LANGUAGE CIRCLE: Journal of Language and Literature .... p-ISSN 1858-0165 Available online at http://journal.unnes.ac.id e-ISSN 2460-853X 321 English Teachers’ Pedagogical Competence in Regard to Understanding the Students Hasriani G English Department FBS UNM hasriani@unm.ac.id Abstract This research aimed at identifying the English teachers’ pedagogical competence in understanding the students. The profile of English teachers’ pedagogical competence in understanding the students was based on the National Standard of Education, in section 28, sub-section 3 point a. The researcher employed descriptive evaluative method. The subjects of this research were four English teachers from different schools of Madrasah Aliyah in Kabupaten Enrekang. The purpose of the research was to describe the teachers’ pedagogical competence in understanding the students. Based on the result and discussion, the four teachers have different quality in terms of pedagogical competence especially in understanding the students. The score of teacher 1 and teacher 4 was 3 (good). They both could understand the students’ cognitive ability, whether the good or the poor students. They also paid attention to the different characteristics or ability of the students. Besides, they already paid attention to the students’ prior knowledge. They used to review the lesson in the previous meetings before coming to the next material. In another hand, the result showed that the score of teacher 2 and 3 was different from teacher 1 and teacher 4, that was 2 (poor). In understanding the students, teacher 2 and teacher 3 ignored one point, which is paying attention to the students’ prior knowledge. They never reviewed the last material before coming to the new material. Based on the result and discussion, it could be concluded that the four teachers had different quality in terms of pedagogical competence in regard to understanding the students. Since the teachers’ quality is the most important point in developing the students’ learning proficiency, the four English teachers still need more improvement. Because in Indonesia, the teachers who meet the standards of being professional teachers are the ones who have the required qualifications and truly understand what to do, whether inside or outside the classroom Keywords: [English Teachers, Pedagogical Competence, Understanding Students] INTRODUCTION There are some factors making teaching and learning processes possible to take place, which is exclusively called the four perennial truths, namely teacher, students, material, and context of time and place (Rasyid, 2009:19). In certain time and place, the teacher has to exist in teaching and learning process because he/she is the one who teaches and the students have to exist because they are the ones who are going to be taught. In the same time, the material must be available because it is the matter to be learnt. In short, those four factors are linking with each other. If one of them is not available, there will be no teaching and learning process, though the learning process itself may still take place. Among of those factors, the teacher has important role because he/she is responsible to educate and transfer knowledge to the students. The teacher is motivator, facilitator, and there are still many other roles of the teachers. Thus, teacher must have four competences obligated by Permendiknas No. 16/2007; pedagogical competence, personal competence, social competence and professional competence (Soedarmawan, 2009). In relation to the teachers’ competence, the success of the implementation of teaching and learning process is influenced mostly by pedagogical competence of the teachers. Pedagogically, the teachers have to apply their knowledge, skills and attitude in managing the students’ learning in order to maximize the learning process and increase the students’ learning result. That is why the teachers are expected to be able to facilitate the students in increasing their proficiency. http://journal.unnes.ac.id/ mailto:hasriani@unm.ac.id LANGUAGE CIRCLE: Journal of Language and Literature .... p-ISSN 1858-0165 Available online at http://journal.unnes.ac.id e-ISSN 2460-853X 322 To develop the quality of teacher’s pedagogical competence, the government has an effort named certificate program lasting from around July 2007 until now. In 2007, the program was executed in the form of portfolio then changed into PLPG around October 2010 until 2017 and changed again into PPG until now. For the teachers who cannot pass through portfolio, they will get training program, while for the teachers who cannot pass through PLPG and PPG, they have to face the remedial program. Another activity is in the form of MGMP, as the forum in which the same subjects’ teachers of certain regions gather to discuss about their subjects and share their ideas in implementing the curriculum in teaching. MGMP continues to play its role in providing opportunities for teachers to share ideas and experiences. However, if the teachers are willing to develop themselves, then the teachers will be qualified because of constantly looking for opportunities to improve their own quality. Ideally, the government, teacher associations and education units have to facilitate teachers to develop the cognitive skills of understanding and knowledge, affective form of attitudes and values, as well as performance in the form of