A STUDY ON THE CONTRIBUTION OF PEER FEEDBACK TO THE IMPROVEMENT OF WRITING QUALITY AND THE STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION IN SMU N. 3 YOGYAKARTA
A STUDY ON THE CONTRIBUTION OF PEER FEEDBACK TO
THE IMPROVEMENT OF WRITING QUALITY AND
THE STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION IN SMU N. 3 YOGYAKARTA
A THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree in English Language Education
By
Name: Maria Dyah Lintang Primadiani
Student Number: 031214027
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM
DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION
FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY
2007
A Thesis on
A STUDY ON THE CONTRIBUTION OF PEER FEEDBACK TO
THE IMPROVEMENT OF WRITING QUALITY AND
THE STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION IN SMU N. 3 YOGYAKARTA
By Name: Maria Dyah Lintang Primadiani
Student Number: 031214027 Approved by
Major Sponsor, Drs. Pius Nurwidasa Prihatin, M. Ed.
13 September 2007
A Thesis on
A STUDY ON THE CONTRIBUTION OF PEER FEEDBACK TO
THE IMPROVEMENT OF WRITING QUALITY AND
THE STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION IN SMU N. 3 YOGYAKARTA
By Name: Maria Dyah Lintang Primadiani
Student Number: 031214027 Defended before the Board of Examiners on September 27, 2007 and Declared Acceptable
Board of Examiners Chairperson : Ag. Hardi Prasetyo, S.Pd. __________________ Secretary : Drs. P. G. Purba, M.Pd. __________________ Member : Drs. Pius Nurwidasa Prihatin, M.Ed. __________________ Member : Drs. Concilianus Laos Mbato, M.A. __________________ Member : F. X. Ouda Teda Ena, S.Pd., M.Pd. __________________
Yogyakarta, 27 September 2007 Faculty of Teachers Training and Education Sanata Dharma University
Dean, Drs. Tarsisius Sarkim, M.Ed.,Ph.
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 the bibliography, as a scientific paper should.
Yogyakarta, 13 September 2007 The writer,
Maria Dyah Lintang Primadiani
“Our body is the garden…. our desire is the gardener”
(William Shakespeare)
“To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven…. He hath made every thing beautiful in His time: also He hath set the world in their heart, so that no man can find out the work that God maketh from the beginning to the end.”
(Ecclesiastes 3: 1 & 11)
This thesis is dedicated to:
- Bapa, Putera dan Roh Kudus - Bunda Maria - My beloved and Wonderful Parents
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all, I would like to express my greatest gratitude to God the
Almighty and Mother Mary, the Holy Virgin, who have given Their blessings to
me, so that this thesis could be finished.For the initial faith he showed and for his continued beneficial feedback and encouragement, I acknowledge with gratitude my thesis advisor respectively, Drs.
Pius Nurwidasa Prihatin, M.Ed., who was willing to spend his precious time for
the sake of guiding me in writing this thesis. My gratitude also goes to all of my
lectures in PBI who have guided and taught me well, especially to Drs. Petrus
Garahim Purba, M.Pd., my academic advisor, Drs. Concilianus Laos Mbato,
M.A. and Fransiscus Xaverius Ouda Teda Ena, S.Pd., M.Pd.I am truly indebted to Drs. Bambang Supriyono, M.M., the principle of SMU N. 3 Yogyakarta, who had permitted me to undertake this research. My special thanks go to Dra. Arti Umiyati and Dra. Sri Indah Asmorowati, the English teachers, who had accepted me and treated me well. I also thank all of the students
of XI IPA 2 of SMU N. 3 Yogyakarta for being my research participants. Bhakti
Vidya Kshatriya Tama, Tan Lalana Labet Tunggal Bangsa, Jaya-jaya Padmanaba!I am immeasurably grateful and thankful to my great and beloved parents,
Antonius Pri Oetomo Soetopo and Maria Gorretti Murwani, who have supported
me through their companion and affection. I also thank my brother, Stephanus Bismo Dharupurnomo.
My gratitude goes to Robertus Bellarminus Drajat Jati Purnama, S.Sn., who has, as always, given me his continued support and affection during finishing this thesis.
