students’ and lecturers’ perception on the … filekarena diskusi kelompok terarah jarang...

i

STUDENTS’ AND LECTURERS’ PERCEPTION ON THE

IMPLEMENTATION

OF FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION IN TRANSLATION

SUBJECT

A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements

to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree

in English Language Education

By

Slavian Oktabri Delastyanto

Student Number: 131214171

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM

DEPARTEMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION

FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

YOGYAKARTA

2017

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

ii

APPROVAL PAGE


iii


iv

I dedicate this Thesis to:

My Father

My Mother

My Sister

and My Brother


v

STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY


vi


vii

ABSTRACT

Delastyanto, Slavian Oktabri. (2017). Students’ and Lecturer’s Perceptions on the

Implementation of Focus Group Discussion in Translation Subject. Yogyakarta:

English Language Education Study Program, Sanata Dharma University.

There are many strategies used by the lecturer to teach translation. One of

the strategies is focus group discussion. This strategy is new to be applied in the

education field as a teaching strategy. People regard Focus Group Discussion as a

a research data gathering tool. However, in translation course or subject of English

Language Study Program of Sanata Dharma University, Focus Group discussion is

implemented. Since Focus Group Discussion is rarely used as teaching strategies,

this strategy has its own disadvantages and advantages. Thus, the researcher intends

to find out the fact about focus group discussion especially in finding the students’

perceptions on the implementation of it.

There were two research questions formulated in this research: (1) How is

the Focus Group Discussion conducted? (2) What are the students’ and lecturers’

perceptions about the implementation of focus group discussion in Translation

subject? This research is important to be discussed because it will give information

about the real practice of group discussion.

In order to answer these research questions, the researcher conducted

mixed-method research. The respondents of this research were forty-two students

of Translation subject in English language Education Study Program of Sanata

Dharma University. There were three instruments used in this research;

questionnaires, interview, and observation.

The results show that the implementation of focus group discussion in two

classes was different. One of the classes implemented group presentation whereas

another class implemented general format of focus group discussion. Further,

students and lecturers had positive perception on implementation of focus group

discussion in translation class. The students and lecturers had positive perception

on process of focus group discussion, advantages of focus group discussion and role

of the lecturers’ during focus group discussion.

Keywords: Focus Group Discussion, perception and translation subject


viii

ABSTRAK

Delastyanto, Slavian Oktabri. (2017). Students’ and Lecturer’s Perceptions on the

Implementation of Focus Group Discussion in Translation Subject. Yogyakarta:

Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris. JPSB. FKIP. Yogyakarta: Universitas

Sanata Dharma.

Terdapat banyak strategi yang dapat digunakan oleh dosen untuk

mengajarkan pelajaran penerjemahan. Salah satu strategi tersebut adalah diskusi

kelompok terarah. Strategi ini termasuk baru untuk digunakan di dunia pendidikan

sebagai salah satu strategi dalam pengajaran. Orang orang menganggap diskusi

kelompok terarah adalah salah satu cara untuk mengumpulkan data dalam

penelitian. Namun, dalam mata kuliah penerjemahan di Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris

Universitas Sanata Dharma, diskusi kelompok terarah digunakan sebagai media

untuk pengajaran. Karena diskusi kelompok terarah jarang digunakan sebagai

strategi dalam pengajaran, strategi ini mempunyai kelemahan dan kelebihan.

Sehingga, peneliti mempunyai tujuan untuk menggali fakta mengenai diskusi

kelompok terarah, berpusat dalam penemuan persepsi siswa dan implementasi atau

pelaksanaan didalam kelas.

Terdapat dua masalah yang dirumuskan dalam penelitian ini: (1) Bagaimana

implementasi dari diskusi kelompok terarah? (2) Apa persepsi murid dan dosen

terhadap pelaksanaan diskusi kelompok terarah? Riset ini penting untuk

didiskusikan karena akan memberi informasi tentang praktik diskusi kelompok

terarah yang sesungguhnya.

Untuk menjawab pertanyaan tersebut, peneliti menggunakan metode

campuran. Responden dalam penelitian ini adalah empat puluh dua siswa dan dua

dosen di kelas penerjemahan Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Sanata

Dharma. Terdapat tiga instrumen dalam penelitian ini: kuisioner, observasi dan

interview.

Hasil dari penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa pelaksanaan diskusi kelompok

terarah di dua kelas menunjukkan perbedaan. Di salah satu kelas menerapkan

presentasi kelompok, sedangkan di kelas satunya menerapkan format umum diskusi

kelompok terarah. Selanjutnya, siswa dan dosen memiliki persepsi yang positif

terhadap penerapandiskusi kelompok terarah di kelas penerjemahan. Murid dan

dosen memliki persepsi yang positif terhadap proses diskusi kelompok terarah,

keuntungan diskusi kelompok terarah, dan peran dari dosen selama

dilangsungkannya diskusi kelompok terarah.

Kata Kunci: Diskusi Kelompok Terarah, persepsi dan kelas penerjemahan


ix

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First of all, I would like to say thank to Jesus Christ and Mother Mary for their

blessing. Only by Their guidance and blessing I could be strong in dealing with all problems

that I encountered during writing this thesis. Secondly, I would like to express my gratitude to

my advisor, Concilianus Laos Mbato, M.A., Ed.D. for his valuable time, advice, motivation,

feedback, and guidance.

Then, I would like to thank my father who always motivates me in every difficult

situation and for always inspires me by his way of thinking. I also thank my mother for her

never ending patience and love. I thank to my grandfather for his books, suggestion and advice

in this thesis. Moreover, I thank my brother and sister for their support. A special appreciation

goes to Ms. Marnie and Ms. Patrice who gave me permission to do this research in her class,

Translation class A and E 2016/2017 for became the participants in this research and Voni,

Ranti, Dian and Niko for their time to be my interviewees.

I would thank to my friends in Mr.Cons’ thesis class who always supported and gave

advice during this thesis. I thank to Lorcin Squad 13 for their time, happiness and amazing

experience in this 4 years. I also thank my new family in English Language Education Study

Program; Mbak Astri, Shinta, Liza and Juan Kolemar for being my support friends in this

finishing this bitter and sweet thesis. I also thank to Alberik Ryan for his time and willing to

check the format of my thesis.

I would like thanks to my best friend Fennie Tenau for her encouragement, support,

prayer, and patience to accompany me in doing this thesis. There were a lot of drama during

this thesis and thanks God finally we finish this thesis together.

I would like to thank to my best friend Zefanya Ardantya for his support and advice

since the first time in this study program until now. Last, I thank the people whom names I

cannot mention one by one on this paper. I wish them all the best.


x

TABLE OF CONTENTS

APPROVAL PAGE .............................................................................................. ii

STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY .................................................................... v

ABSTRACT ......................................................................................................... vii

ABSTRAK .......................................................................................................... viii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................. ix

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

LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................. xiii

LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................... xiv

LIST OF APPENDICES .................................................................................... xv

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION .......................................................................... 1

A. Research Background 1

B. Research Questions 4

C. Research Significance 4

1. English Language Education Study Program Lecturers ............................. 4

2. Students ....................................................................................................... 4

D. Definition of Terms 5

1. Perception .................................................................................................... 5

2. Focus Group Discussion .............................................................................. 5

3. Translation Subject ...................................................................................... 6

4. Cooperative Learning .................................................................................. 6

CHAPTER II REVIEW RELATED LITERATURE ........................................ 7

A. Theoretical Description 7

1. Perception .................................................................................................... 7


xi

2. Translation ................................................................................................. 10

3. Cooperative Learning ................................................................................ 13

4. Focus Group Discussion ............................................................................ 18

B. Theoretical Framework 28

CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY ................................................................... 30

A. Research Method 30

B. Research Setting 31

C. Research Participants 31

D. Research Instruments and Data Gathering Technique 32

E. Data Analysis Technique 35

F. Research Procedures 36

CHAPTER IV RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ........................ 39

A. Implementation of Focus Group Discussion 39

1. Implementation of Focus Group Discussion in Class A ........................... 40

2. Implementation of Focus Group Discussion in Class E ............................ 43

B. Students’ and Lecturers’ Perception on the Implementation of Focus Group

Discussion 45

1. Students’ and Lecturer’s Perception in class A ......................................... 46

a. Students’ and Lecturer’s Perception on the Nature of Translation ........... 46

b. Students’ and Lecturer’s Perception on the Process of Focus Group

Discussion ...................................................................................................... 49

c. Students’ and Lecturer’s Perception on the Advantages of Focus Group

Discussion ...................................................................................................... 53

d. Students’ and Lecturer’s Perception on the Obstacle of Focus Group

Discussion ...................................................................................................... 57


xii

e. Students’ and Lecturer’s Perception on the Role of Lecturer ................... 61

2. Students’ and Lecturer’s Perception in class E ......................................... 64

a. Students’ and Lecturers’ Perception on the Nature of Translation ........... 65

b. Students’ and Lecturers’ Perception on the Process of Focus Group

Discussion ...................................................................................................... 68


Discussion ...................................................................................................... 72


Discussion ...................................................................................................... 76

e. Students’ and Lecturer’s Perception on the Role of Lecturer ................... 80

CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................... 85

A. Conclusion 85

B. Recommendation 87

REFERENCES .................................................................................................... 89

APPENDICES ..................................................................................................... 93

APPENDIX A First Questionnaire Blueprint .................................................. 94

APPENDIX B Final Questionnaire Blueprint ................................................ 101

APPENDIX C Students’Questionnaire ........................................................... 107

APPENDIX D Lecturers’Questionnaire ......................................................... 111

APPENDIX E Result of Students' Questionnaire .......................................... 115

APPENDIX F Result of Lecturers' Questionnaire ........................................ 118

APPENDIX G Observation Sheet ................................................................... 121

APPENDIX H Transcript of Interview ........................................................... 125


xiii

LIST OF TABLES

Table Pages

3 1 the sample of questionnaire form ................................................................... 33

3 2 the sample of observation sheet ..................................................................... 34

3. 3 The Data Percentages of the Respondents .................................................... 35

4. 1 Students’ Questionnaire Results on the Nature of FGD ................................ 47

4. 2 Lecturer's Questionnaire Results on the Nature of FGD ................................ 47

4. 3 Students’ Questionnaire Results on the Process of FGD ............................... 50

4. 4 Lecturer's Questionnaire Results on Process of FGD .................................... 51

4. 5 Students' Questionnaire Results on Advantage of FGD ................................ 54

4. 6 Lecturer’s Questionnaire Result on Advantages of FGD .............................. 54

4. 7 Students' Questionnaire Result on Obstacle of FGD ..................................... 58

4. 8 Lecturers’ Questionnaire Result on the Obstacle of FGD ............................. 59

4. 9 Students’ Questionnaire Result on the Role of Lecturer...................................................62

4.10 Lecturers’ Questionnaire Result on the Role of Lecturer..............................62

4.11 Students’ Questionnaire Result on the Nature of Translation........................66

4.12 Lecture’s Questionnaire Result on the Nature of Translation........................66

4.13 Students’ Questionnaire Result on the Process of FGD.................................69

4.14 Lecturer’s Questionnaire Result on the Process of FGD...............................69

4.15 Students’ Questionnaire Result on the Advantage of FGD...........................73

4.16 Lecturer’s Questionnaire Result on the Advantage of FGD..........................73

4.17 Students’ Questionnaire Result on the Obstacle of FGD...............................77

4.18 Lecturer’s Questionnaire Result on the Obstacle of FGD.............................78

4.19 Students’ Questionnaire Result on Lecturer’s Role.......................................81

4.20 Lecturer’s Questionnaire Result on thie Roles..............................................81


xiv

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Pages

Figure 2 1 the perceptual process (Altman et al, 1985, p. 86) ................................ 8

Figure 2 2 Types of group moderation .................................................................. 24


xv

LIST OF APPENDICES

APPENDIX A First Questionnaire Blueprint ....................................................... 94

APPENDIX B Final Questionnaire Blueprint..................................................... 101

APPENDIX C Questionnaire Students ............................................................... 107

APPENDIX D Questionnaire Lecturers.............................................................. 111

APPENDIX E Result of Students' Questionnaire ............................................... 115

APPENDIX F Result of Lecturers' Questionnaire .............................................. 118

APPENDIX G Observation Sheet ....................................................................... 121

APPENDIX H Transcript of Interview ............................................................... 125


1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

This research investigates the implementation of Focus Group Discussion in

Translation subject. In chapter one, the researcher discusses the research

background, the research problem, the problem limitation, the research objectives,

the research benefits and the definition of terms.

A. Research Background

Translation is a daily phenomenon for those who learn English as a foreign

language and it cannot be separated with communication. At the same time

communication occurs, the process of translation also occurs. Newmark (1981)

states translation as “a craft consisting in attempt to replace a written message

and/or statement in one language” (p. 4). Based on Newmark definition, translation

only works in scope of expressing from one language to another language, and the

focus is on preserving the message and statement of the source text. However,

translation has another meaning. Munday (2008) states that “translation has several

meanings: it can refer to the general subject field, the product (the text that has been

translated) or the process (the act of producing the translation, otherwise known as

translating)” (p. 5). From the theories above, we can see that translator must

understand source language and target language. Catford (1974) defines translation

as a process of substituting a text in one language for a text in another. In doing a

process of translating, the translator has to understand everything about both


2

languages (p. 1). Newmark (1991) says both source language and target language

cultural background are essential in translation (p. 137). It indicates that translation

consider the cultural background of the language. This consideration is not only for

translator but also for teacher of translation. Newmark (1991) says teacher should

apply their knowledge about second and third language to make a brief analogies

and illustration which aims to emphasize their points (p. 138). Then, Newmark

(1991) says the teacher must teach translation as well as translation theory. It shows

that teaching translation is as challenge as translator. Teacher has to deliver the

theory of translation and practice it with the students. In teaching translation,

Newmark (1991) argues teacher must be interactive, not passive (p. 141). Thus,

teaching translation implies the discussing of translation, switching from examples

to generalization and back to examples (Newmark 1991, p. 145).

Discussing could be a method for teaching translation. Teacher could ask

the students to discuss the issue or topic related to the material. Chui and Zhao

(2015) state teacher could ask students to search the purpose of the text and

rearrange the story in different way. In order to find out the purpose, the students

sometimes cannot work individually but they need friends to share with or to help

them in understanding what the text is. Duff (1992) states that translation is suited

to discussion (p. 14). Students are required to discuss with their friends and find the

best way in translating. Moreover, learning text together in groups and doing a

group work together in groups are an interesting process to be implemented in the

classroom.


3

Most of lecturers in ELESP applied all this technique in all subjects. Group

discussion is required to see how far the students’ understanding about one material

and how far they work together and share their ability with the members in the

group. However, the form of discussion in here is not as simple as students do in

group discussion commonly. Lecturer could use Focus Group Discussion (FGD).

Focus Group Discussion is a form of research tool in gathering data (Cohen, Manion

and Morrison, 2011). The researcher uses Focus Group Discussion to collect the

data. The use of Focus Groups Discussion as teaching strategy is not appropriate

yet because Focus Group Discussion is a research tool in gathering the data.

However, Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2011) states that Focus Groups Discussion

could suggest issues, concerns, or point of view about the topic that is necessary.

Thus, the lecturer could conduct Focus Group Discussion to see the student’s

incomprehension about the topics or issues.

On the other hand, focus group discussion can help the students to do the

assignment easily. The students have opportunities sharing each other through

Focus Group Discussion. WBI Evaluation Group (2007) states that “each member

in focus group discussion allowed to build each other’s comment and reactions (p.

1)”. Hence, every student tries to give responses and opinions about his or her work

and friend’s work.

Based on the explanation above, the researcher wants to see what the students’

perceptions on the implementation of the focus group discussion when it is applied

and focused on the process of group discussion in Translation classroom especially

in the Translation subject. Hence, the researcher wants to find the fact about focus


4

group discussion whether or not it is really helpful by observing the real practice of

discussion directly.

B. Research Questions

In accordance with the research background, the researcher formulates two

research problems to be answered as follows:

1. How is focus group discussion conducted?

2. What are the student’s and lecturers’ perceptions about the implementation

of focus group discussion in translation class?

C. Research Significance

This research is educational research which will be beneficial for the

development of education. Hopefully, this research will be beneficial for these

elements below.

1. English Language Education Study Program Lecturers

This research is expected to provide clear information about the

implementation of focus group discussion. Hopefully, the lecturer could get the

clear information about the implementation of focus group discussion. So, the

lecturer can decide whether Focus Group Discussion could be continued or

changed.

2. Students

Knowing the function of Focus Group Discussion and correct

implementation are the goal of this research for the students. Students can little bit


5

surprised in this implementation. They must know what the Focus Group

Discussion is. Thus, the students do Focus Group Discussion in right way.

D. Definition of Terms

There are some terms used in this research. The researcher will provide clear

information to avoid the misinterpretations. The terms used in this research are

perceptions, translation course, and focus group discussion. The explanation will

be discussed in this following part.

1. Perception

According to Stephen P. Robbins (2005) defines perception is “a process by

which individuals organize and interpret their sensory impressions in order to give

meaning to their environment” (p. 134). George and Jones (2005) define perception

as the process which individual select, organize and interpret the input from their

senses (p. 105). In this research, perceptions are the ELESP students thought about

the use of Focus Group Discussion in the class.

2. Focus Group Discussion

Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2011) categorized Focus Group Discussion

as a form of group interview (p. 436). In Focus Group Discussion the researcher

gains the data by gathering the participant and forming into group of participant.

Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2011) explain that the aims of Focus Group

Discussion is to collect the data by discussing a particular theme or topic where the

participant interact each other than with the interviewer (p. 436). Ary, Jacobs and

Razavieh (2002) say focus group may suggest issues, concerns, or point of view

about the topic that the researcher had not heard or thought before (p. 392). Hence,


6

Focus Group discussion might be applied in teaching activities to discuss a

particular issues or topic that students may not know before.

3. Translation Subject

Translation is a subject that is studied by the English Language Education

students in semester six at Sanata Dharma University. In this subject, the students

are taught to the concept of cultural transfer, naturalization, coherence, unity and

flow. Then, students are exposed to the hands-on experiences of translating various

text types which are given by the lecturer. The purpose of this subject is to introduce

knowledge of the definition, principles, problems, and process of translation.

4. Cooperative Learning

Cooperative Learning is an approach to teaching that makes maximum use

of cooperative activities involving pairs and small groups of learners in the

classroom. The students learn cooperatively to achieve the goal. Kruger and Casy

(2015) claim that Focus Groups have a focused discussion (p. 38). It indicates that

Focus Group Discussion is a part of group discussion. Moreover, Slavin (1995)

reveals, “Among the oldest and most widely used forms of cooperative learning are

group discussion and group projects” (p. 130). The engangement of lecturer in focus

group discussion is basically important. The lecturer decided the material to be used

in focus group discussion. Thus, cooperate learning is used in this research


7

CHAPTER II

REVIEW RELATED LITERATURE

In this chapter, the researcher explains about all of theories that are used in

conducting this research. It is divided into two main sections, namely theoretical

description and theoretical framework. In the theoretical description, the researcher

discusses some important theories related to the research. The theories are

Translation Subject, Focus Group Discussion, Perception and Cooperative

Learning. Then, in theoretical framework, the researcher summarizes and relates

the theories to the study.

A. Theoretical Description

In this section, the researcher discusses the theories related to this research.

There are four related theories to be explained. They are teaching translation, focus

group discussion, cooperative learning and perception.

1. Perception

Perception related to the how people see, view and perceived. One individual has

different way in perceive something. Some scientists define perceptions as follows

a. Definition

Perception is one of important aspects which influence the learners in

teaching activities especially in using learning strategy. How can it be important?

Altman, Valenzi and Hodgetts (1985) define that perception is how stimuli selected

and grouped by an individual to understand and manage the environment in which

she or he lives (p. 85). It indicates that through perception, people try to recognize


8

of their environment, events, objects and other people. He also says that perception

has four components. They are selection of stimuli, organization of stimuli, self-

concept, and the situation.

Moreover, Robbins (2005) defines perception as “a process by which

individuals organize and interpret their sensory impressions in order to give

meaning to their environment” (p. 134). From this definition, giving perception

means stating opinion or senses of their environment around people. However,

environment is not the only aspect for interpreting the perception. According to,

Ivancevich, Konopaske and Matteson (2014) say that perception is empirical based

on prior experience (p. 90). It means in order to give opinion, individual should

experience it first so they can perceive something real.

Then, Noe (2004) explains that perception is not what an individual happen

but it is something that an individual does (p. 1). It means that an individual enacts

his/her perceptual experience then act it from what he/she has thought.

Figure 2 .1 the perceptual process (Altman, Valenzi and Hodgets, 1985, p. 86)

This theory above is supported by George and Jones (2000), who define

perception as the process at the time people select, organize and interpret the input

or stimuli from their senses (p. 105). From the definition above, we can define that

an individual can get the data from environments through stimuli. Perception can

be looked in how the individual view their environment and respond the stimuli.

Stimuli Sensors’

selection

of stimuli

Behavioral

responses

Perception,

organization,

and

interpretatio

n of stimuli


9

The response happens in the individual’s awareness to the incoming stimuli

through sensory receptors. The response will be acted as the behavioural responses

called perception.

b. Factors influencing Perception

Altman, Valenzi and Hodgetts (1985) describe that there are four factors

influencing perception. They are selection of stimuli, organization of stimuli, self-

concept, and the situation (p. 134)

1) Selection of stimuli

Mostly, people focus on a small number of stimuli from all stimuli

surrounded. This process called selection. Individual selects stimuli based on the

specific cues and filters, or screens, out the others. It influences individual to

perceive things differently.

2) Situation

An individual familiarity, past experience, expectation and situation affect

how individual perceives something. Thus, perceiving situation carefully deals with

how an individual adjust the behaviour situation.

3) Organization of Stimuli

After the information is gathered and selected, the brain will try to organize

to be meaningful based on the experiences. The perceptual organizations of

information help people to categorize sensory input by reducing complex

information into the simpler categories.


10

4) Self-concept

The fourth factor is self-concept. How individual sees and perceives

her/himself is the notion of self-concept. Self-concept influences how individual’s

perception sees of the world around.

2. Translation

Some theories are presented related to translation in this sub-chapter. They

are definition of translation and teaching translation.

a. Definition

Translation is important for those who are learning English as the foreign

learning. Duff (1989) says that translation can happen everywhere, especially in

classroom (p. 6). It indicates that translation happens all the time in mind of foreign

learners.

Munday (2008) states that “translation has several meanings: it can refer to

the general subject field, the product (the text that has been translated) or the process

(the act of producing the translation, otherwise known as translating)” (p. 5).

However, in simple way, translation can be concluded as a simple meaning of

changing one language into another language.

Duff (1992) states five general principles of translating (p, 10), they are:

1) Meaning

Translation should possess or show the same meaning of original text. The

meaning cannot be changed although the way expressing the idea is different. The

same meaning should be cited accurately.

2) Form


11

The words and ideas of the text should be as similar as the original text.

Form is very considerable part to translate important and formal documents, such

as contract or agreements

3) Register

Register means how the translators concern with the different level of

formality in translating the document or context. Translator should differentiate the

formal and informal expression. For example, informal expression cannot be

expressed in the legal document such as contract or curriculum vitae.

4) Source language influence

Translation should be as natural as possible. It means that the translation

should be clear and it should have closed meaning to second language meaning.

Thus, considering about second language culture is necessary.

5) Style and clarity

The style of the original of the text should not be changed. However,

translator can correct, reduce and replace the repetition words in the text.

6) Idiom

In term of translating idioms, the translator should pay attention on those

idioms. If the idioms are untranslatable, those kinds of idioms should not force to

translate into second language. Using equivalent meaning or inverted commas is

recommended.

b. Teaching Translation

Translation has been included in each skill of English because in teaching

there has found the idea of translation directly or indirectly.In order to create the


12

appropriate translation, students have to understand the theory, phenomena, and

problems in translation. Students could feel it as a real world of translation. Nord

(2005) emphasizes that teaching of translation must be similar to the real practice

in world translation (p. 15). It means that practice is the key to become a good

translator. Then, teacher must consider practice for students.

In teaching translation, practicing is important aspect. Duff (1992) says that

students who learn foreign language are asked to translate, but they are rarely given

any practice in that skill (p. 8). It shows how important practicing in translation is.

Practicing would help students to master the translation world.

Moreover, Newmark (1991) says teacher must teach as well as translation

theory. Teaching Translation must recognize many things (p. 138). Newmark

(1991) says to teach translation, teacher must have translation specialism, a wide

knowledge of translator and cultural of habitual, understanding temporarily topic,

able to draw on cultural background and able to stand as target reader (p. 138). It

indicates that teacher translation is as challenge as translator.

Thus, in teaching translation, teacher must be an active person. Duff (1992)

says that the teacher’s roles is not to be a passive spectator (p. 14). Teacher should

try involving him or her in the students’ activity. This theory is supported by

Newmark (1991) says that relationship between teacher and student must be

interactive, not passive (p. 141). Teacher should create a good situation and good

atmosphere in the class to attract the students’ attention and enthusiasm. Newmark

(1991) identifies criteria for a good class, “there are: the students must be close,


13

students are having easy access, not sitting in far corners and not steeping

amphitheatre” (p. 141).

3. Cooperative Learning

Cooperative Learning is one of the teaching strategies that is used in this

research. Here, there are four parts that are presented, namely definition of

cooperative learning, key elements of successful cooperative learning, teachers’

role, and advantages of using cooperative learning.

a. Definition

Jolliffe (2007) defines that cooperative learning involves pupils working

together in small groups to help and support each other improving their own

learning (p. 14). Cooperative Learning is an approach to teaching that makes

maximum use of cooperative activities involving pairs and small groups of learners

in the classroom. The idea is simple. Cooperative learning provides opportunity for

students to work together to accomplish shared goals. Thus, each member in the

group must help and assist others to do whatever is necessary to reach

successfulness in a team that means everyone needs to put in maximum effort or

they will let their team down.

Slavin (1995) says cooperative learning refers to variety of teaching method

which students work and discuss in small groups to assist one another learning the

material (p. 5). Moreover, Johnson, Johnson and Holubec (1994) define cooperative

learning is the instructional use of small group that permits students working

together to maximize their own and each other’s learning (p. 3). Cooperative

learning allows students to help, assist, discuss, and raise opinion among other


14

students. Thus, in this study, cooperative learning is an approach that makes the

students work and discuss their material in achieving learning goals. It means that

student studies each other from the groups. In the classroom, the students are

expected to help each other, cooperate with peers, to discuss and argue each other

in the learning process.

b. Key Elements of Successful Cooperative Learning

Jolliffe (2007) mentions there are five essential elements to obtain success

in cooperative learning (pp. 39-43). These five elements are Positive

Interdependence, Face-to-Face Interaction, Individual Accountability, Small group

and Interpersonal skill and Group Process.

1) Positive Interdependence

Pupils realize that they cannot reach success unless everyone in the group

cooperate with other. In simple idea, pupils must feel that they need each other and,

in order to accomplish the group task, they must fight together.

2) Individual Accountability

It means that each member of the group must maintain and learn to be

responsible for his or her own contribution. Students should take personal

responsibility to work toward the group goals

3) Group Processing

Pupils need to learn and evaluate how well their own progress and their

ability to work as a group together. It can enable control over the quality of the work

produced.


15

4) Small-group and interpersonal skill

Students learn and use appropriate social skills including leadership,

decision-making, trust building, communication and conflict management.

5) Face-to-face interaction

Students encourage to help each other. Students share sources with others,

present constructive feedback, argue other members’ reasoning and ideas, keep an

open mind, act in a trustworthy way, and promote a safe feeling for all by reducing

anxiety.

Students need communication in gaining the group goals. When they face

each member in the groups, the discussion could run well and effectively and vice

versa. If each member has a good relationship, there will be less problem. Thus,

students have to cooperate each other well, or it will harm the dynamic of the group

discussion.

c. Teacher’s Role

Cooperative learning encourages students to work collaboratively with

others, however, the role of teacher in the activity is still important. It is vital that

the teacher provides the supportive classroom to encourage cooperative learning

and opportunities for team-building. Jolliffe (2007) states 4 teacher’s roles in

cooperative learning (p. 47). They are:

1) Plans lessons that decide on (a) objectives, (b) size of groups, (c) how to group

pupils,(d) group roles, (e) organisation of the classroom, and (f) materials

needed.

2) Explains the task and the cooperative skill with criteria for the success of both.


16

3) Monitors and intervenes with groups where necessary

4) Evaluates the quality and quantity of achievement and ensures that groups

reflect on their achievement and effectiveness as a group and set goals for

improvement.

Then, Jolliffe (2007) states three major ways forming groups in the classroom (p.

50):

Random selection

Pupil Selection

Teacher selection

It indicates that teacher is not the main source in the learning process,

students can freely get information from their friends. They can interact, argue and

raise opinion with others freely. However, Gall and Gillett (1980) reveal that

students in classes tend to get a bit noisy and disorganized when the discussion in

group is applied (p. 98). Thus, teacher should monitor every group’s work in every

condition, or the class will not be conducive. Teacher should realize that they have

right to intervene the group if the group does not show the development.

d. Advantages of using Cooperative Learning

Jolliffee (2007, p. 6) and Johnson, Johnson and Holubec (1994 p. 26)

categorize three main advantages of working cooperatively. They are, achievement,

interpersonal relationship and psychological and social competence.

1) Improvement in learning achievement:

• Greater productivity


17

Higher process gain (that is, more high-level reasoning, more frequent

generation of new ideas and solutions)

• Greater transfer of learning from one situation to another

• More time on task

• Greater problem-solving.

• Improvements in interpersonal relationships

• Promoting the development of caring and committed relationships

• Establishing and maintaining friendships between peers

• A greater sense of belonging and mutual support

• Improved morale.

2) Improvements in psychological health and social competence

• Higher self-esteem

• Improved self-worth

• Increased self-confidence

• Greater independence

• Supporting sharing of problems

• Increased resilience and ability to cope with adversity and stress.

Moreover, Jolliffe (2007) says that Cooperative Learning can support the

development of high-order thinking skill, such as analysis, synthesis and evaluation

(p. 47). This idea is combined with Bloom’s taxonomy of thinking. It indicates that

cooperative learning has many advantages to be applied in the classroom


18

4. Focus Group Discussion

Focus Group Discussion is one of the strategies used in teaching translation.

a. Definition

Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2011) categorize Focus Group Discussion as

a form of group interview (p. 436). The main purpose of Focus Group Discussion

is to create a friendly environment for participants to raise and share their ideas and

opinion. This idea is supported by Ary, Jacobs and Razavieh (2010, p. 381), who

say participants are assured to express their idea in their words and to respond not

only to the researcher but also to the participants and their responses and idea.

Morgan (1998) states “Focus Group Discussion is first and foremost a method for

gathering research data” (p. 29). It is clear that Focus Group Discussion is a

research tool for gathering data.

However, the method in Focus Group Discussion seems suitable applied as

a teaching strategy. Hennink (2014) explains that ‘Focus Group Discussion requires

a focus on specific issues, with a predetermined group of people, and participating

actively in an interactive discussion” (p. 1). Further, Hennink (2014) states that the

method is an interactive discussion between six to eight pre-selected participants,

led by moderator and focus on selected topics or issues (p. 1). Moreover, Kitzinger

& Barbour (1999) explain the definition of focus group discussion.

Focus groups are group discussions exploring a specific set of issues. The

group is ‘focused’ in that it involves some kind of collective activity - such

as viewing a video, examining a single health promotion message, or simply

debating a set of questions. Crucially, focus groups are distinguished from

the broader category of group interviews by the explicit use of group

interaction to generate data. Instead of asking questions of each person in

turn, focus group researchers encourage participants to talk to one another:


19

asking questions, exchanging anecdotes, and commenting on each other’s’

experiences and points of view (p. 4).

Since Focus Group Discussion uses group discussion, Focus Group Discussion is

suitable applied as teaching strategy. The notion is supported by Walton (1997),

who states that “group discussion is a method for generating free communication

between all participants in the group” (p. 459).

All participants have same right to share and speak about ideas or notions

during Focus Group Discussion. Morgan (1998) says during the discussion in a

focus group discussion, the notion for each person speaking is not limited. It is a

free for each participant to speak more than once (p. 31). However, Morgan (1998)

argues that the researcher could limit their chance in speaking based on time (p. 32).

For example, if the researcher conducts Focus Group Discussion in 60 minutes, and

the participants are 10 people, time for each participant is 6 minutes. Thus, it is not

a limitation.

b. Related as teaching strategy

The scopes of relation Focus Group Discussion in Education is the using

Focus Group Discussion as a strategy in teaching. Group Discussion is used in

Focus Group Discussion. Morgan (1998) states that Focus Group Discussion uses

group discussion (p. 32). The notion is supported by Kruger and Casy (2015, p. 38),

who claim that Focus Groups have a focused discussion. It indicates that Focus

Group Discussion is a part of group discussion. Moreover, Slavin (1995) revals,

“Among the oldest and most widely used forms of cooperative learning are group

discussion and group projects” (p. 130). Thus, in this research, the researcher

categorizes Focus Group Discussion as an example of Cooperative Learning.


20

Since Focus Group Discussion uses group discussion and categorises as

cooperative learning, it can be implemented or used in teaching translation. Duff

(1992) says that the essential of practicing translation does not mean doing writing

assignment but giving the students regular opportunities to compare and discuss

their work with others, and responding to suggestions are the essential (p. 8).

Moreover, Gall, and Gillett (1980) explain that purposes of the discussion are to

help the students’ analyse and evaluate opinions, and to rise their awareness of their

opinions or opinions of others (p. 99). Gall and Gillet (1980) state that the

opportunity to raise their ideas and to listen to others speaks helps students learn

better (p. 99). An activity in teaching and learning process in translation is not

merely about practicing. Discussion can be a viable option for lecturer or teacher.

The function of Focus Group Discussion expands recently. Focus Group

Discussions are used in many fields such as education, communication studies,

political sciences, and public health. However, in education fields, applying Focus

Group Discussion as teaching strategy is not popular and hard to find the example.

Mostly, Focus Group Discussion is used for gathering opinions and suggestion for

evaluating curriculum, teachers’ performance and policies in education. The

researcher only finds one example of applying Focus Group Discussion as teaching

strategy in Department of Geography Michigan State University. Olson, Broomes,

Drzyzga and Dygert explain in their research titled Teaching and Learning Focus

Group Skills: A Classroom Example Evaluating Map Design.

