8 - Ahmad Zakki Maulana et al http://jurnal.fkip-uwgm.ac.id/index.php/Script P-ISSN: 2477-1880; E-ISSN: 2502-6623 October 2020, Vol. 5 No. 2 C h a r a c t e r B u i l d i n g i n L a n g u a g e T e a c h i n g : A n A n a l y s i s o f t h e L e a r n i n g A c t i v i t i e s Mohammad Ilyas Mulawarman University, Indonesia Email Correspondence: milyas1010@gmail.com Abstract Background: This study aimed to describe how to implement character building in language teaching (Indonesia and English) at Junior High School. Methodology: The study was conducted at SMP Muhammadiyah 2 Samarinda, and the teachers were the subject of the study. In this research, the teachers were assigned as Teacher A, Teacher B, and Teacher C. Teacher A and Teacher C are females, and Teacher B is male. Findings: According to the findings of this research, the six different lesson plans that were analyzed contained 12 different character values. The character values were reinforced by two different teachers throughout the various learning activities, and they were also mentioned in a special sub-title. Conclusion: the points that demonstrate Workshops, seminars, and guidebooks are needed for teachers to learn more about how to assist their students develop as individuals. English teachers should learn more about creating lesson plans which emphasize character development. It is additionally proposed that the teacher make the students realize that they will be developing character by teaching character values in a more direct manner, so that the students may feel the development personally. Keywords: character building; English subject; Junior High School. DOI : http//dx.doi.org/10.24903/sj.v5i2.1080 Received : August 2020 Accepted : September 2020 Published : October 2020 Copyright Notice : Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal. http://jurnal.fkip-uwgm.ac.id/index.php/Script https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ 196 Script Journal: Journal of Linguistic and English Teaching P-ISSN: 2477-1880; E-ISSN: 2502-6623 October 2020, Vol. 5 No. 2 1. INTRODUCTION Indonesian moral degradation in Indonesia has become a more significant concern today. Education plays a vital role in addressing the issue of integrating character building in education. Character education is a national movement in schools that foster culture, responsible and caring young people as modeling and developing good character through teaching. Developing a moral character by emphasizing universally shared principles It is the deliberate and proactive effort made by schools, districts, and states to develop ethical ideals such as compassion, honesty, justice, responsibility, and respect for self and others in children. No "quick fix" exists for character education (Farahmadnian & Pacukaj, 2014; Thalib et al., 2016; Yulianti et al., 2016). It implies that character education building requires a long-term undertaking that requires support from all areas of humanity to attain its objective. In order to construct the character values, character building needs a motor. Here, teachers play an essential role in those values. Teachers must be able to find ways to implement character building in the teaching and learning process. Since 2010, character building in education has been a program that the government has socialized. All schools in Indonesia are required to implement this program. In line with the government’s regulation, there are 20-character values to be developed (Nasional, 2010). They are religiousity, honesty, responsibility, healthy lifestyle (bergayahidupsehat), disciplined, hardwork, confidence, enterpreneurship, logical, critical, creative, and innovative thinking, independence, curiousity, joyfulness of reading, cooperativeness, obedience, respect, courtesy, democratic, environmental care, nationalism, and respect for diversity.The government has also launched the mapping of character values to be developed in each subject. For Indonesian and English, there are six character values, that is, respect for diversity, courtesy, confidence, independence, cooperativeness, and obedience (Rahman et al., 2017; Retnawati et al., 2018). The purpose of character development is to increase the quality of implementation and outcomes of education in shaping the character or morals of students in a holistic, balanced manner. Through the practice of character development, students are intended to become individuals who adhere to the Pancasila ideology of Indonesia. Character education contributes to the formation of school culture, which emphasizes the attitudes, customs, habits, and symbols practiced by all school stakeholders and their communities . Therefore, character education is anticipated to contribute to the formation of a new generation in Indonesia. 197 Character Building in Language Teaching: An Analysis of the Learning Activities Mohammad Ilyas Character values are interwoven into the teaching and learning process, self-development activities, and school culture (Dwiningrum, 2013; Sutomo, 2014; Trisiana et al., 2015). Therefore, teachers and students should incorporate these ideals into the curriculum, syllabus, and lesson plan. According to Retnawati et al. (2018) there are three guiding principles for implementing character education in schools so that pupils see the character values as their own and accept responsibility for them. The primary tenet is continuity. It implies that the process of implementing character values is lengthy, commencing at the beginning of an education level and lasting until its conclusion. The second concept is that character values be infused into all academic disciplines, self- improvement activities, and school cultures. It indicates that character values are incorporated into every intra- and extra-curricular activity topic. The third point is that character values should not be taught as separate concepts. These values will also not be included in the examination. They are integrated into the activities of the class. However, pupils must recognize that they are in the process of forming moral principles. English has become the foreign language most commonly studied in Indonesia. It is a required subject taught at all levels of education, from elementary to graduate. It is advantageous to teach excellent character through language by utilizing good words and expressing them in an excellent manner. Therefore, character values can be fostered through the study of English. The development of character qualities through the English subject is