actions that reflect an understanding of the skills and attitudes. Those efforts are important as it is a way enhancing the pedagogical competence of teachers, and it was claimed that the best English teacher has to meet the profile expected by Permendiknas No. 16/2007 (Sagala, 2009:31 and Soedarmawan, 2009). A lot of efforts have been made to improve English teaching: curriculum, methodology, and technical aspects such as classroom, textbooks, and the media. But the result is still unsatisfactory (Risan et al., 2021). Identifying the English teachers’ pedagogical competence should be considered as the expectation of the improvement of the teachers’ competence in order to meet the national standard of education in Indonesia, in which the teachers should keep teaching with a good knowledge, skills, and attitude. Pedagogical competence of the teachers is obviously performed in three teaching and learning phases, that is before, during and after teaching. In these three phases, the teachers should understand the students’ cognition, personality and prior knowledge; they should have a good plan before teaching; they have to be able to implement the teaching and learning process based on the curriculum; they have to know the appropriate way to evaluate the result of the students’ learning. Besides that, the teachers should also be able to facilitate the students in developing their potency. When the teacher can apply those things effectively, hopefully the students gain the learning objectives (Risan, 2021) Pedagogical Competence Pedagogical competence is the wish and ability to regularly apply the attitude, the knowledge, and the skills that promote the learning of the students in the best way (Apelgren & Giertz, 2010: 30). In the National Standard of education in section 28 subsection 3 point a, it is explained in the Indonesian constitution that pedagogical competence deals with sub- competences which are: The teachers’ competence in understanding the students, the teachers’ competence in planning the teaching and learning process, the teachers’ competence in implementing the teaching and learning process, the teachers’ competence in evaluating the students’ learning outcome, and the teachers’ competence in developing the students’ potency. The Teachers’ Competence in Understanding The Students The teachers’ competence in understanding the students is the first sub-competence of pedagogical competence. Mulyasa (2009:79) stated that there are at least three things should be understood by the teachers related to this competence. They are the learners’ coginitive development, the learners’ personality, and the learners’ prior knowledge. 1. The learners’ cognitive development Intelect is another word of thinking. It gets developed as the development of brain goes. Basically, thinking shows the function of brain, so intelectual ability is generally called ability of thinking. When the brain gets mature, a person http://journal.unnes.ac.id/ LANGUAGE CIRCLE: Journal of Language and Literature .... p-ISSN 1858-0165 Available online at http://journal.unnes.ac.id e-ISSN 2460-853X 323 will get his/her ability of thinking. The ability of thinking will continually develop following his/her knowledge about outside world and learning process that they have experienced before. The development of ability of thinking is also called cognitive development. In relation to teaching and learning process, teacher should understand his/her students’ cognitive development. Possibly, there are some students getting slow in thinking to understand the material given, and there are also some who get fast in thinking to understand the material. Whatever the student’s cognitive development is, the teacher should understand it and is responsible to help the students. 2. The learners’ personality It is also very important for the teacher to know about the learners’ personality in order that he/she can apply appropriate way in teaching the students with the different personality. According to Bean in (1996: 39-40) Engaging Ideas, the students’ personalities are various, they are: a. Extrovert, a person who enjoys using class discussions or small groups to explore their ideas. b. Introvert, a type of person who likes to be in solitude situation. c. Sensing type, a person who likes to write assignments with very detailed instructions and guidelines. d. Intuitive type, they rebel against prescribed patterns and like open-ended assignments with the opportunity to be creative and personal. e. Thinking, a person who excels at writing logical things, well-organized essays requiring analysis and argumentation. They can use reason and evidence and stay personally detached from the issue. f. Feeling, a person who prefers assignments that allow for personal voice, conviction, and emotion. They would like putting their personal experience in a paper or using a narrative approach. g. Judger, the one who tends to arrive at a thesis quickly and are bored with journals. h. Perceiver, a person who likes to play with ideas endlessly and have trouble deciding on a thesis unless a deadline forces them to make a decision. 