my paper

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION
A. Background of the problem

Language takes an important role in people’s life as human beings; either on their own life or on social cases. Language is used for building relationship, expressing feeling, discussing, gossiping, creating and persevering cultures, telling histories, etc. One of the essential functions of language is as the communication tool. People do the above mentioned activities, communicating one to another, by using language.
Wardhaugh (2006:1) stated that language is what the members of a particular society speak. A society use language for communication. One form of communication is the interaction between the speaker and the listener; can be a student with a student, lecturer with a student, etc. Both of them should concern about language acquisition that is communicative competence, especially when communicating in foreign language.
English, as a tool of communication, has an important role in Intensive English Program on Service Language Center (Pusat Pelayanan Bahasa) at STAIN Batusangkar. English is used for communicating in teaching and learning process. So, each student should master one of four basic language skills that is speaking subject in order to increase students speaking ability. Actually, English is still difficult to be understood by the students although most of them have learned it since they were in junior high school. Even though the lecturers have repeatedly explained the material, most of students still can not understand well. The writer notices that not all students are able to do communication in English. So, lecturers need to do code-switching communication during teaching and learning process.
As Gal in Wardhaugh (2006:101) says, ‘code switching is a conversational strategy used to establish, cross or destroy group boundaries; to create, evoke or change interpersonal relations with their rights and obligations. In other word, Code-switching is a term in linguistic referring to using more than one language or variety in a communication. Bilingual person have the ability to do code- switching or mix their language during the communication. This phenomenon occurs when bilingual substitute a word or phrase from one language with a word or phrase from another language. For example, in the sentences (1)Tolong, open the door! (2) Saya tidak pergi ke sekolah because I am sick. (3) Please! Jangan di- report dulu.
In my opinion why the lecturer and the student do code switching during teaching and learning process generally because of the students’ lack of English vocabulary, grammatical error, avoid bored situation they make a joke with the language, and emphasize the massage in order to be understood.
The focus on this paper is to know the effectiveness of lecturers’ doing code switching in teaching and learning process for the first year students’ understanding of the learning material in Intensive English Program at STAIN Batusangkar. The reason why the writer focus on the effectiveness of doing code switching are generally most of students can not do communication in English well and many lecturers do code- switching in teaching and learning process to make the students more easy to understand the material. The writer believes that code-switching can help the student to understand the message from the lecturer.
B. The identification of the problem
There are many people do the code-switching including the lecturer, student and they are doing this with various reasons. The reasons are students’ lack of terminology in one language, grammatical error, make a joke in order to avoid bored situation in the class, emphasize message or information in order to be understood by the students easily, including someone in conversation and repetition in one language, and the lecturer can not express himself/herself in one language. In this paper the writer focus on three reasons why the lecturer do code switching; students’ lack of vocabulary, grammatical error, make a joke, and emphasize message or information and the connection with students’ understanding about the learning material.

C. Limitation of the problem
The writer limit the problem on the study of the lecturers’ effectiveness of doing code- switching for the students’ understanding during teaching and learning process at the first year students of Intensive English Program at STAIN Batusangkar.
D. Formulation of the problem
Based on the limitation of the problem, the writer formulates the problems follows: “How effective do the lecturers do code switching in their conversation during teaching and learning process in term of students’ lack of vocabulary, make a joke, and emphasize message or information for students’ understanding of learning material at first year student of Intensive English Program at STAIN Batusangkar?”
E. The purpose of the paper
The purpose this paper is to find out how effective the lecturers do code switching in term of students’ lack of vocabulary, make a joke, and emphasize message or information for students’ understanding of learning material and as requirement for final project on Sociolinguistic subject.
F. Definitions of the key term
In order to understand clearly and to avoid misunderstanding of the term used in this paper, the writer defines them as follows:
Code switching is combination more than one language and may be combining in the different way in conversation or a single clause (Wardaugh: 2006). In this paper means code switching is a people who switch their language from Bahasa Indonesia into English or English into Bahasa Indonesia in terms of students’ lack of vocabulary, make a joke, and emphasize message or information during teaching and learning process.