anticipated to have a favorable effect on children and national development (Burr et al., 2014; Suprayitno et al., 2019). Before integrating character development into the teaching and learning process, teachers should develop lesson plans that incorporate character development. According to Jensen (2001), a lesson plan is an exceptionally beneficial instrument that combines guides, a resource, and a historical document that reflects our teaching philosophy, student demographic, textbooks, and most importantly, our students' goals. The objectives were in both the cognitive and affective domains. To incorporate character development into the teaching and learning process, the lesson plan must be modified. Adaptation may involve adding or modifying learning processes, indicators, and evaluation strategies to incorporate character values into the teaching and learning process (Malihah, 2015; Saidek & Islami, 2016). Budiastuti (2010), Rosalina (2011), Yulianthi (2012) demonstrated in different subjects that character development was incorporated into the teaching and learning process. The first study by Budiastuti (2010)) revealed that character development was adopted in the fashion design class at Vocational High School 6 in Jogjakarta. The character values integrated were 198 Script Journal: Journal of Linguistic and English Teaching P-ISSN: 2477-1880; E-ISSN: 2502-6623 October 2020, Vol. 5 No. 2 religiosity, honesty, enterpreneurship, creativity, and responsibility since the students frequently work in the studio and directly deal with customers. The subsequent research by Rosalina (2011) reveals that instructors in Gugus 4, Kecamatan Batujajar, Kabupaten Bandung Barat have already developed lesson plans incorporating character values. However, teachers did not devise activities to implement character development in the classroom. The other study by Yulianthi (2012) demonstrates that implementing character development in the English subject at Laboratory Junior High School, State University of Malang, was successful. However, the survey reveals that teachers rarely include character qualities in their class plans. Teachers favored implementing character values directly over including character values in lesson plans. Concerning this topic, the researcher chose to investigate the implementation of character development in English language instruction at SMP Muhammadiyah 2 Samarinda. Since this school is regarded as a private school in Samarinda, it is anticipated that the outcomes of this study will serve as a model for character development implementation. 2. METHODOLGY According to Sari & Bogdan (1992), qualitative research has five qualities. The natural environment is the immediate source of data, and the researcher is the principal instrument. In this study, the researcher entered the class and sat in the back row. The researcher's presence did not alter the natural atmosphere of the classroom because the children at this institution are accustomed to being monitored by numerous researchers. The second characteristic of qualitative research is its descriptive nature. Instead of numbers, the data collected is in words or images. Third, it focuses on processes rather than merely outcomes or goods. Fourth, it tends to perform inductive data analysis. Fifth, "Meaning" is an indispensable component of qualitative research. The study was conducted at SMP Muhammadiyah 2 Samarinda, located at Sempaja, East Kalimantan. The setting was chosen based on some considerations. First, the school implemented character-building immediately after the government launched the character- building program in 2010. It is shown by the mission and vision of this school that are oriented toward implementing character building. Second, the school is considered in Samarinda based on the input and output rank (Diknas Kota Samarinda: 2012). As a Junior High School in Samarinda, this school must have high-quality human resources, school facilities, and a teaching and learning process. Third, English is taught six hours a week at this school. In line with the principle of character building released by (Nasional, 2010), character building is a 199 Character Building in Language Teaching: An Analysis of the Learning Activities Mohammad Ilyas habituation process. From the explanation above, this school's English teaching and learning process is a perfect medium to implement character values, so it can be a model of character- building implementation for other schools. The subjects of the study were the English teachers of SMP Muhammadiyah 2 Samarinda. In this research, the teachers were assigned as Teacher A, Teacher B, and Teacher C. Teacher A and Teacher C are females, and Teacher B is male. Teacher A and Teacher C were certified teachers, while Teacher B is still a junior. Teacher A has attended a seminar dealing with character building, while Teacher B and Teacher C have not. The researcher took the English teachers from grades VII and VIII as the subjects because of several considerations. First, the teachers were chosen by the school authority. The English teachers’ coordinator in the school permitted the researcher to conduct research with two English teachers from grade VII and one English teacher from grade VIII. Second, the researcher could not conduct the research with English teachers from grade IX because they had to prepare the students for National Examination. The researchers did document study, observations, and interviews to obtain the data. The document studied was the teachers’ lesson plans. The researcher investigated whether character building was mentioned in the lesson plans or not. In the document study, the researcher used a checklist based on Panduan Pendidikan Karakter released by (Nasional, 2010). Then the researcher compared the lesson plans to the classroom teaching and learning process. The observations were conducted from November 17th until 29th, 2016. To know the natural condition of implementing character building in English subjects, the researcher did two observations for each teacher. The participants of this research were six classes taught by three English teachers. The classes consist of four classes for VII graders and two for VIII graders. The researcher used nonparticipant observation in this study. The researcher did not actively participate in the teaching and learning process to keep the natural and original condition during the observation. During the observation process, the researcher sat in the back row and made field notes to record