Language and Gender

Gender Differences in Language Use
(A Short Look at Lakoff’s and Tannen’s Theories)

I Dewa Putu Eka Adi Putra
NIM. 0929011016
English Education Department
Post-Graduate Program
Ganesha University of Education

Abstract

Everyone knows that the speech of women and men do not sound the same–a person generally can tell a male voice from a female’s, and knows what constitutes “masculine” or “feminine” speech. This relationship between language and gender is one that has been explored in increasing depth in the past thirty years. Consequently, many works have been conducted concerning this matter. Among others, the works done by feminists Robin Lakoff and Deborah Tannen are the most popular. Their works provide basic theories and concepts that can greatly serve as the basis for much research on the subject on the present day. Regarding such the fact, this paper then tries to provide Lakoff’s and Tannen’s theories about language and gender systematically. The presentation of these theories and concepts, in this paper, is complemented with some samples of everyday-Balinese conversation, intended to make the theories and concepts provided more understandable.

Key words: Language, Gender, Female’s and Everyday-Balinese Conversations

1. Introduction

From childhood, males and females are different in many ways, both physiologically and psychologically. According to Eisenman (1997), women have better memory than men. Meanwhile, men are quite accurate in maintaining a sense of direction but women are not (Eisenman, 1997). This is consistent with the claim that men tend to do better than women on visual-spatial tests and in mathematics (Nemati and Bayer, 2007). Apart from that, there also exist social differences between men and women. According to Nemati and Bayer (2007), men and women, even those within the same group, live in different or separate cultural worlds and, as a result, they promote different ways of speaking. In simple terms, although men and women live in the same environment, they establish different relations with the society as if each belongs to a different environment and culture; the result of which is consequently reflected in the language of both genders as in other aspects of their lives.
Men and women use different linguistic forms in their interaction (cf. Holmes, 1993; Climate, 1997; Tannen, 1990; Kaplan and Farrell, 1994; and Lakoff, 1975). The linguistic forms used by men and women contrast to some extent in all speech communities. For example, Holmes (1993) mentions the Amazon Indians’ language as an extreme example, where the language used by a child’s mother is different from that used by her/his father, and each tribe is distinguished by a different language. In this community, males and females speak different languages.
Less dramatic are communities where men and women speak the same language, but some distinct linguistic features occur in the speech of women and men. These differences range from pronunciation or morphology to vocabulary (Holmes, 1993). Holmes (1993) refers to Japanese, where different words, with the same meaning, are used distinctively by men and women. For example, in this language when a woman wants to say ‘water’, she uses the word ‘ohiya’, whereas a man uses the word ‘miza’.
Furthermore, women tend to use standard language more than men do. Climate (1997) believes that females generally use speech to develop and maintain relationships. They use language to achieve intimacy. Moreover, Tannen (1990) states that women speak and hear a language of connection and intimacy, while men speak and hear a language of status and independence. According to Kaplan and Farrell (1994), messages produced by women are short and their participation is driven by their desire to keep the communication going rather than the desire to achieve consensus. In addition, Lakoff (1975) proposes a theory on the existence of women’s language which states that women’s language is immature, hyper-formal or hyper-polite, and non-assertive, whereas men’s language is assertive, adult, and direct.
All arguments given by the mentioned scholars clearly reveal that women and men use language differently. Regarding such the fact, the writer, in this paper, intends to provide a theoretical description concerning how women’s language different from men’s language, or vice versa. In this paper, theories and concepts about language and gander, especially those which are proposed by Lakoff (1975) and Tannen (1990), are presented. The presentation of these theories and concepts is complemented with some samples of everyday-Balinese conversation, intended to make the theories and concepts provided more understandable.

2. Gender Theories
The biological theory defines gender in terms of biological sex. The theory assumes that men outsize and outpower women and that gender polarities exist in language use (Tannen, 1990). The theory gives little regard to language individualization (Coates, 1993). The biological theory also assumes that gender roles are static and contextually independent. On the other hand, the social constructionist theory defines gender in light of social contexts in which interactions occur (Leaper & Smith, 2004 in Bell, 2007). It assumes that gender roles are fluid and contextually situated, that gendered identities are voluntary, and that males and females choose their gendered identities (Leaper & Smith, 2004 in Bell, 2007).
In terms of language use, the social constructionist theory assumes that males and females are not confined to one particular language style, but exchange styles based on the social context of their interactions (Leaper & Smith, 2004 as cited in Bell, 2007).

3. Gender Differences in Language Use: A Short Look at Lakoff’s and Tannen’s Theories
The investigation and identification of differences between men’s and women’s speech date back across time. Until 1944, no specific piece of writing on gender differences in language appeared (Grey, 1998). As stated by Grey (1998), it was in 1970s that comparison between female cooperativeness and male competitiveness in linguistic behavior began. Since then, the relationship between language and gender has attracted considerable attention. As a result, there is an increasing number of researchers who focus on studying linguistic differences employed by men and women in their interaction. Among those researchers, Robin Lakoff and Deborah Tannen are the most well-known researchers, as they could provide influential theories and concepts concerning language and gender relationship, especially about the differences existing in men’s and women’s language.
3.1 Lakoff’s Theory
Robin Lakoff is a feminist who was one of the premier linguists who initiated an extensive research concerning language and gender. Lakoff’s work has served as the basis for much research on the subject of women's language.
Lakoff (1975) suggests that: “Women’s language – meaning both languages restricted in use to women and language descriptive of women alone – submerges a woman’s personal identity, by denying her the means of expressing herself strongly”. Furthermore, she explains that by doing this, or encouraging women to use expressions that suggest triviality in subject matter and uncertainty about it, they are treated as objects and never as serious persons with individual views. She recognizes that this phenomenon is especially clear linguistically but nevertheless other forms of behavior have the same purpose in society. In addition, the phenomenon leads to women being systematically denied access to power (Lakoff, 1975). She claims that there is a discrepancy between English used by men and women and that the social discrepancies of male and female positions in society contribute to linguistic disparities (Lakoff, 1975).
According to Lakoff (1975), women’s speech differs from men’s speech in several ways. She mentions vocabulary as one level of grammar where there are differences. One example she gives is color names, where she suggests that women have more words describing color. Her example is a man and a woman looking at a wall in pinkish purple and the woman says: “The wall is mauve”. But if a man was to say that the wall was mauve one might conclude that he is either making fun of a woman, is gay or an interior decorator. Additionally, Lakoff (1975) claims that men find color an unworldly, trivial, and irrelevant to the world topic, and since it is nothing important women get to name/decide colors. Men, on the other hand, have a larger vocabulary regarding sport for example. This assumption can be illustrated in Balinese interaction as the followings:
(1) Two young females are talking about clothes
A: “Dije meli baju, Mang?”
(Where did you buy your cloth, Mang?)
B: “Di Hardy’s. Engken teh?”
(At Hardy’s. What’s wrong?)
A: “Melah gati. Ake demen jak warnane.”
(It is really nice. I like its color.
B: “O… Demen ci jak warna ungu?”
(O… Do you like purple?)
A: “Demen gati. Kali meli ah.”
(I like it very much. I want to buy.)

(2) Father and his son are talking about football
Father : “Nyanan dudun je bapak nyaan nah, De.”
(Wake me up later, De.)
Son : “Kenape teh?”
(Why?)
Father : “Bapak kal mebalih sepakbola.”
(I will watch football match.)
Son : “Ape maen?”
(What teams will play?)
Father : “Arsenal ngelawan Juventus.”
(Arsenal versus Juventus)
Son : “Nah. Yang kal mebalih masi.”
(O.K. I will watch as well)

Conversation (1) is typically women’s conversation. Meanwhile, conversation (2) can clearly be seen as men’s conversation. We can come to such a conclusion, as we can see typically-women or -men’s vocabulary in both conversations. In conversation (1), we can see the word “purple”; the word that is closely related to women. Men will not talk about color, especially about purple. They tend to talk about something different like sport as shown in conversation (2). In conversation (2), as we can see, a father and his son are talking about football; this is really men-related word. Women seldom talk about such a thing.
Aside from lexical items, Lakoff (1975) mentions “meaningless” particles (one example of such a meaningless article would be “Oh, dear”) as a special feature of female speech. These particles may have no referent but instead indicate the relationship the speaker feels between herself and her addressee, between her and what she is talking about, as shown in the following conversation:
(3) Wife is asking her husband to wake up
Wife : “Beli , Bangun je malu. Be tengai ne.”
(Beli, please wake up. It has been late morning)
Husbund : “Uh…. Adeng malu.”
(Uh… later.)
Wife : “Dewa ratu……”
(My God…..)

