PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI … fileLanguage Education Study Program, Department of...

LECTURERS’ LIVED EXPERIENCE

IN PUBLIC SPEAKING FEEDBACK

IN THE ELESP OF SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

to Obtain Sarjana Pendidikan Degree

in English Language Education

By

Laurensia Shella Leonita

Student Number: 121214119

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM

DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION

FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

YOGYAKARTA

2016

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

i

LECTURERS’ LIVED EXPERIENCE

IN PUBLIC SPEAKING FEEDBACK

IN THE ELESP OF SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

to Obtain Sarjana Pendidikan Degree

in English Language Education

By

Laurensia Shella Leonita

Student Number: 121214119

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM

DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION

FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

YOGYAKARTA

2016


vi

ABSTRACT

Shella, Laurensia. (2016). Lecturers’ Lived Experience in Public Speaking

Feedback in the ELESP of Sanata Dharma University. Yogyakarta: English

Language Education Study Program, Department of Language and Arts, Faculty

of Teachers Training and Education, Sanata Dharma University.

Public Speaking skill holds an important role in everyone’s career,

especially in ELESP students’ careers. When ELESP students choose to become

teachers, speaking and teaching in front of the class will be their daily tasks. In the

process of acquiring good Public Speaking skills, the students need to practice

their speaking skills in public. Lecturers are required to provide beneficial and

meaningful feedback for students’ learning progress. Their feedback will be the

guidance for the students in improving their public speaking skills. Their feedback

can be informative and motivational. Then, the feedback could be given

immediately after the performance or delayed for later.

This study aims at acknowledging lecturers’ beliefs and experience in

providing feedback in Public Speaking classes. Therefore the research problem is

“what does giving feedback in Public Speaking mean to the lecturers in the

ELESP of Sanata Dharma University?”

This study is a qualitative research. As for the method, phenomenology

focusing on lived experience was used in this research. The participants for this

study were three Public Speaking lecturers in the ELESP. The data were gathered

through some in-depth interviews with the participants.

Based on the interview, it was found that for the lecturers, Public Speaking

feedback meant self-improvement, constraints and freedom. First, while giving

feedback, they yielded the self-improvement for both the lecturers and the

students. However, they also found some obstacles or constraint in the process.

Therefore, they had their own preferences in feedback style to encourage self-

improvement and diminish constraint.

Keywords: lecturer’s feedback, Public speaking, phenomenology


vii

ABSTRAK

Shella, Laurensia. (2016). Lecturers’ Lived Experience in Public Speaking

Feedback in the ELESP of Sanata Dharma University. Yogyakarta: Pendidikan

Bahasa Ingris, Jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa dan Seni, Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu

Pendidikan, Universitas Sanata Dharma.

Public Speaking memegang peranan penting dalam pekerjaan seseorang,

khususnya mahasiswa PBI ketika mereka lulus dan bekerja. Ketika mahasiswa

PBI memutuskan untuk menjadi guru, berbicara dan mengajar di depan kelas

merupakan tugas sehari-hari. Dalam proses mendapatkan kemampuan berbicara

di depan umum yang baik, para mahasiswa perlu melatih kemampuan berbicara

mereka. Dalam proses latihan ini, para dosen diharapkan untuk memberikan

umpan balik yang bermakna dan bermanfaat. Umpan balik tersebut berperan

sebagai panduan bagi para mahasiswa dalam meningkatkan kemampuan

berbicara mereka di depan umum. Umpan balik dari dosen dapat berupa

informasi dan motivasi, dan dapat diberikan langsung setelah mahasiswa

menunjukkan kemampuannya maupun beberapa waktu setelahnya.

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk memberi pengakuan terhadap pandangan

dan pengalaman dosen dalam memberikan umpan balik di PBI. Maka itu,

rumusan masalah dalam penelitian ini adalah, “bagaimana dosen memaknai

pemerian umpan balik dalam mata kuliah Public Speaking di PBI di Universitas

Sanata Dharma?”

Penelitian ini bersifat kualitatif. Peneliti menggunakan metode

fenomenologi yang dikhususkan pada pengalaman yang dimaknai oleh partisipan.

Partisipan dalam penelitian ini merupakan tiga dosen pengampu Public Speaking

di PBI. Data penelitian didapat melalui wawancara mendalam dengan para

partisipan.

Berdasarkan wawancara tersebut, peneliti mendeskripsikan bahwa Public

Speaking memiliki makna bagi para partisipan sebagai peningkatan, halangan

dan kebebasan. Dalam memberikan umpan balik, mereka menghasilkan

peningkatan baik bagi para mahasiswa maupun para partisipan. Namun, mereka

juga menemukan beberapa masalah yang menghalangi mereka dalam proses

peningkatan tersebut. Oleh sebab itu, para partisipan memiliki beberapa teknik

umpan balik yang digunakan untuk mendukung peningkatan dan menangani

halangan yang mereka hadapi.

Kata kunci: lecturer’s feedback, Public speaking, phenomenology


viii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First of all, I would like to thank Jesus Christ for all the blessings that I

have received in my life. He has surrounded me with good people, provided me

with the strength, patience and health that I really need, and stayed with me in

every single day.

I would like to express my gratitude to my thesis advisor, Fidelis Chosa

Kastuhandani, S.Pd., M.Hum., for his time, patience, and kindness. He had

shown his invaluable support during my thesis progress by providing meaningful

feedback and never ending motivation. I would also like to thank him for

believing in me and bringing out the best in me.

I would like to thank all the lecturers who have taught me since my first

semester, especially Christina Lhaksmita Anandari Ed. M., Laurentia

Sumarni S.Pd., M.Trans.St., and Patricia Angelina M.Hum. I am grateful for

their assistances during my learning process in the English Learning Education

Study Program (ELESP).

My deepest gratitude goes to my parents, Jin Ce and Bofudin, for their

unconditional love, affection, support and prayer. I would like to thank them for

always being there for me and convincing me that I deserve the best things in my

life. I also thank my younger sister, Sherly, and my younger brother, Shandy.

They are the reasons why I keep striving and working on my goals.

I also thank the lecturers who became the participants in this study. This

thesis would be impossible without them. In their tight schedule, they had spared


ix

their time to help me with my data gathering process. There were a lot of

beneficial and meaningful experiences that I could learn from their stories.

Furthermore, I thank my friend, Raka, Agnes, and Ceandy who

accompanied, helped, and motivated me when I was working on my thesis. I also

thank my classmates, Mita, Iput, Venny, Vita, who encouraged me to keep

working on my thesis. Then, I thank the people in my class D group, Penguins. I

appreciated the four year of togetherness. I learned a lot of meaningful things

from them. They had shown me that family was not limited to the people who

shared the same blood.

Finally, I would like to thank all ELESP students and all my friends whose

names are not mentioned one by one in this short acknowledgment. I am forever

grateful for every help, support, and motivation that they have given to me.

Laurensia Shella


x

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

TITLE PAGE .............................................................................................. i

APPROVAL PAGES .................................................................................. ii

STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY ........................................... iv

PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI ....................................... v

ABSTRACT ................................................................................................ vi

ABSTRAK .................................................................................................. vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................ viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................ x

LIST OF APPENDICES ............................................................................. xiii

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION 1

A. Research Background................................................................ 1

B. Research Problem ..................................................................... 2

C. Problem Limitation ................................................................... 2

D. Research Objectives .................................................................. 3

E. Research Benefits ...................................................................... 3

F. Definition of Terms ................................................................... 4

1. Feedback ....................................................................... 5

2. Lived Experience .......................................................... 5

3. Public Speaking ............................................................. 6


xi

CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 7

A. Theoretical Description ............................................................. 7

1. Feedback ....................................................................... 7

2. Speaking Learning Progress in the ELESP ................... 10

3. Public Speaking in the ELESP ...................................... 11

B. Theoretical Framework ............................................................. 13

CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY 16

A. Research Method ....................................................................... 16

B. Research Setting ........................................................................ 18

C. Research Participants ................................................................ 18

D. Instruments and Data Gathering Technique .............................. 19

E. Data Analysis Technique .......................................................... 20

1. Epoche ........................................................................... 21

2. Phenomenological Reduction ....................................... 21

3. Imaginative Variation.................................................... 22

4. Synthesis of Meanings and Essences ............................ 22

F. Research Procedure ................................................................... 22

CHAPTER IV: RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 25

A. Individual Textural Description ................................................ 25

a. Participant 1’s story....................................................... 25


xii

b. Participant 2’s story....................................................... 27

c. Participant 3’s story....................................................... 29

B. Theme Description .................................................................... 31

a. Self-Improvement ......................................................... 32

b. Constraint ...................................................................... 33

c. Freedom ........................................................................ 35

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 38

A. Conclusions ............................................................................... 38

B. Recommendations ..................................................................... 40

REFERENCES ............................................................................................ 43

APPENDICES ............................................................................................ 45


xiii

LIST OF APPENDICES

Page

Appendix 1 Construct Mapping .............................................................. 46

Appendix 2 Bracketing and Horizonalization

of Participant 1’s interview ................................................. 47






1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

In this chapter, the researcher discusses the introduction of this study. The

introduction consists of the research background, research problem, problem

limitation, research objectives, research benefits, and definition of terms.

A. Research Background

As a student of English Language Education Study Program, the researcher

has acknowledged the importance of speaking ability. Enhancing speaking ability

enables the language students to participate more actively in social

communication and interaction. Public Speaking is a speaking course in which the

language students are trained to speak not only in front of their friends or relatives

but also in public. This course was offered in the fifth semester in the ELESP. The

ELESP students need to practice their grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation

skill. Moreover, they should develop the skills of talking in public, such as

audience analysis, body language, construction of the speech, and the appropriate

way to deliver the speech.

Since learning Public Speaking covers many materials and takes a lot of

practices, it is essential for the lecturers to guide the students through the learning

process. Feedback from the lecturers is used for guiding the students to

acknowledge their ability and improve their language skill. From the researcher’s

experience, the lecturers had a huge influence in assisting the researcher’s public


2

speaking skill improvement through giving feedback. While giving feedback, the

lecturers informed all the students about their language performance, gave some

advice for improvement, and encouraged the students to develop public speaking

skills.

Feedback given by lecturers plays an important role in improving public

speaking skills for the students (Lewis, 2002; London, 2003). Therefore, the

researcher sought to understand about the way the lecturers value the feedback

itself and their beliefs about feedback in Public Speaking. The researcher also

wanted to acknowledge the effective types of feedback for improving public

speaking skill according to the lecturers. Then, the lecturers’ experiences that

were involved in constructing their beliefs about giving feedback in Public

Speaking were also subjects to be comprehended. Hence, this research was

designed to gain a deeper understanding of those matters.

B. Research Problem

In order to gain a deeper understanding of the matters mentioned in the

research background, a research was carried out to study lecturers’ lived

experience in giving Public Speaking feedback in the ELESP of Sanata Dharma

University. Thus, the research problem was formulated as: What does giving

feedback in Public Speaking mean to the lecturers in the ELESP?

C. Problem Limitation

This study was carried out through investigating the lecturers’ lived

experience in giving feedback in Public Speaking class. The participants of this


3

study were three ELESP lecturers that were assigned to teach Public Speaking

classes during their teaching period. In order to investigate each participant’s lived

experience effectively, the study was limited only on the lecturers’ beliefs about

feedback, public speaking and giving feedback in Public Speaking class. The

belief itself was limited only on general understanding, advantages,

disadvantages, any problem encountered, any expectation, and the experiences

that support them based on the participants’ utterances in the interview process.