the activities in the class. The field notes dealt with character building in the English teaching and learning process. It could be seen through how the teacher taught the character values and what character values appeared during the teaching and learning process. The field note form is provided in Table 1. Table 1 The Field Note Form Character Learning Teacher’s Students’ Possible Notes values in Activity activity Activity character lesson plan values to be implemented Pre- activity 200 Script Journal: Journal of Linguistic and English Teaching P-ISSN: 2477-1880; E-ISSN: 2502-6623 October 2020, Vol. 5 No. 2 Main activity Post activity As seen from table 1, the field note was in the form of a table containing five columns. They were character values that appeared in the lesson plan, learning activities, teacher’s activities, students’ activities, possible character values to be implemented in the class, and notes. The second column was divided into pre-, main, and post-activity. To know the implementation of character building in the teaching and learning activity, the researcher wrote down the activities in that field note form in detail. Basically, the interview was used to obtain the data from the English teachers to support and crosscheck the findings through the observations. In order to conduct an effective interview, an interview guide was needed to control the questions and answers in the discussion. In this study, there eight questions were given to the subjects. Question 1 was made to determine the teacher’s background knowledge about character building. Question 2 concerned the teacher’s experience in joining training or workshop about character building. Question number 3 was made to dig up the teacher’s opinion on implementing character building in English subjects. Question number 4 to 8 related to the implementation of character building in English subject. This study's data were qualitatively examined and published descriptively. Observational and interview data were analyzed using a method proposed by (Bryman & Burgess, 1994). Prior to data analysis, the gathered data were reduced and separated into relevant and irrelevant categories. Relevant data are those that can be used to support the investigation, whereas irrelevant data do not contribute meaningfully to the study. The pertinent data were evaluated, while the unnecessary data were removed. Next was data presentation. The data were identified, categorized, organized, and clarified. The identification process consisted of recognizing and verifying the data. The data were then categorized and organized according to the research questions. We acquired the data from the lesson plan by carefully reading the lesson plan and picking the relevant data. The statistics were then clarified with English teachers. Finally, descriptive results of the analysis were provided. 3. FINDINGS Before doing the observations, the researcher analyzed the lesson plans of the three English teachers. The researcher assigned them teachers A, B, and C. The researcher took two samples of lesson plans from each teacher; therefore, the researcher got 6 lesson plans in total. 201 Character Building in Language Teaching: An Analysis of the Learning Activities Mohammad Ilyas 3.1 The Character Values within Teacher A’s Lesson Plans The researcher examined the lesson plans that Teacher A had provided, and from that, they were able to identify several characters that Teacher A intended to use in her classroom. In the first lesson plan given by teacher A, the researcher found the values of confidence, appreciation, responsibility, and innovative and critical thinking. The second lesson plan given by teacher A contains the values of confidence, creativity, responsibility, open-mindedness, and discipline. However, some of the values were not included in the character values launched by the government. Those values were appreciation and open-mindedness. After the section titled "Instructional Objectives," Teacher A included a specific point in the lesson plans where she discussed the importance of having good character. The researcher looked in the "Learning Activities" section, but she was unable to uncover any information that elaborated on character values. The "Learning Activities" were conceived of by Teacher A in the format of a table with four columns. The first column included the various types of activities, followed by the actions of the teacher, the students, and the total amount of time. Teacher A did not include a separate column for character values in their assignment. 3.2 The Character Values within Teacher B’s Lesson Plans The researcher examined the lesson plans that Teacher B had provided, and from that, they were able to identify several characters that Teacher B intended to use in her classroom. The first lesson plan contained the values of confidence, logical thinking, criticalness, creativity, and innovativeness, responsibility, and open-mindedness. The second one contained values of confidence, politeness, responsibility, activeness, and cooperativeness. After the point "Indicator," Teacher B mentioned the character values in a special point in the lesson plan. The researcher could also find character values elaboration in the "Learning Activities" area. Teacher B created the "Learning Activities" table as well. Teacher B, unlike Teacher A, included a specific column for character values. The table had four columns: steps, activities, time allocation, and character values. 3.3 The Character Values within Teacher C’s Lesson Plans If the first two teachers inserted plenty of character values for their lesson plans, teacher C only mentioned several dominant character values in her lesson plans. She designed a lesson plan for the first meeting with two character values. They were “activeness” and “confidence,” while for the second meeting, the character values in her lesson plan were activeness, confidence, and cooperativeness. 