• Tidak ada hasil yang ditemukan

STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS ON PEER FEEDBACK IN WRITING A Thesis

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2019

Membagikan "STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS ON PEER FEEDBACK IN WRITING A Thesis"

Copied!
161
0
0

Teks penuh

(1)

STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS ON PEER FEEDBACK

IN WRITING

A Thesis

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree

in English Language Education

By RINA

Student Number: 021214073

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA

2007

(2)

A Sarjana Pendidikan Thesis on

STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS ON PEER FEEDBACK IN WRITING

Prepared and Presented by RINA

Student Number: 02 121 4073

Approved by:

Date F. X. Ouda Teda Ena, S.Pd., M.Pd. 10th February 2007 Major Sponsor

Made Yulia, S.Pd., M.Pd. 10th February 2007 Co- Sponsor

(3)

A Sarjana Pendidikan Thesis on

STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS ON PEER FEEDBACK IN WRITING

By RINA

Student Number: 021214073

Defended before the Board of Examiners on 21st March 2007

and Declared Acceptable

Board of Examiners Chairman : A. Hardi Prasetyo, S.Pd., M.A. Secretary : Drs. P. G. Purba, M.Pd.

Member : F. X. Ouda Teda Ena, S.Pd., M.Pd. Member : Made Frida Yulia, S.Pd., M.Pd. Member : C. Tutyandari, S.Pd., M.Pd.

Yogyakarta, 21st March 2007

Faculty of Teachers Training and Education Sanata Dharma University

Dean,

Drs. Tarsisius Sarkim, M.Ed., Ph.D.

(4)

STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY

I honestly declare that the thesis I wrote does not contain the works or part of the works of other people, except those cited in the quotations and the references, as a scientific paper should.

Yogyakarta, 21st March 2007 The writer

RINA 021214073

(5)

I dedicate this piece of work to

My late father, mother, my sister Rini,

and Dedik

Nothing is more blessed than having

a little family on earth, it doesn’t have to be

rich to buy a real estate but warm enough

to be the shelter of days and nights.

There is no greater motivation but you.

(6)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

After the completion of this little piece of hard work, I would like to thank to God for His blessing, for His love and guidance and for the strength He has given me. My deepest gratitude goes to my major sponsor F. X. Ouda Teda Ena, S.Pd., M.Pd. for his guidance, suggestions and help and to my co-sponsor Made Frida Yulia, S.Pd., M.Pd. for her willingness to spend her time reading my thesis patiently, her carefulness in correcting my drafts in details, and her advice as well as her encouragement from the beginning of the research until the accomplishment of this thesis.

I would like to express my thankfulness to C. Tutyandari, S.Pd., M.Pd. who gave some beneficial criticism when I was having my thesis defense, Dr. Retno Muljani, M.Pd. who was willing to assist and keep motivating me when I failed in conducting my research for the first time and to Theresia Astanti Rorik, S.Pd., M.Ed., who gave me permission to conduct my research in her Writing classes and her valuable inputs for my thesis.

I am very grateful to my beloved parents, Bapak and Mamah, for their endless care, support, and encouragement during my study and my dearly loved sister, Rini, who lent a hand when I had to deal with the data calculation and kept motivating me with her ceaseless inspiring words. I also give my sincere thanks to Dedik for his loyal company when I was downhearted with the thesis completion, his unending encouraging words, and his help to make anything possible to be available whenever and wherever I needed.

My thankfulness also goes to my best friends, Ajeng, Ciplux who helped me by sharing some information related to my thesis and always encouraging me

(7)

to keep struggling for my thesis and Ayu who spare her time earnestly in spite of her busy time to do editing. I thank to Eko “bebex” for converting the thesis file into PDF. I thank to my PBI friends Gede ‘genjix’, Dani, Linda, Adesti, Tyas ‘pow-pow’, Lisa, Rumi ‘tumi’, Santi, Woro, Haryana, Vivin, for their companionship full of sadness, happiness, tear and laughter. For EME’s occupants Mas Aga, Bita, Grace, Nathan, Melly, Mba Iik, and Mba Nita and other beloved EME’s friends I finally give the last thanks but not least. You were “the entertainers” of my heart. Never have I been as comfortable as when I am at home.

RINA

(8)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TITLE PAGE ………... i

PAGES OF APPROVAL ………... ii

STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY ……….. iv

DEDICATION PAGE ……… v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ………... vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS ………... vii

LIST OF FIGURES ………... xi

LIST OF TABLES ………. xiii

ABSTRACT ……….. xiv

ABSTRAK ………... xv

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ……… 1

A. Background ………. 3

B. Problem Limitation ………. 3

C. Problem Formulation ……….. 4

D. Objectives of the Study ……….. 4

E. Benefits of the Study ………... 5

F. Definition of Terms ………. 6

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW ……… 8

A. Theoretical Description ………... 8

1. Feedback ………. 8

a. Definition of Feedback ……….. 8

b. Sources of Feedback ………. 9

c. Functions of Feedback ……….. 13

d. Purposes of Feedback ……… 14

e. Types of Feedback ……… 16

f. Forms of Feedback ……… 17

2. Writing as a Process ……… 17

(9)

3. Perceptions ………. 24

a. Factors Influencing Perceptions ……… 25

b. Relationship between Perceptions, Learning and Thinking .. 28

B. Theoretical Framework ………... 29

CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY ……… 31

A. Methods ……….. 31

B. Research Participants ……….. 32

C. Research Instruments ……….. 33

D. Data Gathering Techniques ………. 35

E. Data Analysis Techniques ……….. 36

CHAPTER IV RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ………. 40

A. Research Findings and Data Analysis ………. 40

1. The Process of the Implementation of Peer Feedback …….. 42

a. Findings ……… 42

b. Data Analysis ……… 49

2. Students’ Perceptions on the Implementation of Peer …….. Feedback and the Feedback from Peers 52 a. Findings ………... 53

b. Data Analysis ……… 63

1) Students’ Perceptions on the Implementation ………. of Peer Feedback 63 2) Students’ Perceptions on Feedback from Peers ………….. 66

3. The Implications of the Implementation of Peer Feedback .. 68

a. Findings ……… 68

b. Data Analysis ……… 70

B. Other Findings ………. 71

CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS ……….. A. Conclusions ……… 73

B. Suggestions ………. 76

(10)

REFERENCES ………... 78

APPENDICES ………... 81

APPENDIX 1 OBSERVATION SHEET ……….. 82

APPENDIX 2 QUESTIONNAIRE ………... 84

APPENDIX 3 QUESTIONNAIRE BLUEPRINT ……… 89

APPENDIX 4 INTERVIEW BLUEPRINT ……….. 91

APPENDIX 5 RAW DATA FROM THE OBSERVATION ……… 93

APPENDIX 6 RAW DATA FROM THE QUESTIONNAIRE ……… 98

APPENDIX 7 RAW DATA FROM THE INTERVIEW ……….. 103

APPENDIX 8 CHECKLISTS ……… 117

APPENDIX 9 THE LIST OF STUDENTS’ MARKS ……….. 130

APPENDIX 10 RESEARCH CALENDAR ……….. 142

(11)