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
A. Bilingualism
Before we are going to further theories about code switching, it is important to know about bilingual. As it has been shown that code switching may occur in bilingual and multilingual. The practice of using and understanding two or more languages called bilingualism. Matthews (2007:40) gives the definition of bilingual is traditionally of someone with a native or native-like control of two languages. Code switching only can be used by bilingual; therefore the writer needs to include the statement of “Bilingualism” in this chapter.
Language is used more than two language varieties can be reserved for specific functions in a society. It is also bilingualisms that is a subjects for psychologists and psycholinguistics; it refers to an individual’s ability to use two language varieties. A bilingual or multilingual situation can be producing still other effects on one or more of the language (Wardaugh, 2006). We noted that bilingual as a person who speaks two or more languages, dialects or styles of speech that involve differences in sound, vocabulary and syntax. It shows that bilingualism does not only involve the language itself, but also involve linguistics feature; such as sound, syntax, lexical, and semantic.
Finally, bilingualism is considered as ability or a competence of using more than one language, even in comprehending or producing those languages in speaking, reading and writing skills. Bilingualisms will be more valuable if a bilingual have learned the two languages and spoken those two, and have been taught in both language.
B. Code Switching
The concept of code was put forward by Bernstein in Wardhaugh (2006). It refers to any system of signals, such as numbers, words, signal, which carries concrete meaning. Wardhaugh (2006) pointed out that the term code is a neutral term rather than terms such as Dialect, Language, Style, Pidgin and Creole which are inclined to arouse emotions. Code can be used to refer to “any kind of system that two or more people employ for communication”. When a particular code is decided on, there is no need to stick to it all the time. People can and will shift, as the need arises, from one code to another.
In the studies of code-switching, there have been various definitions of the term “code-switching”. Meisel in Cantone, Katja F (2007: 57) says that: Code-switching is the ability to select the language according to the interlocutor, the situational context, the topic of conversation, and so forth, and to change languages within an interactional sequence in accordance with sociolinguistic rules and without violating specific grammatical constraints’. Then, Florian Coulmas (1998: 149) code-switching is used by producing discourses which, in the same conversational turn or in consecutive turns, include morphemes from two or more of the varieties in their linguistic repertoire. So, Code-switching is the practice of moving between variations of languages in different contexts. This paper explains the history of code-switching, explores important literature on the subject, and discusses approaches to language response in the classroom.
Furthermore, Gumperz in Wardhaugh (2006) referred to it as “the juxtaposition within the same speech exchange of passages of speech belonging to two different grammatical systems or subsystems”. In the context of foreign language classroom, it refers to the alternate use of the first language and the target language, a means of communication by language teachers when the need arises. And Gal in Wardhaugh (2006:101) also gives the definition of code switching, but he stresses on conversational strategy. He states that code switching is a conventional strategy is used to establish, cross or destroy group boundaries, to create, evoke or change interpersonal relations with their rights and obligation. From the definitions above, it can be concluded that people are usually required to select a particular code whenever they choose to speak and they may also decode to switch from one code to another code or mix codes.
Bernardo in Borlongan (2009:30) proposed code-switching can be a legitimate and potent resource for learning and teaching for bilingual students and teachers, and that we [Filipinos in general and stakeholders in Philippine education in particular] should relax our language prescription in formal school environments to allow students and teachers to benefit from the use of this efficacious resource of developing knowledge and understanding Code switching is a term in linguistics referring to using more than one language or variety in conversation.
Code switching involves more than one language and may combine in different ways. Although some experts have seen code switching as reflecting a lack of language ability, some other experts consider code switching to be a normal and natural product of interaction between the bilingual (or multilingual) speaker’s language. Code switching can be distinguished from other language contact phenomena such as borrowing, pidgins and creoles, and transfer or interference.
In conclusion, a person who is bilingual or multilingual perhaps switch from variety X to variety Y or from one language to another language for several reason such as solidarity, emphasize the massage, make a joke, choice of topics, and perceived social and culture distance. In other words, the motivation of the speaker is an important consideration of choosing the words.
C. Reasons on doing Code Switching
People who are bilingual or multilingual do code switching for a number of reasons. There are some reasons why people do code switching; those are to quote someone word or sentences, to specify addressee, to emphasize or to qualify the message, to show expertise, raise status, and add authority, to specify speaker involvement, to convey confidentially, angers and annoyance, to trigger (communicative strategy), to exclude someone from a conversation and to mark and emphasize group identity.
Some expert also states some statements which show the cause why people do code switching: , for instance, Gumperz (1982) states three reasons why people do code switching. First is code switching can be more convenient. Second is helping an ethnic minority community retain a sense of cultural identity. Third is speaker may not be able to express himself/herself in one language.
To sum up, the reasons on doing code switching is to help the students to understand about the material lesson and to clarify or emphasize the point information learning process.
D. Code-switching in the classroom

