Students` responses to teacher written feedback on their compositions - USD Repository
STUDENTS’ RESPONSES TO TEACHER WRITTEN
FEEDBACK ON THEIR COMPOSITIONS
A THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree
in English Language Education
By
MARIA AGUSTINA SRI WULANDARI
Student Number : 021214023
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM
DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION
FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY
YOGYAKARTA
2007
STUDENTS’ RESPONSES TO TEACHER WRITTEN
FEEDBACK ON THEIR COMPOSITIONS
A THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree
in English Language Education
By
MARIA AGUSTINA SRI WULANDARI
Student Number : 021214023
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM
DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION
FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY
YOGYAKARTA
2007
STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY
I honestly declare that this thesis which I wrote does not contain the works or part of the works of other people, except those cited in the quotations and bibliography, as a scientific paper should.
Yogyakarta, 15 June 2007 Maria Agustina Sri Wulandari
kalau kau kejar mimpimu salut… kalau kau ingin berhenti ingat ‘tuk mulai lagi tetap semangat dan teguhkan hati di setiap hari sampai nanti… sampai mati
… L etto… sampai nanti, sampai mati dedicated to: my beloved family and friends who are always being there for me
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I dedicate my greatest and deepest gratitude to Jesus Christ and Holy Mary for Their blessings, love and strengths. Through Their grace, I could finish this thesis and reach one of my dreams.
My sincere appreciation also goes to my major sponsor, Dr. F.X. Mukarto, M.S., and my co-sponsor, A. Hardi Prasetyo, S.Pd., M.A. for their great patience in guiding me and their invaluable ideas and suggestions during the completion of this thesis. I really appreciate the knowledge, time and guidance they shared with me.
I would like to sincerely thank Olivia, Clara, Marlinda and Swesty, the participant s of my research. I tha nk them for their cooperation during the collecting of the data.
My deepest gratitude goes to my beloved parents, B.P. Sutikno, BA and F.X. Suyati for their endless love, prayer and encouragement all my life, especially during the thesis writing. My deepest thanks also go to my dearest little brother, Stephanus Susilo Nugroho for being the best brother I have ever had. I thank him for his patience and willingness in helping me to cope with the confusing Corel Draw and all the computer stuffs. It is such a great blessing to have a family like them in my life.
I would like to dedicate my appreciation to my lovely cousins, Mbak Sisca and Mbak Wiwin, and to my lost Cie-Cie, Cie Melly ‘Piglet Jr.’ for their never- ending advice, patience, grumbling and love. I also thank them for treating me like their own little sister and for sharing me their experiences and stories so that I can see the world through their eyes.
My best thanks are also delivered to all of my friends. I thank Mbak Sarie and Mbak Adesti for their encouragement s and friendships. I am deeply grateful to Rizakti for his patience and willingness in giving critic ism, corrections and suggestions to improve my thesis. To Ardi and Lintang who helped me to prepare the thesis examination, thanks a lot. I thank Edi_Ahong for lend ing me his sophisticated scanner. I also thank Yosi-Kalva for his support, it means a lot. To Uni, Nissa, Haryana, Ardi, Rendy, Nita, Dianing, Sari, Hastri, Selly, Mas Adi, Mas Prim, Sabum Maklon Hatti, all PBI’s 2002ers, seniors and juniors, I thank them for their inputs and supports. My appreciation also goes to Garuda 9ers; Cie Olive, Bu Tita, Dik Ira, Dik Lia, Mbak Mut and the late Pepsi for their encouragement. I thank all of them for the time, experiences and stories full of laughter, lessons, love and tears they have shared me.
I would also like to thank Swaragama, especially to Zaki ‘Dreamland’ Pradana for being my great companion when I had to stay up late at night to finish the thesis. I thank him for his stories, advices and wise words that influenced me to be a better person.
Finally, I would like to thank some other friends and relatives for all the supports and prayers during the process of the writing of this thesis. My wholehearted thanks to them will never be enough. May God bless them all!
