EEJ 9 (1) (2019) 74 - 83

English Education Journal

http://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/eej

The Professional and Pedagogic Competences of English Teachers With

Different UKG (Teaching Competence Test) Achievement Levels

Iis Siti Aisyah1, Issy Yuliasri2, Warsono2

1. SMP Muhammadiyah 3 Bandung, Indonesia
2 Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia

Article Info

________________

Article History:

Recived 15 October

2018

Accepted 19 December

2018

Published 15 March

2019

Keywords:

Professional

Competence,

Pedagogic Competence,

UKG Achievement

Levels

____________________

Abstract

___________________________________________________________________

Professional and pedagogic competences are the basic aspects for effective teaching and

learning to take place in classrooms. They are dealing with the quality of teaching-learning

process. However, the average score of UKG (Teacher Competence Test) in Indonesia did

not achieve standard expected target. This mixed-methods study is aimed to reveal

professional and pedagogic competences of English teachers with different UKG

achievement levels. Quantitative method was employed in the first phase through student

questionnaire to investigate students‟ perception on their English teachers‟ professional

and pedagogic competences performed in classrooms. 14 classes students of six junior

high schools in Bandung, West Java, were chosen as participants.The total number of

students was 474 with 14 English teachers as subjects of the study. In the second phase,

this study employed a descriptive qualitative method through classrooms observation and

documentation to reveal how English teachers with different UKG chievement levels

performed their competence in classrooms. Five teachers out of the 14 teachers under

study were chosen as participants.The finding reveals that based on students‟ perception,

professional and pedagogic competences demonstrated by English teachers in classrooms

do not fully reflect their UKG achievement levels. In some aspects, the teachers with

lower UKG achievement are not perceived worse than those with higher UKG

achievement. This finding is in line with the finding based on classrooms teaching

performance of the five English teachers‟ under study. In some parts of lessons, the lower

achievers could even perform better than the highers.

Correspondence Address:

PHH Mustopha No.90/209 C, Bandung, Indonesia

E-mail: iis28sitiaisyah@gmail.com

p-ISSN 2087-0108

e-ISSN 2502-4566

mailto:iis28sitiaisyah@gmail.com

Iis Siti Aisyah, Issy Yuliasri, Warsono/ EEJ 9 (1) (2019) 74 - 83

INTRODUCTION

Teaching English as foreign language is

not an easy task. According to Richards (2011),

not everyone who speaks English can teach

English. English language teaching is seen a

career in a field of educational specialization.

This profession requires a specialized knowledge

base obtained not only through academic study

but also practical experience (Richards, 2011).

Moreover, English teachers have more burdens

because the curriculum not only emphasizes on

the mastery of linguistics competence but also

communicative competence in written and oral

skill. It is supported by Agustien (2014) who

contends that the main purpose of language

learning is to develop the ability to communicate

(Communicative Competencies) and discourse

competence is the core of the ability to

communicate.

The statement contended by Agustien

above also prescribed in Indonesia department

of education regulation that communication in

English is intended to understand and express

information, thought, feeling, and develop

science, technology, and culture by using the

language. The ability to communicate in a full

understanding is the ability of discourse.

Furthermore Celce-Murcia, et al. (1995) in

Agustien (2014) explains that the ability of

discourse is "choice, sequence, word order,

structure, and text of speech to achieve coherent

oral and written texts".

From the statements above, it can be

concluded that teaching English is not only

about transferring knowledge to students in the

classrooms. English teachers need to conduct

effective and efficient learning therefore their

students can gain good communicative

competences. In order to make students learn

effectively and efficiently, teaching English does

not only require English speaking skill but also

teaching competences.

Regulation number 14 of Indonesian

Ministry of National Education (2005) about

Teachers and Lectures defines competence as “a

set of knowledge, skill, and attitudes a teacher

must have, fully comprehend and master to

perform his/her professional task”. Regulation

of Indonesian Ministry of National Education

(2007) also develops four core competences of

teacher competence standards. They are

pedagogic, personal, social, and professional

competence acquired through professional

education.

Pedagogic competence is the competence

in managing students‟ learning. Personal

competence includes having good and steady

personal characteristics. Professional

competence is a competence in mastering the

subject matter broadly and deeply. Whereas

social competence means competence in

communicating and interacting effectively and

efficiently with learners, colleagues/fellow

teachers, parents/guardians, and community

(Minister of National Education Number 16,

2007).