The meaningless particle in conversation (3) is Dewa ratu. This particle has no any referent in this conversation, but it shows what the speaker feels.
“Empty adjectives” is the third level of grammar where male and female speech differs (Lakoff, 1975). The specific category of adjectives that she mentions is the kind that besides their specific and literal meanings could be used to indicate the speaker’s approbation for something. Some of these adjectives are neutral to the gender of the speaker but others are largely curbed to women. Listed in the table below are some of these adjectives.
Table 1: Typical neutral and female adjectives
Neutral Women only
Great Adorable
Terrific Charming
Cool Sweet
Neat Lovely

Beside the three lexical differences mentioned above, Lakoff (1975) claims that syntactically too, women’s speech is peculiar, and that is when it comes to the formation of tag-questions. The definition of a tag question: “a question (as isn’t it in “it's fine, isn't it?”) added to a statement or command (as to gain the assent of or challenge the person addressed); also a sentence ending in a tag question” (Lakoff, 1975). An example; “You are happy, aren’t you?” Tag questions are being used when the speaker is stating a claim, but lacks full confidence in the truth of the claim (Lakoff, 1975). This sentence type disables the speaker to commit and enables him/her to avoid coming in to conflict with the addressee. And, according to Lakoff (1975), this could also give the impression that the speaker is not really sure of him-/herself and lacking opinions of their own, and this criticism has been pointed at women. Tag questions, then, are typical for women’s speech, as shown in the following husband-wife interaction:
(4) Husband and wife are talking about an invitation
Husband : “Pidan nak kundangan ke Banyuning?”
(When do we have to come for the invitation to Banyuning?)
Wife : “Seinget tiang, bin telun je, bin telun kan?”
(As I remember, it is three days later, isn’t it?)
In conversation (4), the use of tag-question shows that the wife (woman) is not sure about when they have to come for the invitation. Apart from that, it can also be interpreted that she does not want to show up their power, even though she, in fact, knows exactly when it is and the answer she gives is true. With tag-question, she wants to decrease her power and allows her husband to decide whether it is true or not.
The use of hedges in various kinds is also a typical feature for female speech (Lakoff, 1975). Hedges are words or sentence fragments like “well”, “y’know”, “kinda”, “I’m not an expert but…” and “sorta”, which convey that the speaker is uncertain about the utterance (Lakoff, 1975). She also claims that women use hedges more because they are socialized to believe that affirming themselves strongly is not polite or ladylike. The utterance “Seinget tiang…..” spoken by the woman (wife) in conversation (4) is consistent with this assumption. The woman produces this utterance, as she does not want to affirm herself. She believes that not affirming herself, especially in the front of her husband, is considered polite.
Moreover, Lakoff (1975) suggests that women use intensifiers like “so”, “rather” and “quite”, more than men do. She gives an example where the speaker is trying to express that they feel strongly about something but does not dare to make it clear how strong it is. So to say, “I like him very much”, is stating exactly how much you like someone, but instead the speaker chooses “I like him so much” to hide the intensity. Again, this feature of female speech is used to hide strong emotions or assertions (Lakoff, 1975).
Hypercorrect grammar, avoidance of coarse language, more frequent apologizing and the usage of super polite forms are additional features women speech (Lakoff, 1975). In other words, women speak as close to the standard language as possible. Lakoff (1975) connects these features with each other since they all come down to the fact that women are not supposed to talk rough or less polite than men. For instance,
(5) A man is talking with his female workmate about her son.
Man : “Engken I Gede? Be Seger?”
(How is Gede? Is he already better?)
Woman : “Sampun. Awakne manten kari panes.” Benjang check-up malih”
(Already. But, his body is still warm. He will do “check-up” tomorrow.)
Man : “Sekenang malu to!”
(Take care of him!)
In conversation (5), the woman’s speech is more polite than the man’s. The woman uses middle speech level of Balinese, while the man uses the lowest level.
Women do not tell jokes. According to Lakoff (1975), this is an American axiom that women cannot tell jokes, always ruin the punch line, get the order mixed up and so forth. Furthermore, they do not get the jokes, because they don’t have a sense of humor (Lakoff, 1975).
Finally, women speak in italics by using intonation equal to underlining words. Lakoff (1975) states that “The more ladylike and feminine you are, the more in italics you are supposed to speak”. She claims that this is another way to express uncertainty about your own self-expression. However, she also claims that it could appear as the opposite that italics seem to strengthen an utterance (Lakoff, 1975).
Lakoff’s ideas about the features of women’s language can be summarized as the followings:
1. Lexical hedges or fillers, e.g. you know, sort of, …
2. Tag questions, e.g. she is very nice, isn’t she?
3. Rising intonation on declaratives, e.g. it’s really good.
4. Empty adjectives, e.g. divine, charming, cute.
5. Precise color terms, e.g. magenta, acqamarine.
6. Intensifiers such as just and so.
7. Hypercorrect grammar, e.g. consistent use of standard verb forms.
8. Superpolite forms, e.g. indirect requests, euphemisms.
9. Avoidance of strong swear words, e.g. fudge, my goodness.
10. Emphatic stress, e.g. it was a BRILLIANT performance.
What it all comes down to is that segregation between male and female language is a result of segregation between male and female power in society. Lakoff (1975) states that most of the features of female speech are a result of female submission.
3.2 Tannen’s Theory
Deborah Tannen is a linguist who began as a student of Lakoff’s. Her work concerning linguistic differences between men and women has become popular as help with relationship improvement. In one of her most famous books, You Just Don’t Understand: Women and Men in Conversation, she suggests that taking a sociolinguistic approach to a relationship makes it possible to enable understanding and explain dissatisfactions without blaming the relationship for it (Tannen, 1990).
Tannen, as well as Lakoff, claims that there are gender differences in ways of speaking (Tannen, 1990), but she focuses more on conversational differences as such. Many of these differences “arise because boys and girls grow up in what are essentially different cultures, so talk between women and men is cross-cultural communication” ( Tannen, 1990). This in contrast to Lakoff’s view that male and female communication does not work because of men’s tendency to dominate women.
Additionally, Tannen (1990) mentions several ways in which conversational styles differs between men and women. Talking about trouble is one thing she mentions where men and women’s views are different and cause problems. Another thing that differs is asking for information such as directions (Tannen, 1990). She also claims that men are more comfortable doing public speaking, while women do private speaking. From this she has developed her famous terms report-talk and rapport-talk. At the heart of this theory lies the idea that many men are more comfortable than most women in using talk to claim attention.
3.2.1 Rapport talk
According to Tannen (1990), the language of conversation between women, is foremost a language of rapport (Tannen, 1990). The purpose of it is to establish connections and negotiating relationships. Women tend to display similarities and matching experiences with each other, and in meetings, women tend to argue by using their own experience as evidence. For instance,
(6) Two young women are talking about their boyfriends.
A : “Uh…. Jek inguh gati nok.”
(Uh… I am stressed.)
B : “Kenape, Met?”
(Why, Met?)
A : “Kabak akene kal megae ke Qatar. Inguh ake.”
(My boyfriend will work in Qatar. I am getting stressed.)
B : “Sante gen. Ake pidan nak keto masi. Pidan kabak akene 6 bulan training di Singapur. Engkenang men? Demi masa depan masi.”
(Rilex! I had the same situation before. My boyfriend was on his job training in Singapore for 6 months. What should we do? That is for our future.)
A : “Ake ngerti je. Cuman…. Ake sedih gati. Nu je ye kal inget jak ake?”
(I understand. But…. I am really sad. Will he still remember me?)
B : “Pasti… Jani sabar gen malu. Mun ci sabar ye kan bisa tenang megedi. Ake ipidan nak inguh masi, cuman ake berusaha sabar. Paling aminggu ci lakar inguh, setelah to biasa be, patuh care ake ipidan.”
(Sure… Be patient. If you can be patient, he can go with a nice feeling. I was also stressed in that time, but I tried to be patient. I am sure you will get stressed for a week, after that everything will be normal. It is the same as I felt before.)
3.2.2 Report talk
For most men, on the other hand, language is a way to preserve independence and negotiate and maintain status in the hierarchy. According to Tannen (1990), men do this by exhibiting their knowledge and skill. And men also do it through “holding centre stage” by, for example, telling stories, joking, or conveying information. Men in meetings for example, tend to argue by making categorical statements about right and wrong. For instance,
(7) A young man is trying to install Window Software in his laptop, but he does not know how to do it. Therefore, he asks his friend who is sitting next to him.
A: “Kene carane ng-install widow o?”
(Is it the way how to install Window, right?)
B: “Sing keto! Lengeh gati cai!”
(It is not like that. You are so stupid!)
A: “Mai, ake ng-install-ang. Kene carane.”\
(Let me do it. This is the way)
3.2.3 Antithesis
Some other differences, which also contributes to report and rapport talk, suggested by Tannen (1990), are listed below:
• Orders vs. Suggestions
Men/boys give orders, while girls and women express their preferences as suggestions (Tannen, 1990). Men/boys’ orders in Balinese can be like “Beliang jep rage roko” (Buy cigarette for me!), “Jemak piring!” (Take the plate!), “Dini negak!” (Sit here!), etc, while girls/women’s expression of their preference can, for example, be “Kenken asanange yen yang ane meli?” (What do you think if I buy?).
• Conflict vs. Compromise
Men choose the conflict, while women compromise instead, in order to try to prevent fights. For instance,
(8) Husband can’t find a newspaper, and he is asking his wife where it is.
Husband : “Dije kaden korane!”
(I can’t find where the newspaper is)
Wife : “Sing beli ane ngejang? Seinget tiang beli je tuni mace ne terakhir.”
(You put it, don’t you? As I remember you are the last person who read it.”
Husband : “Pidan maan mace?” Kaden ye tuni mace.”
(When did I read it? You read it just now.)
• Status vs. Support
Moreover, it is suggested by Tannen (1990), that men grow up in a world where conversation is often a contest. The goal is either to achieve status among other people, or to prevent them from pushing them (the men themselves) around. Women, on the other hand, use talking to exchange confirmation and support. For instance,
(9) Two young men are talking about football players.
A : “Ronaldo di Chelsea jani maen o?
(Ronaldo plays with Chelsea, right?)
B : “Nyen ngorahang? Kene be sing taen bebalih berita! Sing tawang ye di Madrid main?”
(Who says? It is the effect of never watching news. Don’t you know that he plays with Madrid?)
A : “O….. Sing di Chelsea?”
(O… Not with Chelsea?)
(10) Two women are talking about beauty salon.
A: “Salon Wella ngadep eye shadow?”
(Does Salon Wella sell eye shadow?)
B: “Ngadep. Ake ditu pidan meli.”
(Yes. I bought there last time.)
A: “Aji kude jani besik?”
(How much is it?)
B: “Ake meli aji Rp. 45.000 pidan.”
(It was Rp. 45.000 when I bought.)
According to this assumption, conversation (9) shows typical men’s conversation, while conversation (10) shows women’s conversation
• Advice vs. Understanding
Men give advice, while women show understanding. Tannen (1990) uses the example of Eve to illustrate it:
“Eve had a benign lump removed from her breast. When she confided to her husband, Mark, that she was distressed because the stitches changed the contour of her breast, he answered, “You can always have plastic surgery”. This comment bothered her. “I’m sorry you don’t like the way it looks,” she protested. “But I’m not having any more surgery!”. Mark was hurt and puzzled. “I don’t care about a scar,” he replied. “It doesn’t bother me at all.” “Then why are you telling me to have plastic surgery?” she asked. “Because you were upset about the way it looks.”
Mark sees the complaint as a “challenge” to come up with a solution but Eve just wants sympathy/understanding (Tannen, 1990).
Tannen’s view of male and female language and speech, can be summarized by saying that: women and men use different conversational styles due to different purposes with the speech, and therefore communication might break down.

