CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS
B. Suggestions
1. Considering that socio eotional approach and students’ ability in
44
speaking, so, teachers should develop certain approach that teachers should develop specific approach that make the learning process as much fun, caring as they do their socio emotional between the teachers and the students, as well as when they can learn English.
2. The teacher should apply Socio Emotional Approach in the classroom in order that the students can be motivated and encourage joining in the class activities. It is suggest the English teacher to apply this approach for teaching as one of the alternative ways in learning and teaching English speacially in speaking. The teacher have to be creative to apply various technique, caring with their students in order that the students will never bored, but they will be more interesting in learning English.
3. For the students, they should be highly motivated to practice their English languange and use them in activities. they should realize that there are so many ways to make a good relation between the teachers and the students.
By socio emotional approach, we can learn to speak English enjoy and fun. We can learn how to make a good socio emotional with the teacher.
The population of this research was the second grade students of SMA Negeri 1 Sungguminasa in 2015/2016 academic year. The total number of the population were 137 students. The resercher chose the students of senior high school as the subject of the research because the objects had been able to control their emotions.
27 2. Sample
In this study the sample that would be taken was one class. The class chosen was XI Bahasa 1 of SMAN 1 Sungguminasa in 2015/2016 academic year. The sample were 45 students out of the population. The sample of this research would be selected by Simple Random Sampling. The resercher used simple random sampling to give every member of the population an equal chance of being selected in the study.
C. Techniques of Collecting the Data
In this research there were three main instruments which were used to collect data they were speaking test, observation and questionnaires. The functions of each research instrument were: 1) Speaking test was used to measure the students ability in speaking, 2) questionnaire, it play an important role to collect data. This was used to find the students’ opinion about socio emotional approach.
The Instruments of Collecting the Data:
a. Speaking Test
According to Kuntjojo, test was the technique of data collection that was done by provides a series of questions or tasks as well as other tools to the subject the required data.
It was finding the students speaking ability. It was used to measure the students ability in speaking. The researcher gave speaking test to the students in order to know their improvement. The type of speaking test which was used in this researcher was dialogue form and daily activity.
speech test to know the students’ speaking skill. The resercher was given theme for the dialog about family and the students made the dialog based on the theme.
The researcher also was given speech test about daily activity.
b. Questionnaire
Questionnaire was used to get the data of the students’ opinion about socio emotional approach. A questionnaire was a trial to collect information using some written-questions that must be answered in written form.
The writer would use a close direct questionnaire, a closed direct questionnaire was a questionnaire consisting of questions that must be answered by the respondents and there were several answers that had been provided so that a respondent only chose the most appropriate answer to collect the data of socio emotional approach.
To score the students’ speaking skill, the writer used 5 classifications as follows;
In order to conduct a good arrangement, the resercher uses a statistic formula.
The data from instruments were analyzed by using these formulas as follows;
Classifying the students’ score into five classifications:
Classifying the students’ score
(Depdiknas, 2005: 214) This formula was used to find the correlation between socio-emotional approach and students’ ability in speaking. Product Moment and Linear regression formula to analyze the data. Product moment was used to describe the strength of the relationship between the variables, while Linear Regression was used to describe the strength of the relationship between several independent variables and one dependent variable (Sujarweni, 2012: 176).
Product Moment Formula as follows:
n X2N XYX 2
n
XYY2
Y 2
r
Where:
r = Item validity coefficient sought.
X= Scores obtained by subjects in each item.
Score Classification
91-100 Excellent
75-90 Good
61-74 Fair
51-60 Less
X<51 Poor
31 Y = The total score obtained by subjects in all items.
X= The number of scores in the distribution of X.
Y= The number of scores in the distribution of Y
X2= Squares amount of each score X.
Y2= Total Score Y respectively Squares.
N = the number of respondents
(Sujarweni, 2012: 177).
Value of r could be used to show coefficient correlation between the variables as shown below;
1. Positive Correlations: Both variables improve or decrease at the same time. A correlation coefficient close to +1.00 indicates a strong positive correlation.
2. Negative Correlations: Indicates that as the amount of one variable improves the other decreases. A correlation coefficient close to -1.00 indicates a strong negative correlation.
