LANGUAGE EFFECTIVENESS AND FACTORS INFLUENCING SCIENTIFIC WRITING OF INDONESIAN UNDERGRADUATE THESIS
Abstract
The linguistic feature distinction between written and spoken discourse, like scientific writing, narrative text, discussion text, oral speech, etc. has been a longstanding discussion among scholars. However, there is limited number of studies on Indonesian undergraduate thesis context. This article reports the language effectiveness, i.e. lexical density and grammatical complexity of undergraduate thesis using the Flesch’s Analysis of the Readability of Adult Reading Materials (1974) and the determinant factors influencing them. This descriptive study, applying online system application, was conducted in an Indonesian pseudonym university. Forty-two undergraduate theses were used as data source of lexical density and grammatical complexity, and four English lecturers participated on interview. Results showed that the average lexical density ratio was 42.14 and the grammatical complexity was 14.54. On the other hand, the determinant factors of academic writing holistically encompass; (1) psychological factors including identity awareness, motivation, and conceptual competency, (2) sociocultural factor covering personal experience, and (3) linguistic factors, namely linguistic awareness and application, and mechanical competency. To sum up, three important conclusions are drawn. Firstly, there is no exactly the same lexical density and grammatical complexity across chapters of the undergraduate theses. Secondly, the undergraduate theses are lexically acceptable, but grammatically are not as they are interpreted as American students’ slick fiction product. Finally, variables affecting academic writing are not only linguistic factors, but also psychological and sociocultural ones.
Keywords: lexical density; grammatical complexity; undergraduate thesis; Indonesian context; academic writing; language effectiveness.
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Adawiyah, R. (2015). Grammatical intricacy and lexical density in scientific and narrative texts. (Undergraduate Thesis). Medan: Universitas Sumatera Utara. Retrieved from http://repository.usu.ac.id/bitstream/handle/123456789/62923/Cover.pdf?sequence=7.
Afshar, H. S., & Farahani, M. (2015). Reflective thinking and reflective teaching among Iranian EFL teachers: Do gender and teaching experience make a difference? Procedia-Social and behavioral sciences, 192, 615-620. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.107.
Alkan, F., & Erdem, E. (2014). The relationship between metacognitive awareness, teacher self-efficacy, and chemistry competency. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 778-783. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.07.475.
Alhojailan, M. I. (2012). Thematic analysis: A critical review of its process and evaluation. West east journal of social sciences, 1 (1), 39-47. Retrieved from https://fac.ksu.edu.sa/sites/default/files/ta_thematic_analysis_dr_mohammed_alhojailan.pdf.
Andrén, U. (2012). Self-awareness and self-knowledge in professions: Something we are or skill we learn. Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Hothoburgenesis.
Azzam, T., & Whyte, C. E. (2018). Evaluative feedback delivery and the factors that affect success. Evaluation and program planning, 67, 148-159. doi: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2017.11.005.
Apostolou, B., Dorminey, J. W., Hassell, J. M., & Rebele, J. E. (2018). Accounting education literature review (2017). Journal of accounting education, 43, 1-23. doi: 10.1016/j.jaccedu.2018.02.001.
Baba, K. (2009). Aspects of lexical proficiency in writing summaries in a foreign language. Journal of second language writing, 18(3), 191-208. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2009.05.003.
Bauerly, K. R., & Gottwald, S. R. (2009). The dynamic relationship of sentence complexity, childhood stuttering, and grammatical development. Contemporary Issues in Communication Science and Disorders, 36, 14-25.
Bayat, N. (2014). The effect of the process writing approach on writing success and anxiety. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, XIV(3), 1133-1141. doi: 10.12738/estp.2014.3.1720.
Bench, S. W., & Lench, H. C. (2013). On the function of boredom. Behavioral Sciences, III, 459-472. doi: 10.3390/bs3030459.
Biber, D., Gray, B., & Stamples, S. (2016). Contrasting the grammatical complexities of conversation and academic writing: Implication for EAP writing development and teaching. Language in Focus Journal, 2(1).
Calkin, A. B. (2018). Writing on writing. International journal of educational research, 87, 127-137. doi: 10.1016/j.ijer.2017.05.002.
Chokwe, J. M. (2013). Impacting academic writing skills of English second language students. Mediterranean Journal of Social Science, IV(14), 337-384.
Dakhi, S., & Damanik, I. S. (2018). Students’ motivation in reading English text: A qualitative study in EFL context. Journal of English teaching, 4(2), 81-93. Retrieved from http://ejournal.uki.ac.id/index.php/jet/article/view/832.
Dakhi, S. (2016). Foreign language acquisition of souvenir seller in Bawomataluo village. Journal Ilmu Bahasa, II(1), 16-32. doi: 10.22225/jr.2.1.46.16-32.
