21
investigated. Hyland catalogued and analyzed all teacher written feedback and students’ revisions to figure out the relationship between feedback and revision. To
validate the analysis, interviews, questionnaires and observations were used. The research found out that students incorporated most of the usable teacher
feedback in their revision based on their needs, past learning experiences and writing approach. Students’ revisions usually followed teachers’ suggestions, acted
as an initial stimulus of a number of revisions or prompted deletions. This study also showed communication breakdowns because of basic differences in the value
that teachers and students placed on written feedback. Thus, Hyland suggested for an open dialogue concerning the kinds of feedback that students want and what
teachers will give. This current research has a similar topic to the two researches composed by
Kurniyati and Hyland which concerns about the teacher written feedback. However, this current research also has difference with the former studies. While,
Kurniyati and Hyland’s studies discuss on the students’ perceptions toward teacher written feedback and the impact of teacher written feedback on individual writers,
this study will discuss on the responses of students toward the teacher written feedback.
2.3 Theoretical Framework
The process of writing puts emphasis on pre-writing work to generate ideas and the writing of series of drafts to revise and extend those ideas. Feedback is
essential in the writing process as it helps students to improve their drafts in order to end up with a final draft which is better than those previous drafts. However,
22
students often do not know how to use feedback productively to improve their skills as writers. This research, therefore, concerns on the response given by
students toward teacher written feedback. Some experts’ points of view are used as the references to answer the
research problems. Those points of views play some significant roles in exploring, identifying and analyzing the teacher written feedback and students’ responses.
Theory of feedback, especially focus of feedback proposed by Fathman and Whalley 1990 and Williams 2003 helps to identify the category of written
feedback given by teacher. The written feedback may fall into two categories; form and content. Feedback on form concerns with grammar and mechanics errors while
feedback on content concerns with organization, ideas and amount of detail. Furthermore, theory of student’s response proposed by Cohen 1987, Hyland
1998, Chiang 2004 and Berzsenyi 2001 helps to reveal the responses of students toward teacher written feedback. Students may have various strategies in
responding teacher written feedback such as making correction and revision, adding missing details and explanations, deleting irrelevant wordsphrases,
discussing or conferencing with teacher and classmates also checking the books or dictionaries.
To obtain the detailed information of the written feedback provided by teacher, a checklist which contains feedback categorization is used as the main
instrument. Yet, in order to obtain the detail information of students’ responses, first draft and revised composition are compared then students’ responses are listed.
An interview with students is conducted to verify the analysis on the students’ responses toward teacher written feedback.
23
CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY
This chapter presents the methodology employed in this study in order to answer the research problems. It covers the description of the kinds of methods
used in the research, the research subjects, the research setting, the research instruments, the data source, the data collection, the data analysis, and the research
procedures.
3.1 Research Methodology
The method employed in this study was descriptive research. Ary, Jacobs and Razavieh 1990: 381 state that descriptive research studies are designed to
obtain information concerning the current status of phenomena. The phenomenon investigated in this research was the responses of students toward written feedback
given by their teacher. This research was typically qualitative research since its primary purpose
was description Sprinthall, Schmutte and Sirois, 1991: 98. Fraenkel and Wallen 1993: 386 state that qualitative research produces descriptive data from the actual
words or actions of people. As a result, the data in this research would be in the form of verbal statements, not numericalstatistical one.
This research also employed document analysis method in order to obtain the data. According to Fraenkel and Wallen 1993: 386, document analysis
involves an analysis of the written or visual contents of a document. A document is a piece of writing belonging or pertaining to the setting Holliday, 2002: 72. The
