Gender Dynamics.......................................... 73 Creation is distributed under the Creative Commons License Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International Published in: http://ejournal.stkipmpringsewu-lpg.ac.id/index.php/smart JurnalSMART : Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics. GENDER DYNAMICS ON SPEAKING INTERACTION IN THE COLLEGE CLASSROOM Sigit Apriyanto1), Adelina Anum2) 1 Universiti Tun Hussein on Malaysia, Faculty of Applied Science and Technology, Malaysia email: sigitteduh89@gmail.com 2 University of Sang Bumi Ruwa Jurai, Faculty of Social and Political Science, Bandar Lampung email: punya.adel@gmail.com ABSTRACT Objectives of this research are to describe the gender dynamics, the influence of lecturers to the student’s interaction and the influence of classmates to the students’ interaction in speaking interaction. The population of this research are the third semester students in Graduate School, Ahmad Dahlan University. Triangulation method is used to address the same set of research. The research found that personalities of group members appeared to affect group dynamics positively. Then, an authoritarian teaching has a negative effect on the classroom climate. The lecturers’ interaction is perceived to affect the students’ interaction in the classroom and on their learning. Keywords:Gender Dynamics, Gender Problems, Speaking Interaction. 1. INTRODUCTION Most of mothers will have same questions about their son, frequently questioned by mothers is why their son is different with their neigbour’s daughter. Their son cannot communicate as fast as their neighbor's daughter. They always complain about their son who cannot speak as fast as the girls. Children born with the ability to learn speech and language have the need to communicate because children are human beings who are social creatures that live together with other creatures. Men and women have different choice of words to show their feelings. On the other hand, women often like to speak in a high-pitch voice and prefer to use reverse accent as well. Women like to use words that show politeness, such as please, thanks, and they use more euphemism, but “slang” isconsidered to be men’s preference (Xia, 2013). Talking about gender, it is not something we are born with, and not something we have, but something we do or perform. According to (Warastuti, Jurnal SMART , Volume 4, No 2 (2018), Page. 73- 92 ISSN Cetak : 2356-2048 ISSN Online : 2356-203X DOI: 10.26638/js.692.203X Gender Dynamics.......................................... 74 2011),women are not born but they are made is applicable to the making of men as well. It means that everything we are is the result of our choices. Shortly, the verdict “it’s a boy” or “it’s a girl” does not concern only biological characteristics. This process begins even before a baby is born. Newborn babies cannot be identified easily as girls or boys if they are dressed identically. Therefore, in many cultures, babies are dressed in ways to make their gender clear. Gender assigning process takes different forms, starting with the tradition of providing pink caps for girls and blue caps for boys (Warastuti, 2011). In addition to the visual, color- coding sign, another attribution of gender is the linguistic event of naming the baby. Moreover, from the early childhood girls and boys are interpreted and interacted differently. In EFL classrooms, gender operates on three levels, namely the language itself, classroom processes and the interaction between people in the classroom, whether lecturer-student or inter student (Warastuti, 2011). Besides, in the context of EFL classrooms, in the research conducted by (Shehadeh, 1999), it has been shown that gender- related differences in interaction between native speakers and non-native speakers, and between non-native speakers. This research found that same-gender dyadic interaction gave females a better context. Furthermore, men and women seem to play different roles in conversation with regard to the negotiation of meaning, dominance, interpersonal relations, the amount of talk and leading the conversation. According to (Pavlenko & Piller, 2008), there are three different frameworks to deal with gender issues, they are in the differences framework, such as “women as a group” and “men as a group”, in the research of linguistic diversity, and in the research of second or foreign language education, which finds, for instance, that females generally do better than males in this field. However, beginning in the early 1902s, feminist linguists criticized all three of these frameworks because the assumptions about “men” and “women” are homogeneous categories and ignored individual differences. Gender is not only talking about male and female but also about the roles as a human social: in communication and interaction, while the concept of dynamics in the classroom is defined as the interaction patterns between lectures and students or inter students. Gender dynamics means the interaction between Sigit Apriyanto.................................. Gender Dynamics.......................................... 