I owe great debts to the following people who have helped me during my finishing this thesis: Antonius Eko Haryanto, Intan Sukma Varamashinta, S.E.,
Monika Dini Kurniasari, Sri Ratnasari Sindu Lestari, Amelia Murtyoastuti,
S.Psi., Dewie Angan, S.Pd., Dyah Ayu Margareta P., Binawati Agustin D., S.Pd.,
Ansgaria Oscarita Febriani, Deonisia Tyas Yuniwati, Angel Berta Desi
Suryanti, S.T., Yosepha Henny, S.Farm., Priyatno Ardi, S.Pd., Yohana Ika
Harnita S. and Agatha Nila Sukma.Finally, I must express my appreciation to the staffs of PBI secretariat, mbak Dani and mbak Tari, for their beneficial information during my study.
Matur nuwun awit sadaya pambiyantunipun. Mugi Gusti ingkang Maha Welas tansah paring berkah lan paring piwales panjenengan sami.
Maria Dyah Lintang Primadiani
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
TITLE PAGE ................................................................................................... i PAGE OF APPROVAL ................................................................................... ii PAGE OF ACCEPTANCE ............................................................................. iii PAGE OF DEDICATION ............................................................................... iv STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY ............................................. v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................. vi ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................... xiv ABSTRAK .......................................................................................................... xv TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................. viii LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................... xi LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................... xii LIST OF APPENDICES ................................................................................. xiiiCHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ................................................................... 1 A. Background of the Study .......................................................................... 1 B. Problem Formulation ................................................................................ 5 C. Problem Limitation ................................................................................... 5 D. Objectives of the Study ............................................................................. 5
F. Definition of the Terms ............................................................................ 6 CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE .................
8
8 A. Theoretical Description ............................................................................
1. Product-focused vs. Process Approach ..............................................
8
a. Product-focused Approach ............................................................. 9 b. Process Approach ...........................................................................
10 c. Writing as both a Process and Product ...........................................
12 2. The Presence of Feedback in Writing ................................................
12 a. The Importance of Feedback in Writing .........................................
13 b. What is peer feedback? ...................................................................
14 c. The Benefits of Peer Feedback .......................................................
15 d. Does peer feedback work? ..............................................................
15 e. Peer Feedback as the Implementation of Cooperative Learning ....
16
3. Teaching Writing for the Eleventh Grade Students of Senior High School ................................................................................................. 17 4. The Students’ Perception on the Use of Peer Feedback ....................
18
20 B. Theoretical Framework .............................................................................
CHAPTER III: METODOLOGY .................................................................. 22
22 A. Research Method ......................................................................................
22 B. Research Participants ................................................................................
23 C. Research Instruments ................................................................................
E. Data Analysis Technique ..........................................................................
27 F. Research Procedures .................................................................................
30 CHAPTER IV: DATA ANALYSIS ................................................................
31 A. Data Presentation and Interpretation ..........................................................
31 1. The Improvement of the Students’ Writing Quality .............................
31 2. The Students’ Responses to the Questionnaire .....................................
37 B. Discussion .................................................................................................. 43 CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS .............................
46 A. Conclusions ................................................................................................
46 B. Suggestions ................................................................................................. 47
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................ 48
APPENDICES .................................................................................................. 50
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1 Questionnaire Blue Print ....................................................................25 Table 3.2 The Scoring System of the Students’ Writing ...................................
27 Table 4.1 The Comparison of the Writing Quality of the Students’ Pre-peer and Post-peer Writing ........................................................
32 Table 4.2 The Student’s Achievement on Each Aspect of Writing Quality ......
33 Table 4.3 The Frequency and Percentage of the Students’ responses on Each Statement on the Questionnaire .........................................................
37
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1 The Perceptual Process .....................................................................19
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix 1. Letters of Permission .....................................................................51 Appendix 2. Students’ Pre-peer Writing ............................................................
