The effectiveness of English as a general course program in Yogyakarta State University

The effectiveness of English as a general course program

in Yogyakarta State University

Jamilah

Yogyakarta State University

e-mail: [email protected]om

Abstract: This study was aimed at ﬁnding out the effectiveness of English as a gen-

eral course program in Yogyakara State University using a survey technique. The

population covered students, teachers, and program managers. Respondents from

students were selected by the cluster random sampling technique while respondents

from teachers and program managers were purposively selected. Data were collect-

ed using questionnaires, interview guides, and documents, and were descriptively

analyzed. Findings showed that English as a general course program in Yogyakarta

State University was ineffective since there were a lack of management support and

teacher’s support, no coordination among the parties involved, no sound curriculum

to guide the teachers in implementing the program, a lack of teaching staff develop-

ment, and low work satisfaction among the teachers and students.

Keywords: program effectiveness, English as a general course program, work

satisfaction

1. Introduction

in Indonesia, one of the quality indicators of

good universities is the English competence

of their graduates.

Globalization has put English in a very

strategic position as a global or international

language. English is used as a means of

communication in various ﬁelds such as

in politics, diplomacy, industry, trade,

science, technology, education, media,

information technology, and popular cultures

(Crystal, 1987; Huda, 2000; Jenkin, 2003;

and Lauder; 2008) and as a consequence

everyone is required to master it in order to

be able to function effectively as a global

citizen.English competence is one of the

requirements for people to participate in this

global era. In the context of higher education

To facilitate their students to achieve

this competence, universities in Indonesia

offer English as a compulsory subject and

it is commonly called Bahasa Inggris MKU

(Mata Kuliah Umum) or English as a general

course program. Despite its crucial function

to facilitate the students to achieve this

competence, this course program, so far, has

not been given enough attention and it is

considered as a minor subject. Many people

say that the course is not effective to facilitate

students to reach the desired competence.

1

JOURNAL OF EDUCATION, Volume 8, Number 1, November 2015

The effectiveness of a language program

can be seen from many aspects. Richards

(2001: 198) states that teaching program

effectiveness can be seen from four factors

that can create condition to result in quality

teaching. They are institutional, teacher,

student, and teaching factors. The quality

indicators of an institutional factor include

eight points: (a) There are clearly stated

educationalgoals;(b)Thereisawell-planned,

balanced, and organized program that meets

the needs of its students; (c) Systematic and

identiﬁable processes exist for determining

educational needs in the school and placing

them in order of priority; (d) There is a

commitment to learning, and an expectation

that students will do well; (e) There is a high

degree of staff involvement in developing

goals and making decisions; (f) There is a

motivated and cohesive teaching force with

good team spirit; (g) Administrators are

concerned with the teachers’ professional

development and are able to make the

best use of their skills and experience; and

(h) The school’s programs are regularly

reviewed and progress toward their goals is

evaluated (Richards, 2001: 201). He further

adds that a good educational institution

should have clear vision, mission, strategic

plans to reach its institutional goals, clear

quality assurance mechanism, appropriate

curriculum, ﬂexible structural organization,

smooth internal communication, develop

its staff’s professionalism, provide its staff

with enough opportunity to develop their

potentials, and provide conducive learning

atmosphere (Richards, 2001: 202-207).

Teachers can function well in their role if

they get enough support from the institution.

They should be well selected based on

their skills and qualiﬁcation and then given

opportunities to develop their potentials to

reach qualiﬁed teaching practice.

The third factor is teaching process. The

quality of a teaching process can be seen from

the way teachers plan the lessons and teach.

A good teaching process follows certain

principles reﬂected in the teaching methods,

activities, materials, strategies, techniques

and assessment employed. Quality teaching

cannot simply be assumed to happen. It needs

much effort from the teachers and should be

facilitated by the institution (Richards, 2001:

217-218).

Li (2012) identiﬁes nine principles

of effective language teaching. They are

(a) implementing challenging curriculum

with high expectation, (b) designing

standard academic content and making

it more accessible, (c) offering explicit

and culturally relevant instruction, (d)

supporting metacognitive strategies and

speciﬁc learning strategies, (e) using ELLs’

ﬁrst language strategically with difﬁcult

concepts, (f) teaching vocabulary within

multiple contexts, (g) building reading

comprehension ability, (h) providing strong

oral and written language models for students

to follow, and (i) integrating reading, writing,

speaking, and listening skills.