Dakhi, S. (2011). Lexical changes of southern dialect of Li Niha (Master Thesis). Medan: Universitas Negeri Medan. Retrieved from http://digilib.unimed.ac.id/3219/.
Deane, P., et al. (2008). Cognitive models of writing: Writing proficiency as a complexly integrated skill. Princeton: Educational Testing Service.
Demir-Vegter, S., Aarts, R., & Kurvers, J. (2013). Lexical richness in maternal input and vocabulary development of Turkish preschoolers in the Netherlands. Journal of psycholinguistic research, 43(2), 149-165. doi: 10.1007/s10936-013-9245-7.
Dwihandini, L. A., Marhaeni, A. A. I. N., Suamajaya, I. W. (2013). The analysis of the factors affecting undergraduate students’ difficulties in writing thesis in the English Department of Mahasaraswati University. E-journal Program Pascasarjana Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha, II, 1-12. Retrieved from https://media.neliti.com/media/publications/206945-the-analysis-of-the-factors-affecting-un.pdf.
Egiri, Y. O., & Wuritka, E. (2016). Conceptualizing concepts: A new approach to industrial design. doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23092.45443.
Ferdipour, A., & Delavar, A. (2011). The effect of rhetorical patterns or schemata on reading comprehension in expository text of Perian. Procedia-Social and behavioral sciences, 30, 690-693. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.10.133.
Flesch, R. (1974). The art of readable writing. New York: Harper.
Francis, J. M. (2012). Student-regulated learning: Roles and responsibilities for students motivation (Master Thesis). West Point: United States Military Academy. Retrieved from https://www.usma.edu/cfe/Literature/Francis_12.pdf.
Fushan, S. (2014).The application of schema theory in teaching college English college writing. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, IV( 7), 1476-1482. doi: 10.4304/tpls.4.7.1476-1482.
Ghamari, A. M., & Khatib, M. (2011). Mutual relations of identity and foreign language learning: An overview of linguistic and sociolinguistic approaches to identity. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, I(12), 1701-1708. doi: 10.4304/tpls.1.12.1701-1708.
Ghasemi, H., & Jahromi, M. K. (2014). The difference between spoken and written discourse in English. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, VI(4), 147-155.
Halliday, M. A. (1989). Spoken and written language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Huy, N. T. (2015). Problems affecting learning writing skill of grade 11 at Thong Linh High School. Asian Journal of Educational Research, II(2), 53-69.
Javed, M., Wu, X. J., & Nazli, S. (2013). A study of students’ assessment in writing skills of the English. International Journal of Instruction, VI(2), 129-144. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1085369.pdf.
Jonker, J., & Pennik, B. (2010). The essence of research methodology. doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-71659-4_2.
Kawase, T. (2015). Metadiscourse in the introductions of PhD theses and research articles. Journal of English for academic purposes, 20, 114-124. doi: 10.1016/j.jeap.2015.08.006.
Levy, Y., & Ellis, T. J. (2006). A system approach to conducting an effective literature review in support of information system research. Informing Science Journal, IX, 181-212.
Li, J., Link, S., & Hegelheimer, V. (2015). Rethinking the role of automated writing evaluation (AWE) feedback in ESL writing instruction. Journal of second language teaching, 27, 1-18. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2014.10.004.
Ling, H., & Ling, S. (2008). ESL students' perceptions and experiences of standardized English writing tests. Assessing Writing, XIII(2), 130-149. doi: 10.1016/j.asw.2008.08.001.
Louws, M. L., Meirink, J. A., van Veen, K., & van Driel, J. H. (2017). Teacher's self-directed learning and teaching experience: What, how, and why teachers want to learn. Teaching and teacher education, 66, 171-183. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2017.04.004.
Mahadouche, M. (2010). Developing the writing skill through increasing learners' awareness of the writing process: The case of second-year Students-University of Constative (Master Thesis). Retrieved from https://bu.umc.edu.dz/theses/anglais/HAM1132.pdf.
Marques, G. (2008). Establishing a continuum in spoken and written language in student emails. Odense Working Papers in Language and Communication (pp. 564-576).
Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper and Bros.
Muchemwa, S. (2015). factors influencing the learning of English language for academic purposes for foreign students: A case of Solusi University. European Online Journal and Social Sciences, IV(3), 527-533.
Mukherjee, M., & Roy, S. (2017). Feasibility studies and important aspect of project management. International Journal of Advanced Engineering and Management, II(4), 98-100. Retrieved from https://ijoaem.org/00204-25.
Muslim, I. M. (2014). Helping EFL students improve their writing. International Journal of Humanities and Social Studies, IV(2), 205-12. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8650/5e5674fefaa9b63af0dd76405985c77db95c.pdf.
Nesia, H. B., & Ginting, S. A. (2018). Lexical density of English reading texts for senior high school. Retrieved from https://media.neliti.com/media/publications/221925-none.pdf.
