Analysis of Teacher's Feedback on Students in Writing Recount Text  at Senior High School

Winda Sari; Sholihatul Hamidah Daulay

doi:10.29240/ef.v7i1.6442

Analysis of Teacher's Feedback on Students in Writing Recount Text at Senior High School

Winda Sari, Sholihatul Hamidah Daulay

Abstract

This study aims to examine the types of written feedback given by teachers on the writing of eleventh-grade senior high school students at SMA Tarbiyah Islamiyah. The instrument used was document analysis to examine the type of written feedback given by the English teacher on the writing results of tenth-grade students majoring in Social Sciences (IPS) and Natural Sciences (IPA). The findings revealed that the two teachers used different written feedback on students' writing. Teachers who teach in the Science major tend to use direct written feedback and teachers who teach in the Social Sciences department use indirect feedback. It can be concluded that the reason for the different types of written feedback used is that teachers who teach in science majors think that direct feedback is more detailed and understood more quickly by students. Meanwhile, teachers who teach in the Social Sciences major argue that providing written feedback indirectly it can encourage students to think and make students more curious about the mistakes they write and students can ask questions to the teacher.

Keywords

writing; recount text; written feedback.

Full Text:

PDF

References

Anderson, M., & Anderson, K. (1997). Text types in English. 1. Australia: Macmillan Education Australia.

Chen, Y. S., & Su, S. W. (2012). A genre-based approach to teaching EFL summary writing. ELT Journal, 66(2), 184–192. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccr061

Daulay, SH., (2011). Introduction to General Linguistics. Medan: La-Tansa Press.

Daulay, S. H., Dewi, U., & Pulungan, R. (2022). Using Digtogloss Dictation Method to Improve Students’ Skills in Writing Narrative Text. AL-ISHLAH: Jurnal Pendidikan, 14(2), 1703-1710.

Daulay, S. H., Damanik, E. S. D., & Annisa, N. (2023). Student’s Difficulties on Writing Descriptive Text. EJI (English Journal of Indragiri): Studies in Education, Literature, and Linguistics, 7(1), 54-66.

Ellis, R. (2008a). A typology of written corrective feedback types. ELT Journal, 63(2), 97–107. https://doi. org/10.1093/elt/ccn023

Ellis, R. (2008b). Principles of Instructed Language Learning Asian ELF Journal, 1(1), 1–16.

Emilia, E. (2011). Pendekatan Genre Based Dalam Pengajaran B Inggris. Bandung: Rizqi Press.

Ferris, D. (2002). Treatment of error in second language student writing. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

Ferris, D. (2003). Response to student writing : implications for second language students. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Ferris, D., Hyland, K., Hyland, F., Ferris, D., Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2012). Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short- and long-term effects of written error correction. In Feedback in Second Language Writing (pp. 81–104). https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139524742.007

Ferris, D. R. (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing studies. Language Teaching, 45(4), 446–459. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444812000250

Ferris, D. R., & Hedgcock, J. S. (2004). Teaching ESL composition: Purpose, process, and practice. In Teaching ESL Composition: Purpose, Process, and Practice: Second Edition. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410611505

Ferris, D., & Roberts, B. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(3), 161–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(01)00039-X

Gerot, L., & Wignell, P. (1994). Making Sense of Functional Grammar. Retrieved from https://books.google.co.id/ books/about/Making_Sense_of_Functional_Grammar.html?id=RlRdnQEACAAJ

Halliday, M., & Matthiessen, C. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar. (Third). London: Routledge. Harmer, J. (2004). How to Teach Writing: Written. Retrieved from https://www.amazon.co.uk/How-Teach-Writing- Publisher-Paperback/dp/B00SLUOFRU

Harmer, J. (2007). The Practice of English Language Teaching (Fourth). Retrieved from https://www. bookdepository.com/Practice-English-Language-Teaching-4th-Edition-Book-DVD-Pack-Jeremy- Harmer/9781405853118

Hyland, K. (2007). Genre pedagogy: Language, literacy and L2 writing instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(3), 148–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.07.005

Jalaluddin, I., Md. Yunus, M., & Yamat, H. (2011). Improving Malaysian rural learners’ writing skill: A case study. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 1845–1851. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.013 Jarvis, D. J. (2002). The Process Writing Method. The Internet TESL Journal, 8(7), 1–10. Retrieved from http:// iteslj.org/Techniques/Jarvis-Writing.html

Lewis, M. (2002). Giving feedback in language classes. The University of Auckland : SEAMEO Regional Language Centre.

Martin, J. R. (1985). Language, register and genre. Children Writing: Reader, 1(1), 984.

Nunan, D. (2003). Practical English language teaching. New York: McGraw-Hill/Contemporary.

Poudel, A. P. (2018). Academic Writing: Coherence and Cohesion in Paragraph. 1(1), 1–10. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322537095_Academic_Writing_Coherence_and_Cohesion_in_ Paragraph

Reid, J. M. (1993). Teaching ESL writing. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cat03043a&AN=bupn.00172698&site=eds-live

Richards, J. C., Hull, J. C., & Proctor, S. (1990). The Language Teaching Matrix. In The Language Teaching Matrix (Fourth). https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511667152

Richards, J. C., & Renandya, W. A. (2002). Methodology in language teaching: an anthology of current practice (Second). England: Cambridge University Press.

Suryani, I., & Daulay, S. H. (2022). Students’ Perceptions on Writing Activities by Using Padlet Application. The Proceedings of English Language Teaching, Literature, and Translation (ELTLT), 11(1), 175–188. Retrieved from https://proceeding.unnes.ac.id/index.php/eltlt2021/article/view/1658

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.29240/ef.v7i1.6442