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE .................................................................................................. i
PAGE OF APPROVAL .................................................................................. ii
PAGE OF ACCEPTANCE ............................................................................ iii
STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY ............................................. iv
PAGE OF DEDICATION ............................................................................. v
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .............................................................................. vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................... viii
LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................... xi
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................ xii
ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................... xiii
ABSTRAK ........................................................................................................ xiv
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .................................................................. 1
1.1 Research Background ............................................................................. 1
1.2 Problem Formulation ............................................................................... 4
1.3 Problem Limitation .................................................................................. 4
1.4 Research Objectives ................................................................................ 4
1.5 Research Benefits ..................................................................................... 5
1.6 Definition of Terms .................................................................................. 5
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................... 7
2.1 Theoretical Description ............................................................................ 7
2.1.1 Theory of Writing ........................................................................... 7
2.1.1.1 Writing ............................................................................. 7
2.1.1.2 Writing Product vs Writing Process Approaches ............. 9
2.1.2 Theory of Feedback ........................................................................ 12
2.1.2.1 Definition of Feedback in Writing .................................... 12
2.1.2.2 Purposes of Feedback ........................................................ 13
2.1.2.3 Roles of Feedback ............................................................. 14
2.1.2.4 Sources of Feedback ......................................................... 15
2.1.2.5 Forms of Feedback ............................................................ 17
2.1.2.6 Focus of Feedback ........................................................... 17
2.1.2.7 Responses to Feedback .................................................... 18
2.2 Review of Existing Researches ................................................................ 20
2.3 Theoretical Framework ........................................................................... 21
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY ................................................................. 23
3.1 Research Methodology ............................................................................ 23
3.2 Research Participants ............................................................................... 24
3.3 Research Setting ...................................................................................... 24
3.4 Research Instruments ............................................................................... 25
3.4.1 Checklists ...................................................................................... 25
3.4.2 Interview ........................................................................................ 26
3.5 Data Source ............................................................................................. 27
3.6 Data Collection ........................................................................................ 27
3.7 Data Analysis .......................................................................................... 28
CHAPTER 4: ANALYSIS RESULTS .......................................................... 31
4.1 Teacher Written Feedback ...................................................................... 31
4.1.1 Language Use ............................................................................... 32
4.1.1.1 Article s ......................................................................... 33
4.1.1.2 Tenses ......................................................................... 34
4.1.1.3 Plural Markers ............................................................. 35
4.1.1.4 Language Objectivity ................................................... 36
4.1.1.5 Pronouns ...................................................................... 36
4.1.1.6 Sentence Constructions ............................................... 37
4.1.2 Mechanics .................................................................................... 38
4.1.2.1 Punctuation .................................................................. 38
4.1.2.2 Italics ............................................................................ 39
4.1.2.3 Capitalization ............................................................... 40
4.1.3 Content .......................................................................................... 41
4.1.4 Organization .................................................................................. 43
4.1.5 Format ........................................................................................... 44
4.2.4 Ignoring ......................................................................................... 55
APPENDIX 1 Analysis on the Categories of Teacher Written Feedback ........ 64 APPENDIX 2 Analysis on the Students’ Responses of Teacher Written
BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................... 61
APPENDICES ................................................................................................. 64
5.2.3 For The Further Researchers ........................................................ 60
5.2.2 For The Students ........................................................................... 59
5.2.1 For The Teachers .......................................................................... 59