4. Explanative models for differences
4.1 Genetic Theories
The structural differences in the brain between men and women are argued to be a cause for differences in the language (Nemati and Bayer, 2007). According to Bell (2007), babies are suggestively born male or female; their brains develop differently and at different rates. In addition, the male brain is asymmetric, the right hemisphere is larger than the left and it contains more white matter than gray (SIC) (Bell, 2007). Furthermore, he states that women’s brains contain more gray (SIC) matter and are generally smaller (women have smaller heads and bodies) than the male brains. Research shows that this could be the reason for why women are typically better than men at verbal tasks while men are better at spatial tasks, and why men and women score equally on intelligence test, in spite of men having larger brains (Nemati and Bayer, 2007). Scientists have also established that apart from the fact that the language treatment and thinking strategy differs, women use both hemispheres to a larger extent. Men mainly use the left hemisphere (Bråmer 2003 in Nemati and Bayer, 2007). If a person’s left hemisphere is damaged, men have a harder time with their language work, while women’s language use, get less affected. (Bråmer 2003 in Nemati and Bayer, 2007).
4.2 Motherese/Fatherese
Research has shown that adults speak differently to boys and girls in most western societies. Boys are played with (especially by men) in a more rough and tumble way with an accompanying language, the so-called “fatherese” (Bell, 2007). This results in boys picking up and using male language. Further research has shown that girls are spoken to in a more standard variant than boys (Bell, 2007). This results in girls picking up a more correct language.

5. Conclusion
Language use has strong correlation with gender in such a way that it reflects one’s gender identity. One can judge someone else as male or female from their language, without seeing him/her face by face. This relationship between language and gender has intensively been explored in the past thirty years. Today, there have been a great number of researches conducted with regard to this relationship; two of those researches, which are most influential, are those conducted by Lakoff (1975) and Tannen (1990). In her study, Lakoff (1975) proposes a women theory which states that women’s language has ten characteristic features, such as lexical hedges, tag-questions, empty adjective, etc. She also states men’s language are assertive, adult, and direct, while women’s language is immature, hyper-formal or hyper-polite and non-assertive. Meanwhile, Tannen (1990) argues that women and men use different conversational styles due to different purposes with the speech, and therefore communication might break down. These two theories have served as a basis for much research on the subject on the present day.

Bibliography

Bell, C. M. 2007. Variations in Language Use across Gender: Biological versus Sociological Theories, at http://csep.psyc.memphis.edu/pdf/Bellgender28CogSci.pdf (Retrieved: 22/12/2009).

Climate, C. 1997. Men and Women Talking: The Differential Use of Speech and Language by Gender, at http://www.google/differentia l language.html+pronoun+use+men+women+differences&hl=e. (Retrieved: 14/12/2009).

Coates, J. 1993. Women Men and Language. New York: Longman Group Limited.

Eisenman, R. 1997. Men, Women and Gender Differences: the Attitudes of Three Feminists–Gloria Steinem, Gloria Allred and Bella Azbug, at http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:ww…/eisenman.html+men+women+differe nces&hl=e. (Retrieved: 14/12/2009).

Grey, C. 1998. Towards an Overview on Gender and Language Variation, at http://www.eche.ac.uk/study/schsubj/human/English/rh/modules/337-1.htm. (Retrieved: 14/12/2009).

Holmes, J. 1993. An introduction to Sociolinguistics. London: Longman.

Kaplan, N. and Farrell, E. 1994. Weavers of Webs: A Portrait of Young Women on the Net. The Arachnet Journal on Virtual Culture, Volume 2, No. 3.

Lakoff, R. 1975. Language and Woman’s Place. New York: Harper Colophon.

