STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION TOWARD PEER FEEDBACK IN WRITING CLASS
A THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment or the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree
in English Language Education
By
Farida Noor Rohmah Student Number: 06 1214 111
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA
i
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION TOWARD PEER FEEDBACK IN WRITING CLASS
A THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment or the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree
in English Language Education
By
Farida Noor Rohmah Student Number: 06 1214 111
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA
iv
STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY
I honestly declare that this thesis, which I have written, does not contain the work or parts of the work of other people, except those cited in the quotation and the references, as a scientific paper should.
Yogyakarta, August 23rd, 2010 The Writer
v
LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN
PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIK
Yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini, saya mahasiswa Universitas Sanata Dharma:
Nama : Farida Noor Rohmah
Nomor Mahasiswa : 06 1214 111
Demi pengembangan ilmu pengetahuan, saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma karya ilmiah saya yang berjudul:
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION TOWARD PEER FEEDBACK IN WRITING CLASS
Beserta perangkat yang diperlukan (bila ada). Dengan demikian, saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma hak untuk menyimpan, mengalihkan dalam bentuk media lain, mengelolanya dalam bentuk pangkalan data, mendistribusikannya di Internet atau media lain untuk kepentingan akademis tanpa perlu meminta ijin ataupun memberikan royalti kepada saya selama tetap mencantumkan nama saya sebagai penulis.
Demikian pernyataan ini saya buat dengan sebenarnya. Dibuat di Yogyakarta
Pada tanggal : 23 Agustus 2010
Yang menyatakan
vi
"Success is how high you bounce when you hit bottom."
(George S. Patton)
I dedicate this thesis to:
♥
My beloved father and mother
♥
My little sister and brother
♥
My big family
vii
ABSTRACT
Rohmah, Farida Noor. 2010. Students’ Perception toward Peer Feedback in Writing Class. Yogyakarta: English Language Education Study Program, Sanata Dharma University.
In process of writing, revision plays an important role. In order to have an effective revision, students need feedback from their readers. In writing classes, commonly feedback is from the teacher. Meanwhile, depending feedback only from the teacher will lead the students to be dependent learners. In fact, feedback can be obtained from the students namely peer feedback which direct them to be more independent as learners. This research deals with the use of peer feedback in writing class. The researcher formulates two problem formulations in this research. The first problem is what the students’ perception toward peer feedback in writing class and the second problem is to what extent the students give peer feedback.
Thus, the researcher employed survey research which was conducted on the beginning of May 2010. The participants of this research were the students of the two Paragraph Writing classes academic year 2009/2010 at English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University. Gathering the data, the researcher used a set of questionnaire as well as peer feedback checklist. The questionnaire was used to gather students’ opinion of a list of questions about the use of peer feedback in writing class. Meanwhile, the peer feedback checklist was set to gather information about to what extent the students give peer feedback.
Based on the data analysis, it was found that the students gained positive perception toward peer feedback in writing class. This answer was proved by the value of the degree of agreements that frequently occurred were “strongly agree” and “agree” in the questionnaire. Only a small part of the students had negative perception toward peer feedback in writing class. Dealing with the second problem, the result showed that the students could provide useful feedback for their peers on organization area, content area, language use area, vocabulary area, and mechanic area. The students even provided some suggestions to their peers related to the composition to improve the quality of the composition. There were only a few students who did not provide clear explanation or suggestion about feedback they gave in their peers’ compositions
In summary, students gave positive perception toward peer feedback in writing class. Most of the students agreed that peer feedback is beneficial to be applied in writing class. Students also could provide feedback for their peers on organization area, content area, language use area, vocabulary area, and mechanic area. Some suggestions to improve the implementation of peer feedback in writing class were presented.
viii ABSTRAK
Rohmah, Farida Noor. 2010. Students’ Perception toward Peer Feedback in Writing Class. Yogyakarta: Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Universitas Sanata Dharma.
Dalam proses menulis, revisi mempunyai peranan penting. Untuk merevisi tulisan dengan efektif, mahasiswa membutuhkan umpan balik dari pembacanya. Dalam kelas Writing, pada umumnya umpan balik selalu diberikan oleh dosen. Padahal, ketergantungan pada umpan balik dari dosen dapat mengarahkan mahasiswa menjadi tidak mandiri. Pada kenyataannya, umpan balik bisa didapatkan dari sesame mahasiswa atau yang disebut dengan peer feedback. Penelitian ini melingkupi penggunaan umpan balik antar teman dalam kelas Writing. Peneliti merumuskan dua permasalahan dalam penelitian ini. Masalah yang pertama yaitu persepsi apakah yang dimiliki mahasiswa terhadap penggunaan umpan balik abtar teman dalam kelas Writing. Masalah yang kedua adalah sampai seberapa jauhkah mahasiswa memberikan umpan balik kepada temannya dalam karangan mereka.
Maka dari itu, peneliti menggunakan metode survei yang dimulai pada awal Mei 2010. Responden penelitian ini adalah mahasiswa dua kelas Paragraph Writing tahun ajaran 2009/2010 di Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Universitas Sanata Dharma. Untuk mendapatkan data penelitian ini, peneliti menggunakan dua instrumen penelitian yaitu kuisioner dan peer feedback checklist. Kuisoner digunakan untuk mengetahui pendapat mahasiswa tentang peer feedback. Sementara itu, peer feedback checklist didesain untuk mengetahui seberapa jauh mahasiswa memberikan peer feedback.
Berdasarkan analisa dari data yang didapatkan, peneliti menemukan bahwa mahasiswa memiliki persepsi yang positif terhadap penggunaan umpan balik antar teman did lam kelas Writing. Ini dibuktikan dengan banyaknya mahasiswa yang menjawab “sangat setuju” dan “setuju” dalam merespon pernyataan dalam kuisioner. Mayoritas mahasiswa sejutu bahwa umpan balik antar teman menguntungkan untuk diterapkan di dalam kelas Writing. menjawab permasalahan yang kedua, peneliti menemukan bahwa mahasiswa dapat memberikan umpan balik kepada teman dalam lingkup organisasi, isi, bahasa, perbendaharaan kata, dan mekanika penulisan. Kebanyakan mahasiswa bahkan memberikan saran kepada teman terkait dengan tulisan mereka agar tulisan mereka dapat lebih berkualitas. Hanya sebagian kecil dari mahasiswa yang tidak memberikan penjelasan yang jelas tentang umpan balik meraka.
