Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

AKADEMİK YAZIMDA KULLANILAN GERİ BİLDİRİM ÜZERİNE YAPILAN ÇALIŞMALARIN İNCELENMESİ

Year 2022, Volume: 12 Issue: 1, 147 - 171, 14.01.2022
https://doi.org/10.17943/etku.955882

Abstract

Akademik yazım, ön lisans, lisans ve lisansüstü programlardaki öğrencilerin çalışmalarının ve ortaya çıkardıkları ürünün kalitesinin artırılması ve yazma becerilerinin ilerleyebilmesi için bir gelişim faaliyetidir. Geri-bildirim ise öğreten-öğrenen arasında meydana gelen ve öğrenmeyi teşvik eden etkileşimli bir iletişimdir. Bu çalışmada, üniversite düzeyinde akademik yazımda kullanılan geri bildirimler ile ilgili yapılmış araştırmaların sistematik bir şekilde incelenerek, geri bildirimin öneminin ortaya çıkartılması amaçlanmaktadır. Bu bağlamda, geri bildirim konusunda yapılan araştırmaların yayın bilgileri, yöntemsel eğilimleri ve geri bildirime ait özellikler, nitel bir araştırma deseni olan sistematik derleme yöntemi ile incelenmiştir. Üniversite düzeyinde akademik yazımda kullanılan geri bildirimler ile ilgili yapılmış araştırmalara, ERIC ve Web of Science veri tabanları kullanılarak ulaşılmış, konu kapsamında olan ve erişimi sağlanan 84 çalışma örneklem olarak belirlenmiştir. Araştırmalardan elde edilen veriler, yayın sınıflama formuna girilerek içerik analizi yöntemiyle analiz edilmiş ve ardından yorumlanmıştır. Üniversite düzeyinde akademik yazımda kullanılan geri bildirimlere yönelik yapılan çalışmalarda yıllara göre artan bir grafik gözlemlenmiştir. İncelenen çalışmaların çoğu, duyuşsal boyut ve beceriler üzerinedir. Nitel araştırmalar yöntemsel olarak daha fazla tercih edilmiştir. Anket yoluyla veri toplanan içerik ve betimsel analizlerin kullanıldığı çalışmalar daha fazladır. En fazla geri bildirim, ders yürütücüleri tarafından verilmiştir. Geri bildirimlerin daha çok yüz yüze verildiği tespit edilmiştir. Akademik yazımda geri bildirimin özellikleri bakımından ise en fazla biçimlendirici, düzeltici ve yapıcı geri bildirimler verilmiştir. Biçimlendirici özelliği olan geri bildirimin ise öğrencilerin başarılarını artırdığı, daha çok işbirliğine dayalı çalışmalarda görüldüğü bulunmuştur.

