THE IMPACT OF PEER FEEDBACK IMPROVING WRITING SKILLS

IN ENGLISH AMONG JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS

A RESEARCH PAPER

Submitted To The English Education Study Program Language Educational

Faculty of IKIP Siliwangi In Partial Fulfillment Of The Requirement for the
Sarjana Pendidikan Degree

By

Danti Septrianingsih

Student’s ID. 20220050

ENGLISH EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM

FACULTY OF LANGUAGE EDUCATION

IKIP SILIWANGI

2023
 PREFACE

Alhamdulillahirabbil’alamin. In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious and the

Most Merciful. Praised be to Allah SWT for the guidance and bless to the writer
in finishing this research paper entitled “THE IMPACT OF PEER FEEDBACK
IMPROVING WRITING SKILLS IN ENGLISH AMONG JUNIOR HIGH
SCHOOL STUDENTS”. This paper is written to fulfill the requirement for
finishing the study at English Education Study Program of IKIP Siliwangi
Bandung to obtain Sarjana Pendidikan degree. The writer would find difficulties
to get this research paper done without academic and psychological guidance from
the supervisors who help the writer in finishing this research paper. For this
reason, deep gratitude for this assistance. The writer realized that this research
cannot be considered without critiques and suggestions. Therefore, it is a pleasure
for the writer to get critiques and positive suggestions to make this research paper
to be useful for those who are interested.

Cimahi, April 2023

Danti Septrianingsih

20220050

2
 TABLE OF CONTENT

PREFACE ....................................................................................................i

TABLE OF CONTENT ....................................................................................ii

A. Topic .....................................................................................................1

B. Background Of The Research ...............................................................1

C. Research Question ...............................................................................3

D. Research Objective ..............................................................................4

E. The Significances Of The Research ......................................................4

F. Definition of Keys Terms ......................................................................5

G. Literature Review .................................................................................6

H. Research Hypothesis ............................................................................12

I. Methodology and Design of the Research...........................................13

J. The Subject of the Research.................................................................14

K. Research Instrument............................................................................14

L. Research Procedure..............................................................................17

M. Data Collection Technique....................................................................18

N. Research Schedule................................................................................19

REFERENCES

3
 A. Topic

The Impact of Peer Feedback Improving Writing Skills in English Among Junior

High School Student

B. Background Of The Research

In English dialect learning, the understudies are required to ace four aptitudes of

language one of those abilities is composing skill writing is exceptionally imperative and must

require in scholastic field writing may be a mental work of concocting thoughts, considering

around how to precise them, and organizing them into sentences and passage. (Ziamalina,

Yenni Rozimela, & Refnaldi, DIYAH UNIVERS Tran In composing abilities, there are parcels of

content sort to be specific; relate, graphic, story, interpretive, etcFrom all sorts of the

writings, hortatory article is the content which is overwhelmingly and regularly thought to

senior high schools understudies, too within the college. Hortatory composition content may

be a kind of class which points to influence the peruser that something ought to or ought to

not be the case (Yuliani & Arini, PUSTAKAAN DAREN It comprises of thesis, arguments, and

suggestion. In hortatory composition, the understudies are required to share their

supposition or suggestion almost the common case. The understudies have to be

communicate with each other to extend their information, and building their conclusions and

contemplations there are a few challenges in composing, since composing is handle

movement, it moreover since understudies are not able to utilize linguistic arrange and

4
anxious to specific their thoughts. Understudies are not able to characterize a theme, 

develop the relationship between their suppositions and truths clearly, need of lexicon, and

the instructor regularly connected repetitive techniques. To make strides the students'

capacity in composing hortatory composition content needs fitting methods making a

difference them as arrangement for their issues. Really, there are a few procedures. One of

them is Peer Input. Peer Criticism implies understudies can share their inventive work with

peers for input and after that utilize that criticism to reexamine and make strides their work

peer Feedback is an movement within the reexamining arrange of composing in which

understudies get criticism approximately their works from other understudies - their peers

