284
EEJ 12 (2) (2022) 284-292
English Education Journal
http://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/eej
Teachers’ Practice of Form-Focused Feedback in Writing Classroom
Teaching Writing At SMK N 1 Blado, Batang.
Eka Nur Fatmah, Warsono Warsono, Dwi Anggani L.B
Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia
Article Info
________________
Article History:
Accepted 18 February
2022
Approved 30 May
2022
Published 20 June
2022
________________
Keywords:
Teachers’ Practice,
Form-Focused
Feedback (FFF),
Teaching Writing
____________________
Abstract
___________________________________________________________________
This study focused on the description of the teachers’ perception, plan,
implementation, and evaluation of Form-Focused Feedback (FFF) in teaching
writing. It employed a descriptive qualitative study that applied interviews,
questionnaires, and classroom observations in obtaining the research data. The
research took place in a vocational high school in Central Java and involved two
teachers as well as the twelfth-grade students as the research participants. The
results of the study show that the teachers mostly have the same perceptions of
Form-Focused Feedback as the experts and researchers of previous related
studies. The teachers’ lesson plans show that the teachers included almost all the
categories to implement FFF. However, an assessment category which is
essential in teaching and learning process was not covered in the lesson plan.
The implementation of FFF in teaching writing show that there was only in one
out of four meetings the teachers implemented the FFF. Both teachers integrated
the FFF and Project Based Learning methods through group discussion. The
evaluation of the FFF show that the students made good progress in the form
context. It affects the text’s coherence and cohesion and helps students write
more accurately. Teachers’ perceptions, planning, and implementation of the
FFF have a positive relation to each other. In addition, it suggests that Form-
Focused Feedback be used in writing classroom. Also, teachers need to
anticipate the facts that the FFF implementation may occur along with the
challenges and problems.
Correspondence Address :
Pacasarjana UNNES Jl kelud Utara 3 Sampangan Semarang,
Indonesia,
E-mail : ekanurfatmah91@gmail.com
p-ISSN 2087-0108
e-ISSN 2502-4566
Eka Nur Fatmah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (2) (2022) 284-292
285
INTRODUCTION
English as a lingua franca is used in in
official events world-wide. In Indonesian
education context, English is taught as a foreign
language and a compulsory course given to
primary up to university students. The
implication is to offer the scholars practical
competencies allowing students to use the
English language for communication.
English contains four primary skills:
speaking, listening, writing, and reading. The
students have to master those skills equally to
give a good result of teaching English because
one skill interconnects with others. In
vocational high schools, writing is one of the
language skills that should be taught.
According to Caroline (2003), writing means
creating something in written form so people
can read, execute, and use it. Therefore, the
teacher has an essential role in reinforcing
students to produce written form so that it can
be readable by people.
In writing class, students should produce
meaningful written texts. However, the pre-
research of twelve-grade students of SMKN 1
Blado (one of the vocational high schools in
Central Java) showed that most of them still
produce errors, especially in grammatical
forms. Therefore, the teacher has a vital role in
giving input and correcting the students’
writing errors, and use better ways to instruct
writing, including feedback. Hyland (2006)
stated that feedback seen as crucial for
encouraging and consolidating learning. This
significance has also been recognized by those
working in the field of second language (L2)
writing. Moreover, according to Najmaddin
(2004), giving feedback is one of the most
appropriate ways of instruction in second
language writing. For this reason, teachers
should provide a relevant feedback to
encourage students in writing. Furthermore,
casual observation of English teachers’
practices in the United Arab Emirates (UAE)
suggests that most teachers’ written feedback
tends to focus more on a form (i.e., correctness
of grammatical structures and mechanics)
rather than on content (i.e., ideas, coherence,
and organization). Therefore, form-focused
feedback is recommended to be used in
correcting the students’ errors.
Ellis (2001) stated that form-focused
instruction is any planned or incidental
instructional activity aimed to induce language
learners to focus on linguistic form. It is a
generic term for analytic teaching, focusing on
structures, corrective feedback/error
correction, and negotiation of form.
Consequently, it is believed that teachers’ form-
focused feedback can regard as input for the
students to improve their writing skills. Also, it
will help students clarify their understanding of
the meaning of the language. It is supported by
Oksana (2015) that the use of various focuses
on form strategies could promote language
acquisition.
