See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325569383

I Can Vlog!: Oral Competency of Gen Z within

Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK)
Framework

Chapter · May 2018

CITATIONS READS

0 24

2 authors, including:

Made Hery Santosa

Ganesha University of Education
60 PUBLICATIONS   8 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Investigation on TPACK View project

Learning Approach View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Made Hery Santosa on 05 June 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 ‘I Can Vlog!’: Oral Competency of Gen Z within Technological Pedagogical
Content Knowledge (TPACK) Framework

Made Hery Santosa

mhsantosa@undiksha.ac.id
Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha, Singaraja, Bali, Indonesia

Ratih Mas Absari

mas.absari@gmail.com
Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha, Singaraja, Bali, Indonesia

Abstract
With increasing numbers of generation Z in today’s classrooms, teachers must align
into students’ capacities to fully engage them in the teaching and learning process.
This study aimed to improve students’ speaking competencies using Vlog in the
secondary level EFL context within Technological Pedagogical Content
Knowledge (TPACK) framework. Over one semester period, three main activities
were utilized to 30 students of second grade vocational high school, namely
distributing a TPACK survey, implementing a classroom action research, and
conducting a focused group interview. Instruments, like the TPACK survey, rubric,
and a semi-structured interview guide were used in the study. Results show that
students have a relatively high understanding of using technology but slightly
limited information on pedagogy and content aspects. The use of Vlog eventually
increased students’ speaking competencies as they were given wider opportunities
to express their thoughts using technology as a part of daily life. It is further
suggested that students need to fully engage their daily use of technology into
learning, and thus teachers, schools, and government must take into account the
students’ current preferences of learning in the digital age.
Key words: Generation Z, 21st century learning, Vlog, TPACK