75 men and women, boys and girls, etc., each gender having its own particular psychological and physical characteristics (Carli, 1989). In this case, gender dynamics in the college classroom has become an even more prominent topic of educational research and discussion (Reidy, 2013). There are differences of male and female language performance in the classroom interaction. Such as women talk more and give more information than men. Furthermore, most of female use more words and pronouns when they make a conversation and interaction in the classroom. In line with this statement, women are better than men in human relations, recognizing emotional overtones in others and in language, emotional and artistic expressiveness, esthetic appreciation, verbal language and carrying out detailed and pre-planned tasks (Zaidi, 2010). It can be seen that those women always spend their time with friends just for talking to each other. They use variation of language, from the daily language to the specific one that only understandable among themselves. On the other hand, (Baalen, 2001)explains that women talk more, give more information and are more concerned with someone’s feelings. Male language was reported to show “control”, for example by the use of short sentences. Furthermore, (Romaine, 2008) states that women speaking in more formal conversation are closest to the standard and never use the non-standard form. In other word after comparing those studies above, it can be concluded that most of female use more words and pronouns when they make a conversation, especially during teaching and learning process. When female interact, all of them use collaborative style and more focus on solidarity between the participants involved and female always think to accomplish good solution when they are negotiating something. Besides, they focus on the maintenance of relationship; it means that they always take care and more attention to each other among the relationship. Then, female are thought to be emotional and sensitive. Furthermore, they use the rules or a pattern that nearly right, so that their talks are more focused and precise. In mixed classes, the inter students or students to lecturers speaking interaction, it can be seen that boys talk less than girls do in student’s interaction. Besides, the classroom interaction is often malfunction. Less motivation, poor performance, Gender Dynamics.......................................... 76 unresponsive, and low language ability students are some of the causes in passive English class. In the preliminary research, the attention was focused on girls and boys during the teaching and learning process in the classroom. Based on the classroom observation in the third semester of Graduate School of Ahmad Dahlan University, it shows that the boys were regularly told off because of lack for intellectual competence, while the feedback for girl’s expression about their intellectual capabilities is more talkative and dominant. The students come to doubt their own abilities and skills. Meanwhile, classroom dynamics vary markedly depending on the instructor’s sex, the class’ sex ratio, class size, and the gender relevance of the course. Male and female students tend to have different speaking styles in the classroom. Female students tend to speak in order to establish status and hierarchy, and their style tends to be more argumentative. Many male students feel uncomfortable having their ideas evaluated publicly. Many prefer to work with others to solve problems. On the other hand, male and female students tend to have different attitudes toward their own abilities and different ways of dealing with failure. Based on the explanations above, it can be known that the student’s achievements in learning process is influenced by gender differences. The ways that girls and boys experience teaching and learning in the classroom can be quite different, influencing their class participation, educational achievement and learning outcomes. The first relevant study about gender interaction in the classroom is conducted by Sundari and Dasmo (2014) entitled The Effect of Speaking Self-Efficacy and Gender in Speaking Activities at the second semester of college-students of Indraprasta PGRI University in academic year 2012/2013. The aim of this research is to find out the effect of speaking self-efficacy and gender in speaking activities particularly in English as second/foreign language situation. The result showed that the level of speaking self-efficacy both male and female students is moderate. They can moderately perform speaking activities but they think them quite though and difficult. Besides, gender gave significant effect towards speaking activities. Yet, not only speaking self-efficacy partially but also its simultaneous interaction with gender did not affect significantly towards Sigit Apriyanto.................................. Gender Dynamics.......................................... 77 speaking activities. It can be seen that the level of speaking self-efficacy both male and female students is good enough but genders’ role did not affect significantly towards the students’ speaking interaction in the classroom. The second study is conducted by (Matsumoto, 2008) entitled Investigating classroom dynamics in Japanese university EFL classrooms. The proves that the lecturers’ behavior affects the students’ behavior and their learning; and Students exhibit gender differences in terms of the types of problems encountered and the ways in which they deal with them, but some problems are dealt negatively by female and male students alike. The study also shows that the students have different problems towards speaking interaction process in the college classroom. Besides, the ways of problems encountered are also different, both lecturers’ and students’ ways. Moreover, lectures’ behavior during teaching and learning process in the classroom affects the students’ behavior in learning English speaking skill. The third study was conducted by (Xiulian Zhu, 2009) entitled Gender dynamics in peer interaction and their influence on second language learning in the English as a second language classroom. From this study, it is known that the repertoires of gender dynamics containing its potentials are carried and expanded when social relations vary. These repertoires centered on familiarity, which served as a factor to