202 Script Journal: Journal of Linguistic and English Teaching P-ISSN: 2477-1880; E-ISSN: 2502-6623 October 2020, Vol. 5 No. 2 Teacher C mentioned character values in a specific point after the point "Indicator," as we can see from the lesson plan above. The researcher could also find character values elaboration in the "Learning Activities" area. Teacher C created the "Learning Activities" table as well. Teacher C, like Teacher B, included a specific column for character values. The table had four columns, one for each of the following: steps, activities, time allocation, and character values. The researcher discovered 12-character values from the six lesson plans provided by Teachers A, B, and C. Confidence was the most common, followed by logical thinking, politeness, respect, and discipline. Furthermore, table 2 summarizes the values contained within the lesson plans. Table 2 The Character Values Appearing in the Lesson Plans No. Character Values in Frequency the Lesson Plan 1. Confidence 6 x 2. Responsibility 4 x 3. Activeness 3 x 4. Innovativeness 2 x 5. Criticalness 2 x 6. Creativity 2 x 7. Open-mindedness 2 x 8. Cooperativeness 2 x 9. Logical Thinking 1 x 10. Politeness 1 x 11. Appreciating (respect) 1 x 12. Discipline 1 x After studying the lesson plans, the researcher observed the implementation of character building in the English teaching and learning process. All observations were carried out in two meetings, one for each teacher. Each meeting was 90 minutes. To make the findings more particular and accurate, each observation was undertaken in various classes handled by the professors. 3.4 Character Values Taught in Teacher A’s Classes The researcher observed Teacher A’s class twice. The first observation was done on November 17th, 2015. The class observed was Class 8.2.The lesson took place in the first and second periods. In the first meeting, the topic was the statements of agreement, disagreement, asking for and giving an opinion. During this meeting, Teacher A taught the character values of creativity, confidence, courtesy, religiosity, respect, cooperativeness, criticalness, and hard work. The second observation was done on Monday, January 25th, 2016. The class observed was Class 8.6. This meeting also took place in the first and second periods. In this second meeting, 203 Character Building in Language Teaching: An Analysis of the Learning Activities Mohammad Ilyas the topic was announcement and invitation. During the meeting, she taught the character values of courtesy, discipline, environmental care, cooperativeness, hard work, and respect. 3.5 The Way Teacher A Taught the Character Values In the first meeting, Teacher A taught the students the expression of agreement, disagreement, asking for, and giving an opinion. The class took place in the first and second periods. At the lesson's beginning, the students prayed and greeted the teacher. The character values of religion and courtesy were inherent in the praying and reading activities. Before discussing the topic, the teacher suggested the students be creative and confident during the lesson. Here, the teacher taught the values of creativity and confidence using direct statements. The skill taught at that meeting was listening to skill. However, the teacher did not teach in the language laboratory. She taught listening by reading aloud some sentences twice and asking the students to write whether the statements were in agreement or disagreement. The values of respect and hard work were inherent in the activity. After that, the students were asked to discuss the answers with a partner. The character values of cooperativeness and criticalness were not directly stated, but inherent in asking the students to do the task. After some minutes, the teacher asked the students to read aloud the answers voluntarily. The students raised their hands enthusiastically. The teacher then pointed some students, and the students answered the questions confidently. In the next activity, the teacher gave a worksheet containing material for the topic of asking for and giving an opinion. The teacher asked the students’ opinion about ants. The students raised their hands enthusiastically to get the opportunity to answer that ant is a diligent and hard-working animals. Here, the students inferred the value of hard-working. Afterward, the teacher taught the value of hard work by using direct statement to encourage the students to be diligent and work hard too in studying to gain success. The teacher then read aloud a conversation and asked the students to repeat it after her. The students worked with their partners and answered some questions related to the conversations. The values of cooperativeness and criticalness were inherent in the activity. After that, the students raised their hands enthusiastically and read aloud the answers confidently. The last learning activity for that day’s lesson was the students’ making a summary from the material shown in the PowerPoint slides. In the post activity, the teacher gave homework to the students to make a conversation containing the expressions of agreement, disagreement, asking for and giving an opinion. 204 Script Journal: Journal of Linguistic and English Teaching P-ISSN: 2477-1880; E-ISSN: 2502-6623 October 2020, Vol. 5 No. 2 Before ending the lesson, the teacher asked whether the students found difficulties or not during the lesson. The teacher greeted the students to end the lesson. In the second observation, the teacher explicitly built the values of discipline and environmental care at the beginning of the lesson. By the time the students finished praying, the teacher had given advice to the students to always be ready for the lesson right after the bell rang. After that, the teacher reminded the students to keep the classroom clean. At this point, the values of discipline and environmental care were not directly stated but inherent in asking the students to clean the classroom before the lesson started. The topic for the lesson was an announcement and invitation. The teacher introduced the topic by using real objects and asking the students one by one whether they had ever received an invitation card. Subsequently, the teacher showed a slide containing an example of an announcement and questions related to the text. One of the students read aloud the text while the others were listening. The teacher asked the students to work in pairs and answer the questions. The character value of cooperativeness was not directly stated but was inherent in the pair activity. Then the students raised their hands excitedly to answer the questions loudly. In the middle of the discussion, the teacher personally gave advice to one student who ignored the lesson. After that, she advised the whole class to work hard and pay attention to the lesson well. Here, Teacher A used a direct statement to teach the character values of hard work and respect. Before ending the lesson for that day, the teacher gave homework to the students. Each student had to make a decorated invitation or announcement text. 3.6 The Character Values Taught in Teacher B’s Classes The researcher also had two observations on Teacher B’s classes. The first observation was done in Class 7.3 on November 21st, 2016. The meeting that day took place on the third and fourth period. The topic for the lesson that day was descriptive text. From the first observation, the researcher found some values taught during the teaching-learning process. The values that were implemented in the first meeting were courtesy, confidence, hard work, respect, and cooperativeness. The second observation was done in Class 7.1 on November 29th, 2016. The lesson took place on the third and fourth periods. Similar to the first meeting, Teacher B also taught descriptive text. In the second observation, Teacher B taught the values of courtesy, independence, respect, and confidence. 