According to Montgomery and Baker
(2007), teachers perceived to give less feedback
on local issues (grammar, mechanics) and more
feedback on global topics (ideas, content,
organization, vocabulary) than they did.
Regarding the statements above, it is crucial to
explore teachers’ perceptions towards the
implementation and evaluation of feedback to
explore what they think and students’ needs
towards feedback.
Lindsay and Norman (1972) stated
perception interprets as the process which
individuals experience their environment both
person and the stimuli. Teachers have their
perspectives on the teaching and learning
process, and it is very imperative to build
attitude and behavior in improving their
language learning strategy so that harmonious
views contribute to facilitating the teaching-
learning process and help them achieve optimal
learning outcomes.
The preliminary research result of
twelfth-grade students of SMKN 1 Blado,
showed that most of them still produced errors,
especially in grammatical forms. Therefore, the
teacher has a vital role in giving input and also
correcting on the students’ writing errors, and
use better ways to instruct writing, including
feedback.
Eka Nur Fatmah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (2) (2022) 284-292
286
From the statements above, it seems that
the effectiveness of feedback in students’
writing also depends on the teachers’ ability to
perceive the students’ needs and preferences.
Regarding the statements above, the present
study explored the teachers’ practice of form-
focused feedback for vocational high school
students in Indonesia, along with the problems
that occurred during the form-focused feedback
implementation and the evaluation strategies
used by the teachers to assess the students’
work.
There are numerous studies related to the
topic of the present study. The previous studies
were functioned to find any gaps and help show
the current research’s novelty. Regarding
perception concept, Erkkila (2013) in her study
showed that the teachers involved do not offer
feedback other than error corrections.
Moreover, Rauda (2013) stated that most
teachers focused on meaning and content
errors. In line with this study, Riyadh and
Faridi (2017) also said that congruent
perspectives facilitate the teaching-learning
process and help achieve optimal learning
outcomes. Pohan (2016) emphasized that the
teacher, as the leading actor in the successfully
implementing learning instruction, needs to
have a good perception of it conceptually. Here,
sufficient knowledge about the instructional
framework concerning its plan, procedure, and
assessment is very fundamental. Also, the
teachers’ perception play an essential role, for
different perceptions may affect the teachers’
behavior based on their judgments (Wayan,
2017). It means that the teachers’ perception is
important in teaching and learning.
In the case of considering feedback in
general, Asnawi et al. (2017) presented that
feedback can enhance language learning and
make the students realize the way they express
the target language has been mistaken in it. In
other words, feedback is given as a response to
the students’ errors when using the target
language. It strengthens Bookrhart’s study
(2008) that providing students with feedback
motivates them and gives them control over
their learning. Also, Nahadi et al. (2015) stated
that the application of feedback in formative
assessment has a positive impact toward
students’ learning process activity. Students
became more enthusiastic, motivated, and
more active in learning processes. In line with
those statements, Michael (2010) revealed that
student feedback as an appraisal tool has a
positive impact when thoughtfully
implemented. Moreover, Noriah et al. (2014)
and Farrah (2012) said that feedback given to
students was helpful and provided a platform
for the students to do self-revision. It is one of
the most effective lifelong learning process and
peer feedback offered an opportunity for social
interaction and improved students’ writing
skills. Moreover, it enhanced students’ critical
thinking, confidence, creativity, and
motivation. Feedback also has a significance
role. Implementating the written feedback to
improve the learning competence in grammar
practice in writing was working well. It could
enhance the students’ writing skills in grammar
practice and improve the students’ interest in
learning grammar. They will be more careful in
writing, especially in punctuation and spelling
(Wijayanti, 2015). From this study, it seems
that feedback is one way to solve students’
errors especially in form context. It is
compatible with Astrid’s study (2015) that the
implementation of writing feedback techniques
affected students’ writing ability. Similarly,
Isnawati (2019) emphasized that corrective
feedback can facilitate students’ revision,
especially in terms of students’ language
accuracy. From the researchers above, it can be
inferred that feedback has a positive impact on
the teaching and learning and also supports
students’ achievement.