3. The learners’ prior knowledge In teaching and learning process, teacher needs to understand the learners’ prior knowledge. This is for students to keep remembering the previous material. By understanding the students’ prior knowledge, the teacher will also recognize how to relate the previous material and the new material which will not make the students difficult in receiving the new material given. General directorate of the quality improvement of teachers and education personnel (2010) decided that the first sub competence of pedagogical competence, that is understanding the students, covers several characteristics. Those specific characteristics are written as the instrument to assess the teachers’ pedagogical competence, especially for the first sub competence. Those characteristics are: 1. Teachers can identify the individual characteristics of their learners. 2. Teachers ensure that all students have the same opportunity to participate actively in the learning activities. 3. Teachers can set the class to provide the same learning opportunities for all students with disabilities and different learning abilities. 4. Teachers try to find the cause of the behavioral deviation of learners in order to prevent such behavior not to harm other students. 5. Teachers help developing the potency and overcoming the students’ weakness. 6. Teachers pay attention to the students with certain physical weakness in order to follow the activity of learning, so they are not marginalized (excluded, vmocked, insecure, etc.)] METHODOLOGY This research employed descriptive evaluative method. In this research, the researcher provided the description of English teachers’ pedagogical http://journal.unnes.ac.id/ LANGUAGE CIRCLE: Journal of Language and Literature .... p-ISSN 1858-0165 Available online at http://journal.unnes.ac.id e-ISSN 2460-853X 324 competence in understanding the students at Madrasah Aliyah in Kabupaten Enrekang. There were four English teachers from different schools as the subjects of this research. Those four english teachers were certified English teachers. The researcher used two kinds of instruments, namely classroom observation checklist and interview guide. Classroom observation checklist was used by the researcher to obtain the data by simply watching the participants during the teaching and learning process. The researcher used observation matrix referring to pedagogical competence. The observation matrix covered some criteria that were scored with final score 1 to 4. Each score can be categorized as: 4= high (very good), 3= medium (good), 2= low (poor) and 1= very low (very poor) (Mulyasa, 2009:214). In conducting observation, the researcher used video recorder as the observation device. In this research, interview was a purposeful interaction in which the researcher tried to obtain information from the teachers and the students to clarify and support the data from observation. The interview questions consisted of some structured questions about pedagogical competence. The interview was semi-structured interview in which the researcher asked questions that was previously structured and would be continued by asking other questions related to the teachers’ answer to get the deep data about the variable (Arikunto, 2006:227), in this case the profile of English teachers’ pedagogical competence. The researcher used a recorder as an interview device. Descriptive analysis was used in analyzing the data, in which the researcher analyzed the data collected through the instruments previously mentioned. Firstly, the researcher collected the by observing the teaching and learning activity in the classroom, and next the researcher interviewed English teacher and the students. Secondly, the researcher analyzed the data through data reduction in which the researcher summarized, chose the main things, and focused on the important points. After reducing the data, the next step was data display, in which the researcher analyzed and described the data qualitatively. Miles and Huberman in Sugiyono (2009:249) stated that looking at displays helps us to understand what is happening and to do some thing-further analysis or caution on that understanding. The last step was conclusion (drawing/verifying) in which the researcher took the conclusion about the result of analyzing the data.] RESULT AND DISCUSSION According to the data collected during observation and interview, there were some important points that the researcher found related to the profile of English teachers pedagogical competence in understanding the students of Madrasah Aliyah in Kabupaten Enrekang. Teachers’ competence in understanding the students a. Teacher 1 Teachers’ ability to understand the students covers three important points. Based on the observation conducted by the researcher toward the first teacher, the result showed that the first teacher’s score is 3 (good). That score was gained by calculating all scores of each point as written in the observation matrix. It indicated that the first teacher had good competence in understanding the students. However, observation was not the only one way to see the teacher competence in understanding the students. Some supporting data were gained from interview and those were clarified in the following findings. In understanding the cognitive ability of the students, the supporting data gained from the interview indicated that the teacher tried to understand her students, not only the good students, but also the poor students. When she found a student got problem in learning English, she used to care and try to help the students. R : “Jadi bagaimana cara Ibu untuk mengatasi atau apa tindakan Ibu