• Tidak ada hasil yang ditemukan

THE STUDENTS’ ABILITY AND PROBLEMS IN WRITING A RESEARCH PROPOSAL.

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2017

Membagikan "THE STUDENTS’ ABILITY AND PROBLEMS IN WRITING A RESEARCH PROPOSAL."

Copied!
28
0
0

Teks penuh

(1)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

APPROVAL PAGE ………... i

DEECLARATION ... ii

ACKNOWLEDMENTS ………... iii

ABSTRACT ……….. iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS ………... v

LIST OF TABLES ……… vii

LIST OF BOXES ……….…. viii

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background of the Study ……….………..……… 1

1.2 Research Questions ……….……..………….. 3

1.3 Purposes of the Study……….……...… 3

1.4 Significance of the Study ……….. 4

1.5 Scope of the Study ……… 5

1.6 Clarifications of Key Terms ………... 5

1.7 Organization of the Thesis ……… 6

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Setting ……...… 8

2.1.1 Research Proposal as One of Academic Texts ……… 10

2.1.1.1 Purpose of a Research Proposal ………...… 10

2.1.1.2 Major Elements of a Research Proposal …………...… 10

2.1.2 Introduction Chapter ……… 11

2.1.2.1 Purpose of Introduction ………11

2.1.2.2 Elements of Introduction ………..12

2.1.2.3 Linguistic Features of Introduction ………..… 13

2.1.3 Literature Review Chapter ………... 18

2.1.3.1 Purpose of Literature Review ………..… 19

2.1.3.2 Elements of Literature Review ……… 20

2.1.3.3 Linguistic Features of Literature Review ……… 21

2.1.4 Methodology Chapter ……….… 25

2.1.4.1 Purpose of Methodology ………..… 26

2.1.4.2 Elements of Methodology ……….…... 26

2.1.4.3 Linguistic Features of Methodology ……… 27

2.2 Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) ……….…... 28

2.2.1 Transitivity System ...………...… 29

2.2.1.1 Material Process ………... 29

2.2.1.2 Mental Process ………. 30

2.2.1.3 Verbal Process ………. 31

2.2.1.4 Relational Process ……… 31

2.2.1.5 Behavioural Process ………. 32

2.2.1.6 Existential Process ………....32

2.2.1.7 Circumstances ………...33

(2)

3.1 Research Design ………35

3.2 Research Site and Participants ……….. 36

3.3 Data Collection Techniques ……….. 37

3.3.1 Documentation of Students’ Research Proposals ……….……... 37

3.3.2 Interview ………..… 38

3.4 Data Analysis ……… 39

3.4.1 The Students’ Research Proposals ………...……… 39

3.4.2 Interview ……….. 40

3.5 Conclusion ……… 41

CHAPTER IV DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS 4.1 The Students’ Research Proposals ………...………… 42

4.1.1 The Major Elements in the Research Proposals …………...….. 43

4.1.2 The Elements and Linguistic Features of Each Chapter …….… 45

4.1.2.1 Introduction ………..… 45

4.1.2.2 Literature Review ……… 56

4.1.2.3 Methodology ……… 64

4.2 Interview ………74

4.2.1 The Major Elements in the Research Proposals …..……..……. 75

4.2.2 The Elements and Linguistic Features of Each Chapter …….… 78

4.2.2.1 Introduction ………..… 78

4.2.2.2 Literature Review ……….…84

4.2.2.3 Methodology ……… 87

4.3 Conclusion ……… 92

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 5.1 Conclusion ……….... 93

5.2 Recommendation ……….. 95

BIBLIOGRAPHY ………. 96

APPENDICES Appendix 1: List of Students’ Research Proposals ………... 104

Appendix 2: Results of the Analysis of Students’ Research Proposals …... 105

Appendix 3: Interview Guide ………..154

(3)

LIST OF TABLES

(4)

LIST OF BOXES

(5)

1 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents the general issues related to the present study. These include the background of the study, research questions, purposes of the study, significance of the study, scope of the study, clarifications of key terms central to the study, and organization of the thesis.

