SMART Journal Volume 2 No.2, Agustus 2016 Hlm. 74-84 74 Published in: http://ejournal.stkipmpringsewu-lpg.ac.id/index.php/smart English Department of STKIP Muhammadiyah Pringsewu Lampung STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PROJECT BASED LEARNING IN ENTERPRENEURSHIP CLASS Rahmatika Kayyis English Department, STKIP Muhammadiyah Pringsewu email: jengkayz@yahoo.com Abstract Project based learning is teaching method that offer learner autonomy and freedom to be enggaged with their learning activity. From that also the learner can learn their language (L2) by doing their project conciously or unconciously.Project-based learning was suceed to be implemented in the class of enterpreneurship class. In this project, 62 students were divided into 31 pairs and asked to do the project on building their own bussiness. The bussiness should be based on language skills. The data were collected mainly from students’ essays, writen at the end of semester, on the advantages and disadvantages of using project-based learning in classroom. The data were then analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively. The quantitative analysis was first used for assessing the responses obtained from the essays; and secondly, the qualitative analysis provided the evaluation and interpretation of the figures. The results showed that most students appreciated the use of PBL in the classroom because the method made them to be more independent in learning of how to teach using English and use their talent in creating bussiness.Beside this also evoke the students willingness to do their project in creating bussiness, English courses. Keywords: project, teaching and learning method, enterpreneursihp, bussiness 1. INTRODUCTION Various curriculums that has been implemented in STKIP, there is one subject that being taught that can not be replaced from the curriculum that enterpreneurship subject. The objective of teaching learning in this sibject may change, but the essence is still the same. For students in English education, the enterpreneurship class existed to evoke the willingness of doing bussiness. Realize it or not, the chance of fresh-graduated to be recruited as a teacher or goverment employees. The chance should be created by optimalizing the studnts autonomy to create their own bussiness in the class. Learner autonomy has been a major area of interest in foreign language (FL) teaching for some 30 years. In aplying the learner autonomy there are some aspects that should be considered. Sinclair & lamb (2000) similarly suggests 13 aspects of mailto:jengkayz@yahoo.com SMART Journal Volume 2 No.2, Agustus 2016 Hlm. 74-84 75 Published in: http://ejournal.stkipmpringsewu-lpg.ac.id/index.php/smart English Department of STKIP Muhammadiyah Pringsewu Lampung learner autonomy which „appear to have been recognized and broadly accepted by the language teaching profession, those are: 1. Autonomy is a construct of capacity 2. Autonomy involves a willingness on the part of the learner to take responsibility for their own learning 3. The capacity and willingness of learners to take such responsibility is not necessarily innate 4. Complete autonomy is an idealistic goal 5. There are degrees of autonomy 6. The degrees of autonomy are unstable and variable 7. Autonomy is not simply a matter of placing learners in situations where they have to be independent 8. Developing autonomy requires conscious awareness of the learning process – i.e. conscious reflection and decision-making 9. Promoting autonomy is not simply a matter of teaching strategies 10. Autonomy can take place both inside and outside the classroom 11. Autonomy has a social as well as an individual dimension 12. The promotion of autonomy has a political as well as psychological dimension 13. Autonomy is interpreted differently by different cultures Many researches have been conducted to investigate the benefit of applying the learner autonomy in class. Camilleri (2007) presents questionnaire data collected from 328 teachers in six European contexts (Malta, The Netherlands, Belorussia, Poland, Estonia and Slovenia). The instrument used consisted of 13 items each asking about the extent to which learners, according to the teachers, should be involved in decisions about a range of learning activities, such as establishing the objectives of a course or selecting course content. Although this project was supported by the European Centre for Modern Languages, it is unclear what proportion of the participating teachers actually taught languages (some of the Netherlands sample, for example, taught Economics). In terms of the findings, teachers were found to be positive about involving learners in a range of activities, such as deciding on the position of desks, periodically assessing themselves and working out learning procedures. In contrast, teachers were not positive about learner involvement in the selection of textbooks and deciding on the time and place of lessons. SMART Journal Volume 2 No.2, Agustus 2016 Hlm. 74-84 76 Published in: http://ejournal.stkipmpringsewu-lpg.ac.id/index.php/smart English Department of STKIP Muhammadiyah Pringsewu Lampung The latter findings are hardly surprising given that many respondents worked in state schools. Camileri Grima (2007) replicated this study with a group of 48 respondents made up of student teachers and practicing teachers of modern languages in Malta. She compared her results to the Malta cohort in the original study and found much similarity both in terms of the positive overall views