Halmari (2004:141) states that the functions of code-switching are often difficult to interpret since they are closely connected to the speech situations and interpersonal relationships affecting them. Compared to code-switching among bilinguals in a social setting, code-switching in the foreign language classroom is more complex to deal with, because of the fact that it works on several levels (Simon, 2001:314). The student’s role in the classroom is associated with the implicit obligation to use the target language. However, for different reasons this obligation is sometimes disregarded.
One apparent reason for switching to the native language is the fact that foreign language students generally have a relatively unequal mastery of their first and their second language (Simon, 2001:316). If the students know one language better than the other, it is natural and likely that they will switch to the language that they know and feel secure in using. Furthermore, the mastery of the target language is not evenly distributed between teacher and students. As a rule, the teacher is much more proficient in the target language than the students are. The native language is (in most cases) a common code of communication which makes it possible to level off the linguistic advantage held by the teacher. Thus, in spite of the existing but unwritten pedagogical rule to speak the target language, the L2 learners are aware of the possibility to retreat to the native language if necessary.
As mentioned earlier, communication in the foreign language classroom is more complex than social communication in general. Perhaps the most important reason for this is that in the classroom there is a double level of communication. The foreign language is not merely used to exchange ideas and to communicate, but also to talk about the language itself. In other words, we are communicating about communicating, and both communication and meta-communication take place. When the teacher conveys information in the foreign language, the learners commonly intervene in the native language in order to clarify and assimilate the information. A situation where this type of learner intervention is likely to occur is when grammar is being taught. Another typical situation would be when the learners use their native language in order to check their understanding of lexical items. Consequently, as pointed out by Simon (2001:327), the choice of code is closely related to the type of task or activity being performed in the classroom. Oral production tasks and comprehension are examples of activities associated with the foreign language. Hence, meta-communication, for instance, is a trigger for the native language to come into effect and the ultimate reason for this is the learners’ need to negotiate meaning in order to help the learning process.
Closely related to the sort of code-switching accounted for above, is help-switching (Simon, 2001:333). Help-switching is what occurs when a learner switches to his/her native language in order to obtain information from a fellow student, or to make him/her clarify information previously given by the teacher. This type of switching codes helps the learner to construct a response in the foreign language.
Moreover, code-switching is to a considerable degree connected to changes in roles and role relationships. The student has a sort of double identity – one as a learner and one as a social interlocutor. Similarly, the relationship between the teacher and the students has two aspects – one institutional and one interpersonal. In other words, they do not merely interact as teacher and student, but also as social beings. When either of the interlocutors switches code, there is a shift in social and institutional roles. A switch from the target language to the native language places the learner on more equal social grounds with the teacher. When switching from the foreign language to the native language, the student denies his/her identity as a learner and instead assumes a social role. From the students’ perspective, the teacher now becomes more of an equal and less of a teacher.
In line with this, Halmari (2004:138) describes the bilingual teenage daughter who speaks English most of the time, but switches to her native language Finnish when she wants to persuade her Finnish father into extending her curfew. When she feels that the battle is lost, she switches back to English, which is her language of authority and can be seen as a symbol of protest. Consequently, code-switching functions as an indicator of alignment/in alignment, bonding or persuasion; when the girl wants to align with her father and persuade him, she speaks Finnish, and when she wants to protest and disaffiliate herself from her father she speaks English.
E. Code-switching and the role of the teacher