untuk mengatasi masalah tersebut”? (“so how do you solve that problem or what will you do to solve that problem”?) T1:”………….caranya adalah membiasakan dia untuk mengerjakan pekerjaan dan bertanya apabila ada kendala yang dihadapi. Caranya adalah dengan melakukan pendekatan secara persuasive kepada anak http://journal.unnes.ac.id/ LANGUAGE CIRCLE: Journal of Language and Literature .... p-ISSN 1858-0165 Available online at http://journal.unnes.ac.id e-ISSN 2460-853X 325 tersebut, menanyakan apa masalahnya dan seterusnya, akhirnya dia tidak lagi canggung untuk bertanya dan ikut andil kalau diberikan tugas”. (“…………the way is to accustom him to do the task and give question if he faces problem, by approaching him persuasively, asking about his problem till he will not be reluctant anymore to ask question and participate in doing assignment”) Based on the data above, besides understanding the students’ cognitive ability, the teacher also tried to help the students who got problem in learning. She approached the students persuasively then tried to solve the problem. It was supported by the data from the observation. The teacher could arrange the classroom atmosphere to give chance to all students to actively participate in the teaching and learning process. She also paid attention to the different characteristics or ability of the students. She said that there were two students who tended not to socialize with the other students. Probably it was caused by their low IQ, so they just kept silent in the class. “… ada dua orang siswa yang saya lihat dia cenderung menyendiri, mungkin IQ-nya dibawah rata- rata jadi dia kurang bersosialisasi dengan siswa yang lain, cenderung diam di tempat dan apabila dikasih tugas dia diam saja…” (“…there are two students who like being alone, probably their IQ is under average so they do not want to socialize with the others, they tend to keep silent and when they are given task they do not do anything…….”) However, the teacher has the solution in facing such students. She said that her way successfully changed those students to be better because finally they could actively participate in the teaching and learning process. Not only understanding the students’ cognitive ability and individual differences of the students, but the teacher also considered that it is important to know the students’ prior knowledge. R: “Apakah ibu menganggap penting untuk mengetahui pemahaman siswa terhadap pelajaran sebelumnya sebelum memulai pelajaran yang berikutnya”? (“Do you think it is important to know the students’ prior knowledge about the material in the previous meeting”?) T1: ”Iya penting” (“ Yes, I do”) R: “Kenapa Bu”? (“why”?) T1: “Karena kita kan harus memastikan bahwa siswa itu, paling tidak beberapa siswa sudah mencapai tujuan sebelum kita melanjutkan pembelajaran berikutnya”. (“because we have to make sure that at least some of the students have reached the learning objective before we move to the next material”) The data gained indicated that the teacher understood the students who still needed explanation about the previous lesson before continuing the next lesson. By understanding the students’ prior knowledge, the teacher can decide whether she can directly continue the next material or keep explaining the material of previous meeting to avoid making the students confused so that they will understand the lesson well. Based on the observation, it was proved that the teacher really paid attention to the students’ prior knowledge. By the beginning of some meetings, she used to review the lesson in the previous meeting. The students’ attitude that could hamper the other students was also the point that the teacher paid attention to. She had her own way in facing the student who used to disturb his friends in order that the other students could focus to study. Based on the data, the teacher also paid attention to the things that probably could disturb the teaching and learning process in the classroom, including the naughty students. The teacher could recognize then handle the naughty students. She could solve the naughtiness in her classroom. The naughty students could be better students if the teacher could approach them well. R: “Kalau yang agak naughty begitu Mam”? (“what about the naughty students Mam”?) T1: “……..caranya yang saya berikan adalah saya memberikan kepercayaan kepada untuk bertanggung jawab atas keadaan kelas pada saat saya mengajar, jadi saya berikan tanggung jawab, “Akbar, kamu harus bertanggung jawab atas kelas ini, kalau kelas ini rebut maka kamu yang akan kena ganjaran”, yah, otomatis dia akan berubah sendiri, jadi yang tadinya Cuma mengganggu, sekarang dia malah menegur http://journal.unnes.ac.id/ LANGUAGE CIRCLE: Journal of Language and Literature .... p-ISSN 1858-0165 Available online at http://journal.unnes.ac.id e-ISSN 2460-853X 326 temannya kalau ada yang mengganggu”. (“……the way I use is giving his responsibility to control the class when I am teaching, so I give him responsibility and say “ Akbar, you have to be responsible for the safety of this class, if it gets noise it means you will get punishment”. Automatically he will think twice to disturb his friends, he even reprimands his friend who disturbs the others.”) Supporting data about the teacher competence in understanding the students was gained from the result of observation toward the teacher in teaching and learning process. The