mediate gender dynamics. Instructors and curriculum developers may design activities to establish familiarity. Social conversations meet the needs of language learners for establishing familiarity. Gender is demonstrated through a variety of interactional styles. Moreover, gender dynamics and second language learning were centered on interaction and diversity framework of language and genders’ role. In our society males and females are not equally respected. These can be shown when a new baby was born. We usually ask, whether the baby is male or female, and in other situation, when male behaves like a female he will be mocked or will not be accepted sooner or later by the society. This case proves that males and females have different roles in society, and of course the society hopes that they do their role as well. When male and female students interact with the lecturer during the teaching and learning process, they have Gender Dynamics.......................................... 78 different strategies in learning, especially in learning speaking. According to ( Matsumoto, 2008), women talk more, give more information and are more concerned with someone’s feelings. Male language was reported to show “control”, for example by the use of short sentences. On the other word, after comparing those studies above, it can be concluded that most of female use more words and pronouns when they make a conversation, especially during teaching and learning process. When females interact, all of them use collaborative style and more focus on solidarity between the participants involved. They always think to accomplish a good solution when negotiating something. Besides, they focus on the maintenance of relationship; it means that they always take care and more attention to each other among the relationship. Then, female are thought to be emotional and sensitive. Surprisingly, (Kiesling, 2008) explains that men are more focused on solidarity in the socializing situation, and more on power in the interview and meeting situations. In other word, men are more likely to pay attention to the state environmental situation to determine what they should say. In addition, the male uses his voice and intonation power to convince the listener and less attention to the patterns or grammatical sentence. Furthermore, (Chamot, 2004)states that males use more strategies than females do. The difference strategies used by men and women are related to the type of strategy rather than an overall differences. It can be concluded that men use more direct language while women often use more connotative speech pattern. On the other hand, (Matsumoto, 2008) states that the way that participants in classroom interaction feel about each other, and about the situation they are in has an important influence on what actually goes on in a classroom. Feelings and attitudes can make for smooth interaction and successful learning, or can lead to conflict and the total breakdown of communication. The differences between women and men previously described show that gender differences lead to different expectations and treatment. The interaction patterns between lecturers and students in the classroom, female students in using their own voices in the classroom reflect gender-based Sigit Apriyanto.................................. Gender Dynamics.......................................... 79 differences. The concept of interaction is defined as reciprocal events that require at least two objects and two actions(Wagner, 1994). Interaction occurs when these objects and events naturally influence one another. The communicative process involves interaction between at least two people who share a list of signs and semiotic rules. In every classroom, the students have different characters and past experiences. Students have various characters such as taciturn, talkative, showy, shy, adventurous, dominant, competitive, submissive, withdrawn, rebellious and so on. The students may face difficulties in copying the characters of the other students in the class. Lecturers also have different personalities. They can also be forcible, talkative, taciturn, dominant, showy, kind, patient, enthusiastic, etc. Both lecturers and students inevitably bring their different personalities into the classroom, and the ways in which these personalities interact can have a profound effect on the types of learning. Based on the writer observation data of the third semester students of Graduate School in Ahmad Dahlan University, female students tend to more dominant than male students. This study would like to investigate how female and male students and lecturers perceive and deal with interaction problems in Indonesian classrooms, for one-way communication still exists there, with mostly vertical interaction between lecturer and students. Gender equality in education also encompasses girls’ and boys’ experiences in school, in terms of equal and fair treatment by lecturers and the gender responsiveness of the curriculum, textbooks and learning materials, as well as the learning environment and education outcomes (Jondeya, 2011). Achieving equality of opportunity in the learning process, learning achievement and outcomes for both boys and girls is a key challenge for the Government in Indonesia in the next decade. In the latest study by Horiguchi, Imoto, & Poole(2015), it was found that there are four specific points to absorb the problems of English education. (1) the fact that English is a foreign language in some countries. (2) the relationship between language, individuals and society. (3) nationalism; and (4) language to help gender realize their independent selves. Gender Dynamics.......................................... 