1.1 Background of the Study

In English-major programs at the tertiary level, written work is an integral part of its education. Students are prompted to think independently about particular issues and subjects by performing assignments and research papers. At the same time, students also learn how to access, select and evaluate information from different sources and to formulate ideas (Anderson and Poole, 2001:4). In other words, academic writing is arguably the most important language skill to English tertiary students whose grades are largely determined by their performance in written assignments, academic reports, term examinations and graduation theses (Nga, 2009:112).

(6)

2 genres, especially in writing a research report as their thesis. Some studies examine the students’ problem in writing the whole thesis (see Kareviati 2004; Emilia, 2009), while some others focus on a particular section, e.g. abstract (see Abdul & Sadeq, 2006), data presentation and discussion (see Bitchener & Basturkmen, 2006; Emilia, Rodliyah, & Gustine, 2009), and conclusions (see Bunton, 2002).

(7)

3 Thus, this present study aims to investigate the students’ ability and problems in writing a research proposal. This study has been conducted in an undergraduate English study program in a university in Banten. This study attempts not only to identify the students’ ability and problems in writing a research proposal, but also the possible causes of the problems and the possible solutions that can be proposed to solve the problems based on the students’ work.

1.2 Research Questions

This study attempts to answer the following research questions:

1. What are the students’ ability and problems in writing a research proposal? 2. What are the possible causes of the problems faced by the students?

3. What possible solutions can be proposed to solve the students’ problems based on the students’ work?

1.3 Purposes of the Study

The specific purposes of the study are as follows:

1. To identify the students’ ability and problems in writing a research proposal. 2. To identify the possible causes of the problems faced by the students in

writing a research proposal.

(8)

4 1.4 Significance of the Study

Theoretically, this study will provide a reference on the study on academic writing. Furthermore, this study will be preliminary inputs for other researchers to further study in the similar area of research with different interest.

Practically, this study will provide a general guidance by the experts to write a research proposal, especially in term of its elements and linguistic features.

Professionally, the results of this study are expectedly beneficial for English study program students and lecturers, especially writing instructors and supervisors.

For students, the results provide information to understand how they organize a

research proposal and to see how this organization may lead to problems, and to better understand the expectations of discourse community to which they will be initiated.

For writing instructors, the results can be used to pursue academic writing

strategies for foreign language students who seek to write in English in ways that will allow their work to be accepted in English academic journals, in a world in which academic discourse is dominated.

For supervisors, the results can be used to help them understand better the

(9)

5 1.5 Scope of the Study

This study is a case study of undergraduate English Study Program students in a university in Banten. It uses text analysis and in-depth interview to investigate the students’ performance in writing a research proposal. The analysis focuses on the elements and linguistic features employed in the research proposals. The analysis attempts to identify the students’ ability and problems in writing a research proposal, the possible causes of the problems, and the possible solutions that can be proposed to solve the problems based on the students’ work.

1.6 Clarifications of Key Terms

For the sake of clarity, key terms in this study are defined and specified as follows:

Students: The seventh-semester undergraduate students of English study program

in a university in Banten.

Ability: The students’ ability in writing appropriate elements and linguistic

features of a research proposal to convey its communicative purposes.

Problems: The students’ problems in writing appropriate elements and linguistic

features of a research proposal to convey its communicative purposes.

Research proposal: Students’ written plan for conducting their research study as

one of the requirements for completing their study which is written in English.

Elements: The elements of a research proposal and each chapter of it.

Linguistic features: Forms and structures used by the students to achieve a

(10)

6

Genre analysis: A study of a particular type of a written discourse made

distinctive by its purpose and the discourse community for which it is intended. Examples of genres are abstracts, grant proposals, laboratory reports, poems, letters, editorial, novels, etc (Swales, 1990). Particular genre to be analyzed in this present study is students’ research proposals (to follow Swales, 1990, 1996, 2004; Swales and Feak, 2004, 2009; Paltridge and Stairfield, 2007; Emilia, 2008, 2009, among others)

Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL): Halliday model of text analysis as a point

of reference and theoretical framework for the analysis of students’ writing in terms of linguistic features based on the Transitivity system (developed by Halliday, 1985, 1994; Martin and Rose, 2003, 2007; Eggins, 1994, 2004, among others).