It is a common mistake for the teacher to automatically make assumptions about the students’ proficiency from the way they switch codes in the classroom. A student that frequently switches between the target language and the native language will in many cases be considered less proficient than one who uses the target language throughout. In reality, these assumptions are rather fallacious since various studies show that it is very hard to make assumptions about the proficiency of a speaker from the use of different code-switching patterns (Halmari, 2004:143).
It is, however, not only the students that are involved in the code-switching occurring in the classroom. The teacher plays a crucial and many times quite complex role in this process (Ur, 1996). While the learner is interested in leveling out the social boundaries in the classroom by code-switching, the teacher many times strives for quite the opposite – namely to maintain those boundaries and consequently his/her formal function that is signaled by the foreign language. In spite of this, the lecturer also switches codes. The motives for code-switching, however, differ between the lecturer and the students. While the learners switch to the native language in order to make the classroom discourse available as input for learning, the teacher does so in order to obtain cooperation on part of the students and through this get them to speak the target language. Considering the different motives and aims of lecturers and students, it is evident that there is a tight and complex process of negotiation going on in the classroom (Simon, 2001:333).
One important contributor to achievement in language learning is motivation, and studies show that the lecturer’s role in this area is central (Ur, 1996:274). Recent studies tend to be somewhat learner-centered, seeing the teacher’s role merely as providing materials and conditions for learning. However, this learner-centered approach is not implemented very often since the reality is that most teachers see motivation as their task (Ur, 1996:277). The learner-centered approach could be valid for some learners, but not for all. It is, for example, likely that there is a rather big difference in motivation between schoolchildren and adult learners who make an explicit choice to learn a new language. Integrative motivation is especially important when talking about code-switching. Integrative motivation reflects “the desire to identify with and integrate into the target culture” (Ur, 1996:276). The lecturer can to a great extent contribute to this by setting an example through his/her own application of the target language. The enthusiasm and eagerness of EFL lecturers is very important in the way that they communicate their motivation to the students (Ur, 1996:276). Mother tongue use is a problem that most lecturer experience when speaking activities are performed in the classroom. To make the students motivated in keeping to the target language, it is important to set up activities on an appropriate level. For the same group of students, the language required for an oral exercise should be on a lower level than that used in other language learning activities. Furthermore, the language employed should be easy to recall and reproduce by the learners so that they can do the task as fluently and with as little hesitance as possible.
CHAPTER III
DISCUSSION
My purpose in this study has to contribute to the understanding of how code-switching works and the impact it has on the interaction in the classroom. I have tried to accomplish this through examining the proportionate use of English and Indonesia in Service Language Center, and I have also looked at the circumstances in which the switches take place and for what reasons. Moreover, I have aimed at finding out what effect the lecturer’s use of code-switching has on students’ language acquisition.
Due to the limited scope of this study, it is difficult to point to any exclusionary results. However, the study showed some tendencies about the role of code-switching in the classroom. An important finding is that the lecturer’s use of code-switching has a clear impact on the students. Even though the lecturer gave rather similar information about their language use in the interviews, they differed notably in their use of English and Indonesia in the classroom during my teaching. Their language use seemed to be reflected in their students’ reported choice of language. The lecturer’ use of English clearly served as motivation for the students to speak the target language.
In addition to this, the lecturer and the students gave very different answers regarding the situations in which the students switched to Indonesia. The lecturers gave grammatical explanations as the only particular situation in which the students switched codes, while the students gave answers ranging from speaking to fellow students to explaining lexical items. This could of course be a sign of the students, rather than the lecturers, not being aware of their language use.
Regarding the situations in which the students switch to Indonesia, there some factors that trigger of code switching in the classroom. An example of this is grammar, lack of the vocabularies; make a joke, which is an important factor. The same thing is valid in the case of content based code-switching. Other factors, such as code-switching as an indicator of changes in roles and role relationships, are rather difficult to evaluate and it is hard to determine whether they were present in the classroom or not.