Theoretically stated, teacher competence

affects many aspects of education. It is one of

the factors determine the quality of learning and

the quality of students, which in turns determine

the quality of education.

However, the fact indicates the lack of

teachers‟ comprehension of professional and

pedagogic competences. The national average

results of teacher competence test or Uji

Kompetensi Guru (UKG) in Indonesia for two

areas (professional and pedagogic competences)

is below the minimum competence standards

(http://www.thejakartapost). This fact is

supported by several previous studies both in

domestic and international frame. In domestic

frame, the findings reveal that English teachers‟

competences have not been developed as they

were expected (Syahrudin, Ernawati, & Ede,

2013; Husin, 2013; Siki, 2013; Febriana &

Faridi, 2016). Meanwhile in foreign frame, the

results report that teachers‟ utmost weakness

area is to make the subject matter applicable to

the real world situation (Ghazi et al, 2013).

Other studies uncover that not all competences

required by curriculum are demonstrated by

English teachers and English student teachers

(Cubukcu, 2010; Kizilaslan, 2011; Tawalbeh &

Ismail, 2014; Zhao & Zhang, 2016).

Based on the fact supported by previous

studies as outlined above, this study focusses on

http://www.thejakartapost/

Iis Siti Aisyah, Issy Yuliasri, Warsono/ EEJ 9 (1) (2019) 74 - 83

investigating whether the teachers‟ achievement

of UKG represents their teaching skill with the

aim to describe teacher competence performed

in classrooms by English teachers with different

UKG achievement levels in four point of views.

They are; 1) students‟ perceptions of professional

competence performed in the classrooms by

their English teachers, 2) students‟ perceptions

of pedagogic competence performed in

classrooms by their English teachers 3)

professional competence performed in

classrooms by English teachers, 4) pedagogic

competence performed in classrooms by English

teachers.

METHODS

This study employed a mixed-methods

design that implementing sequential which

quantitative data come first in the first phase

followed by qualitative data in the second phase

(Cresswell, 2009).

Questionnaire was used in the first phase

in order to measure or describe any generalized

pictures which matches this study aim: to

explore students‟ perception of English teachers

with different level of UKG perform their

professional and pedagogic competences in the

classrooms. In the second phase, this study

included a descriptive qualitative method

through classroom observation and

documentation to complement the qualitative

components from teacher and also as

triangulation in order to help get a full picture of

how English teachers with different achievement

levels of UKG perform their professional and

pedagogic competences in the classrooms.

In the first phase, the participants were six

junior high school students in Bandung, East

Java, Indonesia. The total number of students

was 474 of 14 classes from state and private

schools. These students participated in this study

by perceiving their English teachers in

performing their professional and pedagogic

competences in the classrooms. the total number

of English teachers under study was 14. and

named T1 (teacher 1) to T14 (teacher 14). The

classes were chosen purposively based on their

English teachers‟ agreement.

The English teachers under study were

grouped into three groups based on the level of

their UKG score. They are group 1, 2, and 3.

The UKG score levels are classified based on

assessment standard prescribed in Decree of

National Education Department (2017). The

obtained scores are converted into scale 1-100

and then classified into four levels from very

poor to excellent. Level 1 is classified “very

poor” with score 1-50, level 2 is “fair” with score

51-70, level 3 is “good” with score 71- 90, and

level 4 is excellent with score 90-100 (National

Education Department, 2017). Since the

obtained score of the perceived English teachers

are at a range of 1 - 90, in this study, the teachers

are grouped into three. Group 1 (level 1) and

group 2 (level 2) are represented by five teachers.

Meanwhile group 3 (level 3) is represented by

four teachers.

In the second phase, five teachers out of

14 teachers under study were chosen as

participants, namely, T1 from Group 1, T6 and

T9 from Group 2, T11 and T12 from Group 3.

They were observed in relation to their

classroom practices.