The last factor is the learners in the

learning process. Learning is not the mirror

image of teaching. The extent to which

teaching achieves its goals will also be

dependent on how successfully learners

have been considered in the planning and

delivery process. The factors that affect a

course successfully received by students

are students’ understanding of the course,

their views of learning, learning styles, and

motivation (Richards, 2001: 223-224).

The second factor, teachers, is the

most crucial one. Teachers are the ones

that ultimately determine the success

of a program. Good teachers can often

compensate for the lack of good curriculum,

proper materials, and learning resources

for their teaching (Richards, 2001: 209).

2

Jamilah: The Effectiveness of English…(page 1-9)

Yogyakarta State University (YSU) is

a state university of Indonesia that is based

in Yogyakarta. It is trying to improve its

quality to reach a world class university. To

reach this ambition, a good English training

program is essential to facilitate its students,

its academic and also administrative staff

to participate successfully in its world-

class programs. English as a general course

program is compulsory for all students of any

study programs. Has this program run well

and able to help the students improve their

English competence? This study aimed at

ﬁnding out how English as a general course

program was implemented in this institution

and how effective it had been so far.

implementation, according to the 2013

Curriculum, English as a general course

program (MKU6211)isoffered to all students

of all study programs. There are 7 schools

or faculties in YSU consisting of 65 study

programs. Some 25 study programs offer it

in the ﬁrst semester, 24 study programs offer

it in the second semester, 2 study programs in

the third semester, 10 in the fourth semester,

3 in the ﬁfth, and 1 study program offer it

in the sixth semester. Most study programs

(75%) put the course in the ﬁrst year, either

in the ﬁrst or second semester, but the other

25% of the study programs put it in higher

semesters.

From the data, it appears that not

every study program has the same view to

the nature of this course. Even some study

programs name the course differently despite

the course code that remains the same. For

example, Accounting Education Study

program names the course Bahasa Inggris

TOEFL, Accounting D3 names it Bahasa

Inggris Bisnis (Business English).

The course names may imply the focus

they want to learn. Some study programs

want to focus on TOEFL test practice, and

some others may want to focus on Business

English. The semester they choose to offer

the course may also imply something. Those

study programs that offer it in ﬁrst and second

semester consider it as the basic course, a

course that is needed by students to prepare

them to learn further in the university, but

those that offer it in the ﬁfth or sixth semester

may consider it as a subject that prepares

students for their job. From here, it seems

that there are different views among the

managers of the study programs towards the

English Course (MKU6211).

2. Method

This study was a survey applying

several techniques including observation,

interview, distributing questionnaires, and

document study. The respondents included

students ofYSU, the English teachers and the

managers of all levels. The student sample

was taken randomly, while the teachers and

managers samples werepurposively taken.

There were two kinds of questionnaire; one

was for the students and the other was for

the teachers. Interview guidelines were used

to interview the managers. The instruments

were developed based on Richards’s theory.

The data were collected from July to October

2014 and were descriptively analyzed.

3. Findings and Discussion

The research ﬁndings are grouped into

four sub headings: the general picture of

the program implementation, institutional

support to run the program effectively,

teachers’ views towards the program, and

students’ satisfaction towards the program.

In the general picture of the program

Torunthegeneralcourseprograms,YSU

set up a center called UPT MKU or Technical

Centre for General Course Programs. There

are many divisions in this center, such as the

3

JOURNAL OF EDUCATION, Volume 8, Number 1, November 2015

division for the English Course, for Pancasila

Education, for Religion Education, etc. Each

division is headed by a coordinator that is

taken from the departments or schools where

the related teachers are mostly taken from.

For example, the coordinator for the English

course is taken from the English education

department, whether the secretary or the

head of the department. This coordinator is

in charge of assigning English teachers from

this department to teach English in certain

study programs that need them. Some study

programs in YSU need English teachers from

The English Education Department to teach

English in their study programs, but some

others have their own staff to do it.

by the English department head but they

did not report to him/her. Instead, they had

to report to the school where they taught.