LIST OF FIGURES

Figures Page

1 The Relationship of Learning and Thinking in the Complex

Process of Perceptions ……….. 28

2 The Frequency of Giving Corrections ……….. 44

3 The Frequency of Giving Comments and Suggestions ………… 44

4 The Students’ Confidence in Giving Feedback ……… 45

5 The Students’ Activeness in Asking Clarification ………... 45

6 The Students’ Feeling Free in Having Peer Feedback …………. 46

7 The Students’ Ability to Solve the Writing Problems with Their Peers ………. 46

8 The Students’ Feeling Difficulty in Doing Correction ………… 47

9 The Students’ Convenience on the System of the Implementation of Peer Feedback ……… 47

10 The Time Sufficiency of the Implementation of Peer Feedback in Class ………. 47

11 The Helpfulness of Checklist ………... 48

12 Students’ Learning from Their Peers’ Mistakes ……….. 54

13 How Challenging Peer Feedback for the Students ………... 54

14 Students’ Being Able to Gain More Knowledge from Their Peers ………. 55

15 The Students’ Ability to Clarify Their Writing ……… 55

16 Students’ Becoming Independence ……….. 55

17 Students’ Becoming More Critical ………... 56

18 The Students’ Motivation to Learn from Their Peers ………….. 56

(12)

19 Students’ Awareness of Making Mistakes ………... 57 20 Students’ Learning How to Appreciate Others’ Work …………. 58 21 Students’ Enthusiasm of Doing Peer Feedback ………... 58 22 General Perceptions of the Students in Each Level on the

Implementation of Peer Feedback ……… 59 23 The Benefit of Feedback Given by Peers ………. 60 24 The Clearness of Feedback Given by Peers ………. 60 25 The Satisfaction of the Students with the Feedback Given by

Peers ………. 61

26 Students’ Attention to Feedback Given by Peers ……… 61 27 Students’ Consideration to Include Feedback Given by Peers for

Revision ……… 62

28 The Influence of Feedback Given by Peers on Writing

Improvement ……… 62

29 The Students’ Preference on the Implementation of Peer

Feedback ……….. 68

30 The Students’ Preference on the Implementation of Peer Feedback to Every Assignment ……… 69 31 The Students’ need for Teacher Feedback ………... 69

(13)

LIST OF TABLES

Tables Page

1 The Results of the Questionnaire of the Process of the

Implementation of Peer Feedback ……….. 37 2 The Results of the Questionnaire of the Students’ Perceptions on

the Implementation of Peer Feedback and Feedback Derived from

Peers ……… 38

3 The Results of the Questionnaire of the Implications of

Implementation of Peer Feedback ……….. 39 4 The Results of the Interview ………... 39 5 The Results of the Observation of the Implementation of Peer

Feedback ………. 42

(14)

ABSTRACT

Rina. 2007. Students’ Perceptions on Peer Feedback in Writing. Yogyakarta: English Education Study Program, Sanata Dharma University.

In writing classes, commonly feedback is from the teachers. Meanwhile, obtaining feedback only from teachers will lead the students to be spoon-fed learners. In fact, feedback can also be from students so called peer feedback, which might direct them to be independent learners. Hence, the researcher focused on discovering how peer feedback was implemented, the students’ perceptions on peer feedback after its implementation and the students’ perceptions on the feedback given by peers, and the implications of the implementation of peer feedback.

The respondents of this descriptive study were the fourth semester students in the academic year of 2005/2006. They were taken from two Writing IV classes at the English Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University, Yogyakarta. The instruments used were observation, questionnaire and interview. The questionnaire items dealing with students’ perceptions were discussed separately according to the students’ rank of mark which was above average, average, and below average. The interview was also done based on the stratified sampling. The researcher chose three respondents of each class who constantly obtained above average marks, average ones, and below average ones in their assignments and tests. It was aimed to know the perceptions of the students who had different rank of marks.

The first data were gathered through observation for one semester. Afterward, the researcher collected the second data by distributing questionnaire sheets to all students. Having collected the questionnaire sheets, the researcher analyzed them. Finally, the researcher took some respondents to be interviewed based on the sampling.

There were two different procedures of how peer feedback was carried out. Peer feedback was done in class and at home. There were 86%, 88%, and 82% of the students from above average, average, and below average levels having good perceptions on the implementation of peer feedback. For those who were in the above average level, peer feedback was a challenge to teach their friends who had weaknesses in grammar. Meanwhile, those who were in the average and below average levels regarded peer feedback as a means of sharing to make work better. Yet, the above-averaged students considered the discussion within peer feedback a one way discussion since if they found difficulty in grammar they did not seem to have any courage to ask other students who were below their level. Besides, most students said that the procedures were not various and the checklist kept persisting in the same format. Moreover, the students in all level considered feedback given by peers beneficial. Yet, the above-averaged students tended to select the feedback given by other students. In contrast, the students who were in the average and below average levels tended to use the feedback more often to revise their assignments. In summary, there were 89% of the students agreed that peer feedback should be applied in writing class since it gave them some benefits. However, it should not be carried out in every assignment and should be implemented using various procedures.

(15)

ABSTRAK

Rina. 2007. Students’ Perceptions on Peer Feedback in Writing. Yogyakarta: Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Universitas Sanata Dharma.

Pada umumnya, di kelas Writing, koreksi selalu diberikan oleh dosen. Padahal pemberian koreksi secara terus-menerus oleh dosen dapat mengarahkan mahasiswa menjadi tidak mandiri. Pada kenyataannya, koreksi pun bisa diberikan oleh teman yang disebut peer feedback, dimana mahasiswa bisa dilatih untuk menjadi mahasiswa yang mandiri. Oleh karena itu, peneliti bermaksud untuk mencari tahu bagaimana peer feedback dilaksanakan, persepsi mahasiswa tentang pelaksanaan peer feedback dan hasil koreksi itu sendiri dan akibat adanya pelaksanaan peer feedback tersebut.

Responden penelitian deskriptif ini adalah mahasiswa semester empat yang di ambil dari dua kelas mata kuliah Writing IV di jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Sanata Dharma Yogyakarta tahun akademik 2005/2006. Instrumen yang digunakan adalah observasi, kuesioner, dan wawancara. Pertanyaan dalam kuesioner yang berhubungan dengan persepsi akan dibahas menurut tingkat nilai, yaitu diatas rata-rata, rata-rata, dan dibawah rata-rata. Wawancara juga dilakukan sesuai dengan sampling bertingkat. Peneliti mengambil tiga orang dari setiap kelas yang konsisten mendapat nilai diatas rata-rata, rata-rata-rata, dan dibawah rata-rata pada tugas harian dan tes mereka. Hal ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui persepsi mahasiswa di tingkat nilai yang berbeda.