The learning process involved two parts. Part one was a 75-minute focus

group discussion during regular class time with the instructor as the

moderator, one student as the assistant and note taker, and the other

members of the class as the subjects. After instructions were given,


21

everyone studied the map for a brief period and then discussed a set of

issues focused on the design of the map. Discussion was orderly but lively

and packed with relevant comments. Based on the discussion, the

conclusion is focus-group study of specific maps would help cartography

students to develop knowledge of design. Learning to design, like the map

design itself, is also wholistic and in need of approaches other than

classroom lecture and hands-on map construction, the traditional

mainstays of cartographic instruction (pp. 26-27)

It shows that using Focus Group Discussion for redesigning the campus map is an

appropriate method. The lecturer can gather and obtain many opinions and ideas

through discussion. The researchers explain that all participants contribute and the

discussion is lively. It happens because the moderator provides series of

introductory comments that establishes the value of everyone’s participation. It

indicates that through Focus Group Discussion the students feel comfortable to raise

ideas and opinions.

Teacher implements Focus Group Discussion to see the students’

understanding or problem about the material. Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2011)

say that Focus Group Discussion could suggest issues, concerns, or point of view

about the topic that is necessary (p. 30). Teacher or lecturer can see the student’s

incomprehension about the topics or issues using Focus Group Discussion. It means

that Focus Group Discussion can be used as teaching strategy to seek the students’

problems in subject.

Moreover, Focus Group Discussion is friendly for the participants in

discussing. Kruger and Casy (2015) say that two purpose of focus group discussion

are to support or promote a comfortable atmosphere of disclosure in which people

can share their ideas, experiences, and attitudes about a topic, give the participants

feeling of comfort, respect and free to voice their ideas and opinions without being


22

judged (p. 34). This idea is in line with Morgan (1998), who claims that focus group

discussion is not a viable option, unless the participants feel comfortable in voicing

their voice (p. 61). It indicates that in using Focus Group Discussion, the

participants can share their ideas freely and independently. They will not feel in

jeopardy with the conversations or discussions.

However, teacher or lecturer must pay attention on the participants. They

cannot categorize and involve all participants joining Focus Group Discussion.

Krueger and Casey (2015) say that Focus Group Discussion are composed for

participants who possess similarity in characteristic or homogeneity (p. 37). The

researcher should pay attention in this issue. This is important for the researcher to

produce a valid research or gather the valid information. Then, Goebert and

Rosenthal (2001) describe their experiences in conducting focus group discussion.

“Unless I’m trying to ferret out information for a product or idea aimed

strictly at kids and teenagers or High School Students, I try to avoid doing

groups with them. It’s just too tough squeezing useful information out of

adolescents. If you have a teen, you know that “nothing” and “I don’t know”

are the responses to 99 per cents of your questions (p. 15)”.

It indicates that doing Focus Group Discussion in High School Students

class would not run smoothly and successfully. They do not grasp the information

or question truly and seriously.

c. Elements of Focus Group Discussion

Conducting Focus Group Discussion needs many preparations. It is not as

simple as conducting group discussion as well as in the class. Many people claim

that they do the good Focus Group Discussion. There are some general guidelines

and important considerations in conducting Focus Group Discussion. The goal, the


23

leader, the participants and the note taker should be considered in discussion. The

lecturer should pay attention on it. Moderators, Participants, Note Taker and

Reporter are the basic elements in Focus Group Discussion. Each of them has

different roles in Focus Group Discussion.

1) Moderator

Wherever it takes, discussions need a leader. Fern (2001) states that

moderator is a facilitator or discussion leader (p. 73). Moreover, Hennink (2014)

explains that managing groups, questioning and responding, fostering group

cohesion, and managing group dynamics are the example of the moderators’ roles

(p. 70). Their roles are very challenging and crucial. The successful of discussion

depends on them. Stewart and Shamdasani (1990) claims that mastering technique

of moderating a focus group is important for the successful of the discussion (p.

69). Wilen (1990) states that students’ communication skill can be developed by

discussion especially leading and participating in the discussion (p. 40). Thus, the

researcher, teacher and lecturer have to select the professional moderator.

However, the using of professional moderator is not really necessary. Fern

(2001) explains that different research purposes need different moderator and

characteristic of the moderators is not adequate for all focus groups are the several

factors why focus group discussion do not use professional moderator (p. 73). The

successful of discussion depends on the goal of the discussion. In education fields,

teacher or students can take on the responsibility as moderator.

Each moderator has different style in moderating Focus Group Discussion.

The style can encourage or stifle the discussion. Hennink (2014) states that


24

moderation-dominated discussion and interactive group discussion are types of

group moderation (p. 73).

Figure 2 2 Types of group moderation

Based on figure 2.2 moderator-dominated discussion involves set of questions to

the participants with dominant roles of moderator whereas interactive group

discussion involves the participants discuss each other with limited moderator roles.

Further, Hennink (2014) explains that an effective focus group discussion occurred

where the moderator has limited involvement yet still subtly manages the discussion

by involving participants in the discussion, assuring time to explore the ideas,

recognizing the participants’ cues, and maintaining the discussion on the track (p.

73).

The role of the moderator is challenging and difficult. In discussion, the

participants do not want to engage to the discussion. Inattentive and quite or passive

participants are the examples. Gall and Gillett (1980) explain the inattentive

participant doesn’t seem to hear or understand the discussion, and the individual

may seem preoccupied (p. 99). Moreover, Hennink (2014) explains that quiet

participants are participants who acutely lack of aware and the longer they remain


25

silent the more difficult it may to be (p. 73). In order to assissting in moderating,

the moderator creates discussion guidelines. Hennink (2014) explains that

discussion guideline is a prepared list of topic or question to guide the group

discussion (p. 48). Discussion guideline helps the moderator to arrange the

questions and steps in the discussion. Hennink (2014) states typical discussion

guideline for moderator are; an introduction, an opening question, a series of short

introductory questions, transitions questions or statements, key topics with specific

questions, and closing questions (p. 52).

2) Note Taker

Note Taker is a moderator assistant. Hennink (2014) explains that the main

job is writing down the key points raised in the discussion as detail as possible (p.

69). It shows that the role of note taker is important. Moreover, Hennink (2014)

categorizes two ways how focus group discussion recorded: audio and/or video

recorder and note taker’s written summary (p. 82). If the participants refuse

permission to record or the recording devices fail, at least, the discussion is

summarized by the note taker. Using recording devices are not restricted, but the

note taker does not rely on it. Note taker has to regard the recording devices as the

assistant. Therefore, note-taking is an important backup. The note taker should be

consider many things in summarizing.

Krueger (1998) explains points to consider in summarizing (pp. 76-78):

Strive for clarity and consistency

Pay attention on organize and identify


26

Capture quotes

Highlight key points and themes for each question

Jot down question that could be asked

Note big ideas, hunches or thoughts

Note body language or nonverbal activities that might help analysis

Focus on recording main points than interpretation or judgement

Remember the purpose of the focus group

It shows that the note taker role is as important as moderator. If the note takers do

not understand their roles, and do it carelessly, of course, the note takers jeopardize

the focus group discussion.

3) Participants

One of the goals conducting focus group discussion is to obtain specific

types of information clearly from sets of individuals. It means individuals who

invited to participate have obligation to provide the desired information willingly.

The role of participants in focus group discussion is important. Cohen, Manion and

Morrison, (2011) state that focus group discussion as research data gathering tools

regards participants’ opinions, ideas and insights as the research data (p. 436). If

the participants do not speak their ideas actively, the researchers do not get the data

for the research.

Focus group discussion involves sets of individual into the group. There are

many references suggest the ideal number of participants in one group, minimum 6

and maximum12 people (Hennink 2014, p. 37; Morgan 1998, p. 1; Shamdasani

1990, p. 57). Hennink (2014) states the fewer than six participants provide less


27

diversity in discussion and greater than eight participants it becomes difficult for

moderator to manage the discussion (p. 37).

However, there are no general rules concerning the optimal number of the

group. Hennink (2014) explains that the number of the participants in the group is

influenced by the purpose of the study, the topic of the discussion and the type of

participants (p. 38). The less number of the participants in the group gives chance

for participants to talk intensively and vice versa. Moreover, Shamdasani (1990)

states that most of focus groups involve more than one group, but seldom more than

four groups (p. 58).

Determining the composition of the groups is a matter. Homogeneity in the

group could be a problem. Freitas, Oliveira, Jenkins and Popjoy (1998) state that

the more homogeneous the groups in terms of background and perspectives, the

smaller the number of groups needed (p. 11). The researchers or lecturers have to

choose the individuals in group considerately. The participant’s ideas, opinions and

insight are important in focus group discussion.

4) Reporter

After moderating, note taking and discussing, it does not mean Focus Group

Discussion is over. Reporting the result of Focus Group Discussion is the last and

crucial step. The reporter reports the result of the note taker summary. This activity

is probably ignored and underestimated. Krueger (1998) claims that reporting is

perhaps overlooked and neglected. Indeed, the researchers or lecturers assume that

keeping the note taker’s summary is enough (p. 103).


28

In order to produce a good reporting, Krueger (1998) explains three

principles of reporting; remember the purpose of the study, consider the audience

and consider the reporting option (pp. 105-107). The first principle is remembering

the purpose of the study. It means that the reporter has to know why reporter are

reporting. The second principle is considering the audience. The reporter has to

concern who is the reader of their reports. The third principle is considering the

reporting option. There are three types of focus group reports: oral only, written

only and combination of both oral and written.

B. Theoretical Framework

Referred to the chapter 1, there are two objectives to be achieved in this

research. First is how the Focus Group Discussion is conducted. Second is how

students’ and lecturers’ perceive on the implementation of Focus Group Discussion

in Translation Subject. In order to get the answer of the research question, the

researcher will use three major theories, namely perception, translation and Focus

Group Discussion.

First the researcher explained the process in teaching translation using

related theory. It is needed to dig out what skill of lecturer needs to be a translation

teacher. The basic difference in teaching translation is that the teachers or lecturers

have to concern in students’ existence. How the teachers or lecturers convey their

meaning is important. Meanwhile translator, they only deal with the text.

Second, the researcher implemented the theories of focus group discussion

and cooperative learning in order to explain the process how the discussion in the

focus group work is conducted to answer the first research question. The researcher


29

also explains the definition of group discussion to help everybody understand what

Focus Group Discussion is.

Then, the researcher will use theory of perception proposed by Altman,

Valenzi and Hodgetts (1985) to answer the definition and the factors influencing

perception. Those are selection of stimuli, organization of stimuli, self-concept, and

the situation


30

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

This chapter discusses the method of this research in order to answer the

research questions as mentioned in chapter I. It contains of research method,

research setting, research participants, instruments and data gathering techniques,

data analysis techniques, and research procedure.

A. Research Method

The focuses of this research are on the process of focus group discussion

and the students’ and lecturer’s perception on the implementation of focus group

discussion, in order to find out the result the researcher used mix method approach.

Ary, Jacobs and Razavieh (2010) define that mixed method research is a research

that let the research collect the data by combining quantitative and qualitative

research that each approach provides something to the understanding of the

phenomenon (p. 559). Ary, Jacobs and Razavieh (2010) say researcher may

consider that the using of mixed method offers a better understanding of the

research problem than using single method design (p. 559). Moreover, Fraenkel,

Wallen and Hyun (2011) say that mixed method has several strengths: (a) help to

clarify and explain relationship found to exist between variables (b) explore more

deep about relationship between variables (c) confirm or validate relationship

discovered between variables (p. 558).


31

B. Research Setting

The research was conducted in Translation class in the academic year of

2016/2017, ELESP Sanata Dharma University. First of all, the researcher gathered

the data on Friday, 10th May 2017 through distributing the questionnaire at 09.00

a.m. in class E and on Friday, 26th May 2017 at 09.00 a.m. in class A. The researcher

also distributed the questionnaire to lecturers of Translation subject in class A and

E. In this research, the researcher only interviewed the students. The interview was

conducted on Tuesday, 13 June 2017 for class E and 19 June 2017 for class A which

was located at library of Sanata Dharma University, Yogyakarta.

C. Research Participants

The participants of this research were the students and lecturers of the

English Education Study Program who was taking and teaching Translation Subject

in class A and E. The Translation students and lecturers of the Academic Year of

2016/2017 were chosen as the primary participants. The researcher took 20 students

from the Translation subject in class E, 22 students in class A, lecturers in class A

and E.

In this research, the researcher uses purposive sampling. Singleton and Straits

(1999. p, 158) define purposive sampling characterized as nonprobability sampling

which the researcher picks the unit that are the representative of the population

based on their judgment. Then, the researcher selects the sample based on the

consideration and belief that the participants of the research had experienced in

doing focus group discussion as their learning activities.


32

Four out of 42 respondents who had filled the questionnaire were chosen to be

interviewed by the researcher. Those interviewees were chosen based on their

answers. Two students were chosen who had negative perception and two students

were chosen who had positive perception.

D. Research Instruments and Data Gathering Technique

In this chapter, the researcher described each of instruments used in this

research. The researcher used three instruments, namely Questioner, Observation

Checklist and Interview.

1. Questionnaire

Questionnaire is used to find out the research questions. It is used to get the

student’s perception and on the using of focus group discussion as their learning

activities. Singleton and Straits (1999) state that questionnaire used by researcher

to obtain the personal information from the respondents (p. 281). In this research,

the researcher used close-ended questions. Ary, Jacobs and Razavieh (2009) define

close-ended questions and open-ended questions are used in questionnaire (p. 391).

The researcher created 25 questions and each questions have five degrees of

agreement options to be used. Those are strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree and

strongly disagree. The participants would ask to show their level of agreement with

the statement.

The statement of the questionnaire were divided into five parts, namely the

nature of translation, the process of Focus Group Discussion, the advantage of

Focus Group Discussion, the obstacles dealt by the students, students’ perception

on the role of lecturer. Then, the researcher provided three open-ended questions.


33

Fraenkel, Wallen and Hyun (2011) say that open-ended questions permit more

individualized responses (p. 400). The respondents are freely to fill in the

questionnaire. The three open-ended questions were about the helpfulness of focus

group discussion itself, the influences of focus group discussion itself and the

suggestion for the future focus group discussion.

Table 3 1 the sample of questionnaire form

No Statement SS

1

S

2

N

3

TS

4

STS

5

1

Translation is the process of

changing a text from one language

to another

2

Translating idiom in source

language is as simple as translating

in target language idiom

3 Practicing is important aspect in

translation

2. Interview

The use of interview was to get the detail data from the participants.

Basically, the interview was used to strengthen, clarify and confirm the answer from

the questionnaire and observation check list. Interview also used to get the detail

information about the implementation of Focus Group Discussion. Ary, Jacobs and

Razavieh (2010) say interview is used to make a direct contact between the people

in the sample group or participants and the interviewer which their response would

be recorded (p. 379).

Cannel and Kahn described that “interview can be defined as two person

conversations initiated by interviewer for the specific purposes of the obtaining

research-relevant information, and focused by him on content specified by research


34

objectives of systematic description, prediction or explanation” (as cited in

Williams and Micallef, 2009, p. 108) in . Thus, the interview could be used to clarify

the students answer in questionnaire and got clear answers through interview. The

interview transcript can be seen in Appendix H.

3. Observation Checklist

The using of observation was to find out the answer to the first question. By

doing observation, the researcher could gather the data and able to look the real

condition of the participants being observed. Robson (2002) explains that “what

people do may differ from what they say they do, and observation provides a reality

check; observation also enables a researcher to look afresh at every-day behaviour

that otherwise might be taken forgranted, expected or go unnoticed” (p. 310)

The researcher constructed 15 statements that were classified into three

parts. The first part was about preparation before class began. The second part was

about the form of FGD. The last part was about lecturer’s and students’ participation

in the classroom.

Table 3 2 the sample of observation sheet

OBSERVATION SHEET

Date :

Class :

Participants: ...... students

Statements Yes No Note

Students are

ready to start the

lesson

√ All students are

ready in learning

activities.

Lecturer reads the

rule about FGD

√ The moderator

reads the

guideline and

rules


35

Moreover, the researcher observed the learning activities during the lesson

by giving a check sign (√) in the observation sheet to decide whether the activity

was done or not. Through this instrument, the researcher could record all of the

information related to the aspect to be observed. Then the results were be used to

complete the explanation in answering how focus group discussion is conducted.

The whole observation checklist can be seen in Appendix.

E. Data Analysis Technique

In data analysis technique, the researcher acquired the data from

observation, questionnaire and interview. Firstly, the researcher analysed the

observation checklist and made a description. Secondly, the researcher analysed the

questionnaire. There were five degree of agreements that used in the questionnaire.

After that the researcher counted the raw data into percentages and made an

interpretation. The formula was:

∑𝑋

∑n X 100%

Note:

∑x = The number of students based on the degree of agreement

∑n= The number of all students.

The data of the questionnaire was put on table as follows:

Table 3. 1 The Data Percentages of the Respondents

No Statement Degree of Agreement

SA A N D SD

1

2

3


36

4

In addition, after the researcher finished calculating the percentage distributions.

The researcher made descriptions on each statement based on the data. At the end

of every category, the researcher also made conclusion towards the statements.

Furthermore, the researcher also collected the data from the interview.

During the interview, the researcher used recorder to record the answer of the

interviewee. The recording was listened repeatedly to make the transcript of the

interview. The researcher concluded the main points and noted some important

information from the interview.

F. Research Procedures

In conducting the research the researcher followed some research

procedures. The steps were as follows:

1. Planning

Planning was used to see the potential topic for research. In choosing the

topic, the researcher searched the problems that usually occurred during teaching

activity. Thus, the problems selected were also related and close to the researcher’s

experience. Then the researcher formulated the research problems that needed to be

answered through the research.

2. Defining Population

In this step, the researcher determined the research participants. The

research was done at English Language Education Study Program of Sanata

Dharma University at translation class. There were 42 students and two lecturers

who became the participants.