Pada intinya, mahasiwa mempunyai persepsi yang positif terhadap penggunaan peer feedback dalam kelas Writing. Mahasiswa juga dapat memberikan umpan balik kepada teman dalam lingkup organisasi, isi, bahasa, perbendaharaan kata, dan mekanika penulisan. Akhirnya, beberapa usulan juga disampaikan dalam studi ini untuk meningkatkan kualitas penerapan peer feedback di kelas Writing.
ix
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
First and foremost, my greatest gratitude is addressed to Allah SWT for always blessing me. He guided and showed me the paths in finishing my thesis and my study. Without Him I would not be like what I am now.
For sure, I am truly indebted to my sponsor, the one and only, Caecilia Tutyandari, S.Pd., M.Pd. for her willingness to spend her busy time reading my thesis, her guidance and her advice from the beginning of this research until the accomplishment of this thesis. I would like to express my thankfulness to Nugraha Krisdiyanta, S.Pd., who gave me permission to conduct my research in his Paragraph Writing classes and valuable advices for my thesis. Further, I would like to deeply thank all lecturers of PBI for their guidance during my study.
I am very grateful to my beloved parents, Bapak and Ibu, for their endless care and support during my study and my sister, Nisa, and my brother, Ajib, for their attention for me. My deepest gratitude also belongs to Camiku “Mas Adit”, who always gave me his continued affection and motivation.
My thankfulness also goes to my best friends Rusna, Ayum, Yeyen, Rika, Rina, Deinza and Danny for their companionship which full of happiness,
sadness, laughter and tears. I would like express my appreciation to Mbak Danik and Mbak Tari for their beneficial information during my study. Finally, my gratitude is addressed to all of the people who have helped me in completing this thesis.
x
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE ... i
PAGES OF APPROVAL ... ii
STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY ... iv
LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIK ... v
DEDICATION PAGE ... vi
ABSTRACT ... vii
ABSTRAK ... viii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ... ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS ... x
LIST OF FIGURES ... xiv
LIST OF TABLES ... xvi
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION A. Background of the Study ... 1
B. Problem Formulation ... 3
C. Problem Limitation ... 4
D. Objectives of the Study ... 4
E. Benefits of the Study ... 4
xi
CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
A. Theoretical Description ... 7
1. Perception ... 7
a. Definition of Perception ... 7
b. Factors Influencing Perception ... 8
c. Students’ Perception toward Peer Feedback ... 9
2. Writing as a Process ... 10
3. Feedback ... 12
a. The Presence of Feedback in Writing Class ... 12
b. Sources of Feedback ... 13
c. Purposes of Feedback ... 17
4. The Roles of Peer Feedback in Writing Class ... 18
B. Theoretical Framework ... 20
CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY A. Research Method ... 22
B. Research Participants ... 22
C. Research Instruments ... 23
xii
E. Data Analysis Technique ... 26
F. Research Procedure ... 27
CHAPTER IV: RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION A. Research Results ... 28
1. Students’ Responses to the Questionnaire ... 29
a. Students’ Perception on the Process of Peer Feedback ... 29
b. Students’ Perception on the Benefits of Peer Feedback ... 33
c. Students’ Perception on Feedback from Their Peer ... 38
d. Students’ Perception on the Implementation of Peer Feedback ... 40
e. The Results of Open-Ended Questions ... 41
2. Students’ Responses to the Peer Feedback Checklist ... 42
B. Discussion ... 44
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS A. Conclusions ... 51
B. Suggestions ... 52
REFERENCES ... 54
xiii
Appendix 2. Peer Feedback Checklist ... 60
Appendix 3. Questionnaire Blueprint ... 61
Appendix 4. Result of Close-ended Questions ... 62
Appendix 5. Raw Data of Open-ended Questions ... 65
xiv
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
2.1 The Perceptual Process ... 9
4.1 The Necessity of Revision and Feedback in Writing ... 30
4.2 The Frequency of Giving Correction, Suggestion and Comments ... 30
4.3 Students’ Confidence in Doing Peer Feedback ... 31
4.4 Students’ Freeness in Doing Peer Feedback ... 32
4.5 Students’ Activeness in Asking Clarification ... 32
4.6 Students’ Difficulty in Giving Feedback to Their Peer ... 33
4.7 The Helpfulness of Peer Feedback Checklist ... 33
4.8 The Usefulness of Feedback Given by Peer ... 34
4.9 Students’ Ability to Solve Their Writing Problem Through Peer Feedback ... 34
4.10 Students’ Learning from Their Peer’s Mistakes ... 35
4.11 Students’ Motivation to Learn from their Peer ... 35
4.12 Students’ Encouragement to Work Cooperatively with Their Peer ... 36
4.13 Students’ Becoming More Independent ... 36
4.14 Students’ Becoming More Critical ... 37
4.15 Students’ Awareness of Making Mistakes through Peer Feedback ... 37
4.16 Students’ Consideration of Duration of Peer Feedback ... 38
xv
4.18 The Clearness of Feedback Given by Peer ... 39 4.19 Students’ Satisfaction with the Feedback
Given by Peer ... 39 4.20 Students’ Consideration to Include Peer’s Feedback
for Revision ... 40 4.21 The Influence of Feedback Given by Peer
on Writing Improvement ... 40 4.22 Students’ Need of Teacher Feedback ... 41 4.23 Students’ Preference on Implementation of
xvi
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
3.1 Table of Participants’ Rating Scale Responses ... 26 4.1 Table of Participants’ Responses on
1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
The study investigates the students’ perceptions on the use of peer feedback in writing class. This chapter presents background of the study, problem limitation, problem formulation, objectives of the study, benefits of the study, and definition of the terms.