3. No Correlation: Indicates no relationship between the two variables. A correlation coefficient of 0 indicates no correlation
Correlation characteristics would determine the direction of the correlation, the closeness of the correlation could be grouped as follows;
Interpretation value of r
Besarnya nilai r Interpretasi
> 0.800 - 1.00
> 0.600 - 0.800
> 0.400 - 0.600
> 0.200 - 0.400 0.000 - 0.200
Very Strong Correlation Strong Correlation Moderately Correlation
Weak Correlation Very Weak Correlation
(No Correlation)
(Sujarweni, 2012: 61)
1. The students ability in speaking
The data were obtained by giving speaking test on students. After analyzing the data, below was the result of data analyzing. The data were served table which consist of some forms of analysis namely classification, score, frequency and percentage.
Table 4.1
Data of students’ ability in speaking
No. Classification Data Analysis
F %
1 Excellent (91-100) 3 6,67%
2 Good (75-90) 13 28,89%
3 Fair (61-74) 24 53,33%
4 Less (51-60) 5 11,11%
5 Poor (X<51) 0 0%
Total 45 100%
Based on Table 4.1 percentage of the data showed that out 45 students, none of them got poor. There were 5 students (11,11%) got less score, 24 of them (53,33%) got fair score and 13 of them (28,89%) got good score and only 3 of them (6,67%) got excellent. So the result could be shown that students in SMA Negeri 1 Sungguminasa were fair categorized.
To see clearly the students’ score percentage of students’ ability in speaking score, the graphic would be shown the result:
Graphic 4.1
The Frequency of the Distribution of Students’ Ability in Speaking
Graphic 4.1 indicated the score percentage of students’ ability in speaking were fair. It was showed by the graphic that there were 24 (53,33%) students from 45 students got fair score, 13 students (28,89%) got good score and 3 students (6,67%) got excellent score.
2. Socio Emotional Approach
The data of socio emotional approach were obtained from questionnaire. The number of respondent was 45 and the number of questions was 20 that would be answed to each respondents. The data were served table
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Excellent Good Fair Less Poor
Frequency (F) Percentage (%)
0%
11,11% 0 53,33%
28,89 6,67%
5 24
13
3
35
which consist of some forms of analysis namely classification, score, frequency and percentage.
Table 4.2
The Data of the Socio Emotional Approach
No. Classification Data Analysis
F %
1 Excellent (91-100) 1 2,22%
2 Good (75-90) 9 20%
3 Fair (61-74) 26 57,78%
4 Less (51-60) 6 13,33%
5 Poor (X<51) 3 6,67%
Total 45 100%
Based on Table 4.2 percentage of the data showed that 45 students, majority got fair categorized where 26 students (57,78%) got >61-74. There were 6 students (13,33%) got less score, 3 of them (6,67%) got poor score .while for good score, there 9 students (20%) got good score and 1 students (2,22%) got excellent. So the result shown that students in SMA Negeri 1 Sungguminasa in socio emotional approach were fair categorized.
The graphic would be shown the result for making clearly about socio emotional approach score percentage.
Graphic 4.2
The Frequency of the Distribution of Socio Emotional Approach
As shown in the graphic 4.2 the score percentages of socio emotional approach were fair. It was showed by the graphic that a half of students (57.78%) from 45 students got fair score, 6 students (13,33%) got less score, 3 students (6,67%) got poor score, 9 students (20%) and 1 student (2,22%) got excellent.
3. Correlation between Socio Emotional Approach and Students Ability in Speaking
After collecting the data, the next step was to analyse them to know whether there was a correlation or not, between socio emotional approach and students ability in speaking. The research findings correlation between Socio- Emotional approach and students’ speaking ability. To obtain data on the correlation between socio-emotional approach and students’ speaking ability at the second students academic year 2015/2016 can be obtained from the
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Excellent Good Fair Less Poor
Series 1 Series 2
1 6,67%
3 13,33%
6 57,78%
26
20%
9
2,22%
37
results of observations, questionnaires and speaking tests which have been given to students as respondents who were 45 students.
Questionnaires were distributed to 45 students of class XI Bahasa I, while the questionnaire approach to socio-emotional in the subjects of literature English consists of 20 questions in the form of questions, from each of the questions in the questionnaire was followed by 5 (five) alternative answers that consecutively very Satisfied (VS), Satisfied (S), Self-Satisfied (SS), Less Satisfied (LS) and Not Satisfied (NS) with consecutive scores 5,4,3,2 and 1.