3.7 The Way Teacher B Taught the Character Values At the beginning of the first meeting, the values of courtesy and religion were inherent in the pre-activity when the class prayed and greeted. After that, the teacher introduced the topic 205 Character Building in Language Teaching: An Analysis of the Learning Activities Mohammad Ilyas for the day’s lesson, that is, spoken descriptive text about describing someone. Before the speaking activity, the teacher began with some listening exercises to make the students get used to the vocabulary. The teacher played an audio file about body parts while the students do the worksheet. After that, the teacher and the students discussed the answers together. The value of confidence was inherent when the students read aloud the answers. Afterward, the teacher showed a picture of an actress. Together with the students, the teacher described the artist. Next, the teacher gave the material containing vocabulary in describing people to the students and asked the students whether or not they found difficult words in the material. The teacher asked one student to come to the front and led the class to describe the student together. The value of respect for diversity was inherent during this activity. Afterward, the teacher played a guessing game with the class. She gave some clues about someone working in the school by describing the person’s appearance and asked the students to guess who the person is. The teacher implemented the values of criticalness, logical thinking, and curiosity when she played the game with the class. Those values were not directly stated but were inherent in the game activity. Afterward, the teacher asked the students to make a description of one of their friends in their exercise book. For speaking assessment, the teacher called the students to the front one by one and asked them to describe one of their friends while the other students tried to guess the name of the person being described. This activity's values of hard work, confidence, and curiosity were inherent. In the post-activity, the value of religiosity was inherent in reflection and praying activities. In the second observation, the text discussed was still descriptive text. However, the language skill developed was different. It was reading descriptive text with the topic Hobbies. Before starting the lesson, the teacher greeted the students. To start the lesson, the teacher showed a picture of gardening and the equipment needed. She taught the value of confidence in asking some students to mention the name of the tools loudly. For the main activity, the value of cooperativeness was inherent in group activities. In groups, the students should do some reading exercises. In this activity, the values of cooperativeness were inherent. During the group activity, the teacher always mentioned how much time given to the students to do each task and asked the students to finish the task on time. Here, the students inferred the values of discipline and confirmed by the teacher. Afterward, the teacher and the students discussed the answers together. Before ending the lesson, the teacher and students made conclusions about the lesson. The lesson ended after greetings. 206 Script Journal: Journal of Linguistic and English Teaching P-ISSN: 2477-1880; E-ISSN: 2502-6623 October 2020, Vol. 5 No. 2 From the six observations, the researcher found some character values taught by Teacher A, Teacher B, and Teacher C. Table 3 presents the character values taught by the three teachers in six meetings. Table 3 Character Values Taught by Three Teachers No. Character Values Taught by Three Teachers Frequency 1. Creativity 1 x 2. Confidence 5 x 3. Hard work 3 x 4. Courtesy 6 x 5. Religiosity 2 x 6. Respect 4 x 7. Cooperativeness 4 x 8. Criticalness 3 x 9. Discipline 2 x 10. Environmental care 1 x 11. Independence 1 x 12. Respect for diversity 1 x 13. Logical thinking 1 x 14. Curiosity 1 x According to the table above, the three English teachers taught 15-character values during the six observations. The most commonly taught value was civility, whereas the least frequently taught values were creativity, environmental stewardship, independence, respect for variety, logical reasoning, and curiosity. These 15 ideals were taught in various ways. Direct statements were used to teach some of the ideals. Other values were implicitly embedded in activities, not explicitly expressed but implied in requesting pupils to perform something and deduced by the students and affirmed by the teacher. Teachers frequently did not declare the character values clearly when teaching them, but they were implicit in some exercises. In the six observations, this technique was used 14 times. Making students infer and affirm values was a less commonly utilized strategy for teaching character qualities. In the six observations, this technique was used only twice. 