.png)
Merging Feedback in Process Approach to Develop Students’ Ability in Writing an Effective Paragraph
Abstract
Many studies have been conducted to demonstrate the efficacy of either the process approach or feedback on students' writing achievement. Earlier studies primarily used feedback to improve students' grammatical and writing accuracy. However, studies that focus on providing feedback to improve the content of students' writing are hard to come by. This study aims to bridge that gap. The process approach was used in this study, with feedback focusing on the content and organization of students' writing. Purposive sampling was used to select 35 second-semester students from the English study program at Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa University. Data was gathered through the use of questionnaires, observations, and writing tests. To determine the validity and reliability of the data, a detailed assessment rubric criterion and an assessment of writing results given by two raters were used. The results of this study show that combining process approaches with feedback has a significant impact on improving students' skills in writing effective English paragraphs. The most significant improvements are on the aspect topic development, topic sentence writing, and ideas organization. This suggests that combining a process approach with feedback is beneficial in improving students’ skill in writing effective paragraphs.
Full Text:
PDFReferences
REFERENCES
Adisca, F. A., & Mardijono. (2013). Written Corrective Feedback and Its Effects on English Department Students’ Writing Drafts.
Arici, A. F., & Kaldirim, A. (2015). The effect of the process-based writing approach on writing success and anxiety of pre-service teachers. Anthropologist. https://doi.org/10.1080/09720073.2015.11891883
Bijami, M., Pandian, A., & Singh, M. (2016). The Relationship between Teacher’s Written Feedback and Student’s’ Writing Performance: Sociocultural Perspective. International Journal of Education & Literacy Studies, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.4n.1p.59
Brown, H. D. (2003). Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom Practices. In -. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
Celce-Murcia, M. (2001). Teaching English as a second or foreign language. Retrieved from https://openlibrary.org/publishers/Heinle_&_Heinle_Publishers
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education. In Professional Development in Education (Vol. 38). https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2011.643130
Conrad, S. M., & Goldstein, L. M. (1999). ESL student revision after teacher-written comments: Text, contexts, and individuals. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(2), 147–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80126-X
Dokchandra, D. (2018). The Effects of Process Writing Approach on Performance of an Overcrowded EFL Writing Class at a University in Thailand. 2018, 191–206. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v3i4.1931
Eslami, E. (2014). The Effects of Direct and Indirect Corrective Feedback Techniques on EFL Students’ Writing. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.438
Farjadnasab, A., & Khodashenas, M. (2017). The Effect of Written Corrective Feedback on EFL Students’ Writing Accuracy. https://doi.org/10.18869/acadpub.ijree.2.2.30
Ferris, D. (2003). Response to Student Writing: Implication for SecondlLanguage Students. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers.
Gashout, M. A. S. (2014). Incorporating the facilitative feedback strategies together with the process approach to improve students’ writing. International Journal of Education and Research, 2(10). Retrieved from www.ijern.com
Gilliland, B. (2014). Academic Language Socialization in High School Writing Conferences. 303–330. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.1753
Goksoy& Nazli. (2016). The Effect Of Direct And Indirect Written Corrective Feedback On Students’ Writing.
Goldstein, L. (2017). Feedback and Revision in Second Language Writing: Contextual, teacher, and student variables.
Goldstein, L. M. (2004). Questions and answers about teacher written commentary and student revision: Teachers and students working together. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(1), 63–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.04.006
Hashemnezhad, H., & Hashemnezhad, N. (2012). A Comparative Study of Product, Process, and Post-process Approaches in Iranian EFL Students’ Writing Skill. Journal of Language Teaching and Research. https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.3.4.722-729
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The Power of Feedback. 33. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Hosseiny, M. (2014). The Role of Direct and Indirect Written Corrective Feedback in Improving Iranian EFL Students’ Writing Skill. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.466
Hyland, K. (2003). Second Language Writing. In Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback on second language students’ writing. Language Teaching, 39(2), 83–101. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444806003399
Jamalinesari, A., Rahimi, F., Gowhary, H., & Azizifar, A. (2015). The Effects of Teacher-Written Direct vs . Indirect Feedback on Students ’ Writing. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 192, 116–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.018
Keh, C. L. (2015). Feedback in the Writing Process: a model and method for implementation. (April). https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/44.4.294
Kroll, B. (1990). Second Language Writing: Research Insights for the Classroom (p. 246). p. 246. Cambridge University Press.
Listiani. (2017). Students’ Perception toward Teacher’s Written Corrective Feedback in Writing 3 class. Advanced in Social Science, Education, and Humanities Research (ASSEHR), 109, 164–167.
Lundstrom, K., & Baker, W. (2009). To give is better than to receive : The benefits of peer review to the reviewer ’ s own writing. 18, 30–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2008.06.002
Mehr, H. S. (2017). The Impact of Product and Process Approach on Iranian EFL Learners ’ Writing Ability and Their Attitudes toward Writing Skill. 7(2), 158–166. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v7n2p158
Min, H. (2005). Training students to become successful peer reviewers. 33, 293–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2004.11.003
Nabhan, S. (2017). The Process Approach To Improve Students’ Writing Ability In The Process Approach To Improve Students’ Writing Ability In English Education Department University Of PGRI ADI BUANA SURABAYA. (June 2016), 0–15.
Omer, M., Mahfoodh, H. A., & Pandian, A. (2011). A Qualitative Case Study of EFL Students’ Affective Reactions to and Perceptions of Their Teachers’ Written Feedback. 4(3). https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v4n3p14
Raimes, A. (1983). Techniques in Teaching Writing. Oxford University Press.
Rollinson, P. (2005). Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class. 59(January), 23–30. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/cci003
Shvidko, E. (2018). Writing conference feedback as moment-to-moment af fi liative relationship building. Journal of Pragmatics, 127, 20–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.01.004
Silver, R., & Lee, S. (2007). What does it take to make a change? Teacher feedback and student revisions RITA SILVER. 6(1), 25–49.
Srichanyachon, N. (2012). Teacher written feedback for L2 learners’ writing development. Silpakorn University Journal of Social Sciences, Humanities, and Arts, 12(1), 7–17. Retrieved from www.journal.su.ac.th
Tom, A. A., Morni, A., Metom, L., & Joe, S. (2013). Students’ Perception and Preferences of Written Feedback in Academic Writing. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2013.v4n11p72
Ur, P. (1991). A Course in Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press.
Weigle, S. C. (1997). Assessing writing (Vol. 4). https://doi.org/10.1016/S1075-2935(97)80014-1
Zareil, A. A., & Rahnama, M. (2013). The Effect of Written Corrective Feedback Modes on EFL Learners’ Grammatical and Lexical Writing Accuracy: from Perceptions to Facts. International Journal on Studies in English Language and Literature (IJSELL), 1(3), 1–14. Retrieved from www.arcjournals.org
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.30870/jllp.v1i2.18028
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Journal of Linguistics, Literacy, and Pedagogy is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright @2024 Journal of Linguistics, Literacy, and Pedagogy.