INTRODUCTION
The most effective way to understand each other is by communication. Nowadays,
communication is developed wider. Communication in 21 st century demands people to use English
in general. English became a lingua franca that needs to be learned by everyone to be able to
communicate globally. Since the technology develops rapidly, the communication became more
complex than before. If in many years ago, people interacted only with their little circle of
friendship, but now people may communicate with people in different part of the world even they
have not meet in person yet. In the present world, as the development of technology, people use
social media as their tools of communication. By thus way of communication, English is demanded
used to be able to have good communication.
According to Cates (2002) there is a global approach to education which is divided into
knowledge, skills, attitudes, and action. The first goal is knowledge about world problems where
the students are wanted to know the nature, causes, and solutions of world problems in order to
work for a better world. The second goal is acquiring skills, for examples are communication,
critical and creative thinking, cooperative problem-solving, nonviolent conflict resolution,
informed decision making, and the ability to see issues from multiple perspectives. The third is
acquiring global attitudes, global awareness, curiosity, an appreciation of other cultures, respect
for diversity, a commitment to justice, and empathy with others. The last goal is action in which
democratic local and global participation may occur to solve world problems. In addition, the
global education issues in EFL are various. The global education content is the main issue. The
content issues occur as language has a certain degree of flexibility of topic than the other subject.
This becomes an issue in the content since the students are just starting to learn the sound of foreign
language.
Based on the result of English Proficiency Index (EPI) in 2017, Indonesia was in the 39th
from 80 countries. It was in the low level (EF, 2017). This showed that Indonesian students have
low proficiency in English. In Indonesia, English is learned at school by students since they are in
4th grade of elementary school in common. It is continued until the students are in their senior
high school grades. Due to the development of era in global, some people thinks that English might
be taught to the earlier children, such as in kindergarten. Although the students in Indonesia already
learn English for more than 9 years until they are in senior high school, not all students may speak
English confidently and correctly. This of course becomes problem that is faced by many schools
in Indonesia. According to Musthafa (2001), there are some reasons that explained why this
happened. There are because of teachers’ degree of confident in using the language before their
own students, the students are not getting involved in social communication in the classroom as
the time constraint, the type and focus of the exam which the students as judges to choose the
answer as it is in multiple-choice format, and the authentic learning material that is not
commutatively-engaging learning tasks. Therefore, speaking became the most difficult basic of
English if it compared with reading, writing, or listening. This supports that speaking needs more
mental readiness than others since people communicate spontanly. The students who have problem
in English are not from public school only but also vocational school. The students in vocational
school supposed to be able to speak English well as they took major tourism and the daily routine
in the classroom is learn about touring tourists. Based on the pre-observation, the students are
demanded to speak English well in order to be ready for the work field. For Tourism Department,
they need to be able to be at least tour guide for foreigners.
Nowadays, students are categorized as generation Z which means they are close with
technology in their daily life. Generation Z is also known as Post-Millennial or the iGeneration.
According to Wood (2013), Gen Z refers to those individuals who were born from the mid-1990’s
to the early 2000’s. They were born in the decade following the widespread emergence of the
World Wide Web. Most of this generation comprises the children of Gen X. There are four trend
characteristics of Gen Z. The first is the Gen Z focus on innovation. Generation Z feels comfortable
with the virtual world, therefore the internet has always existed. The second, they are insistence
on convenience. Generation Y, and it is generally believed for Generation Z, are much less likely
to be concerned about privacy issues than Baby Boomers and Generation X. The third is an
underlying desire for security. Given a different parental influence and the current economic
environment, Generation Z may be more pragmatic and more scarcity-oriented. Generation Z may
feel more careful and discriminating in where they spend their money. The last is a tendency
toward escapism. The Generation Z is likely to be facilitated by technological advances that 1)
make entertainment products like video-games more real and compelling, 2) offer greater 24-7
access to social networks, and, 3) offer greater mobility in devices that offer escapism (e.g., mobile
phones with media and Internet availability). Based on those characteristics, teachers nowadays
cannot teach their students as in the way they studied. Teachers must follow the needs of the
students today, where teacher should be able to engage with technology in the teaching and
learning process in the classroom.
Gruth and Helm (2010) classed Web 2.0 as tools used for online language learning into
three categories. They are social networks, wikis, and blogs. These three categories are using
communication and collaboration platform. According to Herring (2015), this Web 2.0 platforms
support the user-touser communication with a convergence of channels or modes in text, audio,
video, and images. According to Mutmainna (2016), integrating technology in the classroom
environment is one the latest approaches of teaching and learning English in English classroom.
The technology environment is supported by the existence of internet in education field and it
plays significant role as many classes have internet based instruments work (Rakhmanina &
Kusumaningrum, 2017). Mutmainna (2016) added that people could do many things through
internet, such as text, chat, browse, call, video call, and through the internet also, people may share
their own stories in their own site. The sharing activity names Blogging. Type of technology that
allows writing personal journals online published and viewed over the web is “Weblogs” or
“Blogs” or “Blogging”. This Blogging may help students writing in education field. To develop
the sharing activity that supports speaking competency is through video and it is uploaded to their
own channel. This is called as Vlog or Video Blogging. Since the platform is video, the students
might have challanges to be able to speak correctly and confidently.
Vlog is a simple video which a person faces a camera and addresses a public viewership
briefly, informally, and more or less intimately (Werner, 2012). According to Johnson (2005), the
Vlog is seen a powerful potential instructional medium by many educationalists as it is suitable to
be teaching tool for the generation who grew up during the emergence of the World Wide Web
and other digital technologies. This is supported by Gale and Kung (2009) stated that Vlog
assignments provide opportunities for the students to learn receptive and expressive skills of a
language comfortably and increase language used during the teaching and learning process. The
used of Vlog to the Generation Z is the right choice that can be decided by the teacher in order to
improve the students’ speaking competencies. Vlog itself is suitable with the students today as
they grew up during the emergence of technology. According to Ivorycon (2015), Zoe Sugg or
best known as Zoella is the international YouTubers with 6 million followers on her YouTube
channel and reported average of 2 million viewers per clip. To prove it, she was published her
debut novel, Girl Online, and it became the fastest-selling book on record, beating J.K. Rowling
with over 78k sales in its first week. Even though Vlog is suitable media for learning, there are
also challenges that should be faced in making a Vlog..
This Vlog can be used as a media for learning with the framework of TPACK. TPACK
stand for Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge. TPACK has a purpose of integrating
ICT or education technology into the classroom teaching and learning process by synthesized the
form of the knowledge (Mishra & Koehler, 2006). There are three core constituents of TPACK,
Content Knowledge (CK), Pedagogical Knowledge (PK), and Technological Knowledge (TK).
These three core can be extended and collaborated to each other (Chai, Koh, & Tsai, 2013).
According to Cox and Graham (2009), TPACK framework has more specifies of what teachers
need to integrate to the technology than how the process can be improved. Table 1 shows the
definition and examples of each dimension of TPACK regarding to review literatures.
 Table 1. Definition and Examples of TPACK Dimensions

As TPACK supports students’ need toward technology in teaching and learning process in
the classroom, this study focused on the improvement of students’ speaking competencies through
Vlog within TPACK framework. This study also aimed at the students’ perception toward TPACK
when it was implemented in teaching and learning process in the classroom. The Vlogs were the
results of students’ projects in determining students’ speaking competencies with TPACK
framework.

