1 Journal of Research on English and Language Learning is licensed under aCreative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License eISSN 2721-5016 | pISSN 2721-5024 Journal of Research on English and Language Learning http://riset.unisma.ac.id/index.php/JREALL/user DOI: DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.33474/j-reall.v3i1.11481 Volume 3 | Number 1 | p. 1-15 Published on September 24th, 2021 Pedagogical content knowledge of english teacher on reading comprehension during pandemic covid-19 with online classes in senior high school R. Much. Aditya Rafianto Kusuma English education, Faculty Language and Arts, Universitas Negeri Surabaya. aditya17020084072@mhs.unesa.ac.id *) correspondence: aditya17020084072@mhs.unesa.ac.id ABSTRACT The research of Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) uses a qualitative approach. The purpose of this research is to obtain the Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) of prospective teachers of English Courses in terms of academic ability during the Covid-19 pandemic, as it is known that the pandemic has changed the structure of life that has been neatly arranged in this world. Data were analysed in the form of documents, observed, and interviewed with prospective English teachers on SMAN 15 SURABAYA. The technique of taking the data in this study was purposive sampling. The subjects in this study are teachers with more learning hours because in general they are categorized as professional teachers, then teachers with many teaching hours will be examined how the PCK is. The instruments in this study used CoRe and Vignette. The data analysis technique uses the Miles and Huberman model, namely data reduction, data presentation, and conclusions. Based on the results of the study, it shows that the pedagogical content knowledge of English teachers on reading comprehension during the pandemic still needs more creative and innovative adjustments, this is indicated by the number of teachers who are still hampered during learning hours. Keywords: pck, pedagogical content knowledge, reading comprehension INTRODUCTION Teachers are an important part of education. It is based on the principal role of the teachers, namely Education, instruction, leadership, preparation, evaluation, and assessment of childhood development students informal training, basic education, and post-secondary (Law No. 14 of 2005). So that a teacher/educator is a major learning factor that could determine the success of the lectures and practices process in the classroom. Educators are a significant factor in learning process development, this is because educators are teachers and managers of learning as well as mediators, figures, role models, and identification for students. Therefore, to achieve a good learning process, educators are required to have an effective learning system. Effective learning can be realized if educators apply appropriate learning strategies and analyze the character of students. Besides, effective learning will encourage students to express their ideas, be more creative and respect each other's opinions (Noula 2018). Based on this, the role of professional educators is needed to support the process of implementing effective learning. It shows that the professionalism of educators will affect learning. The two major theoretical aspects Which affected learning conceptions stem from behavioral and psychological emotional. These provide entirely different insights into the essence of learning. Behavioral psychologists consider learning to be measurable directly behavior that can be calculated behavioral students' responses. Learning is seen as a learning process guided and influenced by sequences of stimulus, reactions, feedback, and enhancement (Firmin and Phillips 2009). In learning activities, the teacher holds a central role, it is in control. Learning interactive or one- way, dominated by lectures or contains exploratory activities by students, centered on material or students, depending on planning done by the teacher. Teachers can make learning is very interesting http://riset.unisma.ac.id/index.php/JREALL/user http://riset.unisma.ac.id/index.php/JREALL/user http://riset.unisma.ac.id/index.php/JREALL/user http://dx.doi.org/10.33474/j-reall.v3i1.11481 R. Much. Aditya Rafianto Kusuma 2 Journal of Research on English and Language Learning is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License or boring, a teacher also can lead students to learn a material in-depth or just learn on the surface only, and the teacher can also arrange view learning interactions from the point of view of teacher behavior. This approach pays more attention to the things the teacher does, or the methods used by teachers when teaching (Nolan and Molla 2017). This view believes that teacher activity in the classroom very determines the learning success of his students. This approach encourages the development of correlational research that looks for relationships between applying certain methods with the effective achievement of learning objectives, for example, influence application of the x method to student achievement. This approach is also known as the 'product process' approach, an influential teacher learning method directly on student learning outcomes. This approach pays more attention to the things the teacher does, or the methods used by teachers when teaching. This view believes that teacher activity in the classroom very determines the learning success of his students. This approach encourages the development of correlational research that looks for relationships between applying certain methods with the effective achievement of learning objectives, for example, influence application of the x method to student achievement. This approach is also known as the 'product process' approach, an influential teacher learning method directly on student learning outcomes. The professionalism of educators in the 2013 Curriculum explains that educators who have professionalism in their knowledge and skills need to be retained which their capabilities to continue the learning process professionally sustain, strengthen and build. Quality teachers' self-efficacy their expertise, skills, and understanding of students (Segundo Marcos et al. 2020). The obligation to become a professional educator is something that every educator must have. Professional educators must be highly qualified and committed to performing their duties. The professionalism of educators can improve student learning outcomes (Nolan and Molla 2017). Educator professionalism needs to be developed by increasing pedagogical competence. The pedagogical abilities of educators can be