3. Reviewing the related literature and finding some theories


37

In this step the researcher reads many sources and theories related to the topic

and tried to understand the theories. After that the researcher selected the

appropriate method and applied in this research.

4. Constructing the instrument

Questionnaire, interview, and observation checklist were constructed in this

step. Questionnaire and observation checklist were used as the main data of the

research meanwhile interview were used to support the data from observation and

questionnaire. In constructing questionnaires the researcher made a blueprint as the

guide of the instruments. The researcher created two blueprints. When the

researcher consulted the first blueprint to the expert, the expert provided suggestion

for the revision. The first blueprint can be seen in Appendix A meanwhile the final

blueprint can be seen in Appendix B.

5. Conducting observation

The researcher asked permission to the lecturer in both of the classes to

conduct observation. The observation was conducted once in both of the classes

6. Distributing questionnaire

After conducting observation, the researcher distributed questionnaire to all

of the participants and lecturers. The questionnaire consisted of close-ended and

open-ended questions.

7. Conducting interview

In conducting interview, the researcher selected the participants based on their

answer in the questionnaire. Then, the researcher made a promise with the

participants.


38

8. Processing the data

After obtaining the data, the researcher analysed and interpreted them into

description. The data processing was reported in the written form and the

conclusion of the research was made.

9. Reporting the results

The researcher reported the result and drew conclusions of the research. The

researcher reported the result in the written form.


39

CHAPTER IV

RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter presents the detailed information about the data which have

been gathered and analysed. This chapter is divided into two parts; the first part is

about the implementation of Focus group Discussion, the second part is about the

student’s and lecturers’ perception on the implementation of Focus Group

Discussion. In the first part, the researcher presents the data from the observation

and interview. In the second part, the data will be presented on questionnaire and

interview. Moreover, the researcher provides table for helping interpret the data.

A. Implementation of Focus Group Discussion

Focus Group Discussion was implemented in the Translation subject at

Sanata Dharma University. Both of the lecturers implemented focus group

discussion as one of the strategies used in teaching translation subject, especially,

class A and E of academic year 2016/2017. The observation was done in both

classes, class A and E.

Focus Group Discussion used in the the class as a teaching strategy. Both of

the class took 2 hour or one full-time class of translation subject. Both class A and

E used moderator, participants, note taker and reporter as the element for running

the focus group discussion. Students took a responsibility on moderator,

participants, note taker and reporter. Thus, the lecturers’ role was to monitor the

discussion. The lecturer only intervened when it was necessary.


40

Focus Group Discussion used group sets of individuals. The researcher

found that each of groups consisted 5 until 6 individuals. Both of the lecturers

selected the members of the group randomly. Then, the result is five groups in both

of the classes. In every focus group discussion, the composition in both of the

classes was one group as a moderator, two groups as participants, one group as a

note taker and one group as a reporter, regardless the number of individuals.

Although both of the lecturers used Focus Group Discussion as teaching

strategy, the implementation of Focus Group Discussion in class A and E was

different. The researcher found many differences. Furthermore, the researcher

discussed separately to present the clear information.

1. Implementation of Focus Group Discussion in Class A

The researcher conducted the observation on May, 26th 2017. The teaching

and learning activity was done in multimedia laboratory. In the beginning, there

were 18 students who came to the class on time, and then five minutes later, two

students came. Thus, at that day, there were 20 students from 24 who came in the

class.

Moderating focus group discussion needs preparations. Two from five

members in moderator group came in time, not on time. While the other members

in moderator group had prepared themselves, these two members started their

preparations. Consequently, they had prepared the projector, when the lecturer


41

opened the class. Fortunately, they were ready as soon as the lecturer finished

opening the class.

Because learning activities used multimedia laboratory, the participants

could not adjust the seat arrangement. It was hard to seat the participants in face-

to-face way. The computer blocked the participants’ view. The participants only

saw the moderator clearly. This position is counterproductive for group interaction

and discussion. It made the moderator implemented moderator-dominated

discussion. Besides, Hennink (2014) states that moderator-dominated discussion

involves moderator to ask each participant serial of questions (p. 73).

Surprisingly, the implementation in this class was group presentation. The

moderator presented the material about one topic, then, the moderator opened the

questioning and answering sessions. In general, the moderator asked the

participants opinions about the topic, however, in this class the participants asked

to the moderator about the material that they did not understand. This style was

contrary with the class E.

This implementation seems contradicted with the general implementation of

focus group discussion. The moderator did not arrange the discussion guideline.

Hennink (2014) states typical discussion guideline for moderator are; an

introduction, an opening question, a series of short introductory questions,

transitions questions or statements, key topics with specific questions, and closing

questions (p. 52). It was clear that moderator created guideline discussion for

asking to participants.


42

Fortunately, the basic elements of focus group discussion was used in focus

group discussion. Moreover, the moderator in class A encouraged the participants

to interact actively in the discussion and asked the participants to pay attention on

the discussion. This activity categorized as Focus Group Discussion. Kitzinger and

Barbour (1999) states that any group discussion may be considered as focus group

discussion as long as the moderator is actively encouraging of, and paying attention

to, the group interaction (p. 4). Thus, the researcher concluded that activity in class

A categorized as focus group discussion.

During discussion, the moderator opened asking and answering session.

There were two sessions. In the first session, the moderator allotted 5 questions.

However, there were only 4 participants who asked to the moderator. The moderator

did not answer the question simultaneously. The moderator gathered all questions,

then, asked time to discuss the answer. After all questions were answered, the

moderator closed the first asking and answering session. Then, in the second

session, the activities were the same with the first session. But, in this session, there

were only 3 participants who asked to the moderator. The lecturer reviewed and

evaluated in the end of the presentation. She only interrupted to enlarge the font in

one of the slides.

The note taker wrote the summary of the discussion. The note taker did not

use recorder to record how the discussion ran. They wrote what the participants

questions are, how the moderator respond, how the moderator encouraged the

participants. Besides, Hennink (2014) states that one of the ways note taker

summarized is note taking (p. 82).


43

2. Implementation of Focus Group Discussion in Class E

The researcher conducted the observation on May, 10th 2017. The teaching

and learning activity was done in I/K.15. In the beginning, there were 18 students

who came to the class in time, and then five minutes later, four students came. Thus,

at that day, there were 22 students from 25 who came on the class.

The moderator in this class was well-prepared. All of the members in

moderator group came in time. They prepared the projector, the audio and their

laptop. They did it before the lecturer came to the class. Thus, as soon as the teacher

came, the Focus Group Discussion started.

The moderator asked those who took a role as participants to sit in front of

the class, near the moderator. The moderator set the seat arrangement like in a

classroom set-up. The moderator was in front of the class and all group members

faced the moderator. Hennink (2007) states that the participants tend to comment

directly to the moderator rather than other participants’ comments (p. 162).

Moreover, it occurred. The participants tend to comment to the moderator.

The implementation of discussion in this class was different from the class

A. The implementation of focus group discussion in this class was similar with the

implementation in general. The moderator asked the participants set of questions.

They created discussion guideline to guide the discussion. Besides, Hennink (2014)

states that discussion guideline is a prepared list of topic or question to guide the

group discussion (p. 48).

The moderator provided three questions in this discussion. The moderator

provides two minutes for participants to think about the answer. As soon as the time


44

was over, one of the members in participant groups raised their hand to provide the

ideas. There were two participants who gave their opinion. Then the moderator

explained the answer and provided the video to strengthen the answer. Moreover,

the moderator asked the lecturer to clarify the answer of the moderator.

Surprisingly, in the third question, the moderator provided two videos to be

analysed. The first video was the product advertisement. The participants were

asked to analyse whether the video used dubbing, voice over, or subtitling. The

second video was one of the running man episodes. The participants were analysed

what subtitling used in the video. Kitzinger and Barbour (1999) underlines that

“the group is ‘focused’ in that it involves some kind of collective activity - such as

viewing a video, examining a single health promotion message, or simply debating

a set of questions” (p. 4).

In the first video, the discussion took long time because both of the

participant groups had and provided different opinions. There were four participants

who raised the opinions, two members in each group. The moderator provided the

answer, but, one participant disagreed and argued to the moderator. As Jolliffe

(2007) states that one of the teacher’s or lecturer’s roles is to monitor ad intervenes

the discussion when it necessary (p. 47). Therefore, the lecturer intervened the

discussion and gave explanations about the video.

The note taker did not take a note during discussions. The note taker used

one of the member’s phones to record the moderator’s questions, the participants’

responses and the lecturer’s explanation. Moreover, Hennink (2014) categorized


45

two ways how focus group discussion recorded: audio and/or video recorder and

note taker’s written summary (p. 82).

B. Students’ and Lecturers’ Perception on the Implementation of Focus

Group Discussion

This part used the data from the questionnaire and interview about

perception of implementation of focus group discussion in Translation subject. The

researcher categorized the questionnaire into five categories. The first category is

about the nature of translation. The second category is about the students’ and

lecturers’ perception on the process of Focus Group Discussion. The third category

is about students’ and lecturer’s perception on the advantages of Focus Group

Discussion. The fourth category is about students’and lecturers’ perception on

obstacle during Focus Group Discussion. The fifth category is about students’ and

lecturers’ perception on lecturers’ or their roles on Focus Group Discussion.

The results presented in percentages. In the first part, there were 25 items

which had to be answered by giving a check (√) on the box provided. For one item,

there were four options: Strongly Disagree (SD), Disagree (D), Neutral (N) Agree

(A), Strongly Agree (SA) for which the students had to fill the answers according

to their experiences and perceptions.

The second part was in the form of essay. The total of question was three

questions which the students had to fill in the space provided to retell their

experiences and perceptions. The focus of this part was also to investigate the

perception of using Focus Group Discussion as learning strategy in Translation

Subject. After retelling their experiences, in the third question, the participants were


46

also asked to give their opinions about the improvement in Focus Group Discussion.

In order to gain the clear information, the researcher discussed it separately.

1. Students’ and Lecturer’s Perception in class A

The questionnaire sheets were distributed to the Translation subject. The

researcher got permission to do the research in class A. The total of participants

whom participated in filling the questionnaire was 20 students and one lecturer.

a. Students’ and Lecturer’s Perception on the Nature of Translation

The following table presents the students’ responses to the statements about

the nature of translation.

Table 4. 1 Students’ Questionnaire Results on the Nature of Translation

No Statements SD D N A SA

1 Translation is the process of changing a

text from one language to another

0 (4)

20%

(2)

10%

(11)

55%

(11)

55%

2 Translating idioms from the source

language to target language is difficult

0 (1)

5%

(11)

55%

(14)

70

(2)

10%

3 Practicing is an important aspect in

translation

0 0 (1)

5%

(10)

50%

(9)

45%

4 Group Discussion is an appropriate

strategy in translation

0 (1)

5%

(4)

20%

(11)

55%

(4)

20%

Table 4. 2 Lecturer’s Questionnaire Results on the Nature of Translation




(1)

100%



(1)

100%


47


translation

(1)

100%



(1)

100%

Table 4.1 and 4.2 showed the students’ and lecturer responses to each

statement on the questionnaire. From the first statement, it showed that the lecturer

disagreed and there were 70% of total students agreed that translation is the process

of changing a text from one language to another. 5% of the students strongly agreed,

55% of the participants agreed, 10% of the participants stood on neutral side, 20%

of the participants disagreed and none of the participants strongly disagreed with

the statements. This result is supported by Munday (2008), who says that

“translation has several meanings: it can refer to the general subject field, the

product (the text that has been translated) or the process (the act of producing the

translation, otherwise known as translating (p. 5). Moreover, the researcher

concluded that both the students and lecturer had positive perception on definition

that translation is the process of changing a text from one language to another.

The statements number two dealt with the students translating idioms from

the source language to target language is difficult. There were 80% total of the

students who agreed and the lecturer strongly agreed that translating idioms from

the source language to target language is difficult. 10% of the participants strongly

agreed, 70% of the participants agreed, 15% stood on neutral side, 5% of the

participants disagreed and none of the participants strongly disagreed with the

statement. This result is in line with Duff (1992, p. 10), who say if the idioms is

untranslatable, those kinds of idioms should not force to translate into second


48

language. Then, the researcher concluded that students and lecturer agreed that

students are facing difficulties when translating idiom.

The statement number three dealt with whether or not practicing is an

important aspect in translation. The result showed that there were 95% of the total

participants agreed and the lecturer strongly agreed not practicing is an important

aspect in translation. 45% of the participants strongly agreed, 50% of the

participants agreed to it, 5% stood on neutral side, and none of the participants

disagreed and strongly disagreed with the statement. This result is supported by

Duff (1992, p. 8), who says that students who are learn foreign language are asked

to translate, but they are rarely given any practice in that skill. It showed that the

students and lecturer agreed that practicing is an important aspect in translation

Then, for the last statement, it dealt with whether or not group discussion is

an appropriate strategy in translation. The results showed that there were 75% of

the students agreed that group discussion is an appropriate strategy in translation

meanwhile the lecturer agreed that group discussion is an appropriate strategy in

translation. 20% of the participants strongly agreed, 55% of the participants agreed,

20% stood on neutral side, and 5% of the participants disagreed and none of the

participants strongly disagreed with the statement. . This result is supported by Duff

(1992, p. 8), who says that the essential of practicing translation does not mean

doing writing assignment but giving the students regular opportunities to compare

and discuss their work with others, and responding to suggestions are the essential.

The researcher concluded that the students and lecturer agreed that group discussion

is an appropriate strategy in translation


49

From the explanation about the statements on the questionnaire results, the

researcher concluded that the students and lecture had positive perception on the

process of Focus Group Discussion. The meaning was most of the participants

agreed that they got many advantages by sharing and raising ideas and opinions. It

was supported by the facts and related theories which were shown in the degree of

agreement most frequently answered by participants.

b. Students’ and Lecturer’s Perception on the Process of Focus Group

Discussion

From the questionnaire, there were five statements about the process of

Focus Group Discussion. The followings are the description of the students’ and

lecturer’s responses to each statement.

Table 4. 3 Students’ Questionnaire Results on the Process of FGD


5 Focus Group Discussion is one of the

teaching strategies in translation

0 0 (3)

15%

(17)

60%

(1)

25%

6 During FGD, I express the idea not only

to moderator, but also other friends

0 0 (3)

15%

(13)

35%

(4)

20%

7 The moderators read the guidelines and

the rules before starting FGD

0 0 (6)

30%

(12)

60%

(2)

10%

8 Moderator could ask the participant(s)

who rarely raise the ideas to speak

0 (3)

15%

(7)

35%

(8)

40%

(2)

10%

9 Moderator is assertive in time

management

0 (2)

10%

(7)

35%

(10)

50%

(1)

5%

Table 4. 4 Lecturer’s Questionnaire Results on Process of FGD


50




(1)

100%

6 During FGD, I express the idea not

only to moderator, but also other

friends.

(1)

100%



(1)

100%



(1)

100%


management

(1)

100%


statement on the questionnaire. From the first statement, it showed that 85% of total

students agreed and the lecturer agreed that Focus Group Discussion is one of

teaching strategy in translation. 5% of the students strongly agreed, 60% of the

participants agreed, 15% of the participants stood on neutral side and none of the

participants disagreed and strongly disagreed with the statements. This result is

supported by Duff (1992, p. 8), who says that the essential of practicing translation

does not mean doing writing assignment but giving the students regular

opportunities to compare and discuss their work with others, and responding to

suggestions are the essential. Moreover, the researcher concluded that both the

students and lecturer had positive perception on using Focus Group Discussion as

teaching strategy.

The statements number two dealt with the students express idea not only to

the moderator but other friends during Focus Group Discussion. There were 55%

total of the students who agreed and the lecturer strongly agreed that the students


51

express idea not only moderator but other friends. 20% of the participants strongly

agreed, 35% of the participants agreed, 15% stood on neutral side, and none of the

participants disagreed and strongly disagreed with the statement. This result is in

line with Ary, Jacobs and Razavieh (2010, p. 381), who say participants are assured

to express their idea in their words and to respond not only to the researcher but

also to the participants and their responses. Then, the researcher concluded that

students and lecturer agreed that participants can express idea to others.

The statement number three dealt with whether or not the moderator reads

the guidelines and rules before starting Focus Group Discussion. The result showed

that there were 70% of the total participants agreed and the lecturer agreed that the

moderator reads the guidelines and rules. 10% of the participants strongly agreed,

60% of the participants agreed to it, 30% stood on neutral side, and none of the

participants disagreed and strongly disagreed with the statement. This result is

supported by Krueger (1998, p. 21), who categorized 4 recommended pattern for

moderator to introduce the FGD: a) welcome or introduction b) overview the topic,

c) Guidelines and rules, d) Opening question. It showed that the students and

lecturer agreed that moderator reads the guidelines and rules before starting Focus

Group Discussion

Furthermore, from the students’ and lecturer responses to the fourth

statement whether or not the moderator could ask the participants who rarely raise

ideas to speak. The result showed that there were 50% of the participants agreed

and the lecturer strongly agreed that the moderator could ask participants who rarely

raise ideas to speak. 10% of the participants strongly agreed, 40% of the participants


52

agreed to it, 35% stood on neutral side, and 15% of the participants disagreed and

none of the participants strongly disagreed with the statement. Krueger (1998, p.

61), says that the moderator can call on shy or inattentive participants by name.

However, the researcher concluded that students and lecturer agreed that the

moderator could ask participants to raise ideas.