While the value obtained from the students' speaking ability the value of the speaking test instrument. To get the data, researcher used a questionnaire with 20 items about distributed to 45 sample respondents of 137 students.
Based on research that has been done at SMA Negeri 1 Sungguminasa obtained from the student's learning on the material English learning, as follows:
Criteria Socio
Emotional Approach
Students’
Speaking Ability
The number of samples 45 45
Standard minimum completeness 65 65
The highest score 95 95
The lowest value 48 60
Average value 68,20 71,78
The number of students who completed
29 40
The hypothesis test used correlation product moment value. The
hypothesis was a temporary answer to the problems of the research until it was proven through the data collected. It can be concluded that the hypothesis was provisional or temporary answer allegations that must be verified.
The hypothesis that the authors propose in this paper: 1. (H1): There is correlation between socio emotional approach and students’ ability in speaking. 2. (Ho): There is no correlation between socioemotional approach and students' ability in speaking.
To find a correlation above, then assisted with the table of correlation coefficient between variables X and Y, as follows:
From the table above, it can be seen : N ∑ XY = 10051650
∑ X ∑ Y = 9912870
n∑ X2 = 9623025 (∑ X)2 = 9418761 n∑ Y2 = 10622250 (∑ 𝑌)2 = 10432900
Correlations between predictors X with Y can be searched through correlation product moment techniques of Pearson, with the formula:
n X2N XYX 2
n
XYY2
Y 2
r
39
With the result :
9623025 941876110051650
106222509912870
10432900
r
204264
189350
138780
r
0 3867738840
138780
r
705664569 ,
0 r
r = 0,706
So the count value r = 0.706, while rtable with a significance level of 5%
db = N-2 = 43, because the table was not found number 43, the authors took the nearest whole number of 43 was 45, and obtained rtabel at 0.288.
6 students (13,33,%) got less score, 3 of them (6,67%) got poor score .while for good score, there 9 students (20%) got good score and one students got excellent.
So the result showed that students in SMA Negeri 1 Sungguminasa in socio emotional approach were fair categorized.
In other words, socio emotional approach gave contribution to speaking skill. Then, it also meant that the improvement of students’ speaking skill would be followed by the improvement of approach in the classroom. Djamarah and Zain (2003 : 203 ) says that, Socio-Emotional approach is a social atmosphere and the feeling (social–emotional approach) in the classroom as a group of individuals tend to view Clinical Psychology and counseling (counseling), so that the process of teaching learning become more effective. Moreover, with the influence of socio emotional approach on emotional development, the teaching process would be even more effective because if the emotional development of a person was good, then they would be able to perform the analysis process, to understand and memorize because the students’ can made a good relation wuth their teacher, which were the parts of the socio emotional approach was caring process.
This indicated that the students’ ability in speaking still fair category on teaching learning proccess, it was showed from the results of the data where 53.33% of students get fair scores on collecting data which it also indicated that almost all of students was need some approach to improving their speaking skill and more than 57,78% of students could obtain fair category in socio emotional approach. This was consistent as stated by Roger said that, some of the attitudes
41
that need to be held by teachers to help students learn is. It was important approach for a learner to made a good relation between the teachers and the students.
The result of foundings about correlation between socio emotional approach and students’ ability in speaking at class XI Bahasa I of SMA Negeri 1 Sungguminasa compare prices count with r-r- table. From the testing of the data between socio emotional approach and students’ ability in speaking, it was found that the data saying that there was a positive, significant correlation between socio emotional approach and students’ ability in speaking, because If rhitung> rtable then H1 was accepted (significant) and vice versa if rhitung <rtable then Ho was rejected (non-significant). With the 5% significance level of 0.288 was obtained rtable rhitung
at 0.706. When compared both rhitung = 0.706> rtable = 0.288 so that H1 accepted and Ho rejected or the correlation between socio emotional approach and students’ ability in speaking was 0.706. This meant that correlation between them was strong correlation.
This found had related with the other research. The first review related to this research entitled, “Infusing Social Emotional Learning Into teachers Education Curriculum”. Which Baddiyah Wajid the student of Virginia State University, USA has researched in this thesis, she has found there are correlation between Socio-Emotional and academic learning. The second is done by Marilyn Lindsay entitled, “Integrating Social Emotional Learning into Secondary Curriculum”. She was the study of Dominican University of California. The research was clear that property designed and implemented SEL (Social-
Emotional Learning) programs not only improve the intropersonal and interpersonal skills of participants.