METHODOLOGY
This study was designed in the form of classroom action research. This research employs
both quantitative and qualitative methods in collecting data and it is conducted to solve educational
problem as it provides an opportunity for educators to reflect on their teaching practices (Creswell,
2012). The purpose of this study was to improve students’ speaking competencies, therefore the
study was appropriate with this design.
In this study, the data of the students’ perception on TPACK was conducted quantitatively
by distributing TPACK survey. The students’ improvement on their speaking competency was
seen on the classroom action research that was implemented in one semester to the students as the
samples. Moreover, focused group interview was conducted in the end of the classroom action
research. This had purpose to get deeper data from the samples. Those were analyzed qualitatively.
Since this study was suitable with the characteristics of mixed methods research, therefore this
study was conducted in mixed methods research. This was appropriate for analyzing the
improvement in speaking competencies of Gen Z using Vlog within TPACK framework among
students in vocational school in North Bali.
The subjects of this study were students in vocational school in North Bali. The researcher
is interested in conducting the study in vocational school because based on pre-observation, the
teachers in vocational school expected their students to be able to speak English well as they took
focus on tourism class. This meant that the students’ speaking competencies in vocational school
had to be improved to help them in achieving the standards of the school. The amount of the
students were 30 students which 11 boys and 19 girls with the range ages 16 – 17 years old. There
was also one teacher participating in this study.
The main purpose of this study was to improve students speaking competencies using Vlog
in the secondary level EFL context within TPACK framework. The procedures that were done by
the researchers such as developed the survey and done classroom action research. The samples
were selected from the population, the samples were taught as classroom action research and they
were distributed the TPACK survey after they had finished evaluate the Vlogs. The classroom
action research was conducted in one semester, started from July 2017 until December 2017.
There were two cycle that were conducted. The first cycle was in the beginning of the
semester. The first cycle was implemented with a custom activity in the classroom, which was role
play. For the second cycle was modified with the technology as the students were Gen Z. The
modification was using Vlog. Besides, there was a TPACK survey that was distributed to the
samples. This TPACK survey had purpose to analyze the students’ perception toward technology
in general or TPACK as learning media in the classroom. This was kind of close questions. After
distributing the survey, there was interview with 5 samples to find out their reasons of preferring
the answers which were open questions.
The survey was made on a five-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (very low competency)
to 5 (very high competency). The questionnaire had some part of dimensions. The first was
accessibility to the internet, the second was attitude and interest of the usage of technology, the
third was the usage of software, and last one was about TPACK that were divided into some
components with 50 statements. The components were Technology Knowledge, Content
Knowledge, Pedagogical Content Knowledge, Technological Content Knowledge, Technological
Pedagogical Knowledge, and Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge.
There were several processes that were taken to analyze the data, such as classified the
data, analyzed the students’ responses in the questionnaire, displayed in the form of table to ease
the researcher in analyzing the data, and determined the category of mean score of speaking
competencies.

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

After implementing the first cycle of classroom action research, the students showed their
speaking competency by performing role play. The score that the students got for their role play,
here it was analyzed as their pretest as most of the students could not reach the minimum standard.
The results of the students’ score after performing role play is presented in Table 2.
As the standard of minimum score was 75, Table 2 showed that only 5 students who passed
the standard score. The 25 students left were not passed that standard score. Therefore, a second
cycle was conducted in order to reach that standard of minimum score. This cycle was modified
with the usage of technology as the students’ daily life that is close with technology. The
technology that used was Vlog. The Vlog was used because it is supported with the research that
had been done by Hung (2011) which stated that Vlogs offer visual representation, relief from time
constraints, self-evaluation, wider audience, peer learning and technical capability to the students
as a set of advantages. Moreover, based on Bilbao, Bravo, García, Varela, González, Baro and
Rodríguez (2009), some advantages of using Vlog in teaching and learning process are developing
students’ opportunity to read, watch, and listen to the information, collaborate with others to
enlarge and deepen their knowledge, and use technology to create new knowledge as well as
organize and present knowledge. From the students’ side, they became highly motivated and
engaged in active metacognitive learning involving team work and communication
understandings.
Table 2. Students’ Score in Cycle 1
Number of Students Score Number of Students Score
S1 70 S16 55
S2 75 S17 65
S3 65 S18 60
S4 70 S19 60
S5 60 S20 55
S6 70 S21 65
S7 70 S22 55
S8 75 S23 50
S9 70 S24 60
S10 55 S25 55
S11 55 S26 70
S12 65 S27 50
S13 60 S28 75
S14 70 S29 70
S15 75 S30 80
Total 1930
Mean Score 64.3