Then, for the last statement, it dealt with whether or not the moderator is

assertive in time management. The results showed that there were 55% of the

students agreed that moderator was assertive in time management meawhile the

lecturer agreed that moderator was assertive in time management. 5% of the

participants strongly agreed, 50% of the participants agreed, 35% stood on neutral

side, and 10% of the participants disagreed and none of the participants strongly

disagreed with the statement. The result is supported by Morgan (1998, p. 32), who

says that the researcher could limit their chance in speaking based on time. The

researcher concluded that the students and lecturer agreed that the moderator is

assertive in time management








53


Discussion

From the questionnaire, there were six statements about the advantages of


lecturer responses to each statement.

Table 4. 5 Students’ Questionnaire Results on the Advantages of FGD


10 Focus Group Discussion helps me to

express idea freely, anytime I want.

0 (2)

10%

(5)

25%

(9)

45%

(4)

20%


develop my communication skill.

0 0 (4)

20%

(12)

60%

(4)

20%

12 Through FGD, I obtain new knowledge

from other members’ opinion

0 0 (2)

10%

(12)

60%

(6)

30%

13 FGD helps me to think critically. 0 (1)

5%

(2)

10%

(12)

60%

(5)

25%

14 Through FGD, I learn to evaluate my

own thinking and the thinking of others

0 0 (3)

15%

(11)

55%

(6)

30%

15 Through FGD, I learn to appreciate

other’s idea

0 0 (1)

5%

(9)

45%

(10)

50%

Table 4. 6 Lecturers’s Questionnaire Result on Advantages of FGD


10 Focus Group Discussion helps the student

to express idea freely, anytime they want.

(1)

100%


to develop their communication skill.

(1)

100%

12 Through FGD, the students’ obtain new

knowledge from other members’ opinion

(1)

100%

13 FGD helps the students to think critically. (1)

100%


54

14 Through FGD, the students’ learn to

evaluate their own thinking and the

thinking of others

(1)

100%


appreciate other’s idea

(1)

100%

Table 4.5 and 4.6 showed the students’ and lecturer’s responses to each

statement on the questionnaire. From the first statement, it showed that 65% of total

students agreed and the lecturer agreed that Focus Group Discussion helped

students to express their idea. 20% of the participants strongly agreed, 45% of the

participants agreed, 25% of the participants stood on neutral side, and 10% of the


statements. The result is in line with Morgan (1998), who claims that focus group

discussion is not a viable option, unless the participants feel comfortable in voicing

their voice (p. 61). Moreover, the researcher concluded that lecturer and students

had positive perception on using Focus Group Discussion to express idea.

The statement number two dealt with the development of the students’

communication skill through Focus Group Discussion. There were 80% of total

students who agreed that their communication skill was developed through Focus

Group Discussion. 20% of the participants strongly agreed, 60% of the participants

agreed to it, 20% stood on neutral side, and none of participants disagreed and

strongly disagreed with the statement. Wilen (1990) explains that students’

communication skill can be developed by discussion especially leading and

participating in the discussion (p. 40). Then, the researcher concluded that students

and lecturer had positive perception on the development of the student’s

communication skill through Focus Group Discussion.


55

The statement number three dealt with the new knowledge that students

obtain from other members. The result showed that the lecturer stood on neutral

side and there were 90% of the total students agreed that the students obtained new

knowledge from other participants. 30% of the participants strongly agreed, 60%

of the participants agreed, 10% of the participants stood on neutral side, and none

of the participants disagreed and strongly disagreed with the statement. This result

is supported by Gall and Gillet (1980), who state that the opportunity to raise their

ideas and to listen to others speaks helps students learn better (p. 99). Although the

lecturer had tendency to stood on neutral side, the researcher concluded that Focus

Group Discussion helps students to obtain new knowledge from other members.

Furthermore, from the students’ and lecturer’s responses to the fourth

statement whether or not the students’ critical thinking is improved through Focus

Group Discussion. The result showed that the lecturer agreed and there were 85%

of the total participants who agreed that the students’ critical thinking was improved

through Focus Group Discussion. 25% of the participants strongly agreed, 60% of

the participants agreed, 10% of the participants stood on neutral side, 5% of the


statement. Jolliffe (2007) says that Cooperative Learning, especially through

discussion, can support the development of high-order thinking skill, such as

analysis, synthesis and evaluation (p. 47). It showed that the students and lecturer

had positive perception on the improvement of student’s critical thinking through

Focus Group Discussion.


56

Responding to the fifth statement, it dealt with whether or not the students

learn to evaluate their own thinking and thinking of others through Focus Group

Discussion. It was known that the lecturer agreed and there were 85% of total

participants who agreed the students learn to evaluate their own thinking and the

thinking of others through Focus Group Discussion. 30% of the participants

strongly agreed, 55% of the participants agreed, 15% of the participants stood on

neutral side and none of the participants disagreed and strongly disagreed with the

statement. This result is supported by Gall and Gillett (1980), who explain that

purposes of the discussion are to help the students’ analyse and evaluate opinions,

and to rise their awareness of their opinions or opinions of others (p. 99). Moreover,

the researcher concluded that the students and lecturer had positive perception on

using Focus Group Discussion to evaluate own thinking and thinking of others.

Then, for the last statement, it dealt with whether or not focus group

discussion helps the students to appreciate each other’s ideas. It showed that the

lecturer agreed and 95% of the participants agreed that focus group discussion helps

the students to appreciate each other ideas. 50% of the participants strongly agreed,

45% of the participants agreed, 5% of the participants stood on neutral side, and

none of the participants disagreed and strongly disagreed with the statement. Kruger

and Casy (2000) also claim that the purpose of the focus group discussion is to

support or promote a comfortable atmosphere of disclosure in which people can

share their ideas, experiences, and attitudes about a topic (p. 34). Thus, the

researcher concluded that the students and lecturer had positive perception on using

focus Group Discussion to appreciate each other’s idea.


57


researcher concluded that the students and lecturer had positive perception on the

advantages of Focus Group Discussion. The meaning was most of the participants





Discussion


the obstacle of Focus Group Discussion faced by students.

Table 4. 7 Students’ Questionnaire Results on the Obstacle of FGD


16 The discussion in FGD tend to be

disorganized and uncontrolled

(2)

10%

(11)

55%

(2)

10%

0 (1)

5%

17 There is a friend who intimidate other's

opinion

(7)

35%

(10)

50%

(3)

15

0 0

18 When I become a moderator, it is

difficult to invite participants to raise

ideas.

(1)

5%

(4)

20%

(9)

45

(6)

30%

0

19 During focus group discussion, there

are some of my friends in my group

who are passive

(1)

5%

(4)

20%

(4)

20%

(6)

30%

(5)

25%

20 There is a friend in my group who is not

focus.

(1)

5%

(3)

15%

(5)

25%

(5)

25%

(6)

30%

Table 4. 8 Lecturer’s Questionnaire Result on the Obstacle of FGD




(1)

100%

17 There is a student who intimidate

other's opinion

(1)

100%


58

18 It is difficult to invite students to raise

ideas.

(1)

100%


are some of students in their group

who are passive

(1)

100%

20 There is a student in one of the groups

who is not focus when she/he takes a

role as participants

(1)

100%



disageed and there were 65% of the total participants were disagreed that discussion

in Focus Group Discussion was disorganized and uncontrolled. 5% of the

participants strongly agreed, none of the participants agreed, 10% of the participants

stood on neutral side, 55% of the participants disagreed and 10% of the participants

strongly disagreed with the statement. The result is supported by Stewart and

Shamdasani (1990, p. 69), who claims that mastering technique of moderating a

focus group is important for the successful of the discussion. Moreover, it was

concluded that the discussion in Focus Group Discussion was organized and

controlled and the moderator did their roles well.

Statement number two dealt with whether or not there was a friend who

intimidates others. The results showed that the lecturer stood on neutral side and

there were 85% of the total participants disagreed that there was a student who

intimidated other’s opinion. None of the participants strongly agreed and agreed,

15% of the participants stood on neutral side, 50% of the participants disagreed and

35% of the participants strongly disagreed. This result is in line with Kruger and

Casy (2015, p. 34), who say that the purpose of focus group discussion is to give


59

the participants feeling of comfort, respect and free to voice their ideas and opinions

without being judged. However, the researcher concluded that the students

respected others when they are speaking.

In addition, the statement number three dealt with the difficulties in inviting

or asking participants to raise opinions or ideas when they become moderator. The

results showed that lecturer stood on neutral side and 45% of the students were not

sure that students facing difficulties in inviting or asking participants to raise ideas

or opinions. None of the participants strongly agreed, 30% of the participants

agreed, 45% stood on neutral side, 20% of the participants disagreed and 5% of the

participants strongly disagreed with the statement. Hennink (2014) says that

participants who are silent are likely to be acutely aware of their lack of involvement

and the longer they remain silent the more difficult it may be to contribute (p. 79).

Although, they have tendency to disagree with the statements, the researcher

concluded that most of the students were not sure facing difficulties in inviting

participants to raise ideas or opinions.

Furthermore, from the student’s responses to the fourth statement, it was

whether or not some friends in group were passive when doing Focus Group

Discussion. It was known that the lecturer agreed and there were 55% of the total

participants agreed that some friends are passive when doing Focus Group

Discussion. 25% of the participants strongly agreed, 30% of the participants agreed,


5% of the participants strongly disagreed with the statement. This results is in line

with Krueger (1998, p. 61), who states that the passive participants sometimes have


60

much ideas to share, however extra effort is required to get them in the discussion.

Moderator can call their name to involve in the discussion. Therefore, the researcher

concluded that the lecturer and students agreed that some of their friends are passive

when doing Focus Group Discussion.

Then, for the last statement, it dealt with whether or not some friends did

not focus during Focus Group Discussion. The results showed that the lecturer stood

on neutral side and there were 55% of the total participants agreed that some friends

did not focus when doing Focus Group Discussion. 30% of the participants strongly

agreed, 25% of the participants agreed, 25% of the participants stood on neutral

side, 15% of the participants disagreed and 5% of the participants strongly

disagreed with the statement. This result is supported by Krueger (2007), who states

that the inattentive participant doesn’t seem to hear or understand the discussion,

and the individual may seem preoccupied (p. 61). It showed that most of the

students were not focus during Focus Group Discussion.

From the explanations on the questionnaire results, the researcher concluded

that the students had negative perception on the obstacle of Focus Group

Discussion. The meaning was that most of the students disagreed that the students

faced the obstacles in Focus Group Discussion. This results supported by the fact

and related theories which were presented in the degree of agreement most

frequently answered by participants.


61

e. Students’ and Lecturer’s Perception on the Role of Lecturer

When doing Focus Group Discussion, the role of the lecturer in classroom

is important. The followings are the descriptions of the students’ responses to

each statement.

Table 4. 9 Students’ Questionnaire Results on Lecturer's Role


21 My lecturer opens the class before FGD

is started

0 (1)

5%

(2)

10%

(6)

30%

(11)

55%

22 My lecturer divides the groups’

member in the beginning of subject

0 (1)

5%

(1)

5%

(7)

35%

(11)

55%

23 My lecturer categorizes the group roles

in every FGD

(2)

10%

(4)

20%

(1)

5%

(5)

25%

(8)

40%

24 During focus group discussion, my

lecturer intervenes the discussion

(8)

40%

(6)

30%

(3)

15%

(1)

5%

(2)

10%

25 In the end of lesson and discussion, my

lecturer evaluates and reviews the

topic.

0 0 0 (4)

20%

(16)

80%

Table 4. 10 Lecturer’s Questionnaire Result on their roles


21 I open the class before FGD is started (1)

100%

22 I divide the groups’ member in the first

meeting

(1)

100%

23 I categorize the group roles in every

FGD

(1)

100%

24 During focus group discussion, I

intervenes the discussion

(1)

100

%

25 In the end of lesson and discussion, I

evaluate and review the topic.

(1)

100%


62

Table 4.9 and 4.10 showed the students’ responses to each statement on the

questionnaire. From the first statement, it showed that 85% of the total students and

the lecturer agreed that the lecturer opened the class before Focus Group Discussion

was started. 55% of the participants strongly agreed, 30% of the participants agreed,


none of the participants strongly disagreed. This result is supported by Jolliffe

(2007, p. 47), who states that one of the teacher’s roles is opening the class.

Moreover, it concluded that the lecturer opened the class before Focus Group

Discussion is started.

Statement number two dealt with whether or not the lecturer divided the

groups’ member in the beginning of the class or first meeting. The result was 90%

of the total students agreed and the lecturer agreed that the lecturer divided the

group’s member in Focus Group Discussion. 55% of the participants strongly

agreed, 35% of the participants agreed, 5% of the participants stood on neutral side,

5% of the participants disagreed and none of the participants strongly disagreed.

This result is supported by Jolliffe (2007, p. 47), who states that one of the teacher’s

roles is dividing the group member.

The teacher divided the groups randomly. The students asked to count from

(1-4), and then asking all the 1st to form a group, 2nd a group, and so on.

Student #04 said:

My lecturer divided the groups’ member randomly. It was done by

numbering. Then, she asked students who said one (1) formed a group, two

(2) formed a group and so on. It was a good way for students to work and

collaborate with each other. Sometimes, there was a “gank” in the class who

only worked willingly with that members. So it could cut it off.

(Interviewee 3)


63

It showed that the lecturer divided the group’s member randomly. It had

many advantages as what the interviewee said. Removing and decreasing student’s

gap in the discussion is necessary for maintaining good discussion.

In addition, statement number three dealt with whether or not the lecturer

categorized the groups’ role. The result shows that 75% of the total participants

agreed and the lecturer agreed that the lecturer categorises the group’s role in every

Focus Group Discussion. 40% of the participants strongly agreed, 25% of the

participants agreed, 5% of the participants stood on neutral side, 20% of the

participants disagreed, and 10% of the participants strongly disagreed with the

statement. The result is supported by Jolliffe (2007), who states that giving students

specific function or role within groups or pair help them to responsible for their

own action. It showed that the students and lecturer agreed that the lecturer

categorised the g (p. 50)roup’s role in every Focus Group Discussion.

Furthermore, from the students’ response to the fourth statement, it showed

that 70% of the total participants disagreed and the lecturer disagreed that the

lecturer intervened during focus group discussion. 10% of the participants strongly

agreed, 5% of the participants agreed, 15% of the participants stood on neutral side,

30% of the participants disagreed and 40% of the participants strongly disagreed.

The result is contradicted with Jolliffe (2007), who states that one of the teacher’s

roles is to intervene the discussion when it is necessary (p. 47). Then, the researcher

concluded that lecturer and students disagreed that the lecturer intervened during



64

Then, for the last statement, it dealt with whether or not the lecturer

evaluates and reviews the topic. The result showed that 100% of the total

participants agreed and the lecturer agreed that the lecturer evaluated and reviewed

the topic in the end of Focus Group Discussion. 80% of the participants strongly

agreed, 20% of the participants agreed, and none of the participants stood on neutral

side, disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement. The result is supported by

Jolliffe (2007), who states that one of the teacher’s role is to evaluate the quality

and quantity of achievement and ensures that groups reflect on their achievement

and effectiveness as a group and set goals for improvement (p. 47). It showed that

lecturer and students agreed that the lecturer reviewed and evaluated in the end



researcher concluded that the students and the lecturer in class A had positive

perception on the roles of the lecturer. It meant that most of students agreed that the

lecturer had some important roles in the classroom during Focus Group Discussion.

It was supported by the facts which were shown in the degree of agreement most


2. Students’ and Lecturer’s Perception in class E

To obtain the data about students’ and lecturer’s perception in class E, the

researcher distributed the questionnaire in this class. The total of participants whom

participated in filling the questionnaire was 22 students and one lecturer.


65

a. Students’ and Lecturers’ Perception on the Nature of Translation


the nature of translation.

Table 4. 11 Students’ Questionnaire Results on the Nature of Translation


1 Translation is the process of changing

a text from one language to another

0 0 (2)

9.1%

(12)

54.5%

(8)

36.4%


language to target language is

difficult

0 0 (5)

22.7%

(13)

59.1%

(3)

13.6%


translation

0 0 0 (8)

36.4%

(14)

63.6%



0 0 (4)

18.2%

(16)

72.7%

(2)

9.1%

Table 4. 12 Lecturer’s Questionnaire Results on the Nature of Translation




(1)

100



(1)

100


translation

(1)

100



(1)

100




66

strongly agreed and there were 90.9 % of total students agreed that

translation is the process of changing a text from one language to another. 36.4 %

of the students strongly agreed, 54.5 % of the participants agreed, 9.1 % of the

participants stood on neutral side, and none of the participants disagreed and

strongly disagreed with the statements. This result is supported by Munday (2008),

who says that “translation has several meanings: it can refer to the general subject

field, the product (the text that has been translated) or the process (the act of

producing the translation, otherwise known as translating (p. 5). Moreover, the

researcher concluded that both the students and lecturer had positive perception on

definition that translation is the process of changing a text from one language to

another.

The statements number two dealt with the students translating idioms from

the source language to target language is difficult. There were 72.7% total of the

students who agreed and the lecturer strongly agreed translating idioms from the

source language to target language is difficult. 13.6 % of the participants strongly

agreed, 59,1 % of the participants agreed, 22.7 % stood on neutral side, and none

of the participants disagreed and strongly disagreed with the statement. This result

is in line with Duff (1992), who say if the idioms is untranslatable, those kinds of

idioms should not force to translate into second language (p. 10). Then, the

researcher concluded that students and lecturer agreed that students are facing

difficulties when translating idiom.