A. Background of the Study
Writing is considered to be a complex skill and subject in English language learning. Written expression is considered the be the most complex stage of language development, more complex than oral language, and the last to be mastered (Evans, 1986). In addition, Richards (1990: 101) states that, “It is not merely the linguistic organization of written discourse that makes writing a difficult skill to acquire. The process moving from concepts, thoughts, and ideas to written text is complex.” Thus, students might face difficulties and make mistakes in writing. Writing requires students to experience trial and error process in achieving a qualified writing product.
topic and generate the idea. The second step is called drafting, in which the students make a draft of their writing. This step also lets the students generate further idea. The third step is called responding. The responses might come from teacher or peer. Responding is done after the students have produced the first draft and before they proceed to revise. The next stage is revising. In this step, the students make some necessary revision to improve their composition based on the feedback given in the responding stage. The fifth step is editing in which students are dealing with tidying up their texts as they prepare the final draft for evaluation by the teacher. The sixth step is called evaluating. The evaluation is usually done by the teacher. Yet, students may be encouraged to evaluate their own and each other’s writing once they have been taught how to do it. The last step is post-writing which includes publishing, sharing, reading aloud, and so on.
the students to be independent learners. The researcher believes that peer feedback is very helpful in improving students’ writing quality.
As the researcher experienced when she was in Paragraph Writing class and Academic Writing class in English Education Study Program, her lecturer implemented peer feedback in class. The researcher, then, found that her writing quality was better after getting feedback from her peer. The researcher believes that peer feedback is very helpful to improve students’ writing quality of their writing performance. Moreover, a thesis by Rina (2007), entitled “Students’ Perceptions on Peer Feedback in Writing” reveals that most of the students had positive perception toward peer feedback. The students believed that peer feedback was advantageous. Yet, beginner students or the students in the lower level of semester may have different perception toward it.
Thus, the researcher intends to find the students’ perception on the use of peer feedback in writing class. Moreover, the researcher also intends to reveal to what extent the students give peer feedback. To answer those two problems, the researcher uses qualitative research.
B. Problem Formulation
This study would like to address two questions.
C. Problem Limitation
The problem is limited to the discussion on the students’ perception on the contribution of peer feedback in writing class. Writing class here is Paragraph Writing class in the academic year 2009/2010 in English Education Study Program Sanata Dharma University Yogyakarta.
D. Objectives of the Study
The present study is aimed at investigating the students’ perception toward the contribution of peer feedback in writing class. Moreover, the study is also aimed at exploring to what extent the students give peer feedback.
E. Benefits of the Study
In general, the researcher hopes that this study could give some valuable contribution to all educational communities, especially at the English Education Study Program. The researcher hopes that this study can give an understanding for the readers, especially English teachers, English teacher candidates and English learners about the contribution of peer feedback in writing class.
Hopefully, the writing lecturers can consider using not only teacher feedback but also peer feedback in their writing class since learning a language cannot be separated from interaction of one learner to another learner.
writing classes will be encouraged to utilize peer feedback considering the benefits they can obtain.
Finally for the future researchers, the researcher hopes that this study can give them inspiration to conduct further research on peer feedback of other topics related to feedback to enrich the existing study.
F. Definition of Terms
To avoid misleading to occur and to make common conception to the reader about some terms related to this study, the researcher defines as follows: 1. Perception
Huffman and Vernoys (2000) define perception as a process of selecting, organizing, and interpreting sensory data into usable mental representations of the world. Trough this definition, they state that experiences, cultural factors, perceptual expectations and personal motivations and frame of reference influence the process of forming the perception.
Moreover, Altman, Valenzi, and Hodgetts (1985) describe perception as a person’s view of reality. It is the way stimuli are selected and grouped by a person so that they can be meaningfully interpreted. In Oxford Advanced Learners’ Dictionary (Hornby, 1995: 895), perception is defined as a way of seeing,
2. Peer Feedback
7
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
Review of the literature chapter is aimed at discussing the theories that underlie this study. It involves theoretical descriptions. Since this study discusses the use of peer feedback in writing class, the theoretical descriptions contains the concept of peer feedback and issues of the use of peer feedback in writing class. In the theoretical framework, the researcher relates the theories to the study.
A. Theoretical Description
This section deals with the explanation of perception, writing as process, feedback and the role of peer feedback in writing class.
1. Perception
a. Definition of Perception
Huffman and Vernoys (2000) define perception as a process of selecting, organizing, and interpreting sensory data into usable mental representations of the world. Through this definition, they state that experiences, cultural factors, perceptual expectations and personal motivations and frame of reference influence the process of forming the perception.
stimuli and allow us to interpret, or give meaning to, the sensory message. This message is, then, sent to the brain. Thus, the brain will process the message into feeling. Finally, the brain continues to interpret the feeling into perceptions.
b. Factors Influencing Perception
There are a number of factors influencing a person’s perception. Altman et al. (1985) describe four of the most important factors influence a person’s perceptions. They are as followed.
1) Selection of Stimuli
A person focuses on only a small number of stimuli from all stimuli with which he or she is surrounded. This process is called selection. That is why people perceive things differently. It means that each person selects specific cues and filters, or screen, out the others.
2) Organization of Stimuli
After information has been selected, it must be arranged to become meaningful. The mind tries to bring order out the unarranged data by selecting certain items and putting them together in a meaningful way based on experience.
3) The Situation
4) Self-Concept
Self-concept or the way a person feels about and perceives him or herself. This self-concept is important since the mental picture of a person determines much of what he or she perceives and does.
c. Students’ Perception Toward Peer Feedback
Based on the definitions of perception suggested by psychologists above, it can be concluded that perception involves organizing and interpreting information and data coming from the environment so that the information and the data can be meaningfully interpreted. The students’ perception will lead them to different behavioral responses. Thus, when the students perceive peer feedback positively, they will think that peer feedback is beneficial for them in revising their writing. Then, they will be likely to revise their writing based on the peer feedback. On the contrary, when they perceive peer feedback negatively, they will not consider peer feedback is beneficial source to revise their writing. Consequently, they will not revise their writing based on peer feedback. This notion is supported by Figure 2.1.
Figure 2.1. The Perceptual Process
(Source: Altman, Valenzi, and Hodgetts 1985: 86) Stimuli
Sensors’ selection of stimuli
Perception, organization,
and interpretation of
stimuli
2. Writing as a Process
The traditional approach to the teaching of writing has been called product approach. The basic assumption of this approach is that the students are capable of turning out final product the first time around (Cohen, 1990). Yet, it can be concluded that the writing product approach only emphasizes on the final product without paying attention on stages that the students should reach the final product of writing.
In recent years, process approach to writing has been used. Cohen (1990: 105) states that writing refers to the process in which the final product comes from after a series of time. Furthermore, Cohen adds that writer’s awareness of writing process is highly valued and the student’s writing has gone through some series of peer feedback and self-assessment before the teacher assesses it. From this process, the students can explore their ability to write and develop their skill in writing.
