English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

A number of research finding results indicated that students' speaking ability is still below average. It is highly estimated, that the trigger was students’ lack confidence, lack of understanding toward material, and lecturers less communicative. This study captured up learning patterns conducted in four different universities. The learning patterns were then reviewed from constructivism approach, for each learning pattern certainly assist students and enables them integrating their knowledge from the lesson learned. Because of that, students can speak fluently since they have both concept and experience making them to become more confident. This is a qualitative study, the data was taken by observation, interview, and documentation. The classroom discourse data were analysed by using Miles and Huberman’s interactive models. The results found that the learning pattern of speaking subject at those studied universities dominated by lecturers. Lecturer was the one who initiates, inspires, asks, and evaluates. Lecturers have not succeeded in developing critical thinking skills, students only respond, correspond, and answer questions for clarification and confirmation. Lecturers were often called Teacher Talking Time (TTT) instead of Student Talking Time (STT). The average score of students’ speaking subject was 76.

Learning Pattern of Speaking Subject in Higher Education: A Constructiveness Review as Educational Innovation