Based on the research above, socio emotional approach had effect for teaching learning proccess specially in speaking English. Ornstein and Levin identify the characteristics of effective teachers in classroom management, which include: encouraging and maintaining interest of impact student learning objectives, while retaining the activity of students in the learning process using teaching skills.
45
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Arikunto, Suharsimi. (2002). Prosedur Penelitian: Suatu Pendekatan Praktek.
Jakarta: PT. Rineka Cipta.
Arikunto, Suharsimi. (2005). Metode Penelitian Pendidikan: Pendekatan Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R&D. Bandung: Alfabeta.
Badiyyah Waajid, dkk. 2013. Infusin Social Emotional Learning Into The Teacher Education Curriculum. Journal. Vol. 5. Number. 2. November 2013. The Internasional Journal Of Emotional Education.
Badiyyah Waajida, dkk. 2013. Infusing Social Emotional Learning into the Teacher Education Curriculum. Volume 5, Number 2, November 2013 pp 31-48.
Virginia State University, USA.
Badulu’ Abdul Muis.2001. Introduction to linguistics. Makassar. State University of Makassar.
Brown, Gillian & Yule, George. (1989): Teaching the Spoken Language: Approach Based on the Analysis of Conversational English. Australia: Cambridge University Press.
Brown,H.Douglas.1994. Teaching by principle(An Alternative Approach to Language Pedagogy). New Jersey.Prentice.
Harmer,Jeremy.1991. The Practice of English Language Teaching. London and New York.Longman Group.
Hornby As, 1984 Oxford Advanced Learners. Dictionary of Current English .London:
Oxford University Press.
Joseph E. Zins. 2010. Social and Emotional Learning. University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH.
Klingner, K. Janette. 2007. Teaching Reading Comprehension to Students with Learning Difficulties. New York: United Stated of America.
Krashen,1960. The Natural Approach:Language acquisition in the classroom.
Oxford: Perdamon.
Larsen, Drane. 2002. Technique & Principles in Language Teaching. Second Edition.
New York: University Press.
Manser.Martin.H.1982.Teaching and Learning Languages New York: Cambrigde University Press.
Marcel.1978. English Speaking Elements. New York: Cambrigde University Press.
Marilyn Lindsay. 2013. Integrating Social Emotional Learning Into Secondary Curriculum. Thesis. Dominican University Of California.
Mclaughlin, Barry. 1997. Theories of Second Language Learning (Second Language Acquisition). Australia: Edward Arnod Press.
Nunan, David,1991. Language Teaching Methodology A Text Book for Teacher Prentice Hall: International Ltd.
Nurbaya Ihasan. 2011. Improving the student’s speaking ability through series picture technique at the second year student of smp negeri 2 anggeraja kec.
Malua. Thesis. Muhammadiyh University of Makassar.
Rahmawati. 2012. The Influence Of Students’ Educational Background Toward Their Ability In Speaking. Thesis. English department State islamic studies institute (stain) salatiga.
Richard,Jack C and Rodgers, Theodores.1986. Aproachest and Methods in Language.
New York: Cambridge University
Sujarweni, V.Wiratna and Poly Endrayanto. 2012. Statistika untuk Penenlitian.
Yogyakarta: Graha Ilmu.
Ur, Penny.1966.A course in Language Teaching. Cambrigde: Cambrigde University Press.
Widdowson,H.G.1985. Teaching Language as communication Dictionary of the English Language; Unbrigde.
Widdowson,H.G.1985. Teaching Language as communication Dictionary of the English Language; Unbrigde.
Widdowson. 2004. The Problem in Learning English. New York: University Press.