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2013). Assessment of higher education learning outcomes feasibility study report. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/education/skills-beyond-school/AHELO%20FS%20Report%20Volume%201%20Executive%20Summary.pdf.
Oscarson, A. D. (2009). Self-assessment of writing in learning English as a foreign language: A study at the upper secondary school level. Göteborg: GesonHylteTryck. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED505960.pdf.
Oyserman, D., Elmore, K., & Smith, G. (2012). Self, self-concept, and identity. In M. R. Leary, & J. P.Tangney, The Handbook of Self and Identity (pp. 69-104). New York: The Guilford Press.
Palpanada, S. T., Salam, A. R. B., & Ismail, F. B. (2014). Comparative analysis of process versus product approach of teaching writing in Malaysian schools: Review literature. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research, XXII(6), 789-795. doi: 10.5829/idosi.mejsr.2014.22.06.21943.
Pardede, P. (2012). Scientific articles structure. Scientific Writing Workshop. Retrieved from https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7pJkzTapTsOU0NuSVBBT3lzc28/edit.
Plaut, V. C., Adams, G., & Anderson, S. L. (2009). Does attractiveness buy business? “It depends on where you are from”. Journal of the International Association for Relationship Research, XVI, 619-630. Retrieved from https://www.law.berkeley.edu/files/Attractiveness_paper.pdf.
Pouliot, V. (2008). The logic of practicality: A theory of practice of security communities. International Organization, 62(2), 257-288. doi: 10.1017/S0020818308080090.
Radzi, A. H. M., & Aziz, N. H. A. (2014). Exploring content schemata influence on L2 learners’ comprehension of Zuraidah Omar’s. Twelve and not stupid. Procedia – Social and behavioral sciences, 155, 215-222. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.10.282.
Rasekh, A. S., & Barati, H. (2014). Teachers’ feedback and students’ motivation in English for general and specific purposes courses in Iran. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, V(5), 973-981. doi: 10.4304/tpls.4.5.973-981.
Saaristo, P. (2015). Grammar is the heart of language: grammar and its role in language learning among Finnish university students. In J. Jalkanen, E. Jokinen, & P. Taalas (Eds.), Voices of pedagogical development – Expanding, enhancing and exploring higher education language learning (pp. 279-318). Dublin: Research- publishing.net. doi: 10.14705/rpnet.2015.000296.
Seyabi, F. A., & Tuzlukova, V. (2014). The writing problem and strategies: An investigative study in the Omani school and university context. Asian Journal of Social Science and Humanities, III(4), 37-48.
Signes, C. G., & Arroita, B. C. (2015). Analysing lexical density and lexical diversity in university students' written discourse. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences (pp. 546-556).
Sihem, B (2013). Social responsibility of educators. International Journal of Education Research and Technology, IV(1), 46-51. Retrieved from http://www.soeagra.com/ijert/ijertmarch2013/8.pdf.
Smith, R. C., Dorsey, A. A., Lyles, J. S., & Frankel, R. M. (1999). Teaching self-awareness enhances learning about patient-centered interviewing. Academic Medicine, 74(11), 1242-1249. Retrieved from http://bpsmedicine.msu.edu/pdf/22-%20%20ctstudypstrng.pdf.
Stapa, S. H., Maasum, T. N. R. T., & Aziz, M. S. A. (2014). Identifying problems in writing thesis introductions in research methodology class. Procedia-Social and behavioral sciences, 112, 497-502. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.1194.
Stegan, O. (2003). Lexical density in oral versus written rangi texts. SOAS Working Papers in Linguistics, XV, 173-184.
Supriya, et al. (2018). Systematic review of literature review: Best practices. Academic Radiology. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2018.04.025.
Thanh, N. C. (2015). The difference between spoken and written grammar in English, in comparison with Vietnamese. Gist Education and Learning Research Journal, (11), 138-153.
Vieira, D. S., Picoli, S., & Mendes, R. S. (2018) Robustness of sentence length measures in written texts. Physica A: Statistical mechanics and its applications, 506, 749-754. doi: 10.1016/j.physa.2018.04.104.
Woo, M. M., Chu, S. K. W., & Li, X. (2013). Peer-feedback and revision process in a wiki mediated collaborative writing. Educational technology research and development, 61(2), 279-309. doi: 10.1007/s11423-012-9285-y.
Wuest, J., et al. (2015). The process, outcomes, and challenges of feasibility studies conducted in partnership with stakeholders: A health intervention for woman survivors of intimate partner violence. Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/nur.21636.
Zhang, B. (2013). An analysis of spoken and written language and how they affect English language learning and teaching. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, IV(4), 834-838.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.25134/erjee.v7i1.1496
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2018 English Review: Journal of English Education