An Analysis of Students’ Inhibition Level on Synchronous Class Using Video Conferencing
INTRODUCTION
According to the World Health Organization (2020), COVID-19 is the infectious sickness
instigated by the coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, which is a respiratory pathogen. It
was exposed in the last months
of 2019 in
a wet market
in Wuhan. The
Director of WHO
publicized the outburst as a
pandemic due to the swift surge in the number of cases outside of China. Based
on Oxford Learner’s Dictionaries, a pandemic is a sickness that extends over an
entire country or the whole world. Social distancing is a conscious increase in
the physical space between people to
control the dissemination
of disease (Red
Cross, 2020). This
pandemic has enforced
global physical interaction of industries, sports events, and school
activity by insistent all institutions to drift to online platforms (Adedoyn
& Soykan, 2020).
Online
learning is one
of the functions
of the internet
which is intended
to develop materials for
educational tenacities, instructional distribution, and controlling of programs
(Fry, 2001). It refers to a teaching and learning setting where: (1) the
learner is at a remote distance from the instructor, (2) the learner employs
technology to get the materials of learning, (3) there is a practice of
technology to create interaction between the learners, instructor and their
peers, and (4) some
kind of funding
is served to
learners (Anderson, 2011).
Hrastinski (2008) addresses two
forms of online
learning, those are
asynchronous and synchronous
e-learning. Asynchronous e-learning, commonly assisted by platforms like
e-mail and discussion boards. It provides
a connection among
learners and with
teachers, even when
participants cannot be online
simultaneously. Synchronous e-learning
generally supported by
media such as videoconference and
chat, and support
a real-time interaction
between the participants (Hrastinski, 2008).
A videoconference class is preferred to fulfill the
requests of face-to-face learning during this
pandemic. Since it
allows the connected
users to share
a visual and
audio connection in real-time
(Al-Samarraie, 2019). By
using a videoconference as
the platform, the
students and lecturer are
expected to experience
more social interaction.
It is also
an attempt to
avoid frustration by enabling
students and lecturers
to do a
question and answer
session simultaneously.
Al-Samarrie (2019) states
interactive
videoconferencing (IVC) is
the type of videoconferencing that empowers
one-to-many interaction where the host delivers their material to the
audiences in real-time.
However, this kind
of videoconferencing requires
a stable environment of
internet connection and
advanced configuration to
maintain the interaction between the participants.
During IVC classes in these pandemic times, the writer
noticed that the students become less responsive toward the lecturer’s
question. The lecturer needs to repeat the question for few more time
after waiting for
the response before
finally, one or two students
give their answer. This
situation differs from
how the face-to-face
or physical class
would occur. The
lecturer would not need
to wait too
long for a
response in a
classroom setting where
they meet the students in the same room. This situation
brings the writer to a question of whether it is caused by inhibition or not,
and if it is, then what are the factors that appear in students’ inhibition.
Inhibition is sets
of barricades to
shield ones’ ego (Brown, 2000)
or a temperamental proclivity to reveal caution,
anxiety, or restraint in reaction to unfamiliar surroundings, objects, and circumstances
(Kagan et all,
1988). According to
Kurtus (2019), inhibition
to speak happened simultaneously with
the distress of
making mistakes that
becomes a reason
for students being afraid
of appearing injudicious
in front of
other people. Richard
and Schmdt (2002) also
consider inhibition as a negative
factor that hinders
students from their
natural performance and makes them act in a reluctant, hesitant, or
anxious way.
According to Mohseni
and Ameri (2010),
the source of
attitude problems, including inhibition, can be categorized into
four: (1) cognitive factors that cover skill and understanding about grammar,
vocabulary, and pronunciation, (2) affective factors that consist of the
absence of motivation, insecurity,
self-confidence,
self-respect, and language
ego, (3) the
factors that come from
classroom interaction, “since
a good relationship
of classroom members
is an important key
to create an
ideal teaching environment” (Humaera, 2015), (4) fear of
language evaluation. Inhibition that comes together with affective
factors will be more influential for the learning process compared to the
inhibition caused by cognitive
factors. The mental inhibition such as
lack of self-confidence, learning motivation, anxiety, and shyness more inhibit
students in showing off their personality even though they have comprehension
in language skills such as vocabulary, pronunciation, and grammar.
Previous studies on students’ inhibition have varied
results. Abedini and Chalak
(2017) reported that the
most influential factor
contributing to inhibition
in speaking was
negative evaluation from teachers followed by students’ anxiety and
confidence, and students’ linguistic knowledge.
The findings of
Loan and Tuyen
(2020) revealed that
more factors related
to students cause inhibition than those related to teachers. Most of the
students point out teachers’ teaching
methods, ways of
giving corrective feedback,
and attitudes towards
students’ knowledge and ability
as the factor
that causing inhibition.
Mohseni and Ameri
(2010) identified the three
most influencing factors
are offense or
insult from teacher
or classmates, student's
psychological, and factors that come from cultural and racial.
INFO DAN FILE LENGKAPNYA KLIK DI SINI ATAU HUB 085398507498
TERSEDIA JUGA DI CHANNEL YOU TUBE PEJUANG SKRIPSI