The same 45 items in four likert scale are

developed in questionnaire and observation

checklist to explore two components of

professional competence and eight components

of pedagogic competence as prescribed in Rule

Of Minister Of National Education Number 16

(2007). The components of professional

competence explored includes: 1) mastering the

materials, structural, concept, and knowledge

mindset of subject matter, and 2) developing

learning materials creatively. Meanwhile the

components of pedagogic competence include:

1) mastering students‟ characteristic, 2)

mastering learning theories and learning

principles, 3) developing the curriculum related

to subject matter 4) implementing effective

teaching and learning, 5) integrating ict in

teaching and learning process, 6) developing

students‟ learning potential, 7) communicating

effectively, emphatically, and mannerly with

students, and 8) assessing students‟ learning.

Iis Siti Aisyah, Issy Yuliasri, Warsono/ EEJ 9 (1) (2019) 74 - 83

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Professional and pedagogic competences

performed by English teachers with different

UKG achievement levels presented and

discussed as follow.

Students’ Perception of English Teachers

Professional Competence Performed in

Classrooms

English teachers professional

competence performed in classrooms based on

students‟ perception is described in two

components.

Concerning the first component of

professional competence (mastering the

materials, structural, concept, and knowledge

mindset of subject matter), the findings uncover

that generally English teachers of all groups

show good performance in three indicators,

namely: mastering of knowledge of subject

matter as the essence of teacher‟s quality;

providing samples of English words and

grammatical structures; monitoring his/her own

speech and writing for accuracy. Nevertheless

they are considered have the lack of English

proficiency due to the poor performance of other

three indicators, namely: maintaining use of

English; maintaining fluent use of English in the

classroom; giving explanations and instructions

in English.

This findings indicate that the teachers

need improvement in English proficiency. They

must be encouraged to activate their passive

English by starting to speak and use English in

class and school environment. Therefore, they

are more confident to use the language in

classrooms.

In performing the second component of

professional competence (developing learning

materials creatively in classrooms as perceived

by students), all groups demonstrated good

classroom practices in providing learning

material creatively that meets the level of

students‟ progress but still need improvement in

using various learning resources creatively.

This finding indicates that the teachers

were likely to use monotonous learning

resources. This is not in line with Wachidah,

Gunawan, and Diyanti (2017) who state that in

language learning, the experience of using

various learning resources enables students to

realize that different texts can have the same

social function and purpose or vice versa. They

are also supposed to aware that various kinds

and contents of text are caused by different

purposes and context of communication.

Students’ Perception of English Teachers’

Pedagogic Competence Performed in

Classrooms.

Teachers‟ pedagogic competence

classroom performance based on students‟

perception is presented in eight components.

Concerning the first component

(mastering students‟ characteristics) , the

teachers of all groups failed to know their

students‟ characteristics well; need improvement

in calling students‟ by name; need improvement

in identifying students; demonstrating good

identifying student‟s learning difficulties.

Based on the findings above, it is obvious

that this mastering students‟ characteristics

appears as a big challenge to the perceived

English teachers. Collecting this information is

not an easy thing. In Indonesia, in order to be a

certified teacher and able to receive teacher

certification allowance, teachers are required to

teach at least 24 periods in a week which last 40

minutes of each period. Since English language

class of Junior High School is held 4 periods in a

week, the English teachers must teach at least

six classes with about 30-36 students in each

class to fulfil the requirement. This condition

becomes an obstacle in mastering the big

number of students‟ characteristics.

In performing the second component

(mastering learning theories and learning

principles), all groups need improvement in

applying student-centered approach, making use

of teaching methods creatively, and making use

of various teaching technique creatively. This

fact is supported by Leo (2013) who stresses that

some teachers who claim their classroom

Iis Siti Aisyah, Issy Yuliasri, Warsono/ EEJ 9 (1) (2019) 74 - 83

activities to be students-centered are actually still

teachers-centered. Kuma (2016) suggests school

administrators support student-centered

management and provide training and skills to

their teachers because teachers and their

students will have higher outcomes and success.

More various teaching methods and tecniques

should be adopted, modified, or varied by

teachers since according to Forsyth and

McMillan in Leo (2013), variety reawakens

students‟ involvement in the course and their

motivation.

In developing curriculum related to

subject matter (the third component), lesson

topic was well-introduced by all groups.

