is the perception from the participants as the peer feedback
receivers. The followings are data presentations from the questionnaires and interviews.
1. The Result from the Questionnaire
In this research, the researcher divided the questions into closed-ended
open-ended questions. The open-ended questions were aimed at digging out more about the participants’ perception and participants’ suggestions on the peer feedback in Microteaching class.
a. The Perception from the Participants as the Evaluators
To find out the participants’ perception on peer feedback especially from the participants as evaluators, the researcher provided six statements. Those were
statement number 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 18. The table below shows the distribution of those six statements and the results.
Table 4.1.
The Questionnaire Result of the Perception of Participants Who Gave Feedback to Their Peer
No Statements Frequency Percentage (%)
Based on the previous data presentation, it can be seen that most of the participants (as evaluators) had positive perception toward the use of peer feedback in Microteaching class. Most of the participants had experienced of
giving feedback to their peer during Microteaching class. There were 98.09 % participants who had experienced of giving feedback to their peer. Their experience of giving feedback during the Microteaching class affected their
behavior. They had already known how to give feedback to their peer in Microteaching class so that they realized that feedback was important during the
teaching learning activity. They showed their respect to their peer through their behavior in the way they gave feedback. Most of the participants were serious when they did peer feedback. It is shown in the percentage, there were 94.23 % of
the participants who said that they were serious in giving feedback to their peer. Being serious means that the students did peer feedback because they thought that
it was important for them to do the activity not merely to accomplish the task from the lecturer. Most of the participants admitted that they were honest (94.23%) and objective (94.23%) when they did peer feedback, they gave
comments from what they really saw and heard and they tried to give comment as honestly as possible. They gave comments objectively not subjectively for the
sake of their peers’ improvement.
The positive perception is also shown through the participants’ statement
was sufficient. Doing peer feedback also brought positive impact for the students. They became more critical toward their peer performances (94.2%).Being critical means that students could see something from different point of view, negative
sides and positive sides. If the students were accustomed to using of peer feedback, they would also be accustomed to finding their peer strengths and weaknesses to comment on.
Having finished the study, the researcher also found some participants had negative perception toward peer feedback in the Microteaching class. There was
one participant (1.91%) who had no experience in giving peer feedback in Microteaching class. This participant might be absent when she or he got the turn to do peer feedback so that she or he had no experience of giving peer feedback to
his/her peer. There were 5.77% of the participants who were not serious when they gave comments or feedback to their peer. Some of the participants were also
not honest to their peer when they gave feedback. There were 5.77% of the participants who admitted it. There were also 5.77% participants who admitted that they were not objective when they gave feedback to their peer. The negative
perception was also showed in the participants’ statement about time. There were 30.77% of the participants who said that the time given to do peer feedback was
not sufficient for them. For those who had negative perception toward peer feedback, they thought that they could not be more critical toward their peer
b. The Perception from the Participants as the Peer Feedback Receivers To answer the research questions, the researcher also arranged some statements to dig out the perception from the participants as peer feedback
receivers. The researcher provided 12 statements to obtain the information. Those were statements number 2 and statements number 7-17. The following is data presentation of the perception of participants who received feedback from their
peer in the form of table.
Table 4.2.
The Questionnaire Result of the Perception of Participants as Peer Feedback Receivers
No Statements Frequency Percentage (%)
SD D A SA SD D A SA
8. Participant felt that the feedback given to his/her was mere criticism.
1 17 31 3 1.91 % 32.7% 59.62% 5.77%
No Statements Frequency Percentage (%)
16. Participant was able to identify his/her teaching strength after reading the feedback given to his/her.
0 3 33 16 0 % 5.77% 63.46% 30.77%
17. Participant was able to identify his/her feedback receivers) that the participants also had positive perception. Most of the
participants have experienced on receiving feedback from their peer (98.09%). After they received the feedback, they also read the feedback carefully (96.15%) and kept the feedback after they read it (86.6%). For those who saw feedback as