55 Appendix 3. Students’ Peer Feedback Checklist ...............................................
63 Appendix 4. Students’ Post-peer Writing ..........................................................
71 Appendix 5. Questionnaire .................................................................................
79
ABSTRACT
Maria Dyah Lintang Primadiani. 2007. A Study on the Contribution to the
Improvement of Writing Quality and the Students’ Perception in SMU N. 3
Yogyakarta . Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma UniversityRevision plays an important role in process of writing. In order to have effective revision, students certainly need feedback from their readers. Exposing the students to be independent learners, which is in the line with the Curriculum at the School Level, teachers may utilize peer feedback at this point.
This study deals with the use of peer feedback in the writing class of the eleventh grade students of SMU N. 3 Yogyakarta. There are two problems formulated in this study. The first problem is to what extent peer feedback contributes to the students’ improvement in their writing quality and the second problem is what the students’ perception of the use of peer feedback in their writing class is. This research is a descriptive research because the writer describes the information about the current status of phenomena. In undertaking the research, the writer conducted a writing class and then utilized peer feedback in the class. Gathering the data, the writer used the students’ pre and post peer writing as well as a set of questionnaire.
Based on the data analysis, it was found that peer feedback improves the students’ writing quality in all of the aspects: content, organization, language use, vocabulary and mechanics. Revising their writing based on the feedback from peers, the students have successfully demonstrated better content, organization, language use, vocabulary and mechanics. The content is more knowledgeable and accurate, the organization is more coherent and unified, the language is more accurate, the vocabulary is more effective and the mechanics is more commanded.
Dealing with the second problem, the writer finds out that the students gain positive peer feedback on the use of peer feedback. This answer is proved by the fact that the value of the degree of agreement that most frequently occurred was “agree”. This answer is also sustained the finding of the first problem formulation that was the fact that the students revised their writing based on the feedback from their peers.
ABSTRAK
Maria Dyah Lintang Primadiani. 2007. A Study on the Contribution to the
Improvement of Writing Quality and the Students’ Perception in SMU N. 3
Yogyakarta. Yogyakarta: Universitas Sanata DharmaRevisi merupakan hal yang penting dalam proses menulis. Dalam merevisi tulisan secara efektif, siswa tentu saja membutuhkan umpan balik dari pembacanya. Mendorong siswa untuk menjadi siswa yang lebih mandiri, sesuai dengan Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan (KTSP), guru dapat menggunakan proses saling memberi dan menerima umpan balik antar teman.
Penelitian ini melingkupi penggunaan umpan balik antar teman dalam kelas menulis siswa SMU N. 3 Yogyakarta kelas sebelas. Terdapat dua masalah yang dirumuskan dalam penelitian ini. Masalah yang pertama yaitu sampai seberapakah umpan balik antar teman berkontribusi dalam meningkatkan nilai kualitas tulisan para siswa, sedangkan masalah yang kedua yaitu persepsi seperti apa yang dimiliki para siswa terhadap penggunaan umpan balik antar teman dalam kelas menulis mereka. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian deskriptif karena di dalam penelitian ini penulis menjelaskan fenomena yang ada tentang penggunaan umpan balik di SMU N. 3 Yogyakarta, lebih spesifik tentang kontribusi and persepsi siswa. Dalam melaksanakan penelitian ini, si penulis mengajar dalam kelas menulis dan memanfaatkan penggunaan umpan balik antar teman kepada para siswa. Di dalam mendapatkan data untuk penelitian ini, si penulis menggunakan tulisan siswa sebelum dan sesudah pelaksanaan umpan balik antar teman dan juga mengunakan satu set kuesioner.
Berdasarkan analisis data, umpan balik antar teman ternyata terbukti ampuh untuk dapat meningkatkan kualitas nilai tulisan siswa. Setelah merevisi tulisan mereka berdasarkan umpan balik dari teman mereka, isi, organisasi, bahasa, perbendaharaan kata, dan mekanika penulisan para siswa meningkat. Isi tulisan mereka dinilai lebih detil dan berwawasan, organisasi tulisan mereka dinilai lebih berkembang secara logis and teratur, bahasa mereka lebih akurat dan tepat, perbendaharaan kata dalam tulisan mereka lebih efektif dan akurat, dan mekanika penulisan mereka lebih terkontrol dan terjaga.
