Article Sidebar

Submitted
March 12, 2024
Accepted
July 27, 2024
Published
August 1, 2024
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 110 Download : 60

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

Although there have been a few studies on written e-feedback in EFL writing coursework, the research on students’ perception of e-feedback practice in online learning in Indonesia's higher education context is still underexplored. This study aims to investigate EFL undergraduate students’ perception of the lecturers’ e-feedback practice during online thesis proposal writing coursework. Two students from two different classes were willing to participate in in-depth interviews. A descriptive qualitative approach with thematic analysis was employed as the research method. The findings revealed three prominent themes on how the students perceive the lecturers’ e-feedback practices. The participants perceived that the lecturers’ e-feedback practice:  (1) scaffolded the participants to develop technical and conceptual writing skills, (2) supported the participants' personal and academic development, and (3) influenced the participants’ emotions. Students who initially felt unable to face online classes during the COVID-19 pandemic gradually got used to and overcame the feeling of being unable to take online courses. This study implies that the lecturers’ role in being thoughtful in delivering feedback to students is critical because e-feedback as a pedagogical practice influences students’ social and emotional learning process in writing their undergraduate thesis. Participants who initially felt unable to face online classes during the COVID-19 pandemic, in the end, finally succeeded in overcoming the feeling of not being able to take online courses for their undergraduate thesis writing because they were being scaffolded, supported, and influenced by the lecturers’ e-feedback practices during their online learning.

Keywords

Thesis Proposal Writing EFL students’ perception E-feedback practice Undergraduate students Online coursework

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2024 Afni Febriani Muzdalifah, Astri Hapsari

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish in this journal agree with the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
  4. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
Muzdalifah, A. F., & Hapsari, A. (2024). Undergraduate Students’ Perception of E-feedback Practice during Online EFL Thesis Proposal Writing Coursework. JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature), 9(2), 305–327. https://doi.org/10.33369/joall.v9i2.33355
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Alharbi, M. A. (2019). Exploring the Potential of Google Docs in Facilitating Innovative Teaching and Learning Practice in an EFL Writing Course. Innovative in Language Learning and Teaching. 14 (3), 227-242, https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2019.1572157
  2. Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology. 3 (2), 77-101, http://dx.doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
  3. Brinkmann, S., & Kvale, S. (2015). Interviews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  4. Cahyani, N., & Murtafi’ah, B. (2022). Undergraduate students’ perceptions of teachers’ written feedback in academic writing class: A survey study. Communications in Humanities and Social Sciences. 2 (2), 60-64, https://doi.org/10.21924/chss.2.2.2022.35
  5. Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  6. Chong, I. (2017). Interplay Among Technical, Socio-emotional and Personal Factors in Written Feedback Research. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 43 (2), 185-196, https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1317712
  7. Chong, S. W. (2019). College Students’ Perception of E-Feedback: A Grounded Theory Perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 44 (7), 1090-1105, https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1572067
  8. Clarke, V., & Braun, V. (2017) Thematic analysis. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 12:3, 297-298, DOI: 10.1080/17439760.2016.1262613
  9. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for Developing grounded theory (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  10. Elola, I. & Oskoz, A. (2017). Writing with 21st Century Social Tools in the L2 Classroom: New Literacies, Genres and Writing Practices. Journal of Second Language Writing. 36, 52-60, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2017.04.002
  11. Ene, E. & Upton, T. A. (2014). Learners Uptake of Teacher Electronic E-Feedback in ESL Composition. System. 46, 80-95, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.07.011
  12. Ferguson, P. (2011). Students Perceptions of Quality Feedback in Teacher Education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 36 (1), 51-62, https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930903197883
  13. Guba, E. G. (1981). Criteria for Assessing the Trustworthiness of Naturalistic Inquiries. ERIC/ECTJ Annual Review Paper. 29 (75), https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02766777
  14. Hyland, F. (1998). The Impact of Teacher Written Feedback on Individual Writers. Journal of Second Language Writing. 7 (3), 255-286, https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(98)90017-0
  15. Hamp-lyons, L. & Chen, J. (1999). An Investigations Into the Effectiveness of Teacher Feedback on Students Writing. English Language Teaching and Learning. 3, 207-219.
  16. Ilgen, D. R. & Davis, C. A. (2000). Bearing Bad News: Reactions to Negative Performance Feedback. Applied Psychology. 49 (3), 550-565.
  17. Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic Analysis: Striving to Meet the Trustworthiness Criteria.
  18. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1-13, https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847
  19. Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The Role of Goal Orientation in Self-Regulated Learning. Handbook of Self-Regulation. 451-502, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50043-3
  20. Rahmadhani, Z., & Hapsari, A. (2023). Undergraduate students’ perception of lecturers written corrective feedback in the process of writing undergraduate thesis. ELT Echo: The Journal of English Language Teaching in Foreign Language Context. 8 (2), 135-144, https://doi.org/10.24235/eltecho.v8i2.13399
  21. Roberts, R. E. (2020). Qualitative interview questions: Guidance for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 25(9), 3185-3203. https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol25/iss9/1
  22. Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage. ISBN: 978-1-4129-7837-8
  23. Saeed, M. A. & Qunayeer, H. S. A. (2020). Exploring Teacher Interactive E-Feedback on Students’ Writing Through Google Docs: Factors Promoting Interactivity and Potential for Learning. The Language Learning Journal. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2020.1786711
  24. Samburskiy, D. & Quah, J. (2014). Corrective Feedback in Asynchronous Online Interaction: Developing Novice Online Language Instructor. CALICO Journal. 31 (2), 158-178, http://www.jstor.org/stable/calicojournal.31.2.158
  25. Sandelowski, M. (2000). Whatever Happened to Qualitative Description? Research in Nursing and Health. 23 (4), 334-340, https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-240X(200008)23:4<334::AID-NUR9>3.0.CO;2-G
  26. Seidman, I. (2013). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education & the social sciences (4th ed.). New York: Teachers College Press. ISBN: 978-0-8077- 5404-7
  27. Straub, R. (1997). Students’ Reaction to Teacher Comments: An Exploratory Study. Research in the Teaching of English. 31 (1), 91-119.
  28. Tuzi, F. (2004). The Impact of E-Feedback on the Revisions of L2 Writers in Academic Course. Computers and Compositions. 21 (2), 217-235, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2004.02.003
  29. Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.