References

  • Ata, B., & Urman, B. (2008). Critical appraisal of systematic reviews. Journal of Turkish Society of Obstetric and Gynecology, 5(4), 233- 240.
  • Belcher, W. L. (2009). Your journal article in 12 weeks: A guide to academic success in publishing. Los Angeles: Sage. Bloom, B. S. (2016). İnsan nitelikleri ve okulda öğrenme. (Çev. D. A. Özçelik). Pegem Akademi.
  • Can, G., & Walker, A. (2011). A model for doctoral students' perceptions and attitudes toward written feedback for academic writing. Research in Higher Education, 52, 508-536. doi:10.1007/s11162-010-9204-1.
  • Coşkun, E., & Tamer, M. (2015). Yazma eğitiminde geri bildirim türleri ve kullanımı. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 12(32), 337-372.
  • Cotos, E., Link, S., & Huffman, S. (2017). Effects of technology on genre learning. Language Learning & Technology, 21(3), 104–130. 10 Nisan 2020 tarihinde http://llt.msu.edu/issues/october2017/cotoslinkhuffman.pdf adresinden erişildi.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2016). Nitel araştırma yöntemleri. (Çev. S. B. Demir). Ankara: Siyasal Yayınevi.
  • Çimen, O. (2017). Öğretmen adaylarına uygulanan geri bildirim modelinin motivasyon ve yansıtıcı düşünme eğilimlerine etkisi. (Doktora tezi). YÖK Tez Merkezi. (461507).
  • Delante, N. L. (2017). Perceived impact of online written feedback on students’ writing and learning: a reflection. Reflective Practice, 18(6), 772-804. doi:10.1080/14623943.2017.1351351.
  • Goktas, Y., Kucuk, S., Aydemir, M., Telli, E., Arpacik, O., Yildirim, G., & Reisoglu, I. (2012). Educational technology research trends in Turkey: A content analysis of the 2000-2009 decade. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 12(1), 191-199.
  • Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. doi:10.3102/00346 54302 98487.
  • Hattie, J., Gan, M., & Brooks, C. (2016). Instruction based on feedback. In R. E. Mayer & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning and instruction (2nd ed., pp. 290–324). Routledge.
  • Horstmanshof, L., & Brownie, S. (2013). A scaffolded approach to discussion board use for formative assessment of academic writing skills. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(1), 61-73. doi:10.1080/02602938.2011.604121
  • Hyland, K. (2013). Faculty feedback: Perceptions and practices in L2 disciplinary writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(3), 240–253. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2013.03.003.
  • Inoue, A. B. (2007). A reply to Peter Elbow on community-based assessment pedagogy. Assessing Writing, 12(3), 228–233.
  • Joughin, G. (2008). Assessment, learning and judgement in higher education. London: Springer.
  • Kayalı, B., Balat, Ş., Kurşun, E., & Karaman, S. (2019). Lisansüstü eğitimde etkili ve nitelikli geribildirim. Journal of Instructional Technologies & Teacher Education, 8(1), 10-20.
  • Kim, K. M. (2018). Academic socialization of doctoral students through feedback networks: a qualitative understanding of the graduate feedback landscape. Teaching in Higher Education, 23(8), 963-980. doi:10.1080/13562517.2018.1449741
  • Kırmızı, Ö., & Aydın, E. (2019). Yazma başarısı düşük olan ileri seviye öğrencilerin yazma becerisi problemlerinin nitel bir araştırması. Current Research in Education, 5(1), 34-54.
  • Li, Y., Hyland, F., & Hu, G. (2017). Prompting MEd students to engage with academia and the professional world through feedback. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 26, 52–65. doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2017.02.005
  • Lucas, C., Gibson, A., & Shum, S. B. (2019). Pharmacy students’ utilization of an online tool for immediate formative feedback on reflective writing tasks. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 83(6), 1260-1267. doi:10.5688/ajpe6800.
  • Man, D., Xu, Y., & O'Toole, J. M. (2018). Understanding autonomous peer feedback practices among postgraduate students: a case study in a Chinese university. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(4), 527-536. doi:10.1080/02602938.2017.1376310.
  • Martocchio, J. J., & Webster, J. (1992). Effects of feedback and cognitive playfulness on performance in microcomputer software training. Personnel Psychology, 45(3), 553–578. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1992.tb008 60.x
  • McCarthy, J. (2017). Enhancing feedback in higher education: Students’ attitudes towards online and in-class formative assessment feedback models. Active Learning in Higher Education, 18(2), 127–141. doi:10.1177/1469787417707615
  • Nelson, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2009). The nature of feedback: How different types of peer feedback affect writing performance. Instructional Science, 37(4), 375–401. doi:10.1007/s11251-008-9053-x
  • Neuman, W. L., & Robson, K. (2014). Basics of social research. Toronto: Pearson Canada. Newman.
  • Pham, V. P. H. (2019). The effects of lecturer’s model e-comments on graduate students’ peer e comments and writing revision. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 34(3), 324-357. doi:10.1080/09588221.2019.1609521
  • Poverjuc, O., Brooks, V., & Wray, D. (2012). Using peer feedback in a master's programme: a multiple case study. Teaching in Higher Education, 17(4), 465-477.
  • Price, M., Handley, K., & Millar, J. (2011). Feedback: Focusing attention on engagement. Studies in Higher Education, 36(8), 879–896.
  • Ramaprasad, A. (1983). On the definition of feedback. Behavioral Science, 28(1), 4–13. doi:10.1002/bs.38302 80103
  • Salter-Dvorak, H. (2017). How did you find the argument?: Conflicting discourses in a master’s dissertation tutorial. London Review of Education, 15(1), 85–100. doi:10.18546/LRE.15.1.08
  • Seviour, M. (2015). Assessing academic writing on a pre-sessional EAP course: Designing assessment which supports learning. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 18, 84-89.
  • Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of educational research, 78(1), 153-189.
  • Singh, M. K. M. (2016). Graduate students' needs and preferences for written feedback on academic writing. English Language Teaching, 9(12), 79-88. doi:10.5539/elt.v9n12p79
  • Thai, N. T. T., De Wever, B., & Valcke, M. (2020). Face-to-face, blended, flipped, or online learning environment? Impact on learning performance and student cognitions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 36(3), 397–411. doi:10.1111/jcal.12423
  • Yamalee, E., & Tangkiengsirisin, S. (2019). Effects of integrated feedback on academic writing achievement. Arab World English Journal, 10(3), 250-270. doi:10.24093/awej/vol10no3.17
  • Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2006). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri, (11. Baskı) Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık
  • Yu, S., & Lee. I. (2013). Understanding supervisors’ commentary practices in doctoral research proposal writing: A Hong Kong study. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher 22(4), 473–483.
  • Zheng, Y., & Yu, S. (2018). Student engagement with teacher written corrective feedback in EFL writing: A case study of Chinese lower-proficiency students. Assessing Writing, 37, 13–24.

