https://jurnal.unigal.ac.id/index.php/jall/index JALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literacy), ISSN 2598-8530, September, Vol. 6 No. 2, 2022 JALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literacy), ISSN 2598-8530, September, Vol. 6 No. 2, 2022 213 Received Accepted Published July 15 th 2022 August 28 th 2022 September 14 th 2022 STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION ON THE LECTURER’S FEEDBACK OF THEIR SPEAKING ABILITY IN ONLINE CLASS Septyana Dwi Utami* septyana.du.09@gmail.com Universitas Muhammadiyah Purwokerto Dyah Kusumastuti dyahkusumastuti@ump.ac.id Universitas Muhammadiyah Purwokerto ABSTRACT Speaking English has challenges for each individual to do. Because of the difficulties, the students need feedback from the lecturer in correcting their mistakes in speaking. This research is aimed to find out students’ perception of the lecturer’s feedback on their speaking ability. The research belongs to the descriptive quantitative method which is analyzed someone’s opinion about a thing. The methods of collecting data used in this research were questionnaire and interview. The researchers used the interview to enrich the research data therefore the data sources were trusted. The data from the questionnaire were analyzed using the Likert Scale and determining the mean score of each statement. The sampling technique used in this research was simple random sampling. The samples of the research were 35 students of the English Education Department in a private university in Purwokerto. In addition, the interview data were analyzed using data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing/reduction. Based on the research that has been conducted, the result of the research was the students have a positive perception of the lecturer’s feedback on the students’ speaking ability. It can be seen in the grand mean score of 3.65, which means this research has a positive perception. From the interview, this research also proves that the lecturer’s feedback is important for the students because it helps the students in correcting their mistakes in practicing speaking English. Keywords: direct feedback, indirect feedback, lecturer’s feedback, oral feedback, students’ perception, written feedback. INTRODUCTION Speaking is an oral communication process when someone communicates or informs others about something. It happens when there is the speaker(s) that gives information to the audience. According to Cunningham (1999:3), speaking includes a process of producing, accepting, and processing information. Because English become the foreign language in Indonesia, most students in Indonesia have difficulties in practicing https://jurnal.unigal.ac.id/index.php/jall/index mailto:septyana.du.09@gmail.com mailto:dyahkusumastuti@ump.ac.id JALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literacy), ISSN 2598-8530, September, Vol. 6 No. 2, 2022 214 speaking. Before the students speak, they have to consider the word choice, tense, grammar, intonation, and how to pronounce the word(s) and others. If the students have less vocabulary in their minds, it may be harder to practice their speaking ability. In speaking activities, students may make mistakes in some speaking aspects such as pronunciation, grammatical rules, and others. In this condition, feedback is important to make the students realize what mistakes they have made and how they can give correction and betterment in their speaking ability. The students need the teacher’s feedback since research found that the students’ mistakes need to be revised and if it does not happen, they may be confused about it (Leki, 1991). It is commonly understood that students need feedback to make their speaking abilities better. Some lecturers still not maximize in giving feedback on students’ speaking ability whereas the lecturer’s feedback is important for their improvement, especially in speaking. Considering the importance of feedback, it has some purposes for giving feedback to the students. According to Lewis (2002), the purposes of giving feedback are to provide information for both the lecturers and students, provides students with learning advice, provides students with language input, gives motivation to the students, and lead students toward autonomy. In giving feedback to the students, there are many forms of it to make it effective and can be understood by the students. According to Cohen (1990: 109), there is oral and written feedback. Oral feedback refers to the feedback given orally to correct the students’ mistakes. While written feedback is given in written form draft. Both oral and written feedback is important for the students in correcting and evaluating the students’ speaking ability. The lecturer’s feedback may give different perceptions of the students. Each student may have a different perception of the lecturer’s feedback on their speaking ability. Perception is someone’s opinion or point of view of things. As people know that feedback is given to give correction for any mistakes, feedback has an important role in speaking betterment. The students may have a positive perception of the lecturer’s feedback and receive it as their reference in correcting the students’ mistakes in speaking. On the other hand, the students also may have a negative perception of the lecturer's feedback. During the