Students’ Filler in Academic Presentation

Ira Nurrahmi(1*), Sahril Sahril(2), La Sunra(3),

(1) Universitas Negeri Makassar
(2) Universitas Negeri Makassar
(3) Universitas Negeri Makassar
(*) Corresponding Author



Abstract


This research was aimed to identify which filler that used by the students during the thesis proposal presentation seminar, what factors can cause the filler, and the audience's perception through the use of filler in thesis proposal presentation. This research is a descriptive qualitative study. The sample was taken from the English department students of Universitas Negeri Makassar by using snowball technique sampling. The sample was six students who present their thesis proposal to full fill the magister study. The instruments used in this research were interviews and questionnaires. The data showed that the filler used mainly by the students was filler 'Ee' and "Aa,' and lots of factors caused the use of filler, such as the frequency, duration, function, and the main reason for the filler. The questionnaire was used to identify the audience's perception of the use of filler in the presentation. From the audience's perception, we find out that many participants cannot understand the presentation well. It can be caused by filled pauses in the presentation or caused by another factor such as connection. Even though some of the participants can notice that the presenter uses filled pauses in the presentation. Furthermore, the researcher finds out that the filled pauses in the presentation are bothered the participant if they use the filled pauses often in the middle of the presentation because it can distract the meaning of the presentation


Keywords


Academic; Filler; Presentation; Proposals

Full Text:

PDF

References


Burns, Anne. 1999. Collaborative action research for English Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Clark, H. H., & Fox Tree, J. E. (2002). Using Uh and Um in spontaneous speaking. Cognition.

Corley, M., & Hartsuiker, R. (2011). Why um helps auditory word recognition: The temporal delay hypothesis.

Corley, M., & Stewart, O. W. (2008). Hesitation disfluencies in spontaneous speech: The meaning of um. Language and Linguistics Compass.

Creswell, John w. 2003. Research design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Method Approaches. California: Sage Publications.

Erten, S. (2014). Teaching Fillers and Students’ Filler Usage: A Study Conducted at ESOGU Preparation School. International Journal of Teaching and Education

Harmer, J. (2001). The Practice of English Language Teaching. London: Longman

J. Richards and R. Schmidt. (2012). Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching & Applied Linguistics. Essex: Longman.

Kemenristekdikti. 2012. Kerangka kualifikasi nasional Indonesia. Jakarta: Kementerian, Riset, Teknologi dan Pendidikan Tinggi.

King, Jane. (2002). Preparing EFL Learners for Oral Presentations.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Nunan, David. (2001). Practical English Language Teaching. New York: Mc. Graw Hill.

Rieger, C. (2003). Disfluencies and hesitation strategies in oral L2 tests. Gothenburg Papers in Theoretical Linguistics.

Rose, R. L. (1998). The communicative value of filled pauses in spontaneous speech. Master‟s thesis, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.

Stenström, A. (1994). An Introduction to Spoken Interaction. London: Longman.


Article Metrics

Abstract view : 280 times | PDF view : 65 times

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.