THE EFFECT OF TEACHER’S WRITTEN FEEDBACKS ON INDONESIAN EFL LEARNERS’ RECOUNT WRITING COMPETENCE Marwito Wihadi & Ine Martiana The Effect of Teacher’s Written Feedbacks on Indonesian EFL Learners’ Recount Writing Competence THE EFFECT OF TEACHER’S WRITTEN FEEDBACKS ON INDONESIAN EFL LEARNERS’ RECOUNT WRITING COMPETENCE Marwito Wihadi Department of English Education, University of Kuningan, IndonesiaEmail: m_wihadi@yahoo.com Ine Martiana Department of English Education, University of Kuningan, IndonesiaEmail: inemartiana@yahoo.co.idAPA Citation: Wihadi, M. & Martiana, I. (2015). The effect of teacher’s written feedbacks on IndonesianEFL learners’ recount writing competence. Indonesian EFL Journal, 1(1), 58-62Received: 03-10-2014 Accepted: 06-11-2014 Published: 01-01-2015 Abstract: This paper investigated the effect of teacher’s written feedbacks in recount writingcompetence and the students’ attitudes towards written feedbacks. Giving written feedbacks helpsstudents to decrease their errors and gives guidance in writing as a beginner writer. This studyemployed a quantitaive and qualitative research design. The experimental group given writtenfeedbacks. For measuring the effect of written feedbacks, a pretest and posttest was administered toboth group. Meanwhile, for getting their attitudes toward teacher’s written feedbacks wasadministered questionnaire and open-ended interview. Based on the data, teacher’s writtenfeedbacks gave positive effects on their improvement in recount writing competence. The result ofquestionnaire and interview showed that students got real guidance and special attentionindividually in their writing process as a beginner writer. Keywords: written feedbacks, recount writing competence, attitudes. INTRODUCTIONEnglish Foreign Language learners learnEnglish as integrated process that needsappropriate guidance in order to balance theall of skills. Everyone has agreed that fourskills including reading, listening, speakingand writing should be well-balanced forlearners' actual language development. Inthis present study, writing skill will become amajor focus. Harmer (2001) assumed thatwritten text has a number of conventionswhich separate it out from speaking. Apartfrom differences in grammar and vocabulary,there are issues of letter, words, and textformation, layout and pronunciation. Itmeans that in writing competence there are alot of aspects that should be achieved.Brown (2000) revealed “Foreignlanguage contexts are those in which studentdo not have ready-made context forcommunication beyond their class room”. Itmeans that foreign language learners are noteasy to put and generate their ideas directlyin writing form. Their effort must be made to create some opportunities. Such as specialmedia, special treatment from the teacherand so on.Hyland (2003) cited in Hyland & Hyland(2006) affirmed that teacher writtenfeedbacks are substantial comments onpapers to provide a reader reaction tostudents’ efforts, to help them improve aswriters and to justify the grade they havebeen given. Gulcat and Ozagac (2006) alsorevealed “the most important aspect whilegiving feedback is adopting a positiveattitude to the students writing”. So, whenthe teacher only highlights the all ofmechanical errors, the students will be hardto correct the errors because they becomediscourage to revise their writing task.Duppenthaler (2002) lists that there arethree types of written feedbacks: (1)meaning-focused feedback, in which heengaged in an ongoing and cumulative,interactive dialog, providing commentaryon the content, suggesting future topics, andasking for additional information and 58 mailto:inemartiana@yahoo.co.id Indonesian EFL Journal, Volume 1 (1) January 2015ISSN 2252-7427 clarification; (2) Positive comments, inwhich he responded with phrases such as“well done,” “keep up the good work” and“keep writing,” and with occasional shortpositive comments on the content, but didnot engage in an ongoing interactive dialog,or ask for additional information andclarification; and (3). Error-focused feedback,in which he corrected all errors, in red ink, inthe participants’ journal entries with norevision required on the part of theparticipants.In teaching and learning writing,feedback becomes a tool for measure ourquality and the accuracy. In EFL learners,they still lack in understanding and cannotcomment their or the others work. It becauseEFL learners still need a real guidance that isteachers’ responses on their writing task.Although, responding to and commenting onstudent writing consumes the largestproportion of teachers’ time. Specifically,however, we comment on student writingbecause we believe that it is necessary for usto offer assistance to student