5.2 Suggestions .............................................................................................. 59
5.1 Conclusions .............................................................................................. 57
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS ............................. 57
4.2.3 Consulting ...................................................................................... 54
4.1.6 Reference to Source ...................................................................... 44
4.2.2.4 Restructuring ................................................................ 53
4.2.2.3 Substituting .................................................................. 53
4.2.2.2 Deleting ........................................................................ 52
4.2.2.1 Adding ........................................................................ 51
4.2.2 Revising ........................................................................................ 50
4.2.1 Correcting ...................................................................................... 48
4.2 Students’ Responses ................................................................................. 48
4.1.8 Clarity ............................................................................................ 47
4.1.7 Vocabulary .................................................................................... 46
Feedback ................................................................................... 75 APPENDIX 3 Profile of Feedback Categorization .......................................... 94 APPENDIX 4 Results of the Interview ............................................................ 98 APPENDIX 5 Sample of Students’ Compositions (first draft) ........................ 100 APPENDIX 6 Sample of Students’ Compositions (revised version) ............... 117
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1 The Table Checklist of Teacher Written Feedback ........................... 26Table 4.1 The Table Checklist of Teacher Written Feedback Percentage ........ 31
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3.1 Flow Chart of Research Procedures ................................................. 30
ABSTRACT
Wulandari, Maria Agustina Sri. 2007. Students’ Responses to the Teacher
Written Feedback on their Compositions. Yogyakarta: English Education Study
Program, Sanata Dharma University.Providing students with effective feedback on their writing is important as it helps students to ensure that what they write conveys their intended messages and to produce compositions with minimum errors and maximum clarity. However, students may not utilize feedback optimally because they may not know what to do with it and they may end up responding to the feedback by copying all corrections or deleting words/sentences which contain errors. This study aims at investigating the students’ responses toward the written feedback by formulating two research problems: 1) What are the categories of teacher written feedback? 2) What are the students’ responses to the teacher written feedback?
The research was conducted using the descriptive qualitative method. The participants of the study were four-semester eight-students of English Letters Study Program, Sanata Dharma University, academic year 2005/2006 who joined thesis writing course. The data were gathered from students’ undergraduate thesis compositions from chapter one to three. It consisted of eight pieces of compositions divided into four pieces of the undergraduate thesis drafts with teacher feedback on them and four pieces of the revised versions. The re are two instruments used in this study, i.e. checklist and interview.
The results of the data analysis on the first problem reveal that the teachers provided written feedback on language use, mechanics, organization, content, format, reference of source, vocabulary, and clarity. The findings show that the teacher feedback was mostly on the form. The content, which was the main component to form a good composition, only got few attentions. Based on the second problem, it was figured out that the students’ responses toward teacher written feedback were correcting, revising, consulting and ignoring. In correcting, the students either simply copied teacher’s correction or did correction on their own based on the markings or symbols given. In revising, the students responded by adding some details/explanations, deleting words/phrases, restructur ing sentences and substituting words/phrases. Students also had consultations with teachers, peers and books whenever they did not understand the feedback given. The last response was no response or ignorance in which students ignored the written feedback and did not make changes to the problematic parts.
Related to the findings of this study, there are some suggestions for teachers, students and future researchers. The teachers should : (1) provid e more feedback on content than on form, (2) give clearer written feedback with legible handwriting, and (3) promote discussions on response and encourage students to read and ask question about the feedback. The students should : (1) practice to write compositions to produce better quality of writing, (2) make use of teacher written feedback and implement various strategies to respond it, and (3) enhance the strategies in responding teacher written feedback. As this study had some weaknesses, future researchers are recommended to: (1) conduct similar research with an interview with the teacher for verification and (2) investigate the relationship of the students’ response with their writing improvement.
ABSTRAK
Wulandari, Maria Agustina Sri. 2007. Students’ Responses to the Teacher
Written Feedback on their Compositions. Yogyakarta: English Education Study
Program, Sanata Dharma University.Pemberian umpan balik yang efektif terhadap karangan siswa sangatlah penting. Hal ini dapat membantu siswa untuk memastikan bahwa apa yang mereka tulis mengandung pesan yang sama seperti yang ingin disampaikan dan untuk menghasilkan karangan dengan sedikit kesalahan dan kejelasan yang maksimal. Akan tetapi, kadang para siswa tidak memanfaatkan umpan balik secara optimal dikarenakan mereka tidak mengerti apa yang harus dilakukan terhadap umpan balik tersebut sehingga pada akhirnya siswa menanggapi umpan balik dengan menyalin semua pembetulan atau menghapus kata/kalimat yang mengandung kesalahan. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui tanggapan siswa terhadap umpan balik tertulis guru melalui dua masalah penelitian yaitu: apa saja kategori-kategori dari umpan balik tertulis guru? dan apa tanggapan siswa terhadap umpan balik tertulis tersebut?
