Students’ Perceptions on Peer Feedback In Improving Group Performances In Efl Classroom Context

Authors

  • Henny Mardiah Universitas Muhammadiyah Sumatera Utara , Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31004/jptam.v7i2.7511

Keywords:

Umpan Balik Teman Sebaya, Kerja Kelompok, Persepsi Siswa

Abstract

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menyelidiki persepsi siswa tentang umpan balik teman sebaya dalam meningkatkan kinerja kelompok dalam konteks kelas EFL (Bahasa Inggris sebagai Bahasa Asing). Penelitian ini dilakukan dengan metode campuran, baik kuantitatif maupun kualitatif. Subjek penelitian ini adalah mahasiswa semester V kelas C1 Universitas Muhammadiyah Sumatera Utara jurusan Pendidikan Guru Sekolah Dasar (PGSD) semester gasal tahun ajaran 2022-2023 yang berjumlah 35 mahasiswa. Desain kuantitatif diterapkan untuk menghitung persepsi siswa melalui kuesioner yang terdiri dari tiga variabel yaitu, 1) persepsi umum persepsi umpan balik rekan, (2) efek positif dari umpan balik rekan (3) kemauan untuk meningkatkan. Sedangkan metode kualitatif dilakukan melalui observasi dan analisis dokumen. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan; pertama, responden siswa bahwa peer feedback membantu mereka untuk belajar lebih baik dan mengembangkan kompetensinya, terutama dalam kelompok (100%). Kedua, umpan balik teman sebaya mendorong siswa untuk terlibat aktif dalam proses pembelajaran dan meningkatkan kemampuan pengaturan diri mereka (97,1%), dan untuk variabel ketiga, ada 35 siswa yang bersedia meningkatkan kinerjanya setelah menerima umpan balik dari teman sebayanya ( 100%). Kesimpulannya, ketika siswa diberi wewenang untuk mengevaluasi teman sebayanya melalui umpan balik teman sebaya, mereka cenderung lebih percaya diri, aktif dan bertanggung jawab atas penampilan kelompoknya. Temuan dari penelitian ini diharapkan dapat meningkatkan kualitas kegiatan belajar mengajar di Indonesia, khususnya dalam pembelajaran bahasa Inggris.

References

Coit C. 2004. Peer review in an online college writing course, Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on advanced learning technologies, 902-903.

Creswell, J. W. 2012. Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research (4th ed). Pearson.

Ellis, R. 1994. The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Eggen, P., & Kauchak, D. 2012. Strategies and Models for Teachers: Teaching Content and Thinking Skills (6th ed.). Boston: Pearson.

Falchikov, N. 2001. Learning together: Peer tutoring in higher education. Routledge Falmer, London.

Govaerts, M. J. B., L. W. T. Schuwirth, C. P. M. Van der Vleuten, and A. M. M. Muijtjens. 2011. “Workplace-Based Assessment: Effects of Rater Expertise.” Advances in Health Sciences Education 16 (2): 151–165. doi:10.1007/s10459-010-9250-7.

Grabe W., & Kaplan, R. B. 1996. Theory and practice of writing: An applied linguistic perspective. New York: Longman.

Harmer, J. 1991. The Practice of English Language Teaching. London: Longman.

Hu?G. 2005. Using peer review with Chinese ESL student writers. Language Teaching Research (3) ?

Jacobs, G. M., & Kimura, H. 2013. Cooperative learning and teaching. In the series, English language teacher development. Alexandria, VA: TESOL (Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages).

Karami, A. & Rezaei, A. 2015. An Overview of Peer Assessment: The Benefits and Importance, Journal for the Study of English Linguistics,3:1, 93-99, https:// doi: 10.5296/jsel.v3il.7889

Kaya, F. B., & Y?lmaz, M. Y. 2019. An Analysis of the In-Class Oral Feedback Provided by the Teachers of Turkish as a Foreign Language. Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 14(1), 144–155. https://doi.org/10.29329/epasr.2 019.186.8

Ken, Hyland. 2013. Faculty feedback: Perceptions and practices in L2 disciplinary writing, Journal of Second Language Writing 22 (3), 240-253, ISSN 1060-3743. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2013.03.003.

Lin, G.H. C., & Paul, S. C. C. 2009. An investigation Into Effectiveness of Peer Feedback. U.S.: Eric Clearinghouse.

Long, M. 1983. Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input, Applied Linguistics, 4, 126-41. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/4.2.126

Maskowitz, G. (1978): Sharing and caring in the foreign language class: A Sourcebook on Humanistic Techniques. Massachusetts: Newbury House.

Lu, R., and L. Bol. 2007. “A Comparison of Anonymous versus Identifiable E-Peer Review on College Student Writing Performance and the Extent of Critical Feedback.” Journal of Interactive Online Learning 6 (2): 100–115.

M.H. Nguyen, 2013. EFL students’ reflections on peer scaffolding in making a collaborative oral presentation. English Language Teaching 6(4), 64–73.

Mendonça C. O., & K. E. Johnson 1994. Peer review negotiations: Revision activities in ESL writing instruction, TESOL Quarterly, Vol. 28, 4,745-769.

Patchan, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. 2015. Understanding the benefits of providing peer feedback: how students respond to peers’ texts of varying quality. Instructional Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251- 015-9353-x

Puegphrom, P. & Chiramanee, T. 2011. The Effectiveness of Implementing Peer Assessment on Students’ Writing Proficiency, The 3rd International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences, 1-17.

Downloads

Published

30-06-2023

How to Cite

Mardiah, H. (2023). Students’ Perceptions on Peer Feedback In Improving Group Performances In Efl Classroom Context. Jurnal Pendidikan Tambusai, 7(2), 8093–8099. https://doi.org/10.31004/jptam.v7i2.7511

Issue

Vol. 7 No. 2 (2023): Agustus 2023

Section

Articles of Research

Citation Check

License

Copyright (c) 2023 Henny Mardiah

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

  • 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.
  • 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.
  • 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).