The Effect of Teacher, Peer, and Self-Corrective Feedback Toward English Writing Quality of EFL University Students
Abstract
Penelitian saat ini adalah mengetahui pengaruh berbagai jenis umpan balik terhadap kualitas menulis siswa. Penelitian quasi eksperimen yang digunakan adalah one group pre-test post-test design. Subjek penelitian adalah 108 siswa yang diambil dari tiga kelas. Data dianalisis oleh SPSS. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa ada peningkatan dalam tulisan siswa dengan menggunakan umpan balik guru, teman sebaya dan koreksi diri tetapi umpan balik korektif teman memberikan peningkatan yang lebih efektif daripada yang lain. Para siswa kebanyakan berfokus pada makna bukan bentuk. Selain poin-poin ini, umpan balik rekan mendorong siswa untuk menulis teks bermakna berbasis pembaca. Oleh karena itu, ini menyarankan bahwa para guru perlu waspada, dan bereksperimen dengan berbagai umpan balik dan strategi koreksi kesalahan yang sesuai untuk berbagai tingkat dan siswa
The current research was to find out the effect of different types of feedback on the students' writing quality. The quasi-experimental research used is one group pre-test post-test design. The subject was 108 students taken from three classes. The data were analyzed by SPSS. The result showed that there is an improvement in the students’ writing by using teacher, peer and self-corrective feedback, but peer corrective feedback gives more effective improvement than the others. The students mostly focused on meaning not form. Besides these points, peer feedback encouraged the students to write reader-based meaningful texts. Therefore, this suggested that the teachers need to be aware and do the experiment with a wider range of feedback and error-correction strategies which are appropriate for different levels and students.
Keywords: Corrective feedback, quality, writing.Full Text:
PDFReferences
Bitchener, J., Young, S., and Cameron, D. (2005). The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 14 (2005), pp. 191–205.
Brown, H. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching, 4th ed. New York: Longman.
Chandler, J. (2003). The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing. Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 267-296.
Cross, K. P. (2000). Cross paper 4: Collaborative learning 101. Mission Viejo, CA: League for innovation in the community college.
Dehkordi, S. A. S and Hadi. (2015). Impact of explicit vocabulary instruction on writing achievement of uppur. International Education Studies: Vol. 9 No. 4.
Diab, R. L. (2005). EFL university students' preferences for error correction and teacher feedback on writing. TESL Reporter, Vol. 1, No. 38, pp. 27-51.
Erfanian, M. (2002). The effect of self-correction strategy on the development of learners' linguistic competence. Unpublished master’s thesis, Tehran: Allameh Tabatabaei University.
Ferris, D. (2007). Preparing teachers to respond to student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 16, 165–193.
Ferris, D. R. (1999). The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to Truscott. Journal of Second Language Writing, Vol. 1, No.8,pp. 1-10.
Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century. New York: Basic Books.
Hendrickson, J. (1978). Error correction in foreign language teaching: Recent theory, research and practice. Modern Language Journal, Vol. 1, No. 62, pp. 387-398.
Hyland, F. and Hyland, K. (2001). Sugaring the pill: praise and criticism in written feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing. Vol. 1, No. 10, pp. 185-212.
Katayama, A. (2007). Japanese EFL students’ preferences toward correction of classroom oral errors. The Asian EFL Journal. Vol. 9. No. 4, pp. 19-28.
Lalande, J. (1982). Reducing compositions errors: An experiment. The Modern Language Journal, Vol. 1, No. 66, 140-149.
Lee, I. (2005). Error correction in the L2 writing classroom: What do students think? TESL Canada Journal, Vol. 2, No. 22. pp. 156-171.
Linse, Caroline T, & Nunan, David. (2005). Practical English language teaching: young learners. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Nakanishi, C. (2007). The effects of different types of feedback on revision. The Journal of Asia TEFL, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 213-244.
Noora, A. (2008). Iranian non-English majors' language learning preferences: the role of language institutes. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, Volume 8(2) 2008.
Palloff, R. М., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Semke, H. (1984). The effects of the red pen. Foreign Language Annals, Vol. 1, no. 17, pp. 195-202.
Topping, K., Smith, E., Swanson, I., and Elliot, A. (2000). Formative peer assessment of academic writing between postgraduate students. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 149-169.
Truscott (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning. Vol. 1, No. 46, pp. 327-369.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Walz, J. (1982). Error correction techniques for the foreign language classroom. Washington: Prentice Hall.
Wang, P. (2010). Dealing with English majors written errors in chinese universities. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, Vol. 1, No. 3, pp. 194-205.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2019 U-JET
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.