Regarding form-focused feedback, there
are some previous studies conducted. Peloghitis
(2010), in his study tried to investigate the
impact of FFF on improving overall essay
scores and on the use of three types of
grammatical forms between students who
receive-focused feedback and students who do
not receive form-focused feedback. The result
showed that the control group made a
significant level of improvement in
Eka Nur Fatmah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (2) (2022) 284-292
287
organization and in the overall score of their
essays. Moreover, the form-focused feedback
significantly improved grammar and
performance in accuracy in two grammatical
areas. As stated by Zohrabi and Rezaie (2012),
the students who received form-focused
feedback improved considerably. In line with
the statement above, they investigate the effect
of focused feedback on the students’ revision
and explore the relationship between correction
and text improvement. The result showed that
focused feedback appears to hold promise as a
means of facilitating negotiation and problem
solving, enhancing efforts, and potentially
affecting the quality of writing.
From the research results presented, it
can be observed that using form-focused
feedback refine the students’ grammatical
errors and improve their writing skills. Related
to some studies that presented benefits of
applying form-focused feedback to teach
students in writing class, this study explored
how teachers used form-focused feedback to
refine the students’ errors in writing style.
Furthermore, some differences exist between
some studies mentioned early and this research.
The studies mentioned do not consider the
teachers’ perception, plan, implementation,
and evaluation of form-focused feedback.
There are five objectives of this present
study: to investigate the teachers’ perception of
form-focused feedback in teaching writing; to
examine the teachers’ planning to implement
form-focused feedback in teaching writing; to
describe the teachers’ implementation of form-
focused feedback in teaching writing; to
describe how the teachers evaluate form-
focused feedback in teaching writing; to
analyze the relationships between teachers’
perception and practice of form-focused
feedback in teaching writing.
METHODS
The design of this study was descriptive
qualitative research to investigate the teachers’
perceptions, plan, implementation, and
evaluation of form-focused feedback in
teaching writing. The research was held in
SMKN 1 Blado and involved two teachers and
twelve-grade students as the research
participants. The data were gathered through
questionnaires, interviews guidelines,
document analysis guidelines, and observation
checklists. Furthermore, the research process
was based on Creswell (2014).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
This section presents the research results
and interpretations based on the data obtained
through questionnaires, interviews, document
analyses, and observations.
Teachers’ Perceptions of Form-Focused
Feedback (FFF) in Teaching Writing
Gained the findings of teachers’
perceptions of FFF in teaching writing from an
interviews with two teachers as the
respondents: Teacher #1 and Teacher #2. They
responded to 13 questions about the concept of
feedback and the implementation of FFF. The
first discussion was about how teachers
perceive the idea of FFF and what the teachers
know about FFF. Both teachers stated that
Form-Focused Feedback is feedback that
focused on form context: vocabulary,
grammatical errors, and structure. The
teachers’ perceptions are primarily similar to
the experts’ perceptions. That definition is in
line with Ellis (2001) that FFF serves as a
generic term for analytic teaching, focusing on
form, error correction, and negotiation of form.
The first aspect of teachers’ perceptions
is that Feedback can motivate the students’
writing. This perception is similar to the
experts. For example, Nahadi et al. (2015)
stated that the application of feedback
encourages the students and gives them control
over their learning.
The second perception is about the
purpose of Form-Focused Feedback. Both
teachers perceive that the goal of FFF is to
improve and give corrections in writing,
especially to revise the students’ grammatical
errors. This statement supports Zohrabi (2007)
Eka Nur Fatmah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (2) (2022) 284-292
288
that Form-Focused Feedback appears to hold
promise as a means of facilitating negotiation
and problem solving, enhancing efforts and
potentially affecting the quality of writing.
The third perception is about the
procedure of Form-Focused Feedback, which
can be done in various ways. It can be given
through direct or indirect, written and oral
feedback, and in manual ways or through
technology.
The fourth perception is about the benefit
of Form-Focused Feedback. Both teachers
perceive that the use of FFF made students
understand and aware of vocabulary, grammar,
and structure to produce good writing. The
teachers’ perceptions are in line with
Peloghitis’s study (2010) showing that the FFF
made a significant gain in grammar and
performance in accuracy in two grammatical
areas.