(Richard, 2002) DIYA UN A few past thinks about appear that Peer Input has positive impact

on progressing understudies composing ability; LEMBA Peer Input increments the

opportunity of important interaction and maximisizes the opportunity of sharing modern

thoughts with distinctive points of view. Peer Input makes understudies associated with each

other and offer assistance understudies gotten to be dynamic learners amid ERP AN

composing prepare whereas creating their basic considering and communication(Pearce,

Mulder & Baik, 2009: 3) Cases Peer Input technique makes understudies get comments the

students' point of view, improve basic perusing and basic considering abilities, and includes

within the prepare of sharing thoughts and sharing input. It moreover picks up students'

group of onlookers awarenessIn other words, understudies are considering as a peruser that

will make strides their composing as well. (Wakabayashi, 2008 and Farrah, 2012) Other

than, since understudy analysts before long see that other understudies involvement the

5
same troubles in composing that they do, peer input too leads to a decrease in essayist

trepidation and an increment in essayist confidenceResponding to peer work includes

understudies in each others composing, in this way, they can see comparative issues and

shortcomings in their possess composing. Managing with their thought, encountering peer

input makes a difference scholars get it the significance of assembly readersneeds and create

group of onlookers awarenessThe reality that journalists change their expositions based on

their peer's comments proposes that peer criticism exercises create in understudies the

pivotal capacity to audit their composing with their eyes of another. (Gokce Kurt & Derin

Atay, 2007)

Writing skills in English are essential for Junior High school students as they

navigate their educational and professional journeys. Proficiency in writing allows

students to effectively communicate their ideas, thoughts, and knowledge.

However, many students face challenges in developing their writing skills,

including limited opportunities for practice, inadequate feedback, and a lack of

motivation.

Peer feedback, a process where students provide feedback on each other's

writing, has gained recognition as a potentially effective strategy to address these

challenges. By engaging students in the feedback process, peer feedback promotes

active learning, collaboration, and the development of critical thinking skills. This

6
research focuses on investigating the impact of peer feedback on improving

writing skills in English among Junior High school students.

While previous studies have explored various approaches to writing instruction,

the role of peer feedback in enhancing writing skills among Junior High school

students remains an area requiring further investigation. This research aims to fill

this research gap by examining the specific impact of peer feedback on writing

skills in English within the context of Junior High schools.

The niche of this study lies in its focus on the unique dynamics of peer

feedback in improving writing skills among Junior High school students. By

delving into the specific benefits and challenges associated with peer feedback,

this research aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of its effectiveness

and identify key factors that contribute to successful implementation.

C. Research Questions

Based on the background above, the problem in the research formulated as

follows:

1. What is the effect of peer feedback on the improvement of writing skills in

English among Junior High school students?

7
2. How does peer feedback influence students' motivation and engagement in the

writing process?

3. What are the perceptions and experiences of Junior High school students

regarding the peer feedback process in enhancing their writing skills?

4. What are the challenges and limitations associated with implementing peer

feedback in the Junior High school English language classroom?

5. What practical recommendations can be provided for educators to effectively

integrate peer feedback strategies into writing instruction for Junior High school

students?

D. Objective of the research

Based on research questions, this research aims to :

1. To examine the effect of peer feedback on the improvement of writing skills in

English among Junior High school students.

2. To investigate how peer feedback influences students' motivation and

engagement in the writing process.

3. To explore the perceptions and experiences of Junior High school students

regarding the peer feedback process in enhancing their writing skills.

8
4. To identify the challenges and limitations associated with implementing peer

feedback in the Junior High school English language classroom.

5. To provide practical recommendations for educators to effectively integrate

peer feedback strategies into writing instruction for Junior High school students.

E. Significances of the research

This study hopefully can give benefits for teacher, students and researcher

a. For Teacher

1. The study on the impact of peer feedback can provide teachers with valuable insights

and strategies to enhance their teaching practices.

2. Implementing peer feedback in writing instruction can help alleviate the workload of

teachers.

3. Peer feedback has the potential to positively impact student learning outcomes. By

engaging in the process of providing and receiving feedback from peers, students can

develop their critical thinking skills, gain different perspectives, and improve their writing

skills.

b. For Student

9
1. The study on the impact of peer feedback can benefit students by enhancing their

writing skills in English.