seen in the field of PCK developed by scientists such as Shulman (1986), (Ball et al. 2008), (Oliver 2007), and others. However, in this study, researchers used 7 components formulated by Shulman, namely (1) Subject matter awareness (2) General awareness of pedagogy (3) Pedagogical material awareness (4) knowledge curriculum (5) learners and meet the requirements (6) Learning technique awareness (7) knowledge of the learning context. The perspective of educator knowledge is formulated by (Shulman 1987) into 4, namely: (1) Knowledge regarding material, (2) Pedagogical Content Knowledge, (3) Curricular Knowledge, (4) Content Examination. In this study, the researcher intends to study Pedagogical Content Knowledge. The definition of Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) according to (Mu et al. 2018) is a combination of pedagogical knowledge and material content, which is how an educator delivers material following the learning objectives that have been formulated by educators in the learning plan so that students are more interested in lessons and make it easier for participants students in understanding the material provided by educators. The above definition shows that PCK is closely related to pedagogical competence and professional competence. However, there is a gap that made this research to conduct, whereas, reading comprehension as a topic discuss related to pedagogical content knowledge because students who use a second language as English is known as EFL is from reading a lot, one must important thing EFL students needed to possess is reading comprehension. Reading skills are important for those EFL students because the main idea of literacy is primarily referring to the ability to absorb knowledge and pieces of information throughout reading activities and proficiency to communicate and obtain information. Reading is nearly appeared to be associated with people properties (Aydin et al. 2015). Therefore, the better their reading skills possess in their community and knowledge, the better their economic they have, because reading skill could give good benefits for those who can comprehend English, especially to pursue academic skills. A present study shows that the students' reading comprehension skills the better the students have in their science and knowledge achievement. However, traditionally the Second language interpretation analysis (as much, if not more thus, in first language comprehension studies), the emphasis on the language to be understood was hardly http://riset.unisma.ac.id/index.php/JREALL/user Pedagogical content knowledge of english teacher on reading comprehension during pandemic covid-19 with online classes in senior high school 3 Journal of Research on English and Language Learning is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License overwhelmingly not on all about the understanding (listener or reader). In this point of view, we consider that the corroboration was nearly typically about the vocabulary and not the interpretation (listener or reader). Here the point of view, each word, each well-formed sentence, and every well- formed text passage is said to "have" a meaning. Meaning is mostly conceived to be "in" the utterance or text, to have a separate, independent appearance from both the speaker or writer and the listener or reader. Also, in this view, failures to comprehend a non-defective communication are always attributed to language-specific deficits-perhaps a word was not in the reader's vocabulary, a rule of grammar was misapplied, an anaphoric cohesive tie was improperly coordinated, and so on. It is necessary to conduct this research because the researcher wants to discover the possibility of a significant knowledge gap about the role of pedagogies on reading comprehension. Persons with a better understanding of reading often get greater chances to promote a better career (Loewenberg Ball, Thames, and Phelps 2008). While these significant audience positions are, surprisingly, among 60 out of 61 countries, Indonesia's level of literacy is among the worst in the world. Learning is one of the principal components of the teaching and learning processes of English in Indonesia. Teachers have at least two levels of English reading skills: the beginning level and the reading level of understanding. The earlier stage of the lecture involves the introduction by teachers of spelling in separate alphabet orders to the students. Teachers typically teach students some basic English languages to bring phonemic information into perspective in the alphabet at this stage. furthermore, there has been an issued especially in Indonesia which led to a phenomenon that caused a lack of skill mastering the English language. More importantly, to master the English language students, have to capable of comprehending reading comprehension in Indonesian society which all of the students are EFL students who desperately need a more innovative approach to guide them to become the one who has mastered English. Therefore, three objectives were formulated in this study, that is the researcher wants to describe and explain the English teacher pedagogical content knowledge from core and vignette point of views. METHODS Based on aims of this paper, the researcher used a qualitative research design. The researcher uses qualitative research design because the objective of the research is to find out the analysis of pedagogical content knowledge of the English teacher reading comprehension in senior high school. Therefore, the result of this study will be in the form of words and descriptions. Qualitative research methods are the research methods used to examine natural objects, where the researcher is the key instrument, the data collection technique is carried out by triangulation (combined), data analysis is qualitative, and the results of qualitative research emphasize meaning rather than generalization (Sugiyono, 2015: 9). This study is expected to find out more about the English teacher's PCK. The data obtained from observations, interviews, field notes, and documentation are then described to produce a detailed description of the English teacher's PCK. With this method, researchers can deal directly with research subjects to explore data thoroughly and deeply, which will then be analyzed to see the PCK. Through this method, the data obtained can be described, studied, and presented as-is. Furthermore, in this study researchers used the following sampling techniques: a. purposive sampling with the target of English teachers who have experience learning hours more to be the subject. Researchers choose teachers with more learning hours because in general they are categorized as professional teachers, then teachers with many teaching hours will be examined how the PCK is. Moreover, the source of data for this research comes from discussion sessions with teachers and students about the difficulties and teaching methods of each educator who has been delivered the materials about reading comprehension and interviewed about topics related to research. This data will be in the form of transcription containing the student’s and teacher’s utterance, expression to answer all three research questions). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION http://riset.unisma.ac.id/index.php/JREALL/user R. Much. Aditya Rafianto Kusuma 4 Journal of Research on English and Language Learning is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License 1. The English teacher Pedagogical Content Knowledge seen from Core point of views. This part describes how teachers carry out teaching and learning activities in class according to learning styles, teaching arts, skills, competencies, curriculum, learning strategies and also the teacher's knowledge of the material to be delivered. The researcher conducted the observation towards two classes with two different learning hours on each teacher, to clarify this section, the researcher proves with some data based on the pedagogical of the teacher seen from the core that has been obtained, such as; I. Pedagogical Knowledge To analyse the pedagogical knowledge possessed by each subject, the researcher reduced data from observations, interviews, field notes, documentation, repeated observation of video documentation. a. Subject 1 FIRST MEETING Picture 1, subject 1 online class. At the beginning of the learning activity, it is unfortunate that the subject during the teaching and learning activities did not command or tell students to pray before starting teaching and learning activities in class. Then Subject 1 delivered the complete learning objectives. This learning objective is under the curriculum, namely identifying text. The following observation data indicated it. Picture 2. The observation guide for Subject 1 point number 1 in the first meeting. At the first meeting, Subject 1 delivering the material about identifying the main idea of the text. Then Subject 1 began to integrate first the difference between main ideas and topics, Subject 1 also explained in detail by showing explanatory examples of main ideas and topics briefly. It shows that Subject 1 integrates subject matter with other material that can support student understanding. As seen in the observation sheet point number 9 as follows. Picture 3. The observation guide for subject 1 point number 9 in the first meeting Subject 1 explains the differences and similarities regarding identifying text in detail and concisely, then Subject 1 guides some students who are in trouble and then returns to repeat explanations to all students. It shows that in delivering material, Subject 1 uses an expository strategy. The interview data shows that the strategy used by subject 1 uses the expository strategy. The results of the interview are as follows. Researcher: “What strategy do you use in teaching this material to your students??” Subject 1: “For the strategy or model I use expository” Researcher: “Why did you choose to use expository, is there a deeper reason for this?” http://riset.unisma.ac.id/index.php/JREALL/user Pedagogical content knowledge of english teacher on reading comprehension during pandemic covid-19 with online classes in senior high school 5 Journal of Research on English and Language Learning is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License Subject 1: “The problem is, because the right one to use it.” "In the expository, you explain and ask questions, because if you only explain, "wow, the children must be sleepy and that's impossible, later the students will get sleepy and the students won't understand" Researcher: “Is the expository strategy only explaining and asking questions?” Subject 1: “expository is all about explaining, asks, and also assignment” From the interview above, we can conclude that Subject 1 can be concluded that using an expository strategy to convey identifying text material is suitable to use this strategy because the strategy is not only explaining, but also by asking questions. Subject 1 also added that the expository strategy included explaining, asking questions, and assignments. Thus, the three steps Subject 1 did in learning according to the prepared lesson plans. After integrating the material of teaching and learning activities with the material on how to identify text, Subject 1 gave students an understanding of how to identify the main ideas in the text. Furthermore, Subject 1 then gave several questions about identifying text to students. Subject 1 monitors student 'performance by reviewing their assignment links in Microsoft Teams class to check students' answers. It is shown in the observation results of point number 6 as follows. Picture 4. The observation guide for subject 1 point number 6 in the first meeting The results of these observations indicate that the subjects approached the students one by one when the students worked on the exercises to overcome the students' misconceptions. In the teaching and learning activities, it was seen that some students were enthusiastic about the strategies used by subject 1, this can be seen when many students were active on how to find the main idea of the text from the questions Subject 1 had given to students. One of the students was seen immediately answering when teaching and learning activities in Microsoft Teams were running, several students were seen scrambling to answer the questions given by Subject 1 which was seen from the atmosphere of the online class which was very enthusiastic. However, some students are indeed difficult or feel they do not understand the assignment of the material provided by Subject 1. It can be when only the same students can answer questions on Subject 1 that have been given, as a result, these students feel they do not understand the material that ends. not very active when class teaching and learning activities take place. Furthermore, Subject 1 then explained problem-solving to find the text's main idea and explained it to students. Then after Subject 1 has finished explaining how to find the main idea of the text, Subject 1 allows students to ask about their difficulties regarding the material to find the text's main idea. It is unfortunate that during this session most students began to be silent, it is very inversely proportional to the time when the first question was given to students, during this session students who were