Nevertheless, all groups demonstrated the lack

of awareness of the importance of clarifying

students the learning objectives before the lesson

begins. On the other hand they performed good

classroom practice in evaluating whether the

objectives have been achieved at the end of the

lesson. This finding is not in line with NSW

Education and Communities (2014) who

contends that “at the beginning of the lesson, it

is crucial to share the specific learning objective

and explain how it contributes to achievement of

the global goals in the learning sequence”. This

helps students see the „big picture‟, make

connections, understand the purpose of and

reason for the lesson.

In accordance with the fourth component

of pedagogic competence (implementing

effective teaching and learning), it can be

concluded that all groups are perceived well-

implemented safe learning environment in the

classrooms. They are also categorized „very

good‟ in managing effective teaching-learning

time. Nevertheless, they need improvement in

performing lesson material readiness and using

various media. On the other hand, all groups are

perceived good in performing taking a

transactional decision in the learning of teaching

appropriate with the evolving situation.

These findings indicate that the teachers

need to go to class with good preparation since

students are able to identify whether the lesson

are well prepared or not especially by students

who want to learn seriously. Furthermore Leo

(2013) stresses that „teachers may lose students‟

respect if they do not prepare the lesson well‟.

They also need to explore and utilize more

various media in order to make teaching-

learning process more interesting and avoid

boredom.

Concerning the fifth component

(integrating ICT in teaching and learning

process), all groups performed unsatisfying

classroom practice in utilizing projector, gadget,

and internet. This finding is not in line with the

curriculum applied in Indonesia, namely

Revised 2013 Curriculum that integrates ICT in

teaching-learning process. A crucial factor that

had prevented the teachers and students from

using ICT in teaching and learning is the lack of

ICT tools such as computers, slide projectors,

and limited internet access.

Concerning the seventh component

(communicating effectively, emphatically, and

mannerly), the teachers performed outstanding

performance in ensuring relaxed atmosphere,

giving clear explanation and instructions,

checking students‟ understanding and

maintaining rapport. They also showed good

performance in checking whether students‟

completing their assignment and providing

comprehensive review of important lesson

content. These findings indicate that the teachers

are percieved as a good communicator in

transfering knowledge supported by classroom

relaxed atmosphere and good mutual respect

among students and their teacher.

Concerning the last component of

pedagogic competence (assessing students‟

learning in the classrooms) performed by

teachers based on students‟ perception, feedback

on students ‟performance including praises is

provided sufficiently by all groups. Group 3

performed the best classroom practice of all

since it is categorized „very good‟. Meanwhile

the other groups are categorized „good‟. In using

varied assessment tools for students‟ learning

and progress, all groups performed „good‟

classroom practice. In keeping accurate records

of students‟ learning and progress according to

the intended learning objectives, all teachers are

perceived need improvement because the scores

Iis Siti Aisyah, Issy Yuliasri, Warsono/ EEJ 9 (1) (2019) 74 - 83

fall in low level of good. In providing self-

assessment and peer-assessment, group 1 and

group 2 are perceived failed to demonstrate good

performance since they fall in level „poor‟.

Meanwhile group 3 is considered almost poor

because it falls at low range of „good‟. In giving

remedial test to the students who do not achieve

minimum standard criteria, all groups performed

„good‟ classroom practice with score range.

Unfortunately, with respect to giving enrichment

to the students who have achieved good

progress), the teachers show “poor” and “very

poor” performance.

English Teachers’ Professional Competence

Performed in Classroom

In mastering the materials, structural,

concept ,and knowledge mindset of subject

matter (component 1) the findings show that all

teachers under observation succeeded in

mastering teaching materials (Indicator 1) and

providing examples of English words and

grammatical structures (Indicator 5).

Nevertheless, in several indicators, namely,

maintaining use and fluent of English (Indicator

2 and 3), giving explanation and instructions in

English (Indicator 4), and maintaining English

environment (Indicator 7), T1, T9, and T12 still

need improvement since they are categorized

„poor‟. Meanwhile T6 is successful since she is

categorized „very good‟ and T11 are categorized

„good‟. Concerning indicator 6 (monitoring

his/her own speech and writing for accuracy, T1

and T9 still need improvement. Meanwhile T6,

T11, and T13 showed „good‟ classroom

performance.

Concerning developing learning materials

(the second component), all teachers under

observation provided sufficient learning

materials creatively (Indicator 1). T1, T6, and

T9 provided sufficient various learning resources

as well (Indicator 2). Meanwhile T11 and T12

need improvement in indicator 2.