Data pertama diambil melalui pengamatan selama satu semester. Kemudian, data kedua diambil melaui kuesioner. Setelah kuesioner di kumpulkan, peneliti menganalisanya. Akhirnya, peneliti mengambil beberapa responden berdasarkan sampling bertingkat untuk diwawancara.

Ada dua cara yang berbeda tentang bagaimana Peer feedback dilakukan. Peer feedback dilakukan di kelas dan dirumah. Ada 86%, 88%, dan 82% mahasiswa dari tingkat nilai diatas rata-rata, rata-rata, dan dibawah rata-rata yang mempunyai persepsi bagus terhadap pelaksanaan peer feedback. Mereka yang nilainya diatas rata-rata menganggap bahwa peer feedback adalah suatu tantangan untuk membantu mereka yang mempunyai kelemahan di dalam tata bahasa. Sedangkan mereka yang nilainya rata-rata dan dibawah rata-rata menganggap bahwa peer feedback adalah media diskusi agar hasil tugas menjadi lebih baik. Tetapi, mahasiswa yang berada diatas rata-rata, peer feedback hanya bersifat searah karena jika mereka menemui kesulitan dalam tata bahasa, mereka tidak berani untuk bertanya pada mahasiwa yang berada di tingkat rata-rata dan dibawah rata-rata. Selain itu, prosedur peer feedback dan checklistnya terkesan monoton. Semua mahasiswa menganggap bahwa koreksi dari teman bermanfaat. Tetapi, mahasiswa diatas rata-rata cenderung memilih koreksi yang diberikan teman untuk merevisi. Sedangkan mereka yang rata-rata dan dibawah rata-rata cenderung untuk menggunakan semua koreksi dari teman mereka untuk merevisi. Kesimpulannya, 89% mahasiwa setuju jika peer feedback dilaksanakan di kelas Writing karena bermanfaat. Namun, peer feedback tidak harus dilakukan setiap ada tugas dan seharusnya dilakukan dengan cara yang bervariasi.

(16)

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

This chapter is to provide background information related to the subject matter being explored and analyzed, present the motivation why the researcher intends to conduct the research on the subject matter, and the general aims of conducting the research.

A. Background

Ayken (2004) states that making errors is a natural and unavoidable feature of learning a language. The approach that the teacher adopts towards errors is very important in terms of turning this natural process into a beneficial feature for learners. Learners need to receive feedback as a reflection in order that they will not make those errors for the second time. Writing, one of the English skills, requires students to experience trial and error process in obtaining a qualified writing product. Accordingly, the use of feedback in writing is essential to improve the learners’ skills in writing.

Feedback can be obtained in many ways by teacher feedback, peer feedback and self evaluation. In writing class, commonly, the feedback is from the teacher’s corrections. In fact, the teachers may use another source of feedback. Kessler, Quinn, and Fathman (1992: 68) find the following:

“Learning often takes place best when students can express idea and get feedback from their peers. Feedback, to be most useful, needs to be more than just correct answer. Rather, it needs to be analytical or suggestive of other ways of thinking. … Current second language learning research emphasizes the value of peer correction and interaction. … Peer feedback in language learning can be more powerful than teacher feedback.”

(17)

When the students are involved in giving feedback to their friends, it gives them more responsibility for their learning. It allows them to think for themselves as learning from mistakes is a valuable part of the language learning process.

However, based on the researcher’s experience, the lecturers teaching Writing at the English Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University did not adopt peer feedback as an alternative of giving feedback to their students. Instead, they tended to use only teacher feedback which might lead the students to be spoon-fed students. In addition, the students even did not know where to start to revise the composition since they were confused with the comments given by the teachers. Sometimes, the students were dissatisfied when they were not able to defend their own opinions so that they were forced to follow what the teachers suggested, whereas their opinions might be better than the teachers’.

Keh (1990), as quoted by Wang Xiang (2004: 238), says that a large quantity of researches have been carried out to investigate the effects of feedback, especially teacher feedback on revision and writing quality (e.g. Ferris 1995 & 1997). It has been established through these studies that teacher feedback is helpful for students to improve their compositions. Nevertheless, some studies (e.g. Hyland (2000), Muncie (2000), Leki (1990)) show that the traditional way in which teachers make comments on the students’ drafts is not effective in improving students’ writing.

(18)

Cohen (1990: 110)) who found that 20% of the students paid little or no attention to the written feedback that they received from their teachers on the last compositions that they had written.

Teacher feedback, indeed, can provide students with greater meaningful language inputs. Hence, students are facilitated to learn new terms and words (Lewis, 2004: 4). In spite of it, Rollinson (2005: 25) remarks that the students lack enthusiasm in revising their papers because perhaps there are many deficiencies in the written comments of teachers. The comments might have been critized as being unspecific, incomprehensible, contradictory, inconsistent, inaccurate, meaningless to the students, vague, not detailed, and abstract.

(19)

A. Problem Limitation

As feedback can be a means to turn a natural process of making errors into a beneficial feature for learners to gain knowledge, it is, indeed, essential to the writing process. Thus, this study focused on the students’ perceptions on the implementation of peer feedback in Writing IV classes at English education Study Program, Sanata Dharma University, Yogyakarta and the feedback which was given by peers, and the implications of the implementation of peer feedback.

B. Problem Formulation

Based on the problem limitation, this study would attempt to answer: 1. How was the implementation of peer feedback in Writing IV classes?

2. What were the students’ perceptions on the implementation of peer feedback and the feedback given by peers in Writing IV classes?

3. What were the implications of the implementation of peer feedback?

C. Objectives of the Study

(20)

D. Benefits of the Study

In general, the researcher hopes that the results of this study could give some valuable contributions to all the educational communities, especially at the English Education Study Program.

Hopefully, writing lecturers may consider using not only teacher feedback but also peer feedback in their writing class as they would be able to see the students work cooperatively with their partners which will possibly lead to improve their learning in writing. The teachers should realize that learning a language cannot be apart from interaction of one learner to another learner since a truly learning is learning by doing.

For the students, they should be able to be independent learners. They are supposed to reduce their dependence on their lecturers since if they depend much on them, they will not be able to improve their skills in writing. They are hoped to apply the knowledge of how to write well from their teachers. One of the ways to know whether they can apply their skills in writing is to involve them in a truly circle of learning, not only as listeners and receivers but also as “teachers” for themselves and helpers for their friends. Thus, through this study, the researcher expects that the students in writing classes will be encouraged and enthusiastic to utilize peer feedback considering the benefits that they can obtain.

(21)

E. Definition of Terms 1. Perception

In Oxford Advanced Learners’ Dictionary (Hornby, 1995: 859), perception is defined as a way of seeing, understanding or interpreting something. In Collins Co-build English Dictionary for Advances Learners (Sinclair, 2001: 1142), perception is the way you think about it or the impression you have of it. More to the point, Altman, Valenzi, and Hodgetts (1985: 85) state that perception is the way stimuli are selected and grouped by a person so that they can be meaningfully interpreted. In other words, perception is a person’s view of reality.