80 In his learning experience at Ahmad Dahlan University, the writer finds that male students tend to look down on female lecturers and female lecturers tend to use words normally restricted to male use in the language, in order to show their authority and dignity. Besides, when the students are grouped in pairs, female students want to do their tasks with students of the same sex as themselves. Gender thus appears to affect the conditions for learning English in classroom. Although pair work or group work is used to increase the opportunities for classroom communication between lecturer- student and inter student, there seem to be different rules of speaking for male students and female students (Sunderland, 1992). According to (Sandler &Hall, 1982), men students may also be more likely to pay more attention to and to pick up on each other’s comments of the professor than do women students. In addition,(Sadker, David., Sadker, Myra., Zittleman, 2009) finds that lecturers respond more frequently to boys, and when girls do call out, they are more likely to be reprimanded. Furthermore, the treatment male students receive includes more nonverbal attention (such as eye contact, waiting for answers, remembering male students’ names). However, on the other studies women may be more sensitive to nonverbal cues than men are (Sandler&Hall: 1982). Observations of the classroom interactions, as well as general studies of nonverbal behavior in everyday situations, indicate that girls and women often receive and give different nonverbal cues than boys and men do. These differences may well arise from differences in the perception of ability. Student gender is a significant component in class participation and the trend is that male students participate more than female students (Fassinger, 1997). According to (Sadker, David, Sadker, Myra, Zittleman, 2009), one out of every two women remains silent during an individual college class. While men are twice as likely to dominate class discussions. Based on the surveys about class participation, (Fassinger, 1997) says that there are seven variables significantly related to student participation: class traits (class size, participation as a part of students’ grades, students’ communication with each other in class, and emotional climate-friendship,acquaintances, Sigit Apriyanto.................................. Gender Dynamics.......................................... 81 cooperation and support from peers in class) and student traits (confidence, interest in subject matter, and gender of student). Other studies on classroom participation reveal that participation is influenced by students’ confidence, class size and gender and other social context factors. There are mixed reviews of the influence of instructor’s gender on student participation. Sex of the instructor only tends to influence class participation in conjunction with another factor (Yaylacı & Beauvais, 2017). Based on the research of a college transitioning from a women’s institution to a coeducational institution, (Canada & Pringle, 1995) reveal the role of classroom gender composition in class participation along with other social context variables such as class size and professor’s sex. Faculty gender has no significant impact to the students’ participation in the classroom (Fassinger, 1995). Teaching English as a foreign language (TEFL) requires learner’s exposure to what is called the foreign language skills: reading, speaking, writing and listening. Mastering the art of speaking to most people become the most important aspect of learning english as second or foreign language, and the success of mastering speaking is measured in terms of the ability to carry out a conversation in the language (Episiasi,Ardayati&Novianti, 2015). Furthermore, as far as speaking is concerned, it is regarded as the major skill to be developed because it is necessary for displaying the language proficiency, learners are going to be put in situations where communication in English is needed, that is why the emphasis is mainly on speaking (Khadidja, 2009). Shortly, it can be concluded that speaking skill is one of the language skills that are very essential to support further oral communication especially in English, but it is the most difficult skill to develop. The environment in Indonesia provides less support or exposure for the learners, because English is not spoken in the community. Speaking is a basic skill that Language Learners should master with the other language skills (Khadidja, 2009). It is defined as a complex process of sending and receiving messages through the use of verbal expressions, but it also involves non- verbal symbols such as gestures and facial expressions. In line with this, (Hedge, 2002)defines speaking as a skill by which they (people) are judged while Gender Dynamics.......................................... 82 first impressions are being formed. That is to say speaking is an important skill which deserves more attention in both first and foreign language because it reflects people thoughts and personalities. According toBrown (2001: 8) Speaking is making use of language in ordinary voice; uttering words; knowing and being able to use a language; expressing oneself in words; making a speech. Speaking is at the heart of second language learning and as a central role in language instruction (Egan, 1999). It is arguably the most important skill for business, education and government personnel working in the field. Nunan (2003: 216) states thatSpeaking requires that learners not only know how to produce specific points of language such as grammar, pronunciation, or vocabulary, but also that they understand when, why, and in what ways to prosandelduce language. In order to help students learning English effectively, lecturers should change their methods