Direct Teacher Corrective Feedback in EFL Writing Class at Higher Education: What Students Perceive
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21580/vjv9i14652Keywords:
direct teacher feedback, students’ perception, writingAbstract
The study is aimed at describing the students’ perception of direct teacher corrective feedback in a foreign language writing class. It is descriptive quantitative research, employing questionnaires and observation as research instruments, which was conducted with 20 students of the fourth semester English department students of Palangka Raya State Islamic Institute of 2018/ 2019 academic year. The findings revealed that, firstly, in terms of the perception of students’ attitudes toward direct teacher corrective feedback, 75 percent of participants felt that they agreed to receive direct teacher corrective feedback on language form, content, and organization. Their preference for the area of corrective feedback in language forms was 85 percent while the organization was 65 percent. Secondly, dealing with the students’ perception on direct teacher feedback, 90 percent of students argued that they felt satisfied when they got direct teacher feedback. 85 percent of students perceived that their teacher’s feedback helped them improve their writing, and 90 percent of them realized that their teacher’s feedback made them feel confident in producing a better draft. Finally, most students responded that they appreciated the teacher’s feedback. In addition, the students believed that direct teacher feedback improved writing especially on grammar accuracy and organization.
Downloads
References
Amara, T. M. (2015). Learners’ perceptions of teacher written feedback commentary in an ESL writing classroom. In International Journal of English Language Teaching (Vol. 3).
Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2010). The contribution of written corrective feedback to language development: A ten month investigation. Applied Linguistics, 31(2), 193–214. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp016
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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2005.08.001
Chandler, J. (2003). The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12(3), 267–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(03)00038-9
Chung, B. (2015). Written corrective feedback: The perception of Korean EFL learners. Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 19(2), 75–88.
Clements, S. J. (2011). Writing conferences in kindergarten : using feedback to enhance student writing. Proquest, Umi Dissertation Publishing.
Ellis, R. (2009). A typology of written corrective feedback types. ELT Journal, 63(2), 97–107. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccn023
Elwood, J. A., & Bode, J. (2014). Student preferences vis-à-vis teacher feedback in university EFL writing classes in Japan. System, 42(1), 333–343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.12.023
Erkkilä, M. (2013). Teacher Written Feedback: Teachers’ perceptions of given feedback Candidate’s thesis. University of Jyväskylä.
Evans, N. W., Hartshorn, K. J., & Allen Tuioti, E. (2010). Written Corrective Feedback: The Practitioners’ Perspective. International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), 47. https://doi.org/10.6018/ijes/2010/2/119191
Ferris, D., & Bitchener, J. (2012). Written Corrective Feedback for L2 Development : Current Knowledge and Future Research. TESOL Quarterly, 46(4), 855–860. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.62
Ferris, D. R. (2004). The “‘Grammar Correction’” Debate in L2 Writing: Where are we, and where do we go from here? (and what do we do in the meantime ...?). Journal of Second Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 49–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.04.005
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. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(01)00039-X
Hamouda, A. (2011). A Study of Students and Teachers’ Preferences and Attitudes towards Correction of Classroom Written Errors in Saudi EFL Context. 4(3). https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v4n3p128
Jodaie, M., Farrokhi, F., & Zoghi, M. (2011). A Comparative Study of EFL Teachers’ and Intermediate High School Students’ Perceptions of Written Corrective Feedback on Grammatical Errors. English Language Teaching, 4(4). https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v4n4p36
Kartchava, E. (2016). Learners’ Beliefs About Corrective Feedback in the Language Classroom: Perspectives from Two International Contexts. TESL Canada Journal, 33(2), 19. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v33i2.1235
Lee, I. (2008). Student reactions to teacher feedback in two Hong Kong secondary classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(3), 144–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.12.001
Mahfoodh, O., & Pandian, A. (2011). A Qualitative Case Study of EFL Students’ Affective Reactions to and Perceptions of Their Teachers’ Written Feedback. English Language Teaching, 4(3), 14–27. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v4n3p14
Martinez Buffa, I. (2016). Written corrective feedback in secondary education: Learners’ and teachers’ preferences and perceptions. Fòrum de Recerca, (21), 525–546. https://doi.org/10.6035/forumrecerca.2016.21.29
Mustafa, R. F. (2012). Feedback on the feedback: Sociocultural interpretation of Saudi ESL learners’ opinions about writing feedback. English Language Teaching, 5(3), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v5n3p3
Oler, S. O. (2015). EFL Students’ Attitudes and Preferences towards Written Corrective Feedback (Universitat Jaume I.). Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10234/134705
Rejab, H. M., Ismail, Z., & Jamaludin, S. (2015). Teacher’s feedback on Arabic student writing process. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6(2), 608–614. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n2p608
Sato, M., & Lyster, R. (2012). Peer interaction and corrective feedback for accuracy and fluency development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34(4), 591–626. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263112000356
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. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2007.tb00059.x
Smalley, R. L., Ruetten, M. K., & Kozyrev, J. (2012). Refining composition skills : academic writing and grammar. English Language Teaching, 4(3), 128–141. https://doi.org/doi:10.5539/elt.v4n3p128
Song, G., Hoon, L. H., & Alvin, L. P. (2017). Students’ Response to Feedback: An Exploratory Study. RELC Journal, 48(3), 357–372. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688217691445
Soori, A., Kafipour, R., & Soury, M. (2011). Effectiveness of different types of direct corrective feedback on correct use of English articles among the Iranian EFL Students. European Journal of Social Sciences, 26(4), 494–501.
Tangkiengsirisin, S., & Kalra, R. (2016). Thai Students’ Perceptions on the Direct Vs. Indirect Written Corrective Feedback: A Thai University Context. (AWEJ), Arab World English Journal, 7(3), 161–176.
Treglia, M. O. (2008). Feedback on Feedback: Exploring Student Responses to Teachers’ Written Commentary. Journal of Basic Writing, 27(1), 105–137.
Vyatkina, N. (2011). Writing Instruction and Policies for Written Corrective Feedback in the Basic Language Sequence. In L2 Journal (Vol. 3). Retrieved from http://repositories.cdlib.org/uccllt/l2/vol3/iss1/art4/
Westmacott, A. (2017). Direct vs. Indirect written corrective feedback: Student perceptions. Íkala, Revista de Lenguaje Y Cultura, 22(1), 17–32. https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.ikala.v22n01a02
Williams, C. (2007). Research Methods. Journal of Business & Economic Research, 5(3), 65–72.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant Vision: Journal for Language and Foreign Language Learning the right of publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and publication in this journal.
- Authors can enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) after the publication process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