In implementing this second cycle, the Vlog was introduced to the students to make them
understand deeper about the usage of this media. When the students have understood about Vlog,
the task was given to the students to make a Vlog with their group. The task was given in the form
of group to make the students did not think that the task was very difficult for them. The theme of
the Vlog that was given to the students was “The Effect of Agung Mountain’s Eruption towards
Tourism Field”. This theme was chosen as the topic of the material was explanation text. Since the
task was given, the students seem enthusiastic. Their enthusiasm was shown in their final score
after making their Vlog which had improvement in their speaking competencies. The competencies
that were scored; pronunciation, fluency, content, vocabulary, and gesture. The score of the
students is shown in Table 3.
All students had passed the standard of minimum score when the Vlog was used as their
task which meant technology involving their task. Their pronunciation and fluency became good
and their vocabulary used was better than before on cycle 1. The most improvement could be seen
on their gesture, where when in the role play, they did not show any gesture meanwhile in Vlog
they became active. Although they had passed the standard of minimum score, there was one
competency that was still low, it was in content. The students became confident to speak English,
but their speaking had a little relation to the topic given. Only some students who had related topic
to their speaking.
 Table 3. Students’ Score in Cycle 2
Number of Students Score Number of Students Score
S1 80 S16 75
S2 85 S17 80
S3 75 S18 75
S4 75 S19 75
S5 75 S20 75
S6 80 S21 80
S7 80 S22 75
S8 85 S23 75
S9 75 S24 75
S10 75 S25 75
S11 75 S26 85
S12 80 S27 80
S13 75 S28 90
S14 80 S29 85
S15 90 S30 90
Total 2375
Mean Score 79.2

This finding was supported with the result of the TPACK survey that was distributed to the
students after they finished their Vlog task. From the data that was gathered, there were some
results found. The first was about the percentage of the students’ perception on their accessibility
to the internet. The second was about the percentage of the students’ perception on their attitude
and interest of the technology usage. The third was about the percentage of the students’ ability of
the usage of supporting technological tools. The last was about the mean category of the TPACK
survey which shown the students’ perception in each component of TPACK, they were
Technology Knowledge, Content Knowledge, Pedagogical Content Knowledge, Technological
Content Knowledge, Technological Pedagogical Knowledge, and Technological Pedagogical
Content Knowledge.
The result of the percentage of students’ perception on accessibility to the internet is
presented in Table 4.
Table 4. Percentage of Students’ Perception on Accessibility to the Internet
NO. STATEMENT NUMBER OF STUDENTS (%)
YES NO
I have computer in my house that is connected to
1 30% 70%
the internet.
There is computer which is connected to the
2 90% 10%
internet in my school.
3 I have smartphone that is connected to the internet 100% 0%

The finding above could explain that the students were more had smartphone that was
connected to the internet than computer. Only 30% of the students that had computer which was
connected to the internet in their house. About the computer which was connected to the internet
at their school, there was different perception from the students which 90% said yes and 10% said
no. Based on the interview that had been done to the students who said no, they said there was no
computer which was connected to the internet at their school because even it was there and the
school had that one, the students were not given permission to use it. Therefore, they preferred to
answer no. As the students had smartphone with them, there was only 10% used iOS smartphone
and 93% used Android smartphone. The result was not showed 100% because there was one
student who had 2 smartphones, one was iOS and another one was Android. Their smartphone was
connected to the internet by some ways, such as 40% said by registering internet package monthly,
53.3% said by buying the internet package once, and 23.3% said by connecting to the free Wi-Fi.
The result of the percentage of the students’ perception on their attitude and interest of the
technology usage is presented in Table 5 and 6.