This fact raised some confusion among the

teachers.

Upon receiving the job from the English

Department head, the English teachers

have to decide by themselves what to teach

and how to teach it. There is no certain

curriculum, no guideline or syllabus to

follow. On the other side,they know much

about language teaching methodology, they

know that there are many choices of what

to teach and how to teach it, there are many

sources available for teaching English. There

are so many things to consider and since there

is no certain guideline to follow, the teachers

feel uncertain with their work, feel unable to

help the students in improving their English

ability much, and therefore they are not so

satisﬁed with their job.

On the other hand, teachers from related

study programs, or the content teachers

teaching English, view the job differently.

They are assigned to teach English by their

own heads and report to them as well. They

can discuss what to teach and how to teach it

in the study program. They can even decide

on their own what to focus on depending on

their view of the course.

This results in lighter consequences

among the teachers and tends to make them

satisﬁed with their job. They do not know

much of language teaching methodology,

so there is not much to consider. As long

as they have given the materials related to

their study program and made the students

busy in the learning process, for them it is

enough. When asked how the course ran,

students said that they were given some

journal articles related to their subject and

were asked to translate and understand them

and then present them in front of the class.

Some study programs do not take the

English teachers from the English Education

Department. They use their own teachers

to teach English. Hence, the English

course in certain study programs in YSU

is taught by the content teachers. Among

study programs assigning content teacher

to teach English are those in the School of

Mathematics and Natural Sciences, those

in the School of Social Sciences, some in

School of Engineering, and the Accounting

study program in the School of Economics.

On the other hand, the study programs that

constantly take the English teachers from

the English Education Department are those

from the School of Education, those from

the School of Sport, some from the School

of Languages and Arts, and some from the

School of Economics. From this data it is

seen that there are two types of instructors

for English Course (MKU6211) in YSU,the

English teachers and the content teachers.

The different way of fulﬁlling the

English course job may raise different

views among the teachers assigned. Those

from the English Education Department felt

something inconsistent. They were assigned

4

Jamilah: The Effectiveness of English…(page 1-9)

There was no guidance or teaching as to how

to understand the journal articles. They had

to work on their own.

guidelines to the program implementation,

and a lack of coordination and monitoring

to the program implementation. The lack of

teacher coordination leads the teachers to

work on their own. Most of them (86%) stated

that they made their own syllabus, and only

14% stated that they made it together with

their colleagues. They also stated that they

tried to ﬁnd their own teaching materials,

developed their own teaching program, and

implemented it in their own styles, without

being monitored whether it was effective or

not. This is due to the fact that they got the

teaching task from their department head,

yet they had to report to another, that was the

head of the school/faculty where they taught.

The fact that the teachers work in

isolation is in contrary to the theory stating

that to be effective, teachers should have the

opportunities to beneﬁt from the collective

expertise of their colleagues, and this can be

done when teachers work together in pairs

or in groups on course planning, materials

development, and lesson planning. During

the process of planning, potential problems

can often be identiﬁed and resolved (Richards

2001: 219).

In term of the institutional supports,

the instructional system can include the

availability of strategic plans (vision,

mission, and clear goals) of the program,

sound organization structure, appropriate

curriculum, clear guide-lines to the program

implementation, and clear monitoring system

(Richards, 2001: 202). According to the

managers at the top level, the institution has

provided all the supports needed to run the

program effectively. The center for general

courses has been set up, coordinators for the

courses have been appointed, meetings for

teacher coordination have been facilitated,

projects to develop course syllabus, learning

materials and even course books have

been offered. They feel they have done

many things to support the general course

programs to run effectively. However,

teachers expressed different opinions related

to that. They stated that what the institution

had done was not enough to help them do

their job as effectively as possible. Table 1

shows the teachers’ opinions related to the

institutional supports.