The statement number three dealt with whether or not practicing is an

important aspect in translation. The result showed that there were 100% of the total


67

participants agreed and the lecturer strongly agreed that practicing is an important

aspect in translation. 63.6% of the participants strongly agreed, 36.4% of the

participants agreed to it, and none of the stood on neutral side, disagreed and

strongly disagreed with the statement. This result is supported by Duff (1992, p. 8),

who says that students who are learn foreign language are asked to translate, but

they are rarely given any practice in that skill. It showed that the students and

lecturer agreed that practicing is an important aspect in translation

Then, for the last statement, it dealt with whether or not group discussion is

an appropriate strategy in translation. The results showed that there were 81.8 % of

the students agreed that group discussion is an appropriate strategy in translation

meanwhile the lecturer agreed that group discussion is an appropriate strategy in

translation. 9.1 % of the participants strongly agreed, 72.7 % of the participants

agreed, 18.2 % stood on neutral side, and none of the participants disagreed and

strongly disagreed with the statement. This result is supported by Duff (1992), who

says that the essential of practicing translation does not mean doing writing

assignment but giving the students regular opportunities to compare and discuss

their work with others, and responding to suggestions are the essential (p. 8). The

researcher concluded that the students and lecturer agreed that group discussion is

an appropriate strategy in translation.






68



b. Students’ and Lecturers’ Perception on the Process of Focus Group

Discussion

From the questionnaire, there were five statements about the process of



Table 4. 13 Students’ Questionnaire Results on the Process of FGD


5 Focus Group Discussion is one of

the teaching strategies in translation

0 (1)

4.5%

(3)

13.6%

(17)

77.3%

(1)

4.5%



friends.

0 (1)

4.5%

(6)

27.3%

(6)

27.3%

(9)

40.9%

7 The moderators read the guidelines

and the rules before starting FGD

0 (4)

18.2%

(6)

27.3%

(11)

50%

(1)

4.5%

8 Moderator could ask the

participant(s) who rarely raise the

ideas to speak

0 (7)

31.8%

(8)

36.4%

(5)

22.7%

(2)

9.1%


management

(1)

4.5%

(1)

4.5%

(14)

63.6%

(4)

18.2%

(2)

9.1%

Table 4. 14 Lecturer’s Questionnaire Results on Process of FGD




(1)

100



friends.

(1)

100


69



(1)

100



(1)

100


management

(1)

100


statement on the questionnaire. From the first statement, it showed that 81.82 % of

total students agreed and the lecturer strongly greed that Focus Group Discussion

is one of teaching strategy in translation. 4.55% of the students strongly agreed,

77.27% of the participants agreed, 13.63% of the participants stood on neutral side,

4.55% of the participants disagreed and none of the participants strongly disagreed

with the statements. This result is supported by Duff (1992, p. 8), who says that the

essential of practicing translation does not mean doing writing assignment but

giving the students regular opportunities to compare and discuss their work with

others, and responding to suggestions are the essential. Moreover, the researcher

concluded that both students and lecturer had positive perception on using Focus

Group Discussion as teaching strategy.

The statements number two dealt with the students express idea not only to

the moderator but other friends during Focus Group Discussion. There were 68.15%

total of the students who agreed and the lecturer strongly agreed that the students

express idea not only moderator but other friends. 40.85% of the participants

strongly agreed, 27.3% of the participants agreed, 27.3% stood on neutral side

4.55% of the participant disagreed and none of the participants strongly disagreed

with the statement. This result is in line with Ary, Jacobs and Razavieh (2010, p.


70

381), who say participants are assured to express their idea in their words and to

respond not only to the researcher but also to the participants and their responses.

Then, the researcher concluded that students and lecturer agreed that students can

express idea to others participants.

The statement number three dealt with whether or not the moderator reads

the guidelines and rules before starting Focus Group Discussion. The result showed

that the lecturer agreed and there were 54.55% of the total participants who agreed

with the statement. 4.55% of the participants strongly agreed, 50% of the

participants agreed to it, 27,3% stood on neutral side, 18.2% of the participants

disagreed and none of the participants strongly disagreed with the statement. This

result is supported by Krueger (1998), who categorizes 4 recommended pattern for

moderator to introduce the FGD: a) welcome or introduction b) overview the topic,

c) Guidelines and rules, d) Opening question. It showed that the students and

lecturer agreed that moderator reads the guidelines and rules before starting Focus

Group Discussion (p. 21).

Furthermore, from the students’ and lecturer responses to the fourth

statement whether or not the moderator could ask the participants who rarely raise

ideas to speak. The result showed that there were 36.4% of the participants were

not sure and the lecturer agreed that the moderator could ask participants who rarely

raise ideas to speak. 9.1% of the participants strongly agreed, 18.2 % of the

participants agreed to it, 36.4 % stood on neutral side, and 31.8 % of the participants

disagreed and none of the participants strongly disagree with the statement. Krueger

(1998) says that the moderator can call on shy or inattentive participants by name


71

(p. 61). However, the researcher concluded that most of the students were not sure

that the moderator could ask participants to raise ideas.

Then, for the last statement, it dealt with whether or not the moderator is

assertive in time management. The results showed that there were 63.6% of the

students who were not sure that moderator was assertive in time management

meawhile the lecturer agreed that moderator are assertive in time management.

9.1% of the participants strongly agreed, 18.2% of the participants agreed, 63.6%

stood on neutral side, and 4.55% of the participants disagreed and 4.55% of the

participants strongly disagreed with the statement. Morgan (1998) says that the

researcher could limit their chance in speaking based on time (p. 32). However, the

researcher concluded that the students were not sure that the moderator is assertive

in time management while lecturer agreed that moderator is assertive in time

management








72


Discussion

From the questionnaire, there were six statements about the advantages of



Table 4. 15 Students’ Questionnaire Results on the Advantages of FGD




0 0 (12)

54.5%

(8)

36.4%

(2)

9.1%



0 0 (1)

4.5%

17

77,3%

(4)

18.2%

12 Through FGD, I obtain new

knowledge from other members’

opinion

0 0 (3)

13.6%

(13)

59,1%

(6)

27.3%

13 FGD helps me to think critically. 0 0 (2)

9.1%

(11)

50%

(9)

40.9%

14 Through FGD, I learn to evaluate my

own thinking and the thinking of

others

0 0 (3)

13.6%

(11)

50%

(8)

36.4%


other’s idea

0 0 0 (12)

54.5%

(10)

45.5%

Table 4. 16 Lecturers’s Questionnaire Result on Advantages of FGD


10 Focus Group Discussion helps the

student to express idea freely, anytime

they want.

(1)

100


student to develop their communication

skill.

(1)

100



opinion

(1)

100


73

13 FGD helps the students to think

critically.

(1)

100



thinking of others

(1)

100



(1)

100


statement on the questionnaire. From the first statement, it showed that 54.5 % of

total students stood on neutral side and the lecturer disagreed that Focus Group

Discussion helped students to express their idea. 9.1 % of the participants strongly

agreed, 36,4 % of the participants agreed, 54.5 % of the participants stood on neutral

side, and none of the participants disagreed and strongly disagreed with the

statements. The result was contradicted with Morgan (1998), who claims that focus

group discussion is not a viable option, unless the participants feel comfortable in

voicing their opinion (p. 61).

However, according to the interviewee 1, there was a reason why it

occurred. Student #01 said:

The answer of moderator’s questions were provided in the hand out which

was given by my lecturer. Consequently, I might not have reason to express

idea freely because I had already known the answer. I spoke when I did not

know about something. The moderator did not reinforce us to speak by

providing good questions. (Interviewee 1)

Moreover, the researcher concluded that the students and lecturer had

negative perception on using Focus Group Discussion to express idea. The

moderator did not provide a decent questions that reinforce the participants to speak

freely.


74

The statement number two dealt with the development of the students’

communication skill through Focus Group Discussion. The result showed that the

lecturer strongly agreed and there were 95.5% of total students who agreed that the

students’communication skill was developed through Focus Group Discussion.

18.2% of the participants strongly agreed, 77.3% of the participants agreed, 4.5%

stood on neutral side, and none of participants disagreed and strongly disagreed

with the statement. Wilen (1990) explains that students’ communication skill can

be developed by discussion especially leading and participating in the discussion

(p. 40). Then, the researcher concluded that students and lecturer had positive

perception on the development of the student’s communication skill through Focus

Group Discussion.

The statement number three dealt with the new knowledge that students’

obtain from other members. The result showed that the lecturer strongly agreed and

there were 86.4% of the total students agreed that the students obtained new

knowledge from other participants. 27.3% of the participants strongly agreed,

59.1% of the participants agreed, 13.6% of the participants stood on neutral side,

and none of the participants disagreed and strongly disagreed with the statement.

This result is supported by Gall and Gillet (1980), who state that the opportunity to

raise their ideas and to listen to others speaks helps students learn better (p. 99). It

showed that the students and the lecturer agreed that Focus Group Discussion helps

them to obtain new knowledge from other members.

Furthermore, from the students’ and lecturer’s responses to the fourth

statement whether or not the students’ critical thinking is improved through Focus


75

Group Discussion. The result showed that the lecturer strongly agreed and there

were 90.9% of the total participants who agreed that the students’ critical thinking

was improved through Focus Group Discussion. 40.9% of the participants strongly

agreed, 50% of the participants agreed, 9.1% of the participants stood on neutral

side, and none of the participants disagreed and strongly disagreed with the

statement. Jolliffe (2007) says that Cooperative Learning, especially through

discussion, can support the development of high-order thinking skill, such as

analysis, synthesis and evaluation (p. 47). It showed that both lecturer and students

had positive perception on the improvement of student’s critical thinking through


Responding to the fifth statement, it dealt with whether or not the students

learn to evaluate their own thinking and thinking of others through Focus Group

Discussion. It was known that the lecturer strongly agreed and there were 86.4% of

total participants who agreed the students learn to evaluate their own thinking and

the thinking of others through Focus Group Discussion. 36.4% of the participants

strongly agreed, 50% of the participants agreed, 13.6% of the participants stood on


statement. This result is supported by Gall and Gillett (1980), who explain that

purposes of the discussion are to help the students’ analyse and evaluate opinions,

and to rise their awareness of their opinions or opinions of others (p. 99). Moreover,


using Focus Group Discussion to evaluate own thinking and thinking of others.


76

Then, for the last statement, it dealt with whether or not focus group

discussion helps the students to appreciate each other’s ideas. It showed that the

lecturer strongly agreed and 100% of the participants agreed that focus group

discussion helps the students to appreciate each other ideas. 45.5% of the

participants strongly agreed, 54.5% of the participants agreed, and none of the

participants stood on neutral side, disagreed and strongly disagreed with the

statement. Kruger and Casy (2000) also claim that the purpose of the focus group

discussion is to support or promote a comfortable atmosphere of disclosure in which

people can share their ideas, experiences, and attitudes about a topic (p. 34). Thus,


using focus Group Discussion to appreciate each other’s idea.


researcher concluded that the students and lecturer had positive perception on the

advantages of Focus Group Discussion. The meaning was most of the participants





Discussion

The following table presents the students’ and lecturer’s responses to the

statements about the obstacle of Focus Group Discussion faced by students.


77

Table 4. 17 Students’ Questionnaire Results on the Obstacle of FGD




(3)

13.6%

(10)4

5.5%

(9)

40.9%

0 0

17 There is a friend who intimidate

other's opinion

(3)

13.6%

(8)

36.4%

(5)

22.7%

(6)

27.3%

0


difficult to invite participants to

raise ideas.

(2)

9.1%

(9)

40.9%

(7)

31.8%

(3)

13.6%

(1)

4.5%

19 During focus group discussion,

there are some of my friends in my

group who are passive

0 (4)

18.2%

(3)

13.6%

(12)

54.5%

(3)

13.6%

20 There is a friend in my group who

is not focus.

(1)

4.5%

(3)

13.6%

(3)

13.6%

(14)

63.7%

(1)

4.5%

Table 4. 18 Lecturer’s Questionnaire Result on the Obstacle of FGD




(1)

100

17 There is a student who intimidate

other's opinion

(1)

100


ideas.

(1)

100


are some of students in their group who

are passive

(1)

100


who is not focus when she/he takes a

role as participants

(1)

100

Table 4.5 and 4.6 showed the lecturer’s and the students’ responses to each


stood on neutral side meanwhile there were 59.1 % of the total participants were

disagreed that discussion in Focus Group Discussion was disorganized and

uncontrolled. None of the participants strongly agreed and agreed, 40.9% of the


78

participants stood on neutral side, 45.5% of the participants disagreed and 13.6%

of the participants strongly disagreed with the statement. The result is supported by

Stewart and Shamdasani (1990, p. 69), who claims that mastering technique of

moderating a focus group is important for the successful of the discussion.

Moreover, it was concluded that the discussion in Focus Group Discussion was

organized and controlled and the moderator did their roles well.

Statement number two dealt with whether or not there was a friend who

intimidates others. The results showed that the lecturer disagreed and there were

50% of the total participants disagreed that there was a friend who intimidated

other’s opinion. None of the participants strongly agreed, 27.3% of the participants

agreed, 22.7 % of the participants stood on neutral side, 36.4 % of the participants

disagreed and 13.6 % of the participants strongly disagreed. This result is in line

with Kruger and Casy (2015), who say that the purpose of focus group discussion

is to give the participants feeling of comfort, respect and free to voice their ideas

and opinions without being judged (p. 34). However, the researcher concluded that

the students respected others when they are speaking.

In addition, the statement number three dealt with the difficulties in inviting

or asking participants to raise opinions or ideas when the students become

moderator. The results showed the lecturer disagreed and there were 50% of the

participants disagreed facing difficulties in inviting or asking participants to raise

ideas or opinions. 4.5% of the participants strongly agreed, 13.6% of the

participants agreed, 31.8 % stood on neutral side, 40.9 % of the participants

disagreed and 9.1% of the participants strongly disagreed with the statement.


79

Hennink (2014) says that participants who are silent are likely to be acutely aware

of their lack of involvement and the longer they remain silent the more difficult it

may be to contribute (p. 79). The researcher concluded that the participants were

active in the discussion.

Furthermore, from the student’s responses to the fourth statement, it was

whether or not some friends in group were passive when doing Focus Group

Discussion. It was known that the lecturer agreed and there were 68.1% of the total

participants agreed that some friends are passive when doing Focus Group

Discussion. 13.6% of the participants strongly agreed, 54.5% of the participants

agreed, 13.6% of the participants stood on neutral side, 18.2% of the participants

disagreed and none of the participants strongly disagreed with the statement. This

results is in line with Krueger (1998), who states that the passive participants

sometimes have much ideas to share, however extra effort is required to get them

in the discussion (p. 61). Moderator can call their name to involve in the discussion.

Therefore, the researcher concluded that most of the respondents agreed that some

of their friends are passive when doing Focus Group Discussion.

Then, for the last statement, it dealt with whether or not some friends did

not focus during Focus Group Discussion. The results showed that 68.2 % of the

total participants agreed that some friends did not focus when doing Focus Group

Discussion. 4.5 % of the participants strongly agreed, 63.7 % of the participants

agreed, 13.6 % of the participants stood on neutral side, 13.6% of the participants

disagreed and 4.5% of the participants strongly disagreed with the statement. This

result is supported by Krueger (2007), who states that the inattentive participant


80

doesn’t seem to hear or understand the discussion, and the individual may seem

preoccupied (p. 61). It showed that most of the students were not focus during Focus

Group Discussion.

From the explanations on the questionnaire results, the researcher concluded

that the students had negative perception on the obstacle of Focus Group

Discussion. The meaning was that most of the students disagreed that the students

faced the obstacles in Focus Group Discussion. This results supported by the fact

and related theories which were presented in the degree of agreement most


e. Students’ and Lecturer’s Perception on the Role of Lecturer

When doing Focus Group Discussion, the roles of the lecturer in classroom

is important. The followings are the descriptions of the students’ responses to

each statement.

Table 4. 19 Students’ Questionnaire Results on Lecturer's Role


21 My lecturer opens the class before

FGD is started

(1)

4.5%

(3)

13.7%

(7)

31.8%

(11)

50%

0



0 (3)

13.7%

(3)

13.7%

(11)

50%

(5)

22.7%

23 My lecturer categorizes the group

roles in every FGD

0 (2)

9.1%

(2)

9.1%

(14)

63.7%

(4)

18.1%



(1)

4.5%

(1)

4.5%

(5)

22.8%

(11)

50%

(4)

18.1%

25 In the end of lesson and discussion,

my lecturer evaluates and reviews

the topic.

0 0 (3)

13.6%

(9)

40.9%

(10)

45.5


81

Table 4. 20 Lecturer’s Questionnaire Result on their roles



100


meeting

(1)

100

23 I categorize the group roles in every

FGD

(1)

100

24 During focus group discussion, I


(1)

100



(1)

100



agreed and there were 50% of the total students and the lecturer agreed that the

lecturer opened the class before Focus Group Discussion was started. None of the

participants strongly agreed, 50% of the participants agreed, 31.8 % of the

participants stood on neutral side, 13.7 % of the participants disagreed and 4.5 %

of the participants strongly disagreed. This result is supported by Jolliffe (2007),

who states that one of the teacher’s roles is opening the class (p. 47). Moreover, it

concluded that the lecturer opened the class before Focus Group Discussion is

started.

Statement number two dealt with whether or not the lecturer divided the

groups’ member in the beginning of the class or first meeting. The result was 77.7

% of the total students agreed and the lecturer strongly agreed that the lecturer

divided the group’s member in Focus Group Discussion. 22.7 % of the participants

strongly agreed, 50% of the participants agreed, 13.7 % of the participants stood on


82

neutral side, 13.7 % of the participants disagreed and none of the participants

strongly disagreed. This result is supported by Jolliffe (2007), who states that one

of the teacher’s roles is dividing the group member (p. 47).