and approaches in teaching, create some strategies which can explore the student’s speaking capability, and give students more opportunity to talk and express themselves(Jondeya, 2011). Therefore, students cannot find the suitable technique or the time needed to master speaking skill in our schools. Shortly, in order to encourage the students to master speaking skill, the lecturers should prepare the suitable environment for interaction. The lecturers needs to create suitable strategies that encourage student's speaking capability. There is a need for giving students more opportunity to talk and express themselves. The lecturers or lecturers need to increase the speaking activities and create real life situations. Based on the preliminary research findings, some problems can be identified as follows: the first, the students’ performance in teaching and learning process in the classroom are still poor. Second, difficulties are often faced by the students and the lecturers when teaching unresponsive. Third, in some cases male students are active participants in control of the classroom conversations, and female students are tend to be passive or conversely. Fourth, the classroom interaction is often malfunction. Fifth, the students are often unmotivated and low language ability. The last problems is the students’ activeness are still influenced by their classmates and lecturers. SigitApriyanto.................................. Sigit Apriyanto.................................. Gender Dynamics.......................................... 83 This research is formulated to find outhow are gender dynamics manifested in speaking interaction?;how do the lecturers of different genders influence the students’ interaction on speaking interaction in the classroom?; and how do the classmates of different genders influence the students’ interaction in the classroom? The objectives of the research are as follows: To describe the gender dynamics in speaking interaction in the college classroom, to describe the influence of lecturers to the student’s interaction on speaking interaction in the classroom, and to describe the influence of classmates to the students’ interaction in the classroom. 2. RESEARCH METHOD This research belongs to descriptive qualitative research. Descriptive qualitative research is used to get the data, then it used as a basis for inference and interpretation. Data collecting technique used in this research is triangulation. Triangulation is used to address the same set of research questions through classroom observation, interviews and questionnaires by distributing the instruments to all students and lectures in Graduate School. In the next section, classroom observation will be discussed. It is important to focus on what happens in classrooms to find the relations between lectures and students. The population of this research are the third semester students ofgraduate school at Ahmad Dahlan University. The samples of this research consist of 33 students at the third semester of graduate school, Ahmad Dahlan University. In taking the sample, census sampling is used in this research.The technique to analyze the data has some stages, those are assembling the data, coding the data, building interpratation and reporting the outcomes. 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Observation of class 3A Students of Graduate School In this class, there were 13 students and consist of 6 male students and 7 female students which observed to learn how it’s full-time the lecturer taught, and how the students learned with their classmates and with the lecturer. Table 1 shows the teaching timeline was taught by lecturer at 15:50 in the afternoon on 8th October, 2016. The class was observed by the lecturer’s permission. On the same day, after the Gender Dynamics.......................................... 84 class observation, 5 students were interviewed one by one at an agreedtime. Table 1 The timeline in the class taught by Female English lecturer Time Lecturer Individual students Group of students 00:00:00 The researcher introduced himself to the students and the lecturer 15:50 Came into the classroom and opened the class by saying Basmallah together 15:55 Invited the first group to discuss about the topic. Each group consist of two students. Both of them are male students. 16:10 Monitoring MS-4 gave the question to the speakers and the second questions given by FS-6 Both of the speakers answered the questions directly. 16:20 She stopped the first discussion delivered by the first group and gave further explanations about the topic (Qualitative data) They back to the seat 16:30 Monitoring and answering FS-6 and MS-4 gave the questions to the lecturer. The atmosphere within the groups becomes friendlier 16:35 Answering The same students gave the other questions to the lecturer The atmosphere within the groups becomes friendlier and they become more communicative, sharing ideas 16:50 Answering the question given by FS-2 FS-2 gave the question to the lecturer. They began to talk Indonesia and Javanese language in their group 17:00 She made a conclusion based on the topic Focused on the lecturer’s conclusion According to table 1 when about 60 minutes had passed, this lecturer asked the students to report what the class had discussed. As the class had been selected by the members of the groups, they were usually the ones who were good at English or waiting for a volunteer to be leaders in a language classroom. When they do, the other members do not have to speak English to the whole class or do their tasks alone. These dependent students may even copy the answers from their peers. However, when only the group leaders report the results, this gives the other members of the group no chance to practice speaking English. As a result, the students cannot not improve by practice, though this class was meant to teach speaking and general research. There must be some way to deal with this situation and give opportunities to all students to speak English; the lecturer should offer all students the chance to do so. During the discussion with the lecturer of this class, the student who had complained earlier now joined the discussion and spoke more than before. Almost all the students in this class did the discussion together after the group leader given everybody in the group a chance to speak; then it was clear that Sigit Apriyanto.................................. Gender Dynamics.......................................... 