THE QUALITY PERFORMANCE OF INTENSIVE ENGLISH COURSE LECTURER

Intensive English Course (IC) has been considered an essential program to prepare qualified English Department students in higher education in the first semester. The lecturers teach this program for the four skills and two components; listening, reading, speaking, writing, vocabulary and grammar in an integrated manner for one semester. This course will be a success if the lecturers have the capability in content and pedagogy to teach the IC program. Furthermore, this study aimed at describing lecturers’ quality performance in teaching IC at UIN Sjech M. Djamil Djambek (SMDD) Bukittinggi. The data was collected by distributing a questionnaire to 95 first-semester English department students in the 2022/2023 academic year. The findings showed the lecturers’ average was 58,83. It means that the lecturers were qualified in teaching Intensive English Courses in all indicators; tangible, reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and empathy.


INTRODUCTION
Intensive English Course (IC) is one of the subjects that must be followed by students of English education in the first semester.This course is considered important because it has the goal that students have an integrative knowledge of English, be able to communicate in English both receptively and productively at the intermediate level so that students are ready and able to use English in spoken and written form, using acceptable language structure and vocabulary (Bouti, 2007;Cahyono, 2002).This course program is intended to lay the foundation for reliable and intensive English mastery in an integrated manner.Intensive characteristics are manifested in the form of teaching which is held with a high frequency of academic activities throughout the first semester, especially face-to-face activities in class.
In more detail, Bouti, (2007) explains the objectives and competencies that must be achieved in this intensive course program.There are four objectives: 1) to produce reliable and professional human resources and teaching staff in the field of English language and literature at all levels including universities; 2) developing department organizations in line with the vision and mission of the faculty and university; 3) creating a conducive academic atmosphere; and 4) develop learning support facilities.Meanwhile, the expected competencies: 1) produce professional teaching staff in the field of English language and literature; 2) produce graduates who have mastery over fields related to the ins and outs behind the English language; 3) produce graduates who have additional competencies as tour guides, English teachers for early childhood and business practitioners.
Several phenomena were found in the teaching process of this intensive course.
Lecturers tend to focus more on the English language skills assigned to them, for example listening skills, reading skills and so on.So unconsciously, lecturers focus more on completing lectures.While the other aspects don't really get the portion they should.Another phenomenon was related to the material.Several lecturers created material for this course.But this is not something that has to be developed in an intensive course, because it tends to be a lecturer's creativity.To avoid this phenomenon, a lecturer who teaches this course should have the ability and understanding of the material and how to teach it.
The research related to IC teaching has been carried out by several previous researchers.Nurcahyani & Bahrani (2021) exposed the teaching strategy of an Intensive Course at the language center of IAIN Samarinda.They explained that the lecturers started to have preparation before teaching IC -preparing lesson plan (RPS) -until the lecturers gave reinforcement, like giving motivation at the end of the lesson.Meanwhile, Jumrah (2019) developed the IC model to improve English language skills.This model was addressed to the students of the early childhood Islamic Education department (PIAUD).She found that the materials had a positive effect on students' language skill improvement.It was different from the research of Bouti (2007) which discussed the phenomena that have occurred in the implementation of IC so far.This problem was seen from two major groups, namely the phenomenon of teaching and the phenomenon of instructional materials.Teaching showed that the IC program unintentionally places too much emphasis on completing material through face-to-face meetings, while other aspects did not get their proper portion, whereas in terms of instructional materials, the material tended to overlap with other English language skills material.
Based on previous research on the IC program, there is still limited research that measures the quality of lecturers who teach IC.This research is deemed necessary to ensure the objectives of the IC program can be achieved successfully.An IC lecturer requires having pedagogical and content abilities.Thus, it is reasonable to research how the lecturers' quality performance in teaching Intensive English Courses.

METHOD
The lecturer must have the ability to improve teaching quality and apply it to students to create satisfaction in students so that teachers can easily achieve the learning objectives that have been set and improve their students' performance (Gichuru et al., 2016).Many experts proposed the theory to assess teaching quality (Goldhaber & Anthony, 2003;Hamid et al., 2012;Jackson, 2012;Jayanti & Purwanti, 2017;Marder, 2012;Parasuraman et al., 1988).This article adopted the theory of service quality issued by Parasuraman et al., (1988).They divided five dimensions to evaluate service quality; tangible, reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and empathy (Parasuraman et al., 1988;Widodo, 2015), since this theory is easy to implement.