The result of this study is not aimed to be generalized to other Public Speaking

lecturers in other institution or other teaching period.

D. Research Objectives

The purpose of this study is to gain a deeper understanding of the lecturers’

beliefs about giving feedback in Public Speaking class. Therefore, the objective of

the study was to describe the lecturers’ beliefs and experiences in giving feedback

in Public Speaking class. Another objective of this study was to elaborate those

lived experience to find out what giving Public Speaking feedback in ELESP

classes really means to the lecturers.

E. Research Benefits

This study of lecturers’ lived experience in giving feedback in Public

Speaking class was designed and conducted with the expectation that it would

provide some benefits for ELESP students, ELESP lecturers and the researcher

herself. ELESP students may have various perspectives about receiving feedback

from their lecturers. The researcher expected that after the students acknowledge


4

the meaning and value of feedback from the lecturers’ points of view, they will

have deeper understanding about feedback and make use of feedback more

efficiently.

The Public Speaking lecturers who contributed in this research as the

participants were also expected to see this study as an opportunity to share their

beliefs and experiences about feedback, and acknowledge the other participants’

beliefs and experiences. Since during the interview session they were asked to

recall their experiences and elaborate their beliefs about giving feedback, the

participants could also see this research as the means of self-reflection. It was

also expected that other lecturers, especially Public Speaking lecturers, could

reflect on their own lived experience and take the participants’ lived experience as

a beneficial lesson.

Finally, the researcher expected that after conducting the research, the

researcher could gain a deeper understanding about lecturers’ lived experience in

giving feedback in Public Speaking class. Thus, the researcher’s intention in

designing this research as mentioned in research background could be fulfilled.

Since the researcher is an ELESP student, the result of the study would also be

beneficial just in case the researcher becomes a Public Speaking lecturer one day.

F. Definition of Terms

In this study about lecturers’ lived experience in giving public speaking

feedback, there are three terms that are elaborated to equalize the perception and

prevent any misunderstanding. Those terms are feedback, lived experience, and

Public Speaking, which are presented as follows:


5

1. Feedback

Feedback refers to any information, opinion, or advice about the students’

language performances given by the lecturers. Feedback aims to inform the

students about their language learning progress and guide them to improve their

language skills and performances (Lewis, 2002; London, 2003). Based on the

purpose, there are two types of feedback. They are informative and motivational

feedback. Informative feedback focuses on informing the student about the

student’s language performance, learning progress, strengths and weaknesses. On

the other hand, motivational feedback aims to encourage and motivate the

students to keep practicing and not to worry about the mistakes that possibly be

made. Based on the timing, feedback is divided into immediate and delayed

feedback. In this study, the feedback which was discussed was Public Speaking

feedback that was given by Public Speaking lecturers.

2. Lived Experience

Lived experience is the combination of someone’s belief and experience. In

other words, it means that someone’s belief is achieved from some experiences or

applied to some experiences. Lived experience is an object of phenomenological

study that aims to gain a deeper understanding about what it is like to be someone

in a particular situation based on his/her belief and experience (Tesch, 1990;

Manen, 1990). The participants’ lived experiences in this study include their

general understanding, their beliefs, and their experiences that are related to the

topic that is studied.


6

3. Public Speaking

Public Speaking does not merely mean speaking in public. It is the means to

express and deliver the speaker’s notion or opinion to public (Lucas, 2009).

Therefore, the speaker should possess the good public speaking skills in order to

make sure that the audience acquire and understand the speaker’s idea or opinion.

Those are the goals that most public speaking courses aim to achieve. Public

Speaking course in this study is offered for the students on their fifth semester in

the ELESP in Sanata Dharma University. The course covers some lesson

materials such as audience analysis, speech outlines and drafts, body language

while delivering a speech, and the techniques to inform and persuade people.

Those are some skills that are required to possess in order to be a good public

speaker.


7

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

In this chapter, the researcher describes the theories of feedback used as the

backbone of this study and Public Speaking in the English Language Education

Study Program in Sanata Dharma University. Furthermore, the researcher’s

preunderstanding for lecturer’s feedback in public speaking based on the theories

and the researcher’s experience is discussed in theoretical framework.

A. Theoretical Description

In theoretical description, three terms that become the backbone of this

study are going to be discussed and elaborated. Each term will be supported by

previous theories or related information. Those three terms are feedback, speaking

learning progress in the ELESP, and public speaking course in the ELESP of

Sanata Dharma University.

1. Feedback

In learning a second language, the role of feedback for the students is

essential. Feedback is described as the process of informing the students about

their learning progress as well as guiding them for their language skills

improvement (Lewis, 2002; London, 2003). The students’ learning progress

includes what the students have done well and what they have not done well yet in

their language performance.


8

There are many benefits that the students can draw from feedback. Feedback

enables the students to acknowledge what performance aspects are important, the

standards of performance expected and how they are doing to fulfill these

requirements. It also motivates the students by showing which part of their

behavior that contributes to successful performance. In addition, feedback

increases the students’ awareness to assess their own performances (London,

2003).

In Public Speaking course, the students are encouraged to learn the skills

through a lot of practices. They need to understand that the goal of their learning

is to use the language as a means of communication (Irfani, 2014). In these

practices, the students are likely to make mistakes as those mistakes are inevitable

in the learning process. Irfani believes that “making errors is a process to make

progress.” However, he thinks that the students should not do the same mistakes

twice. Pollard mentions that the feedback which corresponds to the students’

speaking errors can be used to bolster students’ knowledge of speaking skills. It

also helps the students become more aware of their speaking performance skills

(as cited in Irfani, 2014).

According to Zamel (1981), there are two kinds of feedback based on its

purpose. Those types are informative and motivational feedback. Informative

feedback is given by providing the students about the result of their language

performance, including the mistakes or errors that the students still need to work

on. On the other hand, motivational feedback is given to the students to encourage

the students to keep practicing and take the mistakes and errors as the part of


9

learning progress. Zamel argues that the feedback which is only informing

whether the students’ language performance is correct or incorrect does not really

have a distinctive impact on students’ learning improvement.

Based on its timing, feedback is distinguished into immediate and delayed

feedback. Immediate feedback is given to a student or the whole class right after

the performance. King, Young, and Behnke (2000) mentions in their article that

students who receive immediate feedback would still remember the behavior that

is discussed. Therefore, they are aware of their language performances and what

part of their performances that should be improved. Immediate feedback also

helps the students develop their Public Speaking skills by reflecting their mistakes

right away and correcting their mistakes. On the other hand, immediate feedback

may result in distraction and disruption in learning process. The second type is

delayed feedback which is given after some time since the students performed. It

enables the students to process the information, correction or suggestion from the

lecturer and practice it. Delayed feedback also results in more “long-term memory

storage of the changes in behavior” (King, Young, Behnke, 2000).

Feedback is an art which involves both the lecturers and the students. To

give feedback, the lecturer should practice continuously to find what kind of

feedback that will be useful for the students. In her book, Lewis (2002) defines

four criteria of good feedback in which the lecturers should have in order to

optimize students’ language performance. They are “variety, clarity, motivation,

and cooperative learning.” The lecturers should have some varieties of giving

feedback. Therefore, the students will not get bored and think that the lecturers


10

give the same comment to everyone all the time. The lecturers also need to make

sure their comments have clear and not ambiguous meaning. Furthermore,

learning is not about getting a high mark only. The lecturers should value progress

and improvement higher than the result. The feedback given should be motivating

that the students are encouraged to perform better. It also needs to encourage the

students to learn from one another.

2. Speaking learning progress in the English Language Education Study

Program (ELESP) in Sanata Dharma University

Speaking is one of the most important skills a language student should have

and learn. It serves as an underlying part of talking and meaningful interaction in

social activity (Luoma, 2004). Therefore, speaking is one of the main language

skills that is learned in language learning study program. In the ELESP

curriculum, the progress of achieving speaking skill is divided into five

compulsory courses. The courses are Speaking I, Speaking II, Critical Listening

and Speaking 1, Critical Listening and Speaking 2, and Public Speaking. The

learning progress takes place gradually since the first semester to the fifth

semester.

Speaking 1 is the first course that the students should take in their first

semester in the ELESP. Throughout the semester, the students are encouraged to

practice some expressions such as greeting, leave taking, introducing and other

common communicative functions. They also learn how to keep a conversation

going. The second course is Speaking 2, which should be taken in the second

semester. The focus of this course is to encourage the students to express their


11

personal feelings and opinions. The students are expected to enrich their

vocabulary words, technical terms and expressions and be able to use them

appropriately.

The students are required to take Critical Listening and Speaking 1 in their

third semester. This course aims to improve the students’ listening and speaking

skills and also develop their strategic skills. In terms of speaking ability, the

students are required to utilize the strategic skills and present the spoken response

to the given topics. Students should integrate what they have learned in structure,

vocabulary and pronunciation class into their speaking ability. Their grammar,

diction, and pronunciation will be some of the scoring criteria. The Critical

Listening and Speaking 2 that should be taken in the fourth semester is a

continuation of Critical Listening and Speaking 1 in the previous semester. This

course still deals with improving the students’ strategic skills, but the given topics

are more complicated than the previous ones. The students are expected to

response to these topics using the strategic skill. In this course, the students’

grammar, diction and pronunciation also become some criteria of a good speech.

In the fifth semester, the students are to take Public Speaking. Public

speaking in general and public speaking course in the ELESP will be discussed

further in the next section.

3. Public Speaking in the ELESP of Sanata Dharma University

Speaking can be distinguished into chatting and information-related talk.

Chatting is a conversational exchange between two or more people who take turn

to talk. It aims at maintaining social interaction or contact to other people.


12

Chatting is like an unplanned speech. On the other hand, information-related talk

is like a planned speech. It focuses on delivering an information or message to

other people. Hence, the speaker should make sure that the message is transferred

well and understood by the listener (Brown, 1984). Public speaking belongs to

information-related talk. The communication mostly happens one way and

formally from the speaker to the audience. Public speaking is also described as a

means to express your ideas to public (Lucas, 2009).

Davidson (2003) mentions that “the ability to powerfully and persuasively

impact audiences is an important part of your career and your life.” Even though

the technology has developed rapidly, he also emphasizes that “the need to

improve Public Speaking ability seems to be greater than ever.” Public speaking

has a lot of advantages for those who learn and develop their public speaking skill.

Grice and Skinner (1995) suggest that there are at least three benefits of public

speaking which are “personal benefit, professional benefit and public benefit.”

Personal benefit includes the knowledge and the confidence. When someone

brainstorms an idea, develops it into sequential main points and delivers them to

the audience, he has gained more knowledge. The progress of preparing the

material and practicing speaking in public also help someone build his confidence.

By learning and practicing effective public speaking, someone will develop their

quality, increase the chances to get a job and improve the success in his career.

Those are the professional benefit of public speaking. Public speaking also

provides public benefit by creating an active, well-informed and quality society.


13

According to Hamilton (2012), there are three steps to be prepared before

performing public speaking. The first one is analyze the audience. The speaker

needs to acknowledge the target audiences. The second one is determine the topic,

the purpose, and the main points of the speech. The speaker should select the topic

in which he interests and has the abilities, knowledge and experience. Then, the

purpose and the main points should be carefully prepared. The third one is draft

the main points of the speech. After determining the main points, the speaker

should make a rough draft of main points. The speaker can refer to this draft while

delivering his ideas to audience, so he can produce an organized and effective

speech.

