The Implementation of Teacher Feedback to Improve Students Writing Skills in Junior High School

Authors

  • Siti Lina Nurlina Institut prima Bangsa

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.70152/duties.v1i1.173

Keywords:

Teacher Feedback, Writing Skill, Junior High School

Article Metrics

Abstract

This study investigates the implementation of teacher feedback to improve junior high school students' writing skills, focusing on common writing errors and the effectiveness of different types of feedback. English is a significant challenge for many Indonesian students, especially in grammar and syntax. Research using the Taxonomy of Surface Strategies (Dulay, Burt, & Krashen, 1982), established four main types of writing errors: omission, addition, misformation, and misordering. The study further examined teacher feedback by using Hattie and Timperley's (2007) model, which divides feedback into task, process, self-regulatory, and personal types. Data were collected through classroom observations, interviews, and analysis of students' written documents. The main results of the study show that omission errors are the most common among students, followed by addition errors, information errors, and sequencing errors. Feedback from teachers, especially those focusing on task type and process, proved to be very effective in helping students correct errors and improve their writing skills. The study also found that feedback that encourages students' self-regulation can improve their ability to self-correct errors, while personalized feedback helps increase students' motivation. The implications of this study suggest that comprehensive feedback strategies, which include error correction as well as writing process support, are essential to be implemented in English language learning in junior high schools in Indonesia, in order to sustainably improve students' writing skills.

References

Abbas, F., Rana, A. M. K., Bashir, I., & Bhatti, A. M. (2021). The English Language Proficiency as A Global Employment Skill: The Viewpoint of Pakistani Academia. Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews, 9(3), 1071–1077. https://doi.org/10.18510/hssr.2021.93106

Audry, S., Dewi, N. R., Pd, S., Hum, M., Suri, P., & Anisa, M. (2020). Students’ Preferernces Toward Teachers’ Oral Corrective Feedbacks on Speaking at SMK Negeri 4 Medan. Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning of FBS UNIMED, 9, No.1, 1–16. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.24114/tj.v9i1.19961

Dulay, H., Burt, M., & Krashen, S. (1982). Language Two. Oxford University Press. Gan, Z., An, Z., & Liu, F. (2021). Teacher Feedback Practices, Student Feedback Motivation, and Feedback Behavior: How Are They Associated with Learning Outcomes? Frontiers in Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.697045

Hasibuan, R. I. S. (2021). Teacher’s Feedback on Writing Recount Teacher’s Feedback on Writing Recount Text on The Grade Eight Students of MTs Tarbiyah Islamiyah Hajoran. Journal of English Language Teaching of FBS UNIMED.

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research (77)1, 81–112. SAGE Publications Inc. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487

Indrawati, I., & Ariyanti Hanapi, I. (2022). Teacher Feedback on Students’ Descriptive Text at MTs Alkhairaat Sandana. JME (8)2.

Kemdikbud. (2020). Laporan Kinerja Kementrian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan. Pratiwi,

M. H. (2020). The Impact of Using Teacher’s Indirect Feedback to Students’

Writing of Recount Text.

Prawiro, I. Y., & Kholisna, W. (2020). The Impact of Written Corrective Feedback Towards the Senior High School Students’ Work: Teacher’s and Students’ Perceptions. Journal of English Language Learning (JELL), 4(1), 44–59.

Veren, T. A., Halim, A., & Abidin, A. (2020). Improving Students’ L2 Writing through Teacher’s Written Corrective Feedback. AL LUGHAWIYAAT, 1, No.1, 1

Downloads

Published

2025-03-01

How to Cite

Nurlina, S. L. (2025). The Implementation of Teacher Feedback to Improve Students Writing Skills in Junior High School. DUTIES: Education and Humanities International Journal, 1(1), 34–44. https://doi.org/10.70152/duties.v1i1.173