Nemati, A. & Bayer J. M. 2007. Gender Differences in the Use of Linguistic Forms: A Comparative Study of Persian and English, at http://bibliotecavirtualut.suagm.edu/Glossa2/Journal/dec2007/Gender%20Differences%20in%20the%20Use%20of%20Linguistic%20Forms%20in%20the%20Speech%20of%20Men%20and%20Women.pdf (Retrieved: 14/12/2009).

Tannen, D. 1990. You just don’t understand: Women and Men in Conversation. New York: William Morrow.

Trudgill, P. 1973. Sociolinguistics: An Introduction to Language and Society. London: Penguin Books.

ERROR ANALYSIS

ERROR ANALYSIS AND ITS PEDAGOGICAL IMPLICATION

Written by;
I Dewa Putu Eka Adi Putra
NIM. 0929011016
Student of English Education Department
Post-graduate program, Undiksha Singaraja

Abstract

This paper presents a study of error analysis and its pedagogical implication toward second language and foreign language (SL/FL) classroom teaching. It starts by giving a systematic review of the concepts and theories concerning EA (Error Analysis); the historical background to the field of EA is comprehensively explored. The writer proposes that teachers should employ different and flexible error treatment strategies in accordance with the teaching objectives, students’ linguistic competence, their affective factors and the effectiveness of the error correction.

Key words: error analysis, contrastive analysis, pedagogical implication, interlanguage, SL/FL learning

1. Introduction

Like any other human learning, language learning is closely associated with the making of errors. Therefore, it is quite natural and inevitable that most – if not all – language learners commit errors when they put the language to use. In this sense, errors can be seen as an integral part of language learning that are not avoidable.
In a traditional second language/foreign language (SL/FL) teaching situation relying on Behaviorist learning theory, errors are regarded as the linguistic phenomena deviant from the language rules and standard usages, reflecting learners’ deficiency in language competence and acquisition device (Jie, 2008). In accordance with this thought, many SL/FL teachers simply correct individual errors as they occur, with little attempt to see patterns of errors or to seek causes in anything other than learner ignorance. Presently, however, with the development of linguistics, applied linguistics, psychology, and other relevant subjects, SL/FL teachers’ attitude toward errors changed greatly. Instead of seeing errors as problems to be overcome or evils to be eradicated, most today’s SL/FL teachers tend to consider errors as evidence of the learners’ stages in their target language (TL) development, which can provide information that can be used to sequence items for teaching or to devise remedial lessons (Ellis, 1986). In relation to the later view, learners’ errors in language learning should carefully be analyzed. It is through analyzing learner errors that errors are elevated from the status of “undesirability to that of a guide to the inner working of the language learning process” (Ellis, 1986).
In the field of SLA, there have been some influential approaches to errors with a general movement from approaches emphasizing the product, i.e. the error itself, to approaches focusing on the underlying process under which the errors are made (Jie, 2008). Among others, Error Analysis (EA) is the most influential approach to study learners’ errors. This approach enables SL/FL teachers or researchers to find out the sources of errors and take pedagogical precautions towards them. Thus, the analysis of learner language has become an essential need to overcome some questions and propose solutions regarding different aspects. In addition, whether it is deviant or self-contained, applying EA to interlanguage will enable SL/FL teachers or researchers to reveal some reality of the learner language.
In fact, however, few SL/FL teachers know a lot about EA and some related theories. As consequence, they often take so negative attitudes toward errors that they could not tolerate any errors and tend to correct them as soon as they could find any. As a result, although they think that they have been working hard enough and spend much time and energy working on error correction, their effort is not effective and the students do not believe they have benefited a lot. On the contrary, the students often feel upset, for they have found that there is a great gap between themselves and their teachers in dealing with errors and understanding of error correction. Taking such the fact into account, the writer finds it necessary to have a theoretical foundation about EA and its implication toward language teaching and learning. Therefore, in this paper, the writer presents the theoretical basis and pedagogical implication of the theory – Error Analysis.

2. The Notion of Error Analysis

EA has widely been used among SLA (Second Language Researcher) researchers since it took over its predecessor, CA (Contrastive Analysis), in the late 1960s. EA begins with the premise that errors can be attributed to a variety of factors, not solely to interference from the native language. By collecting a raw linguistic sample and analyzing the errors within it, researchers in the EA camp closely examine, and hopefully explain, the linguistic competence—however transitional it may be—of a second language learner (Harashima, 2006).
James defined the notion of EA as “the study of linguistic ignorance, the investigation of what people do not know and how they attempt to cope with their ignorance” (James, 1998). It was Corder who made the first argument for the significance of learners’ errors in his 1967 seminal paper (in Jie, 2008). The significance of learners’ errors, which signaled the shift of pedagogical interest from CA to EA, provided the impetus for many empirical studies (Jie, 2008).
The analysis of error sources has been regarded as a central aspect of EA. Researchers believe that the clearer the understanding of the sources of learners’ errors, the better SL/FL teachers or researchers will be able to detect the process of second language (L2) learning. In his non-contrastive approach to EA, Richards (1971) identified a number of different sources or causes of competence errors: interference errors of mother tongue interference, intralingual errors within the Target Language (TL) itself and developmental errors, reflecting the learners’ attempts to construct hypotheses about their target language from their limited experience.
Excluding interference errors from his discussion, Richards (1971) focused on the intralingual and developmental errors observed in the acquisition of English as a second language and further classified them into four categories: (1) Overgeneralization, covering instances where the learners create a deviant structure on the basis of his experience of other structure of the TL; (2) Ignorance of rule restriction, occurring as a result of failure to observe the restrictions or existing structures; (3) Incomplete application of rules, arising when the learners fail to fully develop a certain structure required to produce acceptable sentences; (4) False concepts hypothesized, deriving from faulty comprehension of distinctions in the TL.
EA is a systematic study and analysis of errors made by the learners of a SL/FL in an attempt to account for their origin, their regularity, their predictability and variability. It views both first and second language acquisition as a process involving the active participation of the learners. In this approach, errors are seen as a natural phenomenon that must occur when learning the first or second language before correcting language rules are completely internalized. Errors occur systematically in learners’ language behavior and are, therefore, to be regarded as manifestations of an inner-working system.

3. A Historical Background to the Field of Error Analysis

Until late sixties, the prominent theory regarding the issue of second language learning was behavioristic, which suggested that the learning was largely a question of acquiring a set of new language habits. Therefore, errors were considered as being the result of the persistence of existing mother tongue habits in the new language (Erdoğan, 2005).
Consequently, this idea made the researchers of applied linguistics devote their studies largely to the comparison of the native and the target language in order to make predictions and explanations about errors. However, errors that were not explained in this way were underestimated. As a result, all errors whatever their origins were dealt with the same technique of further drilling and exercise.

Error analysis, a branch of applied linguistics, emerged in the sixties to demonstrate that learner errors were not only because of the learner’s native language but also they reflected some universal learning strategies, as a reaction to contrastive analysis theory, which considered language transfer as the basic process of second language learning as what behavioristic theory suggested. Error analysis, on the other hand, deals with the learners’ performance in terms of the cognitive processes they make use of in recognizing or coding the input they receive from the target language (Erdoğan, 2005). Therefore, a primary focus of error analysis is on the evidence that learners’ errors provide with an understanding of the underlying process of second language acquisition

Theoretical analysis of errors, according to Erdoğan (2005), primarily concerns the process and strategies of language learning and its similarities with first language acquisition. In other words, it tries to investigate what is going on in the minds of language learners. Secondly, it tries to decode the strategies of learners such as overgeneralization and simplification, and thirdly, to go to a conclusion that regards the universals of language learning process whether there is an internal syllabus for learning a second language (Erdoğan, 2005).
Applied error analysis, on the other hand, concerns organizing remedial courses, and devising appropriate materials and teaching strategies based on the findings of theoretical error analysis.