Data Socio-Emotional Approach of Class XI Bahasa I at SMA Negeri 1 Sungguminasa
X variables (socio-emotional approach)
Resp onde ns
Alternative Answers Score Total
Skor
A B C D E 5 4 3 2 1
R.1 5 5 3 0 7 25 20 9 0 7 61
R.2 4 5 5 6 0 20 20 15 12 0 67
R.3 6 5 4 2 3 30 20 12 4 3 69
R.4 5 5 3 1 6 25 20 9 2 6 62
R.5 6 5 4 2 3 30 20 12 4 3 69
R.6 5 5 6 3 1 25 20 18 6 1 70
R.7 6 5 3 0 6 30 20 9 0 6 65
R.8 3 8 3 1 5 15 32 9 2 5 63
R.9 4 5 5 6 0 20 20 15 12 0 67
R.10 2 5 5 2 6 10 20 15 4 6 55
R.11 5 6 4 5 0 25 24 12 10 0 71
R.12 5 5 4 1 5 25 20 12 2 5 64
R.13 8 7 4 1 0 40 28 12 2 0 82
R.14 5 5 4 1 5 25 20 12 2 5 64
R.15 12 3 1 1 3 60 12 3 2 3 80
R.16 5 5 6 3 1 25 20 18 6 1 70
R.17 6 5 3 0 6 30 20 9 0 6 65
R.18 4 5 5 6 0 20 20 15 12 0 67
R.19 12 3 1 1 3 60 12 3 2 3 80
R.20 5 5 6 3 1 25 20 18 6 1 70
R.21 16 3 1 0 0 80 12 3 0 0 95
R.22 4 4 2 6 4 20 16 6 12 4 58
R.23 1 7 2 1 9 5 28 6 2 9 50
R.24 3 8 3 1 5 15 32 9 2 5 63
R.25 6 5 4 2 3 30 20 12 4 3 69
R.26 9 5 1 5 0 45 20 3 10 0 78
R.27 1 3 5 5 6 5 12 15 10 6 48
R.28 5 6 3 1 5 25 24 9 2 5 65
R.29 3 8 3 1 5 15 32 9 2 5 63
R.30 5 2 4 6 3 25 8 12 12 3 60
R.31 6 5 3 0 6 30 20 9 0 6 65
R.32 11 8 1 0 0 55 32 3 0 0 90
R.33 6 6 5 3 0 30 24 15 6 0 75
R.34 11 8 1 0 0 55 32 3 0 0 90
R.35 3 7 3 1 6 15 28 9 2 6 60
R.36 9 8 2 1 0 45 32 6 2 0 85
R.37 5 5 6 3 1 25 20 18 6 1 70
R.38 6 6 4 4 0 30 24 12 8 0 74
R.39 5 5 6 3 1 25 20 18 6 1 70
R.40 5 6 3 4 2 25 24 9 8 2 68
R.41 1 7 2 1 9 5 28 6 2 9 50
R.42 3 7 3 1 6 15 28 9 2 6 60
R.43 5 6 4 3 0 25 24 12 6 0 67
R.44 3 7 3 1 6 15 28 9 2 6 60
R.45 6 6 5 3 0 30 24 15 6 0 75
Data on the students’ speaking ability of Class XI Bahasa I at SMA 1 Sungguminasa Respondens The value of
speaking
Respondens The value of speaking
R_1 65 R_24 65
R_2 70 R_25 70
R_3 70 R_26 80
R_4 65 R_27 60
R_5 70 R_28 65
R_6 75 R_29 65
R_7 65 R_30 65
R_8 65 R_31 70
R_9 70 R_32 95
R_10 60 R_33 75
R_11 75 R_34 95
R_12 65 R_35 65
R_13 90 R_36 90
R_14 65 R_37 70
R_15 85 R_38 75
R_16 75 R_39 75
R_17 65 R_40 70
R_18 70 R_41 60
R_19 85 R_42 65
R_20 75 R_43 70
R_21 95 R_44 65
R_22 60 R_45 80
R_23 60
Sum 3230
The number of student’s
X Y XY X2 Y2
1 61 65 3965 3721 4225
2 67 70 4690 4489 4900
3 69 70 4830 4761 4900
4 62 65 4030 3844 4225
5 69 70 4830 4761 4900
6 70 75 5250 4900 5625
7 65 65 4225 4225 4225
8 63 65 4095 3969 4225
9 67 70 4690 4489 4900
10 55 60 3300 3025 3600
11 71 75 5325 5041 5625
12 64 65 4160 4096 4225
13 82 90 7380 6724 8100
14 64 65 4160 4096 4225
15 80 85 6800 6400 7225
16 70 75 5250 4900 5625
17 65 65 4225 4225 4225
18 67 70 4690 4489 4900
19 80 85 6800 6400 7225
20 70 75 5250 4900 5625
21 95 95 9025 9025 9025
22 58 60 3480 3364 3600
23 50 60 3000 2500 3600
24 63 65 4095 3969 4225
25 69 70 4830 4761 4900
26 78 80 6240 6084 6400
27 48 60 2880 2304 3600
28 65 65 4225 4225 4225
29 63 65 4095 3969 4225
30 60 65 3900 3600 4225
31 65 70 4550 4225 4900
32 90 95 8550 8100 9025
33 75 75 5625 5625 5625
34 90 95 8550 8100 9025
35 60 65 3900 3600 4225
36 85 90 7650 7225 8100
37 70 70 4900 4900 4900
38 74 75 5550 5476 5625
39 70 75 5250 4900 5625
40 68 70 4760 4624 4900
41 50 60 3000 2500 3600
42 50 65 3250 2500 4225
43 67 70 4690 4489 4900
44 60 65 3900 3600 4225
45 75 80 4880 5625 6400
Sum 3069 230 223370 213845 236050
Instrument Appendix II 1. Speaking Test:
Diagnostic Test
Introduce your self in front of your friends!