Research type and sample
The study was descriptive quantitative research aimed at describing the result of investigating how the lecturers' quality performance in teaching IC to first-semester students of English education in UIN Sjech M. Djamil Djambek Bukittinggi, Indonesia.The sample was 95 students in the 2022/2023 academic year.

Instrument and procedure
The instrument was in form of a questionnaire which consisted of five indicators; tangible, reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and empathy.There were 16-item statements that were utilized to have students respond to the lecturers' quality performance in teaching IC courses.The instrument has been valid and reliable after being assessed by three experts (content validity).
To get the data, the questionnaire was spread to all classes in the first semester of the English department.The students felt free to answer their evaluation of their IC lecturers' quality performance in teaching.

Data analysis
Students' answers were analyzed based on the theory of Sugiyono (2013).There were five liker scales used; 1 for never, 2 for seldom, 3 for sometimes, 4 for often, and 5 for always.The percentage is calculated using the following formula which is quoted from Atmazaki (2013).
Then the result of the calculation was converted into a descriptive analysis.Data were converted as follows: the range between 76 -100 means highly qualified, 51-75 is qualified, 26-50 is less qualified, and the last 0 -25 is not qualified.c.The lecturer used language that was easy to understand Picture 3: The Language Used 69,5% students agreed that the lecturers always used language that was easy to understand.Only 21,1% said often, and 8,4% told sometimes.it can be concluded that most of the IC course lecturers used an easy language to understand during learning process.

Picture 4: The Campus Facility
The above chart explained that 57,9% students said the lecturers always use campus facility properly.Followed by 30,5% answered often, 9,5% responded sometimes.
e. Lecturers used media to help the learning process Picture 5: The Media Used Less than half of students agreed that the lecturers always use media to help the learning process (46,3%).Then 24,2% told often, 18,9% said sometimes.the worst was 7 students answered seldom, and the rest 3 students responded that the teacher did not use media during learning process.They answered variously, since four lecturers of intensive course taught this course at first semester.
The following table 1 showed the conclusion of the five charts that described students' evaluation of lecturers' tangible.More than half of students (60%) clarified that the lecturers always give appropriate assignments and provided feedback to students, and followed by 34,7% students answer often, 1,1% said sometimes, 3,2% seldom, and 1,1% told never.Overall, the finding above can be concluded in table 2. The mean score of teachers' reliability was in point 67,1.It means that the lecturers' reliability was qualified since it is in between 51-75.The highest point was 81,1.It told that the lecturers taught material based on the syllabus provided and shared with students at the beginning of the semester.The lecturers were consistent.Whereas, the lowest score of 38,9 had the meaning that not all the Intensive English Course lecturers started the classes on time.

Responsiveness
Responsiveness means readiness and the lecturers' ability to assist students and respond to their requests promptly.The indicator of responsiveness provided two statements.

Assurance
The fourth indicator was assurance.It is about the knowledge and courtesy of lecturers and their ability to foster students' trust and confidence.For this case, the students were assessed for three statements about their lecturers.
a.The lecturers comprehended all materials which would be taught often, followed by 5,3% said sometimes.However 1,1% told seldom.It means that almost all Intensive English Course lecturers provided new knowledge about the materials.
Table 4 would show students' responses to lecturers' assurance.For this indicator, the students displayed their trust in their lecturers.They were convinced that the lecturers comprehended all materials which would be taught.The mean score point was 71,6.It means that the lecturers had qualified in assurance.

Empathy
Empathy means the lecturer understands the students' problems and students' needs to provide personal attention.Related to this indicator, the students responded to two statements.
a. Lecturers motivated students' progress in the learning process

Picture 15: Lecturers Motivate Students
The first question of the last indicator showed more than 50% of students (58,9%) answered the lecturers always motivate students' in learning process.
Followed by 32,6% answered often, and the last 8,4% said sometimes.Thus, it is said all lecturers often motivate students in learning process.The last statement for the fifth indicator provided information that 52,6% of students told the lecturers are always willing to help students with lecture problems.