expressed by teachers as well as in the specific aspects of autonomy they were more and less supportive of. The more recent group of teachers, though, were seen to be more positive than those in the earlier study towards particular aspects of autonomy, such as learners setting their own short-term objectives, their involvement in the selection of materials, and self-assessment. The instrument from the above studies was used once again by Balçıkanlı (2010: 98) to examine the views about learner autonomy of 112 student teachers of English in Turkey. Additionally, 20 participants were interviewed in focus groups of four teachers each. The results suggested that the student teachers were positively disposed towards learner autonomy – i.e. they were positive about involving students in decisions about a wide range of classroom activities, though, again, they were less positive about involving students in decisions about when and where lessons should be held. Rather uncritically perhaps, given the limited teaching experience the respondents had and the typically formal nature of state sector schooling in Turkey, the article reports that „these student teachers felt very comfortable with asking students to make such decisions‟. More realistically, though, the study does conclude by asking about the extent to which respondents‟ positive theoretical beliefs about promoting learner autonomy would actually translate into classroom practices. This observation reminds us that in using self-report strategies such as questionnaires and interviews to study teachers‟ beliefs we must always be mindful of the potential gap between beliefs elicited theoretically and teachers‟ actual classroom practices. Al-Shaqsi (2009) was another survey of teachers‟ beliefs about learner autonomy. This was conducted with 120 teachers of English in state schools in Oman. A questionnaire was devised specifically for this study and it asked respondents about (a) the characteristics of autonomous learners (b) their learners‟ ability to carry out a number of tasks (each of which was assumed to be an indicator of learner autonomy – e.g. deciding when to use a dictionary or identifying their own weaknesses) and (c) how learner autonomy SMART Journal Volume 2 No.2, Agustus 2016 Hlm. 74-84 77 Published in: http://ejournal.stkipmpringsewu-lpg.ac.id/index.php/smart English Department of STKIP Muhammadiyah Pringsewu Lampung might be promoted. The three characteristics of autonomous learners most often identified by teachers were that they can use computers to find information, use a dictionary and ask the teacher to explain when they do not understand. The teachers in this study also assessed their learners positively on all of the indicators of learner autonomy they were presented with, with the three most highly rated being asking the teacher to explain when something is not clear, giving their point of view on topics in the classroom and using the dictionary well. Finally, teachers made several suggestions for promoting learner autonomy; what was interesting about these is that in several cases the connection between the pedagogical activity being proposed and learner autonomy was not evident; for example, teachers suggested that they could use different types of quizzes and challenging tasks, increase learner talking time or reward learners for good performance. Interviews would have been useful in this study to explore the connections that teachers felt there were between such activities and the development of learner autonomy. The final study we discuss here is Martinez (2008), who examined, using a predominantly qualitative methodology, the subjective theories about learner autonomy of 16 student teachers of French, Italian and Spanish. These students were studying at a university in Germany and were taking a 32-hour course about learner autonomy at the time of the study. Data were collected through questionnaires, interviews, and observations during the course; copies of the instruments were, though, not included with the paper and it was not possible therefore to critique or draw on these in our study. Results showed that the student teachers had positive attitudes towards learner autonomy and that these were informed largely by their own experiences as language learners. The conceptions of autonomy held by the student teachers generally reflected the view that (a) it is a new and supposedly better teaching and learning methodology; (b) it is equated with individualization and differentiation; (c) it is an absolute and idealistic concept; (d) it is associated with learning without a teacher. There are many kinds of teaching methodology which can be employed to promote learner autonomy: using process syllabus (Widdowson, 1990), employing self-access learning (Jordan, 1997; Lynch, 2001), involving taskbased and project- based learning (Robinson, 1991; Robinson et al., 2001), integrating technology in SMART Journal Volume 2 No.2, Agustus 2016 Hlm. 74-84 78 Published in: http://ejournal.stkipmpringsewu-lpg.ac.id/index.php/smart English Department of STKIP Muhammadiyah Pringsewu Lampung teaching and learning (Todd, 2001; Warschauer, 2002). Project Based Learning is mentioned as the teaching methodology that promote learner autonomy. Kalabzova (2015: 1) states that Project Based Learning (PBL) represents nowadays an approach to learning which may meet several students´ needs. For one thing it offers a skill-based practice for another it symbolizes the focus on students who should become involved, show inner