Penelitian ini dilaksanakan menggunakan metode deskriptif qualitatif. Partisipan penelitian meliputi empat siswa semester delapan Program Studi Sastra Inggris, Universitas Sanata Dharma, tahun ajaran 2005/2006 yang mengikuti kelas
Thesis Writing . Data-data diperoleh dari skripsi siswa dari bab satu sampai bab
tiga. Karangan tersebut terdiri dari delapan karangan yang terbagi menjadi empat
draft skripsi yang telah mendapat umpan balik dari guru dan empat revisi. Ada dua
instrumen yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini yaitu checklist dan wawancara.Dari hasil analisa untuk permasalahan penelitian yang pertama ditemukan bahwa kategori umpan balik tertulis yang diberikan oleh guru yaitu pada penggunaan bahasa, mechanics, organisasi, isi, format, sumber referensi, kosa kata dan kejelasan. Hasil ini menunjukkan bahwa kebanyakan umpan balik dari guru diberikan di form, sementara bagian isi yang merupakan komponen utama dalam sebuah karangan yang baik hanya mendapatkan sedikit umpan balik. Pada permasalahan yang kedua ditemukan bahwa tanggapan yang diberikan siswa terhadap umpan balik dari guru adalah membetulkan, merubah, bertanya, dan mengabaikan. Dalam membetulkan, para siswa langsung menyalin pembetulan dari guru atau berusaha membetulkan sendiri kesalahan menurut tanda atau simbol yang diberikan guru. Sementara, dalam merubah, para siswa mena mbahkan perincian/penjelasan, menghilangkan kata/frase, menyusun ulang kalimat dan mengganti kata/frase. Siswa juga bertanya pada guru dan teman serta membaca buku yang relevan saat mereka tidak mengerti arti dari umpan balik yang telah diberikan. Tanggapan yang terakhir adalah tidak adanya tanggapan atau pengabaian dimana siswa mengabaikan umpan balik tertulis dan tidak membuat perubahan terhadap bagian bermasalah yang telah diberi umpan balik.
Berkaitan dengan hasil- hasil dalam penelitian ini, beberapa saran diberikan bagi guru, siswa dan peneliti berikutnya. Para guru diharapkan untuk (1) memberikan lebih banyak umpan balik di bagian isi daripada di form, (2) memberikan umpan balik tertulis yang lebih jelas denga n tulisan tanga n yang dapat terbaca, dan (3) mengadakan diskusi mengenai tanggapan serta mendorong siswa untuk membaca dan bertanya mengenai umpan balik. Para siswa diharapkan untuk: (1) berlatih menulis guna menghasilkan karangan yang lebih berkualitas, (2) menggunakan umpan balik dari guru dan menerapkan berbagai strategi guna menanggapi umpan balik, dan (3) meningkatkan strategi dalam menangggapi umpan balik dari guru. Karena penelitian ini memiliki kelemahan, peneliti-peneliti berikutnya disarankan untuk: (1) mengadakan penelitian serupa dengan mewawacarai guru agar hasil yang didapat lebih mendalam, dan (2) meneliti hubungan antara tanggapan siswa dengan peningkatan kualitas karangan siswa.
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION This study is about the students’ responses to the teacher written feedback
on their composition. In brief, chapter one is divided into seven main parts, namely research background, problem identification, problem limitation, problem formulation, research objectives, research benefits, and definition of terms.
