Enhancing ESP Learning: Investigating Students' Perspectives on Real-Time Written Corrective Feedback Delivery via Google Docs

Susilawati Susilawati(1), Nurhasanah Halim(2*), Retno Dwigustini(3), Samah Rashad Abdallah Alakhali(4)

(1) Faculty of Communication and Language, Universitas Bina Sarana Informatika
(2) Faculty of Communication and Language, Universitas Bina Sarana Informatika
(3) Faculty of Communication and Language, Universitas Bina Sarana Informatika
(4) Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Sana'a University
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract

The present research aims to investigate the practice of real-time or synchronous written corrective feedback (SWCF) delivery via Google Docs as a platform to deliver feedback, known as a linguistic feedback tool (LiFT) in ESP (English for Specific Purposes) classes, students’ preferences and viewpoints of SWCF. The research employed a qualitative case study involving 15 students from an advanced English correspondence course in a non-English department of a private university in Depok, West Java, Indonesia. Open-ended questionnaires, document analysis, and semi-structured interviews were used to gather the data. The findings revealed that auto-generated and human feedback are used to deliver SWCF via Google Docs, inferring that those features can build students' awareness of language aspects, content, and context in composing professional documents. Direct feedback was delivered more frequently, regarding the learning time efficiency and the students’ ability to identify errors. Further, the students preferred frequent SWCF, direct and indirect feedback, and correcting delivery methods. Finally, they considered that SWCF delivered via Google Docs assists them in improving letter accuracy. Their preferences and viewpoints might allow the lecturer to choose appropriate feedback delivery strategies and material reinforcement. The present research implies a balanced use of auto-generated and human feedback from LiFT in SWCF delivery. Evaluating the effectiveness of SWCF delivery via Google Docs for different levels of achievers in ESP classes might be a potential area of future research. Other LiFTs’ infusion into ESP classes is also worth researching to provide language instructors with alternative applications for SWCF delivery.

Keywords

ESP; google docs; linguistics feedback tool (LiFT); synchronous written corrective feedback (SWCF)

Full Text:

PDF

References

Agricola, B. T., Prins, F. J., & Sluijsmans, D. M. A. (2020). Impact of feedback request forms and verbal feedback on higher education students’ feedback perception, self-efficacy, and motivation. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 27(1), 6–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2019.1688764

Alharbi, M. A. (2022). Exploring the impact of teacher feedback modes and features on students’ text revisions in writing. Assessing Writing, 52, 100610. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2022.100610

Alhumaid, A. (2023). Exploring EFL female teachers’ and undergraduate students’ perceptions regarding written corrective feedback. Saudi Journal of Language Studies, 3(3), 144–157. https://doi.org/10.1108/SJLS-11-2022-0079

Alshumaimmeri, S. N., & Alqarni, R. (2022). Teacher and student perceptions of CALL feedback: Synchronous and asynchronous teacher electronic feedback in EFL-Writing at King Saud University. English Language Teaching, 15(12), 114–138. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v15n12p114

Ashford, S. J., Blatt, R., & VandeWalle, D. (2003). Reflections on the looking glass: A review of research on feedback-seeking behavior in organizations. In Journal of Management (Vol. 29, Issue 6, pp. 773–799). Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2063(03)00079-5

Aziz, M. F., & Jayaputri, H. E. (2023). EFL learners’ perspective on corrective feedback. Scope: Journal of English Language Teaching, 7(2), 219–225. https://doi.org/10.30998/scope.v7i2.14806

Bell, J., & Waters, S. (2018). Doing your research project: A guide for first-time researchers (7th ed.). Open University Press.

Bitchener, J., & Storch, N. (2016). Written corrective feedback for L2 development. Multilingual Matters.

Budianto, S., Sulistyo, T., Widiastuti, O., Heriyawati, D. F., & Marhaban, S. (2020). Written corrective feedback across different levels of EFL students’ academic writing proficiency: Outcomes and implications. Studies in English Language and Education, 7(2), 472–485. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v7i2.16569

Bui, H. P. (2022). Students’ and teachers’ perceptions of effective ESP teaching. Heliyon, 8(9), e10628. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10628

Cambridge Papers in ELT. (2020). Giving feedback to language learners (Cambridge Papers in ELT Series). https://www.cambridge.org/gb/files/4415/8594/0876/Giving_Feedback_minipaper_ONLINE.pdf

Cho, H., Kim, Y., & Park, S. (2022). Comparing students’ responses to synchronous written corrective feedback during individual and collaborative writing tasks. Language Awareness, 31(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2021.1937194

Chong, S. W. (2022). The role of feedback literacy in written corrective feedback research: from feedback information to feedback ecology. Cogent Education, 9(1), 2082120. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2082120

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2018). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (5th ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.