4. The Procedures of Error Analysis

In order to analyze learners’ errors in a proper perspective, it is crucial to make a distinction between “mistake” and “error”. According to Brown (2000), a “mistake” refers to a performance error in that it is a failure to utilize a known system correctly. On the other hand, an “error” is a noticeable deviation from the adult grammar of a native speaker, reflecting the interlanguage competence of the learner. This recognition process is followed by the error description process. We compare learners’ sentences with the correct sentences in target language, and find the errors. Then we come to the next step—explanation stage, finding the sources of errors.
The beginning stages of learning a second language are characterized by a good deal of interlingual transfer from the native language. In the early stages, the native language is the only linguistic system upon which the learner can draw. These kinds of errors can be found in all aspects of language learning (Brown, 2000).
Intralingual transfer (within the target language itself) is also a major factor. At an intermediate level, learners’ previous experience and existing subsumes begin to influence structures within the target language itself. Most of time, negative intralingual transfer or overgeneralization has occurred, and these kinds of errors are called developmental errors. We have found that overgeneralization makes it significant for us to study the psychological process of language learners (Brown, 2000).
Cultural interference can cause either linguistic errors or inappropriateness in the context. In addition, it sometimes hinders communication, so it should be taken seriously (Brown, 2000). For example, an American lady said to a Balinese lady “what a beautiful dress!”. Instead of saying “Thank you, I’m glad to hear that”, she replies “No, no.” In accordance with Balinese way of receiving compliment will make the American lady feel at loss. Thus, language learning is also the culture learning. Otherwise, we cannot get a good understanding of the language.
In some occasions, due to their insufficient linguistic knowledge, learners have to express themselves with the help of communicative strategies. The most frequently used communicative strategies are avoidance, language switch and prefabricated patterns (Brown, 2000). Factually communicative strategies do help learners a lot in expressing their ideas and the communicative teaching approach need these strategies as well. On the other hand, teachers need to pay more attention to the errors occurred, otherwise they will backfire.

5. Error Treatment
Error treatment is a very complicated and thorny problem. As language teachers, we need to be armed with some theoretical foundations and be aware of what we are doing in the classroom. Here principles of optimal affective and cognitive feedback, of reinforcement theory, and of communicative language teaching all combine to form these theoretical foundations. With these theories in mind, we can judge in the classroom whether we will treat or ignore the errors, when and how to correct them.
5.1 What kinds of errors should be corrected?
Learners’ errors are usually classified in different categories. Burt (1975) made a distinction between “global” and “local” errors. Global errors hinder communication and they prevent the learner from comprehending some aspects of the message. Local errors only affect a single element of a sentence, but do not prevent a message from being heard. According to Hendrickson (1980), global errors need not be corrected and they are generally held true. But the expressions such as “a news”, or “an advice” are systematic errors, and they need to be corrected. As for pre-systematic errors, teachers can simply provide the correct one. For systematic errors, since learners have already had the linguistic competence, they can explain this kind of errors and correct them themselves. So teachers just remind them when they commit such errors. As to what kind of errors should be corrected, it needs teachers’ intuition and understanding of errors. At the same time, the teacher should consider the purpose of the analysis and analyze them in a systematic way.
5.2 When to correct the errors?
Concerning this problem, the most controversial issue is to treat them immediately or to delay. First, we are confronted with a dilemma—fluency versus accuracy. For communicative purpose, delayed correction is usually preferred. Some advanced students believe that when to correct errors is determined by the type of errors committed. For instance, if they are pronunciation or grammatical errors, immediate correction is preferable, for post-correction cannot make learners remember anything. Furthermore, the overall situation in the classroom is also important. When the whole class is familiar with a word, but only one of them is singled out for being corrected, he/s would feel awkward. So, we can see that when to correct is very complicated. Both the teachers’ intuition and the feedback from the students are equally important.
5.3 How to correct the errors?
According to James (1998), it is sensible to follow the three principles in error correction. Firstly, the techniques involved in error correction would be able to enhance the students’ accuracy in expression. Secondly, the students’ affective factors should be taken into consideration and the correction should not be face-threatening to the students.
Some teachers believed that their indirect correction is highly appreciated. They either encourage students to do self-correction in heuristic method or present the correct form, so students couldn’t feel embarrassed. Compare the two situations:
(1) Student: “What means this word?”
Teacher: “No, listen, what does this word mean?”
(2) Student: “What means this word?”
Teacher: “What does it mean? Well, it is difficult to explain, but it means…”
It is obvious that teacher’s remodeling in (2) is more natural and sensible than the direct interruption in (1).

6. The Implication of EA toward Language Teaching and Learning
Firstly, by error analysis, teachers will get an overall knowledge about the students’ errors. Foreign language learning is a process of hypothesis and trial and error occurrence is inevitable. So, the teacher should learn to tolerate some errors, especially some local errors. Secondly, errors can tell the teacher how far towards the goal the learner has progressed and consequently, what remains for him or her to learn. So students’ errors are valuable feedbacks. We can do some remedial teaching based on their errors. Thirdly, errors are indispensable to the learners themselves, for we can regard the making of mistakes as a device the learner employs in order to learn. Finally, some errors need to be handled; otherwise, they will become fossilized. In a sense, error analysis theory together with other theories have enriched the second language learning theory in that learning involves in a process in which success comes by profiting from mistakes and by using mistakes to obtain feedback from the environment. With the feedback they make new attempts to achieve the more closely approximate desired goals.
Certainly, error analysis is significant, but it also has its limitations. First, there is a danger in too much attention to learners’ errors and in the classroom teacher tends to become so preoccupied with noticing errors that the correct utterance in the second language will go unnoticed. While the diminishing of errors is an important criterion for increasing language proficiency, the ultimate goal of second language learning is the attainment of communicative fluency in a language. Another shortcoming in error analysis is the overstressing of production data. Factually language comprehension is as important as production. It also happens that production lends itself to analysis and thus becomes the prey of researchers, but comprehension data is equally important in developing an understanding of the process of language acquisition. Thirdly, it fails to account for the strategy of avoidance. A learner who for one reason or another avoids a particular sound, word, and structure or discourse category may be assumed incorrectly to have no difficulty therewith. The absence of error therefore does not necessarily reflect native like competence since learners may be avoiding the very structure that poses difficulty for them. Finally, error analysis can keep us too closely focused on specific languages rather than viewing universal aspects of language.

7. Conclusion
Error analysis is associated with a rich and complex psycholinguistic view of the learner, but the sophisticated use is in its infancy. As SL/FL teachers, we should be aware of what is going on in the field of EA and keep a keen eye on the related theories. In order to improve teaching, we need to explore the learners’ psychological process in language learning so that we can enhance our understanding of learners’ errors. Based on the analysis of the causes of their errors, we provide our timely guide and help. In addition, while placing an emphasis on error correction in the classroom, as language teachers, we should take the teaching objectives, students’ linguistic competence, their affective factors and the effectiveness of the error correction into consideration. Consequently, we can employ more flexible strategies in error correction and make more contributions to the SL/FL classroom teaching and learning.

Reference
Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. London: Longman, Inc.

Burt, M. K. (1975). “Error Analysis in the Adult EFL Classroom”. TESOL Quarterly, 9: 53-63.

Ellis, R. (1986). Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Erdoğan, Vacide. (2005). “Contribution of Error Analysis to Foreign Language Teaching” at http://efd.mersin.edu.tr/dergi/meuefd_2005_001_002/pdf/meuefd_2005_001_002_0261-0270_erdogan.pdf (Accessed on: July 6, 2010).

Harashima, Hideto D. (2006). “An Error Analysis of the Speech of an Experienced Japanese Learner of English” at www.kyoai.ac.jp/college/ronshuu/no-06/harashima.pdf (Accessed on: July 6, 2010).

Hendrickson, J. M. (1980). “Error correction in Foreign Language Teaching: Recent Theory, Research, and Practice” in K. Croft. (Ed.). Readings on English as a Second Language (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Winthrop Publishers.

James, C. (1998). Errors in Language Learning and Use. London: Addison Wesley Longman Limited.

Jie, Xu. (2008). “Error Theories and Second Language Acquisition” at www.linguist.org.cn/doc/uc200801/uc20080107.pdf (Accessed on: July 6, 2010).

Richards, J. C. (1971). “A Non-contrastive Approach to Error Analysis”. English Language Teaching Journal, 25, 204-219.