Stages in writing clearly show that writing is a process. Some authors describe different stages in writing. However, the researcher finds that the stages are almost the same. Based on Seow (2002), there are seven stages in the process of writing. They are as follows:
a. Planning (Pre-writing)
b. Drafting
After finding the topics, the students may generalize it into subtopics and paragraph. Students should also have in mind a central idea they want to communicate to the audience in order to give direction to their writing. At this drafting stage, the students are focused on the fluency of writing and are not preoccupied with grammatical accuracy.
c. Responding
This stage has a central role in the successful implementation of process approach. The responses and the feedback that the students get can be come from the teacher or their peer. Response can be oral or written. It can be after the students have produced the first draft or just before they proceed to revise.
d. Revising
The students revise their writing based on the feedback given in the responding stage. Revising is not only checking for language errors, but also improving global content and the organization of ideas.
e. Editing
At this stage, students are dealing with tidying up their texts as they prepare the final draft for evaluation by the teacher. The students edit their writing for grammar, spelling, punctuation, diction, sentence structure, and accuracy. f. Evaluating
taught how to do it. In this way, they can be more responsible for their own writing.
g. Post-writing
The post-writing activity includes publishing, sharing, reading aloud, and so on. It can be used as motivation for students to write. Students should be made to feel that they write for a very real purpose.
3. Feedback
a. The Presence of Feedback in Writing Class
b. Sources of Feedback
There are some sources are available for the students to receive feedback for their writing. The students may receive feedback from their teacher, their peers, and even from themselves.
1). Teacher Feedback
Traditionally, the feedback comes from the teacher. The process of giving feedback from teacher is usually done by correcting one by one student’s writing then discussing face to face with each student. This technique is called conferencing feedback. Moreover, teacher might use other variation of giving feedback for instance collective feedback. Teachers summarize the comments of students’ writing in front of the class.
However, Cohen (1990) states that the teacher commonly gives comments on grammar or mechanics rather than on content and organization. This argument is presented by Cohen (1990) as followed.
It has been observed that a learner’s motivation to write can be negatively affected by a teacher’s untimely or exclusive focus on surface issues of form (e.g. grammatical concern, spelling and punctuation).
2). Peer Feedback
Lewis (2002) suggests ten ways the teachers can try implementing peer feedback in writing class. They are as followed.
a) Exchange Papers
The students exchange their composition and report to each other on the aspect that could be improved. This way of peer feedback is often applied by the teacher. b) Role-Play
The students can work in groups of three. Each student takes role as a ‘student’, ‘teacher’, and ‘judge’. Here, the teacher comments on the student’s work then the judge gives comment on the quality of teacher’s feedback.
c) Pair work in moving circle
A half part of the class stay seated in a U-shape while the other half move around inside the U-shape. For example, every five minutes they have different partner. Students give feedback on the writing orally.
d) Pass papers round
The students pass their compositions round three places. Then, they have to write comments on the compositions in front of them. It is continued with another three places for different students to write comments.
e) Feedback Questions
The questions could be clarification questions based on pre-writing task of brainstorming, for example, ‘What does this term mean?’ of ‘How’ and ‘Why’ questions leading to new ideas.
The draft of the students is rounded so that each student reads several examples. They note suggestions and or commendations on the compositions. Then, every student reports orally in front of the class on one good feature and what could be improved without mentioning the writer’s name.
g) Read/listen/respond
One student reads aloud their composition and other students comment on it. This way really works for short pieces of writing.
h) Compare writing
The teacher should give question to start and help the discussion for the students to work in pairs to compare their compositions, for instance, what is the main idea of the paragraph?
i) Summarise and photocopy advice
At first, the students exchange their compositions and evaluate other’s work. Then on a piece of paper they write down one suggestion or one commendation. These slips are then compiled and photocopied so that each student has a record of all the comments.
j) Sentence on board
Every student generates a given topic sentence then moves to the board to write their works. Finally, other students give feedback on the works.
3). Self-Correction
Self correction here means the students correct and evaluate their own compositions. Lewis (2002) states that self-correction increases students’ independence from the teacher. By discovering their own mistakes, the students can remember better what mistakes they have done. In addition, it saves time in large classes. Yet, it is difficult to find and seek mistakes in their own compositions without other’s helps. Students who have written compositions will claim that there are no mistakes in it because they have their own subjective point of view. By contrast, other students might provide information that cannot be possibly got by the authors themselves in their compositions.
c. Purposes of Feedback
Another purpose of feedback is that the students can get motivation. In learning process, feedback can be more motivating then marks or grades. It encourages students in using language to the best of their ability. Finally, one long-term purpose of feedback is to lead the students become autonomous. Feedback leads students to the point where they can find their own mistakes.
4. The Role of Peer Feedback in Writing Class
Peer feedback provides several advantages. Hyland ( 2003) states that peer feedback enables the students to develop their critical reading skill. By reading and responding their peers’ work, the students may gain the skill necessary to critically analyze and revise their own writing. Not only developing students’ critical reading skill, peer feedback also creates an authentic social context for interaction and learning (Mittan, 1989, as cited in Hyland, 2003). It can be seen that the students could learn from each other and practice how to make useful interaction with others. Peer feedback, then, can enhance active learner participation (Hyland, 2003).
Another way to ensure ample feedback is to elicit the support of non-native peers in the classroom, usually within a structured framework. For example, learners may be requested to form working groups and to take turns reading each other’s papers.
According to Rollinson (2005), peer readers can provide useful feedback in writing class. This notion is revealed by a research conducted by Rollinson in 1998 that 80% of feedback or comments from peers were considered valid. Moreover, it was found that only 7% feedback or comments were considered damaging. It entails the fact that the students can revise their writing effectively based on the feedback from their peers.
As Mcgroarty (1989) says in Kessler ( 1992:3), peer feedback in writing class can give opportunities to act as sources for each other, hence assuming a more active role in their learning. It is clearly seen that this statement clarifies that cooperative learning, indeed, gives opportunity for the learners to be more responsible for their own learning and the learning of others. In peer feedback, they search the knowledge from their peers as well as share their knowledge and experience about writing to their peers. For instance, making mistakes in the past is an experience. As a result, based on this experience students do not repeat the same mistakes in writing as what they did previously.