motivation and creativity. The main advantage is that students deal with real subject matter by working on the real problems. It emerges that this sense of solving an authentic difficulty, in the area of group work and cooperation experience has the potential to help students learn. However, project work comprises quite a complex topic since its implementation and usage at schools lays increased demands both on organization and psychological aspects of teachers „work. According to Beckett (2002: 54)in the context of secondlanguage (L2) education, PBL has a variety of terms that he finds interchangeable, such as project work, project method, project approach, project- oriented approach or project-based instruction. He claims that this method was firstly applied in L2 setting more than 20 years ago in order to provide learners with chances “to interact and communicate with each other and with native speakers of the target language in authentic context.” Moreover, Ribé and Vidal (1993) see PBL as a chance for students with poor linguistic skills to be in project work actively participating as they may make use of their other talents in other non- linguistic tasks and consequently improve their confidence and general attitude towards language learning. However, Haines (1989) states that one should also mention the possibly challenging issues that PBL brings along in the area of language teaching. To begin with, most teachers are afraid of students speaking their mother tongue instead of using English. In such case, Hutchinson acknowledges that this is very probably to happen mainly during the teamwork, nevertheless, he advises not to considerate it as a drawback but as a natural phenomenon about which there is no need to worry as long as the final product is in English, students are provided with useful translation activities from various source materials and they have the opportunities to practice productive skills in English. Then, some teachers express their concerns about the loss of their firm control over the weaker students so that they would be not able to cope with the work. This again might happen, yet, with the right teacher´s attitude, solid regular class preparation and SMART Journal Volume 2 No.2, Agustus 2016 Hlm. 74-84 79 Published in: http://ejournal.stkipmpringsewu-lpg.ac.id/index.php/smart English Department of STKIP Muhammadiyah Pringsewu Lampung the responsible working and social environment, those students are not neglected but either incorporated into co- cooperative learning groups or dealt with independently by the teacher, who, in his role of facilitator, is able to devote them more time. The last main concern is associated with correcting students´ language and with the number of language mistakes they are to make during the process. This problem deals with the areas of language accuracy versus fluency and their potential balance. On the one hand, teachers should recognize which stages of PBL are more crucial to the need of accuracy practice and which stages are to produce language which is both accurate and fluent. Beside of those worriness about impementation of PBL, if the implementation is succeed and carried out with a careful preparation, right teacher´s attitude and decent knowledge, it comprises not only the general benefits that has been described in the first part of this work but also it produces further advantages. With respect to the English language, PBL affords students to practice the target language they have consider needful, in real and meaningful situations. They are to express their own language needs along with creation of their own chosen end product; hence, it reinforces the learning of both language and the concrete content of PBL. Based on those theories it can be assumed that project based learning is teaching method that offer learner autonomy and freedom to be enggaged with their learning activity. From that also the learner can learn their language (L2) by doing their project conciously or unconciously. Project based learning also believed can promote learner autonomy in class of enterpreneurship. By alowing the students to do the bussiness by opening an english course, the students also can show the talent in other linguistic tasks and improve their confidence and attitude toward learning. Afterwards, the perceptions of students need to be analyzed in order to measure the level of success or failur of this implementation. 2. RESERCH METHOD The participants of this study were 62 sixth-semester undergraduate English Education students that registered as students in enterpreneurship class divided in two classes. The data were collected mainly from the students‟essays, written at the end of semester,on the advantages and disadvantages of using PBL as a teaching and learning method in the classroom. The data were then analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively. The SMART Journal Volume 2 No.2, Agustus 2016 Hlm. 74-84 80 Published in: http://ejournal.stkipmpringsewu-lpg.ac.id/index.php/smart English Department of STKIP Muhammadiyah Pringsewu Lampung quantitative analysis was first used for assessing the responses obtained from the essays; and secondly, the qualitative analysis provided the evaluation and interpretation of the figures PROCEDURE As mentioned in Miller (2011), The first phase in applying PBL in classroom is prepration phase. The main thing teachers should bear in mind is to help students to create authentic, engaging and relevant projects and following instructions help teachers to guide them through the sequence of preparation steps. Preparation phase is gradually recorded into a logical framework form and covers: 1. Selecting the purpose: The teacher gave the explanation about the learning objective in enterpreneurship class. The objectives are to evoke students willingness to create bussiness based language and to create and carry on their own bussiness based on their ideas at the end of the class. 