2. Peer feedback encourages active student participation in the writing process.

3. Engaging in peer feedback can boost students' self-confidence in their writing abilities.

c. For readers

Provide more experience or input for readers to improve writing skills in english among

Junior High school student

F. Definitions Of Key Terms

Some key terms used in this research are as follows:

1. Peer Feedback

Peer feedback refers to the process of students providing constructive feedback on each

other's work. In the context of this study, it involves students offering suggestions,

comments, and evaluations on their peers' writing skills in English.

2. Writing Skills.

10
Writing skills encompass the abilities and competencies required to effectively communicate

ideas, thoughts, and information through written language. It involves aspects such as

grammar, vocabulary, sentence structure, organization, coherence, and clarity.

3. Impact

In this study, the term "impact" refers to the significant and measurable effects or influences

that peer feedback has on the improvement of writing skills in English among Junior High

school students. It examines the outcomes and changes resulting from the implementation

of peer feedback in the context of writing instruction.

4. Improving

"Improving" denotes the process of enhancing or advancing the quality, proficiency, or

effectiveness of something. In the context of this study, it signifies the positive changes

observed in students' writing skills in English as a result of receiving peer feedback.

G. Literature Review

11
 This chapter presents the theories and previous studies related to the research.

In theorical theories, the researcher examines some theories that become the

working frame or thoughts of writing, peer feedback, impact, improving

A. Writing

As a language in general, English as a foreign language has 4 language skills that

we must master in learning, namely: listening, speaking, reading and writing.

Writing is one of the demands of learning English. However, writing is also the

most difficult skill faced by high school students. for this reason, the learning

model should be appropriate in accordance with the age development and

problems faced by students. writing has an important role where the teacher's

learning abilities can be evaluated because each student has a different

understanding of learning (Chan, 2019). Therefore writing can help teachers know

the extent to which students understand in getting conclusions. As many writing

teachers have experienced, most of themain problems that made students do not

start to write because they feel unconfident and unenthusiastic (Choi & Lee,

2018). There may be some reasons for them not to start to write. They have never

written much in their first language or think that they do not have anything to say

and cannot come up with ideas. And writing needs to combine all the techniques

and abilities possessed by students both in terms of vocabulary and sentence

structure; combined sentences into a paragraph, even text or essay (Zilka, Rahimi,

12
& Cohen, 2019). meanwhile, according to Semi (2007), writing is a process of

transferring ideas into written symbols. It means that every writer has an idea or

idea to convey to others through writing. A person cannot possibly write

something without having a purpose and an idea for writing. Therefore, the idea is

the main thing or the main requirement for someone to be able to write. An idea

will mean nothing if it is not advanced and communicated to others. A creator will

attempt to describe and expand the ideas he has to convey to the reader. For the

writer, the slightest idea or idea that comes out of his brain is an enlightenment to

start his creativity. The main function of writing is as a communication tool. This

statement in line with the understanding of writing conveyed by Tarigan (2008:

3), writing is a language skill that is used to communicate indirectly, not face to

face with other people. in addition, meanwhile, Tabroni (2007: 48) defines that

writing is an activity to sharpen the brain and develop imagination. Someone who

has a desire or goal will usually try to find a way so that the desire or goal can be

achieved. the author will do the same. If a writer has a specific purpose or goal, he

will try to find ideas that will be described or developed into writing. thus, in the

process of writing, the brain will be sharpened to come up with new ideas. The

idea was advanced with the imagination and creativity of the author to produce an

interesting writing.Based on the description above, the author concludes that

writing is a process of delivering facts in the form of graphic symbols that can be

13
read and understood by the author himself or by others. thus, in writing, there is a

process of delivering information from the author to the reader or there is indirect

communication between the writer and the reader.

a. Writing process

The writing process is the stages that a writer goes through to produce something

in the form of final writing. This process may be influenced by content subject

matter but in all cases it is suggested that the process has 4 main elements. The

Oshima and Hogue state writing process has four steps; prewriting, organizing,

writing, polishing: revising and editing.

1. Pre-writing

Pre-writing is a way to get ideas. in this step student have to choose a topic and

collect ideas to explain the topic. There are several techniques that can use to get

ideas. listing, is a pre-writing technique in which write the topic at the top of a

piece of paper and then quickly make a list of the words or phrases that come into

our mind. Do not stop to wonder if an idea is good or not. Write down, keep on

writing until the flow of ideas stop.

