Aug 2026· Advanced Electromagnetics· Vol 15, pp. 3609-3616· 0 citations
Abstract
This study investigates revision behaviors of vocational college students in English writing under two feedback conditions: teacher feedback and peer feedback. Accurate technical writing is also essential in engineering disciplines such as electromagnetic waves, antennas, and propagation, where local language accuracy and global logical coherence directly affect the communication of experimental methods and design results. Although previous research has shown that both forms of feedback can support second-language writing development, relatively limited attention has been paid to how vocational students respond to feedback during revision. To address this gap, the study adopts a small-scale comparative design involving 64 first-year students from a public vocational college in China over an eight-week instructional period. Students completed four practical English writing tasks, and their first drafts, feedback sheets, revised drafts, scores, and interview responses were analyzed. Revisions were coded by level, type, uptake, and textual effect. The findings indicate that teacher feedback produced a higher overall uptake rate and was especially effective in stimulating local revisions involving grammar, vocabulary, sentence structure, and accuracy. Peer feedback generated a larger proportion of global revisions, particularly in idea clarification, paragraph development, coherence, and reader awareness. The study concludes that teacher and peer feedback serve different pedagogical functions and should be combined strategically in process-oriented writing instruction, including technical writing training for electromagnetic engineering students.
Teacher feedback plays an important role in supporting students' learning, yet both direct and indirect feedback have limitations in helping students understand and apply feedback during revision. In English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classroom, these challenges are associated with unclarity and incomplete feedback delivery. Audio feedback has been proposed as a complementary strategy to address these issues. Although widely investigated, previous studies have mainly focused on tertiary students, while evidence from Indonesian secondary schools remains limited. Therefore, this study examined Indonesian junior secondary EFL students' perceptions of audio feedback in English writing classes in terms of clarity, usefulness, and motivation. This qualitative case study involved six participants to capture the natural process of feedback, including five eighth-grade students as the focus area and one English teacher to provide the instructional viewpoints. Data were collected through reflection journals, writing assignments, teacher audio recordings, and semi-structured interviews. The findings revealed that students perceived audio feedback as insufficient to support feedback clarity due to language inaccessibility and employed a more effective feedback strategy based on students’ linguistic readiness rather than audio form delivery. English proficiency also influenced students’ ability to interpret and apply the feedback to produce useful knowledge. Furthermore, motivation to revise writing was shaped more by students' perceived competence and emotional responses than by the audio delivery mode itself. This study concludes that audio feedback will be more effective when the teacher utilizes accessible language, adjusts to students' proficiency levels, and provides emotionally supportive setting so that students can produce useful knowledge in improving English writing skills.
ABSTRAK
Umpan balik guru berperan penting dalam mendukung perkembangan belajar siswa, tetapi metode langsung maupun tidak langsung masih memiliki keterbatasan dalam membantu siswa memahami dan menerapkan umpan balik pada proses revisi. Dalam pembelajaran bahasa Inggris sebagai bahasa asing (English as a Foreign Language/EFL), kendala tersebut dipengaruhi oleh kemampuan kognitif siswa dan penyampaian umpan balik yang kurang tepat. Audio feedback diusulkan sebagai strategi pelengkap untuk mengatasi permasalahan tersebut. Meskipun telah banyak diteliti, sebagian besar penelitian berfokus pada mahasiswa, sedangkan kajian pada siswa sekolah menengah di Indonesia masih terbatas. Oleh karena itu, penelitian ini mengkaji persepsi siswa EFL sekolah menengah pertama di Indonesia terhadap penggunaan audio feedback dalam pembelajaran menulis berdasarkan aspek kejelasan, kemanfaatan, dan motivasi. Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif dengan desain studi kasus yang melibatkan enam partisipan untuk mendapatkan gambaran proses alami umpan balik, terdiri atas lima siswa kelas VIII yang mejadi fokus utama dan seorang guru bahasa Inggris untuk memberikan perspektif dari sisi pengajar. Data dikumpulkan melalui jurnal refleksi, tugas menulis, rekaman audio feedback, dan wawancara semi-terstruktur. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa siswa memandang audio feedback membantu memperjelas umpan balik guru apabila bahasanya mudah dipahami dan didukung dengan strategi umpan balik yang lebih efektif, bukan semata-mata karena bentuk medianya. Tingkat kemahiran berbahasa Inggris turut memengaruhi kemampuan siswa dalam memahami dan menerapkan umpan balik untuk mengasilkan pengetahuan yang bermanfaat. Selain itu, motivasi merevisi tulisan lebih dipengaruhi oleh persepsi terhadap kemampuan diri dan respons emosional dibandingkan dengan penyampaian melalui audio. Penelitian ini menyimpulkan bahwa audio feedback akan lebih efektif apabila guru menggunakan bahasa yang mudah dipahami, disesuaikan dengan tingkat kemahiran siswa, serta mendukung kondisi emosional mereka sehingga dapat menghasilkan ilmu yang bermanfaat dalam meningkatkan kemampuan menulis Bahasa Inggris.