1.1 Research Background
The use of English language in the writing activity is still a problem for most Indonesian students, as well as many other students who learn English as a foreign language. Students may find difficulties in writing in a good and right form of English. The difficulties do not only concern on finding the right words and using the correct grammar but also on finding and expressing ideas in English (Raimes, 1993: 13). As stated by Hughey, Wormuth, Hartfiel and Jacobs (1983: 5) that many ESL/EFL students are thinking in their first language and translating sentence by sentence when they write in English rather than translating ideas from first to second language, Indonesian students often think and organize their ideas according to the logic of their first language, that is Bahasa Indonesia, then translate them into English. For this reason, students’ compositions may be far from English compositions since students do not think as English native speaker when they write so that it often occurs that in a composition made by an Indonesian student, the tenses are in English but the sense or logic is Indonesian.
Related to those difficulties, many students often feel frustrated as they learn to write a composition in English (Hughey et al., 1983: 5; Richards, 1992: 100). They are not confident enough to express their ideas in the written form. They are also lacking in knowledge on how to make a good composition, especially in terms of grammar accuracy, organization of ideas, and even probably, diction.
Students feel afraid to make mistakes whether in organization or grammar while writing the composition and feel embarrassed if their mistakes may lead to the confusion of their readers.
Since students often do not feel confident enough to write, it is important for the teacher to give various writing task for students to be accustomed to writing practice and enjoy practicing to write a composition and finally to improve students’ ability in writing skill. Moreover, regarding to students’ lack of knowledge on how to make a good composition, it is necessary for the teacher to provide feedback when their students write a composition to ensure the students that what they write conveys their intended messages that it has achieved the characteristic of a good writing.
As stated by Muncie (2000: 52), feedback is vital to writing. It is important for the teachers to provide feedback in the process of writing to help the students improve their writing proficiency so that they are able to produce their composition with minimum errors and maximum clarity.
Feedback can be provided by peers, teachers or computers (Hyland, 2002: 230). Although peer feedback has been applied in some writing courses, many students still prefer to get feedback from their teacher. They consider feedback from peers cannot be optimal because basically their peers have more or less the same English level with them (Rollinson, 2005: 23). On the contrary, feedback from teacher is considered to be more reliable since the teacher is more knowledgeable than the students about the linguistic and rhetorical features of English (Muncie, 2000: 50-51). Consequently, in many writing courses, teachers are in charge of correcting and improving students’ English writing competence by giving some notes or suggestions on the students’ writing.
Though teachers have provided feedback on students’ writing, students may not utilize it optimally because sometimes they do not know what to do with the feedback (Leki, 1990 in Williams, 2003). It can happen because students may not understand the grammatical rules and terms that the teacher used as cues.
Moreover, they may not have adequate knowledge for error correction and they may be confused with the large number of correction codes on their writings (Chiang, 2004: 107). As the consequence, students often respond to feedback in simply copying all the teachers’ corrections and suggestions or deleting some sentences which contain errors in their revision.
This situation also occurs in writing a thesis. A final report or a thesis is important as a partial fulfillment to graduate from the university. A good formal writing should be produced in order to obtain a qualified thesis. Though, students who write a thesis are those whose in the last semester who are considered to have high competence in writing skills, they still need guidance from their teacher as the thesis advisor in conducting the research. Students need feedback to ensure that their thesis are reliable and understandable as, later on, they will defend it orally. However, sometimes students may not know what they should do with the feedback provided by their thesis advisor so that they only copy the corrections or delete the error words. In regard to this situation, it is interesting to observe the responses of students related to the written feedback given by their teacher. The research entitled Students’ Responses t o Teacher Written Feedback on their
Compositions was intended to observe the responses of the students after they get
written feedback from their teacher.1.2 Problem Formulation
Based on the brief explanation in the previous parts, the problems are formulated as the followings:
1. What are the categories of written feedback that is given by the teacher to the students’ compositions?
2. What are the students’ responses to the teacher written feedback?
1.3 Problem Limitation
The research on the students’ responses to the teacher written feedback is limited in scope. First, the research focuses on the written feedback that is given by teacher on students’ compositions. Second, it only concerns with the responses that students give to the written feedback from their teacher.