The finding above indicates that English

was less used by three out of five teachers under

observation including the teacher with good

UKG achievement in giving explanation and

instruction. According to them, mother tounge

was used to ease communication. Consequently,

students tended to speak their own language in

classroom. This is not appropriate since

according to Lunberg as cited in Coburn (2016),

the English input the teachers produce is

important for development of learner oral

production. She also notes “how the teachers‟

code switching (between L1 and L2) seems to

negatively affect learners‟ oral production and

how the teachers‟ lack of language confidence

may “rub off” on learning”.

Based on the evidences, during teaching,

all teachers happened to made language

inaccuracy covering pronunciation, confusion of

gender, tenses, and preposition as stated by Nell

and Muller (2010). Corrections on their speech

and writing were done immediately when they

realized doing mistakes. Nevertheless these

mistakes still occurred unconsciously especially

in pronunciation. This evidence is supported by

Sukrisno (2015) who reveals that English

pronunciation inaccuracy has often made by

English teachers without being aware of it.

Consequently, their students will receive a

wrong model in the early process of learning

which will be copied and employed by them for

the rest of their lives (Sukrisno, 2015). The

findings above suggest that the teachers need

improvement in English proficiency.

English Teachers’ Pedagogic Competence

Performed in Classrooms

In terms of pedagogic component, the

findings are described in eight components. In

mastering students‟ characteristics (the first

component), all teachers knew students‟

characteristics well. Calling students‟ by their

names was well-performed by T1, T6, and T11.

Meanwhile T9 and T12 performed „very good‟

classroom practice. Concerning identifying

students‟ potential, all teachers performed good

classroom performance. It means students‟

potential were well-identified. This finding

indicates that students‟ strength and weakness

are well-explored. In identifying students‟

background knowledge, the finding reveals that

all teachers showed „good‟ classroom

performance. In identifying students‟ learning

Iis Siti Aisyah, Issy Yuliasri, Warsono/ EEJ 9 (1) (2019) 74 - 83

difficulties, the finding reveals that T1, T9, and

T12 performed „very good‟ classroom practice.

Meanwhile T6 and T11 showed „good‟

performance. These findings indicates that their

performance is not different significantly.

The findings above show that all teachers

realized the important of mastering students‟

characteristics for the sake of efficiency and

effectiveness. They put an effort to call their

students‟ name individually. Therefore students

may feel touched, welcome, andrespected by

yheir teachers. As a result, a rapport is

established (Leo, 2013).

Concerning the second component

(mastering learning theories and learning

principle), all teachers implemented cooperative

learning because their students learned in group

as described by Kagan and High in Astuti (2016)

that in cooperative learning students work in

group. T6 and T11 were successfull in engaging

their students equally and interacted

simultaneously in the lesson. Nevertheless, T1,

T9, and T11still need improvement since they

still dominated the lesson activities and flow of

information is one way from the teachers to

students. This is not appropriate with Yuliasri

(2016) who states that the 2013 curriculum

postulates student-centered learning, active

learning, and learning in groups are used, which

also means that cooperative learning is

applicable. Apparently, some challenges were

faced by the English teachers in practicing

cooperative learning in classroom. One among

the challenges is unavailability of community of

cooperative learning practitioners (Astuti, 2016).

In developing curriculum related to

subject matter (the third component), lesson

topic was well introduced by all teachers. The

finding suggests that the teachers have

awareness in introducing what is generally being

talked about or theme (Wong and Wong, 2011).

However, T9 and T12 failed to clarified lesson

objectives. All teachers performed outstanding

classroom performance in checking whether

objectives have been achieved. T9 and T12 need

to improve their classroom practice in clarifying

lesson objectives since it helps students focus on

what learning is going to be. It is supported by

Hattie as cited in Wong and Wong (2011) who

says “simply tell students what they will be

learning before the lesson begins and you can

raise student achievement as much as 27

percent”.