seen to be active during the session answering the questions given in subject 1 were not seen in this session to ask questions or look like they wanted to. ask something to Subject 1. According to Subject 1, in this way, he can find out how far his students' misconceptions have been. It can be shown when the results of the interview with Subject 1 are as follows. Researcher: “With this expository strategy, can you know the extent of students' understanding, students' difficulties regarding the identifying text material, and their misconceptions?” Subject 1: "It's okay ", just now, for example, if I asked a student, I could know that the student had understood or not by the difference between the main idea and the topic I conveyed earlier". The interview results show results that confirm that by using the expository strategy, Subject 1 can find out the extent to which students understand and the difficulties of students regarding the material presented and their misconceptions by asking students. However, if it is seen more deeply from the learning activities that occur when Subject 1 asks students if there are things that are not yet clear, students tend to be silent and no one asks as if all the students in the class have understood the http://riset.unisma.ac.id/index.php/JREALL/user R. Much. Aditya Rafianto Kusuma 6 Journal of Research on English and Language Learning is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License material very clearly. So, if only by asking and with the condition that the student is just silent and no one asks, we do not know whether the student understands it or not. But to find out students' understanding, student difficulties, and misconceptions, Subject 1 could know when Subject 1 saw the results of working on the questions Subject 1 gave to students. Through this, Subject 1 can explain that the student has understood the material presented or not during the class teaching and learning activities. After several students were silent, no one asked questions, then Subject 1 continued the teaching and learning activities by conveying material differences between main ideas and topics and providing examples. First, Subject 1 displays a previous PowerPoint slide that explains the characteristics of the differences between the main idea with topics. Then, Subject 1 emphasizes to students that the main idea is a sentence that is long and more complex while topics are sentences that look shorter and simpler, then Subject 1 provides directions to students after reading to summarize them in sentences and also Subject 1 explain that students identify a sentence that has repetition in the reading. Next, Subject 1 gives examples of each difference between the main idea and topics, for main idea examples such as; cats having nine lives. While for example topics such as; cats, cars, bikes. Subject 1 again emphasized that the main idea has a longer and more complex sentence. Then Subject 1 explains to students to understand the reading as a whole, find and identify the main ideas, and the topics listed on the questions. As it appears on the field the following note below. Picture 5. Subject 1 field notes on how to determine main idea of the text The field notes succeeded in strengthening the case in which Subject 1, in delivering the material, chose to use the expository. Moreover, it is shown by the real form of the Subject 1 always delivers verbally first so that students who take part in teaching and learning activities in class only need to understand every explanation of the material described by Subject 1, students do not need to bother to cooperate individually and looking for how to find the main idea of the text can be found without going nowhere. Then Subject 1 explains the main points to find the main idea, namely, Subject 1 describes some important points to break down into 4 elements to make it easier for students to find main ideas including, looking for if there are sentences that are repeated in each paragraph as an example of "cat" the sentence could be as the main idea of the text, furthermore subject 1 explains that the main idea has a complete sentence in the form of subject and predicate, these two elements are very obligatory to be included in the main idea if the subject and predicate are not listed in the main idea, likely, the sentence is not the main idea of the text. The following picture can prove it. Picture 6. Subject 1 documentation explains the 4 important points By providing important points that were explained in Subject 1 for students, was less effective for students to pay attention, because what was done by Subject 1 resulted in a lack of development in the student's mindset on the material Subject 1 conveyed. Therefore, maybe it would be nice, Subject http://riset.unisma.ac.id/index.php/JREALL/user Pedagogical content knowledge of english teacher on reading comprehension during pandemic covid-19 with online classes in senior high school 7 Journal of Research on English and Language Learning is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License 1 provides a prior stimulus by giving several questions and exercise related to the material presented so that at least it makes it easier for students to think first with a high possibility of being able to remember the same material if they encounter the same questions and material at a later time. Furthermore, Subject 1 provides practice questions about finding the main idea and a topic in the story questions given by subject 1. Subject 1 gives time for students to complete, read and understand the contents of the reading in the story. Subject 1 also briefly explained the background of the story on the questions that had been given so that students could conclude about the situation that occurred in the story. It can be seen when students understand and read the story questions given by Subject 1, it can be seen that Subject 1 also provides directions to students about their understanding of the questions they have read. It directly shows the teaching strategy of Subject 1 to overcome student misconceptions when teaching and learning activities are running, this can be proven by the following observation sheet. Picture 7. Subject 1 observation After explaining and giving direction to the students' story questions, then Subject 1 emphasizes again that in the main idea there are several repetitions of words that can be classified into main ideas, and main ideas themselves have complex and long sentences. Then subject one closed the teaching and learning activities on that day but it is very unfortunate because of this corona pandemic that the spiritual interaction of teachers with students