Table 5. Percentage of Students’ Perception on Their Attitude and Interest of the

Technology Usage
NO. STATEMENT NUMBER OF STUDENTS (%)
NEVER SOMETIMES OFTEN ALWAYS
1. I use technology for my
0% 36.7% 30.0% 33.3%
self-need.
2. I use technology for my
0% 10.0% 43.3% 46.7%
study-need.
3. I can/allowed use
smartphone in my 100% 0% 0% 0%
classroom

Table 6. Percentage of Students’ Perception on Their Attitude and Interest of the

Technology Usage
NUMBER OF STUDENTS (%)
NO. STATEMENT STRONGLY STRONGLY
AGREE DISAGREE
AGREE DISAGREE
1. In my opinion,
technology can
increase the
46.7% 53.3% 0% 0%
effectiveness in
teaching and learning
process.
2. In my opinion,
technology can make
50% 50% 0% 0%
teaching and learning
process easier.

Table 5 and 6 could explain that the students were close to the technology or smartphone
and they had positive attitude toward the usage of smartphone for teaching and learning process.
Even their perception like that, they were not given permission to usage smartphone in the
classroom. It was about 100% said they were never allowed to bring smartphone to the classroom.
Based on the interview that was done to the English teacher at that school, there was a school
regulation that the students were not allowed to bring smartphone to the school. This was to prevent
the misusage of the smartphone, such as take a record of their friends or teachers which might
conduct bullying.
 The result of the percentage of the students’ ability of the usage of supporting technological
tools is presented in Table 7.

Table 7. Percentage of the Students’ Ability in Using Technological Tools

NO. THE SOFTWARE NUMBER OF STUDENTS (%)
1. Email 71.3%
2. Powerpoint 77.0%
3. Microsoft Office (Word, Excel) 81.0%
4. Online Stickies (e.g. Linoit, padlet) 35.0%
5. Online discussion forum 45.7%
6. Concept mapping (e.g. iMindMap, Mindomo,
37.7%
Mindmeister)
7. Social media (e.g. Facebook, Twitter, Instagram) 92.0%
8. Cartoon creator (e.g. Cartoon story maker,
36.7%
powtoon)
9. Online quizzes (e.g. kahoot, quizlet, quipper) 46.0%
10. Virtual class (e.g. Edmodo, Schoology) 63.7%
11. Google Apps (e.g. Doc, Slides, Form) 73.0%
12. Website builder (e.g. Google site, weebly) 82.0%
13. Blog (e.g. Blogger) 52.0%

The percentage above showed how the ability of the students in using those tools. To make it
simpler, the comparison of the percentage can be seen in Diagram 1.

Students' Ability in Using Technological Tools

92
77 81 82
71.3 73
63.7
45.7 46 52
35 37.7 36.7

Percentage

Diagram 1. Percentage of Students’ Ability in using Technological Tools

The final result was about the mean category of the TPACK survey. There were 50
statements which divided into some components. There were 11 statements for Technology
Knowledge, 6 statements for Content Knowledge, 12 statements for Pedagogical Content
Knowledge, 7 statements for each Technological Content Knowledge, Technological Pedagogical
Knowledge, and Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge.
 In order to determine the category of mean score of students’ perception on the TPACK
survey, Mean Ideal (Mi) and Standard Deviation Ideal (SDi) were counted. Those could be
formulated as below:
Mi = ½ (ideal Max. Score + ideal Min. Score)
Mi = ½ (250+50) = 150
SDi = 1/6 (ideal Max. Score – ideal Min. Score)
SDi = 1/6 (250-50) = 33.3

Based on the calculation formula, the categorization of the mean score of students’
perception on the TPACK survey in general could be seen in Table 8.