TIK dan Pendidikan

IMPLIKASI PERKEMBANGAN TEKNOLOGI INFORMASI
DALAM DUNIA PENDIDIKAN DI INDONESIA

I Dewa Putu Eka Adi Putra
NIM. 0929011016
Jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris
Program Pasca Sarjana, Undiksha

ABSTRAK

Perkembangan teknologi informasi (TI) yang sedemikian pesat menciptakan kultur baru bagi masyarakat dunia. Perkembangan ini telah mampu membawa perubahan-perubahan yang signifikan dalam sendi-sendi kehidupan manusia. Dunia pendidikan pun tak luput dari sentuhannya. Integrasi teknologi informasi ke dalam dunia pendidikan telah menciptakan pengaruh besar. Dengan memanfaatkan kecanggihan teknologi informasi, mutu dan efisiensi pendidikan dapat ditingkatkan. Dengan demikian, di tengah kemelut dunia pendidikan Indonesia yang tak kunjung selesai, teknologi informasi diyakini dapat memberi sumbangan yang berarti dalam meningkatkan mutu pendidikan di tanah air dan mengatasi masalah-masalah yang ada.

Kata kunci: teknologi informasi, dunia pendidikan

1. PENDAHULUAN

Saat ini perkembangan teknologi informasi (TI), atau yang biasa disebut sebagai teknologi informasi dan komunikasi (TIK), mengalami percepatan yang luar biasa. Perkembangan teknologi informasi yang sangat pesat ini membawa dampak yang begitu besar bagi pola hubungan antar individu, antar komunitas, bahkan antar negara atau bangsa, dan mampu membawa kita pada era informasi, suatu era dimana sekat-sekat informasi dan komunikasi menjadi pudar. Saat ini, tanpa terikat batasan tempat dan waktu, kita dapat berkomunikasi, berinteraksi, menciptakan dan menyebarkan data, informasi dan pengetahuan dengan cepat ke berbagai belahan dunia.
Kemajuan teknologi informasi ini telah mengubah cara masyarakat menghabiskan waktu dan mengerjakan sesuatu. Kini muncul bentuk-bentuk perubahan baru dalam aktifitas kehidupan masyarakat sebagai dampak dari kemajuan TI. Misalnya, pada sistem perdagangan dan perekonomi kini muncul e-commerce, e-business, e-trading, dan e-shop. Pada sistem pemerintahan muncul e-government, yang kemudian memunculkan bentuk-bentuk baru dalam penyelenggaraan dan pelayanan pemerintahan, seperti: e-administration, e-society, e-health, e-citizen, e-services, e-demokrasi, dan e-tendering atau e-procurement. Pada sistem surat-menyurat muncul e-mail (Wardiana, 2002). Bentuk-bentuk perubahan tersebut pada dasarnya merubah aktifitas masyarakat dalam dunia nyata ke dalam aktifitas dunia maya (aktifitas dalam dunia internet). Selain itu, masih banyak lagi bentuk perubahan lainnya terjadi dalam sendi-sendi kehidupan masyarakat sebagai pengaruh dari kemajuan TI, tidak terkecuali, dalam dunia pendidikan.
Dunia pendidikan termasuk yang paling diuntungkan oleh kemajuan TI karena memperoleh manfaat yang luar biasa. Misalnya, karena kemajuan TI yang begitu pesat, eksplorasi materi-materi pembelajaran berkualitas (seperti literatur, jurnal, dan buku), pembentukan forum-forum diskusi ilmiah, dan konsultasi/diskusi dengan para pakar di dunia dapat dilakukan dengan mudah dan cepat oleh setiap insan pendidikan. Hal tersebut telah memberikan warna atau wajah baru bagi sistem pendidikan dunia yang dikenal dengan berbagai istilah e-learning, distance learning, online learning, web-based learning, computer-based learning, dan virtual class room (Wardiana, 2002).
Di tengah kemelut dunia pendidikan Indonesia yang tak kunjung selesai, kehadiran inovasi-inovasi sistem pendidikan di atas menjadi satu titik cerah yang diharapkan mampu memberi sumbangan berarti dalam meningkatkan mutu pendidikan Indonesia yang saat ini masih sangat rendah, sebagaimana ditunjukkan dalam laporan Human Development Index UNDP yang menempatkan mutu pendidikan Indonesia pada posisi 111 dari 175 negara, dan hasil survai tentang kualitas pendidikan di Asia yang dilakukan oleh PERC (The Political and Economic Risk Country) menetapkan Indonesia sebagai rangking 12, atau yang terendah (Karsidi, 2000). Memperhatikan masalah tersebut, paparan makalah ini mencoba untuk memberikan berbagai aspek tentang implikasi teknologi informasi dalam pengembangan dunia pendidikan (khususnya di Indonesia), dimulai dari hal yang mendasar yakni pengertian teknologi informasi, kemudian dilanjutkan dengan pembahasan mengenai dunia pendidikan Indonesia, aplikasi teknologi informasi dalam dunia pendidikan, dan implikasi teknologi informasi dalam dunia pendidikan di Indonesia, yang mencakup pemanfaatan TI bagi institusi pendidikan dan kendala-kendala pengimplikasian TI di Indonesia, dan paling akhir akan ditutup dengan suatu simpulan.

2. PENGERTIAN TEKNOLOGI INFORMASI

“Teknologi informasi adalah suatu teknologi yang digunakan untuk mengolah data, termasuk memproses, mendapatkan, menyusun, menyimpan, dan memanipulasi data dalam berbagai cara untuk menghasilkan informasi yang berkualitas, yaitu informasi yang relevan, akurat dan tepat waktu, yang digunakan untuk keperluan pribadi, bisnis, dan pemerintahan dan merupakan informasi yang strategis untuk pengambilan keputusan” (Wardiana, 2002).
Teknologi ini menggunakan seperangkat komputer untuk mengolah data, sistem jaringan untuk menghubungkan satu komputer dengan komputer yang lainnya sesuai dengan kebutuhan, dan teknologi telekomunikasi digunakan agar data dapat disebar dan diakses secara global. Arti teknologi informasi bagi dunia pendidikan seharusnya berarti tersedianya saluran atau sarana yang dapat dipakai untuk menyiarkan program pendidikan (Karsidi, 2000). Pemanfaatan teknologi informasi dalam dunia pendidikan sudah merupakan kelaziman. Sekarang banyak institusi pendidikan telah menyediakan komputer dengan jaringan internet yang menghubungkan rumah siswa dengan ruang kelas, guru, dan admistrator sekolah.
Manfaat yang dapat diberikan oleh aplikasi teknologi informasi ini adalah kemungkianan kita untuk mendapatkan informasi untuk kehidupan pribadi, seperti informasi tentang kesehatan, hobi, rekreasi, dan rohani. Kemudian untuk profesi seperti sains, teknologi, perdagangan, berita bisnis, dan asosiasi profesi, dan sarana kerjasama antara pribadi atau kelompok yang satu dengan pribadi atau kelompok yang lainnya tanpa mengenal batasan jarak dan waktu, negara, ras, kelas, ekonomi, ideologi, atau faktor lain yang dapat menghambat bertukar pikiran (Schweber, 1996). Perkembangan teknologi informasi memacu suatu cara baru dalam kehidupan yang disebut e-life, artinya kehidupan yang telah dipengaruhi oleh berbagai kebutuhan secara elektronik (Schweber, 1996).