is reduced, this is indicated by the absence of a closing prayer at the end of the class when the online class is taking place and ends. SECOND MEETING Picture 8, subject 1 online class It was the same as during the first meeting, at the second meeting the students were also very less aware of turning on the camera during the meeting, so it was difficult for the subject to recognize the personality of the student. At the beginning of this second meeting, again Subject 1 was due to the impact of online classes, Subject 1 did not start the online class by praying first, this is very unfortunate because of the morals accepted by students at school. Then, Subject 1 tries to remember the memory of students related to the material that has been delivered by the previous Subject 1, this is to provide a stimulus to the students' thinking power to return to remember the material that has been delivered at the previous meeting. Subject 1 reviewed the previous material, namely identifying the text's main idea by giving story questions to students and being asked to do it to recall the previous material. In this way, what has been done by Subject 1 can retrieve students 'memories and students' understanding of the material about Identifying the Main Idea of The Text. After giving the story questions to students to work on, then Subject 1 gives time to answer questions about the main ideas contained in the story questions that have been given by, at that time, subject 1 provides directions in case of misconceptions to http://riset.unisma.ac.id/index.php/JREALL/user R. Much. Aditya Rafianto Kusuma 8 Journal of Research on English and Language Learning is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License students who have answered questions which have been given to check, and investigate these misconceptions. However, it is very unfortunate that Subject 1 was too carried away when reviewing the previous material until the teaching and learning activities took place in this second meeting which led subject 1 to forget to explain the learning objectives to be achieved when the meeting took place. It is reinforced by the observation sheet in point number 1 as follows. Picture 9. Subject 1 observation Due to subject 1 while on the second meeting did not explain the learning objectives to be achieved for students on that day, the researcher tried to check the learning objectives on the lesson plans designed by subject 1 so that researcher could find out what students had achieved in the second meeting. Picture 10. Subject 1 second meeting learning objectives Moreover, Subject 1 began to explain the narrative text material to the students who were in this second meeting. At the beginning of understanding the material, Subject 1 gave a reading story to students for them to read and understand. Furthermore, after Subject 1 allowed students to read and understand, then Subject 1 asked the students questions about who had a good character in the story about a kingdom. It is very unfortunate, students' enthusiasm to answer about narrative text material is very lacking, it can be seen when Subject 1 provides the opportunity to answer questions, some students just stay silent, waiting for Subject 1 first to remind students to participate in this. After a while of waiting for students to answer in the end, there was one student who was able to answer the question of Subject 1, he answered with "Prince Anthium and Prince Kobe have a good character in the story". Then Subject 1 gives additional points to these students so that several other students participate for an active spirit of response when the teaching and learning class is taking place. In this case, it can be strengthened by the results of the observation sheet which explains that Subject 1 looks active in asking questions to see students' understandings and misconceptions such as the following observation sheet. Picture 11. Subject 1 Observation sheet. Then, Subject 1 continued the question which was also closely related to the first question that Subject 1 had asked. Subject 1 poses a question with "who are the characters who have evil traits in the story". However, it is unfortunate that almost all students did not answer the question of Subject 1, again with the same students when answering the first question that could answer the question from Subject 1. In the narrative text material for this second meeting, it can be seen that Subject 1 tries to dig up student information by asking questions related to social functions, linguistic elements, and also the structure of the text contained in the story questions. At this second meeting. It could prove that Subject 1 still used the same strategy at the first meeting, namely the expository, the results of the interview showed the following; Researcher: What is the strategy that you use in this second meeting, ma'am?" http://riset.unisma.ac.id/index.php/JREALL/user Pedagogical content knowledge of english teacher on reading comprehension during pandemic covid-19 with online classes in senior high school 9 Journal of Research on English and Language Learning is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License Subject 1: “It's the same as the first meeting.” Researcher: “Why, mam, may I know??” Subject 1: “Yes, because this strategy is appropriate for the X-IPS class, if you use another learning model, I don't think it's suitable for them.” Researcher: “ooh, okey, thank you so much mam” In addition, Subject 1 did not provide many questions for the exercises in this second meeting, for students, only a few questions were given to students. Then after giving story questions to students, Subject 1 provides additional assignments for students to make a text about narrative for their assignment. Then, Subject 1 ended the class with greetings and ended with reading a prayer. b. Subject 2 FIRST MEETING Picture 12, subject 2 online class At this first meeting, it is the same as the situations of the online class on Subject 1, most students find it difficult to have the awareness to turn on the camera when the meeting starts. At the beginning of the teaching and learning activities in the first meeting, subject 2 began teaching and learning activities with greetings and prayers even though the class was still in online classes due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Subject 2 at this first meeting explained the recount text material, in this case, Subject 2 had explained the learning objectives to students, this could be strengthened by the observation sheet as follows. Picture 13, subject 2 observation sheet. Furthermore, at the beginning of this teaching and learning activity Subject 2 explained