Table 8. Categorization of Mean Score of Students’ Perception on TPACK

No Criteria Interval Categorization Qualification
1 Mi + 1.5 SDi ≤< 199.9 ≤M< Very High Very Positive
<M<Mi+3.0 SDi 249.9
2 Mi + 0.5 SDi<M< Mi ≤< 166.6 ≤M< High Positive
+ 1.5 SDi 199.9
3 Mi – 0.5 SDi <M< Mi 133.3 ≤< 133.3 ≤M< Average Neutral
+ 0.5 SDi 166.6 166.6
4 Mi - 1.5 SDi<M< Mi - << 100 ≤M< 133.3 Low Negative
0.5 SDi
5 Mi - 3.0 SDi <M< Mi << 50 ≤< 100 Very Low Very negative
– 1.5 SDi

Based on the interval given in Table 7, it could be seen that the mean score of students’
perception on the TPACK survey in general was in average category, since the mean score was
160.9 and it was in interval 133.3 ≤< 166.6. Thus, because the mean score was average, it
corresponded to neutral perception. This showed that the students did not have perception that
TPACK was important or not important in improving their speaking competencies. Therefore, it
might still be good for them with TPACK or without TPACK.
Besides the general perception that was found, this study also analyzed the perception for
each component of the TPACK survey. Here is the Mean Ideal (Mi) and Standard Deviation Ideal
(SDi) were counted to determine the category of mean score for Technology Knowledge
component.
Mi = ½ (ideal Max. Score + ideal Min. Score)
Mi = ½ (55+11) = 33
SDi = 1/6 (ideal Max. Score – ideal Min. Score)
SDi = 1/6 (55-11) = 7.3
The categorization of the mean score of students’ perception on the TPACK survey in
Technology Knowledge component could be seen in Table 9.
 Table 9. Categorization of Mean Score of Students’ Perception on Technology Knowledge
(TK) Component
No Criteria Interval Categorization Qualification
1 Mi + 1.5 SDi ≤< 43.9 ≤M< 54.9 Very High Very Positive
<M<Mi+3.0 SDi
2 Mi + 0.5 SDi<M< Mi 36.6 ≤< 36.6 ≤M< 43.9 High Positive
+ 1.5 SDi 43.9
3 Mi – 0.5 SDi <M< Mi ≤< 29.3 ≤M< 36.6 Average Neutral
+ 0.5 SDi
4 Mi - 1.5 SDi<M< Mi - << 22.0 ≤M< 29.3 Low Negative
0.5 SDi
5 Mi - 3.0 SDi <M< Mi << 11.1 ≤< 22.0 Very Low Very negative
– 1.5 SDi

The interval given in Table 9 showed that the students’ perception on TPACK survey for
Technology Knowledge (TK) component was in high category since the mean score for this
component was 39.5 and it was in interval 36.6 ≤< 43.9. As the mean score was in high category,
it meant that the students had positive perception. They had good knowledge on the technology
that could support their speaking competencies.
The Mean Ideal (Mi) and Standard Deviation Ideal (SDi) were counted to determine the
category of mean score in the TPACK survey for Content Knowledge component.
Mi = ½ (ideal Max. Score + ideal Min. Score)
Mi = ½ (30+6) = 18
SDi = 1/6 (ideal Max. Score – ideal Min. Score)
SDi = 1/6 (30-6) = 4
Table 10 showed the categorization of the mean score of students’ perception on the
TPACK survey in Content Knowledge (CK) component.

Table 10. Categorization of Mean Score of Students’ Perception on Content Knowledge

(CK) Component
No Criteria Interval Categorization Qualification
1 Mi + 1.5 SDi ≤< 24 ≤M< 30 Very High Very Positive
<M<Mi+3.0 SDi
2 Mi + 0.5 SDi<M< Mi ≤< 20 ≤M< 24 High Positive
+ 1.5 SDi
3 Mi – 0.5 SDi <M< Mi ≤< 16 ≤M< 20 Average Neutral
+ 0.5 SDi
4 Mi - 1.5 SDi<M< Mi - 12 << 16 12 ≤M< 16 Low Negative
0.5 SDi
5 Mi - 3.0 SDi <M< Mi << 6 ≤< 12 Very Low Very negative
– 1.5 SDi

Since the mean score for Content Knowledge component was 15.9, it was in interval 12 <<
16 which categorized as low and had negative qualification. This meant that the students were had
low knowledge on the content and thus, supporting the previous finding in the score of the
students’ content in their Vlog if the students had not spoken related topic to their speaking.
 Another component that was analyzed was Pedagogical Content Knowledge. The
determination of the Mean Ideal (Mi) and Standard Deviation Ideal (SDi) as shown below.
Mi = ½ (ideal Max. Score + ideal Min. Score)
Mi = ½ (60+12) = 36
SDi = 1/6 (ideal Max. Score – ideal Min. Score)
SDi = 1/6 (60-12) = 8
The table 11 below showed the categorization of the mean score of students’ perception on
the TPACK survey in Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) component.

