A Comparative Study between Self-Editing - Peer Review and Peer Review - Self-Editing in Different Groups of Proficiency to Enhance Students’ Writing Improvement
Abstract
Penelitian ini meneliti: 1) adakah perbedaan signifikan atas peningkatan kemampuan menulis mahasiswa yang menggunakan strategi self-editing – peer review dan peer review - self-editing; 2) adakah perbedaan signifikan atas peningkatan kemampuan menulis mahasiswa berdasaran grup proficiency yang berbeda di tiap kelas , dan 3) aspek menulis yang meningkat signifikan di kedua kelas. Subjek penelitian adalah mahasiswa IBI Darmajaya, Lampung. Penelitian menggunakan pendekatan kuantitatif. Instrumen penelitian: tes menulis dan Nelson English Language Proficiency Test (NELT). Hasil penelitian:1) ada perbedaan signifikan pada kemampuan menulis mahasiswa yang menerapkan strategi self-editing – peer review dan peer review -self-editing; 2) ada perbedaan sigifikan pada kemampuan menulis mahasiswa di grup heterogen di kedua kelas; 3) tata bahasa adalah aspek menulis yang meningkat paling signifikan. Self-editing dan peer review dapat meningkatkan kemampuan menulis mahasiswa, dan membalik urutan teknik mengedit dapat meningkatkankemampuan menulis mahasiswa secara berbeda.
This research investigated: (1) was there a statistically significant difference of students’ writing improvement between the students treated with self-editing - peer review and peer review - self-editing; (2) was there a statistically significant difference of students’ writing improvement in different groups of proficiency of both classes; and (3) the aspect of writing significantly improved in both classes. The subject of this research was the students of IBI Darmajaya, Lampung. This research used quantitative approach. The instruments were writing test and Nelson English Language Proficiency Test (NELT). The result shows that 1) there was a significant difference of students’ writing improvement between Class A and Class B; 2) there was a statistically significant difference of students’ writing improvement in heterogeneous groups in both classes; 3) it was language use, a writing aspect mostly improved. Self-editing and peer review can help students to improve their writing. Besides, it is inferred that reversing the order of editingstages does affect students’ writing improvement differently.
Keywords: Peer review, proficiency level, self-editing, writing improvement.
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Abadikhah, Shirin. (2014). Comparison of the Effects of Peer- versus Self-editing on Linguistic Accuracy of Iranian EFL Students. 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies – Vol 20 (3), pp. 113-124.
Al-Sawalha, Abdullah M. (2016). EFL Jordanian Students’ Reaction to Written Comments on Their Written Work: A Case Study. Arab Worl English Journal (AWEJ), Vol. 1, Number 1.
Alwasilah, Chaedar. (2003). Language, Culture, and Education: A Portratit of Contemporary Indonesia. Bandung: CV Andira.
Austria, M.A.B. (2017). Peer Response as an Effective Writing Strategy. International Journal of Progressive Education, 13(2), 95-104.
Ferris, Dana. (1995). Teaching Students to Self-Edit. TESOL Journal. Vol. 4, No. 4. Available: http://tesol.aua.am/tj_digital/tj_digit/Vol4_4.pdf#page=18
Hanjani, Alireza Memari. (2019). Collective Peer Scaffolding, Self-Revision, and Writing Progress of Novice EFL Learners. IJES, vol. 19(1), pp. 41–57.
Harmer, Jeremy. (2004). How to Teach Writing. Essex: Longman
Hu, Guangwei. (2005). Using Peer Review with Chinese ESL Student Writers. Language Teaching Research 9, 3; pp. 321-342.
Insai, Sakolkarn and Tongtip Poonlarp. (2017). More Heads are better than one: Peer editing in a translation classroom of EFL learners. PASAA, Volume 54 July - December.
Kuyyogsuy, Sirikarn. (2019). Promoting peer feedback in developing students’ English writing ability in L2 writing class. International Education Studies; Vol. 12, No. 9.
Oshima, Alice and Ann Hogue. (2007). Intraduction to academic writing. NY: Longman.
Pearce, J., Mulder, R., and Baik, C. (2009). Involving students in peer review; Case studies and practical strategies for University teaching. Centre for the Study of Higher Education; The University of Melbourne.
Scovel, Thomas. (1998). Psycholinguistics. Oxford. Oxford University Press.
Toofan, Zohreh Zare. (2014). Individual self-monitoring and peer-monitoring in one classroom in writing activities: Who is at disadvantage?. IJLLALW. Volume 5, no. 1, pp. 515--534.
Tsai, Yea-Ru. (2012). Investigating the effects of applying monitoring Strategy in EFL Writing Instruction. International Journal of Business and Social Science , Vol. 3 No. 13; 205
Wang, Weiqiang. (2015). How proficiency-pairing affects students’ peer-mediated revisions of EFL Writing: Three case studies. English Language Teaching; Vol. 8, No. 5
Wang, Zhongwan. (2013). Effects of heterogeneous and homogeneous grouping on student learning. Master of Arts in the School of Education. University of North Carolina. Chapel Hill.
Watanabe, Yuko. (2008). Peer–Peer interaction between L2 learners of different proficiency levels: Their interactions and reflections. The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes, 64.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2020 U-JET
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.