Lastly, it is about the teachers’
perceptions about the evaluation of Form-
Focused feedback. To evaluate the
implementation of FFF, both teachers thought
that it could be done by giving the students
assignment with a different topic to know their
progress in writing.
The teachers’ Lesson Plan for FFF
implementation
The data analysis of the teachers’ lesson
plans is shown in the table below.
Table1. The Summary and Result of Aspects
Found in the Teachers’ Planning
Table 1 shows that the teachers include
almost all the categories such as learning goals,
time allotment, teaching materials, and
classroom activities to implement FFF. The
two teachers make the lesson plans with their
creativity and needs. However, one category
was not included in the lesson plan, such as
assessment which is essential in the teaching
and learning. All in all, the lesson plan is
simple but straighforward
In four meetings, there is only one
evaluation using form-focused feedback in the
fourth meeting. In the first meeting, there is
only feedback without specific information.
Moreover, in the lesson plan, the teacher
integrated Form-Focused Feedback through
Project Based Learning using the group
discussion method.
The Implementation of Form-Focused
Feedback in Teaching Writing
The data for this section were mainly
obtained from the class observations. The
observation was conducted 4 times for each
teacher. During the observation, they did
observation checklist field notes to collect some
data. Aspects in the observation checklist
became guidelines to know what kind of action
the teachers did. The aim of employing the
observation checklist was to point out and
highlight the teachers’ efforts and the classroom
situation during their teaching. The result of the
observation checklist can see as follows:
Category Mentioned Not
Mentioned
Learning Goal V
Time allotment V
Teaching
materials
V
Classroom
activities
V
Assessment V
Source of
Learning
V
Teaching media V
Eka Nur Fatmah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (2) (2022) 284-292
289
Table 2. Observation Checklist result
No
.
Checklist Teacher
#1
Teacher
#2
Ye
s
N
o
Ye
s
N
o
Does the
teacher make
an
introductory
section
(showing
media to the
today’s topic)
V v
Does the
teacher tell and
share the
previous
writing test
result and
students’ main
problem in
writing
V v
Does the
teacher explain
the material or
topic for
today’s writing
activities?
V v
Does the
teacher give
changes for
any students’
opinion or
interruption
V v
Does the
teacher give
feedback and
motivation in
any occasion?
V v
Does the
teacher
organize the
student in
some
groups/pairs to
complete
V v
today’s writing
activities?
Does the
teacher state
the instruction
clearly to
students?
V v
Does the
teacher observe
the
groups/pairs
while taking
some notes?
V v
Does the
teacher check
the
groups/pairs to
make sure that
students are
doing well
V v
Does the
teacher
motivate the
students in
learning
process?
v v
Does the
teacher have
difficulty in
managing the
class during the
Form-Focused
implementatio
n?
v v
Does the
teacher tend to
take students’
writing score
and provide
feedback from
their writing
performances?
v v
Does The
teacher makes
a self-reflection
after teaching
which is used
V v
Eka Nur Fatmah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (2) (2022) 284-292
290
for the next
meeting?
Table 2 depicts that the teachers mostly
had met the observation checklist, only three
question checklist items having the different
and absence of practices which are the
participation of teacher in group discussion and
self- reflection. Then, in using technology, both
teachers used it well. They used PowerPoint to
explain the material and took voice notes to
make it clear. Both teachers gave the material
before the FFF activities at the end of the
meeting to test the students’ understanding of
the previously delivered material. The
observation gained many facts about how the
teachers implement FFF in online classes. The
teachers produced the materials using the same
media. Both of them used PowerPoint media.
#Teacher1 implemented FFF in the fourth
meeting. After the teacher checked the
students’ work by underlying and headlining
the error part, he gave it again to the students
and asked them to pay attention to revision.
The teacher explained more about the correct
Vocabulary and Grammar used in a short
formal report. After that, he asked the students
to read aloud voice note for each part. Here, the
FFF was done well because there was input
from the students, and they learned a better way
to write the next assignment. Also, teacher #2
implemented FFF in the third meeting. She
explained the students’ errors in the writing
projects and presented them through voice
notes to make them clear. Then, she asked them
to revise it still in a group discussion. Moreover,
from the interview, it gained information that
limited time is a central problem. It relates to
the topic that needed extra time to be explained
and discussed. Therefore, both teachers could
not provide feedback effectively. Also, after
giving feedback, some students were still
confused and did not notice their errors, so they
made the same mistake in the next project. To
overcome it, the teachers explained their errors
in detail after the meeting.