3. DUNIA PENDIDIKAN INDONESIA

Bangsa Indonesia, sepanjang perjalanannya, selalu diwarnai oleh upaya-upaya peningkatan mutu pendidikan oleh pihak pemerintah. Namun pengalaman empiris bangsa kita telah membuktikan ketidakjelasan arah kebijakan pendidikan. Upaya yang dilakukan oleh pemerintah kerapkali bersifat “jalan pintas”, semisal yang masih “hangat” adalah penetapan angka batas minimal kelulusan UN dengan nilai sebesar 4,25. Kebijakan yang tidak bijak ini adalah refleksi sikap pragmatis pemerintah yang tidak mau direpotkan oleh faktor-faktor non-struktural dan menganakemaskan hasil daripada proses. Karena kebijakan output sentris ini, siswa justru akan mencari rumus-rumus “jalan pintas” untuk menjawab soal, dengan paradigma “yang penting benar”, bukannya menjawab dengan uraian yang sistematik dan rasional. Dengan demikian, hakikat filosofis pendidikan sebagai “pencerah” yang telah terlupakan menjadi semakin terkubur.
Apabila kita amati dengan seksama, apa sebenarnya yang menjadi inti permasalahan pada dunia pendidikan di Indonesia, mungkin jauh lebih sulit dari menggantang asap. Berbagai hal dapat saja dipersalahkan sebagai pokok masalah yang menghambat kemajuan dunia pendidikan di Indonesia. Namun demikian, yang jelas-jelas dapat kita temukan sebagai suatu kecacatan ialah proses “belajar-mengajar konvensional” yang mengandalkan tatap muka antara guru dan murid, dosen dengan mahasiswa, pelatih dengan peserta latihan (Karsidi, 2000). Hal ini menjadi sasaran bagi suara-suara kritis yang menghendaki peningkatan kualitas pada dunia pendidikan.
Inefektifitas adalah kata yang cocok untuk menggambarkan pola sistem pendidikan kita sekarang, sebab seiring dengan perkembangan zaman, pertukaran informasi menjadi semakin cepat dan instan, namun masih ada institusi pendidikan, yang menggunakan sistem tradisional, mengajar dengan sangat lambat dan tidak seiring dengan perkembangan TI dan mobilitas informasi itu sendiri (Karsidi, 2000). Sistem konvensional ini seharusnya sudah ditinggalkan sejak berkembangnya teknologi informasi.

4. APLIKASI TEKNOLOGI INFORMASI DALAM DUNIA PENDIDIKAN

Aplikasi teknologi informasi dalam pendidikan secara langsung akan mempengaruhi keputusan-keputusan tentang proses pendidikan yang spesifik. Misalnya, aplikasi itu mempunyai dampak penting terhadap isi (content) yang akan diajarkan, tingkat standarisasi dan pemilihan isi, jumlah dan kualitas sumber-sumber yang tersedia (Karsidi, 2000).
Masalah-masalah pokok yang dihadapi pendidikan di Indonesia yang terpenting adalah mengenai: peningkatan mutu, pemerataan kesempatan pendidikan, dan relevansi pendidikan dengan pembangunan nasional (Miarso, 1981). Demikian luas dan jauhnya jangkauan yang hendak dicapai oleh program pembangunan pendidikan kita, padahal di lain pihak sumber-sumber yang tersedia bertambah terbatas dan langka.
Kenyataan-kenyataan yang dikemukakan di atas menunjukkan bahwa pemecahan masalah-masalah pendidikan kita membutuhkan alternatif-alternatif lain disamping cara-cara penyelesaian yang konvensional yang dikenal selama ini. Berbagai potensi yang dimiliki oleh teknologi informasi dapat diajukan sebagai suatu alternatif untuk memecahkan masalah-masalah tersebut. Secara umum, sebagaimana dikemukakan oleh Miarso (1981), aplikasi teknologi informasi dalam pendidikan akan mampu:
1. Menyebarkan informasi secara meluas, seragam dan cepat.
2. Membantu, melengkapi dan (dalam hal tertentu) menggantikan tugas guru.
3. Dipakai untuk melakukan kegiatan instruksional baik secara langsung maupun sebagai produk sampingan.
4. Menunjang kegiatan belajar masyarakat serta mengundang partisipasi masyarakat.
5. Menambah keanekaragaman sumber maupun kesempatan belajar.
6. Menambah daya tarik untuk belajar.
7. Membantu mengubah sikap pemakai.
8. Mempengaruhi pandangan pemakai terhadap bahan dan proses.
9. Mempunyai keuntungan rasio efektivitas biaya, bila dibandingkan dengan sistem tradisional.
Jika semula teknologi informasi dalam pendidikan (dalam arti yang sangat terbatas) dipandang hanya berperan pada taraf pelaksanaan kurikulum di kelas, konsepsi baru menghendaki teknologi informasi dalam pendidikan dapat menjadi masukan (input), bahkan sejak tahap perencanaan kurikulum. Dengan demikian sudah sejak perencanaan kurikulum harus pula dikaji dan ditentukan bentuk teknologi informasi yang akan diterapkan. Pemilihan teknologi informasi dalam pendidikan akan membuka kemungkinan lahirnya berbagai alternatif bentuk kelembagaan baru yang menyediakan fasilitas belajar, disamping dapat melayani segala bentuk lembaga pendidikan yang telah ada. Misalnya, kemungkinan bagi suatu bentuk sekolah terbuka yang fasilitas dan tata belajarnya berbeda sekali dengan sekolah konvensional, tetapi dengan hasil (output) yang sama.
Serangkaian kriteria pemanfaatan teknologi informasi dalam pendidikan, antara lain: harus dijaga kesesuaiannya (kompatibilitas) dengan sarana dan teknologi yang sudah ada, dapat menstimulasikan perkembangan teknologi dan ilmu pengetahuan, serta mampu memacu usaha peningkatan mutu pendidikan itu sendiri harus diperhatikan oleh pemerintah dan insan-insan pendidikan (Karsidi, 2000). Dengan demikian, penerapan suatu teknologi informasi dalam pendidikan akan memungkinkan terjadinya perubahan besar-besaran dalam interaksi belajar mengajar antara sumber-sumber belajar dengan pelaku belajar.