Table 11. Categorization of Mean Score of Students’ Perception on Pedagogical Content

Knowledge (PCK) Component
No Criteria Interval Categorization Qualification
1 Mi + 1.5 SDi ≤< 48 ≤M< 60 Very High Very Positive
<M<Mi+3.0 SDi
2 Mi + 0.5 SDi<M< Mi ≤< 40 ≤M< 48 High Positive
+ 1.5 SDi
3 Mi – 0.5 SDi <M< Mi 32 ≤< 40 32 ≤M< 40 Average Neutral
+ 0.5 SDi
4 Mi - 1.5 SDi<M< Mi - << 24 ≤M< 32 Low Negative
0.5 SDi
5 Mi - 3.0 SDi <M< Mi << 12 ≤< 24 Very Low Very negative
– 1.5 SDi

The mean score of the TPACK survey in Pedagogical Content Knowledge component was
39.2 and it was in the interval 32 ≤< 40. Thus, because the mean score was in average
categorization, it corresponded to neutral perception. The students here had perception that the
pedagogical content knowledge might be implemented or not implemented to their teaching and
learning process in the classroom.
The Technological Content Knowledge, Technological Pedagogical Knowledge, and
Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge were the other components that was analyzed.
Due to the total statements were the same in these three components, the Mean Ideal (Mi) and
Standard Deviation Ideal (SDi) were counted at once.
Mi = ½ (ideal Max. Score + ideal Min. Score)
Mi = ½ (35+7) = 21
SDi = 1/6 (ideal Max. Score – ideal Min. Score)
SDi = 1/6 (35-7) = 4.67
As the mean ideal and standard deviation ideal were counted at once, the perceptions of
those three components also were categorized at Table 12.
 Table 12. Categorization of Mean Score of Students’ Perception on TPACK Component
No Criteria Interval Categorization Qualification
1 Mi + 1.5 SDi ≤< 28.0 ≤M< 35.0 Very High Very Positive
<M<Mi+3.0 SDi
2 Mi + 0.5 SDi<M< Mi ≤< 23.3 ≤M< 28.0 High Positive
+ 1.5 SDi
3 Mi – 0.5 SDi <M< Mi 18.6 ≤< 18.6 ≤M< 23.3 Average Neutral
+ 0.5 SDi 23.3
4 Mi - 1.5 SDi<M< Mi - << 13.9 ≤M< 18.6 Low Negative
0.5 SDi
5 Mi - 3.0 SDi <M< Mi << 6.9 ≤< 13.9 Very Low Very negative
– 1.5 SDi

The mean score of those three components was in average interval since the mean score of
Technological Content Knowledge was 20.7, Technological Pedagogical Knowledge was 23.2,
and Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge was 22.3. Those was in interval 18.6 ≤< 23.3.
The students were corresponded had neutral perception on those components which meant that
those three components could be implemented on their teaching and learning process or not in
improving their speaking competencies.
Based on all components of TPACK survey, the only positive perception given by the
students in vocational school in North Bali was in Technology Knowledge. The negative
perception was in Content Knowledge component. The rest of the components were neutral. Those
were interesting finding that the students in vocational school at the context still needed to consider
about the content of their speaking and technology was successfully influenced students in
improving their speaking competencies. Therefore, the teacher had to emphasize the materials
given to the students so that the students would understand the content of their competency
products.
In order to get information about the Vlog and TPACK perception deeper, there was
interview that had been done to the 5 students as the samples. The questions were what was their
opinion about the usage of technology in learning, what was their opinion about Vlog that was
used as tool in learning English, did they think the content of the Vlog they made was relevant
with the theme, and what was the challenges they faced in making the Vlog and how was they
solve it (there were advantages or disadvantages). From those questions, the students’ answers
mostly answer that technology is really important for them to support their learning process. This
is because the students feel easier to get the information that they needed through the internet. By
this, the learning process becomes simpler. But, there was few students also thought that by
technology, students became lazier to read a book and made them depending on the technology.
In their opinion, the used of Vlog for their assignment was appropriate. They thought that
they became more confident in speaking and they could express about their feelings. Moreover,
they argued that by Vlog, they could add their knowledge and practice their English much better
because they could learn English not only at school but also outside of school. Therefore, the
students learned to use English as their daily life. About the content of their Vlog, most of the
students gave opinion that they had tried to make their Vlog relevant with the theme given, but
they had some problems, such as they forgot what should they talked, they just spoke what was in
their mind at that time, etc. For the challenges that they faced, they mostly said about the limitation
of their vocabulary in English, their voice was small, they felt shy because they were seen by others
at the venue they took the Vlog. This is in line with Belek (2013), who stated that the challenges
in making Vlog included technical challenges – adequate lighting and sound, performance
challenges – uncomfortable feeling talking to the camera, and content challenges – desire to make
sure the viewers will get the message of the Vlog. Although they faced those problems, they felt
enjoy and challenged to learn English more, so that they could speak fluently in their Vlog.

