Thesis Writing Supervision: A contribution of feedback to the development of students’ thesis writing.
Thesis Writing Supervision:
A contribution of feedback to the development of student
s’
thesis writing
Dissertation
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctorate Degree in English Education
Sutanto
Student Reg. Number: 1006911
ENGLISH EDUCATION PROGRAM SCHOOL OF POSTGRADUATE STUDIES INDONESIA UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION
(2)
Thesis Writing Supervision:
A contribution of feedback to the
development of student
s’
thesis writing
By Sutanto
Drs., IKIP Bandung, 1985
Dipl. TESL., Victoria University, NZ 1987 M.Ed. TESOL., Leeds University 1995
A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Doctorate Degree in English Education in the Faculty of Language and Arts
Copyright © 2015 by Sutanto
INDONESIA UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION BANDUNG 2015
All rights reserved.
This dissertation may not be reproduced partially or entirely by reprinting, photocopying, or any other way without permission from the author.
(3)
(4)
Declaration of Authorship
I hereby certify that my dissertation entitled “Thesis Writing Supervision: A contribution of feedback to the development of students thesis writing” is
completely my own work. I recognise my responsibility to maintain the principles of academic integrity of the Indonesia University of Education. The ideas expressed in the dissertation are based on my own research or the research of authors referenced. All materials and sources used in my dissertation have been acknowledged and documented properly.
Bandung, 10 June 2015
(5)
Acknowledgement
Praise the Lord that this dissertation entitled “Thesis Writing Supervision: A
contribution of feedback to the development of student’s thesis writing” has been able to be accomplished.
Foremost, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my main supervisor (promotor), Prof. A. Chaedar Alwasilah, M.A., Ph.D. (in memory) for the continuous support of my Ph.D. study, for his patience, motivation, and enthusiasm. His guidance helped me in all the time of research and writing of this dissertation.
My sincere gratitude also goes to my co-supervisor (co-promotor), Prof. E. Aminudin Aziz, MA., Ph.D. for the thorough constructive guide of my Ph.D. research, for his immense knowledge and deep thought about my dissertation. His advice encouraged me to focus on the research and writing of this dissertation.
I would also like to express my sincere thanks to my co-supervisor (member of supervisors), Iwa Lukmana, M.A., Ph.D. for his detailed guide and comments on my dissertation, for his patience and witty support. His guide made me aware of the detailed organisation of my dissertation.
Besides the advisors mentioned above, I would like to thank to Prof. Emi Emilia, M.Ed., Ph.D. as the Head of the study program for her continuous reminders to accomplish this dissertation and for making me aware of writing conventions.
I would extend my special gratitude to all the students and supervisors as the participants of this research for their invaluable information, support and time especially during the prolonged engagement in the interview and observation.
Last but not the least, I would like to thank my family: Iie, Lukas and David for their support and understanding for the three busy years with my doctorate course; my mother in law, my pastor and GBBZ group of prayers for the continuous support and prayers for my study.
(6)
Abstract
Feedback is the heart of learning experience in the thesis writing. This research aims to examine the nature of feedback and the contribution of feedback to the development of students' thesis within the context of writing supervision at one of Tourism Institutes in Bandung. This research employs a qualitative design involving three students writing thesis and their six supervisors as participants. Data were collected on observation, document analysis, interview with students and supervisors, and thesis assessment. The data were analysed by assigning codes to categorize information, identifying patterns and connections between categories, and interpreting the data from the multiple sources. The results show that the nature of feedback is dominated by the feedback on the quality of the contents and writing mechanism. The thesis experienced major changes when feedback dealt with strategies particularly like written and spoken modes and amount of content quality. Remarkable improvement of thesis is contributed by feedback contents that involve focus, comparison, functions, valence especially for suggestions, clarity and specificity. Reasonable thesis enhancement is given by less specific and inspiring tone of feedback. With regard to sources of feedback, strong contribution was presented by supervisors whose interests matched the students’ topics of interest. The thesis underwent minor changes when feedback only dealt with the nature of the responsibility of supervisors and students as well as the relationship between them. In conclusion, different types of feedback and the way of the feedback provided
determine the quality of students’ responses to the feedback. The deeper feedback on the quality of the contents indicates the better students’ responses to improve the
quality of the thesis.