2. Organizing

14
The next step in the writing process is to organize the ideas into a simple outline.

Any ideas that students have in our brain needs to collect and identify them

generally to organize them each other.

3. Writing

The next step is to write a rough draft, using outline as a guide. Write rough draft

as quickly as we can without stopping to think about grammar, spelling or

punctuation. just get the ideas down in the paper. it will probably see many errors

in our rough draft. this is perfectly usual and acceptable -after all, and we will fix

it later.

4. Polishing: Revising and editing

In this step, polish what student have written. This step is also called revising and

editing. polishing is most successful if do it in steps. First, attack the big issues of

content and organization (revising). Then work on the smaller issues of grammar,

punctuation, and mechanics (editing).

B. Peer Feedback

15
Peer feedback is feedback given by students to their peers. After the feedback is

provided, it is expected that the grades of students who have not met the

proficiency criteria will be equivalent to those of students who have met the

proficiency criteria. Supported by the Problem-Based Learning (PBL)

instructional model, which prioritizes problem-based learning and student

engagement, it is hoped that students' spatial abilities can be improved.

There are a number of terms that are used interchangeably and refer to peer

feedback such as peer review and peer response, but all of them share the same

idea where students offer constructive criticism after reading and evaluating each

other’s work. To illustrate, peer feedback refers to the suggestions or comments,

questions or inquiries that learners offer each other after reading any piece of

writing with the aim of producing 'reader based prose’ (Flower, 1979). Liu and

Hansen (2002) defined it as “the use of learners as sources of information and

interactants for each other in such a way that learners assume roles and

responsibilities normally taken on by formally trained teacher, tutor, or editor in

commenting on and critiquing each other’s drafts in both written and oral formats

in the process of writing” (p.75). In other words, peer feedback refers to engaging

learners in the process of sharing their ideas and receiving as well as offering

constructive comments and suggestions for improving a piece of writing. In this

model of learning, learners have great responsibility for their learning as we are

16
moving from teacher-centered to learner-centered approaches to teaching and

learning. As stated by Brown (1999:7), “students need to be able to look with new

eyes at the work they have undertaken, to understand the reasons by which

assessment decisions have been made and to look for ways of remedying defects

and supplying omissions.’’ Hansen and Liu (2005) referred to peer feedback as

the “use of sources of information, and interaction between each other” (p.1). Peer

feedback is an essential part of writing classes. Studies carried out by researchers

have revealed the importance of the implementation of peer feedback in

improving what learners produce, thus leading to meaningful revisions (Hansen

and Liu, 2005).

a. Advantages of Peer Feedback

Peer feedback has been advocated in several studies for a number of benefits that

have been summarized in Ferris (1995). According to her, students increase their

confidence and critical thinking skills as a result of reading text written by peers

on similar tasks. Students also obtain more feedback on their writing than they

could from the teacher alone. Moreover, they bring multiple perspectives as they

get feedback from a more diverse audience. Finally, peer review activities build a

sense of classroom community. Therefore, offering and receiving feedback from

peers enable learners to promote the level of their writing as it offers them

opportunities to share ideas and give constructive comments. Moreover, it has the

17
potential to build confidence, promote critical thinking and maximize motivation.

Furthermore, White and Caminero (1995) believe that learners can benefit from

the invaluable opportunities that can be presented by offering peer feedback and

learning from each other. Students learn to communicate effectively, and accept

different perspectives while listening carefully, thinking critically, and

participating constructively.