Based on both definitions, the researcher might come to a conclusion that each person has different point of view when he / she is experiencing an occasion or observing an object. These points of view might direct further influence on their thought and feeling about what they have seen and experienced and lead to an occurrence of any dissimilar responses and changes in behaviors or attitudes.

Related to this study, perception is what the students are thinking and feeling about something that they have experienced, which in this case is peer feedback in writing class.

2. Peer Feedback

(22)

feedback is a technique to give information of suggestions, comments, and error corrections derived from one-to-one consultation between student and student in pairs by using checklists which contain some guiding questions.

Tiedt (1989: 188) says that in writing, the students learn how to write by writing and they also learn how to write by reading. They learn how to write by reading the writing of their peers. From the statement, the researcher concludes that this technique will create interaction between students who are checking the draft and the students whose drafts are being checked. The interaction provides feedback which is expected to be beneficial for both sides. The learners can learn more about writing from the interaction since they see the ideas from other students and how the ideas are developed. Moreover, the students may gain benefits from the questions and suggestions from their peers.

3. Writing IV

Based on Buku Panduan Akademik (2002: 82) of the English Education Study Program, Writing IV is a course which requires the students to have basic understanding of the nature, function and types of business correspondence, understand and produce various types of business correspondence. As the goals stated formerly, Writing IV focuses on developing writing skills by applying a number of writing techniques / styles in writing formal letters, such as business correspondence, memos and reports, employment and job-related letters.

(23)

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW

There are two parts discussed in this chapter. They are theoretical description and theoretical framework. In the theoretical description, the researcher discusses some theories and research studies which are relevant to the topic. In the theoretical framework, the researcher relates the theories to the study.

A. Theoretical Description 1. Feedback

a. Definition of Feedback

There are many definitions of feedback introduced by many psychologists. As quoted by Berewot (2001: 17), Gagne (1961) presents that feedback is the closing of a ‘loop’ in the learning process which serves to fix the learning result and make it permanently available. It means that as the students have already accomplished their learning, they need corrections, criticisms, or even appreciation from any other sources to assess their learning result. More to the point, Kauchack and Eggen (1989: 85) define that feedback is any information about current behavior that can be used to improve the future performance of the students. From those two definitions, it is clear enough to conclude that feedback is beneficial backwash provided for learners to improve their performance on what they have learnt.

(24)

b. Sources of Feedback

Lewis (2002: 15-23) writes that there are three sources of feedback, namely teacher feedback, peer feedback and self evaluation, which is equivalent to self-directed feedback.

1) Teacher Feedback

In many classes teachers are the main source for the students to obtain feedback. Indeed, teachers are very helpful when students are facing some difficulties as they are writing a composition. Teachers help them by giving an outline of how to write well and check the content and the written mistakes.

After receiving feedback, the students could directly re-check and correct what mistakes they have done based on the teachers’ red-pen correction. Commonly, teachers correct one by one student’s composition then discuss face to face with each student. It is called conferencing feedback. In addition, they might use another variation to give feedback to their students, for instance, collective feedback by commenting orally one by one and summarizing feedback on the board.

(25)

feedback. By conducting collective feedback, the teachers only provide some comments and errors commonly done by the students in general in front of the class and can save time as well. Yet, it still faces some further difficulties.

By giving collective feedback, the teachers will not be able to identify the students who have made some errors so that the students will not acquire thorough explanation of their mistakes. Therefore, the students need to be active in looking at their own works to find the reasons for their marks. In fact, the students are usually reluctant to ask the teachers. The students are satisfied enough to know that their works are returned and not covered with depressing comments.

2) Peer Feedback

It might be monotonous if the feedback only comes from the teachers in every writing class. The students should need another greater variety of suggestions. Proofreading other people’s work prepares the students for proofreading their own work. The students may also practice to be teachers for their friends. Therefore, they will probably feel secure since they are in their own friend circle and they will promote their own active learning.

(26)

learners in the classrooms. As cited by Richards and Rodgers (2003: 192), Olsen and Kagan (1992) define cooperative leaning as group learning activity that is organized so that learning is dependent on the social structure exchange information between learners in groups and in which each learner is held accountable for his or her own learning and is motivated to increase the learning of others. Additionally, cooperative learning offers a wide variety of techniques, strategies and considerations for teachers (Kessler, 1992: 3). In conclusion, peer feedback represents one of a wide variety of techniques offered by cooperative learning.

Peer feedback with its potentially high level of response and interaction between reader and writer can encourage a collaborative dialogue in which two - way feedback is established and meaning is negotiated between two parties (Rollinson, 2005: 26). From the statement, the researcher sees the relationship between peer feedback and cooperative learning. In a classroom using peer feedback as the technique, the learners are the centre of the learning. By working cooperatively, the student will not only see his work from his perspective but also sees from another perspective through his peer. In this situation, they exchange information about their ideas, feeling, and needs.

(27)

teaches the students to critically analyze their own writing and the writing of others.

As Mcgroarty (1989) says in Kessler (1992: 3), peer feedback in writing gives opportunities to the students to act as resources for each other, thus assuming a more active role in their learning. It is clear that this statement clarifies that cooperative learning, indeed, gives opportunity to the learners to be more responsible for their own learning and the learning of others. The students may act as if they were teachers for their friends and for themselves. They are the centre so they are forced to be active. Therefore, the researcher concludes that in cooperative learning, the learners take roles as the sources and the information seekers.

(28)

3) Self Evaluation (Self-directed Feedback)

Self evaluation means that students correct and evaluate their own works. It may increase students’ independence as they are supposed to find their own mistakes. By finding their own mistakes, the students are expected to remember better what mistakes they have done so that they will not make the same mistakes later on. Moreover, self-evaluation saves time in large classes.

On the other hand, it is difficult to seek mistakes in writing without being helped by other people. Someone who has written a composition will claim that there are no mistakes in it since she/he has her/his own subjective point of view. By contrast, objective points of view from other people are needed in writing. They might provide some information that cannot be possibly found by the author her/himself in her/his composition.

The researcher comes to a conclusion that teacher feedback and peer feedback are included to extrinsic feedback. In contrast, self evaluation or self-directed feedback belongs to intrinsic feedback. According to Johnson (1979: 278), extrinsic feedback which derives from other persons is the most effective means of promoting the learning of motor skills. He adds that several studies even proved that receiving feedback from other persons can increase learning to a greater extent than intrinsic feedback deriving from oneself can. Extrinsic feedback can be obtained by placing students in cooperative working in pairs or groups.

c. Functions of Feedback

(29)

feedback is used to provide reinforcement and create motivation. The use of peer feedback requires the students to work cooperatively with their partners. This learning situation not only creates relaxed circumstances that hopefully are able to reduce students’ anxiety in learning but also reinforces the students to engage in the skills of writing. They would not be reluctant to ask their peers or give comments or suggestion to their partners’ writing as they are equal. When they feel secure in a classroom, they might be motivated to learn more and it could result in better performance; that is, to gain a good writing product and skills in writing as well.