The Evaluation of Form-Focused Feedback
At the end of meeting, the teachers
instructed the students: “Write again a simple
report using a better vocabulary, grammar, and
structure” still in group discussion. The result
showed that the students made good progress in
the form context. Also, it affects the coherence
and cohesion of the text. As Teacher #2 stated,
“I can say there is an improvement after FFF
implementation, although it cannot be said
perfect”. By knowing their errors, the students
can make a better version of their work.
Moreover, it helps students to write more
accurately.
Sometimes students only focused on
composing a good writing through its’ content,
but after FFF was implemented, they could
learn how to compose writing concerning its
form. It is the same light Hyland (2003) in
Amelia (2020, pp. 4) stating that providing
feedback to students allows them to see how
others respond to their work, how they learn
from responses, and finally get a range of
messages. Also, the students are more aware of
the form context during writing. In the same
light, Sujito (2018) stated that feedback gave the
students get new knowledge to improve their
writing quality product. From the
questionnaire that the teachers have fulfilled,
there are some discussions related to the
evaluation of FFF, such as: FFF is easy to
implement in class. Moreover, it effectively
refines the students’ errors and encourages
students to produce a better writing project.
Also, FFF helps teachers to refine their
teaching way in the future. In addition, FFF is
practical to be implemented in teaching writing.
It is in line with Zahida’s study (2014) that
feedback plays a pivotal role in EFL classroom
for both learners and teachers. Moreover, to
gather the data, questionnaires were also given
to the students to know their opinion about the
FFF implementation. From 60 students, 19
students said that grammar is the most
challenging thing in writing, 21 students voted
on structure, and 20 on vocabulary. It means
that those three aspects become the main
difficulties in writing. Also, they are afraid of
Eka Nur Fatmah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (2) (2022) 284-292
291
making mistakes. After getting feedback and
revising their work, they feel that their writing
skill is improving for the next project. They
learned not to make the same mistake and have
a better mastery of vocab, grammar, and
structure. From those statements, it can be
concluded that FFF is suitable to be
implemented and can fulfill the students’ need,
especially in writing class.
The Relation of Teachers’ Perceptions,
Planning, and Implementation of FFF in
Teaching Writing
This study has three concerns: teachers’
perceptions, planning, and implementation of
FFF. Based on the findings, those have relation
to each other. Firstly, teachers’ perceptions
influence the way the teachers implement FFF.
Borg (2003) stated that perception becomes a
guide to thought and behavior that lead to
action, for instance, in selecting the procedure
of FFF. Teachers perceived that FFF is
associated with Project-Based Learning with
the group discussion. In FFF implementation,
it was observed that the teacher integrated those
learning models effectively by dividing the
students into groups, giving the assignment,
and letting them discuss to produce writing.
The teachers also perceived that in FFF, the
teachers could provide it through various ways:
direct, indirect, traditional, and used
technology during giving FFF. It seems when
the teacher asked students to revise their work
and asked them to read loudly via voice note.
Teachers’ perceptions of the FFF
implementation, such as the actual practice and
the benefits, also influence the teachers to set
the goals of FFF implementation and the
concept of FFF. For instance, the teachers
believe that FFF can improve grammar,
vocabulary, and structure. In real practice, the
teachers focus on their product and pay
attention to the form context.
The second relation is teaching planning
affects the GBL implementation. The case of
FFF implementation in the present study
showed that when the teachers give feedback to
students, they make a scenario for running FFF
although not in detail. Apart from the things
that might happen differently from what
planned in the procedure, the teachers could
successfully run FFF.
CONCLUSIONS
The current study showed that teachers’
perceptions, planning, and implementation of
FFF have a relation and affection each other.
Also, it showed that FFF is appropriate to be
implemented in writing class, for it affects the
coherence and cohesion of the text and helps
students to write more accurately.