(7)
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
This chapter concludes the study referring to the two research questions presented in the introduction: (a) the nature of feedback in terms of feedback providers and receivers, strategies, contents and sources in thesis writing supervision and (b) the contribution of feedback to the development of the students’ thesis writing. The second part of this chapter presents recommendation for further researchers and practitioners.
5.1. Conclusion
Based on the discussion presented in the previous chapter, the study found that feedback from the supervisors contributes to the developments of students’ thesis writing. The degree of contribution of each feedback is as follows.
Most of the feedback including those from the providers and receivers, the strategies, contents and sources in thesis writing supervision contributes highly to the students’ thesis development. The thesis did not undergo changes dramatically when feedback only dealt with the nature of the responsibility of supervisors and students as well as the relationship between them. This is unlike the case when the supervisors’ interests matched the students’ topics. Supervisors would provide in depth and more comprehensive feedback, and students would receive them accordingly.
The thesis experienced major changes when feedback dealt with strategies, especially in the modes, amount of content quality and individual feedback. On the other hand, the frequency of meetings and group audience has moderate contribution to the refinement of students’ draft of thesis. As for feedback on writing mechanism contributes minor improvement, while the immediacy and delay feedback did not influence the contribution.
Remarkable enhancement of thesis is particularly contributed by feedback contents that involve focus, comparison, functions, valence especially in suggestion, clarity and specificity. Reasonable thesis advancement is given by less
(8)
specific and inspiring tone of feedback. On the other hand, trivial contribution is presented by positive, corrective and unclear feedback and unsurprisingly negative, praise and critique feedback did not affect the improvement to the students’ draft of thesis.
In addition, the feedback contents were contributed by supervisors (1a, and 3b) who focused more on the writing mechanism and supervisor 1b who only provided feedback on statistics. One student was disappointed as the supervisors were not able to provide sufficient feedback to go deep into the quality of the thesis content. The insufficiency for providing feedback is an indication that the supervisors did not have sufficient knowledge (still dark) of thesis writing in the supervision. E. Aminudin Aziz in Leo (2013) stated that supervisors are to give light to students but they themselves are dark (Ilmu Ajug).
With regard to sources of feedback, high progress of students’ thesis was presented by supervisors especially whose interests matched the students’ topics, who used written and spoken modes and who focused on the quality of thesis contents. As for tutor who was familiar with the topic and the object of research, the feedback contributes moderately to the thesis development, while feedback from peers changes the students’ thesis slightly.
The study then concludes that different types of feedback and the way of the feedback that are provided determine the quality of students’ responses to the feedback. The responses of the students to the quality of the contents enhance the progress of the students’ thesis writing, which is displayed in the revised drafts of students’ thesis. The deeper feedback on the contents and organisation indicates the better responses of students in revising the content quality of thesis.
5.2. Recommendations
In line with conclusion in the study, there are three recommendations for further researchers to enhance the various aspects related to the thesis writing supervision feedback.
First, the scope of the study is limited in one of tourism schools that do not represent the tourism schools in Indonesia. Further researchers are expected to
(9)
conduct research dealing with more representative tourism schools to find more generalize-able findings.
Second, the case study with purposive sampling is only able to find out the deep phenomena from the three participants gaining the best achievement in their classes with the six supervisors at the locus of the study. Further researchers are expected to use different research designs with bigger number representative participants gaining the best, middle and poor achievements to gain richer and more reliable data.
Third, the study only focuses on the contribution of feedback to the students’ theses quality involving three students obtaining the best achievement in their class. Further research is expected to examine feedback contribution to the supervisor and institution performance or reputation involving students obtaining low, middle and high achievement.
Next concerning with the result of the study, it is recommended to assess the supervisors’ competences in supervising the research students. The result of the assessment is to be followed by structural actions to make them confident to go deep into the concepts in the whole parts of the thesis and to train them to experience conducting research and to become researchers.
In addition, the supervisors have different perception and abilities in the feedback strategies and that contributes to the development of students’ thesis. It is recommended to investigate the perception and abilities of supervisors to provide feedback for the future research.