Public Speaking course in the ELESP encourages the students to apply the

strategic skill and communicative function they have learned when they speak in

public. This course also supports the students to develop their skills to speak

formally and successfully by providing the artificial public situation. This course

is designed to cover the related public speaking requirements such as audience

analysis, speech outlines, body language while giving a speech, and the ways to

inform and persuade people.

B. Theoretical Framework

In every aspect of life, speaking is an essential skill that works as an

underlying part of communication. Speaking in public is a requirement for all

workers despite whatever their jobs are. As for ELESP students, whether they

decide to become a lecturer, a tour guide, or an interpreter, the skills of speaking


14

in public are needed. Public Speaking is learned through practicing. The students

will try and experiment with various Public Speaking skills and conditions.

Unsurprisingly, in their practices, there is the tendency for making mistakes.

Therefore, the assistance in students’ learning process is an essential need.

Lecturer’s role in giving feedback is essential to inform the students about what

techniques that work well and on them what techniques that do not, to facilitate

their creativity in learning, and to support the learning progress. The feedback

given should guide the students in their learning process, make the students aware

of their mistakes without threatening them not to make other mistakes.

The lecturers can give the feedback to the students right after the

performance or later. Those choices depend on the lecturers’ preferences and

methods. The feedback that is given right after the performance is supposed to

maintain the students’ memory. On the other hand, the feedback is given after

some days or weeks to remind the students about their performances or to give the

students some times to reflect their performances.

Lecturers’ feedback should be informative and motivational. These two

types of feedback complement each other. Feedback which is informative but not

motivational has a tendency to grow students’ fear of making mistakes. It will also

inhibit the learning progress and reduce students’ creativity in experimenting with

various public speaking techniques. On the other hand, motivational feedback

which is not informative will lose its very own purpose which is informing the

students about their performance as guidance for their learning improvement. The

lecturers should figure out the feedback that covers both informative and


15

motivational aspect. Hence, the students are encouraged to improve their language

abilities and experiment with various public speaking techniques without fears of

making mistakes. Then, the lecturers need to explain it to the students that those

errors should be reduced gradually as they learn from their mistakes.

During the process of giving feedback, the lecturers are likely to experience

both encouraging and discouraging moments. Both of them help the lecturers to

improve themselves personally and professionally. They will learn how to deal

with students’ learning problems, students’ different levels of understanding and

other difficult circumstances.


16

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter focuses on the methodology which was employed in the

research to answer the research questions stated in the first chapter. This chapter

consists of six major sections. They are research method, research setting,

research participants, instruments and data gathering technique, data analysis

technique and research procedure. Each section is elaborated and presented as

follows.

A. Research Method

Not many phenomena in human lives can be measured in quantities. In this

study about the essence of Public Speaking feedback for the lecturers, the writer

used qualitative research. Qualitative research covers all the data that cannot be

expressed in numbers. Therefore, the answers for the research questions are in the

form of words (Tesch, 1990). Instead of the calculation of numbers, the result of

the qualitative research is the description of what really happened in some

people’s lives. Qualitative research aims at the findings of the phenomena in a

natural settings that result in new understanding of human’s world (Sherman and

Webb, 1988). Neuman (2006) proposes that qualitative research is a precise,

adequate, and meaningful research, because the researchers obtain the ideas from

the participants of the study and process them to suit the context of a natural

setting.


17

This study aimed to acknowledge the lecturers’ belief about giving feedback

in public speaking based on their experience. In order to get a deeper

understanding of those beliefs and experiences which cannot be measured

quantitatively, the qualitative method was used. The qualitative research enabled

the researcher to dig deeper into the participants’ fundamental beliefs and

distinctive experiences that were related to the study. Thus, the result of the

research that answered to the research problem would really mirror the contextual

situation.

There are many types of qualitative research, such as action research, case

study, ethnography, and phenomenology. Which type is used in a research

depends on the area or topic of the study. This study discussed the lecturers’

beliefs of feedback in Public Speaking. Since the study included their

perspectives, preferences and experiences in giving feedback in public speaking,

the phenomenological research was selected. The phenomenological research

focuses on the individual and the essence of subjective experience. It does not

study the impact of a program implemented in a certain situation, the culture of a

circumstance or the interaction between people in a society. Instead,

phenomenology would emphasize what the experience of being someone in a

particular situation is like. (Tesch, 1990; Manen, 1990) It also aims to gain deeper

understanding about how a person perceives the experience she/he has had and

maintain to provide the “comprehensive description” of it (Moustakas, 1994).

In his book, Manen (1990) suggests that “phenomenological research is the

study of lived experience.” He also describes lived experience as the essence of


18

humanity through which we draw the meaning into our thought, belief and action.

The experiences themselves are related into each other, which then should be

“studied as a whole” which means that it is closely associated with past or present

(Sherman and Webb, 1988). That is the reason why lecturers’ educational

background and personal motivation were counted and taken into consideration.

B. Research Setting

The research was conducted in the form of in-depth interviews in the

English Language Education Study Program (ELESP) of Sanata Dharma

University. In order to make the participants comfortable to share their stories, the

interview for each participant was conducted twice. The first one was an initial

interview where the participants were asked to share their educational

background, teaching background, and their beliefs in Public Speaking in the

ELESP. The second one was an in-depth interview which focused on their beliefs

and experiences in giving feedback in Public Speaking in the ELESP. The

interview for each participant took place in each participant’s office. The

interviews with these three participants were conducted on late February until

March, 2016. The progress from making the interview blueprint, conducting the

interview, analyzing the result until drawing the conclusion was ranging from

November, 2015 to April, 2016.

C. Research Participants

In the qualitative research, the sample is chosen based on their relevance to

the topic studied rather than their representativeness (Neuman, 2006). In this


19

research, purposive sampling was chosen. Therefore, the researcher needed to

identify and determine the participants who had sufficient knowledge or

experiences of the discussed phenomenon (Cresswell and Clark, 2010). This

research aimed to elaborate the lecturers’ lived experience in feedback in Public

Speaking course. Therefore, the participants who were closely related to this study

were three lecturers who had taught Public Speaking in the ELESP in Sanata

Dharma University.

Because the study included a research about some people’s experiences that

could be sensitive, the researcher paid a great attention to confidentiality. The

participants were asked to sign a consent form stating that they agreed to be

interviewed voluntarily and audio-recorded during the interview. They were also

asked if they would prefer using real name or pseudonym. In this study, two of the

participants agreed to go by their real names when the other one preferred to go by

her initial. Therefore, the researcher decided to use numbers to address all

participants. All the participants’ names that were mentioned in the interview

were changed into their initials in the interview transcript. Thus, the participants

were mentioned as Participant 1, Participant 2, and Participant 3.

D. Instruments and Data Gathering Technique

The field interview was selected as a means to conduct the research.

Contradictory to survey interview, the field interview uses “unstructured,

nondirective, and in-depth questions”. The purpose of in-depth interview is not to

test hypothesis or to assess or judge other people’s experiences, but to

“understand their experiences and the meaning they make of those experiences”


20

(Seidman, 1991). The interview involves asking and answering questions,

listening and speaking, expressing opinion, belief and interest. The conversations

of asking and answering are then recorded (Neuman, 2006). Sometimes, the data

needed for phenomenological research “may only consist of no more than one

interview.” (Tesch, 1990) In this research, there were three interviews conducted

by the researcher nevertheless. These interviews had the same basic questions that

were elaborated based on the interview blueprint so that the answers could really

answer to the research problem. The interview blueprint was attached as

Appendix 1.

There are an advantage and a disadvantage in using field interview in a

research. An interview enables the researcher to ask follow-up questions, which

let the researcher to gain deeper and clearer data. On the other hand, when it

comes to sensitive and negative aspects toward the participants or other people,

that particular information would not be unlikely to be revealed in the face-to-face

interview (Borg and Gall, 1983). This situation were overcome when the

researcher created the comfortable and relaxed atmosphere during interview, built

trustworthiness between the researcher and the participants, and ensured the

participants that the researcher would strive for the confidentiality of the study.

Therefore, the each participant was given one copy of her consent form.

E. Data Analysis Technique

In analyzing the research data, the researcher used Moutakas’

phenomenological data analysis techniques (1994). In his book, Moustakas

proposes some steps which are necessary to be applied in order to arrive at the


21

valid description of meanings and essences of one’s lived experience. Those steps

are epoche, phenomenological reduction, imaginative variation, and synthesis.

a. Epoche

Epoche is the first step in phenomenological data analysis process. It means

that the researchers should put aside their biases, tendencies, and prejudices about

the things which are studied. The researchers also need to eliminate their previous

knowledge and everyday supposition since those things tend to bias the

researchers about the truth and reality. The purpose of epoche is to derive the new

knowledge without influencing it. Therefore the experiences could be retrieved as

it expresses itself and perceived to be just like it appears.

b. Phenomenological Reduction

There are four steps in phenomenological reduction. The first step is

bracketing which limits the focus of the interview result only to the research topic

and questions. The interview data that are not related to the research topic or

questions should be eliminated. The second step is horizonalizing in which the

redundant and overlapping statements as well as the fillers are removed. However,

these statements are treated equally in horizonalizing. This process left the

essential statements that are called the Horizons. These horizons are then gathered

and placed in brackets. Brackets in this second step differ from bracketing that

was mentioned in the first step. The third step is creating some themes out of

those Horizons. The themes extracted from those brackets should cover all the

participants’ beliefs. Then the last one is elaborating those themes and Horizons


22

into individual textural description. In individual textural description, the themes

extracted earlier are elaborated more personally based on each participant’s belief

and experience.

c. Imaginative Variation

Imaginative variation aims to find out some factors that were underlying the

experiences. The factors could be “possible structures of time, space, materiality,

causality, and relationship to self and to others (Moustakas, 1994). Those factors

raise the awareness that there are infinite possible factors which are closely related

to the meanings of experiences. Through imaginative variation, the researchers are

able to achieve the structural description of experience from the textural

description that is gained through phenomenological reduction.

d. Synthesis of Meanings and Essences

The phenomenological data analysis technique is ended by integrating the

textural description and structural description. Then, more general and reflective

themes are extracted for summarizing the participants’ beliefs and experiences.

From these themes, the description about the meanings or essences of the

experiences should be generated.

F. Research Procedure

The researcher started the research process by designing a research plan

including the blue print, the questions and the participants. Then the participants’

were asked to participate in the research and decide the date and time for the

interview together with the researcher. Before conducting the research, the


23

researcher eliminated her prejudice, bias, and supposition about the research topic.

It is also called Epoche. After that, the interviews were held and the data were

recorded.

According to Tesch (1990) and Moustakas (1994), there are some steps to

be taken in analyzing the data of phenomenological research. First, the researcher

reads the entire data right after they are gathered. Tesch (1990) emphasizes that

the researcher does more than taking notes during the reading. “The researcher

immerses her/himself in the data, reads and rereads, and dwells with the data, so

s/he may achieve closeness to them and a sense of the whole.” Second, the

researchers would look at the entire interview transcription of each participant and

decide what answers are meaningful and relevant to the research questions. The

data which are meaningful and relevant should be the expressions that are

considered necessarily related to the experience. This process is known as

bracketing. Third, the expressions which are redundant, “overlapping”, unclear,

and irrelevant to the experience are eliminated. It is also called horizonalizing.

(Moustakas, 1994).