covid-19 pandemic, the lecture has to go on online learning. In online learning, speaking activity happens both synchronous and asynchronous learning. It deals with the online sources and apps (Lingga, Yuliyanti, & Ningsih , 2021). In both JALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literacy), ISSN 2598-8530, September, Vol. 6 No. 2, 2022 215 synchronous and asynchronous learning, the lecturer may give feedback on the students’ speaking ability. Some aspects included in the feedback are pronunciation, intonation, eye contact, and gesture. This research focuses on analyzing the students’ perception of the lecturer’s feedback on the students’ speaking ability. The researchers decided to choose “Students’ Perception on the Lecturer’s Feedback of their Speaking Ability in Online Class” which analyzed the students’ perception of the lecture’s feedback on their speaking ability, and whether it was important for the students’ betterment of their speaking ability or not. The researchers took fourth-semester students of the English Education Department in a private university in Purwokerto as the participant in the research because the students had been receiving the lecturer’s feedback on speaking ability. METHOD This research belongs to descriptive quantitative research which is a study that belongs to analyzing someone or a group of people's opinions about something. This research analyzed the students’ perception of the lecturer’s feedback on their speaking ability. This research was conducted in the one of private universities in Purwokerto which is located in Purwokerto, Banyumas Regency, Central Java. The sampling technique used in this research was the simple random sampling technique. The total samples who participated in this research were 35 students. For the interview, the researchers took 5 students randomly as the respondents of the interview. The researchers used a questionnaire and interview as the instrument for collecting data. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION In this section, the data from the questionnaire was answered by 35 respondents. There are three major discussion categories in this part. The first category is the way the lecturer gives feedback on the students’ speaking ability, the second is about the accuracy of the lecturer’s feedback, and the last is about the benefits of the lecturer’s feedback. The Way the Lecturer Gives Feedback to the Students’ Speaking Ability To analyze the way the lecturer’s give feedback, the researchers provided 10 statements in table 1. JALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literacy), ISSN 2598-8530, September, Vol. 6 No. 2, 2022 216 Table. 1 Statements to Analyze the Way of the Lecturer’s Feedback NO STATEMENT SD D N A SA N Mean 1 Feedback given directly by the lecturer orally has been effective 0 1 10 21 3 35 3.74 2 Oral feedback is delivered by the lecturer clearly and easily to understood 0 3 11 16 5 35 3.66 3 Feedback given directly by the lecturer in writing according to my needs 1 4 14 15 1 35 3.31 4 Written feedback is delivered by the lecturer clearly and easily understood according to my mistakes 0 3 11 17 4 35 3.63 5 The lecturer gave direct feedback on where I made a mistake when speaking 1 3 8 16 7 35 3.71 6 The lecturer’s direct feedback helps me improve my speaking ability 0 1 3 16 15 35 4.29 7 Direct feedback helps me more in improving my speaking ability 0 0 8 11 16 35 4.23 8 Lecturers do not give direct feedback where I make mistakes when speaking 5 9 11 9 1 35 3.22 9 The lecturer’s indirect feedback helps me improve my speaking ability 2 6 16 8 3 35 3.11 10 Indirect feedback helps me more in improving my speaking ability 2 6 18 7 2 35 3.03 The Accuracy of the Lecturer Give Feedback on the Students’ Speaking Ability To analyze the accuracy of the lecturer feedback, the researchers provided 5 statements in table 2. Table. 2 Statements to Analyze the Accuracy of the Lecturer’s Feedback NO STATEMENT SD D N A SA N Mean 11 Feedback from the lecturer is appropriate to the mistakes I made when speaking 0 0 11 16 8 35 3.91 12 The lecturer’s feedback on my speaking ability is too long therefore it is difficult to understand 4 13 13 3 2 35 3.40 13 Feedback about the use of grammar when speaking English is given in detail by the lecturer 2 4 12 12 5 35 3.40 JALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literacy), ISSN 2598-8530, September, Vol. 6 No. 2, 2022 217 14 Feedback about the use of grammar when speaking English is given in detail by the lecturer 0 2 12 14 7 35 3.74 15 Feedback about non-verbal communication when I speak English is given in detail by the lecturer 0 2 17 15 1 35 3.43 The Benefit of the Lecturer Give Feedback to the Students’ Speaking Ability To analyze the way the lecturer’s give feedback, the researchers provided 5 statements in table 3. Table. 