1.4 Research Objectives
Related to the research questions stated above, there are two objectives in this research.
1. To find out the categories of written feedback that is given by the teacher to the students’ compositions.
2. To find out the responses given by students toward teacher written feedback.
1.5 Research Benefits
Hopefully, the findings of this research can help to give positive contribution in improving teaching method and strategy of writing teachers, especially in providing effective written feedback on students’ writings so that they are encouraged to develop the ir writing skills.
For the students, it is hoped that by knowing the results of this study, they will be able to improve their writings and writing skills by implementing various strategies in responding the teacher written feedback. Finally, the results of this study can stimulate the other researchers who are interested in the topic and give contribution as references in the in-depth study of feedback for further researchers.
1.6 Definition of Terms
In this research, some terms are important to be defined in order to avoid misinterpretation. Those terms are as follows:
1. Student’s Response Response, according to Power (in Dunkin, 1987: 413), is any verbal or non-verbal act designed to fulfill the expectations implicit in the questions, commands or requests of others. In this study, student’s response refers to any verbal or non-verbal act done by a student to fulfill the expectations implicit in the teacher written feedback.
2. Teacher Written Feedback Sherman (1995: 58) defines feedback as the comments and reactions of the reader(s) and teacher on the student’s composition. Moreover, according to Hyland (2002: 230), feedback is the response given to students writing which can be provided by peers, teachers or computers on either an oral or written form. In this research, teacher written feedback is any comments, responses or reactions provided by the teacher to the students’ compositions in written form. The teacher that is meant here is thesis advisor who guided students in conducting a thesis study.
3. Composition Composition is defined as a short piece of written work (Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, 1995: 234). It is an outstanding way of communicating personal thoughts, perceptions, experiences, knowledge, feelings and ideas which the writer wants to say (Sherman, 1995: 12). The composition being analyzed in this study was an undergraduate thesis written by eight semester students of English Letters Department of Sanata Dharma University.
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW This chapter consists of three parts, namely the theoretical description, the
review of existing research and the theoretical framework. The theoretical description concerns with the theories that underline the topic of the research, namely theory of writing and theory of feedback. The review of existing research reviews some researches related to feedback which were conducted previously.
Then, the implementation of the theories in this study is discussed in the theoretical framework.
2.1 Theoretical Description
This part consists of an explanation about two theories, which underlie this study. The first theory is theory of writing and the second one is theory of feedback.
2.1.1 Theory of Writing
This study deals with writing, therefore, it is necessary to reveal some relevant theories of writing. The theories elaborated in this part are writing and writing product versus writing process approach.
2.1.1.1 Writing
Writing is known as a means of communication. Through writing, people can communicate their ideas and messages to other people in the real world. They can also exchange information and transfer knowledge one to another. In other words, writing is a way of thinking, learning and sharing ideas with others (Zimmerman and Rodrigues, 1992: 4). Moreover, people can explore and express themselves (Sherman, 1995: 12). People can explore their individual potentials and express their ideas and/or ways of thinking in their writings.
In ESL/EFL context, writing becomes one of the skills which has to be mastered besides speaking, listening and reading. A good writing skill is important in this academic context as it helps students to achieve academic success in which their writings are used as evidence of learning such as in essays and assignments or as a means of learning like in notes and summaries (Richards, 1992: 100). In addition, the students’ competence of English proficiency may also be activated through the process of writing since this skill needs other basic skills like good grammatical accuracy, extended vocabulary acquisition, logical way of thinking or paragraph organization and critical point of view on certain topics (Kuswandono, 2003).