Concerning the fourth indicator

(implementing effective teaching and learning in

the classrooms), all teachers were outstanding in

creating learning environment that ensure

standard safety as contended by Indiana

Department of Education (2015) that classrooms

is free from obstacle i.e cords, learning tools are

available but safely displayed and easily

accessible. They performed good managing

effective learning time and preparing the ready-

used lesson material. Nevertheless, T1 need

improvement in using various media. T6, T9,

T11 are categorized „very good‟ and T12 is

categorized „good‟. All of them did not perform

taking a transactional decision in the learning of

teaching appropriate with the evolving situation.

Concerning integrating ICT in classroom

(the fifth component), T1 need improvement, T6

and T9 are classified „very good‟. Meanwhile

T11 and T12 failed to integrate it. Gadget such

as mobile phone was seldom used by T2, T9,

and T12. T6 performed „good‟ classroom

practice and T11 failed to perform it. These

findings indicate that ICT was not integrated by

all teachers in classrooms. Most of classrooms

under observation were not facilitated by slide

projectors. The projector was only available in

T9‟s classroom which is a state school. The

other problem is inadequate access to ICT

resources such as computers, a network

infrastructure, and connectivity. This fact

becomes the main reason why the teachers were

reluctant to use ICT as teaching-learning tool,

not because they were not competent in using it.

Therefore, the obstacles to access ICT at school

must be minimized.

The findings of the sixth component

(developing students‟ learning potential) show

that all teachers performed sufficient supporting

students‟ self confidence, encouraging students

to do their utmost, providing them with

activities to apply knowledge in classroom,

andposing questions to encourage thinking.

Iis Siti Aisyah, Issy Yuliasri, Warsono/ EEJ 9 (1) (2019) 74 - 83

Nevertheless T1, T9, and T12 need

improvement in promoting students‟

participation in the classroom since only certain

students were dominant and the others tended to

be passive. Meanwhile T6 and T12 showed very

good performance since their students

participated actively during the lesson.

Concerning the seventh component

(communicating effectively, empathically‟ and

mannerly), all teachers succeeded in performing

relaxed atmosphere in class as stated by Grif and

Wal (2011) through addressing their students in

a positive manner, demonstrating warmth and

empathy towards all students, and reacting with

humor and stimulate humor (T6 and T11). They

also succeded in giving clear instructions and

explanation to students, checking students‟

understanding, checking students‟ assignment

completion, maintaining rapport, and

performing good classroom practice in

providing comprehensive review of most

important lesson content and vocabulary items

time to time.

Concerning Assessing students‟ learning

(the eighth component), the data reveals that all

teachers gave sufficient oral feedback including

compliment. With respect to written feedback,

the evidence reveals that T9 and T12 gave not

only score and grade but also the strength and

weakness of students‟ work in terms of

communicative purpose of text, structure of text,

and language features covering spelling and

tenses. This is appropriate because according to

Wijayanti, Bharati, and Mudjianto (2015),

implementation of the written feedback improve

the students‟ writing skill in grammar practice. It

could also improve the students‟ interest in

learning grammar and they will be more careful

in writing especially in punctuation and spelling.

The other teachers only give eritten feedback in

form of scoring and grading. All teachers

assessed students‟ attitude, knowledge, and skill

as prescribed on Ministry of Education number

26 year 2016 about assessment standard which

covering three competences, namely, attitude,

knowledge, and skill.

Other finding reveals that concerning

assessment tools, the finding is in line with the

research conducted by Mutmainah, Faridi, and

Astuti (2017) who find that in practice, the

teachers under observation mostly used

observation for assessing students‟ attitude. For

assessing knowledge, the teachers preferred

applying written test. Meanwhile for assessing

skills, the teachers tended to use performance

and project-based assessment because of familiar

with those two kinds of techniques.

Remedial programm was provided

sufficiently by all teachers. However,

enrichment was not demonstrated by all teachers

during observation. This is not in line with

Sudiro (2016) who explains that in mastery

learning, struggling learners who have not

achieved minimum standard criteria and

advance learners need to be provided by equal

opportunities to pursue learning based on their

strength and weakness. Remedial program is

given to struggling students and enrichment is

given to advance learners.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on students‟ perception, the major

conclusion of the study is that, in some cases,

professional and pedagogic competencess

performed by English teachers in classrooms do

not reflect their UKG achievement levels. In

some aspects, teachers with lower UKG

achievement are not perceived worse than those

with higher UKG achievement. On the other

hand, teachers with higher UKG achievement

level are not always perceived better. The study

also found that in some aspects, their

performance is not different significantly.

