Written corrective feedback on students’ thesis writing: an analysis of student-supervisory interactions

Adrefiza, Adrefiza; Fortunasari, Fortunasari

doi:10.26418/jeltim.v2i1.37317

Cited by 6 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The students often put the corrections in their memory to become alert in the next writing, which develops and accelerates the students' writing skills and performance. Through WCF, students are aware of their inaccuracies and errors, which increases students' autonomous learning in writing (Adrefiza & Fortunasari, 2020). Students learn a lot from the WCF since it forms a process in which they become accustomed to handling their errors and inaccuracies from the lecturers' feedback.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There has been a growing interest in studying written corrective feedback (WCF) provided by lecturers on students' writing tasks in the last several years (Bitchener, 2008;Bitchener & Knoch, 2009;Kumar & Stracke, 2007;Adrefiza & Fortunasari, 2020). Although its efficacy and effectiveness remain controversial (Truscott, 1996;Bitchener, 2008), studies have suggested that WCF plays a significant role in developing students' self-regulatory learning (Stracke and Kumar, 2010) and significantly accelerates the students' writing skills and performance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although its efficacy and effectiveness remain controversial (Truscott, 1996;Bitchener, 2008), studies have suggested that WCF plays a significant role in developing students' self-regulatory learning (Stracke and Kumar, 2010) and significantly accelerates the students' writing skills and performance. WCF has also been claimed to boost students' autonomous learning in writing (Adrefiza & Fortunasari, 2020). It strengthens and facilitates students' self-regulatory learning through an engagement process in which they become accustomed to handling their errors and inaccuracies from lecturers' feedback.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The practice of SRL by providing WCF in the students' academic writing is likely uncommon in most local Indonesian HEIs (Adrefiza & Fortunasari, 2020). They claim that studies on how WCF affects students' learning and motivation have been almost absent in academic atmospheres and students rarely receive enough and meaningful feedback from the lecturers to enhance their SRL.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Students’ Voices on Lecturers’ Written Corrective Feedback (WCF) in Their Writing Tasks

Adrefiza

Hidayat

Fortunasari

2021

IEE Ind. J. Eng. Edu.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Students’ Voices on Lecturers’ Written Corrective Feedback (WCF) in Their Writing Tasks

Adrefiza

Hidayat

Fortunasari

2021

IEE Ind. J. Eng. Edu.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Feedback in writing is described as written comments to a student's written product. It is available in written corrections, remarks, or markings [9,13]. In this study, feedback refers to the supervisor's comments and markings on the flaws and mistakes in the students' research proposals.…”

Section: Definition Of Feedbackmentioning

confidence: 99%

Student’ Preferences on the Focus of Feedback in Writing Research Proposals

Yunita¹,

Kusuma²

2022

Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Educational Science and Teacher Profession (ICETeP 2021)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Students' preferences on the focus of feedback may improve the efficacy and efficiency of the supervisory process. However, there is a frequent misalignment of the focus of feedback among students and supervisors. This research aims to reveal the types of focused feedback preferred by the students and the types of focused feedback provided by the supervisors in the students' research proposals. The design employed a mixed-method design. The instruments used were a questionnaire and a table checklist. The data were collected through survey and documents analysis. The quantitative data were analyzed quantitatively while the qualitative data were analyzed qualitatively. Based on the questionnaires, the result of the types of focused feedback preferred by the students respectively is content focused feedback with the scores of 154 (25.84%). Meanwhile, based on the analysis of the documents, the types of focused feedback provided by the supervisors in the students' research proposals is the language form-focused feedback with the scores of 185 (33.27%). It can be concluded that students preferred to get content-focused feedback while the supervisors tend to provide feedback that focused on the language form.

show abstract

Exploring the perceptions and experiences of university lecturers on corrective feedback in students' research project supervision: a case for computer-mediated mode

Osiesi

Azeez²,

Adeniran³

et al. 2023

JARHE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis study intends to add to the existing body of literature and provides a strong advocacy for the use of the computer-mediated corrective feedback by university lecturers in Nigeria and elsewhere. The purpose of this paper is to explore the perceptions and experiences of lecturers toward students' research project supervision using the computer-mediated corrective feedback, factors that facilitate its use, the most preferred computer-mediated corrective feedback types and the extent of its usage in project supervision.Design/methodology/approachThis research relies on both the Dialectical Theory and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. This study adopted the interpretivist philosophical paradigm. The case study approach of the qualitative design was used in this investigation. The research participants were selected using the multi-stage sampling procedure. In all, twenty-four (24) lecturers (four from each university, comprising 16 males and 8 females and their ages ranged from 37 years to 61 years) made up the study sample. In-depth interviews were held with these lecturers. The collected data were transcribed and coded and themes were generated based on the responses of research participants using inductive-thematic analysis (ATLAS.ti version 22).FindingsThe results indicated that lecturers' perceptions towards the computer-mediated corrective feedback in students’ research project supervision are positive, as they considered it flexible, speedy and economical. Users' personal and device-related factors affect the deployment of computer-mediated corrective feedback for students' research project supervision. E-mail, WhatsApp and Zoom are the three themes that emerged as computer-mediated corrective feedback types that lecturers adopt while supervising students’ research projects. Therefore, the study recommends that lecturers should take full advantage of computer-mediated corrective feedback in supervising students' research projects in lieu of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Universities should also provide an enabling environment that facilitates computer-mediated corrective feedback.Originality/valueStudies (outside Nigeria) have been conducted on CMCF using predominantly the experimental and the quantitative research designs in ascertaining the impact of this mode of feedback on students' writing performances. Other studies examined students' perceptions toward CMCF. However, little or no attention has been given to the use of CMCF in the supervision of students' research project writing, especially in Nigeria. Moreover, calls for more qualitative research into lecturer-student interactions and the assessment of educational issues have emerged in recent times. It is against this backdrop that this study explored university lecturers' perceptions and experiences of CMCF on students' research project supervision in Nigerian universities.

show abstract

Written corrective feedback on students’ thesis writing: an analysis of student-supervisory interactions

Cited by 6 publications

References 7 publications

Students’ Voices on Lecturers’ Written Corrective Feedback (WCF) in Their Writing Tasks

Students’ Voices on Lecturers’ Written Corrective Feedback (WCF) in Their Writing Tasks

Student’ Preferences on the Focus of Feedback in Writing Research Proposals

Exploring the perceptions and experiences of university lecturers on corrective feedback in students' research project supervision: a case for computer-mediated mode

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About