3 Statements to Analyze the Benefit of the Lecturer’s Feedback NO STATEMENT SD D N A SA N Mean 16 The lecturer’s feedback is very useful for my English speaking skill 0 1 5 16 13 35 4.17 17 The lecturer’s feedback makes me confused about how I can improve my English speaking ability 5 15 9 4 2 35 3.40 18 The lecturer’s feedback about pronunciation made me easier to remember how to pronounce English words correctly 0 0 8 18 9 35 4.03 19 The lecturer’s feedback about grammar makes me easier to speak English 0 0 16 13 6 35 3.71 20 The lecturer’s feedback about non-verbal communication (eye contact, gesture) made me understand good manners when speaking 0 3 6 14 12 35 4.00 After analyzing the result of the questionnaire, then the researchers sum the mean score of each statement to find the grand mean score. Grand Mean (X) = (X) = = = 3.65 JALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literacy), ISSN 2598-8530, September, Vol. 6 No. 2, 2022 218 The grand mean score of the questionnaire is 3.65. Based on table 2.5, the researchers found that this research has a positive perception which can be seen from the grand mean score, 3.65 which is agreed by the students. The questionnaire data were also supported with the interviews with the students as a technique to get trustworthiness. The interview data is used to enrich data and add discussion. From the interview results, it can be revealed some important key aspects of the feedback from the students as follows: The feedback helps students improve their speaking ability. Students' responses to the interviews show that their teachers’ way of giving feedback helps them to improve their speaking ability, in this case, pronunciation and vocabulary, as R1 stated: “I think the lecturer‟s feedback is very important. Some of the students are still learning, moreover, some students are not fluent and some are already fluent. This feedback is not only to improve pronunciation, and vocabulary but also to encourage students to learn more. Feedback is very important to remind if students make mistakes when speaking English”. (R1) R1 stated that the feedback from the teacher is important for him/her because some students are still not fluent in speaking, they need feedback to help them learn vocabulary and also pronunciation because these two language aspects are challenging for the students. The lecturer’s feedback can be used as a reference in correcting their mistakes and speaking and motivating them to practice speaking English in a good way. It supports Lewis’ (2002) statement that feedback has some aims such as providing information for the lecturers and students, providing students with advice about learning and language input, giving motivation, and leading students toward autonomy. In addition, R4, the teacher of English also emphasized that teachers’ feedback can help the students to identify their weaknesses in learning English, as stated: “The lecturer's feedback is important. By the lecturer‟s feedback, the students will be able to know their weaknesses in English speaking and it can be used as a reference for them in correcting their mistakes”. (R4) According to R4 the feedback given by the teachers can help students to be more aware of the potential mistake that may happen during their speaking. R4 believes that the feedback can allow the students to revise their mistakes. For the students, feedback can be as their evaluation to know their ability and comprehension of the learning material. JALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literacy), ISSN 2598-8530, September, Vol. 6 No. 2, 2022 219 Through feedback, students can understand their weaknesses and strengths, especially in speaking ability (Lewis, 2002). The feedbacks from the lecturer are easy to understand From the interview with the students, it can be seen that students perceived the feedback positively because the feedbacks are clear and understandable, as stated by R4: “The lecturer already gives feedback properly so the students know things that need to be corrected when speaking English. The feedback is also clear enough and easy to understand”. (R4) From the statement, it is clear that giving proper feedback will make the students understand the mistake and can make the correction. Radeki and Swales in Leki (1991) said that the students need the lecturer’s feedback to correct their mistakes and avoid them being confused if they do not give feedback from the lecturer. This statement is also uttered by R5 as stated: “The feedback is always appropriate and easy to understand, such as when the lecturer gives feedback on pronunciation. For example, when the student pronounces „mouth‟ in the wrong way, then the lecturer gives the example of how to pronounce „mouth‟ correctly”. R5 also emphasized that the clear and understandable feedback given by the lecturers will help them improve. Direct feedback is considered more understandable. Direct feedback refers to correction in linguistic form (word, morpheme, phrase, deleted word[s] or morpheme[s]). In speaking ability, direct feedback can be feedback from the lecturer that tells the students directly where they make mistakes when speaking English (Ferris, 2002). Based on the answer of R4 and R5, the researchers found that the students assumed that the lecturer gives feedback according to the students’ mistakes when they speak English. Related to the answer of R4 and R5, the other respondents also mentioned that the lecturer’s feedback is appropriate to the students’ mistakes and the lecturer delivers the feedback well. In addition, R5 also mentioned an example of the way the lecturer gives feedback by giving the example of how to pronounce English words correctly. The Feedback is appropriate to the students’ mistakes From the interview, it can be said that the lecturer already give feedback appropriate to the students’ mistakes in speaking, as