Fourth, some themes or meaning units are developed from the meaningful

and relevant data or Horizons of each participant. The participant’s experience is

then elaborated into “individual textural description” which is placed in those

meaning units. The description includes verbatim expressions used by the

participants that are taken from research transcript. Fifth, the structural description

of experience is constructed based on the textural description and influenced by

the participant’s background. Sixth, the textural and structural descriptions are


24

integrated and elaborated into descriptive form, from which the meaning and new

knowledge are drawn.

In the process of describing and elaborating the themes, the researcher

mentioned some participants’ utterances that could support the description. The

code of each utterance was also mentioned in order to ease the readers in finding

the utterances in the interview bracket. The interview bracket for each participant

can be found in Appendix 2, Appendix 3 and Appendix 4. The code consisted of

the number of each participant and the lines those utterances were taken from. For

example, code (1:2-4) meant that the utterances belonged to Participant 1 and

were taken from line two to four in Participant 1’s interview bracket.


25

CHAPTER IV

DATA ANALYSIS

In this chapter, the researcher presents the findings of the study about

lecturer’s lived experience in giving feedback in Public Speaking. The term “data

analysis” used in the title does not refer to the process of interpretation. Instead, it

refers to the process of understanding the phenomena, drawing the essential

themes, and describing their meaning and essence. Thus, this chapter is divided

into text description and theme description.

A. Individual Textural Description

This section consists of the summary of each participant’s lived experience

that is obtained through the interview. The process of summarizing included

epoche which eliminated the researcher’s previous knowledge and prejudice,

reading the Horizons carefully, and drawing the essential subthemes out of them.

Then, the description of the participant’s lived experience was composed based on

those essential subthemes.

1. Participant 1’s story

The first participant was Participant 1. She is 42 years old and comes from

Bantul. She started learning English formally in Junior High School. However,

she was already interested in English language since she was a kid. In 2000, she

began teaching as a temporary lecturer in the ELESP, and became a permanent

lecturer in 2008. She liked teaching adult since she could also learn something


26

from the students. She started teaching Public Speaking (used to be Speaking 5) in

2003. She thought that Public Speaking is essential for ELESP students with

various possible professions. According to her, the main focus in Public Speaking

is learning the knowledge of the content, the English language, the organization of

the speech and the delivery.

During her teaching Public Speaking period, she had encountered some

encouraging and discouraging experiences. She mentioned that she was excited

when the students took her feedback seriously and improved their performance by

avoiding the same mistakes. However, there were some times when the students

neither listened to nor carried out her feedback (1:11-15). She admitted that those

types of students both existed in ELESP (1:22-24).

According to her, feedback was an essential part of a learning process. Even

though it was not always nice to hear, it made the students stronger. It also

worked as second opinion for the students. Therefore, she analogized feedback as

herbal medicine and rearview mirror (1:116-117, 129-130). She thought that

feedback aimed for learning improvement through information and

encouragement. It was lecturers’ role to provide those information and

encouragement using their existing knowledge and experiences (1:124-126, 133-

135). An example of the encouragement was the terms that she used in her

feedback. Instead of using strength and weakness, she chose to use strength and

room for improvement (1:127-128).

Despite its useful roles, feedback in Public Speaking also had some

disadvantages. Participant 1 said that the tendency to provide incomplete feedback


27

and lack of time allocation as two of those disadvantages of feedback could affect

the assessment validity (1:142-143, 156-158). She also mentioned that she had

some problems in multi-tasking in composing her feedback. The requirement to

look at the performance, listen to the speech, document the score in her computer,

and write her feedback down really tired her. She should carefully divide her

focus into scoring and giving feedback (1:147-153).

As for feedback’s advantages for her, she explained that giving feedback

had helped her in scoring documentation and students’ skills diagnosis. By

acknowledging what the students still lack for, she could design the next meeting

material that met the students’ needs (1:161-168). She expected that students

would listen to her feedback, take it seriously, and recognize their strength and

chances to improve. She also hoped that they would be grateful for their current

abilities (1:177-181, 186-186).


The second participant was Participant 2. She is 38 years old and comes

from Yogyakarta. When she was 8 years old, she moved to America for two years.

It influenced her English language learning process which went from listening,

speaking, reading and then writing, just like learning a mother tongue. Many years

later, she took her bachelor’s degree in 1996 and started to work as a temporary

lecturer in 2002. Her passion in teaching began when she was in her third

semester in her bachelor’s degree as she worked part time as an English tutor in

some institutions. After graduating from her master’s degree in 2010, she was

challenged to teach Public Speaking. She has taught Public Speaking for almost


28

every year then. She thought that PS was important for everyone. It prepares

someone’s mentality and flexibility in speaking. She aimed to teach the language

elements such as language, content, and organization and delivery elements which

are expression, eye contact, body language, and costume.

It has been six years since she first taught Public Speaking and there was not

any discouraging experience that she had. However, she mentioned that some

students had not responded very well to her feedback. “They were resisting the

information that I gave since no one else had said something about it to them.

They were surprised,” she said. (2:1,3-4) On the other hand, she was excited when

her feedback made the students acknowledge their abilities and be willing to

improve themselves. It meant that she had successfully given them insight about

their performances (2:19-20, 23-24).

She mentioned that feedback in Public Speaking course was important since

performing Public Speaking skills produced neither document nor record, unlike

writing courses. Therefore, the students’ opinion about their performances could

be different from how they really performed. It was the feedback of their friends

and lecturer which could bridge the information gap (2:24-28, 31-32). However,

peer feedback was limited due to their understanding level. In this case, the

lecturers were required to give more detailed feedback. (2: 33-35)

Feedback had some disadvantages and advantages. One of its disadvantages

was time consuming because giving feedback in Public Speaking required face-to-

face meeting and real time assessment. She had tried to have the performance

recorded which saved a lot of time. Unfortunately, she found it difficult to feel the


29

class atmosphere. Another problem was the importance to highly concentrate

during the 100 minute performances so she could analyze it well and write her

notes down. “It was so tiring.” (2:65-74) The students’ enthusiasm to take the

feedback was also one of her problems. However, she overcame it by asking the

students to share their experience, so she could give some meaningful input (2:89-

90, 95-98).

She gained her working satisfaction by giving her best to do her duty of

giving detailed feedback. Thus, giving feedback in Public Speaking was tiring, but

not burdensome (2:101-102, 106-107). She expected that the students would

remember her feedback and apply it in their learning process, even though those

expectations depended on their personal choices. She also hoped that the students

had the willingness to do personal reflection. “Overall, Public Speaking was a

long process,” she said (2:107-110, 115).


The third participant was Participant 3. She is 30 years old. She was born in

Jakarta but moved to Yogyakarta in 1999. She had learned English language since

kindergarten and took the ELESP in Sanata Dharma in 2004. She did not enjoy

her teaching practice program. However, after she graduated, she enjoyed working

as temporary lecturer in the ELESP. She took her master’s degree in Kajian

Bahasa Inggris in Sanata Dharma in 2010 and became a permanent lecturer in the

ELESP in 2015. During her teaching period in the ELESP, she has taught Public

Speaking for about several times. She thought that Public Speaking was

fundamental since first impression is usually judged by the way people speak.


30

Moreover, ELESP students are supposed to teach in front of their students. In

teaching Public Speaking, she emphasized the learning process on delivery and

language aspects. Delivery aspect covers gesture and body language, while

language aspect covers the appropriate way to open and close a speech.

During her teaching period, she was happy when the students took her

feedback seriously and were willing to improve themselves (3:59-61). She also

found it exciting when the student she appointed could be the real example for his/

her classmates. “The other students saw his/her performance, so they really

understood my feedback,” she said (3:6-9). However, she also had some

discouraging experiences. There were some students who chose to ignore her

feedback and stayed in their comfort zones. She emphasized that they would not

improve their skills and performances by doing so. Thus, she encouraged those

students personally by telling them that it was okay to make mistakes. Because

they could learn from their mistakes as they try to be a better public speaker. (3:9-

16).

In her opinion, feedback still played an important role in Public Speaking

learning process. Unless the students recorded their performances, it would be

hard for them to acknowledge how well they did it. Therefore, the opinion from

other people could fill them in. It was more meaningful than mere score was

(3:33-37). That was lecturers’ essential role. As the ones who were assumed to

have adequate knowledge of the theory, the lecturers should provide essential

input and advice. The additional feedback from their classmates would also be

beneficial (3:40-44).


31

From her experience, there were some weaknesses of feedback. The criteria

that were in assessment rubric were already fixed and some aspects were not

covered in that rubric. On the other hand, if those criteria included too many

aspects, the feedback would not be discussed thoroughly. However, when she

noticed an aspect to be commented on and she could not find it in those criteria,

she had found it difficult to deliver that feedback to the students. Then, she had to

give an example from her past experience that was related to her intended

feedback. (3:50-57)

She said that she had gained some benefits during her teaching period. By

giving feedback, she had learned about a lot of possibilities that could happen

while giving speech. Beside, her feedback worked as a reflection for her as well.

She could learn from the students’ performances and also her feedback, so she

could do better in her public speaking (3:78-84). She expected that the students

would take her feedback seriously and they would improve in their next

performances. She also hoped that the students would be more confident while

speaking in public (3:75-78).

B. Theme Description

In this section, some general themes were extracted from the interview data.

There are three general themes that cover all the subthemes described in the

previous section. Those themes are self-improvement, constraint and freedom.

These themes are the results of this study which answer to the research problem.


32

1. Self-Improvement

Feedback in Public Speaking course yielded the improvement for both the

students and the lecturers. However, since the study focuses on how the lecturers

give meaning to Public Speaking feedback, the researcher emphasizes the

improvement for the lecturers. The participants thought of the process of

providing feedback in Public Speaking course as self-improvement. Giving Public

Speaking feedback brought some benefits for the them.

“[While giving feedback] I acknowledge the students’ skills and what

aspects they still lack of. So, feedback helps me prepare the materials that

meet the student’s needs. It also gave me an idea whether I have succeeded

in teaching them.” (1:163-168)

“The benefit from giving feedback is that I feel satisfied. I have done my

work as best as I can.” (2:101-102)

“I learn many possibilities that could happen in the stage. Thus, I could

give feedback in more specific aspects. I can also learn from my feedback

about what I should and should not do the next time I speak in public.”

(3:80-84)

Even though providing feedback helped the participants improve in different

areas, it headed in the same direction. Providing feedback for the students helped

the participants improve themselves personally as public speakers and

professionally as lecturers. Moreover, the participants also stated that Public

Speaking feedback brings a lot of benefits for students’ learning improvement.

Feedback was essential for the students’ learning process in Public Speaking

course. All participants mentioned that unless the students were willing to record

their performances and analyze them, they were likely to miss important points

from their performances. Therefore, feedback acted as a second opinion that could

help the students learn their strengths and weaknesses in Public Speaking skills.


33

“Criticism is a second opinion. When we think that we are doing just fine or

we are doing great, there is something that we cannot see.” (1:103-132)

“In speaking course, we do not produce any document. When we are

talking, we look at the audience, not the mirror. So, what other people see

would be different from what we feel.” (2:25-26, 30-32)

“Seldom do the students record their performances and watch them.