writers.Williams (2003: 101) affirmed that thereare three major innovations in the processapproach in improving students writing: (a)Asking students to write often, (b) Providingfrequent feedback on work in progress, (c)Requiring numerous revisions based on thatfeedback. Those three factors involved instudent-centered Instruction. So, that whythe researcher interested in providingwritten feedback on their writing progressand let them revise the feedback individually.While, Wilson (2009: 96) argued that“giving feedback is a key to successfuldevelopment of potential, increasingmotivation and assessment. Feedback is partof learning process, because it tells thelearners how they are doing”. It means thatfeedback has crucial effect in learningprocess. That is not only in their writingachievement but also in their attitude.This study seeks the effect of writtenfeedbacks on students’ writing recountcompetence and students’ attitude towardsteacher’s written feedbacks. In getting thedata in score form the researcher conductstwo times of treatments to the experimental group. Besides that, to know the students’attitude towards the teacher writtenfeedbacks the researcher gives aquestionnaire and interview. METHODThis study employed a mixed-methodresearch. Quantitative and qualitativeresearches are employed to get the dataneeded. The experimental research designwith pretest-treatment and posttest used toget the data. Four meetings held for pretest-two times of treatments-posttest which doneduring two weeks. The treatments areteacher’s written feedbacks on their writingrecount competence.The participants of this study were 40students of class X IIS 1 and X IIS 3 in one ofSenior High School in Darma. The aims of thetest are to evaluate the students’ backgroundknowledge and the treatments’ effectstoward students’ improvement in theirwriting recount competence. Meanwhile, ingetting students’ attitudes the researchergiven questionnaire and open-endedinterview after tests were done. Thequestionnaire given in Indonesian, it consistsof ten questions adopted from Chen & Hamp-Lyons (1999: 216) and Lee (2008: 163). Thefive open-ended questions also given to someof sample. The question delivered inIndonesian. There is no different learningprocess between experimental and controlclass. The difference is the treatment only.Experimental class received teacher’s writtenfeedbacks on their writing tasks. Theresearcher corrected their errors on each text.The results of each test were calculated to seetheir improvements. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONAll scores were computed to analyze thedata. A technique such independent t-test isused to compare the output of the two tests(pretest and posttest). In order to answer thefirst research question, independent samplet-test regarding the experimental and thecontrol class was calculated first. As Table 1displays, both experimental and control classhad almost the same significance on the 59 Marwito Wihadi & Ine Martiana The Effect of Teacher’s Written Feedbacks on Indonesian EFL Learners’ Recount Writing Competence pretest and there was no significantdifference between the two groups.As the findings in Table 2 show, therewas a highly significant difference betweenthe experimental and control class in theposttest-pretest total gain scores (ttable =4.838, sig > 0.005). The result shows anincrease from the pretest to the posttest and improvement in learning occurred moresignificantly in the experimental class andcontrol class. Thus, the experimental classperformed significantly better the controlclass by showing significantly higher gainscore from the pretest and posttest. Table 1. Independent sample t-test related to both groups’ performances on the pretest Table 2. Independent sample t-test related to both groups’ performances on posttestLevene's Testfor Equality ofVariances t-test for Equality of Means Sig. (2-tailed) MeanDifference F Sig. t df Sig(2-tailed) MeanDifference Std. ErrorDifference 95% ConfidenceInterval of theDifferenceLower UpperPost1 Post2 Equalvariancesassumed 4.525 .040 4.838 37 .000 16.068 3.321 9.339 22.798Equalvariancesnotassumed 4.891 32.607 .000 16.068 3.285 9.382 22.755One outstanding factor which made bothclasses different was teacher’s writtenfeedbacks. The control class less, even neverreceived written feedbacks on their writingprocess in this study, compared with thewritten feedbacks or experimental class. Thisis a welcome development by many as itshows the direction in which writtenfeedback becomes guidance for their writingprocess as a beginner.The main purposes of this research is toknow the effect of giving feedback instudents’ recount writing competence. Thedata of students’ recount writing successfullycollected through test. After the writeranalyzed the data, the writer found that thisresearch or ttest > ttable the result is 4.838 > -2.336. It means that there is different significance between pretest and posttestscore in experimental class. So, writtenfeedbacks have positive effect in improvingstudents’ recount writing competence.The students’ attitudes toward theteacher’s written feedbacks were collectedfrom two major ways. Those arequestionnaire and interview. The two waysconducted to get the real and validinformation toward the teacher’s writtenfeedbacks on their writing task.With regard to the second question, itcan be stated that experimental classexpressed satisfaction about the positiveeffect of the teacher’s written feedbacks.They stated that the treatment is very usefulfor their writing process and theirunderstanding about how to compose a good Levene'sTest forEquality ofVariances t-test for Equality of Means F Sig. t Df Sig.(2-tailed) MeanDifference Std.ErrorDifference 95% ConfidenceInterval of theDifferenceLower Upper 60 Indonesian EFL Journal, Volume 1 (1) January 2015ISSN 2252-7427 recount text. They also revealed thatteacher’s written feedbacks becomes aspecial contact with the teacher were allreally beneficial and motivating to them tocorrect their mistakes.Written feedbacks prevent the studentsfrom being discouraged and the studentsbecome more enthusiastic in learningrecount writing. The responses of studentshave a good response towards teacher’swritten feedback for students’ recountwriting competence. It is shown from theresult questionnaire’s answer from students.Although, it is only half of them understandwhat the entire comment. But more than halfof them can correct the errors. It can be seenin their result of post test that experimentalclass got higher means score than controlclass. The result of interview indicates thatteacher written feedbacks had good effect intheir writing recount competence. All of themagree they could enhance their errors writingafter received written feedbacks. They do notneed much time to correct their mistakes.They assert it is very useful for them as abeginner writer. All of them agree if theirEnglish teachers also apply this method inthe future.Based on the interviewing, theresearcher gets viewpoints towards thestudents’ attitudes on the written feedbacks.Generally, students understand towardsteacher’s written feedback but still confusedto understand red marks, or circle marks.Although the students do not understand thewhole written comment, they asserted thatthe written feedbacks are very useful fortheir comprehending in their process ofwriting. They are more easy to understandthe meaning-focused feedbacks suchsuggestion than error-focused feedbackssuch red ink. Because writing learning needsmuch time and more attention so threestudents of five get easy to feel bored. But allof them realize that teacher’s writtenfeedbacks are very useful for theirimprovement in writing learning process.Eventually, they agree if their English teacherespecially can apply this method in the futurewith creatively teaching learning. Eventually, there are many positiveeffects of written feedbacks for their writingcompetence in EFL learners. Analysis of thedata has indicated that there is a positiverelationship between the usage of writtenfeedbacks and improvement of writingcompetence achievement. CONCLUSIONBased on the objectives of research, theresearcher undertook the present study todetermine the effect of teacher’s writtenfeedbacks for EFL learners in improvingrecount writing competence. This was doneby comparing the improvement gained by theexperimental class. Both classes were givenwriting tasks at the low level of intermediatelevel.The analysis revealed that theimprovement obtained by two groups were,to a certain degree, different. The number ofstudents’ errors in certain aspects wasdecreased as students worked with writtenfeedbacks. Most students declared thatwritten feedbacks have many beneficialeffects in their writing process. Although, thepositive effects of written feedbacks on theirwriting tasks are concerned, it is necessary toconduct further research involving othersubjects within the context of EFL learning. Itis nevertheless to be expected that thesefindings will be beneficial to EFL learners.Finding of the study showed that the useof giving feedbacks enhancing students’achievement in writing. There are manyreason why giving written feedbacks isadvantageous for students and teacher ineducation. First, by giving written feedbacksstudents realize their mistakes and theirmisunderstanding and finally they candecrease their mistakes. Secondly, throughwritten feedbacks, teacher