stated by R5: JALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literacy), ISSN 2598-8530, September, Vol. 6 No. 2, 2022 220 “The feedback is always appropriate and easy to understand, such as when the lecturer gives feedback on pronunciation”. (R2) R4 2 also mentioned that: “The lecturer‟s feedback is already appropriate”. (R2) From the students’ responses, it can be said that the lecturer gives feedback based on the students’ mistakes. The feedback is also easy to understand as stated by R3: “It is easy to understand and appropriate with our mistakes”. (R3) It proves that the lecturer’s feedback is appropriate with the students’ mistakes and they can easy to understand about the lecturer’s feedback. Different types of feedback are acceptable as long as they are clear. From the interviews with the students related to the types of feedback given by the lecturers, the student mentioned that whatever the types of feedback as long as the lecturers provide them in clear and understandable ways, it is accepted. “The feedback is given by the lecturer by audio directly and orally so it can be understood by the students easily. The feedback is very helpful and gives the students motivation in improving English speaking ability”. (R1) R1 mentioned that the types of feedback given by the lecturers are not a matter as long as the feedbacks given are clear. This statement is also mentioned by R3 as stated: “The feedback is given directly in zoom meeting and the students also practice English speaking synchronously in zoom meeting, then the lecturer gives feedback at that time”. (R3) R3 explained that even though the lecturers give feedback on the online platform, it is acceptable. This way of giving feedback is not really different from feedback given in a face to face meetings. On the other hand, R5 explained that the lecturers sometimes give the feedback through audio and video recording to make the students able to listen and see the feedback again and again. “The feedback is given in the written form, audio or video recording. The feedback is very helpful for improving the students‟ speaking ability”. (R5) According to the research that has been conducted, the researchers found some answers to the research question “What is students’ perception of the lecturer’s feedback on their speaking ability?” JALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literacy), ISSN 2598-8530, September, Vol. 6 No. 2, 2022 221 Irwanto (2002:71) stated that there are two types of perception; positive and negative perception. In this research, the researchers concludes that the students have a positive perception of the lecturer’s feedback on their speaking ability. Considering the type of perception, the researchers found that in this research, the students have a positive perception because the grand mean score is 3.65 which means good. It is continued by the positive response from the students about the lecturer’s feedback. The lecturer gives detailed feedback on the students’ speaking abilities based on their mistakes. Based on the students’ point of view, the lecturer often gives feedback on some aspects of speaking ability such as grammar, pronunciation, and non-verbal communication. The feedback from the lecturer is also easy to understand and appropriate to the students’ mistakes. The accuracy of the lecturer’s feedback also can be seen from the students’ understanding of the feedback. Based on the data, the researchers find that the lecturer gave detailed feedback on the students’ speaking ability. The feedback is not too long and appropriate to the students' needs. In addition, the lecturer usually tells the students where they made mistakes and gives a correct example of how to speak English well and fluently. According to Cohen (1990), there are two forms of feedback which are oral feedback and written feedback. Oral feedback means the lecturer gives feedback orally on the student’s speaking ability, while written feedback means the lecturer gives correction by using the written form. Based on the result, the researchers found that the students prefer oral feedback because it allows them to be more communicative with the lecturer in discussing their mistakes in speaking. Oral feedback allows the interaction between the students and the lecturer to be more communicative because the students may ask a question during the lecture and give feedback on the students’ speaking ability. In this interaction, the students can confirm and clarify their mistakes in speaking and ask for the things that are unclear to the students. While in written feedback the students only can read and receive the lecturer’s feedback without any direct interaction. In online learning, the lecturers have to be creative in making class situations and make the students more motivated in joining the class. Since the covid-19 pandemic, online learning can be run in synchronous and asynchronous learning. Although the class has to run in online learning, both the students and the lecturers also have to be creative to do effective learning. In synchronous learning, the lecturer usually gives feedback orally JALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literacy), ISSN 2598-8530, September, Vol. 6 No. 2, 2022 222 when the meeting through video conference. While in asynchronous learning, the lecturer usually uses audio