Therefore other people’s opinions are important to acknowledge their

performance in Public Speaking.” (3:33-36)

All participants also combined the information of students’ performances

with encouragement, so the students were encouraged and motivated to do better

in the future. They motivated their students by changing the term “weakness” into

“room for improvement”, providing quotes and examples of speech from famous

public speakers, and also reducing the students’ anxiety of making mistakes. By

doing so, they hoped that the students would comfortably improve their

performance using the information they had provided before. Therefore, feedback

given in Public Speaking course by the lecturers gave beneficial impacts for both

the students and the lecturers in term of improvement.

2. Constraints

The previous section discusses the improvement experienced by the

lecturers and the students in the process of providing and receiving feedback in

Public Speaking. However, the improvement did not just happen smoothly in the

learning process. There were some obstacles faced by the lecturers that

constrained them from achieving the improvement goals. These obstacles

included the ones that emerged from outside and the ones that emerged from

oneself.


34

The obstacles that emerged from outside were the students’ responses in

receiving feedback and weaknesses of feedback itself. All participants had

experienced teaching some students who did not respond to their feedback

seriously. They also faced some problems related to the limited criteria in

assessment rubric, lack of time allocation, and the time required in giving

feedback.

“The problem is a lot of students [performing] when the time for observing

their performance and composing the feedback is limited. It affects the

assessment validity.” (1:156-158)

“The obstacles are the consumed time and students’ willingness to take the

feedback seriously.” (2:89-90)

“The aspects assessed in the rubric are fixed and limited. So, there are some

aspects that were not covered in the rubric criteria. Meanwhile, additional

aspects might result in superficially discussed feedback.” (3:54-58)

The obstacles that emerged from the lecturers included the inability to

provide complete feedback, tiredness, and the difficulty to deliver the feedback.

The inability to provide complete feedback is also affected by the absence of

documents or record of the performances. Therefore, it was limited only to what

the lecturers could observe while watching the performances. There were a lot of

aspects to be observed, so a few details could be missing from the lecturer’s

observation. As for the tiredness, it resulted from the time and concentration that

were required in composing and delivering the feedback.

“The problem in giving feedback, especially in Public Speaking is

incomplete feedback. Sometimes our feedback does not exactly represent

what really happened in the stage.” (1:142-147)

“I need to concentrate for 100 minutes in order to analyze the performance

and take notes. It is very tiring.” (2:68-70)


35

“Sometimes there are some aspects that I want to comment on, but they are

not on the rubric criteria. So, it is hard to deliver those aspects to the

students. I need to find the examples from my past experiences. (3:50-54)

All of those obstacles might constrain the lecturers in providing beneficial

and professional feedback. It might also affect the assessment validity. All

participants were aware of those possibilities. Therefore, they applied some

solutions to overcome those constraints. When the students did not take the

feedback seriously, the lecturers posted the written feedback on Exelsa and

approached the students personally. As for the time consuming process of

feedback, the lecturers chose to give some particular input orally and in general.

To reduce the possibilities of incomplete feedback, the lecturers wrote down the

notes about the performance, arrange them in a good composition, and then

inform them to the students.

3. Freedom

While giving the feedback and overcoming the obstacles, the participants

were able to choose the types of feedback freely to be applied in their teaching

process. This section discusses those types of feedback used by the participants in

order to achieve the improvement for both the students and the lecturers. The

types of feedback are distinguished by its purpose and timing. The lecturers can

choose to give informative and/or motivational feedback. They can also choose to

give immediate and/or delayed feedback.

All participants provided both informative and motivational feedback in

their teaching process. They informed the students about how well the students

performed, what aspects they had already done well, what aspects they had not


36

done well yet, and the errors that occurred during the performance. They did not

interfere much with the learning process to avoid the students’ being afraid of

making mistakes. Then, they gave some motivation to encourage the students to

improve their performance using the provided feedback. That motivation was

given by emphasizing what they had already done well, mentioning the existent

potentials to be developed, reducing the anxiety of making mistakes and providing

motivational quotes from famous public speaker. They expected that after

receiving both the informative and motivational feedback, the students could be

secure and aware of the errors they made, correct them, and improve their public

speaking skills.

“Both informative and motivational [feedback]. I divide my feedback into

the things that are already good and the things that still require

improvement. I always start my feedback with the good ones.” (3:22-24)

“You are tall. Usually tall man gives a great first impression. It was based

on science of psychology and sociology. So, walk like a man.” (2:21-22, 38-

43)

For the timing of giving feedback, feedback is divided into immediate and

delayed feedback. Participant 1 mentioned that she gave her feedback

immediately in speaking practice. As for the exam, she composed the feedback

based on the rubric, input the scores in Microsoft Excel, and distributed it to the

students at the next meeting. The benefit of multi-tasking while providing

feedback was to ease her job when it came to grading. So, the grade could really

reflect the students’ performances. However, she admitted that the providing

feedback and grading at the same time made it more difficult for her to maintain a

complete and valid assessment. Another participant, Participant 3 gave her


37

feedback immediately on that performance day. The purpose was to keep the

performance clear in the students’ mind so they could understand her feedback

easily. Another reason was so they could move on to the next material. Participant

2 had different preference. After taking notes of the students’ performance, she

would formulate her feedback in sequence and detail based on those notes. Then,

she delivered her feedback a week after the performance. She thought that by

doing so, the feedback for the students could be well organized. Therefore, the

students could understand the points of the feedback more easily.


38

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

In this chapter, the researcher presents the conclusions and the

recommendations of the study. The first section is the conclusions of the study

that were extracted from the previous chapter. The conclusions answer the

research problem “what does giving feedback in Public Speaking mean to the

lecturers in the ELESP of Sanata Dharma University.” The second section is the

recommendations for ELESP students, Public Speaking lecturers and future

researchers.

A. Conclusions

Public Speaking is an essential course for ELESP students, since they will

speak in front of the class whenever they teach. Public Speaking lecturers had an

important role in supporting students’ learning process through feedback.

Therefore, this study was conducted to acknowledge what giving feedback in

Public Speaking means for the lecturers. The data gathered from the in-depth

interviews were clustered into three essential themes. Then these themes were

described and elaborated to answer the research problem.

The first theme was self-improvement. The lecturers saw the feedback in

Public Speaking as a means of self-improvement for both the students and the

lecturers. Since the students could not observe their own performances,

informative feedback acted as second opinion that helped them acknowledge their

public speaking abilities. Meanwhile, motivational feedback encouraged them to


39

develop their skills without feeling anxious of making mistakes. The errors should

be seen as a means to acknowledge the better choice of using language in

communicating in public. Motivational feedback also motivated them to be the

better public speakers.

As for the lecturers, the process of providing feedback for Public Speaking

students allowed them to do some diagnoses of the students’ skills and reflection

about how successful their teaching was. Then, they used those data to prepare the

next material. The diagnosis and reflection resulted in self-improvement as a

professional lecturer. The lecturers could also learn from their own feedback and

the students. The experience about the students’ performance, their errors, the

possibilities that could happen in the stage broaden the lecturer’s knowledge and

experience. That new knowledge helped them to improve personally as public

speakers.

The second theme was constraints. However, in the process of providing

essential and beneficial feedback, the lecturers experienced some constraints.

Those obstacles emerged from outside and inside the lecturers. The outside

obstacles consisted of students’ lack of willingness to take the feedback seriously,

the limited criteria in assessment rubric, lack of time allocation, and the time

required in giving feedback. The constraints that emerged from the lecturers were

the inability to provide complete feedback, tiredness, and the difficulty to deliver

the feedback. Those obstacles could prevent the lecturers from providing

beneficial feedback and valid assessment. It could also restrain the improvement

that was expected to happen in the learning process.


40

The third theme was freedom. The term freedom here referred to the

lecturers’ choices of the types of feedback to be applied in their teaching process.

The types of feedback were divided into informative and motivational feedback,

and immediate and delayed feedback. All participants used both informative and

motivational feedback to support the students’ learning process. However, for the

timing of feedback, they had a different opinion. The first participant, Participant

1, gave the feedback right after the performance. However, for the exam, the

feedback was given in the next meeting. The feedback was also posted in Exelsa,

just in case the students did not listen to what she said in the class. Participant 3

preferred to give feedback for the students right away, so the memory of the

performance was still fresh and they could understand the feedback easily. As for

Participant 2, she chose to give her feedback a week after the performance. After

taking notes, she would formulate the feedback sequentially and thoroughly and

deliver the feedback to the students. Those types of feedback lecturers chose were

expected to increase the self-improvement and decrease the constraint.

B. Recommendations

Providing feedback in Public Speaking course could really help the students

and the lecturers improve themselves. For Public Speaking lecturers, the

researcher recommends that they keep giving both informative and motivational

feedback to the students. They should use the types of feedback that are suitable

for each Public Speaking topic and the ones they are comfortable with. Giving

feedback in Public Speaking requires face-to-face meeting and a lot of time. Thus,

they need to consider some alternative and effective ways in giving feedback that


41

require less time. For example, having the students’ performances recorded could

result in less required time, less tiredness, and more valid assessment. Another

obstacle for the lecturers is the students’ willingness to take the feedback

seriously. There are various characteristics of the students. Some of the students

cannot take feedback seriously. However, the lecturers are expected to help all of

the students improve their public speaking skills. Personal feedback and personal

approach can be used to try dealing with these students. The lecturers need to keep

motivating these students in their learning process. If personal approach does not

work, the lecturers can post the written feedback in communication media, for

example Exelsa.

For the students, receiving feedback brings a lot of benefits, i.e. additional

and essential information about their performance, support and motivation.

Feedback was so essential to learning Public Speaking skills. In Public Speaking,

the students will be talking in front of public, not a mirror. What they think or feel

they are doing can be different from what they actually did. Therefore, the

students should take the feedback the lecturers seriously, since the lecturers could

give them the information they need. Then, the students need to learn from the

feedback, and try to avoid doing the same mistakes in the future. Only by doing

so, could the students keep practicing and improving to be better public speakers.

The next recommendation is for the future researchers. This study discussed

the lecturers’ lived experience in giving feedback in Public Speaking in ELESP.

However, feedback is an inseparable part of learning development. Every leaning

process requires feedback as a means of learning development. The lecturers who


42

provide the beneficial feedback play an important role. What they experience,

believe, and feel could affect the essence of feedback itself. The researcher

encourages the future researchers to conduct the research about lecturers’ lived

experience in giving feedback in other ELESP courses.


43

REFERENCES

Borg, W., & Gall, M. (1983) Educational research: An introduction (4th

ed.). New

York (White Plains): Longman Inc.

Brown, G., Anderson, A., Sillcock, R. & Yule, G. (1984) Teaching talk:

Strategies for production and assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Cresswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2010). Designing and conducting mixed

method research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publication, Inc.

Davidson, J. (2003). The complete guide to public speaking. Hoboken: John

Wiley & Sons Inc.

Grice, G., & Skinner, J. (1995) Mastering public speaking. Boston: Allyn &

Bacon.

Haminton, C. (2012). Essentials of public speaking (5th

ed.). Boston: Wadsworth.

Irfani, B. (2014). Proceedings of ICEL ’02: The international conference of

education and language. Lampung: Bandar Lampung University.

King, P. E., Young, M. J., Behnke, & R. R. (2000). Public speaking performance

improvement as a function of information processing in immediate and

delayed feedback interventions. Communication education, 49(4), 365-374.

Lewis, M. (2002). giving feedback in language classes. Singapore: SEAMEO

Regional Language Center.

London, M. (2003). Job feedback: Giving, seeking, and using feedback for

performance improvement (2nd

ed.). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates, Inc.