In relation with its significance, the ESL/EFL students are expected to have a good writing skill. They are expected to be able to compose a good written work which has appropriate content, organization, sentence structures and word choice for its audience and purpose (Zimmerman and Rodrigues, 1992: 9). In order to help students to develop their writing ability, it is necessary for the teacher to engage students in the process of writing which emphasizes in the production of series of draft involving the process of pre-writing, writing, revising and rewriting (Dixon and Nessel, 1983: 84) and of making use of various feedback sources as they write (Hyland, 2002: 89).
2.1.1.2 Writing Product ve rsus Writing Process Approaches
One of the most controversial aspects of writing pedagogy has been the tension between product and process approaches to the teaching of writing (Nunan, 1999: 273). The discussion of the writing product approach has always interrelated to the discussion of the writing process approach which emerges as the criticism to the first approach.
Nunan (1999: 273) states that the writing product approach focuses on the final product, the coherent and error- free text. Similarly, Richards (1992: 106) defines the writing product approach as a writing approach which puts emphasis on the ability to produce correct texts. Supporting these two statements, Cohen (1990: 103) argues that product approach focuses on the finished product, which is sometimes not finished, and on the grade. In other words, this approach puts emphasis on the quality of the writing task without noticing the steps taken by students in achieving the expected final draft.
The writing product approach often begins with a controlled writing exercise in which the learners imitate or adapt, copy and transform various models of written texts provided by the teacher and/or the textbook (Nunan, 1999: 272). The writing product approach expects the students to make a coherent and error- free text by following the model provided. The goal is to teach the students to master different kinds of written texts that they will have in educational, institutional and personal context. This approach also lets the teachers evaluate how the students’ compose their writing based on the models given. In evaluating, the teacher usually has a set of criteria including content, organization of idea, vocabulary and grammatical use, also mechanical considerations like spelling and punctuation (Brown, 2001: 335).
The drawback of the writing product approach in the learning process is that this approach will discourage the students to do their writing assignments seriously since the focus of the writing product approach on the instant product and the grade (Cohen, 1990: 105). The students will only consider the grade that they received and ignore the composing processes they go through.
In contrast to the writing product approach, the writing process approach is seen as more effective than the writing product approach since it allows the students to explore and develop a personal approach to writing (Richards, 1992: 114). The writing process approach puts emphasis on a process in which the finished products came after a series of drafts (Cohen, 1990: 105). This statement is supported by Nunan (1999: 272) who states that the focus of process approach is on the steps involved in drafting and redrafting the piece of written work. In other words, the writing process approach is an approach which emphasizes on giving the students opportunities to shape their writing skills through a set of steps. This approach does not focus on the final product that the students performed, but it considers how the students reach their final output as the most important aspect.
The students are encouraged to put their ideas onto paper without worrying too much about formal correctness (e.g. grammar or mechanics) in the initial stages. Then, they share their work with others, getting feedback on their ideas and how they are expressed, before revising (Nunan, 1999: 272). Thus, it can be said that writing process is a process that can lead the students to make a good written final product which needs a good cooperation between teacher and students in which teacher provide feedback needed by students. This statement is also supported by Shih in Brown (2001: 335) that teachers should give students feedback throughout the composing process as they try to make the closest intended writing. The kinds of feedback that the students can receive concerning their written work and what to do about this feedback and how to utilize it most effectively are the concern of this approach. Feedback is important in writing class because it can help the students investigate if their message can be conveyed as it is expected.
By following the steps of the writing process previously, the writing process is believed to bring great advantages to the students in learning writing.
The first benefit is that by having the writing process the students will have more opportunity for meaningful writing and become independent learners (Richards, 1992: 110). The second benefit is proposed by Brown (2001: 335-336) who stated that writing process gives chances for the students to be more creative in using language but they still focus on content and message. In this process the students have more opportunity to think when they write.
However, every writing process activity should lead to the final product (Shih as cited in Brown 2001: 335). As stated by Brown (2001: 337) that the product is the ultimate goal which becomes the reason that students go through the process of pre-writing, drafting, revising and editing. If the aim of the writing class is to develop fluent writers; it is necessary to examine how fluent the student- writers compose and to re-examine the writing methodology. To sum up, both the teacher and students should realize that the process they go through will end up at the final product. Process is not the end; it is the means toward the end.