recording and it also can be accessed whenever the students want. Sometimes, the lecturer also gives feedback in written form, but mostly the feedback is given in the oral form. According to the questionnaire and interview, the researchers found that the lecturer’s feedback can be used as a reference for the students in revising their mistakes in practicing speaking. In addition, the students also mentioned that the lecturer’s feedback can be used as motivation for the students to be better at practicing speaking English. The research’s result supports Lewis (2002) that stated that the purposes of feedback are to provide information for lecturers and students, provides students with learning advice, provide students with language input, give motivation to the students, and lead students toward autonomy. Considering the type of feedback, the lecturer more often used direct feedback. According to Ferris (2002), direct feedback refers to correction in the linguistic form in direct feedback the teacher gives correction clearly without any clue. In this research, the researchers found that the lecturer gives direct feedback when the learning process was running through video conferences such as zoom meetings. It helps the students because it allows the students to clarify the lecturer’s feedback and avoid misunderstandings between the lecturer and the students. On the other hand, the lecturer also gave indirect feedback through audio or video recording that consist of the lecturer’s feedback which is can be accessed by the students not only when the learning process was running. The indirect feedback also can be in written form that the lecturer gave after the students’ performance. In conclusion, the students have a positive perception of the lecturer’s feedback on the students’ speaking ability. Based on the data from the questionnaire and interview, the researchers found that the lecturer’s feedback is important for the students especially in correcting their way of speaking English. The lecturer gives detailed feedback on grammar, pronunciation, and non-verbal communication which makes the students easier to remember their mistakes in speaking and makes them easy to revise their mistakes speaking. The feedback from the lecturer is also easy to understand by the students. The lecturer also tells the students’ mistakes, for example, if the student is wrong to pronounce the word “mouth”, then the lecturer tells the student how to pronounce “mouth” correctly. In online learning, the lecturer gives feedback by using audio feedback, and sometimes the JALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literacy), ISSN 2598-8530, September, Vol. 6 No. 2, 2022 223 lecturer gives feedback synchronously on a video conference platform when the class is running. Sometimes the lecturer also gives feedback by audio recording, then the lecturer gives the link of the audio recording to the students so they can access it whenever they want. The students prefer direct feedback from the lecturer because they can easy to understand where the mistakes they made. Instead of written feedback, the students prefer oral feedback because it seems more communicative and easier to understand. CONCLUSIONS Based on the research that has been conducted, the result of the research was the students have a positive perception of the lecturer’s feedback on the students’ speaking ability. It can be seen in the grand mean score of 3.65, which means this research has a positive perception. This research also proves that the lecturer’s feedback is important for the students because it helps the students in correcting their mistakes in practicing speaking English. In addition, the lecturer’s feedback also can motivate the students to practice speaking English better than before. According to this research, the researchers also found that the students prefer direct feedback from their lecturer because it is more communicative and make them easier to understand the lecturer’s feedback. The lecturer also has been creative in giving feedback during an online class. In addition, some interviewees mentioned that the lecturer used audio recording or gave direct feedback during the meeting through video conference. REFERENCES Agarwal, S., & Kaushik, J. S. (2020). Student’s perception of online learning during COVID pandemic. Indian Journal of Pediatrics, 87(7), 554. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12098-020-03327-7 Agung, A. S. N., & Surtikanti, M. W. (2020). Students’ perception of online learning during COVID-19 pandemic: A case study on the english students of STKIP pamane talino. SOSHUM : Jurnal Sosial Dan Humaniora, 10(2), 225–235. https://doi.org/10.31940/soshum.v10i2.1316 Amiti, F. (2020). Synchronous and asynchronous e-learning. European Journal of Open Education and E-Learning Studies, 5(2), 60–70. https://doi.org/10.46827/ejoe.v5i2.3313 Babbie, E. (1990). Survey research methods (2 ed). California: Wadsworth Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12098-020-03327-7 https://doi.org/10.31940/soshum.v10i2.1316 https://doi.org/10.46827/ejoe.v5i2.3313 JALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literacy), ISSN 2598-8530, September, Vol. 6 No. 2, 2022 224 Baron, R. (2020). Students’ perception on online application in speaking skill. VELES Voices of English Language Education Society, 4(2), 213–221. https://doi.org/10.29408/veles.v4i2.2543 Basa, I. M., Asrida, D., & Fadli, N. (2018). Contributing factors to the students’ Speaking Ability. Langkawi: Journal of The Association for Arabic and English, 3(2), 156. https://doi.org/10.31332/lkw.v3i2.588 Brown, D. H. (1994). Principles of language learning and teaching. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall Regent. Brown, H. D. (2004). Language assessment: Principle and classroom practices. Allyn &Bacon. Burns, A& Joyce, H. (1997). Focus on speaking. Sydney: National Center for English Language Teaching and Research. Cohen, Andrew D. 1990. Language learning: Insight for learners, teachers and researchers. New York: Newbury House Publishers. Cunningham Florez, M. (1999). Improving adult english language learners’ speaking skills. ERIC Digest, June 1999. (ED425304). National Center for ESL. Dehgani, Q., Izadpanah, S., & Shahnavaz, A. (2017). The effect of oral corrective feedback on beginner and low intermediate students‟ speaking achievement. 9(3), 279–294. Dhawan, S. (2020). Online learning: A panacea in the time of COVID-19 crisis. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 49(1), 5-22. Fahmi, M. A., & Cahyono, B. Y. (2021). EFL students’ perception on the use of grammarly and teacher feedback. JEES (Journal of English Educators Society), 6(1), 18–25. https://doi.org/10.21070/jees.v6i1.849 Ferris, D.R. (2002). Treatment of error in second language student writing. Gamlo, H.N. (2019). EFL learners’ preferences of corrective feedback in speaking activities. World Journal of English Language, 9(2). https://doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v9n2p28 Gay, L. R. (1981). Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and Application. London: Prentice-Hall International (UK) Ltd. Hair J.F., et al. (2020). Multivariate data analysis.Seventh Edition. New Jersey: Pearson Pentice Hall. Husein Umar. (2011). Metode penelitian untuk skripsi dan tesis bisnis. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers. https://doi.org/10.29408/veles.v4i2.2543 https://doi.org/10.31332/lkw.v3i2.588 https://doi.org/10.21070/jees.v6i1.849 https://doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v9n2p28 JALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literacy), ISSN 2598-8530, September, Vol. 6 No. 2, 2022 225 Hyland, Fiona. (2003). Focusing on form: Student engagement with teacher feedback. System, 31, 217-230. DOI:10.1016/S0346-251X(03)00021-6 Hyland, Fiona. (2011). The language learning potential of form-focused feedback on writing: Students‟ and teachers‟ perception. In R. M. Manchon (ed.), Learning-to- write and Writing-to-learn in an Additional Language (159-180). Amsterdam: Benjamins. Irwanto. (2002). Psikologi umum: buku panduan mahasiswa. Jakarta: PT Prenhallindo. Knight, B. (1992). “Assessing speaking skills: A workshop for teacher development”. ELT Journal 46(3), 294-302. Leki, Ilona. (1991). The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college level writing classes. Foreign Language Annals, 24, 203-218. Lewis Marylin. (2002). Giving feedback in language classes. The university of auckland: SEAMO Regional Language Centre. Lingga, Y. M., Yuliyanti, W., & Ningsih , Y. (2021). IMPROVING ENGLISH SPEAKING SKILL OF EFL CLASS BY USING VIDEO BLOG ON SOCIAL MEDIA. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature (JALL), 19-36. M, Easwaramoorthy and Fataneh Zarinpoush. (2006). Interviewing for research. Canada Volunteerism Initiative. Mahmoudi, S., & Mahmoudi, A. (2015). Internal and external factors affecting learning english as a foreign language. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 3(5). Michotte, A. (2019). The perception of causality (1 ed). London: Routledge. Miles, M.B & Huberman A.M. (1984). Analisis data kualitatif. Jakarta : Penerbit Universitas Indonesia. Minoni, E. Tomei, N. and Collini, M. (2017). The value of feedback in the learning process, “Teaching and Learning Together in Higher Education: Iss, 20, http://repository.brynmawr.edu/tIthe/vol1/iss20/8 Muyashoha, A.B. & Sugianto A. (2019). The students’ perception towards oral corrective feedback in speaking class. International Conference on English Language Teaching, 3(1). Nehe, B.M. (2021). Students’ perception on google meet video conferencing platform during English speaking class in pandemic era. Journal of English Education, 10(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(03)00021-6 http://repository.brynmawr.edu/tIthe/vol1/iss20/8 JALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literacy), ISSN 2598-8530, September, Vol. 6 No. 2, 2022 226 Perveen, A. (2016). Synchronous and asynchronous e-language learning: A case study of virtual university of pakistan. Open Praxis, 8(1), 21-39. Rakhmat, D. (2000). Psikologi komunikasi. Yogyakarta: Kanisius Skylar, A. A. (2009). A comparison of asynchronous online text-based lectures and synchronous interactive web conferencing lectures. Issues in Teacher Education, 18(2), 69-84. Smart, K L., & Cappel, J J. (2006). Students’ perception of online learning: A comparative study. Journal of Information Technology Education, 5(1), 201-219. Sugiyono. (2014). Metode penelitian kuantitatif, kualitatif dan r&d. Bandung: Penerbit Alfabeta. Venera, U. (2017). The design and use of speaking assesment rubrics. Journal of Education and Practice, 8(32), 135–141.