The finding above is in line with the

finding on teachers‟ classroom teaching

performance. This study had used empirical

findings to show that different UKG

achievement levels of five English teachers

under study were not fully reflected in their

classroom teaching performance. In some parts

of lesson, the lower achiever could even perform

better than the higher achiever.

Iis Siti Aisyah, Issy Yuliasri, Warsono/ EEJ 9 (1) (2019) 74 - 83

SUGGESTIONS

This study reveals that different levels of

teachers‟ UKG achievement were not congruent

with their classroom performance. It means

using UKG could not serve as the basis for

teacher competence measurement since

competence not only covers knowledge but also

skill and attitude. Therefore in order to gain

more comprehensive and accurate teacher

competence measurement, it is suggested that

the assessment should not only use cognitive

test. Classroom observation and students‟ survey

should be used as other assessment tools. The

results of this multiple measurement

implementation are aimed to map teacher

competence thoroughly, not only in terms of

knowledge but also skill, and attitude.

This study also reveals that teachers

performed good classroom practice in mastering

subject matter. Nevertheless English was less

used in classrooms due to the lack of their

English proficiency. It is also recommended that

the teacher training conducted to follow up their

UKG achievement should be aimed not only to

help teachers gain better UKG score as

experienced by me but also to improve their

teaching skill including English proficiency,

applying various student-center teaching

techniques, applying assessment, etc to be

implemented in classroom.

REFERENCES

Agustine, H. I. R. (2014). The 2013 English

Curriculum: the Paradigm, Interpretation

and Implementation. FBS: Universitas

Negeri Semarang

Astuti, P. (2016). Practitioner of Cooperative

Learning as Part of Novice Teachers‟

Professional Identity. Retrieved from

DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.15639/teflinjo

urnal.v27i2/132-152

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design:

Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed

methodsapproaches (3rd ed.). Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Cubukcu, F. (2010). Student Teachers‟

Perceptions of Teacher Competence and

Their Attributions for Success and Failure

in Learning. The Journal of International

Social Research.3 (10). Retrieved from

www.sosyalarastirmalar

Febriana, E., Faridi, A. (2016). The Junior High

School English Teachers‟ Fulfilment of

Four Competences. English Education

Journal, EEJ6(1). Retrieved from

http://journal.unnes.ac.id

Ghazi, S. R., Shah, M. T., & Shauhib, M.

(2013). Teacher‟s Professional

Competencies in Knowledge of Subject

Matter at Secondary Level in Southern

District of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa,

Pakistan. Journal of Educational and Social

Research.3 (2) May. Retrieved from

http://www.mcser.org/journal/index.ph

p/jesr/issue/view/4

Grift, W. F. D. & Wal, M. F. D. (2011).

Measuring the Development of

Professional Competence among

Teachers. Retrieved from

http://www.icsei.net/icsei2011/fullpaper

s/0127_A.pdf

Husin, A. (2014). Teacher Understanding of

Pedagogy Competency in Tangerang.

Presented at The Second International

Conference of Education and Language.

Retrieved from.

artikel.ubl.ac.id/index.php/

icel/article/download/290/835

ndiana Department of Education. (2015).

Classroom Observation Success

Indicator: A Companion Guide to the

Classroom Observation. Retrieved from

http://www/doe.in.gov

Kizilaslan, I. (2011). ELT Student Teachers‟

Competence for teaching Language Skills:

A Qualitative Exploration. International

Journal of Social Science and humanity

Studies, 3(1). Retrieved from

www.sobiad.org/ejournals/journal/irem

_kizilaslan.pdf

Kuma, K., M. (2016). Challenges of

Implementing Student-centered

Strategies. International Research Journal of

http://www.sosyalarastirmalar/
http://journal.unnes.ac.id/
http://www.mcser.org/
http://www.icsei.net/icsei2011/fullpapers/0127_A.pdf
http://www.icsei.net/icsei2011/fullpapers/0127_A.pdf
http://www/doe.in.gov
http://www.sobiad.org/ejournals/journal/irem_kizilaslan.pdf
http://www.sobiad.org/ejournals/journal/irem_kizilaslan.pdf

Iis Siti Aisyah, Issy Yuliasri, Warsono/ EEJ 9 (1) (2019) 74 - 83

Engineering and Technology (IRJET), 03

(12). Retrieved from www.irje.net

Leo, S. (2013). A Challenge Book to Practice

Teaching in English. Yogyakarta: Andi

Ministry of National Education (MoNE),

Republic of Indonesia. (2007). Peraturan

Menteri Pendidikan Nasional Nomor 16

Tahun 2007 Tentang Standar Kualifikasi

Akademik dan Standar Kompetensi Guru.