teacher used to ask the students’ understanding about the material explained and discussed. Besides that, the data was also gained by interviewing one of the students. The data gained could prove that the students even admitted that their English teacher could understand the students in teaching and learning process. The teacher attitude toward her students was very good. She focused on whole students, not only certain students. When some of the students still did not understand about the material, she would explain it again until most of them understood before moving to the next material. Based on the observation result, commonly, in teaching and learning process, the teacher behaved kindly to all students. She gave the same chance to the students to participate actively in the classroom. She never focused only on certain students. In terms of understanding the character of the whole class, the teacher had been interviewed by the researcher, and the data proved that the teacher could identify the characteristics of the students in whole class. She taught not only class X, but also class XI and XII. She said that every class had different characteristics. However, she could handle those different classes with her own way. In terms of understanding the character of the whole class, the teacher has been interviewed by the researcher, and she stated the following explanation. R : “Bisakah ibu menjelaskan karakteristik umum dari kelas yang Ibu ajar”? (“could you explain the characteristic of your class”?) T1 : “Ok,, jadi ada karakter siswa, misalnya di kelas XA, XA itu adalah X ungulan, nah di kelas itu cara mengajarnya sangat asyik karena hampir 100% anak focus belajar, begitupula dengan kelas 3IPA1 dan kelas 2IPA1. Tetapi kalau dibandingkan sih memang kelas unggulan lebih. Kemudian ada XH. XH itu adalah kalau boleh saya bilang adalah kelas yang paling, terlalu kasar mungkin kalau kelas yang paling hancur- hancuran, bobrok……….” (“well, so there are students’ characteristics, like in class XA, XA is superior class, in which it is enjoyable to teach in that class because nearly 100% of the students focusing on studying, just like class XII natural science 1 and XI natural science 1. Comparing with the other class, the superior class is the best. Next, class XH. XH is the worst class, broken class.”) b. Teacher 2 The second teacher was observed by the researcher for four times. In terms of pedagogical competence, the research findings indicated that the second teacher was not as good as the first English teacher. The following explanation presents the profile of the second English teachers’ pedagogical competence in terms of the first sub- competence. Based on the observations conducted by the researcher toward the second teacher, the result showed that the second teacher’s score was 2 (low). It indicated that the second teacher was not as good as the first teacher. Nevertheless, it was not only one way to see the competence of the second teacher in terms of the first sub- competence. The first sub-competence covers some points, which are understanding the students’ cognitive ability, the students’ personality and the students’ prior knowledge. In understanding the cognitive ability of the students, the data gained from the interview indicated that the teacher used to understand the students’ ability, not only the good students, but also the poor students. She had the way to face both the good and poor students. http://journal.unnes.ac.id/ LANGUAGE CIRCLE: Journal of Language and Literature .... p-ISSN 1858-0165 Available online at http://journal.unnes.ac.id e-ISSN 2460-853X 327 T2:“Untuk siswa yang pintar, siswa yang pintar saya kasih motivasi semacam eee… “seharusnya kamu setiap hari practice in English yah”, dia harus kembangkan bahasa Inggrisnya, saya kasih metode-metode yang lain,… kemudian di sekolah saya sering, kalau saya sapa dia saya menggunakan bahasa Inggris…….. Kemudian siswa yang kurang ini dalam kelas saya selalu dekati dia, saya dekati, ketika saya kasih tugas maka saya bertanya, bagaimana, apakah sudah faham atau tidak bisa, kalau memang tidak bisa, tidak faham, maka saya bimbing lagi, saya bimbing ditempatnya supaya dia bisa seperti dengan teman-temannya yang lain. (“for the good student, I give motivation like “ you should practice your English everyday”, she has to improve her English, I give her some methods,…. When I meet her I speak in English…… while for the poor student, I usually approach his in the classroom, when I give the students assignment, I usually ask whether he understands or not, if he doesn’t understand, I guide him again, I guide him in his seat so that he will be able to be same as the other students”) The data above showed that the second teacher could understand her students’ cognitive ability and use her way in facing those students. The teacher should also give attention to the naughty students. This second teacher stated that she also paid attention to the naughty students. T2:“ Ketika saya lihat dia mengganggu ya pertama saya tegur, saya tegur kemudian saya berikan peringatan, “kalau misalnya kamu selalu mengganggu temanmu, maka saya kasih tugas, atau saya kasih berdiri didepan,” dengan hal itu maka dia akan merubah sifatnya”. (“when I find him disturbing the others, firstly I reprimand him, I reprimand him then I give warning, “if you always disturb your friends, I will give you