Lucas, S. (2009). The art of public speaking (10th

ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Luoma, S. (2004) Assessing speaking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Manen, M. V. (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action

sensitive pedagogy. New York: State University of New York Press.

Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks:

Sage Publication, Inc.


44

Neuman,W. (2006). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative

approaches (6th

ed.). New York: Pearson.

Seidman, I. E. (1991).Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for

researchers in education and the social sciences. New York: Teachers

College Press.

Sherman, R., & Webb, R. (1988). Qualitative research in education: Focus and

methods. New York: The Falmer Press.

Tesch, R. (1990). Qualitative research: Analysis types and software tools. New

York: The Falmer Press.

Zamel, V. (1981). A Model for Feedback in the ESL Classroom. TESOL

Quarterly, 15, 139-150.


45

APPENDICES


46

Appendix 1

Construct Mapping

Feedback

Public

Speaking

(PS)

Giving

feedback in

Public

Speaking

Lecturer‟s role

Problems encountered

Belief about PS

Advantage

Disadvantage

Criteria/ requirements

of good PS

PS in ELESP

Belief about giving

feedback in PS

Advantage

Disadvantage

Experience

Any expectation

Lecturers

of Public

Speaking

Lecturer‟s educational

background

Personal motivation

Disadvantage

Types of feedback

Criteria of good

feedback

Advantage

Belief about feedback

The coverage

of PS in

ELESP

Discouraging

experience

Encouraging

experience

Belief about

PS in ELESP

Lecturers‟

lived

experience in

giving

feedback in

Public

Speaking in

ELESP in

USD


47

Appendix 2

Bracketing and Horizonalization (Participant 1)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

(Pengalaman) yang menyenangkan itu kalau didengarkan. Kemudian di

tindak lanjuti. Feedback ada dua. Satu oral, satu tertulis. Yang oral itu

biasanya aku sampaikan setiap kali abis ada yang presentasi itu. Aku beri

secara spesifik. Saya mengundang teman-teman (memberi) komentar what

is good and what needs to be improved. Kemudian saya juga memberi

masukan. Biasanya masukan saya terdiri dari tiga. Yaitu tentang content,

oranganisasi, sama bahasa. Plus yang lain-lain, kaya delivery, body

language, dan sebagainya. Yang tertulis juga seperti itu. Manfaatnya kalo

oral itu semua dengar, bisa belajar dan aktual ya, tadi barusan liat.

Kemudian kalo tertulis, anak bisa menyimpan karna kadang diberi oral

feedback tapi gak nyatet. Yang menyenangkan adalah kalo didengarkan

kalo kita memberi oral feedback, terus anak-anaknya mencatat, gitu.

Kemudian tidak melakukan kesalahan yang sama lagi di masa depan. Yang

tidak menyenangkan tentu saja kalau tidak didengarkan, tidak

ditindaklanjuti. Kaya kemarin saya memberi feedback di mata kuliah

translation. Di kelas sebelumnya, pas saya memberi oral feedback, anak-

anak nyatet, kemudian bertanya. Sedangkan yang ribut sendiri dan gigi saya

sakit waktu itu. Jadi sangat tidak menyenangkan. Tapi saya maklum.

Biasanya saya tindak lanjuti dengan nulis feedback saya secara keseluruhan.

Saya rangkum, lalu saya tulis di exelsa. Biasanya sih ada yang baca, tapi

lebih banyak yang tidak baca. Sering (terjadi di) kelas Public Speaking, tapi

tidak di semua kelas. Karakter kelas kan beda-beda ya. Jadi ada kelas yang

nyatetan, terus rajin konsultasi. Tapi ada kelas yang senengnya ribut sendiri.

Semuanya ada di PBI. Kalo misalnya mereka ribut sendiri paling saya tepuk

tangan, terus “mau dengerin gak?” Karna kadang-kadang itu saya harus

tegas. Tahun lalu itu saya ngajar dua kelas. Dua kelas itu karakternya beda.

Yang satu itu bagus di style, tapi bahasanya mawut. Yang satunya

bahasanya bagus tapi stylenya terlalu pakem, Tapi gakpapa saya suka

kedua-duanya. Masing-masing itu ada kelebihan dan kelemahannya. Saya

pernah marah dulu kelas Public Speaking. Itu ada hubungannya dengan

esensi Public Speaking itu sendiri. Jadi tahun 2012 itu saya pertama datang

ke Sanata Dharma ya, setelah saya studi. Itu saya ngajar Public Speaking

angkatan 2010. Di kelas itu, anaknya bagus-bagus, tapi ada anak yang tidak

committed di kelas. Suatu hari itu, hari ulang tahun saya, saya sedang

menstruasi, dan anak saya sakit. Jadi ada tiga faktor personal yang

mempengaruhi. Tujuan saya kalo ngajar, saya pengen kita ada interaksi.

Kemudian kita saling diperkaya oleh interaksi itu. Kamu bisa belajar

menguasai skill Public Speaking dengan baik, saya bisa membantu kamu

mencapai tujuan itu. Jadi kita itu saling membantu. Bagaimana mungkin

saya membantu mereka kalo mereka tidak mau dibantu. Jadi suatu hari, saya

menjelaskan tentang how to be moderator. Ketika saya ngomong itu, saya

sadar nobody was listening. Saya ngukuti buku dan computer. Saya keluar


48

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

ke ruangan saya. Anak-anak itu nggak sadar. Maka saya sudah sampe di

ruangan itu baru disusul. Mereka itu datang nyusul saya, „Miss, Ms. M

marah ya?‟ “Iya, marah, tau nggak aku ngomong aja kalian nggak dengerin.

Aku pergi aja kalian nggak tau kan. Terus bagaimana mungkin kalian bisa

mempelajari pelajaranku itu, kalo kalian memperhatikan aja tu nggak.” Aku

bilang gini, “kalian boleh ngomongin dulu sana, aku di ruanganku, kalian

ngobrol dulu, kamu tetep mau aku yang ngajar gak. Karena aku merasa

kalian tidak mencintaiku. Kalo misalnya kalian menginginkanku, kalian

pasti mendengarkan aku. Ternyata mereka minta ketemu. Terus aku datang

ke kelas. “Kalo kamu pengen jadi public speaker tapi kamu tidak mau

belajar tentang Public Speaking, what are you going to be?” Public speaking

is one hundred percent attention. Kalo kita mau ngomong ke orang, kita

harus tau audience kita itu siapa. Kita gak mungkin menyambi Public

Speaking. Mahasiswa dan saya belajar hari itu tentang if you want

something, if you want a change, then you have to make it. Saya memilih

waktu itu untuk berbenturan dengan mereka, dan ternyata berhasil. Sejak

itu, they were the nicest students. Kalo kita bener-bener mau membantu,

kita harus bener-bener mau nampar. Aku bilang ke mereka, I do this

because I do love you. Kalo aku tidak sayang sama kalian, I don‟t care.

Jangan sampe proses ngajar itu nggak ada gunanya, wasted. Orang tuanya

udah bayar tapi mereka nggak dapat ilmu. Aku emang dapat gaji tapi aku

nggak dapat kepuasan kerja. Itu pengalamanku how to deal with students

who are noisy. Ada yang saya diamkan. Kaya semester ini, saya masih

menunggu. Karena anak-anaknya itu baik sebenarnya. Cuma memang ribut.

Ya udahlah. Toh ketika saya memberi mereka tugas, mereka bisa

melakukannya dengan baik. Makanya treatment saya ke kelas ini beda

dengan treatment saya ke kelas lain. Jadi saya nggak bisa menerapkan

metode yang sama ke dua kelas yang berbeda. Kalo practice biasanya

langsung oral (feedback). Kita langsung komentari kurang apa, apa yang

masih harus diperbaiki. Misalnya openingnya nggak catchy, terus endingnya

nggak bang! Kalo ada yang bang! itu aku tunjukan. Misalnya pake quote

yang sangat strong. Tapi ada juga yang tertulis. Kalo ujian, ada rubriknya.

Aku masukin ke excel jadi langsung ketauan dia nilainya berapa. Terus

pertemuan berikutnya itu saya bagi. Ada nilai angka sama strength and

weakness, terus peluang apa yang masih bisa kamu lakukan untuk hal itu.

Kemudian ada lagi yang oral tapi general. Jadi abis midtest itu biasanya

saya bikin refleksi satu lembar. Itu isinya tentang overall. Misalnya

outlining itu opening, body, closing. Ada anak yang kalo speaking itu

openingnya banyak, kemana-mana, isinya nggak ada, closingnya juga

kelamaan. Kaya dulu di kelasnya student E, teknik itu masih salah. Tapi

kalo imaginasi, mereka kreatif. Stylenya itu juga macem-macem. Ada yang

question, ada yang story telling. Kalau kelasnya student A, format tu

menang. Tapi mereka kurang kreatif karna mereka terlalu terpaku pada

pakemnya. Aku komentari itu dua-duanya. Satu lembar itu untuk dua kelas

yang berbeda. Kelas ini begini, kelas itu begitu. Biar mereka itu bisa melihat

di kelas lain itu seperti apa, dan mereka bisa belajar dari kelas lain. Dua-


49

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

duanya (informational and motivational). Saya dulu pernah nulis taun lalu,

“I know that you have done your best, but there are still things you need to

learn. I know that you can do it. I have high hopes for you, guys.” Jadi saya

memang menyebutnya sebagai refleksi. Kemudian di akhir itu saya

memberi motivasi sama quotes dari public speaker terkenal (seperti) Oprah

Winfrey. Intinya supaya mereka encouraged karena ada hasilnya yang dapat

C juga. Bagi yang (dapat) A, itu bukan artinya bahwa kamu terus berhenti

belajar. Bagi yang (dapat) B itu bukan artinya kamu cuma average. Dan

buat yang (dapat) C itu bukan artinya ini final. Masih banyak kesempatan,

saya sebutkan kesempatan apa. Public speaker itu proses. Tidak berhenti.

Sekarang itu baru introduction to Public Speaking. Jadi Public Speaking

yang sebenarnya itu nanti. Jadi kamu masih tetep bisa develop yourself. Ku

kasih link-link video di youtube buat referensi kalo mau bikin pidato yang

baik. Internet tu udah kaya sekali. Saya tinggal copy paste linknya di situ.

Bagi yang rajin dia langsung melihat. Kalo yang nggak ya itu pilihan

mereka. Tapi aku pikir mereka belajar dari temennya (di) Public Speaking

dan kalopun mereka tidak improve Public Speakingnya, setidaknya mereka

become aware. Awarenessnya itu kalo public speaker yang baik harus

begini, harus begitu, mereka tau meskipun belum sampe bisa

melakukannya. Kupikir tidak masalah karna Public Speaking mereka kan

nggak berhenti sampe saat ini. Justru malah karir Public Speaking mereka

itu nanti. Setelah berkerja, setelah mereka mungkin berkeluarga, bergabung

dengan gereja. Baru nyadar Public Speaking itu penting. Sebagai seorang

guru, Public Speaking is like everday thing. Bagiku (peran feedback)

penting banget. Karena apalah gunanya kuliah kalau nggak ada feedback.