1.7 Organization of the Thesis

(11)

35 CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents an overview of the methodology of the study. It describes the research design, research site and participants, data collecting techniques, data analysis, and validity of the study.

3.1 Research Design

(12)

36 3.2 Research Site and Participants

This study was carried out at the undergraduate English study program in one university in Banten. This research site has been chosen for two reasons. First, as a member of the teaching staff with more than five years teaching experience, it is expected that the researcher would get easy access to the research site, and hence, increase the feasibility of the study (Bogdan and Biklen, 1998:54). Second, this English study program had a research proposal workshop for their seventh-semester students to submit their research proposals to be discussed with some instructors. Therefore, the research proposals analyzed would show the students’ own performance since they were not written for this study.

The participants of the study were nine students and two lecturers of Research on ELT subject. The nine students were selected for two reasons. First, the students involved in this study were accessible for the researcher to get the data since they were still active as the seventh-semester students finishing their study in the research site. Second, their temporary GPA represents the low achiever (<3), mid achiever (3-3.5), and high achiever (>3.5). Meanwhile, the two lecturers of Research on ELT were selected because they were assumed to understand the students’ ability and problems in writing a research proposal since the students were assigned to write a research proposal as one of the requirements of this subject.

(13)

37 participants were asked for their willingness to be interviewed, all the participants were voluntary involved in the interview.

3.3 Data Collection Techniques

This study employed two data collection techniques, namely: the documentation of students’ research proposals and interview.

3.3.1 Documentation of Students’ Research Proposals

(14)

38 3.3.2 Interview

The second source of data was the interview with all participants of the study. It was carried out after the process of the students’ research proposal text analysis had been completed. It was used to obtain more comprehensive data on their perspective, especially on two areas related to the second and third research questions, i.e. the possible causes of the problems in writing a research proposal and the possible solutions that can be proposed to solve the students’ problems based on their works.

In this case, individual semi-structured interviews with open-ended questions (Cohen & Manion, 2004:273) were preferred to enable the researcher to get all information required while at the same time permitted the participants’ freedom of responses and description to illustrate the concept (Field and Morse in Emilia, 2005). The content and procedures of the interviews were organized in advance based on the data gained from the text analysis. Each student was given questions based on the problems they face; while the lecturers were given questions based on the general problems faced by the students (see the interview guide in Appendix 3).

(15)

39 3.4 Data Analysis

The data were analyzed through qualitative data analysis on the basis of the research questions. As discussed in data collection section, there were two sources of data in this study, namely: the students’ research proposals and interview. The followings are the steps of data analysis for each source of data.

3.4.1 The Students’ Research Proposals

As pointed out by Travers (2001), the procedure of text analysis in case study follows the procedures laid out in the related theory. For this purpose, this study used the theory of genre analysis and SFL to analyze the students’ research proposals. The analysis was in terms of the elements and linguistic features the students employed in their research proposals to achieve the communicative purpose of each element in the research proposals.

There were six steps of text analysis applied in this study.

First, the research proposals were grouped into one of the three categories (high

achiever, mid achiever, and low achiever) and analyzed as a whole to see its major elements (see Appendix 1 for the list of students’ research proposals).

Second, each chapter of the research proposal, i.e. introduction, literature review,

and methodology, was analyzed to see its elements and linguistic features.

Third, the analysis of the elements and linguistic features were carried out to

(16)

40 As a result, it has answered the first research question, i.e. to identify the students’ ability and problems in writing a research proposal.

Fourth, each student’s ability and problems were categorized in the following

form (see the results of the analysis in Appendix 2):

Student # … (1-9)

(i) The major elements in the research proposal (ii) The elements and linguistic features of each chapter

Ability Problems

Introduction Literature Review

Methodology Introduction Literature Review

Methodology

Elements Linguistic features

Fifth, the results of the analysis of all students’ research proposals were described

and discussed in two major points: (i) the major elements in the research proposals, (ii) the elements and linguistic features of each chapter.

Sixth, the possible solutions to solve the students’ problems reflected in the

research proposals were proposed to answer the third research question, i.e. to propose possible solutions to solve the students’ problems based on their work.

