Investigasi Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhi Kualitas Tulisan Ilmiah Mahasiswa

Penelitian ini didasari dengan adanya kebutuhan untuk mengevaluasi capaian pembelajaran mata kuliah yang berada dalam kategori Writing Skill, seperti: Paragraph Writing, Composition and Essay Writing, Argumentative Writing, dan Thesis Writing. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi kualitas tulisan ilmiah mahasiswa. Desain penelitian yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah rancangan penelitian deskriptif. Data penelitian dikumpulkan dengan menggunakan angket dan panduan wawancara. Yang menjadi partisipan dalam penelitian ini adalah alumni (lulusan) Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan (FKIP) Universitas Lancang Kuning (UNILAK) pada Tahun Akademik 2020/2021. Jumlah alumni tersebut adalah sebanyak 36 orang. Data yang telah dikumpulkan melalui angket dan wawancara dianalisis secara deskriptif. Hasil penelitian ini menujukkan bahwa, terdapat faktor eksternal dan internal yang menghambat keterampilan menulis mahasiswa. Hal ini didukung oleh data dari wawancara bahwa kesulitan mahasiswa dalam menulis tulisan ilmiah itu, secara umumnya memang dipengaruhi oleh faktor eksternal dan internal tadi, seperti kurangnya rasa percaya diri, kurangnya pengetahuan dalam menemukan referensi bacaan, kurangnya pengetahuan dalam hal penggunaan tata bahasa, kosakata, dan mekanisme penulisan yang benar, serta minimnya waktu untuk latihan menulis. Berdasarkan temuan ini, dapat disimpulkan bahwa faktor eksternal dan internal menjadi faktor penentu dan yang paling berpengaruh terhadap kualitas tulisan ilmiah mahasiswa.

Malaysian ESL Students’ Perception of the Importance Learning Argumentative Writing and Challenges Faced

Although argumentative writing skills are essential for survival in today’s social and professional world, they are rather challenging to master. The Malaysian Ministry of Higher Education places great emphasis on the needs for graduates to grasp argumentative writing skills. However, learners appear to be ambivalent about the skills. Thus, using a quantitative approach, this study aims to explore the students’ perceptions towards learning argumentative writing as well as identify the challenges that they face. Analysed using ANOVA, data from the questionnaire used in the study indicates that: i) the respondents believed that learning argumentative writing is equally important for academic success and career development in the future; and ii) those with lower grades tend to struggle more with language style and components of argumentative writing. The findings also suggest that educators should try to cater to students’ needs in order to promote mastery of argumentative writing skills. In the future, qualitative research could be conducted to explore learners’ perceptions in more detail. Researchers could also employ mixed methods to investigate issues around argumentative writing skills from educators’ perspectives.

Genre Effect on L2 Syntactic Complexity and Holistic Rating for Writing Quality of Intermediate EFL Learners

This exploratory study examines whether genre has an impact on syntactic complexity and holistic rating in EFL writing. Over 300 sample texts produced by intermediate learners were collected from a test and some regular after-class assignments for English writing courses. Each participant completed two writing tasks, one argumentative and the other narrative. Results show that genre type has a significant impact on L2 syntactic complexity. Genre effect is found stronger with timed writing tasks. L2 holistic ratings show correlation with syntactic complexity on the different measure(s) depending on genre type and planning conditions. Regression analyses reveal that for timed writing tasks, clausal density (clauses per sentence) is a reliable predictor for holistic assessment on intermediate EFL learners’ writing quality. It is found to account for 6% of the score variance for timed writing and 10% for timed argumentative writing. Genre is evidenced to be related to EFL writing holistic ratings. Closer examination indicates that while syntactic complexity is predictive of holistic writing scores for argumentative writing, it does not correlate with holistic scores for narrative writing. Other linguistic features rather than syntactic complexity may be accountable. Overall, the study lends support to genre effect in the relationship between syntactic complexity and L2 writing quality holistic rating.

Assessment of the Analytic Scale of Argumentative Writing (ASAW)

The Analytic Scale of Argumentative Writing (ASAW) was developed because of the need for a genre-specific scale to assess English as a Second Language (ESL) university student writers’ argumentative essays. The present study reports the findings of field-testing ASAW. For this purpose, argumentative samples (n = 110) were collected and remote-scored by experienced raters (n = 5) who used ASAW. Overall, moderate to high inter-rater reliability (r = 0.7-0.9), as well as high (r = 0.84-0.92) and moderate to high (r = 0.70-0.77) intra-rater reliability coefficients after short (6-week) and long (9-week) rating intervals were obtained, respectively. Some established instruments were used to score the same essays rated using ASAW to test the concurrent validity of the scale. The scores assigned by the raters using the scale demonstrated moderate (r = 0.51) to high (r = 0.77) correlations with the scores awarded using several other standard instruments. The raters who used ASAW were given a questionnaire to evaluate the scale itself, and on average, the results indicated that the raters were highly satisfied with it. It took an average of 5.5 minutes for the raters to evaluate an essay, indicating it was economical. The study has useful implications for refinement of ASAW and development and validation of similar scales and benchmarks in the future.

