LEARNERS’ ENGAGEMENT WITH TEACHER WCF OR LEARNERS’ ENGAGEMENT WITH PEER WCF? LEARNERS’ PERSPECTIVES.

 Nirwanto Maruf, Indyra Mahdiana, Bahar Bahar

Abstract


Written corrective feedback (WCF) is defined as some responses related to learners’ linguistic errors in written and used by teachers to help learners for improving their writing’s accuracy. It is necessary to understand regarding learners’ engagement with corrective feedback. By understanding learners’ engagement with written corrective feedback, teacher can determine the appropriate type of written corrective feedback which used as effective strategy in improving learners’ writing ability. This study aims to reveal learners’ perspectives on their engagement with written corrective feedback and learners’ engagement with peer written corrective feedback (WCF). This quantitative research obtained the data through questionnaires. These questionnaires aim to measure both learners’ engagement with teacher written corrective feedback and learners’ engagement with peer written corrective feedback. The results of the study indicate that learners are more engage and agree with teacher WCF practice (mean 35.5), rather than engagement with peer WCF practice (mean 30.8) since teacher WCF had greater positive impact for learners’ writing rather than peer WCF. This researches conclude that learners believe that teacher WCF more useful to locate their errors. Meanwhile, related to peer WCF, learners engage in affective by feeling happy, enthusiastic, and interested in receiving and reading peer WCF.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Asari, S., & Maruf, N. (2022). Organizational Method of EFL Undergraduate Students’ Academic Essay Writing with and Without Pre-Determined Topic. Budapest International Research and Critics Institute (BIRCI-Journal): Humanities and Social Sciences, 5(3).

Benson, S., & DeKeyser, R. (2018). Effects of written corrective feedback and language aptitude on verb tense accuracy. Language Teaching Research, 23(6), 702–726. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818770921

Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2008). The value of written corrective feedback for migrant and international students. Language Teaching Research, 12(3), 409–431. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168808089924

Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2010). Raising the linguistic accuracy level of advanced L2 writers with written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(4), 207–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2010.10.002

Eslami, Z. R., & Derakhshan, A. (2020). Promoting Advantageous Ways for Teachers and Learners to Deal with Corrective Feedback. Language Teaching Research Quarterly, 19, 48–65. https://doi.org/10.32038/ltrq.2020.19.04

Evans, N. W., James Hartshorn, K., & Strong-Krause, D. (2011). The efficacy of dynamic written corrective feedback for university-matriculated ESL learners. System, 39(2), 229–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2011.04.012

Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School Engagement Potential of The Concept. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109.

Ha, X. Van, & Murray, J. C. (2020). Corrective feedback: Beliefs and practices of Vietnamese primary EFL teachers. Language Teaching Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820931897

Han, Y., & Hyland, F. (2015). Exploring learner engagement with written corrective feedback in a Chinese tertiary EFL classroom. Journal of Second Language Writing, 30, 31–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2015.08.002

Iriarte, M. G., & Alastuey, C. B. (2017). Peer vs. Teacher corrective feedback and its effect on grammar MÁSTER EN FORMACIÓN DEL PROFESORADO DE EDUCACIÓN SECUNDARIA. Universidad Publica de Navarra.

Kang, E., & Han, Z. (2015). The efficacy of written corrective feedback in improving L2 written accuracy: A meta-analysis. Modern Language Journal, 99(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12189

Li, S., & Roshan, S. (2019). The associations between working memory and the effects of four different types of written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 45(September 2018), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2019.03.003

Li, S., & Vuono, A. (2019). Twenty-five years of research on oral and written corrective feedback in System. System, 84, 93–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.05.006

Mao, S. S., & Crosthwaite, P. (2019). Investigating written corrective feedback: (Mis)alignment of teachers’ beliefs and practice. Journal of Second Language Writing, 45(May), 46–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2019.05.004

Nassaji, H., & Kartchava, E. (2017). Corrective Feedback in Second Language Teaching and Learning. In Corrective Feedback in Second Language Teaching and Learning (Vol. 23, Issue 4). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315621432

Qi, D. S., & Lapkin, S. (2001). Exploring the role of noticing in a three-stage second language writing task. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(4), 277–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(01)00046-7

Sachs, R., & Polio, C. (2007). Learners’ Uses Of Two Types Of Written Feedback On A L2 Writing Revision. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29(1), 67–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2012.10.064

Sheen, Y., & Ellis, R. (2011). Corrective Feedback in Language Teaching. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning (pp. 1–1144). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410612700

Stipek, D. (2002). Good Instruction Is Motivating. Development of Achievement Motivation, 309–332. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-012750053-9/50014-0

Storch, N., & Wigglesworth, G. (2010). Learners processing, uptake, and retention of corrective feedback on writing: Case studies. In Studies in Second Language Acquisition (Vol. 32, Issue 2). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990532

Svalberg, A. M. L. (2009). Engagement with language: Interrogating a construct. Language Awareness, 18(3–4), 242–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658410903197264

Tsao, J. J. (2021). Effects of EFL Learners’ L2 Writing Self-efficacy on Engagement with Written Corrective Feedback. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 30(6), 575–584. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00591-9

Tsao, J. J., Tseng, W. T., Hsiao, T. Y., Wang, C., & Gao, A. X. (2021). Toward a Motivation-Regulated Learner Engagement WCF Model of L2 Writing Performance. SAGE Open, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211023172

Ulyah, F., Anwar, K., & Maruf, N. (2021). The Application of English Songs in Teaching Conditional Sentences through Google Classroom. Budapest International Research and Critics Institute-Journal (BIRCI-Journal), 4(3).

Vyatkina, N. (2010). The Effectiveness of Written Corrective Feedback in Teaching Beginning German. Foreign Language Annals, 43(4), 671–689. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2010.01108.x

Zhang, Z. (Victor), & Hyland, K. (2018). Student engagement with teacher and automated feedback on L2 writing. Assessing Writing, 36(February), 90–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2018.02.004

Zheng, Y., & Yu, S. (2018). Student engagement with teacher written corrective feedback in EFL writing: A case study of Chinese lower-proficiency students. Assessing Writing, 37(January), 13–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2018.03.001.

Zheng, Y., Yu, S., Wang, B., & Zhang, Y. (2019). Exploring student engagement with supervisor feedback on master’s thesis: Insights from a case study. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 57(2), 186–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2019.1617181


DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.31314/british.11.2.%25p.2022

Article metrics

Abstract views : 349 | views : 122

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Publisher : Program Studi S1 Sastra Inggris, Fakultas Ilmu Budaya, Universitas Muhammadiyah Gorontalo

Web Analytics View British (Jurnal Bahasa dan Sastra Inggris) Stats