Journals / Journal of Advanced Education Studies / 2023 / Cilt: 5

STUDENTS’ ATTITUDES AND PERCEPTIONS OF E-FEEDBACK TYPES: ONLINE TEACHER FEEDBACK (OTF), ONLINE PEER FEEDBACK (OPF), AND AUTOMATED WRITING EVALUATION FEEDBACK (AWE)

Pages
53–79
Publication Date
2023-10-20
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The results showed that the use of OTF, OPF, and AWE feedback all had a positive impact on learners' writing performance in various areas, including grammar, organization, coherence, and vocabulary.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study investigated students’ attitudes and perceptions of online teacher feedback (OTF), online peer feedback (OPF), and automated writing evaluation (AWE) feedback and their impact on the writing performance of EFL learners.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Data were collected through a questionnaire with 20 open ended questions administered to the participants, and writing samples were collected at various stages of the writing process and semi-structured interviews with volunteer students. 65 students were involved in the questionnaire and 10 students participated in the interviews.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results showed that the use of OTF, OPF, and AWE feedback all had a positive impact on learners' writing performance in various areas, including grammar, organization, coherence, and vocabulary.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Online education · online teacher feedback · online peer feedback

Abstract

This study investigated students’ attitudes and perceptions of online teacher feedback (OTF), online peer feedback (OPF), and automated writing evaluation (AWE) feedback and their impact on the writing performance of EFL learners. It was conducted over two semesters with freshman ELT students. The progress writing technique was implemented. Data were collected through a questionnaire with 20 open ended questions administered to the participants, and writing samples were collected at various stages of the writing process and semi-structured interviews with volunteer students. 65 students were involved in the questionnaire and 10 students participated in the interviews. The results showed that the use of OTF, OPF, and AWE feedback all had a positive impact on learners' writing performance in various areas, including grammar, organization, coherence, and vocabulary. Participants reported that they found the e-feedback, especially the one provided by the instructor helpful and that it improved their writing most while the one provided by the peers was not as effective as the others. The study suggests that the use of written e-feedback from multiple sources can be effective in improving EFL learners' writing performance, and that incorporating OTF, OPF, and AWE feedback can be a valuable addition to the traditional writing process.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖZKANAL, Ü., GEZEN, E. E. (2023). STUDENTS’ ATTITUDES AND PERCEPTIONS OF E-FEEDBACK TYPES: ONLINE TEACHER FEEDBACK (OTF), ONLINE PEER FEEDBACK (OPF), AND AUTOMATED WRITING EVALUATION FEEDBACK (AWE). Journal of Advanced Education Studies, Cilt: 5, 53–79. https://ajindex.com/articles/969215

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (9)

  1. Ab Hamid, H., & Romly, R. (2020). Teachers’ perception on giving feedback to students’ online writing assignment during movement control order (MCO). Proceedings of the First International Conference on Science, Technology, Engineering and Industrial Revolution (ICSTEIR 2020), 536, 461-463. http://dx.doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210312.076 AbuSa’aleek, A. O., & Shariq, M. (2021). Innovative practices in instructor e-feedback: A case study of e- feedback given in three linguistic courses during the COVID 19 pandemic. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ) Special Issue on Covid 19 Challenges, (1), 183-198. https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/covid.14
  2. Armstrong, K. (2010).
  3. Fluency, Accuracy, and Complexity in Graded and Ungraded Writing. Foreign Language Annals, 43, 690-702. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1944-9720.2010.01109.X.
  4. Arslan, R. S. (2013). Integrating feedback into prospective English language teachers' writing process via blogs and portfolios. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 13(1), 131- 150. Bai, L. R. (2012). Validation of Peer Feedback Pattern Inventory for College English Writing. Modern Foreign Languages, 35, 184-192.
  5. Basabrin, A. (2019). Exploring EFL instructors’ and students’ perceptions of written corrective feedback on Blackboard platform: A case study. Arab World English Journal, Special Issue 1: Application of Global ELT Practices in Saudi Arabia, 179-192.
  6. Benson, S., & DeKeyser, R. (2019). Effects of written corrective feedback and language aptitude on verb tense accuracy. Language Teaching Research, 23(6), 702-726.
  7. Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2010). Raising the Linguistic Accuracy Level of Advanced L2 Writers with Written Corrective Feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(4), 204-217. doi: 10.1016/j. jslw.2010.10.002 Cheng, G. (2017). The impact of online automated feedback on students’ reflective journal writing in an EFL course. The Internet and Higher Education, 34, 18–27.
  8. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage Publications. Demirbilek, M. (2015). Social media and peer feedback: What do students really think about using Wiki and Facebook as platforms for peer feedback? Active Learning in Higher Education, 16(3), 211- 224. Doughty, C. & Varela, E. (1998). Communicative focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams, (Eds.),Focus on form in classroom SLA. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  9. Dudeney, G, & Hockly, N. (2007). How to Teach English with Techn