It suggests that Form-Focused Feedback
is supposed to be used in teaching writing, for it
encourages students to improve their writing
skills. It also advises that teachers know the
facts of FFF implementation and the challenges
and problems that may occur. A good
understanding of those things will be helpful in
preparing the teaching strategies and the
appropriate feedback for students so that they
can achieve the teaching goals.
REFERENCES
Amelia, R. (2020). Students’perception on
employing self-directed feedback in
writing. Journal of Applied Linguistic and
Literature Vol. 5 No.1.
Afitska, O. (2015). Role of focus-on-form
instruction, corrective feedback and
uptake in second language classrooms:
some insights from recent SLA research.
Language Learning Journal of the University
of Sheffield.
Arifin, A. R., & Faridi, A. (2017). The students’
perception and achievement of English
reading comprehension using cognitive
learning strategy. English Education
Journal.
Asnawi et al. (2017). Students; Perception of Oral
Corrective Feedback in Speaking Classes.
Syiah Kuala University.
Astrid, A., Rukmini, D., Sofwan, A., Fitriati,
S. (2017). The Effect of writing feedback
techniques and students’ writing anxiety
Eka Nur Fatmah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (2) (2022) 284-292
292
on students’ essay writing
ability. International Journal of Foreign
Language Teaching and Research, 5(18),
37-51.
Borg, W R & Gall, M D. (2003). Educational
Research: an Introduction (7. ed). Logman
Inc.
Caroline, C. Etal. 2003. Teaching Academic
Writing. Centre of Language and
Communication, Routledge, Falmer.
Creswell, J. W. (2010). Research design:
pendekatan kualitatif, kuantitatif, dan
mixed. PT Pustaka Pelajar.
Ellis, R. 2001. Task-Based Language Learning and
Teaching. OUP.
Erkkila, M. (2013). Teacher Written Feedback:
Teachers’ perceptions of given feedback.
Jyvaskyla University.
Farrah, M. (2012). The Impact of Peer Feedback
on Improving the Writing Skills among
Hebron University Students. Hebron
University.
Giannakopoulu, A. (2007). Writing, revision,
and the role of focused feedback: A study in
the development of writing skills in the EFL
classroom. University press.
Hyland, K. (2006). Feedback on second language
students’ writing. Cambridge University
press
Ismail et al. (2008). the impact of teacher feedback
on ESL students’ writing performance.
UPENA UTM.
Isnawati et al. (2019). Impacts of teacher-
written corrective feedback with teacher-
student conference on students’ revision.
International Journal of Instruction 1308-
1470.
Kelso, M. (2010). The Impact of Students
Feedback on Secondary Teachers. Unitec
Institute of Technology New Zealand.
Lindsay, P.H., & Norman, D.A. (1972).
Human Information Processing: An
Introduction to psychology. Academic
Press, NY, USA.
Maba, W. (2017). Teachers’ perception on the
implementation of the assessment
process in 2013 curriculum. International
Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities.
Nahadi et al. (2015). Effect of feedback in
formative assessment in students
learning activities on chemical course to
the formation of habits of mind.
Indonesian Journal of Science Education,
4(1).
Peloghitis, J. (2011). Form-focused feedback in
writing: A study on quality and
performance in accuracy. In A. Stewart
(Ed.), JALT2010 Conference Proceedings.
JALT: Tokyo.
sari, E., Levana, Y. (2016). Teachers’
perceptions of task- based language
teaching in English classroom.
Proceedings of the Fourth International
Seminar Language and Teaching.
Rashed, R. (2013). English Language
Teahers’Percpetion Regarding Providing
Corrective Feedback. United Arab
Emirates University.
Sujito, S. (2018). Applying direct peer feedback
to foster vocational school students’
English writing performance. IAIN
Surakarta Journal.
Wijayanti, P., Bharati. D.A.L., & Mujiyanto, J.
(2015). The use of written feedback
technique to improve the practice of
grammar for sentence writing
competence. English Education Journal
Postgraduate Universitas Negeri Semarang.
Zahida, R., Farrah, M., & Zaru, N. (2014). The
Impact of three types of written feedback
on the motivation and writing skill. An-
Najah Univ.J. Res. (Humanities) Vol. 28
(5).
Zohrabi, M. (2012). the role of form-focused
feedback on developing students’ writing
skill. Theory and Practice in Language
Studies, Vol.2 No. 7