Menjawab masalah kedua, penulis menemukan bahwa persepsi siswa terhadap umpan balik antar teman positif. Ini dibuktikan dengan nilai pendapat yang paling sering dipilih siswa dalam merespon pernyataan di kuesioner adalah “setuju”. Bahwa para siswa mempunyai persepsi positif juga dikuatkan dengan bukti nyata bahwa para siswa merevisi tulisan mereka berdasarkan umpan balik yang mereka dapat dari teman mereka.
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION This chapter includes background of the study, problem formulation, problem
limitation, objectives of the study, benefits of the study, and definition of terms that are going to be discussed as follows.
A. Background of the Study
It goes without saying that in English Language Learning, among four language skills (listening, speaking, reading, and writing), writing skill is considered the most difficult to master (Tiedt, 1989: 6). This idea is also supported by Sokolik (2003: 88). She argues that writing skill is considered the most difficult because it involves many human aspects, such as mental and physical activities. It is no wonder that many students do not like writing (Hughey, 1983). They are not well aware of the importance of writing skill. Most of them consider that writing is boring, difficult and must be avoided. When the writer was in her Senior High School, writing was considered as a deadly subject. Yet, writing skill is very crucial for students. Writing skill can be found and is needed in every field of study. Students dealing with ideas and content in any subject will use writing skill as a way of expressing their ideas and thoughts (Tiedt, 1989: 7). Expressing ideas through a good composition is essential for the success of the students’ study. Considering the importance of writing skill, the government and curriculum designer put this skill as one skill that must be
Both in Competencies-based Curriculum (KBK) and Curriculum at the School Level (KTSP), writing is considered as both a product as well as process.
Based on the teaching learning presented in the syllabus development, the students who deal with writing are assigned to follow the stages of writing process (Model
Pengembangan Silabus dan RPP SMA, 2006: 18-19). The whole stages of writing
process include brainstorming, drafting, writing, feedback and revising. It is apparent, then, that the students must do some revision before coming to the final product. Accordingly, revision, in which ideas are emerged and clarified, has become the heart of writing process (Lehr as cited in Pujikurniawati, 2004: 7).
In order to have effective revision, students certainly need feedback from their audience. Many sources are available for the students to receive feedback for their writing. The students may gain feedback from their teachers or their peers. Usually, the students receive feedback from their teacher. Unfortunately, based on Lewis (2002: 18), teacher usually spends more time on giving feedback. The work of Cohen (1990: 71) cites that the teachers commonly give comments on grammar or mechanics rather than on content and organization. In fact, the students often expect their teacher to give comment more on their content and organization. At this point, teachers may utilize peer feedback. One of the advantages of peer feedback, proposed by Hyland (2003: 199), is that peer feedback could enhance active learner participation. Further, peer feedback is believed to create an authentic social context for interaction and learning (Mittan, 1989, as cited in Hyland, 2003: 198). It implies that the students could learn form each other and practice in how to get along with others. The use of peer feedback, then, could create student-centered learning situation in which the students take part as independent learners. It is in line with the principle of Curriculum at the School Level. So, exposing the students to be independent learners in writing class, the teacher should employ peer feedback.
As the writer experienced when she was in the first semester of English Language Education Study Program, her lecturer always provided feedback on her writing. It helped a lot to improve her writing. In semester three, the lecturer tried to implement the use of peer feedback in the writer’s writing class. The writer did what the lecturer instructed. She gave feedback on her peer’s writing as well as revised her writing based on the feedback from her peer. The writer, then, found out that her post-peer writing’s quality was better than her pre-peer writing’s. She had obtained good perception toward the use of peer feedback in improving her writing. She perceived that peer feedback was a beneficial strategy to improve her writing.
