41 Critical Reading and Writing II Class. It was enough to analyze and interpret the
30 documents in detail because the focus was on the teachers as the main subjects. This method was used to answer two research problems about the kinds of
teachers‟ written feedback and the teacher‟s beliefs in Critical Reading and Writing II Class. The document analysis became the fundamental method to
investigate teachers‟ written feedback and interpret the teacher‟s beliefs that underlie the practice of giving written feedback. Merriam 2009, p. 150 states
that since the researcher was the primary instrument to collect the data, the researcher relied on skills and intuition to find and interpret data from the
document. The interpretation was supported by the theories from many experts. From that, the researcher obtained the kinds of teachers‟ written feedback in CRW
II and the teacher‟s belief were underlying on giving written feedback.
E. Data Analysis Technique
The researcher analyzed the findings using qualitative research to answer the two research problems. Miles and Huberman 1994, pp. 10-12 state that
“general view of qualitative analysis is consisting of three concurrent flows of activity: data reduction, data display and conclusion drawingverification.” In data
reduction, the researcher collected five teachers‟ written feedbacks from each class in order to categorize the document based on the form and types of teachers‟
written feedback. There were 30 teachers‟ written feedbacks in this research to be analyzed
later. Then, the findings described the analysis about the kinds of teachers‟ written
42 feedback used in Critical Reading and Writing II class. The researcher read again
and again the documents to obtain the important part on each teacher‟s written feedback related to the theories. Therefore, the data from the teacher‟s written
feedback was arranged and categorized into certain part. In order to analyze the data, the researcher used the form of written
feedback from two experts. The first form was from Hyland and Hyland 2006, p.83 that there were two forms, direct feedback and indirect feedback. Then, Park
2006, pp. 3-9 also proposed the types teacher‟s written feedback in three types,
form-focused feedback, content-based feedback, and integrated feedback. Those forms and types became the criterion to organize the data in order to answer the
first research problem.
Table 3.1 Categories for Teachers’ Written Feedback
Form of Feedback Types of Teacher’s Written Feedback
Direct Indirect
Form-focused Feedback
Content-based Feedback
Integrated Feedback
Crossing out unnecessary
word, phrase, or
morpheme.
Inserting a missing
word or morpheme.
Writing the correct word
or form near the
erroneous form.
Underline word,
phrase, morpheme,
or sentence.
Circle word, phrase,
morpheme or sentence.
Writing code on
student‟s writing.
Other mark on student‟s
writing. Grammar
Punctuation Generic
structure
Content quality
Ideas organization
Composition
Grammar Punctuation
Generic structure
Ideas organization
Composition Content
quality Comments
43 The researcher used teachers‟ written feedback as the documents in order
to know what kinds of written feedback used in Critical Reading and Writing II Class. The data was displayed in the form of table to classify the forms of
teachers‟ written feedback then the researcher explained deeper in order to obtain the teacher‟s beliefs in teaching writing.
Table 3.2 Forms of Teachers’ Written Feedback
Student Feedback
Diret Feedback Indirect Feedback
Comment Grade
Crossing Out
Inserting Correction
Under- line
Circle Code
Mark
The researcher read the written feedback from each teacher to identify the form of feedback. Then, the categorization of the data was also used to recognize
which feedback was direct or indirect. Ary et al. 2002, p. 465 state that coding is a process to reduce and sort the data into certain categories. The researcher
focused on the teachers‟ responses on students‟ writing. For example, the researcher found crossing out on unnecessary word, phrase, or morpheme. It
would be easy for the researcher to classify the different forms of teachers‟ written
feedback. The researcher listed then inserted what the teachers wrote in giving written feedback to the table.
As the result, the researcher analyzed and interpreted the document from each teacher to i
nterpret the teacher‟s beliefs in giving written feedback for the
44 students in CRW II Class. The researcher interpreted the result into the descriptive
data to obtain the meaning from the data. It is possible to identify the common teacher‟s beliefs in teaching as the second research problem.
Table 3.3 Teacher’s Beliefs in Teaching
No. Teacher’s Beliefs
1. The method in giving feedback to deliver the knowledge.
2. Representation of the teacher‟s thoughts and behaviors on giving feedback.
3. Beliefs about language, learning, writing, and personal relationship.
4. Nine beliefs and assumptions that were underlying their teaching in CRW II:
1. Taking responsibility for the teaching.
2. The need for others.
3. Description over prescription.
4. A nonjudgmental stance.
5. Attention to language and behavior.
6. Avenues to awareness through exploration.
7. Personal connections to teaching.
8. Attention to process.
9. A beginner‟s mind.
Ary et al. 2002, p. 470 state that “the quality of the interpretation depends on the background, perspective, knowledge, and theoretical orientation of
the researcher and the intellectual skills he or she brings to the task.” It became the summary on the whole parts of the research. The researcher wrote all of the
findings and the writer‟s ideas towards the findings in the chronological order to make the reader understand the research. From that, the researcher concluded the
research. The conclusions were to answer the research problems based on the findings.
45
F. Research Procedure
