efek umpan balik teman sebaya terhadap kinerja ... - Pasca Unhas

EFEK UMPAN BALIK TEMAN SEBAYA TERHADAP KINERJA PENULISAN MAHASISWA BAHASA ASING THE EFFECTS OF PEER FEEDBACK ON EFL LERANERS’ WRITING PERFORMANCE

Silvani Umar Ali, Hamzah Machmoed, Burhanuddin Arafah

Program Studi Bahasa Inggris, Program Pascasarjana, Universitas Hasanuddin Dosen Program Studi Bahasa Inggris, Program pascasarjana, Universitas Hasanuddin Dosen Program Studi Bahasa Inggris, Program Pascasarjana, Universitas Hasanuddin

Alamat Korespondensi: Program Studi Bahasa Inggris Program Pasca Sarjana Universitas Hasanuddin Makassar, 90245 HP: 081343773686 Email: [email protected]

Abstrak

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui (1) efek dari umpan balik teman sebaya terhadap kinerja penulisan pembelajar bahasa Inggris sebagai bahasa asing; (2) respon pembelajar terhadap umpan balik teman sebaya dalam kelas penulisan bahasa Inggris. Studi ini adalah model experiment yang terdiri atas dua kelompok: kelompok eksperimen dan kontrol. Penelitian ini dilaksanakan di Universitas Khairun, Maluku Utara dengan 30 pembelajar sebagai sampel. Data dikumpulkan dengan menggunakan tes awal, perlakuan, tes akhir, kuesioner, dan wawancara. Tes menulis diberikan kepada kedua kelompok. Skor dinilai oleh dua penilai. Data dianalisis dan diinterpretasikan dengan menggunakan program software SPSS. 14.0. Hasil penelitian menunjukan bahwa umpan balik teman sebaya memberikan efek yang signifikan terhadap kinerja penulisan pembelajar bahasa inggris sebagai bahasa asing dalam hal isi teks, penyusunan kalimat dan paragraf, tata bahasa, kosakata, dan mechanism. Hasil peningkatan skor penulisan pembelajar dari tes awal sampai tes akhir menunjukan perbedaan yang signifikan. Ditemukan sig (2tailed) adalah 0.00 lebih kecil dari 0.05. Hasil perbandingan peningkatan kinerja pembelajar antara kelompok eksperiemen dan kontrol adalah 0.000. Hal ini berarti bahwa kinerja penulisan pembelajar meningkat secara signifikan. Aplikasi umpan balik teman sebaya meningkatkan kinerja penulisan pembelajar. Hasil penelitian menunjukan bahwa umpan bailk teman sebaya direspon positif oleh pembelajar dalam kelompok eksperimen. Kata : Umpan balik teman sebaya kinerja penulisan, dan respon,

Abstract This research aimed to find out (1) the effects of peer feedback on EFL learners’ writing performance; (2) the students’ responses towards the use of peer feedback in their English writing classroom. The research design was an experiment involving two groups: experimental group and control one. The study was carried out at Khairun University, North Moluccas with the sample of 30 students. The data were obtained by means of pre-test, treatment, post-test, questionnaire, and interview. The writing test was administered both to the students of both groups. The scores were assessed by two assessors. The data were analyzed and interpreted by means of SPSS 14.0. The study reveals that peer feedback Peer feedback has a significant effect on EFL learners’ writing performance in terms of content of the text, sentences and paragraphs organization, language use, vocabularies, and mechanism. The result of students’ writing score improvement from pre-test to post-test demonstrate a significant difference. It was found that sig. (2-tailed) is 0.00 lower than 0.05. The comparison of the students’ writing improvement outcome between the two groups is 0.000 which means that the improvement is significant. The application of peer feedback increases students’ writing performance. The finding signifies that peer feedback is responded positively by the experimental class. Keywords: Peer feedback, writing performance, and response

INTRODUCTION In university level, teaching and learning to write in English has been designed in the curriculum for students who major in English department which starts from undergraduate students to post graduate students. Khairun University which is located in the eastern part of Indonesia, North Mollucas, for example, is one of the universities which offer writing as one of compulsory subjects starting from the third semester until the sixth. The reality of teaching English writing at Khairun University revealed that most of English department students have problems and tend to find many difficulties in producing a good piece of writing. So far, based on the researcher’s preliminary research by interview with some of lecturers and students in this university, there are number of crucial issues concerning the teaching and learning of writing. First of all, students’ accuracy and fluency in writing is problematic. Secondly, students’ poor knowledge becomes one cause that makes them difficult to write. The next problem is word choice and lack of vocabulary which prevent students from expressing their ideas properly. Finally, the form of spelling is problematic to them because English spelling is far different from Indonesian spelling. The results of students’ English writing test prove that the quality of their written texts is low quality and it is caused for many reasons. Insufficient writing practice is one of the most important factors that influence students’ pieces of writing. Less correction and feedback becomes another reason that affects student’s writing quality. Generally, students get feedback on their written product mainly from the teachers, rarely from the peers. Even, the teachers provide feedback they tend to generate or evaluate feedback such as what Coupe (1986:86) addressed “good job”, or “you should try more”. It is also found that the students are rarely asked to revise their writing for better improvement based on the teachers’ feedback. In addition, there is no cooperative learning among students in learning writing in English. The last reason, according to many students of this university is stressful writing environment. In this case, a study which is intended to enhance students’ motivation and improve their performance in writing is considered necessary. Peer feedback strategy can be considered as a strategy that can solve the problems above. The researcher chose peer feedback strategy because peer feedback is still controversial issue. It can be seen from the previous studies above that many researchers have investigated on peer feedback. It has a positive response on the use of peer feedback in EFL writing classroom because it can improve students’ writing competence.