The tendency that I noticed during my investigation on English Intensive Program was that it was difficult for the lecturers to find a compromise between, on the one hand, no use of the target language at all and too much of it on the other. One of the lecturers was very rigid in the use of the target language and did not accept code-switching, while the other did not encourage her students to speak English to any great extent. In my opinion, lecturers should learn more about how code-switching works and allow it in some cases. This would help to create a learning environment in which there is reduced stress and where the students can take use of their native language in the learning process.

CHAPTER IV

CONCLUSION

The lecturers claimed they switched to Indonesia only when explaining grammatical features, whereas the students gave the more general reason for their teacher’s code-switching: to explain things they did not understand. Both lecturers and the majority of the students believed that not being allowed to switch to Indonesia at all was more beneficial to the students’ acquisition of English than being allowed on occasions. There were some results found by the writer. First, both the lecturers and the students switched code from English to Indonesia or vice versa. Besides, they switched code in the form of words, phrases and sentences. Second, the kinds of code switching used by the lecturers and the students were based on the topic changing. The last result was the reason of the usage of code switching. The lecturer used code switching to clarify the difficult concepts or terms to make the students understand some information or knowledge easily during the classroom instruction; to avoid boring situation; and to maintain conducive communication. Meanwhile, the students used code switching because they lacked ability in using certain English terms to answer and ask questions in the class.

In conclusion, one thing that I did not see much of in the classroom, however, was code-switching on the word level as described in previous studies. In my investigation, code-switching tended to be more on the sentence or clause level, while code-switching on the word level only occurred at a few occasions. I think the area of code-switching in the classroom deserves to be studied further. The bulk of the research on code-switching is based on natural bilinguals in a natural setting, and not on learners in the foreign language classroom. Consequently, it would be meaningful to study how code-switching can be used in order to create a naturalistic environment, where the use of the target language can be evoked rather than imposing the mandatory use of it on the students. It would also be of interest to investigate whether code-switching can be employed in the classroom as a way of helping the learning process of the students.

References

Bolander, Ingela. 2008. Code-switching in the classroom A sign of deficiency or a part of the learning process? Engelska C-uppsats Termin: Hostterminen Handledare: Marika Kjellen

Borlongan, Ariane Macalinga.2009. Tagalog-English Code-Switching in English Language Class: Frequency and Forms. Tesol Journal, Vol.1 Desember, 2009, ISSN 2094-3938
Cantone, Katja F. © 2007. Code-Switching in Bilingual Children. Springer Netherlands Dordrecht
Coulmas,Florian . 1998. The Handbook of Sociolinguistic.
Gumperz JJ. 1982. Discourse Strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University. Press.

Halmari, Helena. 2004. Code-switching patterns and developing discourse competence in L2. In Boxer, Diana & Andrew D. Cohen (eds.). 2004. Studying speaking to inform second language learning. 115-144. [Online] Available at http://ebrary.com

Matthews.P.H. 2007. The Concise Oxford dictionary of Linguistics. New York: Oxford University Press. Second Edition

Simon, Diana-Lee. 2001. Towards a new understanding of code-switching in the foreign language classroom. In Jacobson (ed.). 311-342.

Ur, Penny. 2005. A course in language teaching: Practice and theory. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press

Wardhaugh, Ronald. 2006. An introduction to sociolinguistics. Blackwell textbooks in linguistics ; 4. 5th ed. p. cm.