Second, feedback is a means used to make alteration in the present performance, which is beneficial for future performance. Related to this study, peer feedback, indeed, gives information to the students about what they should revise in their drafts. It is intended to reach a desired goal, which is to gain a good product of writing.

d. Purposes of Feedback

Lewis (2002: 3-4) also provides the purposes of feedback for both teachers and students. Feedback aims to give information to teachers and students. Teachers collect the information to assess their teaching in class. The important thing is that the teachers might know their class progress so that they could make plans of how to generate the class to be better than the previous one. Lewis (2002: 3) finds the following:

(30)

marks or grades. By highlighting strengths and weaknesses, the comments provide information about individual progress, unlike marks or grades, which tend to compare one student with another.”

Feedback also provides the students with information which tends to be an ongoing assessment for them. It means that feedback is more than grades but value. The students should value their strengths to be developed and their weaknesses to be evaluated and turn these weaknesses to be beneficial features to learn.

The other purposes of feedback are, first, to become better in learning. Teachers can provide students with more than simply descriptions of their language use but on their students’ learning. Subsequently, since the students are criticized on their learning, they have to adjust themselves in order to be better in learning by turning their weaknesses into strengths.

Second purpose is to be knowledgeable with language input. The teachers’ feedback, whether it is in the form of written or spoken language, provides students with meaningful and individual language input. Thus, giving feedback can facilitate the students to learn new terms and words. Lewis (2002: 4) states that the teachers’ words, both in their form and their purpose, illustrate how language is used in one-to-one communication. That is why, it is important to extend students’ language by writing comments in language at a level slightly higher than the students’ own current language use. In this way students can learn new vocabulary and structure in context.

(31)

language as language should be learned by practicing. Finally, one long-term purpose of feedback is to lead the students to the point where they can find their own weaknesses and strengths. In a word, they are becoming more autonomous.

e. Types of Feedback

According to Stone and Nielsen (1982) as quoted by Berewot (2001: 23), there are two types of feedback, namely informational feedback and affective feedback. Informational feedback refers to the information which functions as the correction, clarification, evaluation, and identification of the incorrect response produced by the students. Meanwhile, affective feedback refers to the occurrence of positive reinforcement to the correct response given by the students. The function of this feedback is to secure the performance and to strengthen positive emotion to the classroom.

(32)

f. Forms of Feedback

Feedback, according to Woolfolk (1987: 539), can be conveyed in oral and written forms. Oral feedback fits well with the younger students since it can help the students to pinpoint and correct the misconception immediately, whereas written feedback is effective for older students. In this study, the students can use both oral and written feedback. Written information of the students’ effort is most helpful when it is personalized rather than stereotyped and when it provides constructive information. Being personalized and not stereotyped implies that feedback should be given appropriately to each student based on what part must be corrected or commented on. Meanwhile, constructive information means that the peers should provide the comments as specific as possible on their friends’ errors and balance the criticism with suggestion about how to improve as well as the comments of the positive aspects of the work. Oral feedback takes an important role to endow with further clarification when written feedback is not clear.

2. Writing as a Process

(33)

produce a correct structure and organization of different kinds of paragraphs and texts. This kind of approach is referred to as product approach.

Writing, indeed, teaches students to be able to produce kinds of essays in a correct grammatical structure. Most teachers apply this kind of approach because of the students’ need; that is, they will often encounter, read, and produce various kinds of written texts in educational, institutional, and personal contexts. In conclusion, a product approach stresses wholly on the form of the products that the students produce rather than the process of writing.

Despite the fact that writing is only seen through one perspective that it only teaches different kinds of texts in an accurate grammar and proper structure, writing can be seen through another viewpoint. Writing is not only a product but also a process. Gere (1988: 8-9) says that writing is to learn and writing is to show learning. Writing to learn can be seen through this example; when there is somebody who is interested in writing a certain issue, he should start to collect all the information that he needs to support what he is going to write. He should go to the library to find some books, have interview to obtain additional information, or even do observation. By collecting information from more than one techniques and sources indicates that he writes to learn other new information to enrich his knowledge.

(34)

important stage (and frequently the most neglected) is revising. Accordingly, revising requires feedback.

Another point of view of a process approach comes from Cohen (1990: 105) who states that the writing process approach emphasizes a process in which the finished products come after series of steps. From the statement, the researcher can conclude that writing process approach aims to give more opportunity to the learners to learn how to produce final products by experiencing a set of steps, namely stages in writing. From this process, the learners can explore their ability to write and develop their skills in writing.

Actually, many points of view are provided by scientists including viewpoints that have been mentioned above. The researcher will add another viewpoint of writing as a process presented by Hyland (2002: 88), which is as follows:

a. Writing is a problem solving

(35)

b. Writing is generative

Writers explore and discover ideas as they write since writing is both a physical and a mental act and has purposes to express and impress (Paulston & Bruder, 1967: 88). Writing as a physical act means that the writers commit words or ideas on the medium, for instance, a writer writes words on a paper as the medium. On the other hand, writing is also a mental act which is inventing ideas, thinking about how to express them and organizing them into good statements and paragraphs that will be clear to the readers. According to the purpose of writing, writing is to express and impress. It means that a writer needs to express his ideas or feeling to impress his readers or audience.

c. Writing is recursive

Writers constantly review and modify their texts as they write and often produce several drafts to achieve a finished product. It is clear enough that one revision is not enough to gain a good product. There might be possibly more than four revisions.

d. Writing is collaborative

(36)

what he does not have in his paper in his peer’s paper and vice versa. By collaborating, they are encouraged to complete the shortage they have in their writing with the strengths in their peers’ writing.

e. Writing is developmental

Writers should not be evaluated only on their final products but on their improvement. It is a notice for teachers that marking only on the product is similar to not knowing students’ real skills in writing. The process leading to the product is more important since it gives more valuable experience for the students. Process, indeed, takes a long time but the teachers could see how their students have been practicing within that time to reach a product.

Stages in writing show that writing is indeed a process. Some authors in their books provide different stages in writing (See Hyland 2002 & Perrin 1965). However, the researcher finds the stages almost similar. Generally, the stages in writing consist of:

a. Brainstorming

After a general topic is selected, students brainstorm or list all the ideas in their mind related to the selected topic. The students specify the general topic to some more specific subtopics. After all the subtopics are listed, the students should focus only on one subtopic they are interested in.

b. Drafting

(37)

developed into several paragraphs and provide a number of supporting ideas or sentences to each topic sentence. Making an outline is aimed to simplify the students to write their papers. Nevertheless, not all students use this technique in their writing as it is too complicated for them. They prefer to express the idea freely as water flow, which is called rough drafting. The students, who formerly have made an outline, may continue to develop the outline into draft. Ample time allotment should be devoted to this first draft as it is the first time they develop their ideas into composition.

Here, the students should be reminded that at this point, they need to focus on the development of ideas more than the development of perfect grammar, punctuation or spelling. However, the importance is that the students must try to avoid making minimum requirement mistakes. Furthermore, before writing, the students should also remember to think of what the purpose of their writing is, for whom they write it, what their writing should look like, and how the tone is (in Hyland, 2002: 93).

c. Feedback

(38)

The researcher would clarify the definitions presented above. Feedback functions to asses their performance when the students find that their writing still contains some shortage. Consequently, they necessarily receive feedback to improve their performance in writing. It is expected that they even modify their behavior by becoming critical, aware of making mistakes, and keen on writing.