assignment, or I let you stand in front of the class”, by doing that he will change his attitude”) Based on data above, the way she used in facing the naughty students was giving the students warming about the punishment they will get when they disturb their friends. Giving punishment is one of the ways to get the students attentions back. Besides understanding the students’ cognition and attitude, the teacher also paid attention to the calamity faced by the students. This second teacher said that she had once found her student whose parent passed away. It could be seen from the interview data that the teacher could see the effect of that calamity for the student and she had the way to motivate the student. She had her way in motivating the students whom were in calamity. She said that as a Muslim, she had to give religious sermon for the students who faced calamity, so that they could get more spirit. In terms of learning English, she motivated her student, gave spirit, mentioned his/her name, and did many other efforts to encourage the students to learn as well as usual. In the first sub-competence of pedagogical competence, not only cognitive ability and the students personality were the main points, but paying attention to the students’ prior knowledge was also very important. Based on the observation, the second teacher did not show her good competence in understanding the students’ prior knowledge. The teacher never reviewed the last material before coming to the new material. However, the student interviewed by the researcher admitted that his English teacher had good competence in understanding her students in teaching and learning process. S2 : “Menurut saya sudah bagus yah, karena cara guru mengajarkan bahasa Inggris tidak selalu menggunakan bahasa Inggris, dia sering menggunakan bahasa Indonesia juga, setiap ada bahasa Inggris toh dia sering mengeluarkan artinya jadi kita cepat mengerti”. (“in my opinion it is good enough, because the way the teacher teaches English, she doesn’t always use full English, she usually also uses Bahasa, every English statement is translated by her so we can understand it”) The data above showed that the student admitted that his teacher taught them by using Bahasa in order to make the students easier in understanding the lesson. Even though she http://journal.unnes.ac.id/ LANGUAGE CIRCLE: Journal of Language and Literature .... p-ISSN 1858-0165 Available online at http://journal.unnes.ac.id e-ISSN 2460-853X 328 explained the material in English, she used to translate it into Bahasa, so the students could understand it well. In understanding the characteristics of whole class, the second teacher explained that she saw the students whom she taught were mostly smart, creative and good. Most of them were good students. However, she used to find some students who liked disturbing their friends. R : “Bisakah Ibu menjelaskan karakteristik umum siswa-siswa di kelas yang Ibu ajar”? (“could you explain the characteristics of the class you teach”?) T2 : Peserta didik yang saya ajar selama ini yah ada yang cerdas, kreatif juga, tapi mereka sih rata- ratanya baik, rata-rata baik dalam kelas. (“the students I teach are some smart, creative, but they are averagely kind in the class”) c. Teacher 3 Observations conducted by the researcher toward the third teacher resulted that the third teacher’s score was 2 (low). It indicated that the third teacher was the same as the second teacher. Since the first sub-competence covers some points, the third teacher’s competence for those points was described as follow. In understanding the cognitive ability of the students, the data gained from the interview indicated that the teacher used to understand the students’ ability, not only the good students, but also the poor students. T3:“Dari semua kelas satu yang saya anggap paling bisa, salah satu siswa saya ada namanya Ct kemudian yang paling kurang diantaranya adalah Id”. (“from all first grade student, the one who I assume good is namely Ct, then the poor one is Id”) Not only understanding the cognitive ability of the students but the third teacher also tried to increase the students’ proficiency. Based on interview, the teacher explained her effort in increasing the students’ proficiency. T3 : “Ya kalau untuk siswa Ct itu saya rasa kita harus berikan pengayaan-pengayaan, pengayaan untuk lebih memperhatikan, lebih meyakinkan bahwa Bahasa Inggris itu memang perlu dan saya usahakan bagaimana cara untuk melanjutkan ya sebagai generasi sayalah sebagai seorang guru. Dan untuk anakda Id saya hanya berusaha memberikan remedial-remedial, pengertian- pengertian bahwa bahasa Inggris itu sangat dibutuhkan………..”