EXAMINING THE RESEARCH STUDIES ON FEEDBACK IN ACADEMIC WRITING

Year 2022, Volume: 12 Issue: 1, 147 - 171, 14.01.2022
https://doi.org/10.17943/etku.955882

Abstract

Academic writing is a development activity in associate degree, undergraduate and graduate programs in order to increase the quality of students' work and to improve their writing skills that they produce. Feedback is an interactive communication between the teacher and the learner and it encourages learning. The study aims to explore the importance of feedback by compiling articles in a systematic way on feedback used in academic writing at the university level. In this context, the demographic and methodological information of the feedback studies and the characteristics of the feedback were examined by the systematic review method, which is a qualitative research design. ERIC and Web of Science databases were reviewed, and 84 accessible studies within the scope of the feedback topic at the university level constituted the sample of the study. The data entered in the publication classification form were analyzed and then interpreted. An increasing graph has been observed over the years in the feedback studies used in academic writing at the university level. Most of the reviewed studies are on affective dimensions and skills. Qualitative research has been more preferred. There are more studies using content and descriptive analysis through questionnaires. The source of feedback was mostly course instructor. It was observed that the feedback was mostly given by face to face. In academic writing, it was seen that formative, corrective and constructive were mostly given in terms of the characteristics of the feedback. In addition, feedback, which has a formative feature, increases the success of the students and this feedback has been seen mostly in collaborative studies.