Maksudku kalo mahasiswa itu masuk, mau berproses. Kemudian endingnya

kalau bisa tuh lebih baik hasilnya. Road to perfection is paved to be

perfection. Aku percaya bahwa kritik itu seperti jamu yang bikin badan kita

kuat. Kalau denger itu mungkin nggak enak, tapi itu bikin kita kuat. Untuk

menjadi lebih baik dari posisi A menjadi posisi B, itu bukan jalan yang

mudah. Mereka harus secara kognitif belajar teorinya bagaimana. Terus

secara conscience, mereka menyerap nilai-nilai yang harus dipegang kalo

menjadi public speaker. Terus compassion juga. Apa yang bisa aku

sumbangkan pada orang lain ketika aku ngomong. Jadi pemilihan topik juga

harus disesuaikan. Ketika orang lain ngomong kita juga harus

mendengarkan. Kemudian, anak-anak itu tau aku baik apa nggak itu dari

mana kalo dosennya nggak ngomong. Itu tanggung jawab seorang dosen,

seorang guru untuk memberi feedback. Feedback itu tujuannya bukan untuk

menjudge tapi untuk memberi encouragement. Jadi (feedback) saya itu

bukan strength sama weakness, tapi strength sama room for improvement.

Kritik itu seperti spion. Kita kan nggak tau di belakang kita itu apa, tapi

begitu ada spion, kita jadi tau. Kritik itu adalah second opinion. Ketika saya

berpikir, „kayanya tadi aku baik-baik saja, aku tadi bagus,‟ ada yang tidak

kita lihat. Itulah gunanya kita denger orang lain, yang dalam hal ini dosen

yang memberi feedback. Dosen yang teorinya, prakteknya udah tau. Ketika

melihat anak berlatih, maka dengan pengetahuan dan pengalaman, (dosen)


50

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

161

162

163

164

165

166

167

168

169

170

171

172

173

174

175

176

177

178

179

180

itu harusnya bisa melihat anak ini kurang apa, harus bagaimana. Itu tugas

seorang namanya supervisor. Jadi lebih ke komunikasi. Ketika ada

perjumpaan di classroom, harus ada perubahaan untuk hal yang baik.

Bedanya lebih ke teknisnya. Kalau di Public Speaking yang dikomentari itu

content, organization, language, sama delivery. Kalau mata kuliah

translation, ada yang process oriented, product oriented. Jadi kupikir

naturenya sama. Ada oral and written feedback. Ada yang online feedback

juga. Kekurangannya feedback terutama di Public Speaking adalah tidak

lengkap. Kadang-kadang itu pas dengerin Public Speaking, menikmati terus

nggak sempat nulis. Atau dia saking nggak jelasnya, saya nggak tau dia

ngomong apa sehingga (tidak tahu) apa yang harus dikomentari.

Kekurangannya adalah kadang-kadang feedback kita tidak benar-benar

menggambarkan apa yang terjadi gitu ya. Kendalanya itu multi tasking

ketika kita mendengarkan Public Speaking, apalagi kalo langsung

dimasukan ke excel. Kalo langsung dimasukan ke excel itu enaknya adalah

nilai langsung selesai. Kalau tidak dimasukan ke excel, tertunda, itu udah

geseh nanti. Kita pengen sevalid mungkin memberi feedback, tapi

multitasking nulis, computer (excel), dengerin, lihat, itu kadang-kadang

konslet sendiri otak saya. Konsentrasi penuh. Terus kadang-kadang

mahasiswa terlalu cepat. Belum saatnya naik udah naik. Jadi kita tinggalkan

yang giliran tadi, terus kita fokus ke yang ini. Itu yang kewalahan. Jadi saya

bilang nanti ya, belum siap saya. Itu kendalanya kalo jumlah pesertanya

banyak tapi waktu sedikit. Kekurangan waktu dan akhirnya mungkin

berdampak pada validitas assessment. Atau setidaknya feedbacknya tidak

lengkap. Harusnya saya bisa ngomong banyak (feedback) konstruktif, tapi

nggak (bisa), karena saya lebih fokus ke angka. Begitu saya fokus ke sini,

angka lewat. Kalo (keuntungan di) aku jelas dokumentasi nilai. Kalau udah

akhir semester itu gampang. Meringankan pekerjaan, tidak pikiran, terus

kita juga tau mahasiswa kita itu seberapa (kemampuannya). Kita udah

sukses belum, dan yang jelas adalah diagnosa mereka kurang apa. Misalkan

katakanlah di kelas banyak anak yang gesturenya nggak begitu (bagus).

Berarti materi berikutnya yang harus aku berikan adalah teori tentang body

language, kemudian prakteknya. Jadi feedback itu berguna bagiku untuk

(mengetahui) apa yang perlu aku siapkan. Dari feedback itu, aku juga

belajar. Mereka grammarnya kok parah, abis will kok V-ing. Jadi aku harus

nambah bahas (materinya). Terus setiap kali mereka ngomong, aku

perhatikan, aku catet. Biasanya ada anak yang nggak berani natap mata.

Terus saya selalu bilang di feedback saya, kita tantang ya student H. Abis

mid tes1 udah berani natap. Udah berani natap kemaren. Pokoknya ada

masalah apa dengan mahasiswa, kita bisa langsung address aja. Terus

treatmentnya apa. Itu yang membahagiakan kalo mereka ada di posisi A ke

posisi B ada perubahan. Kalo dari A yo tetep wae ora berubah, berarti dia

nggak ikut berproses. Harapanku adalah mereka mensyukuri dan menyadari.

Mensyukuri bahwa mereka sudah bisa. Karena banyak mahasiswa yang

terlalu negative. Aku mau feedbackku yang strength itu membuat mereka

tau, „oh ternyata aku spesifik apa itu udah bagus,” dan mensyukuri nek


51

181

182

183

184

185

186

187

mereka itu sebenernya udah bisa. Tapi kan itu bikin kita sombong kalo

cuma tau kehebatan kita. Jadinya aku kasih room for improvement.

“However to be a good public speaker, you need to improve in this areas.”

Kalau aku tau kebetulan ada video bagus, link-link bagus, buku bagus, itu

aku tulis. Kemudian (harapanku mereka) mau mendengarkan atau

melakukan saranku. Agar mereka bisa mencapai tujuan, yaitu menjadi a

good public speaker.


52

Appendix 3


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

Kalau buruk tidak ada. Tapi agak resisting informasi yang saya berikan,

awalnya. Jadi ketika saya mengatakan, kamu tuh kalau jalan, jangan terlalu

melambai. Pokoknya tegak. Dan at some point, itu mungkin karena tidak

pernah ada yang mengatakan seperti itu. Jadi lebih pada kaget. Dan

ekspresinya agak „hah, kok ngomongnya malah kesitu‟. Iya harus ke situ.

Karena itu masalah public speakingnya, bukan bahasanya. Bahasa itu lain

perkara. Jadi lebih pada responnya. Karena ternyata perkataan saya itu hal

yang tidak mereka sadari, tapi saya bisa melihat. Waktu itu pernah juga

saya mengatakan, “saya sempet menghitung berapa kali kamu mengatakan

oke.” Nah itu kan unconscious. Bahkan saya pun kadang seperti itu, which

is ok. Hanya kan ada satu saat dimana saya harus mengatakan itu kepada

mahasiswa tersebut. “Kamu selama 5 menit ini bilang oke nya 10 kali.” „Ah

masa sih, Miss‟. “Iya tadi ini saya hitung loh satu persatu.” The next week

after that itu malah berkurang. Berarti dia sudah mulai sadar. Ketika

ngomong itu nggak hanya langsung ngomong, tapi dipikir. Mereka

memproses informasi baru itu beda-beda. Ada yang langsung ngeh. Ada

yang it takes ya beberapa minggu. (Kejadiannya) sekitar 1 tahun yang lalu.

2013 berarti. Tapi saya agak lupa kelasnya yang mana. Yang exciting lebih

pada ketika saya berhasil membuat mahasiswa itu sadar dan mereka

mengamini itu. „Iya miss saya itu selalu merasa kayak gitu tapi nggak

pernah ada yang berani ngomong kaya gitu‟. Ya contohnya itu, “walk like a

man.” Karena gesture itu sangat menentukan bagaiman cara orang

melihatmu. Jadi lebih ke revelation. Kaya insight, ilham. Dan dia mau

berusaha (berubah). Itu yang menyenangkan bagi saya. Menurut saya

(feedback itu) penting. Entahlah untuk mahasiswa. Karena kalau speaking

itu tidak ada dokumennya. Kalau kelas writing itu pasti ada dokumennya.

Bisa dicorat-coret, bisa di delete, bisa di tambah. Kalau speaking itu kan

real time. Jadi apapun yang keluar dari mulut kita, itulah yang akan

didengarkan oleh pendengar. Dan kita tidak mungkin menghapusnya. Yang

bisa kita lakukan adalah mengkoreksinya. Dan ketika kita ngomong, kita

tidak melihat mirror. Kita melihat orang lain. Jadi apa yang dilihat orang

lain itu akan berbeda dengan apa yang saya rasakan. Peer feedback itu juga

penting. Hanya kadang-kadang level pemahamannya itu masih agak kurang.

Jadi feedbacknya ya „its good‟, „thats good‟, tapi how do you define good?

Itulah tugas dosen. Memberikan feedback yang sedetail mungkin. Memang

capek karena harus one on one. Makanya kadang-kadang feedbacknya

personal, kadang-kadang in general di dalam kelas, supaya saya tidak

terlalu capek. Both (informational and motivational). Contohnya itu tadi,

mahasiswa yang jalannya terlalu santai. Saya bilang, “kamu sudah tinggi.

Biasanya orang tinggi itu memberikan impresi pertama yang bagus. Karena

semua orang akan mempunyai ekspektasi tinggi terhadap orang yang

berperawakan tinggi. Dan itu sesuai dengan ilmu psikologi dan ilmu


53

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

sosiologi.” Itu motivational. Tentu saya harus membahas tentang

pronunciation-nya, grammar-nya, organization of ideas-nya, flow-nya. Itu

tetap saya harus kasih tau. Biasanya (feedback diberikan) a week after.

Karena katakanlah ada dua kloter, saya tidak mungkin memberikan

feedback pada saat itu. Jadi biasanya saya lihat dulu. Coretan-coretan saya

saya formulasi ulang dengan tidak merubah isinya. Kemudian baru saya

bisa bercerita sccara detail dan runut. Karena kalau hanya berdasarkan

notes, kadang-kadang saya lupa. Saya pernah (menggunakan) love letter.

Ada scoresnya dan komentar. Itu sangat efektif dan penting menurut saya

dan banyak mahasiswa. Hanya itu takes time and energy. Jadi semester

kemarin saya gagal melakukan itu. Jadi saya lebih pada memberikan oral

feedback dengan scorenya. Kemudian sambil saya cerita, mereka mencatat.

Itu juga sama-sama efektif. (Feedback diberikan secara) personal. Karena

tiap orang berbeda. Di kelas Public Speaking kita dulu ada sekitar 28-30

anak. Berarti ada 30 characteristics dan kemampuan. Kalau (feedbacknya)

itu saya rangkum, akan tidak efektif dan tidak meaningful untuk kedua

belah pihak. Menurut saya personal akan jauh lebih baik. General iya, tapi

lebih pada yang umum terjadi aja. Tapi kalo yang detail-detail itu

mendingan personal aja. Karena mungkin ada beberapa yang tidak nyaman

kalau diomongkan di dalam kelas. Biasanya kalau setelah ujian itu kan kita

agak relaks. Baru pada saat itu one on one di dalam kelas, sambil yang lain

tetep diberi tugas, melakukan atau mempersiapkan (sesuatu). Tetap ada

kegiatan selama saya ngasih feedback. Kalau saya pribadi kekurangannya

itu lebih ke time consuming. Karena harus real time, bertemu. Kalau kelas

writing kan saya bisa lakukan dimana saja, tidak harus bertemu dengan

orang yang bersangkutan. Yang kedua, konsentrasi saya harus tinggi selama

100 menit itu untuk menganalisa dan untuk menulis catatan-catatan. Untuk

10 orang itu sangat melelahkan. Pernah (penampilannya) direkam. Itu

efisien dari sisi waktu, dan mahasiswa pun tidak harus berada di dalam

kelas. Mereka bisa melakukannya di luar kelas. Bisa latihan beberapa kali

sebelum di shoot. Tapi di saat bersamaan, agak susah bagi saya untuk

mengalami atmosfir yang muncul di dalam kelas itu. Karena atmosfir itu

diciptakan oleh pembicara. Kalau dari kamera, everything looks perfect.