. (“well, for Ct I think I have to give repetition to make her more focus, ensure her that English is very important and I try to continue, as the next generation of me as a teacher. Meanwhile, for Id I just try to give remedial, understanding that English is really needed”) The data could prove that the third teacher knew about what to do in increasing the students’ proficiency, whether the good students or the poor students. Evaluation was used to defend the ability of good students and giving remedial was the way to increase the ability of the poor students. Besides that, she also gave understanding to the students about how important learning English was. The teacher even appreciated the effort of the students in learning, however the students’ achievement was. T3:“Yah, sekecil apapun saya tetap menghargainya walaupun dia hanya, seumpamanya saya mau memberikan tugas untuk membuat kalimat, nah walaupun hanya satu kata yang benar dalam kalimatnya itu ya saya memberikan jempol”. (“yeah, however their achievement is, I always appreciate it, even though they only, for example, I want to assign them to arrange sentences, even though there is only one correct word in a sentence, I always appreciate it”) The data showed that the teacher really appreciated the students’ effort. By doing such a thing, the students would not be reluctant in learning. They would be motivated to be active in learning process without feeling underestimated. This phenomena was proved from the observation that the teacher used to appreciate the students effort in which she never underestimated the students who did the exercise or task incorrectly. Another point of understanding the students is the students’ prior knowledge. The teacher gave her information from the interview that she paid http://journal.unnes.ac.id/ LANGUAGE CIRCLE: Journal of Language and Literature .... p-ISSN 1858-0165 Available online at http://journal.unnes.ac.id e-ISSN 2460-853X 329 attention to the students’ understanding about the previous material. She said that she would not move to the next material if the current material was not understood by most of the students yet. Although she admitted paying attention to the students’ prior knowledge, based on the observation for several meetings, the researcher did not see any evidence. She never asked the students about material in the previous meeting before starting the new lesson. Understanding the characteristics of whole class is also important for the teacher to know. In interview section, the third teacher explained that the students were absolutely different from one another. She realized that no one of the students who were definitely same. Some of them were smart and some others were also creative. For them who were not creative in learning, the teacher had her effort to encourage the students to be better and the smart students as well. T3 : “………diantara siswa-siswa kita tidak mungkin sama semua, pasti ada yang cerdas, ada yang biasa-biasa saja, ada yang kreatif. Namun yang tidak kreatif dan tidak cerdas itu yang kita usahakan bagaimana caranya sifat kekurang kreatifannya itu dikurangi, dan yang memang cerdas kita juga berusaha bagaimana cara untuk menambah kecerdasan anak didik tersebut”. (“……….among the students, they must not be all the same, some of them are smart, some others are common, and some are creative. However, the ones who are not creative and smart, I try to reduce those weakness, and for the ones who are smart, I also try to increase their achievement”) Commonly, the teacher could understand her students in learning. Based on the observation, when the students got confused, the teacher tried to help them by answering the question or explaining the material. It was also admitted by one of the students whom interviewed by the researcher. It could be seen in the data from interview toward the student that the student admitted her teacher could understand the students well. The student said that by the end of every lesson, the teacher used to clarify whether the students understand or not about the material she had presented and explained. When most of the students still needed more explanation, the teacher explained the material again. d. Teacher 4 The result of observation toward the fourth teacher is same as the first teacher’s score that is 3 (medium). It means that the fourth teacher has good competence for the first sub-competence. Since the data gained was not only from the observation, the researcher elaborated the data gained from observation with data from interview. In understanding the cognitive ability of the students, the data gained from the interview indicated that the fourth teacher knew and understood her students well. To indicate that the teacher understood her students’ personality was to know all the students’ names. Based on the observation, the researcher saw that the teacher could recognize all the students by directly mentioning their name in teaching and learning process without seeing the attendance list. The teacher also could identify all students, whether the best, good or poor students. Since the teacher could identify the students, she also had her way in handling the students, whether the good students or the poor students. The data showed that the teacher could understand her students well. She had the effort to defend the ability of the good students and effort to motivate the poor students. She used to give assignment and exercise to the students to foster them to learn actively. T4 :”Ya memancing dengan mengerjakan soal. Jadi untuk memancing siswa yang kurang, saya biasa mengambil nilai secara langsung, langsung naik ke papan tulis. Jadi disitu bisa tercover betul- betul, apakah dia bisa mengerti………”. (“by encouraging them with some exercise. So, to encourage the poor students, I usually score the students directly, directly doing the exercise on the whiteboard. So I can see whether they really understand it or not…….”) http://journal.unnes.ac.id/ LANGUAGE CIRCLE: Journal of Language and Literature .... p-ISSN 1858-0165 Available online at http://journal.unnes.ac.id e-ISSN 2460-853X 330 Understanding the