EFL PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH THE CHATROOM IN PADLET

Angela Bayu Pertama Sari(1*),

(1) Universitas Bina Sarana Informatika
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract


This research was conducted to achieve two objectives. The first one is to give a vivid explanation about the peer feedback practice through Padlet chatroom. Secondly, it was carried out to dig out the students responses toward that practice. It was conducted within qualitative descriptive research by employing observation and open-ended questionnaires of 70 non-English university students as its data collecting technique. Then, qualitative data analysis was utilized by the researcher. The results revealed Padlet usage is a new thing for most of the students, yet they can use it easily because it is user-friendly and cost-free. Moreover, anonymity becomes one of the prominent features in Padlet chatroom. The students found it more convenient as being anonymous in giving and receiving feedback due to the freedom of expressing the students feedback without worrying about their friends sense of emotion. The last finding showed that the peer feedback practice through Padlet chatroom had met five principles out of seven principles that are proposed as the basic requirements of feedback practices.

 


Keywords


Padlet, peer feedback, ICT, EFL learning

Full Text:

PDF

References


Bijami, M., Kashef, S. H., & Nejad, M. S. (2013). Peer feedback in learning English writing: Advantages and disadvantages.Journal of Studies in Education,3(4), 91-97.

De Raadt, M., Toleman, M., & Watson, R. (2005). Electronic peer review: A large cohort teaching themselves?. In Proceedings ASCILITE 2005: 22nd Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education: Balance, Fidelity, Mobility- Maintaining the Momentum? (Vol. 1, pp. 159-168). Queensland University of Technology, Teaching and Learning Support Services. doi:10.5296/jse.v3i4.4314

Espitia, M. I., & Cruz Corzo, C. (2013). Peer-feedback and online interaction: a case study.kala, revista de lenguaje y cultura,18(2), 131-151.

Fuchs, B. (2014). The writing is on the wall: using Padlet for whole-class engagement.LOEX Quarterly,40(4), 7. Retrieved on November 26, 2018, from https://uknowledge.uky.edu/libraries_facpub/240

Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education.The internet and higher education,7(2), 95-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001

Holzweiss, K. A. (2014). Using tech tools for learning with standards.School Library Monthly,30(4), 13-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2008.06.002

Jabar, N., & Ali, A. M. (2016). Cultural video project assignment (VPA) through the eyes of young ESL learners: A multi-modal vocabulary learning approach. Indonesian Journal of EFL and Linguistics, 1(2), 157 - 173. Retrieved on November 30, 2018, from http://www.indonesian-efl-journal.org/index.php/ijefll/article/view/11/pdf.

Kahiigi Kigozi, E., Vesisenaho, M., Hansson, H., Danielson, M., & Tusubira, F. F. (2012). Modelling a peer assignment review process for collaborative e-learning.Journal of Interactive Online Learning,11(2), 67-79. Retrieved on November 27, 2018, from http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:575463/FULLTEXT01.pdf

Liu, E. Z., Lin, S. S., Chiu, c. H., & Yuan, S. M. (2001). Web-based peer review: The learner as both adapter and reviewer. IEEE Transactions on Education, 44(3), 246-251. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/13.940995.

Lowe, T., & Humphrey, O. (2018). A Platform for Partnership: A Technology Review of the Padlet sharing platform.The Journal of Educational Innovation, Partnership and Change,4(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.21100/jeipc.v4i1.706

Lundstrom, K., & Baker, W. (2009). To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the reviewer's own writing.Journal of second language writing,18(1), 30-43.

Manowong, S. Incorporating Online Tools to Promote English Reading for EFL Learners: an Action Research Study. Retrieved on November 30, 2018, from http://www.culi.chula.ac.th/Publicationsonline/files/article2/Uz8VwjDfrZMon32902.pdf

Nicole, D., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006) Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199-218. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090

Pena-Shaff, J. B., & Nicholls, C. (2004). Analyzing student interactions and meaning construction in computer bulletin board discussions. Computers & Education, 42(3), 243-265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2003.08.003

Renner, M., & Taylor-Powell, E. (2003). Analyzing qualitative data.Programme Development & Evaluation, University of Wisconsin-Extension Cooperative Extension. Retrieved on November 27, 2018, from http://nde.ne.gov/afterschool/Data_Collection/Analyzing_Qualitative_Data.pdf

Saito, H., & Fujita, T. (2004). Characteristics and User Acceptance of Peer Rating in EFL Writing Classroom. In Language Teaching Research, 8(1), 3154, http://dx.doi.org/10.1191/13621688041r133oa.

Shields, J. (2014). Visual Toolkit. Screen Education, (75), 92-93.

Spector, J. M., Merrill, M. D., Elen, J., & Bishop, M. J. (Eds.). (2014).Handbook of research on educational communications and technology(pp. 413-424). New York, NY: Springer.

Tsui, A. B., & Ng.M. (2000). Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments? Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(2), 147-170. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(00)00022-9.

Velandia, R., Torres, P., & Ali, M. (2012). Using Web-Based Activities to Promote Reading: An Exploratory Study with Teenagers. Profile: Issues in Teachers Professional Development, 14(2), 11-27.

Retrieved on November 27, 2018, from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1051477.pdf

Weller, A. (2013). Learning in science education. Research in Teacher education, 3(2), 4046. Retrieved on December 3, 2018, from

http://hdl.handle.net/10552/3322

Wheeler, S. (Ed.). (2009).Connected minds, emerging cultures: cybercultures in online learning. IAP.

Yang, M., Badger, R., & Yu, Z. (2006). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of Second Language Learning, 15(3), 179-200. http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.jslw.2006. 09.004




DOI: https://doi.org/10.24071/llt.v22i1.1701

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2019 Angela Bayu Pertama Sari



Indexed and abstracted in:

     

 

 

LLT Journal Sinta 2 Certificate (S2 = Level 2)

We would like to inform you that LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching has been nationally accredited Sinta 2 by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research and Technology of the Republic of Indonesia based on the decree  No. Surat Keputusan 158/E/KPT/2021. Validity for 5 years: Vol 23 No 1, 2020 till Vol 27 No 2, 2024

  

 

This work is licensed under CC BY-SA.

Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License

 

Free counters!


 LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching, DOI: https://doi.org/10.24071/llt, e-ISSN 2579-9533 and p-ISSN 1410-7201, is published twice a year, namely in April and October by the English Language Education Study Programme of Teacher Training and Education Faculty of Sanata Dharma University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.