Additionally, feedback functions to transfer their understandings in ideas devoted to writing. For example, peer feedback which requires cooperative work between two or more students. When one student has another student (a peer) check his draft, and the peer gives some comments and suggestions based on his understanding on the student’s writing, information is transferred. Richards (1990: 110) remarks that by working collaboratively, learners have more opportunity for meaningful writing and are less dependent on the teacher.

d. Revising

Revising is to re–write what the writer has written before. Perrin (1965: 54) says that few people write so well that their first draft represents their best work. Yet, in general, a good writing is rewritten writing.

When doing the revision, a writer reworks his draft according to the feedback given. He may add some information, which does not exist in his writing or perhaps he may omit if the information is not necessary. What he has to take a look at first is the features of writing such as content, purpose, audience, and organization.

e. Editing

(39)

include spelling, grammar, punctuation, and capitalization. It is important for the students to edit by themselves as they have received feedback before they revise their papers. Finally, they are supposed to be independent learners.

3. Perceptions

A number of psychologists have defined what perception is. Leontive (1981: 31) defines perception as the process whereby the external tokens of objects and phenomena are reflected in man’s consciousness. Through his definition, he conforms that man are creating their perceptions when they are aware of experiencing an event or observing an object. If they are not aware, they cannot shape their perception on something.

Another psychologist, Altman (1985: 85), describes perception as the way stimuli are selected and grouped so that they can be meaningfully interpreted. It is a person’s view of reality. This definition means that the process of gaining perceptions starts as a person has chosen stimuli, defined as forms of physical energy that strikes sensory receptors. These receptors will bring the stimuli which have been in the form of a message to the brain. Thus, the brain will turn this message to be a feeling. The process does not stop here; the brain continues to interpret the feeling into perceptions.

(40)

Actually, the process of perceptions still has further outcome. Cook (1994: 150) remarks that perception is the selection, organization, and interpretation of sensory data. It is a critically important process that helps people define their world and guides their behaviour. While, Kreitner (1989: 126) adds that perceptions will lead to the change of attitudes, motivation, and behaviour. In conclusion, perceptions may create these outcomes within individuals.

a. Factors Influencing Perceptions

During the shaping of perceptions, an individual might be influenced by some factors which possibly obstruct his/her perceptions. Both Winardi (1992: 47-48) and Warga (1983: 210-213) provide the factors influencing perceptions which the researcher finds them almost the same. They are as follows:

1) Stereotyping

Stereotyping can influence perceptions because of an individual’s restricted amount of information about what he has experienced and observed. This restricted amount of information may be derived from books and mass media or from past experiences that provide inputs for generalized conclusion. For instance, when some people are asked to group sorts of occupations based on prestige, they will categorize that the prestigious jobs are doctors, directors, and managers. People assume that these jobs have high payment. While, being teachers is not considered to be a high-status job as it is common and they assume that the payment is not high.

(41)

all people have this kind of judgment since each person has different point of view to stereotyping.

2) Selection of stimuli

People will have different perceptions because they tend to select certain stimuli and filter out other stimuli which are considered destructive. For example, there is a girl who is watching a film with a friend of hers. Suddenly, one of them tries to grab her friend’s attention by asking another interesting topic that does not have any relation with the film. If it is successful, watching a film will be turned to be a chatting. Thus, perceptions that are being shaped during watching a film will be changed.

3) Self- concept

The way how an individual sees and feels about him/ herself is called self concept. An individual may think that he/ she is intelligent, qualified, low profile, and patient. This belief on his/her qualification may take an important role as it affects how an individual perceives what he/she is facing. For example, if someone who is participating in a competition, such as a science competition, thinks that he is confident enough to say that he is a qualified contestant, he might perceive that he will play well and win the competition.

4) Situation

(42)

perception. For instance, a woman who has never been taking care of children might find some difficulties in doing so when she has children within a marriage. Thus, she should adjust herself in the situation, if she wants to overcome the difficulties.

5) Needs

Needs influence perceptions. If an individual finds needs of what he has experienced and observed, he must shape positive perceptions in his mind. For instance, there is a person expecting to be able to speak English as he wants to be a television broadcaster. Yet, he lacks capability in English. Then, he enrolls one of the English courses available to reach his need to be able to speak English. Consequently, he should shape positive perceptions on English. Besides, he should try to ignore his lack of capability in English so that he can fulfill his need then reach his goal.

6) Emotion

Emotion has significant influence on perceptions as strong emotion tends to block out stimuli. It means that when an individual is angry, he tends to send away the situation that is opposite to his emotion. An individual cannot feel two emotions at a time. Thus, the dominant one will exist.

(43)

c. Relationship between Perceptions, Learning and Thinking

“Perception is a superset which subsumes the subsets of learning and thinking in the total act of information extraction” (Forgus, 1996: 2). In other words, perceptions, learning and thinking are interrelated and they are referred to as the cognitive processes because they are concerned with knowledge. Before discussing the relationship among perceptions, learning, and thinking, the researcher will formerly present each definition of them.

In general perception can be defined as the process by which an individual receives particular information about his environment. Learning refers to the process by which this information is gained through experience by the individual. This experience is not only gained but will also be part of the individual’s act. Finally, thinking is an activity which happens when an individual is concerned with solving problems by involving his act derived from what he has experienced (Forgus, 1966: 2).

Modifies perception of stimulus Modifies organism Stimulus Organism Learning Thinking

Modifies perception of stimulus Modifies organism through learning

(44)

Figure 1 shows the relationship of learning and thinking in the complex process of perceptions. The process begins with the stimuli possessing information is obtained by an organism/ individual as learning. This learning modifies the individual so that later perception will occur. Learning may also lead to thinking which is the result of previous learning. This thinking will adjust the individual because new learning occurs. Accordingly, the perceptions shaped might be different from the previous one.

Related to peer feedback, the relationship of perceptions, learning, and thinking cannot be apart from it. In this study, the researcher is interested in knowing the students’ perceptions on peer feedback in writing which hopefully, through their positive perceptions, may improve how they learn in writing. The researcher hopes that through peer feedback, the students can learn how to develop their writing skills by cooperating with their peers and it will lead the students to think that peer feedback might cause them to be independent and critical students. Hence, through this thinking, they are supposed to have positive perceptions towards peer feedback so that they will keep learning more to obtain better learning in writing.

B. Theoretical Framework

(45)

on the product approach. The students are asked to do some repetitive revisions based on feedback given by teachers.

Meanwhile, writing is more than creating a product but a process. Focusing only on a product approach rather than a process approach will not enable students to apply their writing skills optimally. Accordingly, they need to engage themselves in a learning situation in which they can practice the writing skills through interactive discussion, such as practicing giving feedback to their friends. They need to see that reaching a good product is dealing not only with perfect grammar or structure but also with a whole process of writing indicated by a set of steps to reach a writing product as it refers to Cohen’s statement (1990: 105), i.e. the writing process approach emphasizes a process in which the finished products come after series of steps.