Finally, it is recommended that the best practice of supervision feedback should be formulated and documented in the school guidebook as a criterion reference. The guidebook is disseminated to final semester students, lecturers/supervisors and related institutions by seminar, training and providing references on best practice of supervision feedback.
(1)
Sutanto, 2015
Thesis Writing Supervision
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu
iv Declaration of Authorship
I hereby certify that my dissertation entitled “Thesis Writing Supervision: A contribution of feedback to the development of students thesis writing” is completely my own work. I recognise my responsibility to maintain the principles of academic integrity of the Indonesia University of Education. The ideas expressed in the dissertation are based on my own research or the research of authors referenced. All materials and sources used in my dissertation have been acknowledged and documented properly.
Bandung, 10 June 2015
(2)
Sutanto, 2015
Thesis Writing Supervision
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu
v Acknowledgement
Praise the Lord that this dissertation entitled “Thesis Writing Supervision: A contribution of feedback to the development of student’s thesis writing” has been able to be accomplished.
Foremost, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my main supervisor (promotor), Prof. A. Chaedar Alwasilah, M.A., Ph.D. (in memory) for the continuous support of my Ph.D. study, for his patience, motivation, and enthusiasm. His guidance helped me in all the time of research and writing of this dissertation.
My sincere gratitude also goes to my co-supervisor (co-promotor), Prof. E. Aminudin Aziz, MA., Ph.D. for the thorough constructive guide of my Ph.D. research, for his immense knowledge and deep thought about my dissertation. His advice encouraged me to focus on the research and writing of this dissertation.
I would also like to express my sincere thanks to my co-supervisor (member of supervisors), Iwa Lukmana, M.A., Ph.D. for his detailed guide and comments on my dissertation, for his patience and witty support. His guide made me aware of the detailed organisation of my dissertation.
Besides the advisors mentioned above, I would like to thank to Prof. Emi Emilia, M.Ed., Ph.D. as the Head of the study program for her continuous reminders to accomplish this dissertation and for making me aware of writing conventions.
I would extend my special gratitude to all the students and supervisors as the participants of this research for their invaluable information, support and time especially during the prolonged engagement in the interview and observation.
Last but not the least, I would like to thank my family: Iie, Lukas and David for their support and understanding for the three busy years with my doctorate course; my mother in law, my pastor and GBBZ group of prayers for the continuous support and prayers for my study.
(3)
Sutanto, 2015
Thesis Writing Supervision
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu Abstract
Feedback is the heart of learning experience in the thesis writing. This research aims to examine the nature of feedback and the contribution of feedback to the development of students' thesis within the context of writing supervision at one of Tourism Institutes in Bandung. This research employs a qualitative design involving three students writing thesis and their six supervisors as participants. Data were collected on observation, document analysis, interview with students and supervisors, and thesis assessment. The data were analysed by assigning codes to categorize information, identifying patterns and connections between categories, and interpreting the data from the multiple sources. The results show that the nature of feedback is dominated by the feedback on the quality of the contents and writing mechanism. The thesis experienced major changes when feedback dealt with strategies particularly like written and spoken modes and amount of content quality. Remarkable improvement of thesis is contributed by feedback contents that involve focus, comparison, functions, valence especially for suggestions, clarity and specificity. Reasonable thesis enhancement is given by less specific and inspiring tone of feedback. With regard to sources of feedback, strong contribution was presented by supervisors whose interests matched the students’ topics of interest. The thesis underwent minor changes when feedback only dealt with the nature of the responsibility of supervisors and students as well as the relationship between them. In conclusion, different types of feedback and the way of the feedback provided
determine the quality of students’ responses to the feedback. The deeper feedback on the quality of the contents indicates the better students’ responses to improve the
quality of the thesis.
(4)
Sutanto, 2015
Thesis Writing Supervision
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu
180 CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
This chapter concludes the study referring to the two research questions presented in the introduction: (a) the nature of feedback in terms of feedback providers and receivers, strategies, contents and sources in thesis writing supervision and (b) the contribution of feedback to the development of the students’ thesis writing. The second part of this chapter presents recommendation for further researchers and practitioners.