The teacher divided the groups randomly. The students asked to count from

(1-4), and then asking all the 1st to form a group, 2nd a group, and so on.

Student #02 said:

Another reason, we can build our communication skill with others. For

your information, my lecturer divided the group members randomly. She

asked us to count from one to five, then we gathered with other members.

It is good to collaborate with other friends who have not any experienced

to collaborate with. (Interviewee 2)

It showed that the lecturer divided the group’s member randomly. It had

many advantages as what the interviewee said. Removing and decreasing student’s

gap in the discussion are necessary for maintaining good discussion.

In addition, statement number three dealt with whether or not the lecturer

categorized the groups’ role. The result showed that 81.8 % of the total participants

agreed and the lecturer strongly agreed that the lecturer categorises the group’s role

in every Focus Group Discussion. 18.1% of the participants strongly agreed, 63.7

% of the participants agreed, 9.1 % of the participants stood on neutral side, 9.1%

of the participants disagreed, and none of the participants strongly disagreed with

the statement. The result is supported by Jolliffe (2007), who states that giving

students specific function or role within groups or pair help them to responsible for

their own action (p. 50). It showed that both students and lecturer agreed that the

lecturer categorised the group’s role in every Focus Group Discussion.


83

Furthermore, from the students’ response to the fourth statement, it showed

that 68.1% of the total participants agreed and the lecturer stood on nutral side that

the lecturer intervened during focus group discussion. 18.1% of the participants

strongly agreed, 50% of the participants agreed, 22.8% of the participants stood on

neutral side, 4.5% of the participants disagreed and 4.5% of the participants strongly

disagreed. The result is in line with Jolliffe (2007), who states that one of the

teacher’s roles is to intervene the discussion when it is necessary (p. 47). Therefore,

the researcher concluded that the lecturer intervened during Focus Group

Discussion.

Then, for the last statement, it dealt with whether or not the lecturer

evaluates and reviews the topic. The result showed that 86.4% of the total

participants agreed and the lecturer strongly agreed that the lecturer evaluated and

reviewed the topic in the end of Focus Group Discussion. 45.5% of the participants

strongly agreed, 40.9% of the participants agreed, 13.6 of the participants stood on


statement. The result is supported by Jolliffe (2007), who states that none of the

teacher’s role is to evaluate the quality and quantity of achievement and ensures

that groups reflect on their achievement and effectiveness as a group and set goals

for improvement (p. 47). It showed that both students and lecturer agreed that the

lecturer reviewed and evaluated in the end Focus Group Discussion.


researcher concluded that the students and the lecturer in class A had positive

perception on the roles of the lecturer. It meant that most of students agreed that the


84

lecturer had some important roles in the classroom during Focus Group Discussion.

It was supported by the facts which were shown in the degree of agreement most



85

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter provides an overall overview of the research findings and the

recommendations. There are two parts on this chapter. The first chapter is the

conclusion to the research questions, and the second is the recommendation for

teachers, students and further research

A. Conclusion

The aims of this research were to reveal how focus group discussion was

implemented in Translation class and to find out how the students and lecturer

perceive on implementation of focus group discussion. The researcher drew the

conclusion based on research findings and analysis.

The first conclusion was the implementation of focus group discussion as

teaching strategy in translation class. Both class A and E implemented different

implementation of focus group discussion. Class A tended to use group presentation

meanwhile in class E tended to use general format of focus group discussion. Class

A presented the material and asked the participants to ask about their

incomprehension. The moderator opened asking and answering session.

Meanwhile, class E implemented the general format of focus group discussion.

They created set of questions to be asked to participants. Then, both lecturer in class

A and E only intervened when it was necessary. They did not interrupt the

discussion. The note taker in class A took a note during discussion. However, the

note taker in class E recorded the participant’s responses, the moderator’s questions


86

and lecturers’ responses. Even though both of the classes implemented different

format of Focus Group Discussion, the discussion in both of the classes ran well

and all of the participants pay attention on it.

The second conclusion was the students in translation class had positive

perception on implementation of focus group discussion. They believed that

implementation of focus group discussion provided some benefits on learning

translation. The first benefit was on the advantages of implementation of focus

group discussion. The students believed that the implementation of focus group

discussion had advantages in learning translation, especially in opportunity

expressing ideas, critical thinking, communication skill, obtaining new knowledge,

evaluating the way of thinking and appreciating others. The second benefit was the

role of the lecturer. The students believed that the roles of the lecturer in focus group

discussion were important. Students believed that the intervention of lecturer was

important to be the one who trusted when there was a never-ending debate.

Grouping member of the group was important to decrease the gap in students. If the

lecturer chose the member of the group randomly, the students were obliged to work

with everyone in the group cooperatively. Reviewing and evaluating in the end of

focus group discussion helped the students to consider which respond was right and

wrong.

The third conclusion was the lecturer perception on implementation of focus

group discussion. The first benefit was on the advantages of implementation of

focus group discussion. The lecturer believed that the students got advantages on

implementation of focus group discussion in translation subject. The students got


87

advantages on opportunity expressing ideas, critical thinking, communication skill,

obtaining new knowledge, evaluating the way of thinking and appreciating others.

The second benefit was that their roles in class during focus group discussion were

important. Grouping the member of the group was important to maintain the

students worked with everyone in the class willingly. Then the lecturer believed

that reviewing and evaluating after focus group discussion was over were important

to provide which respond was wrong and right.

B. Recommendation

The result of the research findings showed that the students and lecturers

in Translation class of academic year 2016/2017 had positive perceptions on the

benefits of implementation of focus group discussion as teaching and learning

strategy in translation subject. Thus, the researcher has some recommendation for

the lecturers, the students and further researchers

1. English Language Study Program Students

The students need to practice their skill in translation. Practicing is not

always the aspect in translation. Students have to discuss the theory of the

translation and phenomenon related to the translation. Focus Group Discussion is

the learning strategy to increase their comprehension about translation. Through

focus group discussion the students can share their ideas freely without being

intimidated.

2. English Language Study Program Lecturers


88

English lecturers, especially the lecturers who used focus group discussion,

need to give more attention on the material, the discussion, and the participants.

The lecturers need to ask the students to add sources from outside the book or hand

out. For the discussion, lecturers have to pay attention on the discussion if it will be

uncontrolled. Then, the lecturers have to encourage the participants if they do not

engage in the discussion.

3. Further Researcher

Based on the results, the students had positive perception on the

implementation of focus group discussion in translation subject. It can motivate

other researcher to conduct the same research on motivation of students using focus

group discussion as their learning strategy and the use of focus group discussion on

other subjects.


89

REFERENCES

Altman, S., Valenzi, E., & Hodgetts, R. M. (1985). Organizational behavior:

Theory and practice. Orlando: Academic Press, Inc.

Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., & Razavieh, A. (2002). Introduction to research education

(6th ed.). Belmont: Wadsworth Group, Thompson Learning

Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., & Razavieh, A. (2010). Introduction to research education

(8th ed.). Belmont: Wadsworth Group.

Catford, J.C. (1974). A linguistic theory of translation: An essay in applied

linguistics. London: Institut d`etudes Theologiques

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research method in Education (7th

ed.). London: Routledge Falmer.

Cui, Y., Zhao, W. (2015). Handbook of research on teaching methods in language

translation and interpretation. English: IGI Global

Duff, A. (1989). Translation. Oxford: OUP

Duff, A. (1992). Translation: Resource book for teachers. Oxford: Oxford

University Press.

Fraenkel, J., Wallen, N., Hyun, H. (2011). How to design and evaluate research in

education (8th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill

Gall, M. D. & Gillett, M. (1980). The discussion method in classroom teaching.

London: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.

George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2005). Understanding and managing organizational

behaviour (4th ed.). Mishawaka: Pearson Prentice Hall


90

Goebert, B., & Rosenthal, H. (2001). Beyond listening: Learning the secret

language of focus groups. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.,

Hennink, M.M. (2014). Focus Group Discussion. Oxford: Oxford University

Press

Ivancevich, J.M., Konopaske, R.M., Michael T. (2014). Organizational

behaviour and Management (10th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T. & Holubec, E.J. (1994). The new circles of

learning: Cooperation in the classroom and school

Jolliffe, W. (2007). Cooperative learning in the classroom: Putting it into

practice. London: SAGE

Jon E. Pedersen, Annette D. Digby. (1995). Secondary schools and cooperative

learning: Theories, models, and strategies. New York: Routledge

Kitzinger, J. & Barbour, R.S. (1999). Introduction: The challenge and promise of

focus groups. Oxford: Sage Publications

Krueger, R., & Casey, M. (2000). Focus Groups: A Practical guide for applied

research (3rd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Krueger, R., & Casey, M. (2015). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied

research (5th ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Krueger, R.A. (1998). Moderating focus groups. California: Sage Publication

Morgan D. L. (1998) The focus group guidebook. California: Sage Publications.

Munday, J. (2008). Introducing translation studies second edition. New York:

Routledge Company

Newmark, P. (1981). Approaches to translation. Oxford: Pegamon press


91

Newmark, P. (1991). About translation. Philadelphia: Multilingual Matter.

Nord, C. (2005). Text analysis in translation: Theory, methodology, and didactic

application of a model for translation-oriented text analysis. New York: Rodopi

Olson, J. M., Broomes, Lesha, Drzyzga, Scott (1998). Teaching and Learning focus

group akills: A classroom example evaluating map design, Cartographic

Perspectives, 31, 26-36.

Robbins, S. P., (2005). Organizational behaviour (11th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson

Education International

Robson, C. (2002). Real world research (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.

Singleton, R., & Straits, B. C. (1999). Approaches to social research (3rd ed.) New

York: Oxford University Press.

Stewart, D.W. & Shamdani, P.N. (1990). Focus Groups: Theory and Practice

London: SAGE

Walton, H. (1997). Small group methods in medical teaching. Retrieved on July 27,

2017, from http://www.bumc.bu.edu/facdev-

medicine/files/2010/06/smallgroup- teaching.pdf

WBI Evaluation Group. (2007). Managing focus groups. Needs Assessment

Knowledge Base. Retrieved on September 29, 2016, from

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/WBI/Resources/213798-

1194538727144/6Final-Focus_Groups.pdf

Wilen, W.W. (1990). Teaching and learning through discussion: Theory, research

and practice of the discussion method. Illinois: Charles C. Thomas Publ.


http://siteresources.worldbank.org/WBI/Resources/213798-1194538727144/6Final-Focus_Groups.pdf

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/WBI/Resources/213798-1194538727144/6Final-Focus_Groups.pdf

92

Williams, A. & Micallef, A. (2009). Beach management: Principles and practice.

London: Earthscan


93

APPENDICES


94

APPENDIX A First

Questionnaire Blueprint


95

Aspects Theories No Statements

Nature of

translation

Munday (2008 p, 5)

states that “translation

has several meanings: it

can refer to the general

subject field, the

product (the text that

has been translated) or

the process (the act of

producing the

translation, otherwise

known as translating)”.

1 Translation is the process of

changing a text from one language

to another

“translation happens ,

all the time, so why not

in the classroom?” Duff,

A (1989, p,6)

Translation subject is important for

ELESP students

Duff (1992 p, 10) If the

idioms is untranslatable,

those kinds of idioms

should not force to

translate into second

language



difficult

Duff (1992, p, 8) says

that students who are

learn foreign language

are asked to translate,

but they are rarely given

any practice in that skill


translation


96

Duff (1992 p, 8) says

that the essential of

practicing translation

does not mean doing

writing assignment but

giving the students

regular opportunities to

compare and discuss

their work with others,

and responding to

suggestions are the

essential



Process of FGD Duff (1992 p, 8) says

that the essential of

practicing translation

does not mean doing

writing assignment but

giving the students


compare and discuss


and responding to

suggestions are the

essential.



Ary, Jacobs and

Razavieh (2010. p, 381)

say participants are

assured to express their

idea in their words and

to respond not only to

the researcher but also

to the participants and

their responses



friends.

Jolliffe ( 2007 p, 50)

states three major ways

forming groups in the

classroom: a)Random

selection, b)Pupil

Selection, c)Teacher

selection

I chose my own group in FGD


97

Krueger (1998 p, 21)

categorized 4

recommended pattern

for moderator to

introduce the FGD: a)

welcome or intoduction,

b)overview the topic, c)

Guidelines and rules, d)

Opening question



Krueger( 1998 p, 61)

says that Eye contact

sometimes give

encouragement for

participants to speak, if

it fails, the moderator

can call on shy

participants by name.



ideas to speak

the researcher could

limit their chance in

speaking based on time

(Morgan 1998 p, 32)


management

Advantage of

FGD

Morgan (1998 p, 31)

says during the

discussion in a focus

group discussion, the

notion for each person

speaking is not limited

10 Focus Group Discussion helps me

to express idea freely, anytime I

want.


to develop my communication skill.

Cohen, Manion and

Morrison (2011 p, 30)

say that Focus Group

Discussion could

suggest issues,

concerns, or point of

view about the topic that

is necessary.



opinion

Jolliffe ( 2007 p, 47)

says that Cooperative

13 FGD helps me to think critically.


98

Learning can support

the development of

high-order thinking

skill, such as analysis,

synthesis and evaluation

14 Through FGD, I learn to evaluate

my own thinking

and the thinking of others

Kruger and Casy (2000

p, 34) say that the

purpose of the focus

group discussion is to

support or promote a

comfortable atmosphere

of disclosure in which

people can share their

ideas, experiences, and

attitudes about a topic


other’s idea

Obstacle Gall, M. D. & Gillett,

M. (1980 p, 98) reveal

that students in classess

tend to get a bit noisy

and disorganized when

the discussion in group

is applied


disorganization and uncontrollable

Morgan (1980 p,60-63)

categorized four

elements inappropriate

used for FGD: a) avoid

FGD when they imply

commitments you

cannot keep, b) avoid

FGD if the participants

aren’t comfortable with

each other, c)avoid FGD

the topic isn’t

appropriate for the

participats, d)avoid

FGD when projects

requires statistical data.


other's opinion



raise ideas.


categorizes 6 negatives

types of participants

behaviour: a) experts

and influentials, b)

dominant talker,c)





99

disruptive participants,

d)ramblers and

wanderers,e ) quiet and

shy participants,

f)inattentive participants


is not focus.

Teacher’s role Jolliffe ( 2007 p, 47)

states 4 teacher’s roles

in cooperative learning.

They are:

1. Plans lessons that

decide on (a)

objectives, (b) size

of groups, (c) how

to group pupils,(d)

group roles, (e)

organisation of the

classroom, and (f)

materials needed.

2. Explains the task

and the cooperative

skill with criteria

for the success of

both.

3. Monitors and

intervenes with

groups where

necessary

4. Evaluates the

quality and

quantity of

achievement and

ensures that groups

reflect on their

achievement and

effectiveness as a

group and set goals

for improvement.



22 Lecturer categorized the group

roles in every FGD is conducted


lecturer intervene the discussion


my lecturer evaluates and review

the topic.


100


categorized 4

recommended pattern

for moderator to

introduce the FGD: a)

welcome or intoduction,

b)overview the topic, c)

Guidelines and rules, d)

Opening question

25 Lecturer opens the class before

FGD is ran


101

APPENDIX B Final

Questionnaire Blueprint


102

Blueprint

Aspects Theories No Statements

Nature of

translation

“translation happens

everywhere, all the time,

so why not in the

classroom?” Duff, A

(1989, p,6)

Translation subject is important for

ELESP students

Duff (1992 p, 10) If the

idioms is untranslatable,

those kinds of idioms

should not force to

translate into second

language



difficult

Duff (1992, p, 8) says

that students who are

learn foreign language

are asked to translate, but

they are rarely given any

practice in that skill


translation

Duff (1992 p, 8) says that

the essential of practicing

translation does not mean

doing writing assignment

but giving the students


compare and discuss


and responding to

suggestions are the

essential



Process of

FGD

Duff (1992 p, 8) says that

the essential of practicing

translation does not mean

doing writing assignment

but giving the students


compare and discuss


and responding to

suggestions are the

essential.



Ary, Jacobs and

Razavieh (2010. p, 381)

say participants are



friends.


103

assured to express their

idea in their words and to

respond not only to the

researcher but also to the

participants and their

responses


categorized 4

recommended pattern for

moderator to introduce

the FGD: a) welcome or

intoduction, b)overview

the topic, c) Guidelines

and rules, d) Opening

question



Krueger( 1998 p, 61)

says that Eye contact

sometimes give

encouragement for

participants to speak, if it

fails, the moderator can

call on shy participants

by name.



ideas to speak

the researcher could limit

their chance in speaking

based on time (Morgan

1998 p, 32)


management

Advantage Morgan (1998, p. 61),

who claims that focus

group discussion is not a

viable option, unless the

participants feel

comfortable in voicing

their voice


to express idea freely, anytime I

want.

Wilen (1990) states that

students’ communication

skill can be developed by

discussion especially

leading and participating

in the discussion


to develop my communication skill. Wilen (1990) also claims that

discussion can develop the students’

communication skill especially in

leading and participating in the

discussion (p. 40).

Gall and Gillet (1980),

who state that the

opportunity to raise their

ideas and to listen to

others speak helps



opinion


104

students learn better (p.

99)

Jolliffe (2007, p. 47) says

that cooperative

Learning, especially

through discussion, can

support the development

of high-order thinking

skill, such as analysis,

synthesis and evaluation

13 FGD helps me to think critically.

Gall, M. D. & Gillett, M.