(46)

CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY

In this chapter, the researcher explains every part of the methodology including what research method is used, how many research participants are taken for the research, what appropriate sampling is used, where the research takes place, what research instruments are applied in the research, how the data are gathered during the research, and how the data are analyzed.

A. Method

The study belonged to descriptive research, which describes the situation as it is. According to Ary, et al. (1979: 295), descriptive research is defined as follows:

Descriptive studies are designed to obtain information concerning the current status of phenomena. They are directed towards determining the nature of a situation as it exists at the time of the study. There is no administration or control of a treatment as is found in experimental research. The aim is to describe “what exists” with respect to variable or conditions in a situation.

Therefore, descriptive research involves the description, recording, analysis and interpretation of condition that now exists (Best, 1970: 15). The researcher tried to describe the situation in which the students were doing peer feedback in their writing class, record and analyze the data, and finally interpret them in terms of how they perceived the implementation of peer feedback as well as the feedback itself and what the implications would be.

(47)

The research also belonged to survey research as it was done by means of observation, questionnaire, and interview. It is verified by Sprinthall, Schumutte, and Sirois (1991: 93) that survey research is designed to collect information from samples (occasionally, even from population) by using questionnaire and interview. The questions might be related to opinions, perceptions, attitude, beliefs, or any of a number of other psychological or sociological qualities. Additionally, survey research is included in descriptive research which requires the researcher to interpret, describe, and explain thoroughly the natural situation revealed on the answered questions.

A. Research Participants

The respondents of the survey research were the fourth semester students who were taking Writing IV at the English Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University Yogyakarta, in the academic year of 2005/2006. The researcher took four out of six writing classes; they were classes A, B, C, and D. The researcher did not include two classes since class F was dropped and class E had the same schedule as class A did, so that the researcher was not able to observe the class. However, in the middle of the research, the researcher cancelled two other classes, classes C and D, as these two classes could not fulfill the implementation of peer feedback as many as classes A and B. Furthermore, there were a lot of holidays on the days on which the classes were held.

(48)

and some others did not always do their writing assignments when the peer feedback was being done. Therefore, the participants left were only 49 students, specifically 29 students from class A and 20 students from class B.

B. Research Instruments

In carrying out the study the researcher used the following instruments: 1. Observation

The observation was done within the class when the students were working in pairs to check their peers’ draft or having discussions based on the guiding questions on the checklists. The observation was used to gather data of how the implementation of peer feedback was and how well the students’ learning process during the implementation of peer feedback was done in pairs or groups. While doing the observation, the researcher took notes of the situation in the class on the observation sheet. This observation sheet consisted of a number of items which should be observed. What the researcher was doing while observing was putting a tick next to the items that represented the class situation and giving some further comments if necessary.

2. Questionnaire

(49)

Closed-ended questions are questions that have fixed options or answers to be chosen. The students did not have opportunity to have their own choices out of the offered options as the answers because they were only allowed to put a tick in the degree of agreement. However, the researcher provided spaces for the students who wanted to write some comments or any information which could be useful for the researcher.

Open-ended questions are questions needed to be answered more freely as there were no fixed options. However, the answers have to be still related to the topic of the questions. The researcher divided the questions in the questionnaire into three parts. The first part contained some items related to the process of the implementation of peer feedback (Questions 1 to 14), the second part was concerned with the students’ perceptions on the implementation (Questions 15 to 24) and the feedback from their peers (Questions 25 to 30), and the last part included some items related to the implications of the implementation of peer feedback (Questions 31 to 33). The questionnaire was distributed to all the students in the two writing classes.

3. Interview

(50)

and unpredictable questions which occur to dig out more information from the interviewees. Besides, the interview was given not for all students. Instead, the researcher only chose certain students based on the stratified sampling. It was employed since each class would have representative samples.

The researcher chose three respondents of each class who constantly obtained above average marks which were dominantly A in their assignments and tests, average ones which were B in dominance, and below average ones which were dominantly B- and C in their assignments and tests. It was noted that this student division was not only based on their marks but also on the observation done by the researcher during the research. By doing the division, the researcher would like to know the perceptions of the students who had different ranks of marks.

C. Data Gathering Techniques

This study was conducted in 2005/2006 academic year. It took place in two Writing IV classes at the English Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University Yogyakarta. The research began on 14th February 2006 and ended on 10th June 2006.

(51)

After gathering the first data, the researcher collected the second type of data by distributing questionnaire sheets to all students. The questionnaire sheets were filled in at home since the researcher wanted to give the students more time to think. Then, the following week the questionnaire sheets were collected. Having collected the questionnaire sheets, the researcher analyzed them. Finally, the researcher took some respondents to be interviewed based on the sampling. That was the third type of data.

D. Data Analysis Techniques

(52)

∑ SA (1) X 100%

∑ n

∑ A (3) X 100% ∑ n

∑ SD (2) X 100%

∑ n

∑ D (4) X 100% ∑ n

∑ : Total

SA : The number of “Strongly Agree” A : The number of “Agree”

SD : The number of “Strongly Disagree” D : The number of “Disagree”

n : Number of Students

The part dealing with students’ perceptions was discussed separately according to the students’ ranks of marks which are above average, average, and below average (See Table 2).

Table 1. The Results of the Questionnaire of the Process of the Implementation of Peer Feedback

Number of Each Degree of Agreement and its

Percentage (%) Items

S A % A % D % SD %

PROCESS

Consecutive No.

(53)

Table 2. The Results of the Questionnaire of the Students’ Perceptions of the Implementation of Peer Feedback and Feedback Derived from Peers

Number of Each Degree of Agreement and Its Percentage (%)

Items S A % A % D % SD %

ABOVE AVERAGE LEVEL PERCEPTIONS

The Implementation of Peer Feedback

Consecutive No.

Total

Mean

Feedback from Peers

Consecutive No.

Total

Mean

AVERAGE LEVEL PERCEPTIONS

The Implementation of Peer Feedback

Consecutive No.

Total

Mean

Feedback from Peers

Consecutive No.

Total

Mean

BELOW AVERAGE LEVEL PERCEPTIONS

The Implementation of Peer Feedback

Consecutive No.

Total

Mean

Feedback from Peers

Consecutive No.

Total

(54)

Table 3. The Results of the Questionnaire of the Implications of the Implementation of Peer Feedback

Number of Each Degree of Agreement and Its Percentage (%)

Items S A % A % D % SD %

IMPLICATION

Consecutive No.

Total

Mean

After analyzing the questionnaires, the researcher took three students having different ranks of marks from each class as samples to be interviewed. It was aimed to verify the questionnaire. The answers were recorded on another table (See Table 4).