A thesis entitled “Students’ Perception on Peer Feedback” and written by Rina (2007), a student of English Education Study Program reveals that on average the students of English Education Study Program obtained good perception toward peer feedback. The students believed that peer feedback were at advantages. The students of Senior High School may have different perception toward the use of peer feedback. The difference may be due to different expectation and needs as well as past experiences. Frequently, different needs, expectation and past experiences lead to different perception. This notion is presented by Bootzin et al (1983: 119) as quoted below:
Perception is also substantially influenced by our needs. When in a particular motivational state, we tend to notice stimuli that in the past have been associated with the satisfaction of that state… Our expectation, past experiences, and psychological states combine, setting us to perceive
Experiencing that the mastery of English skills was not necessary enough for the success of her study, the writer, when she was in the Senior High School, did not consider the four language skills so essential to master. Yet, when she studies at English Education Study Program, becoming a candidate of English teacher, the mastery of all language skills appears to be of the essence. It is not wondered that the use of peer feedback in writing, then, is perceived to be at advantages since writing skill is as essential as other language skills. Further, interviewing the English teachers of SMU N.3 Yogyakarta, the writer comes to a conclusion that peer feedback has not been implemented in the students’ writing activity yet. Teacher written feedback has become the most frequently used strategy of revisions. Even sometimes, the teachers do not provide any feedback for the students. Owing the fact that the students of SMU N. 3 Yogyakarta have different expectation and needs and that they have not been well-involved in the process of peer feedback before, they may perceive peer feedback differently from the way the students of English Education Study Program do.
Considering the idea above, the writer is determined to investigate what perception the eleventh grade students of SMU N. 3 Yogyakarta will be and to what extent peer feedback contributes to the students’ improvement in their writing quality. The eleventh grade students are chosen as population of interest due to the assumption that they have more English exposure, especially in writing, than the tenth grade students do. The twelfth grade students are not chosen for they are no longer involved in academic activity.
B. Problem Formulation
Considering the previous explanation, the problems will be formulated as follows:
1. To what extent does peer feedback contribute to the students’ improvement in their writing quality?
2. What is the students’ perception of the implementation of peer feedback in their writing activity?
C. Problem Limitation
The scope of this study is the use of peer feedback in the writing class of the eleventh grade students of SMU N. 3 Yogyakarta. As noticeably stated above, the focus of this study is to figure out to what extent peer feedback contributes to the students’ writing quality and investigate the students’ perception toward the use of peer feedback. The criteria of writing quality cover content, organization, language use, vocabulary, and mechanics. So, in this study, the writer is determined to see in what aspects peer feedback will give its contribution. The students’ perception is highly valued in this study, as the students’ perception will lead them to different behavioral attitude or response.
D. Objectives of the Study
Two objectives will be obtained in this study. They are sated as follows: 1. To describe the contribution of peer feedback in the students’ writing quality.
2. To examine the students’ perception of the use of peer feedback in their
E. Benefits of the Study
This study is expected to give contribution to:
1. The English teachers The result of the study helps the English teachers of senior high school in general and the English teachers of SMU N. 3 Yogyakarta in particular to be accurately aware and realize that peer feedback improves the students’ writing quality. Having been accurately aware and realized this fact, the teachers are expected to utilize peer feedback as an appropriate strategy in providing a way for the students to gain feedback for their writing.
2. The eleventh grade students of senior high school Knowing that peer feedback improves their writing, the students are expected to employ peer feedback in their writing independently. Next time, in their writing class, the students are expected to be no longer dependent on their teachers in receicing feedback. They could ask their peers to provide feedback for their writing.
F. Definition of Terms
For the sake of avoiding misunderstanding, the writer provides some definition of the terms used in this study. They are stated as follows.
1. Peer feedback
Kauchack, as cited in Berewot (2001: 7), defines feedback as any information concerning about the students’ current behavior used for improving the future performance of the students. Giving feedback means telling the of improvement (Lewis, 2002: ii). According to Lewis, there are three kinds of feedback. They are teacher feedback, peer feedback and self-correction.
In this study, peer feedback in writing refers to any constructive comments/criticism from peers to peers for the sake of improving the writing.
Implementing peer feedback, the students are to exchange their writing to their friends. After that, they should revise their writing based on the comments from their peers.
2. Writing Quality
Writing quality, in this study, is outlined as the evaluation score of the students’ writing judged in its own right against some criteria, which are content, organization, language use, vocabulary and mechanics. The quality of the students’ writing is measured by evaluating the students’ writings based on a weighted rubric taken form the scoring system of the students’ writing (see chapter III).