2.1.2 Theory of Feedback
Since this study focuses on feedback in writing, this part explained some relevant theories of feedback which became references in conducting this study.
The theories elaborated in this part are the definition of feedback in writing, the purposes of feedback, the roles of feedback, the sources of feedback, the forms of feedback, the focus of feedback and responses to feedback.
2.1.2.1 Definition of Feedback in Writing
There are many definitions of feedback introduced by many proponents and some ideas of those definitions will be quoted here.
Feedback can be defined as any input from reader to writer that provides information for revis ion (Keh, 1990, cited in Reid, 1993: 218). In addition , Hyland (2002: 230) defines feedback as the response that is given to students writing. It can refer to either oral or written forms provided by peers, teachers or computers.
Furthermore, according to Penaflorida (2002: 346) feedback or response is an integral part of students writing. By providing feedback, students are given an opportunity to be able to identify their own strengths and weaknesses. This may encourage them to improve their writing skill and become more effective writers.
Supporting this statement, Williams (2003) states that the purpose of feedback is to teach skills that help students improve their writing proficiency so that they will be able to produce a composition which is minimal in errors and maximum in clarity.
From those definitions mentioned above, it can be concluded that feedback is an essential aspect of students writing in which students getting response from classmates and/or teachers on their written work so that they become aware of their strengths and weaknesses in writing and at the end it can encourage them to improve their writing ability.
2.1.2.2 Purposes of Feedback
According to Lewis (2002: 3-4), feedback has several purposes when given in the language classes. First, feedback provides information both for teachers and students. Through feedback, teachers can get information about individual as well as collective class progress. It can also be used as a form of evaluation on the way of their teaching. While for the students, feedback is considered as a continuing type of assessment which is more focused than grades because it gives information about individual progress by highlighting students’ strengths and weaknesses, unlike grades which tend to compare one student with another.
The second is to give students advice in learning. Teacher can give students more than simply descriptions of language use through feedback. The feedback may also provide direct information about language by stating a rule or giving an example.
Providing students with language input is the third purpose of feedback. The teacher’s words, both in their form and purpose, describe how language is used in personal communication so that it is important for the teachers to write comments in a slightly higher level of language than the students have to extend students’ language use since students can learn new vocabulary and structures in context.
Fourth, feedback can be a form of motivation. It can encourage students to learn and use language as best as they can by considering whatever the teachers know about their attitude. As the teachers find out more about their students, the encouragement may take the student’s personal circumstances into considerations.
The last purpose is to lead students toward autonomy. Feedback can help students to learn to find their own mistakes. By learning to find their own mistakes, students are encouraged to be independent students.
2.1.2.3 Roles of Feedback
Feedback is central in learning to write in a second language (Hyland, 2003: 201) and its role cannot be underestimated. It offers an additional framework to improve writing skills, promote accuracy and clear ideas and develop an understanding of written genres. Through feedback, students are able to identify the strengths and weaknesses of their compositions, understand the reason of those weaknesses and discuss possible improvement relating to the weaknesses. It also provides students with a sense of being readers which give them an outside view of the text so that they are cognizant of the readers’ needs.
However, feedback can only be effective if the students are encouraged and able to utilize it to improve their writing. In order to written feedback results in a positive effect, Cohen (1990: 111) presents four conditions which are needed. Written feedback works when:
1. Students have sufficient knowledge about the area of comments/corrections.
The feedback would be useful if the students have knowledge needed to understand a correction or receive an explanation that provides the missing knowledge.
2. The feedback is in an area that the students consider important for their immediate or long-term knowledge.
The students would take more benefit of feedback that concerned about the elements, in examples specific vocabulary, style or complex syntactic structures which they tend to be used frequently.
3. The feedback is clear.