Table 4. The Results of Interview

Class A Class B

No Questions

+ - + -

Student 1 (above average) Student 1 (above average)

Student 2 (average) Student 2 (average) 1 …………

………… ………… ………… …………

(55)

CHAPTER IV

RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter is the part where the data are analyzed based on the justified methodology. The analyzed data are discussed comprehensively to answer the research questions. In other words, the researcher should make links between the findings or data and the aims of the research.

A. Research Findings and Data Analysis

The source of data in this research was the fourth semester students of the English Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University who were taking Writing IV in the academic year of 2004/2005. The number of respondents was 49 students taken from two Writing classes. To collect the data from the participants, the researcher employed three types of instruments, i.e. observation, questionnaire, and interview. The main instruments were observation and questionnaire. The interview was done to verify the results of the main instruments.

The first type of data was gathered through observation. During the research, the researcher made ten times of observation. However, the researcher recorded only four out of ten observation data on the instrument called observation sheets. The researcher merely took a note of the data when the students were doing peer feedback, which was done four times within the period of the research. Those data were interpreted by elucidating the data recorded on the observation sheets (See Appendix 1).

(56)

Having finished with the observation, the researcher took data from the questionnaire (See Appendix 2). The students were asked to fill in the questionnaire at home. The researcher assumed that if they filled in the questionnaire at home they would have more time to think. In addition, they would not be in a hurry as they were filling in it in class. The researcher also distributed the questionnaire sheets to those who did not attend the class by entrusting them to their friends coming to the class. The following week, the students submitted the questionnaire sheets in class. The questionnaire sheets found incomplete were returned to them to be filled in then submitted. Having gathered the questionnaire sheets, the researcher analyzed them by putting the data in the table and discussed them based on the three categories in the blueprint (See Appendix 3).

Afterwards, as the data were all collected and processed, the researcher moved to the third type of data taken from interview. The interview was done in three days since there were six interviewees and the researcher was not able to interview them simultaneously in one day. Instead of using a tape recorder, the researcher directly recorded the data in a table (See Appendix 7) and finally elaborated them with the other data from the observation and the questionnaire.

(57)

1. The Process of the Implementation of Peer Feedback

The process of the implementation of peer feedback dealt with the procedures of its implementation and how well its process lasted in the classes. Therefore, to know its procedure and process, observation was required. However, to verify the data derived from observation, the researcher distributed the questionnaire. Finally, interview was done to confirm the data gained through questionnaire.

a. Findings 1) Observation

The researcher observed four-time-implementations of peer feedback. The data were recorded on the observation sheet (See Appendix 1 and Appendix 5) and interpreted as well as generally summarized (See Table 5).

Table 5. The Results of the Observation of the Implementation of Peer Feedback

(58)

Observation 2 The second implementation was similar to the first one. The students had to exchange their assignment that had been done at home and corrected their partner’s letter of complaint based on the checklist given formerly by the teacher. After having peer feedback, they gave their partner’s letter and the checklist containing corrections back. Finally, the revision was done at home. Both the students in classes A and B were more actively involved during peer feedback. They preferred giving comments and suggestion orally to writing them on the checklist.

Observation 3 Formerly, the students were asked to make a solicited application letter at home. The following week, the teacher asked the students to find their partner then exchange their assignments to their friends. The students worked in pairs to correct their partner’s solicited application letters based on the checklist at home. In the third implementation, the researcher found that the students seemed to be burdened to do the correction at home. Moreover, the discussion was not too smoothly carried out as several students did not attend the class and sit in pairs. Therefore, they did not do the discussion. However, the students began to give their partners more corrections on the works and approximately almost all students included their friends’ feedback to revise their drafts.

Observation 4 The fourth implementation was carried out similarly as the first and second ones. The researcher caught that the students began to be bored with peer feedback. Yet, the researcher observed that there were students who kept giving corrections to their friends. However, there were several students who only put ticks on the checklist without giving more corrections, comments, and suggestions. It was because they did not write the corrections on the checklist but directly on their friends’ works.

2) Questionnaire

(59)

80% 67%

63% 70%

60%

Figure 2. The Frequency of Giving Corrections

Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree 50%

40% 30% 30% 30% 20% 7% 2% 10% 0% 0% 0%

1 2

You always gave corrections to your peers

Your peers always gave corrections to you

60% 50% 46% 50% 40% 33% 30% 20%22% 20% 11% 11% 9% 10% 0% 1 You always gave

comments and suggestions to your peers

2

Your peers always gave comments and suggestions

to you

Figure 3. The Frequency of Giving Comments and Suggestions

(60)

Based on Figure 3, there were 68% of the students who were confident in giving feedback to their peers. There were only few students (33%) who were not confident in giving feedback to their peers. Meanwhile, Figure 4 indicated the students’ activeness to ask clarification if they did not understand the feedback. There were about 87% of the students who always asked clarification when they did not understand the corrections or comments given by their peers. Yet, there were only 13% of the students who did not ask any clarification to their peers when they did not understand the feedback.

9% 0%

Figure 4. The Students’ Confidence in Giving Feedback

Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree 33% 59% 70% 59% 60% 50% 50% 43% 40% 30% 22% 20% 20% 10% 7% 0% 0% 0% 1

You always asked your peers if you did

not understand the feedback

2

Your peers always asked you if they did not understand the feedback

(61)

Figure 6. The Students’ Feeling Free in Having Peer Feedback

It was clearly seen in Figure 5 that 83% of the students felt free when having peer feedback. The percentage of 17% showed the number of students who did not state that they could be free when having peer feedback. Though they felt free, Figure 6 proved that not all student

Gambar

Figure 1. The Relationship of Learning and Thinking in the Complex Process of Perceptions (Forgus, 1966)
Figure 1 shows the relationship of learning and thinking in the complex
Table 1.  The Results of the Questionnaire of the Process of the Implementation
Table 2.  The Results of the Questionnaire of the Students’ Perceptions of the
+7

Referensi

Dokumen terkait

[r]

Muhajir mengakui, penolakan terhadap mahasiswa asing yang ingin kuliah di FK UMM tersebut sebagai salah satu bentuk nasionalisme semata, sebab Malaysia juga memberlakukan kebijakan

• Perubahan yang disebabkan karena belajar itu bersifat relatif permanen, artinya bertahan dalam waktu yang relatif lama, di pihak lain perubahan itu tidak akan menetap

mengundang Saudara untuk melaksanakan Pembuktian Kualifikasi dengan membawa asli dan fotocopy seluruh dokumen yang sesuai dengan daftar isian dokumen

Kenaikan jumlah penduduk juga diimbangi dengan kenaikan Pendapatan Daerah Regional Bruto (PDRB) setiap tahunnya. Peningkatan tersebut tidak lepas dari peran

The survey items drew on the literature on survey design (see, for example, Dörnyei, 2009; Oppenheim, 1992) and were piloted with ten potential respondents in ten

pendekatan ilmiah pada modul sistem operasi ini mendapatkan nilai sangat baik. Tujuh responden pada penelitian mendeskripsikan pendapat yaitu,

mengenai efektivitas pembelajaran berbasis praktikum pada uji zat makanan di. kelas