3.4.2 Interview

(17)

41 categorized by using thematic data analysis with regard to the research questions i.e. the problems faced by the students, the possible causes of the problems, and the possible solutions that can be proposed to solve the students’ problems based on their work (see the interview coding in Appendix 4).

3.5 Conclusion

(18)

93 CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

This chapter presents the conclusion of the present study related to the research questions presented in Chapter One. This chapter also gives recommendation for further researchers and practitioners.

5.1 Conclusion

The study reveals three findings related to the three research questions formulated in this study, i.e. the students’ ability and problems in writing a research proposal, the possible causes of the problems faced by the students, and the possible solutions that can be proposed to solve the problems.

(19)

94 Second, the main causes of the problems were the students’ unfamiliarity with the elements and its linguistic features in a research proposal and the students’ lack of knowledge in applying those elements and linguistic features properly in their research proposals.

Third, the possible solutions that can be proposed to solve the students’ problems are guidance, assistance, and explicit teaching in writing the elements and linguistic features of a research proposal to solve their problems in writing a research proposal.

On the basis of findings above, several conclusions can be proposed. First, most students faced difficulties in presenting arguments in terms of justifications. It supports the previous studies by Bunton (2002) and Paltridge and Starfield (2007) finding that presenting arguments in terms of justifications is something many second-language students find difficult to do. Second, most students were not aware that there are standard models in writing a research proposal, especially in terms of its elements and linguistic features, which are widely accepted in the field of English Language Teaching (ELT). Finally, this study supports the extensive research into academic writing that emphasizes the importance of explicit teaching of the structure of specific written genres, particularly a research proposal, to second-language students (Paltridge and Starfield, 2007; Emilia, 2009; Bailey, 2003; Hyland, 2004, among others).

(20)

95 5.2 Recommendation

In line with the topic under discussion, there are two recommendations for further researchers to enhance the richness of aspects related to the students’ ability and problems in writing a research proposal. First, as the scope of the text analysis in this study was limited on the elements and linguistic features applied by the students in their research proposals, further researchers are expected to deal with more comprehensive analysis and explore other important factors which were not considered in this study, i.e. the analysis of particular processes in the Transitivity system, especially the behavioural process which was not found in all research proposals; the comparison of low, middle, and high achiever students; and the process of teaching and learning of the subjects related to research and academic writing. Second, further researchers are expectedly to deal with a bigger number of participants to get richer and more reliable data.

(21)

96 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abdul, Mahsonh & Aly, Sadeq. (2006). An Analytic Study of the Postgraduate

Students' Difficulties in Writing Abstracts in English. Retrieved on April 19,

2009 from

http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/custom/portlets/recordDetails/detail mini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED493860&ERI CExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED493860

Adnan, Zifirdaus & Zifirdaus, Indrawati. (2002). Merebut Hati Audiens

Internasional. Jakarta: Masyarakat Linguistik Indonesia.

Al-Abri, Abdullah Mohammed. (2008). The Difficulties of Students in Written

English. Retrieved on May 18, 2009 from

http://www.moe.gov.om/portal/sitebuilder/sites/eps/English/MOE/baproject/ Ch%209%20The%20difficulties%20of%20secondary%20students%20in%2 0written%20English%20.pdf

Anderson, Jonathan & Millicent, Poole. (2001). Assignment and Thesis Writing. Australia: John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.

Bailey, C.A. (2007). A Guide to Qualitative Field Research. Second Edition. California: Pine Forge Press.

Bailey, S. (2003). Academic Writing: A Practical Guide for Students. London: Routledge Falmet.

Bitchener, John & Basturkmen, Helen. (2006). Perceptions of the Difficulties of

Postgraduate L2 Thesis Students Writing the Discussion Section. Retrieved

on April 19, 2009 from

http://ciillibrary.org:8000/ciil/Fulltext/english%20for%20academic%20purp oses/article1.pdf

Bogdan, R.C. & Biklen, S.K. (1998). Qualitative Research for Education: An

Introduction to Theory and Methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Bunton, D. (2002). Generic Moves in PhD Thesis Introduction. London: Longman.

Canagarajah, A Suresh. (2002). Critical Academic Writing and Multilingual

Students. Michigan: The University of Michigan Press.