CONCLUSION
It can be concluded that Vlog with TPACK framework can improve students’ speaking
competencies. Therefore, teacher can use Vlog with TPACK framework as students’ assignment.
Moreover, Gen Z needs technology approach to their learning process at school. By this, teacher
cannot teach their students now with the old method like what they got or taught from their teachers
in the past. In addition related with TPACK, Gen Z in average has high perception on Technology
Knowledge but low perception on Content Knowledge. Therefore, teacher should make sure that
the students understand about the material of their study to make the learning meaningful.

REFERENCES
Gruth, S., & Helm, F. (2010). Telecollaboration 2.0. Bern: Peter Lang.
Mutmainna, M. (2016). Implementing Blogs as a Learning Tool in ASIAN EFL/ESL Learning
Contect. BRAC University Journal, XI (1), 27-35.
Herring, S. (2015). New Frontiers in Interactive Multimodal Communication. London: Routledge:
In A. Georgapoulou & T. Spilloti (Eds), The Routledge Handbook of Language and Digital
Communication.
Rakhmanina, L., & Kusumaningrum, D. (2017). The Effectiveness of Video Blogging in Teaching
Speaking Viewed from Students' Learning Motivation.
Cates, K. A. (2002). Teaching for a Better World: Global Issues and Language Education. 41-52.
Musthafa, B. (2001). Communicative Language Teaching in Indonesia: Issues of Theoretical
Assumptions and Challenges in the Classroom Practice. Journal of Southeast Asian
Education, 2(2).
EF. (2017). English Proficiency Index. Retrieved from www.ef.com/epi
Wood, S. (2013). Generation Z as Consumers: Trends and Innovation. Institute for Emerging
Issues.
Werner, E. A. (2012). Rants, Reactions, and other Rhetorics: Genres of the YouTube Vlog. Chaper
Hill.
Johnson, B. (2005). Someone call Karl Marx: The means of production is in the hands of the
masses & a revolution is under way. 118(51), 56-60.
Gale, E., & Kung, S. (2009). Teaching a Foreign Language with Video Podcast assignments:
Examples from an American Sign Language Course. Educause Quarterly, 32(4).
Belek, B. (2013). I Believe It Can Change the Way Things are. Diemen, the Netherlands: AMB
Press.
Chai, C., Koh, J., & Tsai, C. (2013). A Review of Tecnological Pedagogical Content Knowledge.
Educational Technology & Society, 16(2), 31-51.
Cox, S., & Graham, C. (2009). Diagramming TPACK in Practice: Using and Elaborate Model of
the TPACK framework to Analyse and Depict Teacher Knowledge. TechTrends, 53(5), 60-
69.
 Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge?
Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education (CITE Journal). 9(1), 60-70.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework
for Teacher Knowledge. Teacher College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research.
CA: Sage.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating
Quantitative and Qualitative Research (4th ed.). Lincoln: University of Nebraska.
Hung, S. (2011). Pedagogical Application of Vlogs: An Investigation into ESP Learners'
Perception (Vol. 42(5)). British Journal of Educational Technology.
Bilbao, J. B. (2009). Powerful Tool as a Complement to the Traditional Resources on a Course:
Video Podcast. PuertoDe La Cruz, Spain: 14th WSEAS International Conference on
Applied Mathematics.
Ivorycon. (2015, January 12). Vlogs: The Rise and Rise of the Vlogger. Retrieved from
http://ivorycontent.com/vlogs-rise-rise-vlogger/

View publication stats