2. Determination of the educational aims: to give the education to stduents of how to build and use their talent in creating bussiness. 3. Selecting the final product: the final product is the report of the bussiness implementation 4. Creating a general structure, timeline and regular check-ins: started from observation, presentation of observation, presentation of ideas, implementation, reporting, and evaluation. Total 16 meetings in class. 5. Forming teams: the students work in pair, total 31 pairs. 6. Producing the final written framework: The students report the final written framework about the implementation of the ideas from the start until the end Realization phase. This phase covers stages of launching project work; planning and realizing concrete activities along with project finishing. It consists of: 1. Information gathering cycle. Teacher gave instruction to do the project in pairs. It means that from 62 students, there were 31 pairs. The first project is observing the school started from private playground, private kindegraten, private elementary school, private junior high school, private senior high school and private english courses. This project allowed them to choose where is the school to be observed. The teacher only gave the guidance about what is being observed. The observation was about asking the principal or the owner of foundation consisted: 1)how to build the institution/ school? 2)how to manage the school administration? 3)how to SMART Journal Volume 2 No.2, Agustus 2016 Hlm. 74-84 81 Published in: http://ejournal.stkipmpringsewu-lpg.ac.id/index.php/smart English Department of STKIP Muhammadiyah Pringsewu Lampung recruit the employee? 4) What is the marketing strategy? And how? 2. Information processing cycle. First, after getting the data, they have to present the data using oral presentation. The presentation session would then be followed by the question-answer session, when their classmates would ask questions. The class would have two terms of 3 questions each. Each member of the presenting group had his/her turn to answer the questions. When necessary, the person who asked a question might ask for further details or argue on the issue in question, and the other students might also participate in the discussion. The presentation would usually last 30 minutes, and so would the question-answer session. The lecturer might correct the misunderstanding or misinterpretation of concepts, give or add further details to help the students to understand. From this, the students might know about the detail of how to do the bussiness of opening the course or institution Second, moved to the project that we called as “the idea project” In here students asked to share their own creative ideas about the kind of bussiness they would like to create (limited to english course bussiness), logos, mottos, mission and vission, the marketing strategy, and brochure. Everything that they have made, they have to share it in front of the class. A pair should have different ideas to the others. Third, the implementation of the ideas that they have shared. First, they did the announcement about their course in social medias or in general. They did marketing startegy to recruit the students to follow the course. After that, they taught them English in several meetings. The teaching technique or model would be different from one pair to another to attract the students in joining the course. Evaluation phase. PBL assessment does not concern only the final product, in fact students are assessed throughout the process of PBL, which stresses formative assessment and accepts the necessity of final summative assessment. Everything that they have done in the project were 3. FINDINGS The findings of the study are the students‟ perceptions on the use of PBL as teaching learning method in the enterpreneurship classroom, which include its advantages and disadvantages. SMART Journal Volume 2 No.2, Agustus 2016 Hlm. 74-84 82 Published in: http://ejournal.stkipmpringsewu-lpg.ac.id/index.php/smart English Department of STKIP Muhammadiyah Pringsewu Lampung Table 1 Advantages of PBL Advantages N % 1 The students deal with real subject matter by working on the real problems. It emerges that this sense of solving an authentic difficulty, in the area of group work and cooperation experience has the potential to help students learn. 57 91.93% 2 Give chance for students with poor linguistic skills to be in project work actively participating as they may make use of their other talents in other non-linguistic tasks and consequently improve their confidence and general attitude towards language learning. 