<![CDATA[ABSTRACT The collaborative editing process allows students to evaluate written work through the exchange of perspectives with their peers, but the ability to recognize errors does not necessarily develop in line with their level of engagement. This study examines how students participate in small-group collaborative editing and respond to lecturer scaffolding through indirect elicitation. An exploratory qualitative case study was conducted in May 2026 involving 14 second-semester students enrolled in a General English Language course. The learning sequence consisted of individually writing three sentences based on a tense obtained through a lottery, reviewing the writing collaboratively for 15 minutes, discussing the resulting written work in a whole-class discussion, and participating in semi-structured group interviews. Data were obtained from classroom observations, students’ written products, and interviews, and were subsequently examined through thematic analysis and source triangulation. Student engagement was evident in peer discussion and review, yet spelling, capitalization, grammatical, and sentence-form errors remained after the group-editing stage. When the lecturer employed indirect elicitation, students were encouraged to reconsider their writing and examine potentially problematic parts before making revisions. Thus, collaborative editing and lecturer scaffolding serve complementary functions in fostering a more reflective process of reviewing students’ written work. ABSTRAK Proses collaborative editing memungkinkan mahasiswa menilai tulisan melalui pertukaran pandangan dengan teman sebaya, tetapi kemampuan mengenali kesalahan tidak selalu berkembang sejalan dengan keterlibatan tersebut. Penelitian ini menelaah bagaimana mahasiswa berpartisipasi dalam small-group collaborative editing dan merespons lecturer scaffolding melalui indirect elicitation. Studi kasus kualitatif eksploratif ini dilaksanakan pada Mei 2026 dengan melibatkan 14 mahasiswa semester dua pada mata kuliah General English Language. Rangkaian kegiatan berlangsung melalui penulisan tiga kalimat berdasarkan tense yang diperoleh melalui undian, pemeriksaan tulisan secara berkelompok selama 15 menit, pembahasan hasil tulisan dalam whole-class discussion, dan wawancara kelompok semi-terstruktur. Informasi penelitian diperoleh melalui observasi kelas, produk tulisan, dan wawancara, kemudian ditelaah menggunakan analisis tematik serta triangulasi sumber. Keterlibatan mahasiswa terlihat dalam diskusi dan pemeriksaan antarteman, tetapi kesalahan ejaan, kapitalisasi, tata bahasa, dan bentuk kalimat masih ditemukan setelah tahap penyuntingan kelompok. Ketika dosen menggunakan indirect elicitation, mahasiswa terdorong untuk memeriksa kembali tulisan dan menelusuri bagian yang dianggap bermasalah sebelum melakukan perbaikan. Dengan demikian, collaborative editing dan lecturer scaffolding menunjukkan fungsi yang saling melengkapi dalam membangun proses pemeriksaan tulisan yang lebih reflektif.]]>