a. Make short dialogue using expression opinion!
For example :
Lisa: Well, I’ve read your paper.
Susi: What do you think of it ?
Lisa: I’m very much impressed by your humorous way of criticizing the authority.
Susi: Is that all?
Lisa: Well, the ideas are all good b. The Example Of Dialog
Family
(Conversation When Wathching Television) Rara : Shall we watch television tonight?
Rani : All righ. Whats on tonight?
Rara : A pop on channel one at seven. Then at eight there’s a film Rani : Wahat sort of film is it?
Rara : I thingk it’s a western
Rani : What time’s the news on television?
Rara : the news is at six Rani : What’son channel two?
Rara : There is a sport filmat seven o’clock Rani : I don’t want to watch that
Rara : Channel three has a war film at nine Rani : I don’t like was films. Whats else is on?
Rara : There’s a fashion show on channel four
Rani : That’s might be interesting. Whats the time now?
Rani : lets watch news first. Then we’ll watch the fashion show c. Make short story about daily activity.
Daily Activities
Every day I usually wake up in the morning. I always start my habit to wake up early. I usually get up at 5:00 and immediately smoothed my bed. after that I started helping mom in the kitchen like cooking. after that around 05:30 I had a shower immediately. straight out of the shower I use the uniform after uniform I use breakfast directly after breakfast, I use the shoes and immediately rushed to the school.
In school until I met with my friends after I save the bags and take a broom to sweep the school grounds. After that, I immediately prepared to march and sembayang. then me and my friends go straight into the classroom for a lesson.
After recess bell rang, I and my friends and the rest to buy food and drinks in the cafeteria. then we went back to the last studying.
After school I change clothes and rest.
Appendix III 2. Questionnaire
SMA NEGERI 1 SUNGGUMINASA ( CLASS XI BAHASA I )
STUDENT SATISFACTION QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY OF SICIO EMOTIONAL APPROACH
Put a mark (√) on the answers that describe the level of satisfaction
NO STATEMENT ASSESSMENT
VS S SS LS NS 1 How is your Master creativity in using socio-emotional learning
approach?
2 What is the attitude and your Master role in motivating you?
3 How Teachers attempt to make you able to behave well when he joined the social learning?
4 How successful means (tools) that teachers use to facilitate the delivery of material?
5 How Teachers efforts in implementing social and emotional attitudes among your friends?
6 How Teachers attempt to make the grade under control, orderly, and orderly?
7 Do you feel satisfied when the teacher explains the learning material?
8 How Teachers efforts in increasing confidence when speaking in public or in front of the class?
9 Are you satisfied with the discipline teacher in terms of punctuality and neatness of dress?
10 Are you satisfied with the authority of the teacher in terms of attitude and speak?
11 How about giving replay regularity or tests of your Master?
12 Teachers noticed how the business social and emotional needs of you when learning takes place?
13 Are you satisfied with the attitude of caring teacher when you feel doubt, fear, or embarrassment when asked to speak in public?
14 Are you satisfied with the attitude of teachers who act as educators, parents, or friends?
15 How successful teacher in giving advice on personal problems you?
16 Are you satisfied with the actions Yag teachers act as intermediary when the odds with someone else?
17 How does the attitude of teachers in motivating and inspiring about your social life outside of school?