4. DISCUSSION Based on the document study findings, all teachers have designed lesson plans with character values. The values were confidence, responsibility, activeness, innovativeness, criticalness, creativity, open-mindedness, cooperativeness, logical thinking, courtesy, respect, and discipline. Faridi & Bahri (2016), Lestari (2019) stated the Educational Authority has already mapped six character values for English subjects for junior high school. Concerning the formulation of a lesson plan that includes character development, it can be concluded that all three teachers have incorporated character values into their lesson plans. The 207 Character Building in Language Teaching: An Analysis of the Learning Activities Mohammad Ilyas character values were located in a special sub-title below the “Indicator” sub-title. Unfortunately, the values that were mentioned in their lesson plans did not cover the six character values for English subjects. Those values were not elaborated much in each learning activity in the learning procedure. Teachers B and C only distributed those values in the main activity, while teacher A did not mention the values in the learning procedure. The three teachers also did not make any modifications to learning steps, indicators, and assessment techniques in the lesson plan that indicated the implementation of character building (Hoon, 2014; Marini et al., 2018; Nagengast et al., 2014). Regarding the implementation of character building in English subjects, the teachers tended not to explicitly build students’ character by using direct statements. Only teacher A explicitly implemented the character values during the teaching and learning process, whereas teacher B and teacher C did not implement the character values explicitly. Concerning the three principles of the implementation of character building launched by the Educational Authority in 2010, the implementation of character building at SMP Muhammadiyah 2 Samarinda has not fully met the three principles since only one teacher planned and explicitly implemented the character values while the other two teachers did not. Based on the results of this study, the suggestions are primarily addressed to the Educational Authority, English teachers, and future researchers interested in conducting a similar study topic. It is advised that the Educational Authority provide additional direction to instructors in order for character building to be implemented effectively. More workshops and seminars on the execution of character building might provide direction. The workshops and seminars should address how to construct lesson plans and apply character building in English topics properly. The Educational Authority should also implement character-building advice books more widely available so that teachers may easily obtain them. Workshops, seminars, and guide books are crucial for teachers to get additional knowledge to help students develop their character (Ambarita & Purba, 2016; Ratih, 2017). Following that, it is proposed that the school assist teachers in expanding their knowledge of character development. The school should also assess the implementation of character development in the classroom. It is also urged that the school continue to promote the implementation of character development programs. English teachers should learn more about developing lesson plans that include character development. They might receive knowledge by attending seminars or reading guidebooks on the execution of character building published by the Educational Authority. The knowledge they gained can be used to design lesson plans that include character development and to put 208 Script Journal: Journal of Linguistic and English Teaching P-ISSN: 2477-1880; E-ISSN: 2502-6623 October 2020, Vol. 5 No. 2 the values they have planned into action. It is also proposed that the teacher make the students aware that they are in the process of character development by using more direct statements in teaching character values so that the students may directly sense the character development. It is proposed that further scholars look into other aspects of character development. They may be able to witness the material, methodologies, and procedures. The teacher used assessment to conduct character-building in the classroom. They are respect for diversity, courtesy, confidence, independence, cooperativeness, and obedience (Irfan, 2016; Pradana, 2017). The lesson plan from Teacher A, Teacher B, and Teacher C covered 3 of those values. The teachers planned to implement the character values of confidence, politeness, and cooperativeness among the six-character values. The researcher classified the data from the observations to analyze it based on the teacher's techniques for teaching character values. Direct statements were used to teach some of the ideals. Other values were implicitly embedded in activities, not explicitly expressed but implied in requesting pupils to perform something and deduced by the students and affirmed by the teacher. According to Ramli & Wijayanti (2013) state that teachers must make pupils aware that they are in the process of developing good character. Direct statements on character values are one technique to make children aware that they are in the process of character development. According to the observations, only teacher A expressly built the kids' characters through direct statements, while the other teachers did not. Only four qualities were expressly adopted by instructor A: confidence, creativity, hard effort, and respect. Teacher A specifically applied only one of the six mapped values for English: confidence. It is clear from the explanation above that the character values implemented were not the same as those planned by the three teachers. A significant aspect contributed to this. The teacher's lack of experience in integrating character values was a factor. According to the interview results, only instructor A attended the character development workshop. The other two teachers have never attended a workshop or seminar on character development in the English classroom. Teacher plays important roles in the implementation of character building. As stated in Suhardiyanto (2017) states teacher’s roles in implementing character building in the classroom are as facilitator, participant, and motivator. As a result, teachers must have sufficient knowledge and expertise in character development, particularly in English. First, teacher’s lack of knowledge can be seen in the lesson plan. Furthermore, teachers must create lesson plans that involve character development before incorporating character values into the teaching and 209 Character Building in Language Teaching: An Analysis of the Learning Activities Mohammad Ilyas learning process. The teacher should modify the lesson plan in order to incorporate character development into the teaching and learning process. Character values can be integrated into teaching and learning by adding or changing learning phases, indicators, and assessment techniques. However, the study found no adjustment in learning processes, indicators, or assessment techniques in the six lesson plans provided by three English teachers. A lesson plan is an immensely beneficial tool that serves as a guide, resource, and historical document that reflects our teaching philosophy and, more importantly, our student goals (Jensen, 2001). The goal of character development for pupils would be impossible to fulfill if the teacher did not adjust the learning phases, indication, and assessment technique. Only teacher A explicitly implemented character building in the classroom, while the other two teachers did not. From the interview result, Teacher B believes that character building was already integrated into teaching and learning activities. Similar to Teacher B, Teacher C also believes that the activities in the teaching and learning process already involve character values. Therefore, teachers B and C consider that there is no need to use direct statements in teaching character values. According to the findings, the English teachers at SMP Muhammadiyah 2 Samarinda have already integrated character building in the classroom, despite the fact that some of the planned character values did not match. Some values were not applied in the classroom, and some values that were not planned for were implemented during the teaching and learning process. The implementation of character building in English subjects did not fully meet the three principles of character building launched by the Educational Authority in 2010. First, the principle of continuity can be seen only from one character value mentioned in the lesson plan: confidence. The value of confidence appeared in all lesson plans designed by the three teachers. Yet, from the observation result, only teacher A explicitly built the value of confidence in the teaching and learning process. However, the principle of integrating character values in all subject matter was already seen in the school. In school, every subject should integrate character building. English is one of the subjects that must integrate the implementation of character building in the teaching and learning process. As seen from the interview result, the three teachers agreed that the implementation of character building in SMP Muhammadiyah 2 Samarinda. The principal also regularly remindsthe teacher to always implement the character building in every subject. Concerning the third principle of character building, that is, developing the students’ awareness of the character values, from the findings and interview results, only Teacher A used a direct statement to teach the character values, so the principle was not fully implemented by the three teachers. 210 Script Journal: Journal of Linguistic and English Teaching P-ISSN: 2477-1880; E-ISSN: 2502-6623 October 2020, Vol. 5 No. 2 Building a person's character is not easy because it takes time. As a result, this study did not address the teacher's assessment of the students' character development. Furthermore, different ways are required to internalize the character values. Making the pupils aware that they are in the process of character development is also crucial so that the students can judge themselves. As a result, teachers play a vital role in ensuring the success of character development initiatives in Indonesia. 5. CONCLUSION Concerning the formulation of a lesson plan that includes character development, it can be concluded that all three teachers have incorporated character values into their lesson plans. The character values were located in a special sub-title below the “Indicator” sub-title. Unfortunately, the values that were mentioned in their lesson plans did not cover the six character values for English subjects. Those values were not elaborated much in each learning activity in the learning procedure. Teachers B and C only distributed those values in the main activity, while teacher A did not mention the values in the learning procedure. The three teachers also did not make any modifications of learning steps, indicators, and assessment techniques in the lesson plan that indicated the implementation of character building. Regarding the implementation of character building in English subjects, the teachers tended not to explicitly build students’ character by using direct statements. Only teacher A explicitly implemented the character values during the teaching and learning process, whereas teacher B and teacher C did not implement the character values explicitly. Concerning the three principles of the implementation of character building launched by the Educational Authority in 2010, the implementation of character building at SMP Muhammadiyah 2 Samarinda has not fully met the three principles since only one teacher planned and explicitly implemented the character values while the other two teachers did not. Based on the results of this study, the suggestions are primarily addressed to the Educational Authority, English teachers and future researchers interested in conducting a similar study topic. It is advised that the Educational Authority provide additional direction to instructors in order for character building to be implemented effectively. More workshops and seminars on the execution of character building might provide direction. The workshops and seminars should address how to construct lesson plans and apply character building in English topics properly. The Educational Authority should also implement character-building advice books more widely available so that teachers may easily obtain them. Workshops, seminars, and guide 211 Character Building in Language Teaching: An Analysis of the Learning Activities Mohammad Ilyas books are crucial for teachers to get additional knowledge to help students develop their character. Following that, it is proposed that the school assist teachers in expanding their knowledge of character development. The school should also assess the implementation of character development in the classroom. It is also urged that the school continue to promote the implementation of character development programs. English teachers should learn more about developing lesson plans that include character development. They might receive knowledge by attending seminars or reading guidebooks on the execution of character building published by the Educational Authority. The knowledge they gained can be used to design lesson plans that include character development and to put the values they have planned into action. It is also proposed that the teacher make the students aware that they are in the process of character development by using more direct statements in teaching character values so that the students may directly sense the character development. It is proposed that further scholars look into other aspects of character development. They may be able to witness the material, methodologies, and procedures. The teacher used assessment to conduct character-building in the classroom. 