Jakarta: Depdiknas.

Mutmainah, Faridi, A., Astuti, P. (2017).Junior

High School English Teachers‟

Perceptions and Practices of Authentic

Assessment in the Revised 2013

Curriculum. English Education Journal.

Retrieved from http://journal.unnes.ac.id

Nell, N. & Muller, H. (2010). The Impact of

Limited English Proficiency on English

Second Language Learners in South

Africa. South of African Journal of

Education, 30, 635-650. Retrieved from

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ11371

11/pdf

Richards, J. C. (2011). Competence and

Performance in Language Teaching.

Cambridge University Press.

Sikki, E. A. (2013). The Competence of Primary

School English Teachers in Indonesia.

Online paper, 4(11). Retrieved from

http://www.iiste.org

Sukrisno, A.(2015). Cyclic Spelling Patterns of

English Word Groups Spellophonetically

Enabling English Learners to Determine

Segmental and Suprasegmental Realisations

in Pronunciation. Doctoral Dissertion.

Universitas Negeri Semarang. Semarang:

Indonesia

Syahrudin, Ernawati, A. & Ede, M. N. (2013).

Teachers‟ Pedagogical Competence in

School-Based Management: A Case

Study in a Public Secondary School at

Pare-Pare, Indonesia. Journal of Education

and Learning, 7(4), 213-218. Retrived from

www.journal.uad.ac.id>Home>vol7,No4

>Syahrudin

Tawalbeh, T. I., & Ismail, N. M.

(2014).Investigation of Teaching

Competencies to Enhance Students‟ EFL

Learning at Taif University International

Education Studies. Canadian Center of

Science and Education, 7(11). Retrieved

from

http://eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1071025.pd

The Jakarta Post. (2015, November 25), Portrait

of Teachers behind Competency Test.

Retrived from

http://www.thejakartapost.comcompeten

ce.html

Wachidah, S., Gunawan, A., Diyantri, &

Noorman, S. (2017). When English Rings a

Bell: Buku Guru Bahasa Inggris.

Kementrian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan

Republik Indonesia

Wijayanti, P., Bharati, D.A.L., Mujiyanto, J.

(2015). The Use of Written Feedback

Technique to Improve the Practice of

Grammar for Sentence Writing

Competence. English Education Journal,

EEJ5(1). Retrived from

http://journal.unnes.ac.id

Wong, H. & Wong, R. (2011). The Heart of

Every Lesson. Retrieved from

https://www.teachers.net/wong/MAR1

Yuliasri, I. (2016). Cooperative Learning for

Undergraduate Translation and

Interpreting Classes. Paper Presented at

the 1st English Language and Literature

International Conference. Universitas

Muhammadiyah Semarang. Retrieved

from

https://jurnal.unimus.ac.id/index.php/E

LLIC/viewfile/2604/2572

Zhao, W. & Zhang, H. (2016). Investigation into

and Analysis on Middle School English

Teachers‟ Competencies. Journal of

Language Teaching and Research, 7(3), 613-

618. DOI:

http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/jltr.0703.25.

http://www.irje.net/
http://journal.unnes.ac.id/
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1137111/pdf
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1137111/pdf
http://www.iiste.org/
http://eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1071025.pdf
http://eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1071025.pdf
https://www.facebook.com/jakpost/
http://www.thejakartapost.comcompetence.html/
http://www.thejakartapost.comcompetence.html/
http://journal.unnes.ac.id/
https://www.teachers.net/wong/MAR11/
https://www.teachers.net/wong/MAR11/
https://jurnal.unimus.ac.id/index.php/ELLIC/viewfile/2604/2572
https://jurnal.unimus.ac.id/index.php/ELLIC/viewfile/2604/2572
http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/jltr.0703.25