b. Some Concerns and Challenges of Peer Feedback

Despite its perceived benefits, some researchers found that peer comments were

viewed with skepticism and produced few benefits. A number of studies

challenged the strong positive comments about peer review and cautioned that

some peers are likely to comment on surface errors and give advice that does not

help revision. Moreover, some studies questioned the validity of peer's comments

(Zhang, 1995, Leki, 1990, Nelson & Murphy, 1993). Zhang (1995) found that

nearly 94% of the participants indicated preference for the teacher feedback over

peer feedback. Ching (1991) questioned whether students are capable of providing

a high-quality feedback similar to that offered by their teachers and he opined that

unless we offer our students proper training on giving feedback, they are likely to

keep on giving comments on syntactic errors and avoid semantic or textual ones

that are concerned with the development of ideas and the content itself. Sufficient

training was the concern of several studies. Berg (1999) examined the effects of

18
peer response on ESL students’ revision strategies and writing outcomes. The

main question addressed in her study is whether trained peer response influences

writing outcomes, revision strategies, and peer talk about ESL student texts. The

study revealed that “trained peer response positively affected writing outcomes,

revision strategies, and peer talk about ESL student texts” (p.240). Berg

confirmed the success of peer response training by making a comparison for

revision outcomes after peer feedback by trained and untrained students. As a

result of peer feedback followed by revision, she found that trained students’

responses generated more content changes and they scored higher on improving

the overall quality of their own drafts. Tang and Tithecott (1999) indicated that

“experience reveals that students should be given intensive training to enable them

to participate fully in the process” (p. 36). Moreover, Rollinson (2004) examined

the experiences of four Spanish students and their perceptions of the peer response

process. He concluded that “if response groups are to work for every writer, then

current notions of preliminary peer training must be extended and personalized to

take into account the ongoing needs of the individual operating within the group”

(p.79). Hong (2006) investigated the perceptions of 22 advanced English major

students over peer response. Findings revealed that the respondents have “very

negative reactions to peer response” (p.49). The author

19
suggested training students to do peer response as a pre-requisite for the success

of such activities. In fact, these studies show the complexity in the nature of the

peer feedback process and the need to be cautious when implementing it and it

doesn’t mean that we have confusion or contradiction about the outcome. So if it

is introduced with caution and after training students, it could be a part of any

English writing classroom instructions.

H. Research Hypotesis

1. Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant impact of peer feedback on

improving writing skills in English among Junior High school students.

2. Alternative Hypothesis (H1): There is a significant impact of peer feedback on

improving writing skills in English among Junior High school students.

The research aims to investigate the relationship between peer feedback and the

improvement of writing skills in English. Based on the literature review and

theoretical frameworks, it is hypothesized that peer feedback plays a crucial role

in enhancing students' writing abilities in English. By providing constructive

feedback, students can identify areas for improvement, revise their written work,

and develop better writing skills. The hypothesis suggests that there will be a

20
 positive and significant impact of peer feedback on the improvement of writing

skills in English among Junior High school students.

I. Methodology and Design Of The Research

This study will employ a mixed-methods research design, consisting of both

quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis. The quantitative phase

will involve pre-test and post-test assessments to measure the students' writing

skills. The qualitative phase will include interviews and observations to explore

students' perceptions and experiences of peer feedback in improving their writing

skills.The present section discusses the population, research instruments,

procedure, developing the questionnaire and its reliability.

Image 3.1

QUANTITATIVE DATA FOLLOW QUALITATIVE DATA INTERPRET

COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS UP WITH COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS ATION

Source: Cresswell & Clark, 2011

J. The Subject of The Research

21
 The participants of this study will be Junior High school students in grades 9

and 10 from multiple schools within a specific district.Research Instruments:

1. Writing Assessments: Pre-test and post-test writing assessments will be

designed to measure students' writing skills and track their improvement.

2. Interview Protocol: Semi-structured interviews will be conducted with

students to explore their perceptions and experiences of peer feedback.

3. Observation Checklist: Observations will be made during peer feedback

sessions to gather data on student engagement and participation.

K. Research Instrument

Two instruments were used in this study. Before-and-after test and pre-test. Then

publish the survey. 

L. Research Procedure

Students were encouraged to write paragraphs and essays each week. They were

then asked to comment on each other and give feedback paragraphs and essays.

Students were asked to rate each other. Work through the given checklist.

instructor trained. Students were taught and demonstrated how to give

constructive feedback. In some paragraphs and essays. students were introduced.

Paragraph and essay development patterns and the end of each essay. In the

second semester they were given the task of writing a comparative essay on any of

22
the following topics (2 teachers, 2 jobs, 2 restaurant, two friends, two places, etc.).