5. IMPLIKASI TEKNOLOGI INFORMASI DALAM DUNIA PENDIDIKAN DI INDONESIA

Kendala utama dari perluasan kuantitatif sistem pendidikan di Indonesia adalah terbatasnya ruang dan waktu. Inovasi teknologi informasi dapat diberdayakan untuk menembus kendala ruang dan waktu ini. Materi pendidikan yang dipilah-pilah menjadi paket-paket informasi dapat dikirim dan ditansfer kesana-kemari melintasi ruang melalui sistem komunikasi (internet) tanpa kesulitan. Dengan sistem pemberkasan (filing-systems) data elektronik, materi-materi pendidikan yang bermutu dapat pula disimpan dan diakses sewaktu-waktu diperlukan, melintasi dimensi waktu (Sadjad, 2000).
Teknologi internet yang berintikan sistem komunikasi data paket, telah membuka kemungkinan yang hampir tak terbayangkan sebelumnya tentang “globalisasi” sistem informasi (William, 1989). Dunia menjadi satu tanpa batas, rentang waktu menjadi tak berarti, kemarin dan esok, hari ini, sama saja. Ratusan juta terminal data telah terhubung satu sama lain–baik secara permanen mau pun temporer–di seluruh penjuru dunia dengan informasi yang sewaktu-waktu dapat ditransfer dan diakses ke sana ke mari. Sekarang ini, Universitas, perpustakaan, kursus-kursus ketrampilan, sekolah, sudah bisa “online”, berkat kemajuan teknologi informasi. Dengan demikian, berarti kendala ruang dan waktu sudah teratasi, kapasitas sistem pendidikan menjadi tak terbatas, kuantitas dan kualitas dapat ditingkatkan semaksimum mungkin. Tetapi, perlu dipahami bahwa pemberdayaan teknologi informasi dalam dunia pendidikan sama sekali tidak dapat dimaksudkan untuk merubah sistem pendidikan yang ada, melainkan hanya bersifat suplementer (tambahan) dan komplementer (pelengkap) dari sistem pendidikan yang ada, yang telah dibangun selama berabad-abad dengan akar tradisi dan metode yang telah baku, sesuai dengan harkat dan martabat manusia (Sadjad, 2000).
Singkatnya, pemberdayaan teknologi informasi berpotensi besar untuk dikembangkan sebagai sarana penunjang sistem pendidikan untuk meningkatkan kapasitas pelayanan pendidikan, untuk memperbesar peluang akses ke berbagai pusat informasi pendidikan dan memperbesar peluang anak-didik untuk mengatasi kendala keterbatasan ruang dan waktu dalam berinteraksi dengan para pendidik, dan meningkatkan kuantitas dan kualitas sistem pendidikan.
5.1 Pemanfaatan Teknologi Informasi bagi Institusi Pendidikan
Pesatnya perkembangan TI, khususnya internet, memungkinkan pengembangan layanan informasi yang lebih baik dalam suatu institusi pendidikan. Di lingkungan perguruan tinggi, pemanfaatan IT diwujudkan dalam suatu sistem yang disebut electronic university (e- University) (Wardiana, 2002). Pengembangan e-University bertujuan untuk mendukung penyelenggaraan pendidikan, sehingga perguruan tinggi dapat menyediakan layanan informasi yang lebih baik kepada komunitasnya, baik di dalam maupun di luar perguruan tinggi tersebut. Layanan pendidikan lain yang bisa dilaksanakan melalui sarana internet yaitu dengan menyediakan materi kuliah secara online dan materi kuliah tersebut dapat diakses oleh siapa saja yang membutuhkan.
Lingkungan Akademis Pendidikan Indonesia sudah mulai mengenal implikasi TI di bidang Pendidikan. Sebagian besar perguruan tinggi di Indonesia telah memiliki situs (website) sendiri yang dapat diakses oleh masyarakat, memberikan informasi bahkan bagi yang sulit mendapatkannya karena problema ruang dan waktu. Hal ini juga tentunya sangat membantu bagi calon mahasiswa maupun mahasiswa atau bahkan alumni yang membutuhkan informasi tentang biaya kuliah, kurikulum, dosen pembimbing, atau banyak yang lainnya. Layanan yang disediakan pada situs mereka dapat dibandingkan dengan layanan yang disediakan oleh situs-situs pendidikan luar negeri.
Pada tingkat pendidikan SMU, implikasi TI juga sudah mulai dilakukan walau belum mampu menjajal dengan implikasi-implikasinya pada tingkatan pendidikan lanjutan. Di SMU ini, rata-rata penggunaan internet hanyalah sebagai fasilitas tambahan dan lagi TI belum menjadi kurikulum utama yang diajarkan untuk siswa. TI belum menjadi media database utama bagi nilai-nilai, kurikulum, siswa, guru atau yang lainnya. Namun prospek untuk masa depan, penggunaan TI di SMU cukup cerah.
Selain untuk melayani institusi pendidikan secara khusus, adapula yang untuk dunia pendidikan secara umum di Indonesia. Ada juga layanan situs internet yang menyajikan kegiatan sistem pendidikan di Indonesia. situs ini dimaksudkan untuk merangkum informasi yang berhubungan dengan perkembangan pendidikan yang terjadi dan untuk menyajikan sumber umum serta jaringan komunikasi (forum) bagi administrator sekolah, para pendidik dan para peminat lainnya. Tujuan utama dari situs ini adalah sebagai wadah untuk saling berhubungan yang dapat menampung semua sektor utama pendidikan.
Disamping lingkungan pendidikan, misalnya pada kegiatan penelitian kita dapat memanfaatkan internet guna mencari bahan atau data yang dibutuhkan untuk kegiatan tersebut melalui mesin pencari pada internet. Situs tersebut sangat berguna pada saat kita membutuhkan artikel, jurnal ataupun referensi yang dibutuhkan. Inisiatif-inisiatif penggunaan TI di luar institusi pendidikan formal tetapi masih berkaitan dengan lingkungan pendidikan di Indonesia sudah mulai bermunculan. Salah satu inisiatif yang sekarang sudah ada adalah situs penyelenggara “Komunitas Sekolah Indonesia” (Karsidi, 2000).
5.2 Kendala-Kendala Pengimplikasian IT di Indonesia
Manfaat TI di bidang pendidikan memang menggiurkan bagi kaum akademisi yang haus akan informasi, juga bagi mereka yang hendak memobilisasi bangsa Indonesia agar lebih maju lagi dalam bidang ini. Namun ada beberapa kendala di Indonesia yang menyebabkan TI belum dapat digunakan seoptimal mungkin. Kesiapan pemerintah Indonesia masih patut dipertanyakan dalam hal ini. Salah satu kendala utamanya: kurangnya ketersediaan sumber daya manusia untuk melakukan proses transformasi teknologi, dan menyediakan infrastruktur telekomunikasi beserta perangkat hukumnya yang mengaturnya. Dalam hal perangkat hukumnya, yang menjadi pertanyaan dilematis adalah, “apakah infrastruktur hukum yang melandasi operasional pendidikan di Indonesia cukup memadai untuk menampung perkembangan baru berupa penerapan TI untuk pendidikan gaya baru ini?”, Sedangkan Cyberlaw yang menjadi senjata untuk menjerat pelaku kriminalitas di dunia maya tidak terdengar “kabarnya”. Selain itu, masih terdapat kekurangan pada hal pengadaan infrastruktur teknologi telekomunikasi, multimedia dan informasi yang merupakan prasyarat terselenggaranya TI untuk pendidikan, sementara penetrasi komputer (PC) di Indonesia masih rendah.
Biaya penggunaan jasa telekomunikasi juga masih mahal bahkan jaringan telepon masih belum tersedia di berbagai tempat di Indonesia. Untuk itu perlu dipikirkan akses ke internet tanpa melalui komputer pribadi di rumah. Sementara itu, tempat akses internet dapat diperlebar jangkauannya melalui fasilitas di kampus, sekolah, bahkan melalui warnet (warung internet). Hal ini tentunya diperhadapkan kembali kepada kesiapan pihak pemerintah maupun pihak swasta; yang pada akhirnya pemerintahlah yang memegang kunci keberhasilan penerapannya, sebab pemerintah merupakan pihak yang dapat menciptakan iklim kebijakan dan regulasi yang kondusif bagi investasi swasta di bidang pendidikan.
Namun sementara pemerintah sendiri masih demikian pelit untuk mengalokasikan dana untuk kebutuhan pendidikan. Saat ini baru institusi-istitusi pendidikan unggulan yang memiliki fasilitas untuk mengakses jaringan TI yang memadai. Padahal masih banyak institusi-institusi pendidikan lainnya yang belum diperlengkapi dengan fasilitas TI. Harapan kita bersama hal ini dapat diatasi sejalan dengan perkembangan teknologi informasi yang semakin canggih dan semakin murah.

6. PENUTUP

Perkembangan teknologi informasi yang begitu cepat telah mengantarkan kita ke era informasi. Era informasi ini menjanjikan berbagai kecanggihan yang menakjubkan dalam penerapan teknologi informasi. Banyak hal yang beberapa tahun lalu hanya berupa khayalan menjadi kenyataan. Berbagai inovasi dalam bidang teknologi informasi ini sangat bermanfaat bagi dunia pendidikan di Indonesia, terutama untuk meningkatkan secara kuantitatif kapasitas proses pendidikan dalam mengatasi berbagai kendala akibat keterbatasan ruang dan waktu.

DAFTAR PUSTAKA
Buku
Miarso, Yusufhadi, [1981], “Penerapan Teknologi Pendidikan di Indonesia”, Jakarta: Universitas Terbuka.

Schweber, William, [1996], “Electronic Communication Systems”, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Inc.

William, Frederick, [1989], “The News Communication”, Los Angeles : Wadsworth, Inc.

Makalah
Karsidi, R., [2000], “Penerapan Teknologi untuk peningkatan Mutu Pendidikan”, Makalah: Disampaikan dalam Seminar Pendidikan Tingkat Regional EKM –FKIP–Universitas Sebelas Maret Surakarta, tanggal 7 September 2000.

Sadjad, R. S. [2000], “Internet dan Sistem Pendidikan”, Makalah: Disampaikan pada Kuliah Umum dalam Rangka Penerimaan dan Orientasi Mahasiswa Baru T.A. 2000-, STMIK Kharisma Makassar, tanggal 19-20 September 2000.

Wardiana, W. [2002], “Perkembangan Teknologi Informasi di Indonesia”, Makalah: Disampaikan pada Seminar dan Pameran Teknologi Informasi 2002, Fakultas Teknik Universitas Komputer Indonesia (UNIKOM) Jurusan Teknik Informatika, tanggal 9 Juli 2002.