85 the students had accepted one another. The students had succeeded in developing positive inter-member relations. In this class, the character and personalities of the group members appeared to affect group dynamics positively. There was a great deal of interaction in most of the groups. Good leadership seems to have exerted a positive influence on the group dynamics. In most cases, the students in the different groups cooperated well with each other. For example, the students compared their answers with other people, exchanged opinions, taught spellings and pronunciations, and waited for every member to finish the answers. The strong learners, however, tended at times to control the other members of the group; for example, the Indonesian student sometimes prevented other students from speaking. A group leader needs to consider the need of weaker students to join in with the group work. Group leaders need to be friendly but emphatic in getting the tasks done. Unfortunately, there was very little interaction between the lecturer and the students in this class, because the student just stayed on that desk. If this lecturer could have overcome this, this lecturer might perhaps have been a better leader and facilitator. The behavior and leadership of the class surely affected the teaching and thus the learning. Observation of class 3B Students of Graduate School In this class, there were 16 students and consist of 5 male students and 11 female students which observed to learn how it’s full-time the lecturer taught, and how the students learned with their classmates and with the lecturer. The topic was Instructional (Educational) Technology and each group has different topics the other students listened to them carefully. This class has 90 minutes for one meeting. In this class, the lecturer and the students got two-ways communication between lecturer and students in class and made interaction a lot. Table 2 The timeline in the class taught by Male English lecturer on October 7th, 2016 in the afternoon class. Time Lecturer Individual students Group of students 00:00:00 Came into the classroom and opened the class by saying Basmallah together The researcher introduced himself to the students and the lecturer 15:30 Asked the task and gave the clues for presenting the materials. Gave the attention to the lecturer 15:40 The lecturer didn’t say anything. There was a student who came late to the class Gender Dynamics.......................................... 86 15:45 Tried to arrange the group and prepared the topics Move to their group 16:00 Invited the group number 7 to discuss the topic. Sat on their seats The first group from the group number 7 being presenter. 16:30 Monitoring and answering MS-1 gave the questions to the presenter. The atmosphere within the groups becomes friendlier 16:35 Gave the students to be active The same students gave the other questions to the lecturer The students still discussing the materials 16:45 The lecturer didn’t say anything. There was a female student out from the class without permission Some of the students gave the attentions for her. 17:00 He informed the class about the task for next week and the class is over by saying Hamdallah and Sallam. Students look at their lecturer and listen to him. Based on the students were observed, the students were to spend more class time learning together in small groups, the students might learn more and build group cohesiveness, and as a result become more active. During the first part of the lesson, all the students studied by themselves without any interaction with classmates or their lecturer. They merely followed their lecturer’s instructions. There was very little laughter, giggling, talking, exchanging of opinions or thoughts. To begin with, the students sat quietly and looked at each other, wondering what they should do, and some looked worried. If one member of the group made a suggestion, the students agreed, nodding, smiling or saying “Yes”. In general, this lecturer appeared to teach very well, using students as models, using suitable method and using the stronger students to teach the weaker students. This approach went down very well with the students and helped build the confidence. This lecturer also encouraged a great deal of physicalmovement in the class, which kept the students awake. As an example of this lecturer’s good practice, to cover the students who lack of English ability, this lecturer used a good method and good demonstrations so that the students, in particular the weaker ones, could understand what the students had to do. However, there was a problem in this class. One student used the mobile phone during class; moreover, there was a student went out from the class without permission. The lecturer tried to give a tolerant and to ignore of this student. Careful observation is required to prevent weaker students from being lost. Lecturers’ behavior can impact on learning both positively and negatively and the character and personalities of Sigit Apriyanto.................................. Gender Dynamics.......................................... 