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE Chapter II is aimed at discussing the theories underlying this study. Thischapter covers theoretical description and theoretical review. The theoretical description presents a detail discussion of four key concepts in this study. Since this study deals with the use of peer feedback in writing class of eleventh grade students of high school, the theories that will be presented cover the issue of product-focused vs. process approach in writing, the presence of feedback in writing, teaching writing for the second year students of senior high school in Indonesia and the students’ perception on the use peer feedback.
By discussing those concepts, the problem formulation will be theoretically answered through the discussion in theoretical description and afterwards the tentative answer of the problem formulation will be stated in the theoretical framework.
A. Theoretical Description
This section deals with product-focused vs. process approach, the presence of feedback in writing, teaching writing for the second year students of senior high school and the students’ perception on the use peer feedback.
1. Product-focused vs. Process Approach
The issue of product-focused and process approach in process of writing has remained controversial in teaching writing to second language learners (Brown,
2001: 334). These two approaches are related, as the process approach has emerged as the critic for the product-focused approach. The theory of these two approaches is present in this study since the theory is closely related to the use of peer feedback in writing activity. The brief discussion of product-focused and process approach is presented below.
a. Product-focused Approach
The theory of product-focused approach is considered traditional. For many years, the teaching writing in ESL/EFL classroom had been synonymous with the teaching of grammar or sentence structure (Richards, 1992: 106). In accordance with Nunan (1999: 272), the product-focused approach is regarded as the writing approach which puts emphasis on the final product that is coherent, free-error text. In line with this argument, Harmer, as cited in Pujikurniawati (2004: 11), states that this approach possesses an interest in the aim of a task and in the end of product. The similar statement is presented by Cohen (1990: 105), who states that the product- focused approach is mostly concerned with the final/finished product of the writing.
There are some requirements, given by Brown (2001: 335), underlying the expected final product of the writing product-focused approach. The first requirement is that the student’s writing should meet certain standard of prescribed English rhetorical style. Hence, the writing instructional program mostly puts emphasis on the patterns and forms of organization used in different kinds of written texts (Richards, 1992: 106). It assumes, then, that the objective of teaching writing based on the product-focused approach is to have the students master certain kinds of The second requirement is that the writing should present accurate grammar. The student, then, are not allowed to make any mistakes in their writing. The last requirement is that the student’s writing must be organized. These requirements bring a consequence for the teacher to evaluate the student’s writing based on the model given. The evaluation is based on a set of criteria including content, organization, diction, grammar, and mechanical considerations like spelling and punctuation (Brown, 2001: 335).
Apparently, the writing product-focused approach emphasizes on the quality of the final product without noticing the stages that the students have to reach the final writing product. As a result, the students are discouraged to take their writing assignment seriously as the focus of the writing product-focused approach is instant product and grade (Cohen, 1992: 105). Instead of noticing the process of taking the writing assignments, the students will just consider the grade that they will achieve.
b. Process Approach
Unlike the product-focused approach, the focus of the writing process in the process approach is on the steps included in drafting and redrafting a piece of writing (Nunan, 1999: 272). Similar to this, Cohen (1990: 105) states that writing refers to the process in which the final expected product comes after a series of time. Further, Cohen adds that the students’ awareness of writing process is highly valued and for this reason, the student’s writing has usually gone through several series of peer feedback and self-assessment before coming to teacher assessment. Another argument of this approach is coming from Sokolik (2003: 96), who considers writing process is a series of skills leading to that product. Based on the definitions above, the writing process approach can refer to the approach having the student reach the final product through a considerable period of time. In other words, this approach provides more opportunities for the students to sharpen their writing skill.
In accordance with Murray, as cited in Richards (1999: 108), there are three stages in writing, namely pre-writing, drafting, and revising. Re-writing involves finding, thinking, develop and organize a topic and ideas. Drafting includes getting the ideas onto paper in rough form. Revising involves evaluating what has been written. In this stage, the students may make changes as necessary. However, these steps should not be linear to follow. The process of writing is supposed to be recursive (Nunan, 1999: 273). In line with this argument, Flower and Hayes, as cited in Cohen (1990: 106), claims that writing is seen as one continuous process which is recursive in nature. It implies that the students can combine the stages instead of following them in strict sequence. Another opinion is given by Kroll as cited in Sokolik (2003: 96).