students’ characteristic is one of the points in the first sub-competence of pedagogical competence. The researcher asked the questions related to understanding the students’ characteristics. One of the students interviewed by the researcher also admitted that his English teacher could understand her students’ characteristics. Another important point in understanding the students is giving the same chance to all students to be involved in the teaching and learning process. Based on the observation, the teacher gave the same chance to all students to actively participate in the classroom activities. She did not tend to focus on certain students. Besides that, she used to help the students in understanding the material discussed and facilitated them with some media, such as interesting pictures. In terms of understanding the previous knowledge of the students, the fourth teacher also realized that it was very important to identify the previous material and the students’ understanding toward that material. T4:”Sangat penting, karena kita bisa… apa, mengetahui sampai dimana pemahaman siswa sehingga kita bisa memberikan lagi pemahaman yang lebih sampai batas kemampuannya terhadap materi yang kita ajarkan”. (“yes, it is very important because I can know to what extent they understand the material so I can give more explanation based on their ability to understand the material given”) The teacher also admitted that she used to review the lesson in the last previous meeting before coming to the new one. Based on the data, the teacher understood how important to know the students’ previous knowledge about the last material. She thought that it was something she must know because by knowing how far the students understand, she could explain again about the material for the students who still needed clarity about the previous material before continuing to the next material.] CONCLUSION [Based on the result and discussion, it could be concluded that the four teachers had different quality in terms of pedagogical competence in regard to understanding the students. Since the teachers’ quality is the most important point in developing the students’ learning proficiency, the four English teachers still need more improvement. Because in Indonesia, the teachers who meet the standards of being professional teachers are the ones who have the required qualifications and truly understand what to do, whether inside or outside the classroom.] REFERENCES Apelgren, Karin et.al. (2010). Pedagogical Competence – A Key to Pedagogical Development and Quality in Higher Education. Uppsala University. Arikunto. S. (2006). Prosedur Penelitian: Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. Jakarta: PT. Rineka Cipta. Bean, J.C. (1996). Engaging Ideas: The Professor's Guide to Integrating Writing, Critical Thinking, and Active Learning in the Classroom. Retrieved from http://web.presby.edu/writingcenter/newsle tter/studentpref.html. Direktorat Tenaga Kependidikan Depdiknas. (2005). Peraturan Pemerintah Republik Indonesia, Nomor 19 tahun 2005 tentang Standar Nasional Pendidikan. Jakarta: Depdiknas. Direktorat Tenaga Kependidikan Depdiknas. (2003). Standar Kompetensi Guru SMU. Jakarta: Depdiknas. Eken, D. K. (1999). Through the eyes of the learner: Learner observations of teaching and learning. ELT Journal, 53(4): 66-80. Gall, J.P, et al. (2005). Applying Educational Research: A Practical Guide. United Stated: PearsonEducation. Gay, L.R, et al. (2006). Educational Research, A Practical Guide. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall. Kementerian Pendidikan Nasional. Direktorat Jenderal Peningkatan Mutu Pendidik dan Tenaga Kependidikan. (2010). Pedoman http://journal.unnes.ac.id/ http://web.presby.edu/writingcenter/newsletter/studentpref.html http://web.presby.edu/writingcenter/newsletter/studentpref.html LANGUAGE CIRCLE: Journal of Language and Literature .... p-ISSN 1858-0165 Available online at http://journal.unnes.ac.id e-ISSN 2460-853X 331 Pelaksanaan Penilaian Kinerja Guru (PK Guru). Jakarta. www.bermutuprofesi.org Mulyasa, E. (2009). Standar Kompetensi dan Sertifikasi Guru. Bandung: PT Remaja Rosdakarya. Oxford, L. R. (1990). Language Learning Strategy: What Every Teacher Should Know. New York: Newbury House Publisher. Rasyid, M. A. (2009). Tefl I Lecture Materials. English Education Department. Risan, R. (2021). Journal of English Language Teaching Students ’ Perspective toward English Learning for Non-EFL Students in Higher Education. Journal of English Language Teaching, 10(3), 494–506. https://doi.org/10.24036/jelt.v9i3.114388 Risan, R., Hasriani, H., & Muhayyang, M. (2021). The Implementation of CTL Method in teaching English to the students of MAN 1 Enrekang. Language Circle: Journal of Language and Literature, 16(1), 125–136. https://doi.org/10.15294/lc.v16i1.31158 Sadilia, S. (2011). The Students’ Perception toward English Teachers’ Pedagogical Competence. Thesis of FBS UNM. Sagala, S. (2009). Kemampuan Profesional Guru dan Tenaga Kependidikan. Bandung: Alfabeta. Sugiyono, (2009). Metode Penelitian dan Kualitatif dan R & D. Bandung:Alfabeta. Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia. 2005. Undang-Undang Nomor 14 Tahun 2005 tentang Guru dan Dosen. Jakarta: Depdiknas. Walter, E. (2008). Cambridge Advanced Learners’ Dictionary 3rd Edition. Cambridge University Press. http://journal.unnes.ac.id/ http://www.bermutuprofesi.org/