At the end of the process the Students exchanged assignments and were asked to

comment about each other's work. Based on your comments on the one hand, they

revised, restructured and edited their own work. they repeated it i process it a few

times before submitting the final version teacher. After completing the task, the

students filled in the question form with the same content as the pre-

questionnaire. 

M. Data Collection Technique

1. Pre and Post Writing Tests

At the beginning and end of each semester in the 2010/2011 academic year, both

groups of students took preparatory and follow-up courses writing tests. The

purpose of the pre-test was to see two of her the groups had the same level of

writing. The goal of the posttest is to when there is a statistically significant

difference based on peer feedback procedure.

2. The Questionnaire

Development and Distribution of the Questionnaire

23
The questionnaire (see Appendix 1) was developed based on literature survey by

researchers. Reasonable survey created based on feedback from colleagues

distributed by researchers. The questionnaire consisted of 20 items statement on a

5-point likest scale (strongly agree, tend to agree, neutral, tending to disagree,

tending to completely disagree).

Distributing 20-item questionnaires in autumn, spring, and fall summer term

2010/2011 questionnaire distributed at the beginning and end of each semester of

a-questionnaire was used to determine students' views on the impact on their peers

feedback to improve student learning and improve learning ability motivation,

creativity and critical thinking skills (see Appendix 1 questionnaire).

The purpose of the pre-survey was to ensure that we did two things the groups had

the same attitude towards peer feedback. Post goal the purpose of the

questionnaire was to determine whether there was a statistically significant

difference student attitudes after the peer feedback process. 

N. Research Schedule

O. Table 3.5

24
 Month

Activity 1 2 3 4 5 6

1. Preliminary study and literature study (problem

formulation, theory, and hypothesis)

2. Data collection and data analysis

quantitative

3. Data collection and data analysis

qualitative

4. Data processing/analysis of quantitative data and

qualitative

5. Interpretation, conclusions and suggestions

6. Preparation of reports

Reference

− Al-Jamal, D. (2009). “The Impact of Peer Response in Enhancing Ninth

Grader's Writing Skill”. Umm Al-Qura University Journal of Educational &

25
Psychologic Sciences. Vol. 1-N0. 1 January 2009. (Retrieved October 22nd.

2010)http.//uqu.edu.sa/files2/tiny_mce/plugins/filemanager/files/admins/

pag3673/e1. pdf.

− Berg, E. C. (1999). “The Effects of Trained Peer Response on ESL Students’

revision Types and Writing Quality”. Journal of Second Language Writing 8/3.

215-41.

− Berkenkotter, C. & Huckin, T. (1995). Genre Knowledge in Disciplinary

Communities. Hillsdale. NJ. Lawrence Erlbaum.

− Brown, S. (1999). Institutional Strategies for Assessment. In Brown. S. and

Glasner. A. (Ed.) (1999). Assessment Matters in Higher Education. Choosing and

Using Diverse Approaches. Buckingham. Open University Press. Pp. 3-13

− Chiu, C-Y. (2008). “An Investigation of Peer Evaluation in EFL College

Writing”. 25th International Conference of English Teaching (Retrieved March

9th. 2011) www.ccu.edu. tw/fllcccu/2008EIA/English/CO9. pdf.

− Ching, C. L. P. (1991). “Giving Feedback on Written Work”. Guidelines

13(2).6

- FarrahMohammed(2012)The Impact of Peer Feedback on Improving the Writing

Skills among Hebron University StudentsAn-Najah UnivJRes(Humanities)26(1).

26
- Gerot, Linda& Wignell, Peter(1994)Making Sense of Functional

GrammarSydney: Antipodean Educational Enterprises

- HarmerJeremy(2001)The Practice of English Language TeachingCambridge:

Longman.

- Hartono, Budi(2012)Improving StudentsWriting Ability through FacebookA

Partial Fullfilment of the Requirements for Sarjana DegreeUnpublished

ThesisGAP

- Hughes, A. (2003)Testing for Language Teachers (SPENER Cambridge

University PressKAAN DI ed)Cambridge:

- HylandKen & HylandFiona(2006)Feedback on Second Language Teaching.

United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

27