5.1. Conclusion
Based on the discussion presented in the previous chapter, the study found that
feedback from the supervisors contributes to the developments of students’ thesis
writing. The degree of contribution of each feedback is as follows.
Most of the feedback including those from the providers and receivers, the strategies, contents and sources in thesis writing supervision contributes highly to
the students’ thesis development. The thesis did not undergo changes dramatically
when feedback only dealt with the nature of the responsibility of supervisors and students as well as the relationship between them. This is unlike the case when the
supervisors’ interests matched the students’ topics. Supervisors would provide in
depth and more comprehensive feedback, and students would receive them accordingly.
The thesis experienced major changes when feedback dealt with strategies, especially in the modes, amount of content quality and individual feedback. On the other hand, the frequency of meetings and group audience has moderate
contribution to the refinement of students’ draft of thesis. As for feedback on
writing mechanism contributes minor improvement, while the immediacy and delay feedback did not influence the contribution.
Remarkable enhancement of thesis is particularly contributed by feedback contents that involve focus, comparison, functions, valence especially in suggestion, clarity and specificity. Reasonable thesis advancement is given by less
(5)
Sutanto, 2015
Thesis Writing Supervision
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu
181
specific and inspiring tone of feedback. On the other hand, trivial contribution is presented by positive, corrective and unclear feedback and unsurprisingly negative, praise and critique feedback did not affect the improvement to the
students’ draft of thesis.
In addition, the feedback contents were contributed by supervisors (1a, and 3b) who focused more on the writing mechanism and supervisor 1b who only provided feedback on statistics. One student was disappointed as the supervisors were not able to provide sufficient feedback to go deep into the quality of the thesis content. The insufficiency for providing feedback is an indication that the supervisors did not have sufficient knowledge (still dark) of thesis writing in the supervision. E. Aminudin Aziz in Leo (2013) stated that supervisors are to give light to students but they themselves are dark (Ilmu Ajug).
With regard to sources of feedback, high progress of students’ thesis was presented by supervisors especially whose interests matched the students’ topics, who used written and spoken modes and who focused on the quality of thesis contents. As for tutor who was familiar with the topic and the object of research, the feedback contributes moderately to the thesis development, while feedback from peers changes the students’ thesis slightly.
The study then concludes that different types of feedback and the way of the feedback that are provided determine the quality of students’ responses to the feedback. The responses of the students to the quality of the contents enhance the progress of the students’ thesis writing, which is displayed in the revised drafts of
students’ thesis. The deeper feedback on the contents and organisation indicates
the better responses of students in revising the content quality of thesis.
5.2. Recommendations
In line with conclusion in the study, there are three recommendations for further researchers to enhance the various aspects related to the thesis writing supervision feedback.
First, the scope of the study is limited in one of tourism schools that do not represent the tourism schools in Indonesia. Further researchers are expected to
(6)
Sutanto, 2015
Thesis Writing Supervision
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu
182
conduct research dealing with more representative tourism schools to find more generalize-able findings.
Second, the case study with purposive sampling is only able to find out the deep phenomena from the three participants gaining the best achievement in their classes with the six supervisors at the locus of the study. Further researchers are expected to use different research designs with bigger number representative participants gaining the best, middle and poor achievements to gain richer and more reliable data.
Third, the study only focuses on the contribution of feedback to the
students’ theses quality involving three students obtaining the best achievement in
their class. Further research is expected to examine feedback contribution to the supervisor and institution performance or reputation involving students obtaining low, middle and high achievement.
Next concerning with the result of the study, it is recommended to assess
the supervisors’ competences in supervising the research students. The result of
the assessment is to be followed by structural actions to make them confident to go deep into the concepts in the whole parts of the thesis and to train them to experience conducting research and to become researchers.
In addition, the supervisors have different perception and abilities in the
feedback strategies and that contributes to the development of students’ thesis. It
is recommended to investigate the perception and abilities of supervisors to provide feedback for the future research.
Finally, it is recommended that the best practice of supervision feedback should be formulated and documented in the school guidebook as a criterion reference. The guidebook is disseminated to final semester students, lecturers/supervisors and related institutions by seminar, training and providing references on best practice of supervision feedback.