B.Theoretical Framework
Writing does not merely focus on the product. It more focuses on the process. There are several stages the students engage in the process of writing. Revision is an important stage in writing. In making a revision, the students certainly need feedback from their reader. Traditionally, the students should make a revision based on the teacher’s feedback only. Yet, it can be monotonous if the feedback only comes from the teacher. Hence, peer feedback is one alternative that can be done by the students before making the revision of their writing. Peer feedback encourages students to work cooperatively with their peers in giving comments on each other’s draft of writing instead only depending on teacher’s feedback. Hence, the students might have a greater variety of suggestions in improving their writing quality. The work of Rollinson in 1998 reveals that 80% of feedback or comments from peers were considered valid. Moreover, it was found that only 7% feedback or comments were considered damaging. It entails the fact that the students can revise their writing effectively based on the feedback from their peers.
feedback checklist. It is adapted from feedback checklist suggested by Hyland and Sokolik. Meanwhile, to investigate students’ perception toward peer feedback in writing class, the researcher employs perception measuring instrument adopted by Brown and Rogers.
22
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
This chapter deals with the methodology that the writer used in this study. It covers research method, research participants, research instruments, data gathering technique, data analysis technique, and research procedure.
A. Research Method
The researcher used survey research. According to Wiersma (1995), surveys are used to measure attitudes, opinions, or achievement or any number of variables in natural setting. It can be done by means of observation, questionnaire, and interview. This idea is supported by Ary, Jacobs and Razavieh (2002) who state that survey is used for gathering data ranging from physical counts and frequencies to attitudes and opinions. The data gathered from survey is responses of questions that are asked to participants.
Thus, this research used survey research as research method since it dealt with investigating students’ opinion of peer feedback in writing class. The researcher interpreted the students’ perception about the use of peer feedback based on the questionnaire.
B. Research Participants
2009/2010. The participants should have experience about peer feedback. The researcher used two classes of Paragraph Writing namely class D and class F. Class D consisted of 26 students and class F consisted of 25 students. The researcher used these classes because the lecturer of these classes applied peer feedback in class.
C. Research Instruments
To collect the data, the researcher used two research instruments namely questionnaire and feedback checklist.
1. Questionnaire
The questionnaire was used to gather students’ opinion of a list of questions about the use of peer feedback in writing class. The questionnaire was in form of open-ended and close-ended questions. Close-ended questions are questions that have fixed option to be chosen. It consists of degree of agreement which is set to obtain the expressions of opinion, interest, or valuing, problems to react to, or statements to agree or disagree with. The researcher used Likert scale which provides a range of responses to a given question or statement ( Cohen, Marion, Marrison: 2000:253). According to Brown and Rogers (2002: 120), Likert scales can be on a 1 to 4 scale, 1 to 5 scale or 1 to 7 scale. It depends on the answers the researcher wants to gain.
Thus, the respondents should choose whether they agreed or disagreed. Galls and Borg (2007: 235) stated that “One method of dealing with the issue of respondents who lack familiarity with a topic is to include “no opinion” option as a response alternative for each attitude item”. In this research, the respondents have already known about peer feedback since they experienced it in the writing class. Thus, the researcher used 1 to 4 scale to avoid the respondents’ ignorance about the topic.
The statements in the questionnaire covered four parts. The first part of the questionnaire was concerned with the students’ perception on the process of peer feedback. The second part was concerned with students’ perception on the benefits of peer feedback. The third part was related to students’ perception on feedback from their peer. The last part was related to the students’ perception on the implementation of peer feedback. To make it clearer, the questionnaire and questionnaire blueprint is provided in Appendix 1 and 3.
2. Peer Feedback Checklist
Feedback checklists as students evaluate their peer’s work. Hyland (2003) states that it helps structure peer review activities by providing guidance on what participants should look for as they read. He adds that peer feedback checklist can provide a valuable form of indirect instruction about good writing and genre format. In this study, peer feedback checklist was used by the respondents to classify the area the students observe in giving peer feedback in their peer’s writing. The researcher adapted the peer feedback checklist from the work of Sokolik (2003). It consisted of 7 guiding questions to help the students to give feedback to their peers. The peer feedback checklist was presented in the Appendix 2.
D. Data Gathering Technique
This research began on 26 March 2010 and ended on 19 August 2010. In collecting the data in this study, the researcher gave a set of questionnaire to the participants and peer feedback checklist. Firstly, the researcher gathered the data through peer feedback checklist. The students were given peer feedback checklists while they were doing peer feedback in class. Having finished with the peer feedback checklist, the researcher gathered data by using questionnaire as the research instrument.
distributed was 25 sheets, but only 24 sheets were returned as well as the peer feedback checklist. As the result, the total instruments to be analyzed were 49 sheets of peer feedback checklist and 49 sheets of questionnaires.
E. Data Analysis Technique
The data analysis dealt with analyzing the questionnaire result. First, the researcher counted the number of ticks on every degree of agreement of each item in close-ended questions namely strongly agree, agree, disagree, and strongly disagree. Then, the researcher counted the raw data into percentage and interpreted them. The data was presented in form of table (see Table 3.1). For the open-ended questions, the researchers classified and clustered the same answer and then interpreted them.
Table 3. 2. Table 3.1 Participants’ Rating Scale Responses
No Statement
Degree of agreement Strongly
agree % of SA
Agree % of A
disagree % of D
Strongly disagree
% of SD
1 Statement 1
2 Statement 2
3 Statement 3
4 etc
F. Research Procedure
28
CHAPTER IV
RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
In this chapter, the researcher intends to discuss the research results and the data analysis of the results. The analyzed data are discussed comprehensively to answer the problems of the research. This chapter is divided into two parts, namely Research Results and Discussion.
A.Research Results
The participants of the research were the students of the English Education Study Program who were taking Paragraph Writing class in the academic year 2009/2010. The researcher used two classes of Paragraph Writing namely class D and class F with the same lecturer. Class D consisted of 26 students and class F consisted of 25 students. The researchers used these classes because the lecturer of these classes applied peer feedback in class. To collect the data, the researcher employed two research instruments, namely peer feedback checklist and questionnaire. The researcher distributed 26 questionnaires in class D but only 25 sheets were returned. In class C, the number of questionnaire distributed was 25 sheets, but only 24 sheets were returned as well as the peer feedback checklist. As the result, the total instruments to be analyzed were 49 sheets of peer feedback checklist and 49 sheets of questionnaires.
feedback in class. Having finished with the peer feedback checklist, the researcher gathered data by using questionnaire as the research instrument. The analysis of and the students’ responses of questionnaire statements and the students’ responses to the peer feedback checklist are presented as followed.