The “process approach” serves us today as an umbrella term for many types of writing process… What the term captures is the fact that student writers engage in their writing tasks through a cyclical approach rather than through a single-shot approach.
Following the steps in process writing, the students are believed to have several benefits of it. As Richards (1992: 110) points out, the students are given more opportunities to develop their writings into the meaningful ones. Similar to this, Brown (2001: 336) also points out that following the stages of process writing is beneficial for the students. He claims that this process has given the students more chance for the students to write and revise their drafts is crucial, as the students might be anxious when they have no chance to have revision on their writing.
c. Writing as both a Process and Product
Instead of putting the writing process into certain notion that writing is a process or writing is a product, it is best to say that writing is both a process and a product. This idea is supported by Brown (2001: 337).
The current emphasis on process writing must of course be seen in the perspective of a balance between process and product. As in most language teaching approaches, it is quite possible for you to go to an extreme in emphasizing process to the extent that the final product diminishes in importance… This product is, after all, the ultimate goal; it is the reason that we go through the process of pre-writing, drafting, revising and editing… Process is not the end; it is the means to the end.
Furthermore, Sokolik (2003: 88) proposes the same argument saying that writing is defined as both a process and product. She puts emphasis on the idea that the process of writing is often cyclical and sometimes disorderly and what the readers see is a product.
This idea implies that the process and the product of writing must be equally valued. In other words, the process of writing is as important as the product of writing. The students must experience the process of writing (pre-writing, drafting and revising) as well as do their best to gain the best quality of the final writing product.
2. The Presence of Feedback in Writing
Supporting that writing is both a process and product, Shih, as cited in Brown They are focusing on the process of writing that leads to the final product, providing enough time for the students to write and rewrite, providing central importance on the process, and encouraging feedback from both the instructors and peers.
a. The Importance of Feedback in Writing
The presence of feedback is essential to learning to write in foreign language (Hyland, 2003: 207). It is due to the fact that in order to have effective revision, the students certainly need feedback form their audience. Feedback tells the students information concerning their current behavior for the sake of improvement (Kauchack, as cited in Berewot, 2001: 7). So, feedback is a useful means for the students to improve their writing and, at last, sharpen their writing ability. It could be concluded that the presence of feedback in writing is considered crucial, as feedback provide the writers with a sense of readers and lead them to the awareness of the needs of the readers (Hyland, 2003: 207).
Many sources are available for the students to receive feedback for their writing. The students may receive feedback from their teachers or friends. The feedback that the students receive mainly comes from their teacher. However, following Lewis’s argument, teacher usually spends more time on giving feedback (2002: 18). Further, Cohen (1990: 71), states that the teachers commonly give comments on grammar or mechanics rather than on content and organization. In fact, the students often expect their teacher to give comment more on their content and organization. This argument is presented by Cohen (1990: 71) as quoted below:
It has been observed that a learner’s motivation to write can be negatively affected by a teacher’s untimely or exclusive focus on surface issues of form (e.g. grammatical concerns, spelling, and
b. What is peer feedback?
It appears that another theory supporting this study is the theory of peer feedback. The work of Richards (1999: 113) points out that in the process of peer feedback, the students cooperatively work in groups, read, criticize, and then proofread their own writing. From the definition above, it can be concluded that peer feedback in writing class refers to the process where the students exchange constructive criticism to their peers in order to improve their writing.
Basically, the students may tend to feel more comfortable in having the feedback provided by their teacher rather than their peers. Despite it, implementing peer feedback is not considered less valuable (Chaudron as cited in Cohen, 1990 pg. 112). Even, researchers have suggested teachers to make use of peer feedback more (Cohen, 1990: 112).