Situating English Language Teaching in Indonesia within a Critical, Global Dialogue of Theories: A Case Study of Teaching Argumentative Writing and Cross-Cultural Understanding Courses

<p>This dissertation aims to critically examine lecturers’ discursive statements in interviews and English Language Teaching (ELT) classroom practices in Indonesia, primarily in the teaching of Argumentative Writing (AW) and Cross Cultural Understanding (CCU) courses at two universities (Multi-Religious and Islamic University) in Java. This study uses poststructural and interdisciplinary lenses: Foucauldian Discourse Analysis (FDA); Connell’s (2007) ideas of Southern Theory, Kumaravadivelu’s (2006b) Post Method Pedagogy, and Al-Faruqi’s (1989) and Al-Attas’ (1993) Islamisation of knowledge, as well as the critiques of these theories and other postcolonial voices. The critical examination of ELT practices through poststructural and interdisciplinary lenses in an Indonesian context is urgent, as teaching practices at present are subjected by competing regimes of ‘truth’ including Western, neoliberal, Southern, and Islamic discourses. The data were collected from curriculum policy documents, semi structured interviews, stimulated recalls and classroom observations from seven lecturers. The data were then transcribed and analysed primarily using FDA and also discussed in relation to other interdisciplinary theories, the critiques of these theories, and other relevant postcolonial literatures. Within the analysis there is a particular focus on how ELT Methods and World Englishes are enacted, negotiated, or resisted by lecturers. This study strongly suggests that Western discourses have dominated other regimes of truth, as evidenced in the privileging of process and genre approaches, global Northern structures of AW essay, as well as an emphasis on American and British English in AW courses and the privileging of those two dominant English varieties in CCU courses in most contexts. The study also suggests there are tensions between religious discourse and emerging neoliberal discourses in national policies and university documents and some lecturers’ language. Southern discourses seem to have been marginalised and seem to be only resorted to support the use of Western discourses in the classroom teaching. The use of FDA and interdisciplinary lenses, along with their critiques and other postcolonial voices, are underexplored in current studies of ELT practices. Therefore, this study extends scholarship in the ELT field and makes a case for exposing lecturers to counter discourses, such as Southern and Islamic discourses, in order for them to be able to critically negotiate or appropriate Western and neoliberal discourses in their teaching practices.</p>

Situating English Language Teaching in Indonesia within a Critical, Global Dialogue of Theories: A Case Study of Teaching Argumentative Writing and Cross-Cultural Understanding Courses

<p>This dissertation aims to critically examine lecturers’ discursive statements in interviews and English Language Teaching (ELT) classroom practices in Indonesia, primarily in the teaching of Argumentative Writing (AW) and Cross Cultural Understanding (CCU) courses at two universities (Multi-Religious and Islamic University) in Java. This study uses poststructural and interdisciplinary lenses: Foucauldian Discourse Analysis (FDA); Connell’s (2007) ideas of Southern Theory, Kumaravadivelu’s (2006b) Post Method Pedagogy, and Al-Faruqi’s (1989) and Al-Attas’ (1993) Islamisation of knowledge, as well as the critiques of these theories and other postcolonial voices. The critical examination of ELT practices through poststructural and interdisciplinary lenses in an Indonesian context is urgent, as teaching practices at present are subjected by competing regimes of ‘truth’ including Western, neoliberal, Southern, and Islamic discourses. The data were collected from curriculum policy documents, semi structured interviews, stimulated recalls and classroom observations from seven lecturers. The data were then transcribed and analysed primarily using FDA and also discussed in relation to other interdisciplinary theories, the critiques of these theories, and other relevant postcolonial literatures. Within the analysis there is a particular focus on how ELT Methods and World Englishes are enacted, negotiated, or resisted by lecturers. This study strongly suggests that Western discourses have dominated other regimes of truth, as evidenced in the privileging of process and genre approaches, global Northern structures of AW essay, as well as an emphasis on American and British English in AW courses and the privileging of those two dominant English varieties in CCU courses in most contexts. The study also suggests there are tensions between religious discourse and emerging neoliberal discourses in national policies and university documents and some lecturers’ language. Southern discourses seem to have been marginalised and seem to be only resorted to support the use of Western discourses in the classroom teaching. The use of FDA and interdisciplinary lenses, along with their critiques and other postcolonial voices, are underexplored in current studies of ELT practices. Therefore, this study extends scholarship in the ELT field and makes a case for exposing lecturers to counter discourses, such as Southern and Islamic discourses, in order for them to be able to critically negotiate or appropriate Western and neoliberal discourses in their teaching practices.</p>

Human Ratings of Writing Quality Capture Features of Syntactic Variety and Transformation in Chinese EFL Learners’ Argumentative Writing

Traditionally, writing quality is measured by human ratings, either holistically or analytically. The present study aimed to investigate the locus of human ratings by analyzing the linguistic features that are predictive of writing quality. One hundred and 44 argumentative writing samples from Chinese learners of English as a foreign language were evaluated by human ratings and quantitative measurement of writing quality indexed by Coh-Metrix. Holistic and analytic human ratings had significant correlations with quantitative measures related to syntactic variety and transformation. Moreover, linear and logistic regressions revealed that syntactic simplicity, words before main verb, syntactic structure similarity in all sentences and across paragraphs, incidence of passive voice and temporal connectives were five valid indices that can consistently differentiate writing quality indexed by human ratings. The present findings have significant pedagogical implications for human ratings on writing quality in the foreign language learning context.