(1980 p, 99), who

explain that purposes of

the discussion are to help

the students’ analyse and

evaluate opinions, and to

rise their awareness of

their opinions or opinions

of others

14 Through FGD, I learn to evaluate

my own thinking



p, 34) also claim that the

purpose of the focus

group discussion is to

support or promote a

comfortable atmosphere

of disclosure in which

people can share their

ideas, experiences, and

attitudes about a topic


other’s idea

Stewart and Shamdasani

(1990, p. 69), who claims

that mastering technique

of moderating a focus

group is important for the

successful of the

discussion


disorganization and uncontrollable


p, 34), who say that the

purpose of focus group

discussion is to give the

participants feeling of

comfort, respect and free

to voice their ideas and

opinions without being

judged


other's opinion


105

Hennink (2014) says that

participants who are

silent are likely to be

acutely aware of their

lack of involvement and

the longer they remain

silent the more difficult it

may be to contribute (p.

79).



raise ideas.

Krueger (1998, p. 61),

who states that the

passive participants

sometimes have much

ideas to share, however

extra effort is required to

get them in the

discussion




Krueger (2007, p. 61),

who states that the

inattentive participant

doesn’t seem to hear or

understand the

discussion, and the

individual may seem

preoccupied


is not focus.

Jolliffe (2007, p. 47),

who states that one of the

teacher’s roles is opening

the class

21 My lecturer opens the class before

FGD is started

Jolliffe (2007, p. 47),

who states that one of the

teacher’s roles is dividing

the group member



Jolliffe (2007, p. 50),

who states that giving

students specific function

or role within groups or

pair help them to

responsible for their own

action

23 Lecturer categorized the group

roles in every FGD is conducted

Jolliffe (2007, p. 47)

states that one of the

teacher’s roles is to

intervene the discussion

when it is necessary


lecturer intervene the discussion


106

Jolliffe (2007, p. 47)

states that none of the

teacher’s role is to

evaluates the quality and

quantity of achievement

and ensures that groups

reflect on their

achievement and

effectiveness as a group

and set goals for

improvement


my lecturer evaluates and review

the topic.


107

APPENDIX C

Students’Questionnaire


108

QUESTIONNAIRE

The aim of this questionnaire is to analyze students’ and teachers’

perception about the implementation of Focus Group Discussion in Translation

Subject. Answer these questions below honestly based on your own experience and

perception. Your answers will be kept confidential and will not affect your score in

Translation class. The answer will be used as the data of my undergraduate thesis.

Put a tick (√) to the degree of agreement which corresponds the statements. Thank

you for your cooperation and participation for filling out this questionnaire.

SA : Strongly Agree N : Neutral SD: Strongly Disagree

A : Agree D : Disagree

No Statements SA A N D SD






translation





6 During Focus Group Discussion, I

express the idea not only to moderator,

but also other friends.


the rules before starting Focus Group

Discussion

8 The moderators could ask the

participant(s) who rarely raise the ideas

to speak

9 The moderators are assertive in time

management





12 Through Focus Group Discussion, I

obtain new knowledge from other

members’ opinion


think critically.

Name: Student number:


109

14 Through Focus Group Discussion, I learn

to evaluate my own thinking


15 Through Focus Group Discussion, I learn

to appreciate other’s idea

16 The discussion in Focus Group

Discussion tend to be disorganization and

uncontrollable


opinion


difficult to invite participants to raise

ideas.

19 During focus group discussion, there are

some of my friends in my group who are

passive


focus when he/she takes a role as

participant

21 My lecturer opens the class before Focus

Group Discussion is ran

22 My lecturer divides the groups’ member

in the beginning of subject

23 My lecturer categorizes the group roles’

in every Focus Group Discussion

24 During Focus Group Discussion, my



lecturer evaluates and reviews the topic.

Answer the following questions

1. Do you think that Focus Group Discussion is helpful for you particularly

in translation subject? Explain you answer

______________________________________________________

______________________________________________________

______________________________________________________ 2. In your opinion, does focus group discussion give positive or negative

influences in Translation subject? Explain what kinds of influences that you

got from the discussion.

____________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________


110

____________________________________________________

___________________________________________________ 3. What is your suggestion for the further Focus Group Discussion in

translation class?

____________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________

______________________________________________________


111

APPENDIX D

Lecturers’Questionnaire


112

QUESTIONNAIRE

The aim of this questionnaire is to analyze students’ and teachers’

perception about the implementation of Focus Group Discussion in Translation

Subject. Answer these questions below honestly based on your own experience and

perception. The answer will be used as the data of my undergraduate thesis. Put a

tick (√) to the degree of agreement which corresponds the statements. Thank you

for your cooperation and participation for filling out this questionnaire.

SA : Strongly Agree N : Neutral SD: Strongly Disagree

A : Agree D : Disagree

No Statements SA A N D SD






translation





6 During Focus Group Discussion, the

students express the idea not only to

moderator, but also other friends.


the rules before starting Focus Group

Discussion

8 The moderators could ask the

participant(s) who rarely raise the ideas

to speak

9 The moderators are assertive in time

management


students to express idea freely, anytime

they want.


students to develop their communication

skill.

12 Through Focus Group Discussion, the

students obtain new knowledge from

other students’ opinion


students to think critically.

Name:


113


students learn to evaluate their own

thinking and the thinking of others


students learn to appreciate other’s idea

16 The discussion in Focus Group

Discussion tend to be disorganized and

uncontrolled

17 There is a student who intimidate other's

opinion


ideas.


some of the students in their group who

are passive


who is not focus when he/she takes a role

as participant

21 I open the class before Focus Group

Discussion is started


meeting

23 I categorize the group roles’ in every

Focus Group Discussion

24 During Focus Group Discussion, I

intervene the discussion



Answer the following questions

1. Do you think that Focus Group Discussion is helpful for the students

particularly in translation subject? Explain your answer

______________________________________________________

______________________________________________________

______________________________________________________

______________________________________________________

______________________________________________________

______________________________________________________

______________________________________________________ 2. In your opinion, does focus group discussion give positive or negative

influences toward students in Translation subject? Explain what kinds of

influences that students get from the discussion.


114

______________________________________________________

______________________________________________________

______________________________________________________

______________________________________________________ 3. What is your suggestion for the further Focus Group Discussion in

translation class?

______________________________________________________

______________________________________________________

______________________________________________________


115

APPENDIX E Result of

Students' Questionnaire


116

Students’ Questionnaire

No Statements SD

(%)

D

(%)

N

(%)

A

(%)

SA

(%)

1 Translation subject is important for ELESP

students

0 (4)

9,5

(4)

9,5

(23)

54,8

(11)

26,2



0 (2)

4,8

(8)

19

(27)

64,3

(5)

11,9


translation

0 0 (1)

2,4

(18)

42,8

(23)

54,8



0 (1)

2,4

(8)

19

(27)

64,3

(6)

14,2



0 (1)

2,3

(6)

14,2

(29)

69,3

(6)

14,2

6 During FGD, I express the idea not only to

moderator, but also other friends.

0 (1)

2,3

(9)

21,5

(18)

42,9

(14)

33,3

7 The moderators read the guidelines and the

rules before starting FGD

0 (4)

9,5

(12)

28,6

(22)

52,4

(4)

9,5



1

2,3

(10)

23,8

(16)

38,2

(12)

28,6

(3)

7,1

9 Moderator is assertive in time management 1

2,3

(3)

7,1

(21)

50

(15)

35,9

(2)

4,7



0 (2)

4,8

(17)

40,5

(17)

40.5

(6)

14.2



0 0 (4)

9,5

(30)

71,5

(8)

19

12 Through FGD, I obtain new knowledge

from other members’ opinion

0 0 (4)

9,5

(26)

61,9

(12)

28, 6

13 FGD helps me to think critically. 0 (1)

2,4

(3)

7,1

(24)

57,1

(14)

33,3

14 Through FGD, I learn to evaluate my own

thinking and the thinking of others

0 0 11,9 54,8 33,3

15 Through FGD, I learn to appreciate other’s

idea

0 0 (1)

2,4

(21)

50

(20)

47.6



(4)

9,5

(26)

61,9

(11)

26,2

0

(1)

2,4


opinion

(9)

21,4

(19)

45,2

(8)

19

(6)

14,3

0

18 When I become a moderator, it is difficult

to invite participants to raise ideas.

(2)

4,8

(14)

33,3

(17)

40,5

(8)

19

(1)

2,4


117


some of my friends in my group who are

passive

(2)

4,8

(8)

19

(7)

16,7

(18)

42,8

(7)

16,7


focus.

(2)

4,8

(6)

14,3

(8)

19

(19)

45,2

(7)

16,7

21 My lecturer opens the class before FGD is

started

(1)

2,4

(4)

9,5

(9)

21,4

(17)

40,5

(11)

26,2

22 My lecturer divides the groups’ member in

the beginning of subject

(1)

2,4

(4)

9,5

(4)

9,5

(18)

42,9

(15)

35,7

23 My lecturer categorizes the group roles in

every FGD

(2)

4,8

(6)

14,3

(3)

7,1

(19)

45,2

(15)

28,6

24 During focus group discussion, my lecturer


(9)

21,4

(8)

16,7

(7)

19

(12)

28,6

(6)

14,3


lecturer evaluates and reviews the topic.

0 0 (3)

7,1

(13)

31

(26)

61,9


118

APPENDIX F Result of

Lecturers' Questionnaire


119

LECTURERS’ QUESTIONNAIRE

No Statements SD

(%)

D

(%)

N

(%)

A

(%)

SA

(%)

1 Translation subject is important for ELESP

students

(1)

50

(1)

50



(2)

100


translation

(2)

100



(2)

100



(1)

50

(1)

50

6 During FGD, the students express the idea

not only to moderator, but also other

students.

(1)

50

(1)

50

7 The moderators read the guidelines and the

rules before starting FGD

(2)

100



(1)

50

(1)

50

9 Moderator is assertive in time management (2)

100


to express idea freely, anytime they want.

(1)

50

(1)

50


to develop their communication skill.

1

50

1

50


knowledge from other members’ opinion

1

50

1

50

13 FGD helps the students to think critically. 1

50

1

50



thinking of others

1

50

1

50



1

50



(1)

50

(1)

50

17 There is a student who intimidate other's

opinion

(1)

50

(1)

50


ideas.

(1)

50

(1)

50


some of the students in their group who are

passive

(2)

100


120

20 There is a student in one of the group who

do not focus when he/she takes a role as

participant.

(1)

50

(1)

50


100


meeting

(1)

50

(1)

50

23 I categorized the group roles in every FGD

is conducted

(1)

50

(1)

50

24 During focus group discussion, I intervene

the discussion

(1)

50

(1)

50



(1)

50

(1)

50


121

APPENDIX G

Observation Sheet


122

Observation Sheet

OBSERVATION SHEET

DATE: 10 MAY 2017

CLASS: E

PARTICIPANTS: 22

No Statements Yes No Notes

1 Students are ready to start the

lesson

√ Four participants were

late

2 Moderators are ready in the class √ All members in

moderators didn’t late,

they prepared the LCD,

laptop and other

things,but not the audio.

3 Moderators opens the class √ Opened the class, and

gave an understanding of

the topic briefly, recited

again the topic to the

participants. The

moderator red the

explanation of the topic.

Moderators stated the

role for the group

4 Moderator reads the rules of the

game

√ Moderator red it clearly.

5 Lecturer reads the topic for the

discussion

√ The moderator did it

6 All of the participants participate to

raise the idea

√ Moderator asked each

participants to answer

7 Moderator appreciates participants’

opinion by giving chances for every

participant to share their opinions

√

8 Every students are interested to the

discussion

√ The reporter and note

takers pay attention on

the discussion.

9 Lecturer always monitors the

discussion

√

10 Lecturer invites all participants to

raise the idea or opinions

√ The moderators did that

11 The note takers take notes upon the

discussion

√ The note takers recorded

the discussion using one

of their member’s phones

12 The note takers give ideas and

opinions during the discussion

√ The note takers only

focussed on recording the

discussion


123

13 The moderators asks the

participants to raise the ideas

√

14 The participants respond others’

opinion.

√

15 The reporter reports what the note

takers write in the end of discussion

√

OBSERVATION SHEET

DATE: 26 MAY 2017

CLASS: A

PARTICIPANTS: 20

No Statements Yes No Notes

1 Students are ready to start the lesson √ Two students were

late

2 Moderators are ready in the class √ The moderators

prepared the

projector and others.

3 Moderators opens the class √ The lecturer opened

the class.

4 Moderators read the rules of the

game

√

5 Lecturer reads the topic for the

discussion

√

6 All of the participants participate

actively to raise the idea

√

7 Moderator appreciate participants’

opinion by giving chances for every

participant to share their opinions

√

8 Every students are interested to the

discussion

√ .

9 Lecturer always monitors the

discussion

√

10 Lecturer invites all participants to

raise the idea or opinions

√

11 The note takers take notes upon the

discussion

√

12 The note takers give ideas and

opinions during the discussion

√ The note taker focus

on note taking


124

13 The moderators asks the participants

to raise the ideas

√ Themoderators aked

to the participants

actively

14 The participants respond others’

opinion.

√ The participants only

asked to the

moderators.

15 The reporter reports what the note

takers write in the end of discussion

√


125

APPENDIX H

Transcript of Interview


126

The Transcript of the Interview

Student 1 (S01)

1. Have you ever used Focus Group Discussion besides in translation class?

No, I have not. This is my first experience.

2. Is the format of focus group discussion in your class good?

I do not think the format in mis marnie class is good. Because, I do not obtain

new knowledge in the discussion. The answer of moderator’s questions are

provided in the handout which is gave by mis marnie. Consequently, I may not

have reason to express idea freely because I have already known the answer. I

speak when I do not know about something.

3. What is or are obstacle that you faced when you take a role as moderator?

The major problem is in participants. Sometimes, particpants do not listen to

the discussion seriously. I mean the particpants do not engange to the

discussion.

4. What is or are obstacle that you faced when you take a role as

participants?

Truthfully, i do not have any interest in providing the answer to the moderator.

The asnwer is in hand out. I am interested with the style of the moderation in

the last FGD. When the moderator provided video as the media in fcus group

discussion. The participants could analyze the video. Using the real media

helps my comrehension.

5. Have you ever found the intimidation in your fgd?

Yes, but it happens once. It ocurred when one of the member in moderator

group responded the participants questions exaggerately. Thus, it seemed that


127

the moderator took control of the communication among them. However, the

intimidation never happened from participants to others

6. According to your response in second essay, why do you think that fgd

create you to be passive?

Actually, it happens when I take a role as a reporter and note taker. It is like I

am useles. I do not do anything beneficial. Moreover, when I used handphone

to record the discussion when I took a role as note taker, I did not do anything

Student 2 (S02)

1. Have you ever used Focus Group Discussion besides in translation class?



Yes, I think the format in my class (mis.marnie) class is good. I enjoy with that.

3. What is or are obstacle that you faced when you take a role as moderator?

The major problem is in participants. Sometimes, particpants do not listen to

the discussion seriously. I mean the particpants tend to be a quiet participants

with minumum engangement.


participants?

First, I have problem to understand the material for the fgd. Second, I am not

interested in answering the moderator’s questions. Because, the answers are

provided in the hand out


No, I have not faced it.


128

6. According to your response in second essay, why do you think that fgd give

a positive influence?

I can learn independently. I mean students can learn the material without the

presence of the lecturer if we could organize the fgd, participate actively and

other. The lecturer intervened in the end of the discussion however,

occasionally the lecturer intervened when the moderator asked her opinion.

Another reason, we can build our communication skill with others. For your

information, my lecturer divided the group members randomly. She asked us

to count from one to five, then we gathered with other members. It is good to

collaborate with other friends who have not any experienced to collaborate

with.

Student 3 (SO3)

1. Have you ever used Focus Group Discussion besides in translation

class?



No I do no think so. Only moderator know the material, the participants do

not know. The particpants do not know whether the answers of the

moderator are true or not


moderator?

The major problem is in participants. Sometimes, particpants do not listen

to the discussion seriously. I mean the particpants tend to be a quiet

participants with minumum engangement Then, we, moderator, have to

understand the material deeply.


participants?


129

Sometimes, the moderator did not comprehend with the answers. It seems

like they say whatever they want without regarding the truth. It is hard to

understand the moderator’s presentation.


No, I have not faced it.


give a negative influence?

It is boring activity. I mean there is no human atmosphere in the class.

Moreover, mostly the moderator do not present the material interestingly.

Student 4 (SO4)

1. Have you ever used Focus Group Discussion besides in translation

class?



No I do no think so. The format in mis marnie’s class is more interested

thatn in my class. Since my class tend to use group presentation, there is no

discussion in my class.


moderator?

The major problem is in participants. Sometimes, participants was passive.

I mean the particpants tend to be a quiet participants with minumum

engangement. Then, my lecturer does not help us to ask the participants to

raise the idea.


participants?


130

Actually, I do not face the problem as participants. The role of the

participants is to raise the ideas or question. Fortunately, I always asked

when I took a role as participants. I think the problem is creating the

question. Because, the anwer is provided in the hand out.


Yes, but it rarely happened. It occurred from moderator to participants not

among participant to participant.


give a positive influence, especially in communication skill?

Preparing the fgd improves my communication skill. Moreover, i could not

choose the member in my group. My lecturer divided the groups’ member

randomly. It was done by numbering. Then, she asked students who said

one (1) formed a group, two (2) formed a group and so on. It was a good

way for students to work and collaborate with each other. Sometimes, there

was a “gank” in the class who only worked willingly with that member’s.

So it could cut it off. Thus, collaborating with new persons helped me to

improve my communication skill


students’ and lecturers’ perception on the … filekarena diskusi kelompok terarah jarang...

Documents