Tapi kalo di dalam kelas, ketika ada suara, terus dia gimana kan keliatan.

Ekspresinya keliatan. Itu memang positif negatifnya ya. Kalau pakai video

itu efektif, tapi saya kurang bisa menikmati dan mencoba memahami

prosesnya di dalam kelas. Tapi kalau di dalam kelas, bagus saya bisa

melihat apa yang terjadi pada saat itu, sehingga nilainya itu detail, tapi

capek. Saya 2011 pernah pakai (video). Final projectnya mereka

mendemonstrasikan bagaimana cara membuat media (untuk) mengajar

siswa bahasa inggris. 2013 ini belum tau. (Cara ini) bagus, dalam arti

mahasiswanya pun menikmati. Karena mereka bisa nyambi tugas sana sini

sambil bikin videonya, which is okay. Membebani? At some point iya, tapi

it‟s part of my job. Memang itu resikonya kalo mengajar speaking dan

pengen idealis dalam hal pemberian feedback. Hanya kadang-kadang saya

realistis. Jadi instead of making love letter, yaudah face to face aja biar


54

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

gampang. Kalo ada pertanyaan saya bisa langsung menjawab. Hambatannya

itu lebih pada waktu sama kemauan mahasiswa untuk menerima feedback.

Ada yang dikritik itu „yayaya‟ ada yang cuma diem aja, flat expression. It

takes two people to do conversation. Kalo hanya sekedar menerima,

gampang di saya tapi saya juga bertanya, “kamu dong gak sih sebenernya?

Apakah ini membantu atau tidak?” Gak tiap saat (saya) harus bertanya

seperti itu. Biasanya saya kasih pertanyaan awal dan saya suruh cerita

pengalamannya gimana. “Kamu nggak pedenya pas kapan selama proses 7

menit ngomong di depan itu?” Dari situ saya bisa memasukan informasi

yang saya dapat,. (Pertanyaan tersebut) hanya ke beberapa (mahasiswa)

yang sepertinya tidak terbiasa untuk mengekspresikan diri. Itu suatu

kendala ketika mau memberikan feedback tapi org lain gak merespon.

Lebih keuntungan kepuasan. Bahwa saya sudah melakukan tugas saya

dengan semaksimal mungkin. Karena saya berkewajiban untuk memberikan

input sebanyak mungkin. Karena selama ini kalo speaking, as long as

you‟re doing good in front of the class, that‟s good. Tapi ada kalanya

mahasiswa pengen tau apa yang bagus, apa yang gak bagus, mana yang

harus saya perkuat, mana yang sudah harus dipertahankan. Itu penting

Burden? Not really. Paling tidak diingat. Kalau bisa diaplikasikan, that

would be great. Hanya itu kan lebih ke personal choice. Kalau udah diingat,

itu akan secara otomatis terintregasi setiap kali dia ngomong di depan

orang. Itu lebih ke personal reflection juga. Jadi tidak hanya sekedar

memberikan feedback, tapi saya ingin juga mahasiswa itu mempunyai

kemauan untuk selalu berefleksi. Sesimple apapun. Ketika orang (berpikir)

„eh ini bener nggak‟, itu sudah refleksi. Berarti dia mengingat sesuatu yang

pernah dibahas di Public Speaking. That‟s more than enough for me.

Karena it‟s a long process ya.


55

Appendix 4


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

Kalau (kejadian) menyenangkannya sih beda-beda tiap angkatan. Dan tiap

kelas itu kan anaknya beda-beda. Jadi yang dikasih feedback juga aspeknya

pasti ada yang biasa aja, tapi ada yang butuh banyak improvement. Dan

kadang dari situ, kita bisa belajar banyak. Kalo aspek yang dinilai itu sama

untuk setiap kelas. Hanya depth of the feedbacknya itu beda-beda untuk

setiap anak. Setiap anak yang bisa ku ambil jadi contoh itu menyenangkan,

karena kita punya real example. Semua temen-temen yang lain juga liat dia

peerformnya gimana. Jadi pas kita kasih feedback itu semua nyangkut,

mudeng. Yang nggak menyenangkan kalo mahasiswanya itu nggak mau

mencoba. Jadi dia bermain aman aja. Kalo misalnya dia nggak mau

berusaha meningkatkan kemampuan Public Speaking nya, penampilannya

akan biasa-biasa aja gitu. Jadi cuma kita sendiri yang bisa menganggap itu

hal yang menyenangkan atau nggak menyenangkan. Kalo aku nemu anak

yang seperti itu, aku try to encourage them that it‟s okay to make mistakes.

Karena dari kesalahan itulah kita bisa belajar jadi Public Speaker yang lebih

baik, (Anak seperti itu) pasti ada, at least dalam setiap kelas. Beberapa anak

yang masih kurang PD harus di boost supaya maju, dan berani berbicara. Itu

yang butuh ekstra attention. Tapi ada juga disisi lain anak yang over

confident. Jadi dia tu senang sekali maju. Setiap di tanya “any volunteer?”

dia pasti tunjuk tangan terus. Tapi jadinya kelas tu udah bosen duluan.

Karena tau kalo ditanyain pasti dia maju. Jadi kita pinter-pinternya aja

balance antara yang minder sama yang over. Dua-duanya (informational

dan motivational. Jadi feedback tu aku bagi dua. Yang sudah bagus sama

yang masih perlu improvement. Selalu aku mulai dari yang bagus dulu.

“Kamu tadi bagusnya ini, tapi masih ada beberapa hal yang masih perlu

ditingkatkan.” Jadi dua-duanya komplit. (Feedback diberikan) hari itu juga.

Misalnya hanya tiga orang, berarti nunggu tiga tiganya maju baru aku

ngasih summary. Tapi kalo cuma kaya hot seat, yang biasanya cuma satu

sampe dua orang per meeting, itu langsung. Setelah dia perform, aku kasih

feedback, baru kelas. Karena pertimbanganku sih itu warming up activity,

belum main activity di kelas. Jadi aku sengaja kasih feedbacknya langsung.

Biar bisa segera move on ke main activity-nya. Ngga keburu lupa. Kalau

menurutku sih, (feedback) masih penting sekali. Kecuali kita rajin

ngerekam performance kita sendiri dan kita bisa liat. Tapi kan jarang ada

yang mau seperti itu. Jadi ya pendapat orang lain tu penting sekali untuk

mengetahui seberapa bagus kita di Public Speaking. Jadi feedback itu lebih

berguna daripada sekedar angka. Karena (kalau angka saja) kamu nggak

tau bagusnya di mana, apakah masih ada yang perlu ditingkatkan? Jadi

lebih ke prosesnya aja. Dulu ada beberapa topik yang aku juga minta

feedback dari temennya, jadi bukan cuma aku. Cuma (feedback) dosen

penting ya. Karena dosen yang mengajar, diasumsikan bahwa dosen tu yang

mengetahui teorinya, bagusnya kaya gimana, dan bisa memberi saran dan


56

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

masukan yang essential. Kalo (feedback) yang dari temen-temen yang lain

bisa sebagai tambahan. Tapi yang utama itu yang dari dosen. Kalau Public

Speaking, biar gayeng kita harus kasih modelling dulu. Kita harus share

experience. Apakah dulu kita udah pernah kasih pidato, pidatonya kaya

gimana, rasanya kaya gimana. Bukan beban ya, tapi maksudnya bikin deg-

degan. Kalo untuk ngasih feedback, karena kriterianya udah jelas di rubric,

nggak terlalu membebani. Cuma yang membebani mungkin kalo misalnya

gak tau apa lagi yang harus (dikasih feedback.) Kadang ada performance

yang pengen kita kasih feedback, tapi itu ngga ada di rubrik. Jadi susah

membahasakannya. Itu yang kadang kadang susah. Karena kita harus..

mencari past experience supaya mereka juga tau maksudnya kita mau

ngomong apa sih. Kekurangannya mungkin aspek yang dinilai di rubrik itu

udah fix dan terbatas. Karena kalau kita masukan terlalu banyak aspek,

nanti kita jadi ngga bisa eksplor masing masing aspek. Nggak bisa ngasih

feedback yang mendalam. Jadi ada beberapa hal yang tidak ter-cover di

dalam aspek rubrik penilaian Public Speaking. (Kelebihannya) buat mereka

perform lebih bagus. (Hambatannya) mungkin lebih ke anaknya. Kalo

misalnya anaknya itu mau menerima feedback dan improve himself or

herself, aku seneng. Tapi kadang ada juga anak yang cuman „ini

kewajibanku, jadi misalnya aku perform, ini hanya untuk dapat nilai.‟ Jadi

yaudah, dia tampil ala kadarnya. Mungkin tampil sebaik mungkin, tapi dia

nggak peduli dengan feedback. Karena pikirnya dia kan „yaudah giliranku

udah selesai. Buat apa aku belajar lagi dari feedback yang diberikan?‟ Itu

harus personal approach. Dulu aku udah pernah nyoba metode preaching di

depan kelas. Tapi kayanya itu hanya dianggap angin lalu. Yaudah, akhirnya

lebih ke personal aja. Jadi setelah kelas, misalnya pas selama berproses di

dalam kelas itu, kita ngedeketin, terus membahas yang tadi itu. “Tadi kok

kamu gini sih? Kamu sebenernya bisa lebih bagus lagi loh kalo kaya gini.

Tadi kok kamu gini kenapa? Apakah kurang tidur? Biasanya kalo dideketin

secara personal, mereka lebih appreciate daripada di address ke semuanya,

kan mereka juga nggak suka. Tapi kan kadang ada yang perlu mereka

semua tau, ada juga yangcuma orangnya ini aja yang tau. (Kejadiannya)

dulu pas kelas Public Speaking, tapi lupa precisenya. Harapannya jelas,

mereka itu menerima saran dan kritik. Dan next time they perform, mereka

sudah bisa improve aspects yang masih kurang kemarin. Sama lebih PD lagi

ketika ngomong. Pastinya aku juga belajar. Jadi dari performance anak-

anak, banyak hal yang bisa kupelajari. Jadi nggak cuma mereka doang yang

belajar, tapi aku juga bisa belajar. Aku bisa belajar berbagai kemungkinan

yang bisa terjadi di atas panggung atau di depan. Jadi lebih banyak aspek

yang bisa dikasih feedback dan dengan sendirinya itu juga ngasih feedback

ke diri sendiri. Jadi misalnya next time aku kasih speech, harus kaya gini,

jangan begini. Jadi sama sama belajar aja keuntungannya.


PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI … fileLanguage Education Study Program, Department of...

Documents

Transcript of PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI … fileLanguage Education Study Program, Department of...