to students what they would learn, namely; recount text. First, Subject 2 stimulated information about the students' knowledge by asking "have you ever heard of Recount text?". Regarding this, most students still do not know about recount text. After several students answered that they did not know what recount text was, Subject 2 then displayed a shared screen about the recount text explanation to explain to the students. Then, Subject 2 explains to students that recount text is a text which retells events or experiences in the past, it has a purpose is either informing or entertaining the readers. Furthermore, Subject 2 explains to the students that, because the recount text talks about experiences that occurred in the past, the sentences used are simple past tense. Then, Subject 2 tried to dig up students' memories by asking students about the structure of using the simple past tense, but this, response was very far from expectations because there were still many students who did not know grammar well, this could be strengthened in field notes during the activity. teaching and learning Subject 2 take place. Picture 14, subject 2 field notes. http://riset.unisma.ac.id/index.php/JREALL/user R. Much. Aditya Rafianto Kusuma 10 Journal of Research on English and Language Learning is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License The results of these field notes, reinforce the results in the field that some students still often make mistakes in using grammar when Subject 2 allows students to tell. To overcome the difficulties in these students, Subject 2 explains that to use the past must use the simple past tense must use verb 2, and subject 2 provides examples of sentences using verb 2, after solving the difficulties students use the structure of the language Subject 2 continues the material by explaining the definition of Recount text. Subject 2 explains the definition of narrative to students that Recount is a text that aims to inform or entertain readers, in this case, Subject 2 deepens the understanding of informing or entertaining, Subject 2 explains that entertaining, in this case, has its meaning that your writing has its value for the students. readers to have their moral value for them. After explaining, Subject 2 provided the opportunity for students to ask about the material in the first day's meeting whether there were still those who felt they did not understand or were difficult to understand. The thing that should be appreciated in-class Subject 2 is the students who participate in asking questions very high, this can be seen when Subject 2 explains a question from one of the students, it can be seen that some students try to cut the explanation often because students have questions that are not clear enough. for Subject 2 please explain. That, in this case, is an attempt made by Subject 2 to investigate misconceptions and difficulties in students, as seen in point number 7 on the observation sheet. Picture 15, observation sheet points 7 Then, after explaining some of the questions from students, subject 2 continued the material by explaining that there is a generic structure that students must consider to identify questions in the narrative text. Among them orientation; 1. set the scene and introduce the participants (it answers the question: who, when, what, and where). 2. Complication; tells the problems of the story and how the main characters solve them. 3. Resolution; the crisis is resolved, for better or worse. Then Subject 2 returned to giving questions to students, but no students asked questions and Subject 2 felt they had understood the material presented. furthermore, Subject 2 informs students to read some simple recount text related to activities/incidents/events. Then, Subject 2 informs students to read the text they have read. After that, students imitate examples of pronunciation of sentences with the guidance of Subject 2. In this case, Subject 2 asks students to find main ideas, detailed information, and certain information from the text they have read. In this stage, it seems strong that Subject 2 uses the Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition, this is confirmed by the results of the interview which show that Subject 2 also shows that Subject 2 uses the cooperative teaching and learning strategy. The interview is as follows. Researcher: “What's a good strategy for teaching today's meeting, ma'am?” Subject 2: “Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition” Researcher: “Are there any advantages to using this strategy, Mam?” Subject 2: “because the strategy is suitable for my students in this class, if I use this strategy, it can be easy for students to solve story problems and again my dominance in this class is slightly reduced so it's easier for me to save energy” Through the results of the interview, the researcher can emphasize that Subject 2 wants students in the class to be more able to understand the meaning of the story problems contained in the story questions given and also the strategies applied in the class are very easy to implement so that could save the energy of Subject 2 in teaching. Then Subject 2 closes the teaching and learning activities on that day and closes the meeting with greetings and prayers. 2. The English teacher Pedagogical Content Knowledge seen from Vignette point of view This section explains how the two subjects respond, provide suggestion, input based on subject content knowledge related to assignments of the students. http://riset.unisma.ac.id/index.php/JREALL/user Pedagogical content knowledge of english teacher on reading comprehension during pandemic covid-19 with online classes in senior high school 11 Journal of Research on English and Language Learning is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License Furthermore, this provides further information regarding assignment material related to subject competence when providing feedback and reviews to students, this can be proven by the data that has been obtained such as follows; II. Content Knowledge To analyse the content knowledge possessed by each subject, the researcher used the data obtained by each subject, the researcher used the data obtained from the vignette. Vignette is data obtained from subject feedback regarding student answers and interviews with researchers. a. Subject 1 Vignette first meeting case These are the following result of the feedback on subject 1 regarding student answers to vignette case 1 the first meeting of material identifying main idea of the text. Picture 16, subject 1 comment Judging from the comments of subject 1 regarding Student 1 who has been subject 1, give corrections through a