easily to interactwith each student individually with eachneeded. So, teacher’s written feedbacks cantake place between a teacher and student(group of students) over writing tasks is notlimited to the confines of a classroom.Finally, giving written feedbacks alsogive individual attention to the students.Teacher gives revision and suggestion incertain assignment due to the particular 61 Marwito Wihadi & Ine Martiana The Effect of Teacher’s Written Feedbacks on Indonesian EFL Learners’ Recount Writing Competence procedure, teacher also free in revise theirmistakes in each students without disturbingthe other students’ focus. ReferencesBrown, H. D. (2000). Teaching by principle. An interactive approach to language pedagogy: Second Edition. San Francisco: LongmanDuppenthaler, P. M. (2002). Feedback and Japanesehigh school English language. JALT Journal, 24(2).Eagly, A.H & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes: Fort worth. Texas: Harcourt BraceJovanovich.Ferris, D. (1999). The case for grammar correction in L2writing classes: A response to Truscott (1996). Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), 1–10.Fraenkel, J. R & Wallen, N. E. (2009). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, inc.Giorgi, A. (1975). An application of phenomenologicalmethod in psychology. In A. Giorgi, C.T Fischer, & F.Murray (Eds.), Duquesne studies in phenomenological psychology, II (pp. 82-103).Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press.Gulcat, Z & Ozagac, O. (2006). Correcting and givingfeedback to writing. Bogazici: University SFLHamp-Lyons, L & Chen, J. (1999). An investigation into the effectiveness of teacher feedback on student writing. English language teaching and learning. TheHong Kong Polytechnic UniversityHarmer, J. (2001). The practice of English language teaching. Cambridge: LongmanHattie, J. & Helen, T. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.DOI:31021003465430298487Hornby, A. S. (1995). Oxford advance learner’sdictionary of current English: Fifth edition. Oxford:Oxford University Press.Hyland, K & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback on secondlanguage students' writing. Language Teaching, 39(2), 83-101.Hyland, K. (2003). Second language writing. New York:Cambridge University PressJayathilake, C. (2013). Correcting errors: The relativeefficacy of different forms of error feedback in second language writing. English Review: Journal of English Education, (1)2, 136-152.Koentjaraningrat. (1990). Metode-metode penelitian masyarakat. Jakarta: Pustaka JayaKvale, S. (1996). InterViews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. California: SAGEPublication.Lee, I. (2007). Student reactions to teacher feedback intwo Hong Kong secondary classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17, 144-164.DOI:10.1016/j.jslw.2007.12.001Marczyk, G. R., DeMatteo, D. & Festinger, D. (2005). Essential of research design and methodology.Canada: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.Munawaroh, M. ( 2014). Analisis literasi kuantitatif siswa SMA dalam konsep pertumbuhan dan perkembangan tumbuhan. Bandung: UPI. Retrievedfrom http//repository.upi.edu |perpustakaan.upi.eduOskamp, S & Schultz, P.W. (2005). Attitudes and opinions: Third edition. London: Lawrence ErlbaumAssociates, Inc.Priyatno, D. (2009). 5 jam belajar olah data dengan SPSS 17. Yogyakarta: C.V Andi.Rassaei, E & Moinzadeh. (2011). Investigating theeffects of three types of corrective feedback on theacquisition of English Wh-question forms by IranianEFL Learners. English Language Teaching 4(2).Srichanyachon, N. (2012). Teacher written feedback forL2 learners’ writing development. Silpakorn University Journal of Social Sciences, Humanities, and Arts, 12(1), 7-17.Sugiyono. (2012). Metode penelitian pendidikan: Pendekatan kuantitatif, kualitatif dan R & D.Bandung: Alfabeta.Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammarcorrection in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46(2), 327- 369.Wahidi, R. (2008). Genre of texts. Retrieved fromhttp://rachmatwahidi.wordpress.com.Williams, J.D. (2003). Preparing to teach writing: Research, theory, and practice. United State ofAmerica: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Wilson, L. (2009). Practical teaching: A guide to PTLLS & DTLLS. Canada: Cengage Learning EMEA. 62 http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=ntt_athr_dp_sr_2/180-4592594-7728369?_encoding=UTF8&field-author=David%20DeMatteo&search-alias=digital-text&sort=relevancerank http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=ntt_athr_dp_sr_3/180-4592594-7728369?_encoding=UTF8&field-author=David%20Festinger&search-alias=digital-text&sort=relevancerank