t c
g 8
d
a a
o their peers’
composition given by pe
81.6 of the
Figu
d. Students
Base after the imp
agree” and 2 or “strongly
’ feedback ns. Moreover
er on the wr e students ag
ure 4.20 Stu
The influen
s’ Perception
ed on Figure plementation
20.4 of th disagree. A
20 40
60 80
20 40
60 80
100
as their c r, Figure 4.2
riting. There gree, and 2
dents’ consid
nce of feedba
n on the Im
e 4.22, 100 n of peer fee
e students c ll the studen
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 30.6
69
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
16.3 81
consideration 21 reveals h
e were 16.3 of the stude
deration to in
Figure 4 ack given by
mplementatio
of the stud edback 79.6
chose “agree nts still expec
9.4
0.00.0
1.6
2.00.0
n to revise how far the
of the stu ents disagree
nclude peers
.21 peer on writ
on of Peer F
dents still ne 6 of the stu
e”. Here, no cted to have
Stro Agr
Agr Dis
Stro Dis
e their draf influence o
udents strong ed with the s
feedback fo
ting improve
Feedback
eeded teache udents chose
o one chose teacher feed
ongly ree
ree sagree
ongly sagree
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree Strongly
Disagree
40 ft of their
of feedback gly agreed,
statement.
or revision
ment
er feedback e “strongly
“disagree” dback.
p c
4 t
e
q c
Figur peer feedbac
chose “stron 4.1 of the
that peer fee
Figure 4.23
e. The resu
First question Se
counted int
Figure
re 4.23 pres ck in writing
ngly agree” a students dis
edback shoul
Students’ pr
ults of open-
ly, the resea ee Appendi
to the perc
0.0 20.0
40.0 60.0
80.0
0.0 20.0
40.0 60.0
e 4.22 Stude
sents the stu g class. The
and 57.1 o sagreed with
ld be implem
reference on
-ended ques
archer made x 5. For n
entage after
79.6
20.4
38.8 57.1
4
ents’ need of
udents’ pref e results show
of the studen h the stateme
mented n wri
the impleme class
.
stions
e the raw dat number 26,
r it was c
4 0.00.0
4.1 0.0
teacher feed
ference on t wed that 38
nts chose “ag ent. Most of
iting class.
entation of p
ta of each q the raw da
lustered as
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree Strongly
Disagree
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagre Strongly
Disagre
back
the impleme 8.8 of th
gree”. There the students
eer feedback
question in o ata of the r
positive o
e e
y
ee y
ee
41
entation of he students
e were only s suggested
k in writing
open-ended results was
or negative
42 comments. The students’ responses of the open-ended questions are presented as
follows:
Table 4.1. The result of open-ended question of the questionnaire
Question Positive comments
Negative comments
Please give comments on your experience in going
peer feedback in writing 34
69.39 15
30.61
Meanwhile, question number 27 How should peer feedback be implemented in writing class? deals with the suggestions from the students about
the implementation of peer feedback. Hence, the responses cannot be counted into percentage since the answers are different each other. Analyzing the raw data, the
researcher clusters some suggestions the students gave. The students suggested that peer feedback should be done before the composition would be submitted to
the teacher. It should be done before teacher feedback. Therefore, the teacher should be involved in the process of peer feedback. They also suggested that in
the process of peer feedback, the teacher should provide a kind of checklist to help them in correcting the composition. Additionally, they suggested that peer
feedback should not be done in every assignment or every meeting.
2. Students’ Responses to the Peer Feedback Checklist