Written corrective feedback plays a crucial role in second language learning, particularly in the development of writing skills. Nevertheless, an interesting and valid question to consider is how peer feedback compares with teacher feedback in enhancing students’ writing skills. This study is a conceptual replication of Ruegg (2015) that examines the effects of peer and teacher feedback on the writing performance of Cambodian EFL university students and determines whether there are differences in the focus of feedback provided by peers and the teacher. The study was conducted with two intact classes comprising 60 second-year students pursuing a Bachelor of Education in Teaching English as a Foreign Language at a public university in Cambodia.
Employing a quasi-experimental research design, the study utilised pre-tests, post-tests, and delayed post-tests to measure the immediate and sustained effects of peer feedback and teacher feedback following the feedback intervention. One class was assigned as the peer feedback group, giving and receiving peer feedback, while the other was the teacher feedback group, receiving only teacher feedback. The research was conducted over a single academic semester, 15 weeks. Students’ overall writing performance was assessed through a 30-minute timed essay task, which was administered during pre-, post-, and delayed post-tests, the latter being conducted two weeks after the post-test to assess the effects of peer and teacher feedback after the feedback intervention. The timed essays were rated by two writing skills instructors, utilising the analytical rating scale from Ruegg’s study. The feedback intervention lasted 12 weeks between the pre- and post-tests, during which students completed four essay writing assignments. Feedback on students’ preliminary drafts was categorised into six categories following Ruegg (2015) and analysed to identify differences in the focus of feedback provided by peers and the teacher.
This study found that both peer and teacher feedback significantly enhanced students’ overall writing performance over time; however, the difference between the two feedback groups was not statistically significant over time. A time-specific difference was observed at the post-test, with the teacher feedback group scoring higher than the peer feedback group. Additionally, the study found overall improvement across four writing components, with variations. Both feedback groups’ organisation scores improved, but the teacher feedback group performed better, especially at the post-test. Regarding content, both improved, with the teacher feedback group showing a significant improvement over the peer feedback group. No significant differences were found between groups in lexis and grammar scores. The study found differences in the focus of peer and teacher feedback: peer feedback tended to focus more on surface-level grammar, whereas teacher feedback concentrated more on structure and content.
This study emphasises the significance of integrating both peer and teacher feedback within second language (L2) writing pedagogy and the importance of peer feedback training. Future research should investigate the comparative effects of peer feedback, teacher feedback, and combined feedback approaches, incorporating multiple delayed post-tests to more comprehensively assess retention and long-term improvement.
Writing is one of the essential skills that foreign language learners should master. Written feedback is a practical way for teachers in China to provide feedback when teaching English writing. As a dimension of the learner factor, students' cognitive learning styles may influence their performance in developing writing skills and their reaction to teachers' written feedback. This research investigates the effects of teachers' written feedback on English learners with different cognitive learning styles during an English writing course at a university in Beijing. Twenty-six students were recruited and divided into two groups according to their cognitive learning styles. Their essays were observed over a semester, and 13 of them received a follow-up interview. Analysis was based on observing and comparing their reactions to written feedback from the two groups. Students in the field-independent group tended to respond to the feedback with more personal reflection and acted on the feedback to solve more problems in their writing. This finding suggests that teachers can provide more appropriate feedback tailored to students' cognitive learning styles to help them improve their English writing.