References

  • Ata, B., & Urman, B. (2008). Critical appraisal of systematic reviews. Journal of Turkish Society of Obstetric and Gynecology, 5(4), 233- 240.
  • Belcher, W. L. (2009). Your journal article in 12 weeks: A guide to academic success in publishing. Los Angeles: Sage. Bloom, B. S. (2016). İnsan nitelikleri ve okulda öğrenme. (Çev. D. A. Özçelik). Pegem Akademi.
  • Can, G., & Walker, A. (2011). A model for doctoral students' perceptions and attitudes toward written feedback for academic writing. Research in Higher Education, 52, 508-536. doi:10.1007/s11162-010-9204-1.
  • Coşkun, E., & Tamer, M. (2015). Yazma eğitiminde geri bildirim türleri ve kullanımı. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 12(32), 337-372.
  • Cotos, E., Link, S., & Huffman, S. (2017). Effects of technology on genre learning. Language Learning & Technology, 21(3), 104–130. 10 Nisan 2020 tarihinde http://llt.msu.edu/issues/october2017/cotoslinkhuffman.pdf adresinden erişildi.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2016). Nitel araştırma yöntemleri. (Çev. S. B. Demir). Ankara: Siyasal Yayınevi.
  • Çimen, O. (2017). Öğretmen adaylarına uygulanan geri bildirim modelinin motivasyon ve yansıtıcı düşünme eğilimlerine etkisi. (Doktora tezi). YÖK Tez Merkezi. (461507).
  • Delante, N. L. (2017). Perceived impact of online written feedback on students’ writing and learning: a reflection. Reflective Practice, 18(6), 772-804. doi:10.1080/14623943.2017.1351351.
  • Goktas, Y., Kucuk, S., Aydemir, M., Telli, E., Arpacik, O., Yildirim, G., & Reisoglu, I. (2012). Educational technology research trends in Turkey: A content analysis of the 2000-2009 decade. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 12(1), 191-199.
  • Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. doi:10.3102/00346 54302 98487.
  • Hattie, J., Gan, M., & Brooks, C. (2016). Instruction based on feedback. In R. E. Mayer & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning and instruction (2nd ed., pp. 290–324). Routledge.
  • Horstmanshof, L., & Brownie, S. (2013). A scaffolded approach to discussion board use for formative assessment of academic writing skills. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(1), 61-73. doi:10.1080/02602938.2011.604121
  • Hyland, K. (2013). Faculty feedback: Perceptions and practices in L2 disciplinary writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(3), 240–253. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2013.03.003.
  • Inoue, A. B. (2007). A reply to Peter Elbow on community-based assessment pedagogy. Assessing Writing, 12(3), 228–233.
  • Joughin, G. (2008). Assessment, learning and judgement in higher education. London: Springer.
  • Kayalı, B., Balat, Ş., Kurşun, E., & Karaman, S. (2019). Lisansüstü eğitimde etkili ve nitelikli geribildirim. Journal of Instructional Technologies & Teacher Education, 8(1), 10-20.
  • Kim, K. M. (2018). Academic socialization of doctoral students through feedback networks: a qualitative understanding of the graduate feedback landscape. Teaching in Higher Education, 23(8), 963-980. doi:10.1080/13562517.2018.1449741
  • Kırmızı, Ö., & Aydın, E. (2019). Yazma başarısı düşük olan ileri seviye öğrencilerin yazma becerisi problemlerinin nitel bir araştırması. Current Research in Education, 5(1), 34-54.
  • Li, Y., Hyland, F., & Hu, G. (2017). Prompting MEd students to engage with academia and the professional world through feedback. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 26, 52–65. doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2017.02.005
  • Lucas, C., Gibson, A., & Shum, S. B. (2019). Pharmacy students’ utilization of an online tool for immediate formative feedback on reflective writing tasks. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 83(6), 1260-1267. doi:10.5688/ajpe6800.
  • Man, D., Xu, Y., & O'Toole, J. M. (2018). Understanding autonomous peer feedback practices among postgraduate students: a case study in a Chinese university. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(4), 527-536. doi:10.1080/02602938.2017.1376310.
  • Martocchio, J. J., & Webster, J. (1992). Effects of feedback and cognitive playfulness on performance in microcomputer software training. Personnel Psychology, 45(3), 553–578. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1992.tb008 60.x
  • McCarthy, J. (2017). Enhancing feedback in higher education: Students’ attitudes towards online and in-class formative assessment feedback models. Active Learning in Higher Education, 18(2), 127–141. doi:10.1177/1469787417707615
  • Nelson, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2009). The nature of feedback: How different types of peer feedback affect writing performance. Instructional Science, 37(4), 375–401. doi:10.1007/s11251-008-9053-x
  • Neuman, W. L., & Robson, K. (2014). Basics of social research. Toronto: Pearson Canada. Newman.
  • Pham, V. P. H. (2019). The effects of lecturer’s model e-comments on graduate students’ peer e comments and writing revision. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 34(3), 324-357. doi:10.1080/09588221.2019.1609521
  • Poverjuc, O., Brooks, V., & Wray, D. (2012). Using peer feedback in a master's programme: a multiple case study. Teaching in Higher Education, 17(4), 465-477.
  • Price, M., Handley, K., & Millar, J. (2011). Feedback: Focusing attention on engagement. Studies in Higher Education, 36(8), 879–896.
  • Ramaprasad, A. (1983). On the definition of feedback. Behavioral Science, 28(1), 4–13. doi:10.1002/bs.38302 80103
  • Salter-Dvorak, H. (2017). How did you find the argument?: Conflicting discourses in a master’s dissertation tutorial. London Review of Education, 15(1), 85–100. doi:10.18546/LRE.15.1.08
  • Seviour, M. (2015). Assessing academic writing on a pre-sessional EAP course: Designing assessment which supports learning. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 18, 84-89.
  • Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of educational research, 78(1), 153-189.
  • Singh, M. K. M. (2016). Graduate students' needs and preferences for written feedback on academic writing. English Language Teaching, 9(12), 79-88. doi:10.5539/elt.v9n12p79
  • Thai, N. T. T., De Wever, B., & Valcke, M. (2020). Face-to-face, blended, flipped, or online learning environment? Impact on learning performance and student cognitions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 36(3), 397–411. doi:10.1111/jcal.12423
  • Yamalee, E., & Tangkiengsirisin, S. (2019). Effects of integrated feedback on academic writing achievement. Arab World English Journal, 10(3), 250-270. doi:10.24093/awej/vol10no3.17
  • Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2006). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri, (11. Baskı) Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık
  • Yu, S., & Lee. I. (2013). Understanding supervisors’ commentary practices in doctoral research proposal writing: A Hong Kong study. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher 22(4), 473–483.
  • Zheng, Y., & Yu, S. (2018). Student engagement with teacher written corrective feedback in EFL writing: A case study of Chinese lower-proficiency students. Assessing Writing, 37, 13–24.
There are 38 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Other Fields of Education
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Ahmet Yusuf Cevher 0000-0002-0233-3226

İsmail Kara 0000-0002-8097-9006

Murat Akbay 0000-0001-5847-3597

Özlem Oktay 0000-0002-0207-1211

Yüksel Göktaş 0000-0002-7341-2466

Publication Date January 14, 2022
Published in Issue Year 2022 Volume: 12 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Cevher, A. Y., Kara, İ., Akbay, M., Oktay, Ö., et al. (2022). AKADEMİK YAZIMDA KULLANILAN GERİ BİLDİRİM ÜZERİNE YAPILAN ÇALIŞMALARIN İNCELENMESİ. Eğitim Teknolojisi Kuram Ve Uygulama, 12(1), 147-171. https://doi.org/10.17943/etku.955882