1. Students’ Responses to the Questionnaire
This section deals with the students’ responses to the statements of questionnaire. The data can be seen in Appendix 4. The results of the questionnaire are divided into three parts, namely students’ perception on the process of peer feedback, and students’ perception on the benefits of peer feedback, students’ perception on feedback from their peer, and students’ perception on the implementation of peer feedback
a. Students’ Perception on the Process of Peer Feedback
comments. The students’ responses of the open-ended questions are presented as follows:
Table 4.1. The result of open-ended question of the questionnaire
Question Positive comments Negative comments
Please give comments on your experience in going peer feedback in writing!
34 (69.39%)
15 (30.61%)
Meanwhile, question number 27 (How should peer feedback be implemented in writing class?) deals with the suggestions from the students about
the implementation of peer feedback. Hence, the responses cannot be counted into percentage since the answers are different each other. Analyzing the raw data, the researcher clusters some suggestions the students gave. The students suggested that peer feedback should be done before the composition would be submitted to the teacher. It should be done before teacher feedback. Therefore, the teacher should be involved in the process of peer feedback. They also suggested that in the process of peer feedback, the teacher should provide a kind of checklist to help them in correcting the composition. Additionally, they suggested that peer feedback should not be done in every assignment or every meeting.
2. Students’ Responses to the Peer Feedback Checklist
a. Feedback on organization
The feedback on organization can be seen in students’ answers of question number 1 (Is the introduction effective? Explain your answer!) and number 6 ( Is the conclusion effective? Explain your answer!). There were two strategies that
the students employed in giving feedback on organization. They provided comments on their peers’ introduction and conclusion. Most of the students even provided some suggestions on how to make effective introductions and logical conclusion in their compositions. Moreover, it was also found that in the first question, the percentage of the students who gave clear explanation whether the introduction is effective was quite high namely 83.7% and 93.9% for the conclusion.
b. Feedback on content
The students’ answer of question number 2 (What is the writer’s main idea?), number 3 (Does the writer support that idea with evidence? What is that
evidence?), number 4 (What evidence is missing, or incomplete?), number 5
feedback on question number 3, 65.3 % of the students who gave clear feedback on question number 4, and 71.4% of the students who gave clear feedback on question number 5.
c. Feedback on language use, vocabulary, and mechanics
Question number 7 (Do you notice any grammar, spelling, and punctuation or word choice errors?) was answered clearly. The students gave
correction and suggestion if there are any mistakes on grammar, word choice, spelling and punctuation. There were 81.6% of the students who gave suggestions and correction on grammar, word choice, spelling and punctuation. Only 18.4% of
the students did not give suggestion and correction in their composition.
B.Discussion
In this part, the researcher answers and discusses each question of the problem formulations. This part covers two main discussions since there are two problems formulated in chapter I and one additional discussion on the implication of peer feedback in writing class.
feedback itself. The responses of open-ended question of the questionnaire were also mostly positive.
All of the students recognized the importance of revision and feedback in the process of composing a good writing. They did not only emphasis on the product of the final writing but also notice every stage to reach the final writing. One way to get feedback is by doing peer feedback. During the process of peer feedback, the students always gave comments, suggestions, and correction to their peers on the checklist that was prepared. Here, the peer feedback checklist was very helpful to assist them in correcting their peers’ composition.
Almost all of the students felt free and confident in doing peer feedback. Only a few students were not confident with it. The students’ being unconfident occurred as a result of their doubt when they dealt with English grammar. Thus, that was why almost a half of the entire students still felt difficult in doing peer feedback. As students, they felt difficult but they could learn together to improve their writing through peer feedback. It also could be done by asking clarification to their partner about the feedback given. Hence, there was a kind of discussion between students in the process of peer feedback.
feedback. They felt difficult to give comments, suggestions, and correction since they are students. The responses of the open-ended questionnaire could explain the reason why most of the students find difficulties in giving peer feedback.
Students had positive perception toward the benefits of peer feedback. Peer feedback offered benefits for the students. By doing peer feedback, the students could explore more knowledge from their friends. They could learn from their peer’s mistakes in writing. They could solve their writing problem through peer feedback. Learning from friend’s mistakes led the students to be more critical and aware of making mistakes in writing. The students might recognize their own mistakes more easily after correcting their peers’ work. It reduced the students’ dependence on teacher. In addition, they were encouraged to work cooperatively with their peers in giving comment on each other’s composition instead only depending on teacher’s feedback. More than half of the total samples also agreed that peer feedback could save time compared to teacher feedback. Yet, teachers had to still involve in giving feedback as well.
revealed some significant improvement on their composition, for example, the improvement on grammar and organization.
Finally, based on the result, it was found that peer feedback should be considered to be implemented in writing class. Students believed that they could obtain many benefits by doing peer feedback in writing class and improve the quality of their writing. As stated in chapter II, perceiving peer feedback positively, the students will find that feedback from peer can be the beneficial source of feedback to revise their writing so that they will revise their writing based on their peer’s feedback.
1. To what extent do students give peer feedback?
Most of the students could provide feedbacks which were gong into details.The feedback included five areas which were organization area, content area, language use area, vocabulary area, and mechanic area. Most of them were able to provide suggestions and useful information to their peer about their compositions.
Dealing with the organization area, the students provided suggestion to their peers to connect their arguments and the evidences in more reasonable way including the introduction and the conclusion of the composition. The feedback on organization can be seen in students’ answers of question number 1 (Is the introduction effective? Explain your answer!) and number 6 ( Is the conclusion
effective? Explain your answer!), for example: The conclusion is not effective. The
pass their exam. By giving suggestion about a conclusion that possible to use, he or she could help his or her peer to make the compositions more coherent than before.
In giving feedback for their peers’ content area, the students commonly suggested their peers to provide more additional information and evidences to support their peers’ argument or idea. It could be seen in the students’ answer of question number 2 (What is the writer’s main idea?), number 3 (Does the writer support that idea with evidence? What is that evidence?), number 4 (What
evidence is missing, or incomplete?), number 5 (What questions do you have
about this composition?), for example: In paragraph 3, maybe you can relate
water resources with drought disaster. For example, the tree’s root absorbs the
rain water. The root keeps the water under the land, so it can’t be the cause of
drought. Thus, peer feedback then could help the students to provide more
complete details that were relevant to the assigned topic.