Generative AI tools such as ChatGPT are increasingly integrated into the teaching of English writing, and previous research confirms their ability to provide personalized feedback to correct grammatical and lexical errors and improve writing quality. However, few empirical studies have examined how ChatGPT shapes students’ argumentative writing self-efficacy. To fill this research gap, a circular framework of writing-feedback-revision was used for three weeks in this study. Forty-five Chinese English majors were divided into a high-level group (n = 22) and a low-level group (n = 23) according to their vocabulary test scores, and then randomly assigned to the ChatGPT feedback group and the teacher feedback group. The research instruments included an argumentative writing assignment, a writing self-efficacy questionnaire, and a vocabulary assessment. This paper examines the effects of feedback at different levels of writing on writing competence and self-efficacy. The results reveal three key findings. First, learners who received teacher feedback (mean rank = 27.39) made greater writing progress than those who used ChatGPT (mean rank = 19.19), with low-proficiency students showing the weakest improvement with AI feedback (mean rank = 13.63). Second, ChatGPT significantly improved the writing self-efficacy of low-level learners, but there was no corresponding gain in their writing performance. Third, teacher feedback had a consistent positive effect on both writing outcomes and self-efficacy. The evidence suggests that ChatGPT cannot completely replace writing instructors, especially for low-proficiency learners, as over-reliance on AI may inhibit writing growth. Nevertheless, ChatGPT can still be used as a viable aid to correct errors and refine expressions to develop writing confidence, and advanced learners need teacher-led training to develop critical and creative thinking. This study provides empirical evidence for AI-enhanced writing instruction and provides differentiated instructional designs for learners with different proficiency levels.
Chenlong Zhang· Journal of Contemporary Educ...· 0 citations
Writing feedback is essential because it helps learners recognize weaknesses, refine ideas, and revise texts purposefully. Yet secondary-school feedback often remains focused on surface errors rather than argument, organization, evidence, and critical engagement. This study investigated how critical writing feedback was implemented and perceived in Ethiopian secondary-school English classrooms and examined its contribution to students’ writing quality, critical engagement, and revision practices. A qualitative descriptive design involved 12 purposively selected English teachers. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews and 24 non-participant classroom observations using validated interview and observation guides. The data were analyzed through iterative processes of data reduction, data display, conclusion drawing, and verification. The findings showed that feedback was predominantly teacher-led and concentrated on grammar, spelling, vocabulary, punctuation, and sentence construction. Higher-order feedback on ideas, coherence, argument, evidence, audience, and organization occurred less consistently, although teachers with process-writing experience used more dialogic questions and explanations. Students responded more positively to specific, respectful, and example-based comments than to vague symbols or corrective markings. Peer feedback, self-assessment, conferencing, and multiple-draft revision were limited by large classes, examination pressure, restricted time, uneven proficiency, and teacher workload. Teachers perceived moderate improvement in language accuracy, organization, critical engagement, and revision when feedback was prioritized, explained, and followed by redrafting. However, many revisions remained superficial. The study concludes that critical writing feedback is most productive when it is dialogic, criteria-based, emotionally supportive, and integrated with opportunities for revision. Teacher development and assessment policies should recognize feedback as a learning process rather than final correction.
Thoric Ahmad, Ahmad Javed Hassan, Mohammed Meraj et al.· Journal of Language Studies...· 0 citations
This study examines the effectiveness of writing conferences as a supplementary instructional feedback approach for addressing first language (L1) negative transfer errors in English writing. Drawing on theoretical frameworks from second language acquisition and writing pedagogy, the study focuses on three categories of L1 transfer errors: semantic, syntactic, and capitalization. The study argues that written corrective feedback alone is insufficient to help students understand and self-correct systematic errors, positioning oral, face-to-face conferencing as a necessary complement. Using a mixed-methods design, the study investigates how writing conferences conducted by a shared-L1 instructor improve writing accuracy and support sustained metalinguistic awareness across new writing tasks. Participants were 40 female first-year Saudi undergraduates at a public university in Saudi Arabia who were learners of English as a foreign language (EFL) and whose first language was Arabic. Their writing was tracked across three writing tasks over one semester, using a convergent parallel design. An experimental group (n = 20) received written corrective feedback followed by individual writing conferences, whereas a control group (n = 20) received written corrective feedback only. Results showed statistically significant and sustained reductions in all three error categories for the experimental group across tasks of increasing unfamiliarity. Thematic analysis of interviews revealed three themes: enhanced metalinguistic understanding, reduced writing anxiety, and explicit L1 transfer awareness. These findings suggest that shared-L1 conferencing promotes qualitatively different learning from written feedback alone, and offers a pedagogically applicable model for L1-informed writing instruction in EFL contexts.
A. Saaty· Journal of Education and Lea...· 0 citations