87 the group members appeared to affect group dynamics positively. Good interaction seems to have exerted a positive influence on the group dynamics. Questionnaires of the Students and the Lecturer of Graduate School In this part, presented the significant finding from these questionnaires by focusing on the students’ and lecturers’ data. These data were used to answer the research questions number 2 and 3. These data were analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively to interpret the results. Chart 1 also shows that female and male students choose significantly different subjects to study. For example, more female students study in speaking skill than writing, listening and reading. On the other hand, male students focused on different skills; speaking, writing and reading skill. However, a new tendency is being found nowadays in the teaching and learning process in the classroom. This is for more male students lead the class by talkative and ever to start a discussion. Nowadays, the lecturers of Ahmad Dahlan University seems to welcome thischange and encourages male students to promote talented male. The categories of conflict which students have with other students in class The sense of conflict which, according to the students, affected their studying occurs in the proportions shown in chart 2 below. The categories of conflict are covered by 12 of the questions in the student questionnaire. Chart 2 Students’ conflicts with other studens in class. Based on the chart 2 above it can be seen that 6% students are annoyed by students who do not listen 0 2 4 6 8 10 Speaking Writing Listening Reading Chart I Gender and Skills Male Female 6 3 3 16 3 3 3 3 13 16 26 3 S t u d e n t s ' C o n f l i c t s W i t h O t h e r S t u d e n t s I n C l a s s Gender Dynamics.......................................... 88 to other people’s opinion, 16% students are annoyed by students who laugh at someone’s failure, 3% students are annoyed by students who show different attitude to the lecturer, 16% students are annoyed by students who pretend to participate in a group work, 3 % students are annoyed by students who contradict other people’s opinions, 3% students are annoyed by students who do not express their opinioins, 3% students are annoyed by students who return dictionaries slowly, 26% students are annoyed by students who work by themselves, 3% students are annoyed by students who get over excited when lecturer pays attention to them, 3% students are annoyed by students who become too excited, 13% students are annoyed by students who do not find answers for themselves, 3% students are annoyed by other conflicts. The data show that the students have most conflicts with others (i) who work by themselves, (ii) who pretend to participate in group work, (iii) who laugh at someone’s failure or at a wrong answer, and (iv) who do not find answers for themselves, but depend on someone else. These four categories are common in the teaching and learning process for the class. It is interesting to see whether male and female students have the same profile in terms of how tolerant they are of other students’ behavior. Common responses, such as being patient, ignoring and having no strategies are found throughout the analysis. However, these strategies are negative strategies for dealing with the conflicts in the classroom. Female students in particular use the strategy of gazing at others or a non-verbal reaction. Some students seem not to know how tocope with the classmates who affect their learning adversely in the classroom. The conflict of the students with the lecturer The conflicts with their lecturer which students claimed to have affected their studying shown in chart 3. This shows students’ conflicts with lecturers in class. Chart 3 Students’ conflicts with lecturers in class. 11 13 4 11 2 2 4 9 6 17 15 6 S t u d e n t s ' C o n f l i c t s w i t h t h e L e c t u r e r I n C l a s s Sigit Apriyanto.................................. Gender Dynamics.......................................... 89 Based on the chart 2 above it can be seen that 11% students are annoyed by lecturer who do not answer students’ questions, 2% students are annoyed by lecturer who take no account of the students language level, 6% students are annoyed by lecturer who cannot communicate with foregners in English, 13% students are annoyed by lecturer who look down on students who cannot answer, 2% students are annoyed by lecturers who are proud of their language knowledge, 17% students are annoyed by lecturer who do not teach well or who do not know how to teach, 4% students are annoyed by lecturer who lecture all the time, 4% students are annoyed by lecturers who are proud of their study abroad and experience, 15% students are annoyed by lecturer who invite questions but are not happy to answer them, 11% students are annoyed by lecturer who lack of academic knowledge, 9% students are annoyed by lecturer who lack of pronounciation, 6% students are annoyed by other conflicts. The fact that the students are most annoyed by lecturers who do not teach the students well and indicates that the students have a strong set of priorities and know what is the most important for them. The students were asked to identify the student’s conflict with a lecturer and their strategies for coping with conflict in the classroom. Among the responses from the students having conflicts with lecturers in the classroom, there are some common features. Though the students must had strategies to deal with conflicts, the students responded negatively, claiming to have no strategies, study by themselves in the classroom, ignore the lecturers, ask other lecturers or friends, and to be patient. These are not good ways of improving learning in the classroom. Students need to find active strategies to cope with these annoyances while continuing to learn. 