Dmitrenko, N. Y., & Budas, I. O. (2021). The impact of feedback on students’ autonomous ESP learning outcomes. Revista Romaneasca Pentru Educatie Multidimensionala, 13(2), 323–339. https://doi.org/10.18662/rrem/13.2/424

Dou, A. Q., Chan, S. H., & Win, M. T. (2023). Changing visions in ESP development and teaching: Past, present, and future vistas. Frontiers in Psychology, 14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1140659

Ene, E., & Upton, T. A. (2018). Synchronous and asynchronous teacher electronic feedback and learner uptake in ESL composition. Journal of Second Language Writing, 41, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2018.05.005

Ene, E., & Yao, J. (2021). How does that make you feel: Students’ affective engagement with feedback. Language Teaching Research Quarterly, 25, 66–83. https://doi.org/10.32038/ltrq.2021.25.04

Fahmi, M. A., & Cahyono, B. Y. (2021). EFL students’ perception on the use of Grammarly and teacher feedback. JEES (Journal of English Educators Society), 6(1), 18–25. https://doi.org/10.21070/jees.v6i1.849

Febriansyah, D., Dwiputra, K., Azzahra, W., & Heryanto, F. N. (2023). A Systematic Literature Review on Enhancing the Success of Independent Curriculum through Brain-Based Learning Innovation Implementation. Indonesian Journal on Learning and Advanced Education, 5(3), 262–276. https://doi.org/10.23917/ijolae.v5i3.22318

Ganapathy, M., Tan, D. A. L., & Phan, J. (2020). Students’ perceptions of teachers’ written corrective feedback in the Malaysian ESL classroom. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 17(2), 103–136.

Guskey, T. R. (2022). Can grades be an effective form of feedback? Phi Delta Kappan, 104(3), 36–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/00317217221136597

Hattie, J., Crivelli, J., Van Gompel, K., West-Smith, P., & Wike, K. (2021). Feedback that leads to improvement in student essays: Testing the hypothesis that “where to next” feedback is most powerful. Frontiers in Education, 6(May), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.645758

Hoang, D. T. N., & Hoang, T. (2022). Enhancing EFL students’ academic writing skills in online learning via Google Docs-based collaboration: A mixed-methods study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2022.2083176

Huang, S., & Renandya, W. A. (2020). Exploring the integration of automated feedback among lower-proficiency EFL learners. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 14(1), 15–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2018.1471083

Irwin, B. (2017). Written corrective feedback : Student preferences and teacher feedback practices. IAFOR Journal of Language Learning, 3(2), 35–58.

Jinowat, N., & Wiboolyasarin, W. (2022). Investigating learner preferences for written corrective feedback in a Thai higher education context. TEFLIN Journal, 33(2), 386–402. https://doi.org/10.15639/teflinjournal.v33i2/386-402

Karim, K., & Nassaji, H. (2018). The revision and transfer effects of direct and indirect comprehensive corrective feedback on ESL students’ writing. Language Teaching Research, 24(4), 519–539. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818802469

Khadawardi, H. A. (2020). The effect of implicit corrective feedback on English writing of international second language learners. English Language Teaching, 14(1), 123–139. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v14n1p123

Khaki, M., & Tabrizi, H. H. (2021). Assessing the effect of direct and indirect corrective feedback in process-based vs product-based instruction on learners’ writing. Language Teaching Research Quarterly, 21, 35–53.

Khezrlou, S. (2022). Repeated academic writing with synchronous and asynchronous teacher electronic feedback. In Technology in Second Language Writing. Routledge.

Kim, Y., Choi, B., Yun, H., Kim, B., & Choi, S. (2020). Task repetition, synchronous written corrective feedback and the learning of Korean grammar: A classroom-based study. Language Teaching Research, 26(6), 1106–1132. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820912354

Klimova, B., & Pikhart, M. (2022). Application of corrective feedback using emerging technologies among L2 university students. Cogent Education, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2132681

Larsari, V. N. (2020). An enquiry into learners’ feedback seeking behavior (FSB) and writing ability. Language in India, 2(2), 1–15. www.languageinindia.com

Leavy, P. (2017). Research design: Quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, arts-based, and community-based participatory research approaches. The Guilford Press.