However, until this time, peer feedback effectiveness is still debated. Carson and Nelson (1996: 205) and Hyland (2000: 187) found that peer feedback is not suitable to apply in Asian context because of cultural differences which are collectivism, power distance and the concept of face to face. They also said that the country like America does not accept peer feedback because of its culture which is individualism. In the same case, Hong (2006) also did research in feedback and found that students had very negative response towards peer feedback activity in L2 and EFL writing classroom. He said that peer feedback cannot be applied in the classroom because it has many weaknesses that cannot be solved by the English teachers. This phenomenon raises an attempt to reinvestigate peer feedback in L2 writing class, especially in Indonesian Context.

INSTRUMENT AND METHOD OF RESEARCH Research Location and Design This research was conducted in faculty of teachers training and education at English education department of Khairun University which is located in Ternate city, North Moluccas. This research was an experimental research which followed a two-group pre-test and post-test. Population and Sample The population of this research was the sixth semester students who major in English department. They consist of 150 students and all of them are in their third-year in this department which entry of year 2009/2010. The number of sample was 30 students who took writing IV subject at Khairun University. Data Collection In collecting data, three instruments: writing test, questionnaire, and interview. The researcher measured the students’ writing performance in the two groups before and after study by writing pre-test and post-test and conducted questionnaire and interview to know the students’ respond towards the use of peer feedback in their writing class. Data Analysis The students’ writing performances were scored based on five aspect which are content, organization, vocabulary, language use, and mechanism. These aspects are the criterion-reference system in ESL composition profile which is described by Jacob. Et. al, 1981:95. The data then were analyzed and interpreted by means of SPSS 14.0.

RESEARCH FINDINGS The Students’ Writing Performance The data collected through pre-test and post-test shows that the students’ performance of the two groups improved significantly. The pre-test mean score of experimental group is higher than the control group = 61 > 46.9. The students’ previous performance in experimental class is different from the students in control group. The researcher found that the t-observed value is higher than t-table, where t-observed is 2.653 and t-table is 2,048 at 0.05 level of significant at 28 degrees of freedom (T-observed > T-table, α = 0.05). Sig. (2-tailed) is 0,009 which is higher than 0.05. There is a significant improvement in experimental group post-test. The mean score in pre-test enhance 61 to 75.4 in post-test. The mean difference in paired sample test shows the number of 14.266 (75.3333 – 61.0667) and the standard deviation is 7.30753. The researcher found that the t-observed value is higher than t-table, where t-observed is 7.632 and t-table is 2,145 at 0.05 level of significant at 14 degrees of freedom (T-observed > T- table, α = 0.05). Sig. (2-tailed) is 0.00 which is lower than 0.05. In control group’s post-test, there is also improvement. However the improvement is not as large as experimental group. The mean score of control group in pre-test enhance from 46.9 to 54.5. The mean difference in paired sample test shows 9.0667 (55.6000 - 46.5333) with the standard deviation 6.71672. The researcher found that the t-observed is higher than t-table, where t-observed is 4.382 and t-table is 2.145 at 0.05 level of significant at 14 degrees of freedom (Tobserved > T-table, α = 0, 05) Sig. (2-tailed) is 0,001 which is lower than 0.05. The outcome of the students’ improvement of experimental group and control group display a significant difference. The researcher found that the t-observed is higher than t-table, where t-observed is 4.555 and t-table is 2.048 at 0.05 level of significant at 28 degrees of freedom (T-observed > T-table, α = 0.05). Sig. (2-tailed) is 0.000 which is lower than 0.05. Students’ Response The data findings indicate that the highest rank of the mean score is 70, 5% of strongly agree students. The second is 28, 2% agree students. There is 0.65 of undecided answer and none of score for disagree and disagree statements.