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
This research has implications for didactic research on teachers' quality.The overall result of this research showed that the lecturers are qualified to teach IC courses.But some of sub-indicators achieved less qualified criteria, and it requires special attention.The lecturers need to improve these backward.For instance, the lecturers need to provide extra time for the student to have a kind consultation related to their courses.Further, the teachers themselves have to expose and evaluate their quality teaching continuously.
Description of students' responses toward the lecturer's quality performance in teaching Intensive English Course (IC) 1. Tangible Tangible regarding the physical appearance of the facility, services, equipment, human resource, and material that were provided during the lecture takes place.Five statements were offered to the students related to tangible.The charts exposed each statement result based on students' responses to lecturers' tangible.a.The lecturer explained the material clearly.Picture 1: The Lecturers' Explanation during Learning Process The first aspect is tangible.More than half of students or 61,1% students answered that the lecturer always explained the material clearly.Then 33,7% said often, and only 5,3% responded sometimes.In conclusion, the lecturers mostly always explain the material clearly.b.The lecturer used the lecture method in the classroom Picture 2: Method Used Intensive English Course (36,8%).It means that some lecturers used various methods in teaching IC course.
c.The exam was conducted following a predetermined meeting schedule Picture 8: Examination Accuracy Related to this statement, almost all students agreed that the lecturers always conducted the lecture by following a predetermined meeting schedule (88,4%).Only 9,5% answer often, and one student told sometimes.It means that no one lecturer attempted to change the schedule.d.The lecturers taught materials based on the lesson plan Picture 9: Teaching Material ConsistencyAmazingly, 81,1% students answered that the lecturers taught materials based on lesson plan.Only a few students told that the lecturers often.But 2,1% responded sometimes.It means that the lecturers were consistent to employ the lesson plan they composed, and they had distributed the lesson plan at the beginning of semester.
They were the lecturers' willingness to solve students' obstacles, and also the lecturers' extra time consultation for students.a.The lecturer provides a consultation schedule for students outside of learning Picture 10: Extra times for Consultation The data on chart showed not all lecturers who teach Intensive English Course provided a consultation schedule out of learning hours.26,3% students clarified always.27,4% answered often, 21,1% said sometimes, 13,7% seldom, and 11,6% responded never.In conclusion, only a few lecturers provided an extra time to have students' consultation about their learning.b.The lecturers helped students answer difficult questions Picture 11.Helping Students' Academic Difficulty Based on the chart above, 67,4% students answered the lecturers always help them answer difficult questions.27,4% said often.The rest two responded 4,2% was sometimes and 1,1% said seldom.It can be said that most of the lecturers helped students answer difficult questions.
b. Lecturers are willing to help students with lecture problems Picture 16: Lecturers' Intention to Help Students' Problems

Table 1
clarified lecturers' tangible in teaching IC.The students responded that the lecturers were qualified with 52,86 points.69,5% of students assessed that the lecturers used easy language to understand while they were teaching IC.However, sometimes the lecturers still mostly used the lecture method in the classroom.It should be taken into consideration by other lecturers to use various methods in teaching IC courses.2.ReliabilityIt is related to the lecturers' ability to provide service to students that are presented accurately and satisfactorily, for instance, accurate lecture time, suitability of courses, and material accuracy for the learning process.The students responded to four questions related to this indicator.a.The lecturers started lecturing on time Picture 6: The Accurate Lecture Time Students responded for the first question for this indicator variously.38,9% said that the lecturers started lecturing on time.There is slightly difference if it is compared to second response that 36,8% said often, then followed by 22,1% told sometimes.Even, 2,1% answered seldom.It was assumed that Intensive course has four kinds in different times (in the morning and at noon).The phenomenon showed that first lecturing hour will get risk of being started late.b.The lecturers gave appropriate assignments and provided feedback to students Picture 7: Assignment and Feedback

Table 5
showed students' responses to lecturers' empathy.This indicator got 55,75 points.It belonged to the qualifying criteria.The following table would display the average for the five indicators; tangible, reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and empathy.