Lee, I. (2017). Classroom writing assessment and feedback in L2 school contexts. Springer.

Leenknecht, M. J. M., & Carless, D. (2023). Students’ feedback seeking behaviour in undergraduate education: A scoping review. Educational Research Review, 40, 100549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100549

Li, R. (2023). Investigating effects of computer-mediated feedback on L2 vocabulary learning. Computers & Education, 198, 104763. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104763

Lim, F. V., & Phua, J. (2019). Teaching writing with language feedback technology. Computers and Composition, 54, 102518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2019.102518

Luquin, M., & García Mayo, M. del P. (2021). Exploring the use of models as a written corrective feedback technique among EFL children. System, 98, 102465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102465

Maghfiroh, A., Widiyani Styati, E., Fachriza, A., Simpol, W., & Anwar Syaputra, R. (2024). Future-Ready Educators: Assessing Digital Competence and Teaching Preparedness Among Prospective Teachers in the 21 st Century Loey Primary Educational Service Area Office, Thailand. Indonesian Journal on Learning and Advanced Education (IJOLAE), 6(1), 47–61. https://doi.org/10.23917/ijolae.v6i1.23081

Mandouit, L. (2020). Investigating how students receive, interpret, and respond to teacher feedback. University of Melbourne.

Mandouit, L., & Hattie, J. (2023). Revisiting “the power of feedback” from the perspective of the learner. Learning and Instruction, 84, 101718. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2022.101718

Mardian, F., & Nafissi, Z. (2022). Synchronous computer-mediated corrective feedback and EFL learners’ grammatical knowledge development: A sociocultural perspective. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 10(2), 115–136. https://doi.org/10.30466/ijltr.2022.121186

Mohammed, M. A. S., & Al-Jaberi, M. A. (2021). Google Docs or Microsoft Word? Master’s students’ engagement with instructor written feedback on academic writing in a cross-cultural setting. Computers and Composition, 62(December 2021), 102672. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2021.102672

Nassaji, H., & Kartchava, E. (2021). Book review: The Cambridge handbook of corrective feedback in second language learning and teaching. In Frontiers in Psychology (Vol. 12). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.725160

O’Donovan, B., Rust, C., & Price, M. (2016). A scholarly approach to solving the feedback dilemma in practice. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(6), 938–949. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1052774

Omar, N. H., & Shamsudin, M. K. (2022). Improving second language learners writing using a linguistic feedback tool (LiFT). International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 12(9), 493 – 500. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v12-i9/14503

Park, E. S., Song, S., & Shin, Y. K. (2015). To what extent do learners benefit from indirect written corrective feedback? A study targeting learners of different proficiency and heritage language status. Language Teaching Research, 20(6), 678–699. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168815609617

Pham, A. L. (2021). The effects of indirect feedback on grammatical errors in efl learner writing. European Journal of English Language Teaching, 6(6), 153–167.

Rasool, U., Mahmood, R., Zammad Aslam, M., Barzani, S. H. H., & Qian, J. (2023). Perceptions and preferences of senior high school students about written corrective feedback in Pakistan. SAGE Open, 13(3), 21582440231187612. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231187612

Russa, F. La. (2021). The effects of students’ engagement with direct and indirect corrective feedback on text rewriting. Instructed Second Language Acquisition, 5(1), 104–127. https://doi.org/10.1558/isla.18525

Saeed, M. A., & Al Qunayeer, H. S. (2022). Exploring teacher interactive e-feedback on students’ writing through Google Docs: Factors promoting interactivity and potential for learning. The Language Learning Journal, 50(3), 360–377. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2020.1786711

Salmani-Nodoushan, M. A. (2020). English for specific purposes: Traditions, trends, directions. SIELE: Studies in English Language and Education, 7(1), 247–268. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v7i1.16342

Saragih, N. A., Madya, S., Siregar, R. A., & Saragih, W. (2021). Written corrective feedback: Students’ perception. IOJET: International Online Journal of Education and Teaching, 8(2), 676–690.