DISCUSSION The result from the pre-test and post-test demonstrated a significant improvement in the quality of the students’ written text in the experimental class while the quality of students’ written text in control condition was slightly improved. This implies that the students in both groups gained in the writing performance, but those in the experimental condition gained more. It is indicated that peer feedback with the teacher’s support improved the students’ writing performance significantly. The result of the study (the quality of the students’ written text was significantly improved after the treatment) is different from that previous research by Berg, Admiral, and Pilot (2003). These researchers found no significant difference in the quality of the students’ writing before and after research. However, the present study demonstrated a significant improvement in the quality of the students’ written text. One reason for the improvement in the quality of the students’ writing could be explained in terms of the corrective, strategic, and evaluative feedback. Each group got feedback from multiple peers, which Cho and Scunn (2005) believed could reduce the negative impact of incorrect feedback. Therefore, the feedback can be very effective, constructive, and valuable, which might help peers improve the quality of their writing. Another reason that contributes to the development of the students’ writing performance could relate to the critical comments and discussion that followed. As Trahasch (2004) pointed out, critical comments and discussion among students can promote a positive attitude toward peer feedback and lead to a deeper understanding of the topic. The researcher also believes that it is the critical comments and discussions that the students get from their peers could help them avoid confusion and uncertainty. Finally, it could be the case that the students’ self-esteem might play role in the improvement of the students’ writing performance. Because their writing will be read by their friends so that they tried to perform better to avoid shame and maintain self-esteem in front of their peers. One of challenges of peer feedback which have been explained in the previous chapter can be avoided. Students have no skill or incompetent to give feedback to their peer. This challenge can be solved by the researcher because the researcher asked them to work in group which is called cooperative peer feedback. In this group, the students consisted of the high ability student, middle ability student, and low ability student. In theory of cooperative learning, the group must consist of students who have different ability so that the smart students can teach the

low ability student, and the low ability student can asked something that she/he does not understand to the smart students. So, in peer feedback, there was peer teaching. It means that the students are teaching one another. The improvement of students’ performance in writing has an independency correlation with the questionnaires and interview. The finding verifies that the highest rank of the mean score is 70, 65 % of strongly agree students. The second is 28, 2 % of agree students. There is 0.65 % of neutral answer (undecided), and) 0% of disagree and strongly disagree statement. The finding indicates that the peer feedback is responded positively by the students of experimental class and the application is preferable. The answers “strongly agree and agree” are dominated the questionnaire. The individual interview on the participant’s response towards the use of peer feedback in the experimental group revealed that all of the students highly valued the importance of peer feedback in the writing class on answering the first question. Peer feedback benefited them in that it provided them with more writing practice in a non-threatening environment and opportunities to share their written work as well as learn from each other. Although the researcher has reached two aims, there were some unavoidable limitations. First, because of the limit time this research was conducted only on a small size population who were attending the academic writing course in their sixth semester at Khirun University. Therefore, to generalize the result for larger groups, the study should be involved more participants at different level; if necessary they can be in different age, sex, cultures, and social status. Second, this research also has not solved the time problem because it is really timeconsuming. The last point is that this research was only conducted in a high level class. Can we apply peer feedback to low level students? CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION It is concluded that peer feedback has a significant effect on EFL learners’ writing performance. The implementation of peer feedback is responded positively by the students and the application is preferable. In this case, the researcher would like to suggest to English lecturers of Khairun University to think about the peer feedback in teaching writing subject. Also, teaching writing using traditional teacher’s feedback should not be considered as useless. Even though it is an old-fashioned teaching technique, but after some serious treatment, the technique still can improve students’ writing performance. Of course, more various updated teaching techniques must be compared and peer feedback is one of reasonable choice.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Berg I. V. D.. Admiral W., Pilot A. (2003) Peer Assessment in University Teaching. An Exploration of Useful Design. The European Conference on Educational Research, University of Hamburg. Retrieved, May, 26, 2012 from www.Leeds. Ac.uk/educal/document/00003178.htm. Carson, J. G. & Nelson, G. L. (1996). Chinese Students’ Perception of ESL Peer Response Group Interaction. Journal of Second Language Writing. 5(1), 1-19 Cho k. & Schunn C.D. (2005). Scaffolded Writing and Rewriting in the Dicipline: A Webbased Respoirocal peer Review System. Article in Press, computers and education. Coupe, N. (1986). Evaluating Teachers’ Response to Children’s Writing. In J. Haris & J. Willikonson (eds), Reading Children’s Writing: a linguistic view. London:Allen and Uniwin. Hong, G. (2006). ESL Writers and Feedback: Giving more Autonomy to Students. Language Teaching Research 4(1), 33-54 Hyland, k. 2000. The Impact of Teacher Written Feedback on Individual Writer. Journal of Language writing, 3, 255-286 Trahasch, S. (2004). From Peer Assessment Towards Collaborative Learning. 34th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference. Retrieved on 26th December 2012 from http://fie.engrng.pitt.edu/fie2004/papers/1256.pdf