soft file that has been sent through the Microsoft team. It can be seen that according to subject 1, Student 1 is almost a little right in his answer to the story about subject 1, but the answers that have been written by Student 1 do not cover correctly the topics contained in the story problem. The researcher then interviewed with subject 1 to clarify the justification. Reseacher: “For Student 1 answer, did there be confusion when answering??” Subjek 1: “Student 1 answer is almost correct, but he hasn't fully covered the topic of reading yet", "Student 1 didn't read carefully at the first idea of the story.” It can be concluded that, Student 1 was almost correct in answering the questions from Subject 1, however, Student 1 lack of accuracy would result in an incorrect answer. It also proves that Subject 1 has a deep understanding of the material that has been conveyed to students. Vignette second meeting case These are the following result of Subject 1's feedback regarding students' answers to the case vignette for all of the two narrative text materials. http://riset.unisma.ac.id/index.php/JREALL/user R. Much. Aditya Rafianto Kusuma 12 Journal of Research on English and Language Learning is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License Picture 17, subject 1 comment In this case, it can be seen that when Subject 1 assigns students to practice making a narrative text to students, subject 1 comment that the text made by Student 2 is almost perfect, but also Subject 1 has doubts about the text made by the student 1. It is evidenced by interviews with subject 1 as follows. Researcher: “What do you think about the text made by Student 2, remembering that the text that was made was very creative?” Subject 1: “Student 2 is indeed known to be good at writing, but she is also known to be difficult to understand text structure or grammar… so I'm not entirely sure about the text she made.” Researcher: “then to overcome doubts to students, what do you do?” Subject 1: “I prefer to give appreciation, but for the value I will be the same as the average value of other students, bro, so that he doesn't feel down and not confident” It can be concluded that, for the assignment problem in this second meeting, Subject 1 experienced a few difficulties in the authenticity of the assignments assigned by students, Subject 1 was difficult to classify some students who fully understood the assignment and material to be delivered, which also underlies the occurrence of the obstacles. because teaching and learning activities are still running online, educators have a little problem supervising and giving student assignments. B. Subject 2 Vignette first meeting case These are the following result of the feedback of Subject 2 on the assignments related to the recount text material. Picture 18, subject 2 comment In this case it can be concluded that the results of the answers completed by Student 2 still have a weak understanding of students regarding the lack of observing the information contained in the given text, Student 2 also does not pay attention to the main ideas contained in the text. And there is also confusion in grammar, which indeed must be resolved by Subject 2 because since the beginning of teaching and learning activities began when students were asked to explain past events, some students still experienced grammatical errors which made students hampered in balancing teaching http://riset.unisma.ac.id/index.php/JREALL/user Pedagogical content knowledge of english teacher on reading comprehension during pandemic covid-19 with online classes in senior high school 13 Journal of Research on English and Language Learning is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License and learning activities. Therefore, to clarify the comments written by Subject 2, the researcher interviewed with Subject 2. Researcher: “for the answer from this Student 2, how come, ma'am”? Subject 2: “Student 2 is indeed good, but she is too hasty, it can be seen when she answered question number 2 that it is clearly contained in the main idea of the text, but viola failed to pay attention to that idea”. Researcher: “Is it true that Student 2 is also lacking in grammatical understanding?” Subject2: “Yes, that's right, sir, almost all students in X-IPS3 are a little difficult to understand grammar” It can be concluded that, the student 2 is not very good at observing the main part of a main idea of a text given by Subject 2. As a result, it makes Student 2 difficult to answer the question points related to the main idea in the text. Furthermore, there is an issue that is burdensome to Student2 namely the lack of understanding about using text structures or grammatical errors that are still very for Student2. This creates a fundamental obstacle for Students2 to understand the assignments given, especially observing the main ideas related to the text, in this context Subject2 tries to overcome this by providing justification through the power point slides given to make it easier for students to understand the material given. However, Subject 2 has the belief that students from X-IPS3 can still be given understanding by always providing practice questions and some brainstorming so that students begin to find an understanding of the material. CONCLUSION Based on the result and discussion above, it is concluded that the pedagogical content knowledge of the English language teacher is as follows. 1.In starting teaching and learning activities, especially subject 1 did not convey the learning objectives at the second meeting, this was in comparison with subject 2 which had conveyed the learning objectives well and clearly. 2.Lack of awareness between the two subjects to start the class with greetings and prayers at the beginning of the online class. 3.Based on the RPP designed by the two subjects, it can be seen that both of them are very good at making lesson plans, and also very clear and in accordance with the current curriculum, 4.Both subjects have high knowledge of the material presented, namely identifying main ideas, narrative text, and recount text, although in subject 2 there is confusion in grammatical errors that are conveyed when allowing students to tell past events. 5.Both subjects apply to learn strategies that fully support their students in online classes. 6.With the strategy implemented, each subject can overcome and know the misconceptions, difficulties and social experiences experienced by students in their class. 7.In teaching and learning activities, the two subjects provide the opportunity to ask questions to find out misconceptions between students in teaching and learning activities. 