4. CONCLUSION Referring to the data analysis which covers research findings and discussion, this research can be concluded as follows: Using students as models, using suitable method and using the stronger students to teach the weaker students. Personalities of the group members appeared to affect group dynamics positively. Good interaction seems to have exerted a positive influence on the group dynamics. Being aware of the potential gender dynamics can help the Gender Dynamics.......................................... 90 lecturers to create good speaking interaction and promote the communicative learning of all students, male and female.The lecturers’ interaction is perceived to affect the students’ interaction in the classroom and this behavior impacts on their learning. It can be concluded that the lecturers should give the students a chance to talk both student-student interaction and student-lecturers interaction, to express their opinions, thoughts and ideas and as a result the students could not develop congruency in groups or individual.The students will confront with other members of the group, but the students should appreciate their differences and accept the classmates’ collective diversity,with help from the lecturers and other members of the groups. Shortly, for educational success, student-student interaction, if managed effectively, is more important than lecturers-student interaction. 5. REFERENCES Baalen, I. van. (2001). Male and female language_growing together? Available: http://www.let.leidenuniv.nl/hsl_sh l/van Baalen.htm. [12 Juni 2016]. Brown, H. Douglas. (2001). Teaching by Principle: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. New York: Pearson Education. Carli, L. L. (1989). Gender differences in interaction style and influence. Journal of personality and social psychology, 56(4), 565. Chamot, A. U. (2004). Issues in language learning strategy research and teaching. Electronic journal of foreign language teaching, 1(1), 14-26. Episiasi,Ardayati&Novianti, S. (2015). The Effectiveness of Using Pictures to Improve Students’ Speaking Skill.Smart Journal Vol 1: 93-101. Egan, K. B. (1999). Speaking: A critical skill and a challenge. Calico Journal, 277-293. Fassinger, P. A. (1995). Understanding classroom interaction: Students' and professors' contributions to students' silence. The Journal of Higher Education, 66(1), 82-96. Fassinger, P. A. (1997). Classes are groups: Thinking sociologically about teaching. College Teaching, 45(1), 22-25. Hedge, T. (2002). Teaching and Learning in the Language Classroom. T. Hedge. ELT Journal, 56(3), 337–341. Horiguchi, S., Imoto, Y., & Poole, G. S. (Eds.). (2015). Foreign language education in Japan: Exploring qualitative approaches. Springer. Jondeya, R. (2011). The Effectiveness of Using Information Gap on Developing Spekaing Skills for the Eighth Graders in Gaza Sigit Apriyanto.................................. Gender Dynamics.......................................... 91 Governotare Schools. Unpublished Dissertation. Gaza: Al-Azhar University. Canada, K., & Pringle, R. (1995). The Role Of Gender In College Classroom Interactions: a Social Context Approach. Sociology of Education, 161-186. Khadidja, K. (2009). The Effect of Classroom Interaction On Developing The Learner’s Speaking Skill. Department of Foreign Languages.Mentouri University-Constantine. Kiesling, S. F. (2008). 22 Prestige, Cultural Models, and Other Ways of Talking About Underlying Norms and Gender. The handbook of language and gender, 509. Nunan, D. (Ed). 2003. Practical English Language Teaching. New York: McGraw Hill Company. Pavlenko, A., &Piller, I. (2008).Language Education and Gender.In Encyclopedia of language and Education (pp. 57- 69).Springer, Boston, MA. Reidy, C. G. (2013). Students' Awareness of Gender Dynamics in the College Classroom. Romaine, S. (2008). Variation in Language and Gender. The Handbook of Language and Gender, 98–118. Available: https://doi.org/10.1002/978047075 6942.ch4. [7 Juni 2016]. Sadker, David., Sadker, Myra., Zittleman, K. (2009). Still Failing at fairness:How gender bias cheats girls and boys in school and what we can do about it., 136–173. Sandler, B. R., & Hall, R. M. (1982). The Classroom Climate: A Chilly One for Women. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges. Shehadeh, A. (1999). Gender Differences and Equal Opportunities in The ESL Classroom. ELT Journal, 53(October), 256–261. Sundari, H., & Dasmo.(2014). The Effect of Speaking Self-Efficacy and Gender in Speaking Activities: Jurnal Bahasa dan Sastra. 14(2), 205-217. Sunderland, J. (1992). Gender in The EFL Classroom. Elt Journal, 46(1), 81-91. Wagner, E. D. (1994). In Support of a Functional Definition of Interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 8(2), 6-29. Warastuti, R. D. (2011). Gender Differences in Children Language. Musawa, 3(2), 221–234. Xia, X. (2013).Gender Differences in Using Language. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3(8), 1485. Zhu, X. (2009). Gender Dynamics in Peer Interaction and Their Influence on Second Language Learning in The English-as-a- Second Language Classroom. Matsumoto, Y. (2008). Investigating Classroom Dynamics in Japanese University EFL Classrooms(Doctoral Dissertation, University of Birmingham). Gender Dynamics.......................................... 92 Yaylacı, Ş., & Beauvais, E. (2017).The Role of Social Group Membership on Classroom Participation. PS: Political Science & Politics, 50(2), 559-564. Zaidi, Z. F. (2010). Gender Differences in Human Brain: A Review. The Open Anatomy Journal, 2(1). SigitApriyanto.................................