Students’ answer of questions number 7 (Do you notice any grammar, spelling, and punctuation or word choice errors?) revealed that the students could
give peer feedback on language use, vocabulary and mechanic of the compositions. There were a lot of students who committed errors on language use. Mostly, the students gave feedback in form of correction which dealt with grammar, for example: “…unofficial marriage should be ban because…Æ ……unofficial marriage should be banned…”. The feedback was clear although in
Meanwhile, in giving feedback in vocabulary area, the students commonly provided feedback by giving suggestion on word choice, for example: But Æ however. They gave another option of words that were better to use. The last area
was mechanic. The students provided correction on capitalization and spelling to their peers’ composition although there were a few students who committed with mechanical errors, for example: In that story, the writer always writes a little word (huruf kecil) as a beginning of sentence. I think it is false.
However, not all of the students gave the feedback for their peers optimally. Some of them only give the feedback in surface level. It could be seen from some examples of feedback. In answering question number 1 (Is the introduction effective? Explain your answer!), some students only answered
whether the introduction is effective or not without giving any explanation on it. The other example was the answers of question number 3 (Does the writer support that idea with evidence? What is that evidence?). Some students did not
give the example of evidences in their peers’ composition. They did peer feedback activity as an obligation or task which had to be done. In this case, this kind of peer feedback was not clear. The students could not get feedback in form of additional suggestions for the improvement of their composition.
3. How should peer feedback be implemented in writing class?
feedback, firstly, the students should be trained. Teacher might apply self correction before coming to peer feedback. This is for exposing the students to peer practice so that they would not be confused how to give feedback to their peer. Besides, during the implementation of peer feedback, the teacher still should be involved in the process of peer feedback in class. The teacher should control the whole class so that the process of peer feedback would run efficiently. The students needed feedback from the teacher after getting feedback from their peers. Hence, peer feedback should be done before the composition would be submitted to the teacher. Moreover, the teacher should provide a kind of checklist to help them correct the composition.
51
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
This chapter presents the conclusions which summarize the research results discussed in the previous chapter and suggestions which provide possible results of the implementation of peer feedback as well as directions for further researches.
A.Conclusions
Based on the discussion in the previous chapter, the students of writing class gain positive perception toward peer feedback. They respond all the benefits of peer feedback positively. It is believed that peer feedback encourages them to work cooperatively with their peers in giving comments on each other’s draft of writing instead of only depending on teacher’s feedback. The students have a greater variety of suggestions in improving their writing quality. Thus, they agree of the implementation of peer feedback in writing class. The students obtain the awareness of the importance of peer feedback not only just a task but also an activity that can improve their writing quality. By sharing in the process of peer feedback, they obtain more points of view and learn from their peers’ mistakes.
students even provide some suggestions to their peers related to the composition to improve the quality of the composition. There are only a few students who do not provide clear explanation or suggestion about feedback they gave in their peers’ compositions.
B.Suggestions
Teachers may use peer feedback to train the students to seek out their own mistakes. Yet, it is better not to carry out peer feedback in every meeting or every assignment of writing. Peer feedback is an alternative technique for the teacher in order not to make the student bored with the same technique all the time. In addition, in order not to make peer feedback monotonous, peer feedback should not only be done in pairs, but also in small groups. The students may read aloud their compositions in a group and other students give feedback orally. However, if the students are in higher level, and they are asked to write more complex and longer compositions, the procedure of peer feedback should be changed appropriately.
During the implementation, the teacher has to control the whole class so that the process will run efficiently. The teacher should always be available when the students get confused in giving feedback to their peers. The teacher feedback is needed after the feedback from peer.
Finally, the last suggestion is given for to anyone who wants to conduct research on peer feedback. The researcher suggests that the future research should be truly prepare the questionnaire and use additional research instruments such as interview in order to gain more detail information from the participants. Besides, the main point of this research was simply to discuss the students’ perception toward peer feedback. The researcher expects that future research would discuss more on the outcomes of implementation of peer feedback than only on the students’ perception.
54
REFERENCES
Altman, S., Valenzi, E., & Hodgetts, R. M. 1985. Organizational Behavior: Theory and Practice. Florida: Academic Press, Inc.
Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., & Razavieh, A. 2002. Introduction to Research in Education 6th ed. Belmot: Wadsword Thomson Company.
Brown, J. D., & Rodgers, T. S. 2002. Doing Second Language Research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cohen, A. D. 1990. Language Learning. New York: Newburg House Publisher. Cohen, L., Marion, L., & Marrison, K. 2000. Research Methods in Education.
Fort Worth: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Evans, S. S. & Evans, W. S. 1986. Assesments for Instruction. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. 2007. Educational Research: An Introduction. Boston: Pearson Education Limited.
Hyland, K. 2003. Second Language Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hornby, A. S. 1995. Oxford Advanced Learners’ Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Huffman, K., Vernoy, M., & Vernoy, J. 2000. Psychology in Action. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
Kauchack, D. P., & Eggen, P. D. 1989. Learning and Teaching Based Method. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
Kessler, C. 1992. Cooperative Language Learning. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Regents, Inc.
Lewis, M. 2002. RELC Portfolio Series 1: Giving Feedback in Language Classes. Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre.
Richards, J. C. 1990. The Language Teaching Matrix. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Rollinson, P. 2005. Using Peer Feedback in the ESL Writing Class. English Language Teaching Journal, 59 (1), 23-30.
Seow, A. 2002. The Writing Process and Process Writing. In J. C. Richards & W. A. Renandya (Eds). Methodology in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sokolik, M. 2003. Writing. In D. Nunan (Ed.). Practical Language Teaching (pp. 87-108). New York City: McGraw Hill.
Tiedt, I. M. 1989. Writing from Topic to Evaluation. Needham Heights: Allyn and Bacon.
APPENDICES
QUESTIONNAIRE
Students’ Perception toward Peer Feedback in Writing Class
This questionnaire is set to find out the students’ opinion about peer feedback in writing class.
Put a tick (9) to the degree of agreement which corresponds to the statements related to peer feedback that you have experienced in Paragraph Writing Class.