8.There are difficulties in assigning and monitoring student performance, because the class runs online. 9.The behaviour of the two subjects to determine the extent to which students effect another student is to provide exercise questions for students, The creativity carried out by the two Subjects in this online class is indeed a little lacking, it seems that the active interacting is far from enough. REFERENCES http://riset.unisma.ac.id/index.php/JREALL/user R. Much. Aditya Rafianto Kusuma 14 Journal of Research on English and Language Learning is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License Anita, Yuli, and Dias Andris Susanto. 2017. “The Teaching Analysis of Reading Comprehension: A Case of the Eight Grade Students of Smp Pgri 01 Semarang.” ETERNAL (English Teaching Journal) 4(1). Aydin, Sevgi et al. 2015. “The Nature and Development of Interaction among Components of Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Practicum.” Teaching and Teacher Education 46: 37–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.10.008. Bakar, Ramli. 2018. “The Influence of Professional Teachers on Padang Vocational School Students’ Achievement.” Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences 39(1): 67–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kjss.2017.12.017. Berry, Amanda, John Loughran, and Jan H. van Driel. 2008. “Revisiting the Roots of Pedagogical Content Knowledge.” International Journal of Science Education 30(10): 1271–79. Caccamise, Donna, and Lynn Snyder. 2005. “Theory and Pedagogical Practices of Text Comprehension.” Topics in Language Disorders 25(1): 5–20. Cutts, Quintin et al. 2012. “The Abstraction Transition Taxonomy: Developing Desired Learning Outcomes through the Lens of Situated Cognition.” ICER’12 - Proceedings of the 9th Annual International Conference on International Computing Education Research: 63–70. Falkner, Katrina, and Judy Sheard. 2019. The Cambridge Handbook of Computing Education Research Pedagogic Approaches. Finney, John, and Chris Philpott. 2010. “Informal Learning and Meta-Pedagogy in Initial Teacher Education in England.” British Journal of Music Education 27(1): 7–19. Firmin, Michael W., and Annie Phillips. 2009. “A Qualitative Study of Families and Children Possessing Diagnoses of ADHD.” Journal of Family Issues 30(9): 1155–74. Garritz, Andoni. 2014. “Pedagogical Content Knowledge.” Encyclopedia of Science Education: 1–4. Gelfuso, Andrea. 2017. “Facilitating the Development of Preservice Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge of Literacy and Agentic Identities: Examining a Teacher Educator’s Intentional Language Choices during Video-Mediated Reflection.” Teaching and Teacher Education 66: 33–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.03.012. Hempel-Jorgensen, Amelia, Teresa Cremin, Diane Harris, and Liz Chamberlain. 2018. “Pedagogy for Reading for Pleasure in Low Socio-Economic Primary Schools: Beyond ‘Pedagogy of Poverty’?” Literacy 52(2): 86–94. Huber, Mary T., and Pat Hutchings. 2004. “Integrative Learning: Mapping the Terrain.” Carnegie Foundation: 1–32. JELLIFFE. 1908. “The Psychology and Pedagogy of Reading.” The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 35(12): 797. Loewenberg Ball, Deborah, Mark Hoover Thames, and Geoffrey Phelps. 2008. “Content Knowledge for Teaching: What Makes It Special?” Journal of Teacher Education 59(5): 389–407. Longa, Víctor M. 2006. “The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (Review).” The Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La revue canadienne de linguistique 51(1): 60–62. Ma, Lihong, Haifeng Luo, and Leifeng Xiao. 2021. “Perceived Teacher Support, Self-Concept, Enjoyment and Achievement in Reading: A Multilevel Mediation Model Based on PISA 2018.” Learning and Individual Differences 85(October 2020): 101947. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2020.101947. Mu, Guanglun Michael, Wei Liang, Litao Lu, and Dongfang Huang. 2018. “Building Pedagogical Content Knowledge within Professional Learning Communities: An Approach to Counteracting Regional Education Inequality.” Teaching and Teacher Education 73: 24–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.03.006. Nolan, Andrea, and Tebeje Molla. 2017. “Teacher Confidence and Professional Capital.” Teaching and Teacher Education 62: 10–18. Noula, Ioanna. 2018. “Critical Thinking and Challenges for Education for Democratic Citizenship: An Ethnographic Study in Primary Schools in Greece.” Educacao and Realidade 43(3): 865–86. Özgür, Hasan. 2020. “Relationships between Teachers’ Technostress, Technological Pedagogical http://riset.unisma.ac.id/index.php/JREALL/user Pedagogical content knowledge of english teacher on reading comprehension during pandemic covid-19 with online classes in senior high school 15 Journal of Research on English and Language Learning is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License Content Knowledge (TPACK), School Support and Demographic Variables: A Structural Equation Modeling.” Computers in Human Behavior 112(July). Pendidikan, Menteri, D A N Kebudayaan, and Republik Indonesia. 2013. “Menteri Pendidikan Dan Kebudayaan Republik Indonesia.” : 2013–15. Reading, A. 2000. “Improving Students’ Reading..., Bening Savita, FKIP UMP, 2015 8.” : 8–27. Sarkim, T. 2015. “Pedagogical Content Knowlegde : Sebuah Konstruk Untuk Memahami Kinerja Guru Di Dalam Pembelajaran.” Prosiding Pertemuan Ilmiah HFI Jateng dan DIY XXIX 53(25 April): 7–12. https://repository.usd.ac.id/4429/1/2371_FULL- Makalah+Utama+II_+Pedagogical+Content+Knowlegde_+Sebuah.pdf. Segall, Avner. 2004. “Revisiting Pedagogical Content Knowledge: The Pedagogy of Content/the Content of Pedagogy.” Teaching and Teacher Education 20(5): 489–504. Segundo Marcos, Rafael Ibán, Verónica López Ferández, María Teresa Daza González, and Jessica Phillips-Silver. 2020. “Promoting Children’s Creative Thinking through Reading and Writing in a Cooperative Learning Classroom.” Thinking Skills and Creativity 36(January): 100663. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100663. Simon, Beth, and Quintin Cutts. 2012. “Education Peer Instruction: A Teaching Method to Foster Deep Understanding.” Communications of the ACM 55(2): 27–29. Suryanto. 2017. “An Investigation on English Reading Comprehension Problems in Indonesian Cultural Contexts.” The 1st International Conference on Education, Science, Art and Technology (July): 200–205. https://ojs.unm.ac.id/icesat/article/download/3738/2135. Uzmanoǧlu, Selçuk et al. 2010. “Evaluation of Educational and Technical Structure at Vocational Schools.” Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 2(2): 3447–51. http://riset.unisma.ac.id/index.php/JREALL/user