Seijas, J. M., & Spino, L. (2023). Written “corrective” feedback in Spanish as a heritage language: Problematizing the construct of error. Journal of Second Language Writing, 60, 100989. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2023.100989

Setyaningsih, E., Agustina, P., Anif, S., Ahmad, C. N. C., Sofyan, I., Saputra, A., Salleh, W. N. W. M., Shodiq, D. E., Rahayu, S., & Hidayat, M. L. (2022). PBL-STEM Modul Feasibility Test for Preservice Biology Teacher. Indonesian Journal on Learning and Advanced Education (IJOLAE), 4(2), 118–127. https://doi.org/10.23917/ijolae.v4i2.15980

Shadiev, R., & Feng, Y. (2023). Using automated corrective feedback tools in language learning: A review study. Interactive Learning Environments, January, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2022.2153145

Shintani, N., & Aubrey, S. (2016). The effectiveness of synchronous and asynchronous written corrective feedback on grammatical accuracy in a computer-mediated environment. The Modern Language Journal, 100(1), 296–319. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44134985

Shum, S. B., Lim, L. A., Boud, D., Bearman, M., & Dawson, P. (2023). A comparative analysis of the skilled use of automated feedback tools through the lens of teacher feedback literacy. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00410-9

Song, Y., & Zhou, J. (2022). Revising English language course curriculum among graduate students: An EAP needs analysis study. SAGE Open, 12(3), 21582440221093040. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221093040

Taskiran, A., & Goksel, N. (2022). Automated feedback and teacher feedback: Writing achievement in learning English as a foreign language at a distance. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education-TOJDE, 23(2), 120–139.

Thi, N. K., & Nikolov, M. (2022). How teacher and grammarly feedback complement one another in Myanmar EFL students’ writing. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 31(6), 767–779. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00625-2

Vattøy, K.-D., & Gamlem, S. M. (2020). Teacher–student interactions and feedback in English as a foreign language classrooms. Cambridge Journal of Education, 50(3), 371–389. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2019.1707512

Wang, Z., & Han, F. (2022). The effects of teacher feedback and automated feedback on cognitive and psychological aspects of foreign language writing: A mixed-methods research. In Frontiers in Psychology (Vol. 13). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.909802

Wei, P., Wang, X., & Dong, H. (2023). The impact of automated writing evaluation on second language writing skills of Chinese EFL learners: a randomized controlled trial. In Frontiers in Psychology (Vol. 14, pp. 01–11). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1249991

Wiboolyasarin, K., Wiboolyasarin, W., Jinowat, N., & Kamonsawad, R. (2022). EFL learners’ preference for corrective feedback strategies in relation to their self-perceived levels of proficiency. English Language Teaching Educational Journal, 5(1), 32–47. http://journal2.uad.ac.id/index.php/eltej/article/view/4403

Wondim, B. M., Bishaw, K. S., & Zeleke, Y. T. (2024). Effectiveness of teachers’ direct and indirect written corrective feedback provision strategies on enhancing students’ writing achievement: Ethiopian university entrants in focus. Heliyon, e24279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e24279

Yamashita, T. (2022). Effectiveness and inclusiveness of locally adapted human-delivered synchronous written corrective feedback for English referential articles. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2022.2068612

Yang, L. F., Liu, Y., & Xu, Z. (2022). Examining the effects of self-regulated learning-based teacher feedback on English-as-a-foreign-language learners’ self-regulated writing strategies and writing performance. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1027266. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1027266

Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA Sage.

Zhan, Y., Lee, J. C.-K., & Wan, Z. H. (2022). Who perceives more value of teacher feedback? Exploring the roles of college students’ possible second language selves and language learning strategies. Language Testing in Asia, 12(1), 62. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-022-00212-2

Zhang, T. (2021). The effect of highly focused versus mid-focused written corrective feedback on EFL learners’ explicit and implicit knowledge development. System, 99, 102493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102493

Zhang, Z. (Victor). (2020). Engaging with automated writing evaluation (AWE) feedback on L2 writing: Student perceptions and revisions. Assessing Writing, 43, 100439. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2019.100439

Zhu, M., Liu, O. L., & Lee, H.-S. (2020). The effect of automated feedback on revision behavior and learning gains in formative assessment of scientific argument writing. Computers & Education, 143, 103668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103668

DOI: 10.23917/ijolae.v6i2.23155

Article Metrics

Abstract view(s): 34 time(s)
PDF: 32 time(s)

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.