The Implementation of Teacher Corrective Feedback Using Diary in Vocational High School

Yulia Primitasari, Muhammad Asrori, Sri Haryati

Abstract

The present study reports on a case study that investigated the implementation of Corrective Feedback, and primarily focus on how students and the teacher perceive the usefulness of Corrective Feedback in writing class. Qualitative and quantitative data were collected from 36 students in the tenth grade of vocational students in Surakarta by means of interviews and a closed-ended questionnaire using a Likert scale. The other qualitative data were collected through the observation conducted during the English class, in-depth interviews with the teacher and the students, and the documents of the students' pieces of writing. The result showed that the practice of Teacher Corrective Feedback was carried out outside the English class since the diary was not stipulated in the syllabus yet. Overall, the students and the teacher expressed a positive perception regarding the usefulness and implementation of Teacher Correction Feedback using a diary. Nevertheless, it still takes a long time for the students to have a significant improvement in creating sentences with high complexity. Based on the present study's findings, it is suggested that the teacher need to discuss and ensure the students' understanding of the objectives of Corrective Feedback using a diary and their responsibility in revising and correcting the errors.

Keywords

corrective feedback; diary; vocational high school

Full Text:

PDF PDF

References

Bitchener, J., Young, S., & Cameron, D. (2005). The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(3), 191–205.

Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2008). The value of focused approach to written corrective feedback. ELT Journal, 63(3), 204-211.

Brown, H. (2007) Teaching by principles: An interaction approach to language pedagogy (3rd ed). United Stated: Pearson Education, Inc.

Bruton, A. (2009). Improving accuracy is not the only reason for writing, and even if it were... System, 37(4), 600–613.

Chaudron, C. (1988). Second language classroom: Research on teaching and learning. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

Chen, S., Nassaji, H., & Liu, Q. (2016). EFL learners’ perceptions and preferences of written corrective feedback: a case study of university students from mainland China. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 1(5), 1-17.

Creswell, J. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed). United States: Sage Publication International.

Cumming, A. (2001). Learning to write in a second language: Two decades of research. International Journal of English Studies, 1(2), 1-23.

Dincel, B., & Savur, H. (2018). Diary keeping in writing education. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 7(1), 48-59.

Ellis, R. (2008). A typology of written corrective feedback types. ELT Journal, 63(2), 97-107.

Ellis, R. (2009). Corrective feedback and teacher development. L2 Journal, 1(1), 3-18.

Fazio, L. (2001). The effect of corrections and commentaries on the journal writing accuracy of minority- and majority language students. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(4), 235–249.

Ferris, D., & Roberts, B. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes how explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(3), 161-184.

Ferris, D. (2006). Does error feedback help student writers? new evidence on the short- and long-term effects of written error correction. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (eds), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (pp. 81-104). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Fraenkel, J., Wallen, N., & Hyun, H. (2015). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York: McGraw-Hill Education.

Harmer, J. (2004). How to teach writing. Malaysia: Pearson Education Limited.

Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of english language teaching. England: Pearson Longman.

Hosseiny, M. (2014). The role of direct and indirect written corrective feedback in improving iranian efl students' writing skills. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 668–674.

Jordan, R. (1997). English for academic purpose: A guide and resource book for teacher. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Koksal, D., Ozdemir, E., Tercan G., Gun, S., & Bilgin, E. (2018). The relationship between teachers’ written feedback preferences, self-efficacy beliefs and burnout levels. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 14(4), 316-327.

Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (2013). How languages are learned (4th ed). China: Oxford University Press.

Miles, M., & Huberman, M. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3er ed). United States: Sage Publication, Inc

Nekatgoo, B. (2011). The effects of portofolio assessment on writing of EFL students. English Language Teaching, 4(2).

Pham, T. (2015). Different forms of corrective feedback and their effects on l2 students’ writing accuracy: a case study. Asian Journal of Educational Research, 3(1), 10-17.

Phuket, P., & Othman, N. B. (2015). Understanding EFL students’ errors in writing. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(32), 99-106.

Sermsook, K., Liamnimitr, J., & Pochakorn, R. (2017). An analysis of errors in written English sentences: a case study of Thai EFL students. English Language Teaching, 10(3), 101-110.

Sheen, Y. (2007). The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners’ acquisition of articles. Tesol Quarterly, 41(2), 255-283.

Sheen, Y. (2010). Differential effects of oral and written corrective feedback in the ESL classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 203– 234.

Sheen, Y., & Ellis, R. (2011). Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning: corrective feedback in language teaching. New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis.

Sheppard, K. (1992). Two feedback types: Do they make a difference?. RELC Journal, 23, 103–110.

Spratt, M., Pulverness, A., & Williams, M. (2005). The teaching knowledge test course. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46(2), 327-369.

Truscott, J. (1999). The case for “the case against grammar correction in l2 writing classes”: a response to ferris. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(2), 111-122.

Truscott, J. (2004). Evidence and conjecture on the effects of correction: a response to chandler. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 337-347.

Truscott, J. (2007). The effect of error correction on learners’ ability to write accurately. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(4), 255–272.

Truscott, J., & Hsu, A. (2008). Error correction, revision, and learning. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(4), 292–305.

Van, B., De Jong, N., & Kuiken, F. (2012). Evidence on the effectiveness of comprehensive error correction in second language writing. Language Learning, 62(1), 1–41.

Yin, R. (2011). Qualitative research from start to finish. New York: The Guilford Press.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.20961/ee.v9i1.36140

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.