No Statements Strongly Agree
Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
1 Revision is needed in writing process
2 Feedback is needed in writing process
3 You always give correction, suggestion and comments in doing peer feedback
4 You feel confident when you are giving feedback to your peer
5 You feel confident if your peer read your composition 6 You feel free to do peer
feedback with your peer 7 You and your peer always
ask questions each other every time you and your peer do not understand the comments or suggestions 8 You find difficulty in
giving feedback to your peer
9 The feedback checklist helps you to correct your peer’s draft
10 You trust your peer’s feedback
11 You also need feedback from the teacher
No Statements Strongly Agree
Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
12 Your peer provides useful feedback in your composition
13 You can solve your writing problems with your peer 14 Doing peer feedback makes
you learn from your peer’s mistakes
15 You are motivated to learn something from your peer 16 Doing peer feedback
encourages you to work cooperatively with your peers in giving comments on each other’s draft of writing instead of only depending on teacher’s feedback.
17 Doing peer feedback makes you more independents as learner
18 You can improve your critical reading skill by doing peer feedback
19 Peer feedback makes you aware of making mistakes 20 Peer feedback needs less
time than teacher feedback 21 Feedback from your peer is
clear to you
22 You are satisfied with your peer’s feedback
23 You use your peer’s comments, suggestions and correction as your considerations to revise your draft
24 Feedback from your peer gives significant influence to the improvement of your writing quality
Answer the following questions briefly and clearly.
26.Please give comments on your experience in doing peer feedback in writing?
27.How should peer feedback be implemented in writing class?
Thank you
Adapted from Sokolik (2003)
Peer Feedback Checklist
Peer feedback from:__________________to:________________ Day/ Date :____________________________
Read your friend’s composition. Then, answer the questions below! 1. Is the introduction effective? Explain your answer!
2. What is the writer’s main idea? Restate it here:
3. Does the writer support that idea with evidence? What is that evidence?
4. What evidence is missing or incomplete?
5. What questions do you have about this composition?
6. Is the conclusion effective? Explain your answer!
7. Do you notice any grammar, spelling, and punctuation or word choice errors? Mention and correct them here:
Discuss your feedback with your peer!
Questionnaire Blueprint
Item number Features
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 the process of peer feedback 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 benefits of peer feedback 10, 21, 22, 23, 24 feedback from their peer
11, 25, 26, 27 the implementation of peer feedback
The result of questionnaire of students' perception toward peer feedback in writing class
No Statements Degree of agreement
SA % A % D % SD %
You always give corrections, suggestions, and comments in doing peer feedback
14 28.6% 35 71.4% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
4
You feel confident when you are giving feedback to your peer
8 16.3% 31 63.3% 10 20.4% 0 0.0%
5
You feel confident when your peer read your composition
7 14.3% 34 69.4% 8 16.3% 0 0.0%
6
You feel free to do peer feedback with your peer
9 18.4% 35 71.4% 4 8.2% 1 2.0%
7
You and your peer always ask
questions each other every time you and
You find difficulty in giving feedback to your peer
3 6.1% 28 57.1% 15 30.6% 3 6.1%
9
The feedback checklist helps you to correct your peer's draft feedback from the teacher
39 79.6% 10 20.4% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
No. Statements
Degree of Agreement
SA % A % D % SD %
12
Your peer provides useful feedback in your composition
13 26.5% 36 73.5% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
13
You can solve your writing problems with your peer
8 16.3% 35 71.4% 6 12.2% 0 0.0%
14
Doing peer
feedback makes you learn from your peer's mistakes
17 34.7% 31 63.3% 1 2.0% 0 0.0%
15
You are motivated to learn something from your peer
17 34.7% 30 61.2% 2 4.1% 0 0.0%
16
Doing peer feedback
encourages you to work cooperatively with your peers in giving comments on each other’s draft of writing instead of only depending on teacher’s feedback
14 28.6% 33 67.3% 2 4.1% 0 0.0%
17
Doing peer
feedback makes you more independent as learner
7 14.3% 39 79.6% 2 4.1% 1 2.0%
18
You can improve your critical reading skill by doing peer feedback
10 20.4% 39 79.6% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
19
Peer feedback makes you aware of making mistakes
15 30.6% 30 61.2% 4 8.2% 0 0.0%
20
Peer feedback needs less time than teacher feedback
3 6.1% 26 53.1% 19 38.8% 1 2.0%
21 Feedback from your
peer is clear to you 3 6.1% 33 67.3% 13 26.5% 0 0.0%
22
You are satisfied with you peer's feedback
1 2.0% 35 71.4%
No. Statements Degree of Agreement
SA % A % D % SD %
23
You use your peer's comments,
suggestions, and corrections as your considerations to revise your draft
15 30.6% 34 69.4% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
24
Feedback from your peer gives
significant influence to the improvement of your writing quality
8 16.3% 40 81.6% 1 2.0% 0 0.0%
25
Peer feedback should be implemented in writing class
RAW DATA OF OPEN-ENDED QUESTIONS
26. Please give comments on your experience in doing peer feedback in writing!
Respondents Answers
1 They also give me the honest feedback in my writing, and they give it with clearly so I can understand how can I revise my writing.
2 I can revise my draft based on my friends’ feedback. 3 I can know where is my mistakes and I can repair it.
4 I like peer feedback because it can improve my writing skill 5 I think for doing peer feedback in writing is good. But I can’t
to explain it.
6 Doing peer feedback to other friend more effective. 7 Doing peer feedback makes me aware of mistakes. 8 Peer feedback make me aware to my mistake.
9 By give comment in doing peer feedback can help me to be more aware when I make an article. It can improve my critical and I can learn from my peer’s critical.
10 - Make our science develop to give comments - We can know our mistakes so we can revise again. 11 I little bit confused to check the grammar because I actually
didn’t too aware and didn’t know if it was correct or incorrect. With peer feedback can improve my skill in writing.
12 Doing peer feedback can improve my writing skill and make me aware of making mistakes.
13 From my feedback, I know my mistakes and I can revise my writing based on my feedback.
14 In the paragraph writing class, we often make a peer feedback. it is useful to improve our skill in writing, by giving and receiving the feedback. we can learn and develop our writing skill.
15 Give comment to other friends is helping them to know the mistakes that they do not know before.
16 Peer feedback in writing can improve my skills because I can learn the mistakes from my peer.