Another support from the institution to

run the course effectively is the availability

of needed facilities, such as suitable

classrooms, teaching resources, internet

access, help lines, orientation, and teacher

Based on Table 1, YSU has not provided

enough supports needed to run the program

effectively. There is no clear strategic plan

to the course program, no curriculum, no

Table 1

Institutional Supports to Run English as a General Course Program

Indicators

Available Not Available Do Not Know

Clear strategic plan

0

14 (100%)

0

Sound curriculum

Clear guidelines to the program implementation

Teacher coordination

2 (14%) 10 (72%)

2 (14%)

Monitoring to the Program implementation

5

JOURNAL OF EDUCATION, Volume 8, Number 1, November 2015

training (Richards, 2001: 212-214). Related

to teacher trainings, only 21% of the teachers

surveyed stated that they got training on how

to teach English for general course program,

while the other 79% stated that they had

never got the intended training. Related to

the facilities available, all teachers surveyed

stated that facilities needed for their job had

not met their expectation. The classrooms

available were generally not suitable for the

teaching-learning process of English. There

was an LCD projector but no speaker set

available, or, the room was so small while

the number of students was so large. Further,

the internet access was not always available

and could not be used for the teaching and

learning process.

Despite the fact that available facilities

do not support them well, most teachers

surveyed (76%) stated that they had used

information technology (IT) in their

teaching, while 24% had not used it. Among

those who had made use of IT stated that

IT was very advantageous for teaching and

learning of English but they did not use it

maximally due to the limited access and

bandwidth of the internet available.

The lack of institutional support leads

to low work satisfaction among teachers.

Related to this, 72% of the teachers surveyed

stated that they were not satisﬁed with their

work, 14% stated that they felt a bit satisﬁed,

and only 14% stated that they were satisﬁed.

Those who were satisﬁed stated the reasons,

that the job was a kind of entertainment, a

chance to meet different students, and an

opportunity to improve their knowledge

and experience. Those who were unsatisﬁed

stated the reasons, that they could not teach

as good as possible, so that they were not

able to help students improve their English

ability much. Some others stated that it was

because the program was not clear enough

for them to where it should be brought, for

there were no clear guidelines.

In term of the teachers’ views towards

the program, as mentioned previously, most

teachers surveyed (72%) were not satisﬁed

with their work and only 14% was satisﬁed.

Their work satisfaction is much affected by

the way they view their job.The following is

a list of teachers’ views on the job, teaching

English as a general course program in

various study programs, from the positive to

the negative one. They stated that English as

a general course program was: interesting,

entertaining, improving knowledge and

helping them get more friends, an opportunity

to learn new things, improving knowledge,

skills in teaching English for students

from various study programs with various

background knowledge, as a challenge

to teach English better in various study

programs, a job from the institution that

should be done, and a course that is not so

useful in improving students’ English ability.

Further they stated various factors that

made English as a general course program

unable to run well. They are: there is no

clear goals of the course program, there is no

sound curriculum to follow, there is no clear

guideline to the program implementation,

the course book provided by institution is

not suitable with their needs, there is no good

coordination among teachers to the course

implementation, there is not enough time to

prepare the lesson due to the poor schedule

arrangement, class size for English is too

big, students’ entry English ability is too

heterogeneous, students’ English learning

motivation is very low, and facilities for

effective English teaching and learning

process are not available.

Despite their various opinions to the

job of teaching English as a general course

program and various conditions that hinder

6

Jamilah: The Effectiveness of English…(page 1-9)

their job, the teachers seem to have done the

besttheycantoteachEnglishinthisuniversity.

Effective program implementation can be

seen from students’ satisfaction. Students

seem quite satisﬁed with the program they

have followed.

In relation to sudents’ satisfaction

at the English class as a general course

program, students’ satisfaction is seen from

their evaluation on their teachers’ teaching

performances. Quality teaching is indicated

by the ability of the teachers to communicate

learning materials clearly, to prepare the

lesson, to managethetime, toarousestudents’

interest, to be responsive, and to perform

the teaching as a whole. Beside teaching

performance, the content of the program, the

used module or teaching materials, fairness

of the assessment, useful feedbacks also

contribute to students’satisfaction (Richards,

2001). Likert-scale questionnaires were

distributed to a group of students taught

by a content teacher and another group of

students taught by an English teacher. The

data gained were descriptively analyzed and

interpreted based on the Table 2.

Tables 3 and 4 show that both groups of

students were quite satisﬁed with the course

Table 2

Suharto’s Score Category

Scales

Interval of Mean Values