6. REFERENCES Ambarita, B., & Purba, S. (2016). Model Development of Character Educational for the State University of Medan Students. Bryman, A., & Burgess, R. G. (1994). Analyzing qualitative data (Vol. 11). Routledge London. Budiastuti, E. (2010). Strategi Penerapan Pendidikan Karakter pada Pembelajaran Praktek Busana. Prosiding Pendidikan Teknik Boga Busana, 5(1). Burr, V., Giliberto, M., & Butt, T. (2014). Construing the cultural other and the self: A Personal Construct analysis of English and Italian perceptions of national character. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 39(1), 53–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2013.09.012 Dwiningrum, S. I. A. (2013). Nation’s character education based on the social capital theory. Asian Social Science, 9(12 SPL ISSUE), 144–155. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v9n12p144 Farahmadnian, H., & Pacukaj, S. (2014). Nationalism based on Western education in the characters in “Child of all Nations.” Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 5(20), 2676–2681. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2014.v5n20p2676 Faridi, A., & Bahri, S. (2016). Developing English Islamic narrative story reading model in Islamic junior high school. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ) Volume, 7. 212 Script Journal: Journal of Linguistic and English Teaching P-ISSN: 2477-1880; E-ISSN: 2502-6623 October 2020, Vol. 5 No. 2 Hoon, C.-Y. (2014). God and discipline: Religious education and character building in a Christian school in Jakarta. South East Asia Research, 22(4), 505–524. https://doi.org/10.5367/sear.2014.0232 Irfan, M. (2016). Role of learning mathematics in the character building. International Conference on Education (ICE2) 2018: Education and Innovation in Science in the Digital Era, 599–604. Jensen, L. (2001). Planning lessons. Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language. Boston, MA: Heinle&Heinly. Lestari, I. P. (2019). Character Building in Junior High School English Language Textbooks: A Content Analysis. Language in India, 19(1). Malihah, E. (2015). An ideal Indonesian in an increasingly competitive world: Personal character and values required to realise a projected 2045 ‘Golden Indonesia.’ Citizenship, Social and Economics Education, 14(2), 148–156. Marini, A., Safitri, D., & Muda, I. (2018). Managing school based on character building in the context of religious school culture (Case in Indonesia). Journal of Social Studies Education Research, 9(4), 274–294. https://doi.org/10.17499/jsser.11668 Nagengast, B., Chiorri, C., Marsh, H. W., & Hau, K.-T. (2014). Character building or subversive consequences of employment during high school: Causal effects based on propensity score models for categorical treatments. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(2), 584–603. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035615 Nasional, K. P. (2010). Pendidikan Karakter di Sekolah Menengah Pertama. Jakarta: Direktorat Pembinaan Sekolah Menengah Pertama, Direktorat Jenderal Manajemen Pendidikan Dasar Dan Menengah. Pradana, S. A. (2017). Using debate to enhance students’ speaking ability as their character building. English Education: Jurnal Tadris Bahasa Inggris, 10(1), 149–163. Rahman, H., Thalib, S. B., & Mahmud, A. (2017). Integrated character education in social sciences with contextual teaching and learning approach. New Educational Review, 48(2), 53–64. https://doi.org/10.15804/tner.2017.48.2.04 Ramli, R., & Wijayanti, W. (2013). Implementasi Pendidikan Karakter Di SMP Negeri 1 Dan Mts Al-Qasimiyah Kecamatan Pangkalan Kuras Kabupaten Pelalawan. Jurnal Akuntabilitas Manajemen Pendidikan, 1(2), 235–251. Ratih, I. A. M. (2017). The analysis of classroom character education in English lessons based on the 2013 curriculum. Journal of Psychology and Instruction, 1(2), 97–105. Retnawati, H., Apino, E., & Anazifa, R. D. (2018). Impact of character education implementation: A goal-free evaluation. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 76(6), 881–899. https://doi.org/10.33225/pec/18.76.881 Rosalina, R. (2011). Penerapan Pendidikan karakter pada pelajaran IPS di sekolah dasar gugus 4, kecamatan Batujajar, kabupaten Bandung Barat. Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia. Saidek, A. R., & Islami, R. (2016). Character Issues: Reality Character Problems and Solutions through Education in Indonesia. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(17), 158–165. 213 Character Building in Language Teaching: An Analysis of the Learning Activities Mohammad Ilyas Sari, K., & Bogdan, R. (1992). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Suhardiyanto, A. (2017). Need Assesment Pengembangan Bahan Ajar Pendidikan Karakter Berbasis Project Based Learning pada Sekolah Menengah Pertama di Kota Semarang. Integralistik, 28(1), 94–104. Suprayitno, E., Rois, S., & Arifin, A. (2019). Character value: The neglected hidden curriculum in Indonesian EFL context. Asian EFL Journal, 23(3), 183–211. https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0- 85067900823&partnerID=40&md5=14ab49e484c4a5e75ec4f3f034fed808 Sutomo, I. (2014). Modification of character education into akhlaq education for the global community life. Indonesian Journal of Islam and Muslim Societies, 4(2), 291–316. https://doi.org/10.18326/ijims.v4i2.291-316 Thalib, S. B., Samad, S., & Mahmud, R. (2016). The development of character education model to improve students’ academic independence in Islamic Boarding School in Sinjai District, Indonesia. New Educational Review, 46(4), 29–39. https://doi.org/10.15804/tner.2016.46.4.02 Trisiana, A., Jutmini, S., Haryati, S., & Hidayatullah, F. (2015). The development strategy of citizenship education in civic education using project citizen model in Indonesia. Journal of Psychological and Educational Research, 23(2), 111–124. https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0- 84948426350&partnerID=40&md5=7665b04538c8ccc4336b3bc264bec435 Yulianthi, L. E. (2012). A study on character building in english subject at laboratory junior high school of state university of Malang. Universitas Negeri Malang. Yulianti, D., Khanafiyah, S., & Sulistyorini, S. (2016). Inquiry-based science comic physics series integrated with character education. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 5(1), 38– 44. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v5i1.5787