This study examines written corrective feedback (WCF) provided by the lecturers on their supervisee-students' thesis drafts at the English Education Program, Faculty of Education, Jambi University. Following Kumar and Stracke (2007), the analysis focuses on the types and distribution of WCF by Holmes' (2008) three main categories of speech acts: (a) Referential (editorial, organization, content); (b) Directive (suggestion, question, instruction); and (c) Expressive (praise, criticism, opinion). The use of non-linguistic features such as question mark, interjection, circle, and underline was also identified to see the supervisors' emotional expressions during the interactions. The findings show that Referential was the most frequent types of WCF identified (131 out of 271 or 48.3 %), followed by Directive (107 or 39.5 %). Expressive, on the other hand, was not very common with only 33 instances (12.2%) found in the data. Overall, the majority of the lecturers' WCF were dominated by the use of Editorial (102 = 37.6 %) but with a very limited number of Opinion (4 = 1.5%)) and Content (6 = 2.2%).  A total number of 394 non-linguistic symbols were identified along with the lecturers' WCF to show their personal and psychological expressions. Apart from its frequent absence in many students' writing assignments, the provision of WCF on the students' writing does not only play a key role in improving the students' writing but also accelerates their self-directed learning.

The study aims to investigate the students’ speaking anxiety levels, find the effect of anxiety, and identify the factors influencing students’ speaking participation. This study involved 62 students in the second semester of the English Education Department, UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta. This study employed a mixed-method design. To gather the data, a set of questionnaires was utilized based on the Foreign Language Speaking Anxiety Scale by (Horwitz et al., 1986) and an interview. The result of the FLCAS questionnaire classified the category of student anxiety. There were 8 students categorized as very anxious level, 29 students as anxious level, 23 students as mildly anxious level, and 2 students as relaxed level. Students with mildly anxious levels and very anxious levels were interviewed to probe richer data. Further, the study found the effect of students’ speaking anxiety on their speaking participation: considering the idea they want to express, refusing to ask or argue, and being hesitant to participate. This study also found several factors influencing students’ speaking participation, such as English proficiency level, students’ low self-esteem, afraid of making mistakes, lack of preparation, motivation, the method used, and lecturer's attitude

Kegiatan pengabdian masyarakat ini memberikan penyuluhan sosialisasi cerdas dan bijak menggunakan media sosial di era digital kepada siswa kelas IX SMPN 7 Muaro Jambi. Kegiatan ini dilatarbelakangi oleh fenomena penting yang muncul dalam kehidupan masyarakat sejak tahun 2000an, yaitu adanya jejaring media sosial seperti Friendster, YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Whatsapp, dan banyak lagi lainnya. Tidak dipungkiri adanya jejaring tersebut telah memberikan berbagai fasilitas kemudahan kepada penggunanya, misalnya dalam berkomunikasi, menyebarkan dan mendapatkan akses informasi. Seiring dengan banyaknya manfaat positif yang didapat, dampak negatif dari maraknya media sosial pun dirasakan nyata. Didasari oleh fenomena ini, maka tim pengabdian ini memberikan penyuluhan sosialisasi bagaimana menggunakan media sosial secara cerdas dan bijak sehingga tidak terpapar oleh pengaruh negatifnya. Sehingga diharapkan kedepannya, siswa-siswa ini akan menjadi individu-individu yang bertanggung jawab dalam menggunakan media sosial.

This study aimed to describe the President's speech text as a critical discourse analysis taken on the Indonesian Republic Secretariat Cabinet website, conveyed by Ir. Joko Widodo as the 7th president of the Republic of Indonesia. The methodology used by the researchers was a descriptive qualitative method. This textual content analysis is base on Van Dijk's design by which the research unit section is divide into three parts: macro-structure, supra structure and microstructure. The study revealed that the textual content was analyzed thematically or the discourse's subject in the macro-structure. The theme of Jokowi's speech was about Indonesia's excellence. It can be seen clearly from almost all the paragraphs in the statement stating one general subject, namely, about Indonesia's superiority. Then, for the supra-structure, Jokowi's speech text is divided into three main elements: opening, content, and closing, which consisted of two opening paragraphs, eighteen content paragraphs, and two closing paragraphs. The last was microstructure. It was analyzed in a semantic way, which refers to the text's social meaning and the language modes used in the text. Semantically, the text of Jokowi's speech was analyzed from its setting, detail, intention, and presupposition. From Jokowi's information, this expression shows that the speech's overall form contained all the speeches delivered by him; opening, filling, and closing. What has become very clear to set Jokowi apart from many other international public figures is that he uses simple language. The things that Jokowi has brought can be an excellent lesson for people when speaking in front of the audience. Keywords: Critical Discourse Analysis, Jokowi’s Speech Text, Van Dijk’s Design

Although studies on Written Corrective Feedback (WCF, hereafter) have been increasingly prevalent in the last few years, inquiries on how advisory students perceive the lecturers’ feedback on their writing tasks have been likely scarce, especially in Indonesian Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) contexts. This study examines the students’ perception and evaluation of the lecturers’ WCF in response to errors and inaccuracies in their academic writing tasks. Through an online survey questionnaire distributed to 46 respondents via email, the results show that the majority of students appreciated any forms of feedback from the lecturers. Their writing skills in four aspects (grammar, vocabulary, organization, and mechanics) also improved significantly through an enhancement of their self-directed learning. Following the analysis model by one of previous studies, the results showed that the students preferred direct WCF to the Indirect one (58.7 %: 15.2 %), while the “Praise” category was given the highest rate with an average score of (4.06). “Criticism”, on the other hand, was the lowest one with an average score of only (2.3) in the evaluation. It is recommended that lecturers always avoid unclear, vague, aggressive, thoughtless, and inappropriate feedback to improve students’ writing skills and performance. ABSTRAKMeskipun studi tentang Umpan Balik Korektif Tertulis (WCF, selanjutnya) semakin lazim dalam beberapa tahun terakhir, namun, diskusi tentang penilaian mahasiswa terhadap umpan balik dosen terkait tugas menulis mereka sangat terbatas, terutama dalam konteks Lembaga Pendidikan Tinggi Indonesia (PT). Penelitian ini mengkaji persepsi dan evaluasi mahasiswa terhadap WCF dosen dalam merespon kesalahan dan ketidaktepatan dalam tugas menulis akademik mahasiswa. Melalui kuesioner survei online yang dibagikan kepada 46 responden melalui email, hasilnya menunjukkan bahwa mayoritas mahasiswa mengapresiasi segala bentuk umpan balik dari dosen. Keterampilan menulis mereka dalam empat aspek (tata bahasa, kosakata, organisasi, dan mekanik) juga meningkat secara signifikan melalui peningkatan pembelajaran mandiri mereka. Mengacu kepada model analysis dari salah satu penelitian terdahulu, ditemukan bahwa penggunaan WCF Langsung lebih disukai oleh siswa daripada penggunaan Tidak Langsung (58,7%: 15,2%), sedangkan kategori “Pujian” diberikan nilai tertinggi dengan nilai rata-rata (4,06). Sementara, “Kritik” adalah yang paling rendah dengan skor rata-rata hanya (2,3) dalam evaluasi. Disarankan agar dosen selalu memberikan semangat, namun hindari umpan balik yang tidak jelas, kabur, agresif, ceroboh, dan tidak tepat untuk meningkatkan kemampuan menulis dan prestasi mahasiswa.