In order to make peer feedback effective for the students, the teacher should follow certain guidelines. According to Sokolik (2003: 98), the teacher should provide some kind of structured feedback framework. It is due to avoiding the students’ being confused on what to give comments. Moreover, the teacher should expose the students to give comments more on the ideas or organizations than on the grammar or mechanics, as the students often make mistakes the idea of giving feedback or revision with correcting grammar or sentence structure (Sommers cited in Sokolik, 2003 pg. 98). For that reason, it is best for the teacher to spend more time in explaining about the process of pre-writing, drafting and revising separated from editing for grammar or spelling (Sokolik, 2002: 98). It, however, does not imply that the students are not allowed to exchange positive criticism to their peers on their
c. The Benefits of Peer Feedback
Peer feedback is believed to provide several advantages. The work of Hyland (2003: 199) claims that peer feedback enables the students to develop their critical reading skills. Not only developing the students’ critical reading skill, peer feedback also gains the students’ skill necessary to critically revise their own writing (Zhang, 1995, as cited in Hyland 2003: 198). Peer feedback, then, can enhance active learner participation (Hyland, 2003: 199). According to Lewis (2002: 18), the students can save their time in revising their writing based on the feedback from their peers, as teacher usually spends more time in giving feed back. Further, peer feedback creates an authentic social context for interaction and learning (Mittan, 1989, as cited in Hyland, 2003: 198). It implies that the students could learn form each other and practice in how to get along with others. Cooperating together in giving feedback also results in the students’ esteem. Working together, the students are supposed to feel responsible for participating, therefore, in this activity, leadership is distributed (Larsen-Freeman, 2000: 168). As a result, the students are more confident.
d. Does peer feedback work? It is comprehensible that writers need to write for audience (read: readers).
By utilizing peer feedback, the students are given an opportunity to gain feedback from authentic readers, which are their peers, as well as to understand the readers’ needs. The presence of authentic readers is considered important in learning to write as basically writing is social interaction between writers and readers. So, when the students write for no purpose or for no reader, the communication does not take individual, but a joint endeavor between writers and readers. Writing, then, is fundamentally dialogic. Writing, then, is a conversation between writers and readers in an ongoing activity.
Sokolik (2003: 93) suggests that feedback should be helpful and meaningful to be effective to create successful language use. Therefore, peer feedback should be helpful and meaningful to build successful language use. Despite many cons toward the implementation of peer feedback in writing class, according to Rollinson (2005), peer readers can provide useful feedback in writing classroom. This notion is verified by the research conducted by Rollinson in 1998 that revealed that 80% of feedback/comments from peers were considered valid. In addition, it was found that only 7% of the comments were considered damaging. Further, the work of Mendonca and Johnson (1994), as cited in Hyland, states that writers make use of peer feedback in their revisions despite their second language proficiency, group dynamics and prior knowledge. It entails the fact that the students can revise their writing effectively on the basis of feedback form their peer readers.
e. Peer Feedback as the Implementation of Cooperative Learning
In accordance with Cohen (1990: 112), the teacher can make use of cooperative learning in revision step as a special means of getting feedback. He proposed his idea as quoted below:
Another way to ensure ample feedback is to elicit the support of non- native peers in the classroom, usually within a structured framework. For example, learners may be requested to form working groups and to take turns reading each others’ papers… Sometimes learners pass their papers around so that each participant reads all other papers; sometimes one learner reads his or her paper aloud to the rest of the group while
This idea implies that peer feedback could be considered as the implementation of cooperative learning. The emphasis of the using of peer feedback is that it assigns the students to cooperate with their peers in revising their writing. The steps in conducting the peer feedback would be grouping several students in the same group and then having them read their peers’ writing and give constructive criticism. Having finished giving feedback, all of them discuss together about feedback/comment they have given. Apparently, the successful implementation of peer feedback is determined by the successful cooperation among the group members.
3. Teaching Writing for the Eleventh Grade Students of Senior High School
According to Curriculum at the School Level or KTSP, the basic competence in writing skill for the eleventh grade students of senior high school requires the students to express meanings and rhetoric development in essays by making use of written language fluently and accurately on the context of daily life in form of report, narration, and analytical exposition (mengungkapkan makna dan langkah retorika
dalam essei dengan menggunakan ragam bahasa tulis secara akurat, lancar, dan
berterima dalam konteks kehidupan sehari-hari dalam teks berbentuk: laporan,
narasi dan eksposisi analitis) (Model Pengembangan Silabus dan RPP SMA, 2006:
18-19). In line with the syllabus development, in this study, the writer assigned the students to write essays in form of analytical exposition. The writer assigned the students to write argumentative writing. In writing analytical exposition or argumentative writing, the students are to state their thesis statement and then their