40 64.51% The following are some of the students positive comments are still intelligible, yet the grammar is a mess but the content it can be still analyzed. “According to me Proyek Base Learning is good. I can open my course according what I think it is good. Also I can get money from it.” “I not good in teaching before but I learn to teach in my course. I have three student in my course from junior high school. I think to become teacher we have to real teach in course so make course in order you can teach.” “At first time, my lecturer said to do project. I feel afraid because I have no confidence although I can use my English bit better in classroom. I am affraid to do the marketing and recruit the students. Afterall, my problem was solved because I was not alone. My friend always gave me advice that I can do it. “I always hope that my course will long lasting. Before this I think where I can get money while I study in STKIP. This enterpreneurship class is good because lecturer gave my a view and way where I can get money” Table 2 Disadvanatges of PBL Disadvantages N % 1 Students speaking their mother tongue instead of using English 23 37%` 2 The loss of firm control over the weaker students so that they would be not able to cope with the work. 15 24% 3 The problem deals with the areas of language accuracy versus fluency and their potential balance. 20 32.25% The following are negative comments about PBL. “The weakness is in speaking, students use Indonesian language instead of using English as lecturer said before. When doing project I always talk using Indonesian language, but in teaching I seldom use English” SMART Journal Volume 2 No.2, Agustus 2016 Hlm. 74-84 83 Published in: http://ejournal.stkipmpringsewu-lpg.ac.id/index.php/smart English Department of STKIP Muhammadiyah Pringsewu Lampung “The weakness is not only speak English bu mos speak Indonesian language.” “The lecturer gave the limited time to do the bussiness or project it makes us in hurry in everything. I cannot do a lot of consultation because I have to find the students and teach them” “my English is bad how can I teach my students. I am not ready to speak English fluently.” 4. CONCLUSION From the data, it can be concluded that this project based learning can be used in enterpreneurship class to evoke students willingness in creating bussiness and also it can make the students to be independent in learning of how to teach students English. However, this method not suitable for all students. Students mayalso feel that they learn to speak little bit English when they do the project. Therefore, lecturer should ocassionaly vary teaching and learning method. 5. REFERENCES Al-Shaqsi, T. S. (2009). Teachers‟ beliefs about learner autonomy. In S. Borg (Ed.), Researching English language teaching and teacher development in Oman (pp. 157-165). Muscat: Ministry of Education, Oman. Balçıkanlı, C. (2010). Learner autonomy in language learning: Student teachers‟ beliefs. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 35(1), 90-103. Beckett, G. H. (2002). Teacher and student evaluations of Project-Based Instruction.TESL Canada Journal, 19 (2). Retrieved from: http://www.teslcanadajournal.ca/index .php/tesl/article/view/929 Camilleri Grima, A. (2007). “Pedagogy for autonomy, teachers‟ attitudes and institutional change: A case study”, in M. Jiménez Raya and L. Sercu (eds.), Challenges in Teacher Development: Learner Autonomy and Intercultural Competence. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 81-102. Haines, S. (1989). Projects for the EFL classroom, Resource material for teachers. Hong Kong: Nelson House. Jordan, R.R. (1997). English for Academic Purposes: A guide and resource book for teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kalabzova, M. (2015). Thesis: The Application of Project Based Language in the English Classrooms. University of West Bohemia: Faculty of Education. Lynch, T. (2001). Promoting EAP Learner Autonomy in a Second Language: University Context.In J. Flowerdew& M. Peacock (Eds.), Research Perspectives on English for Academic Purposes (pp. 390– 403). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Martinez, H. (2008). The subjective theories of student teachers: Implications for teacher education and research on learner autonomy. In T. E. Lamb & H. Reinders (Eds.), Learner and teacher autonomy: Concepts, realities, and responses (pp. 103-124). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. http://www.teslcanadajournal.ca/index.php/tesl/article/view/929 http://www.teslcanadajournal.ca/index.php/tesl/article/view/929 SMART Journal Volume 2 No.2, Agustus 2016 Hlm. 74-84 84 Published in: http://ejournal.stkipmpringsewu-lpg.ac.id/index.php/smart English Department of STKIP Muhammadiyah Pringsewu Lampung Miller, A. (2011, September 14). Twenty tips for managing Project-Based Learning. edutopia. Retrieved from: http://www.edutopia.org/blog/20-tips- pbl-project-based-learning-educators- andrew-miller Ribé, R., Vidal, N. (1993). Project work: Step by step. Oxford: Heinemann. Robinson, P.C. (1991). ESP Today: A practitioner’s guide. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Inc. Robinson, P.C. et al. (2001). The development of EAP oral discussion ability. In J. Flowerdew & M. Peacock (Eds.), Research Perspectives on English for Academic Purposes (pp. 347–359). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Sinclair, B., McGrath, I., & Lamb, T. (Eds.). (2000). Learner autonomy, teacher autonomy: Futuredirections. Harlow: Longman Todd, R.W. (2001). Induction from self- selected concordances and self- correction. System, 29, 91– 102. Warschauer, M. (2002). Networking into academic discourse. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 1(1), 42–58. Widdowson, H. G. (1990). Aspects of Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. SMART Journal Volume 2 No.2, Agustus 2016 Hlm. 74-84 85 Published in: http://ejournal.stkipmpringsewu-lpg.ac.id/index.php/smart English Department of STKIP Muhammadiyah Pringsewu Lampung