(22)

97 Calabrese, Raymond L. (2006). The Elements of an Effective Dissertation &

Thesis. USA: Rowman & Littlefield Education.

Cassanave, Christine Pearson. (2004). Controversies in Second Language

Writing: Dilemmas and Decisions in Research and Instruction. Michigan:

The University of Michigan Press.

Chase, Paul & Argamon, Shlomo. (2006). Methods for Genre Analysis Applied to Formal Scientific Writing. Digital Humanities 2006. Retrieved on September 6, 2009.

Christie, Frances & Derewianka, Beverly. (2008). School Discourse. London: Continuum Discourse Series.

Christie, Frances & Soosai, Anne. (2001). Language & Meaning. Melbourne: Macmillan Education Australia.

Clare, Judith & Hamilton, Helen. (2003). (Editor). Writing Research:

Transforming Data into Text. Churchill Livingstone.

Coffin, Caroline, Lillis, Theresa, & O’Halloran, Kieran. (2010). Applied

Linguistics Method: A Reader. New York: Routledge.

Cohen, Louis & Manion, Lawrence. (1994). Research Methods in Education. New York: Routledge.

Cook, Vivian. (2008). Second Language Learning and Language Teaching. Hodder Education.

Cresswell, John W. (1994). Research Design: Qualitative and Quantitative

Approaches. California: Sage Publications.

Cummins, Jim. (2000). Language, Power and Pedagogy. Toronto: Multilingual Matters Ltd.

Davis, Lloyd & McKay, Susan. (1996). Structures and Strategies: An

Introduction to Academic Writing. Melbourne: Macmillan Education

Australia Pty Ltd.

Eemeren, Frans Van, Grootendorst, Rob, & Henkemans, Francisca Snoeck. (2002). Argumentation: Analysis. Evaluation, Presentation. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

(23)

98 Eggins, Suzanne. (2004). An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics.

Second Edition. London and New York: Continuum International Publishing Group.

Ellis, Rod. (1994). The Study of Second Language Acquisition. London and New York: Oxford University Press.

Emerson, Lisa. (2007). (Editor). Writing Guidelines for Education Students. Australia: Thomson.

Emilia, Emi. (2005). A Critical Genre-Based Approach to Teaching Academic

Writing in a Tertiary EFL Context in Indonesia. Melbourne: Unpublished

Dissertation, the University of Melbourne.

Emilia, Emi. (2008). Menulis Tesis dan Disertasi. Bandung: Alfabeta. Emilia, Emi, Rodliyah, Rojab Siti, & Gustine, Gin Gin. (2009a). Students’

Critical Capacity in Writing a Thesis: Analysis of Transitivity System of Systemic Functional Grammar. Paper presented at the 56th TEFLIN seminar, Malang 2009.

Emilia, Emi, Rodliyah, Rojab Siti, & Gustine, Gin Gin. (2009b). Pengembangan

Analisis Karya Ilmiah Berbasis Teori Linguistik Sistemik Fungsional dan Berpikir Kritis: Study Kasus di Jurusan Bahasa Inggris UPI. Bandung:

Unpublished research paper at UPI

Emilia, Emi. (2010). Teaching Writing: Developing Critical Learners. Bandung: Rizqi Press.

Evans, David & Gruba, Paul. (2002). How to Write a Better Thesis. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.

Feak, Christine B. & Swales, John M. (2009). Telling a Research Story: Writing a

Literature Review. Michigan: The University of Michigan Press.

Feez, Susan & Joyce, Helen. (1998). Writing Skills: Narrative and Non-fiction

Text Types. Melbourne: Phoenix Education.

Fraenkel, Jack R. & Wallen, Norman E. (1993). How to Design and Evaluate

Research in Education. Singapore: McGraw-Hill Inc.

Frodesen. Jan & Holten, Christine. (2005). The Power of Context in Language

Teaching and Learning. USA: Thomson.

Gay, L.R. (1992). Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and

(24)

99 Gibbons, Paul. (2002). Scaffolding Language, Scaffolding Learning. Portsmouth:

Heinemann.

Gibbons, Paul. (2003). Learning to Learn in a Second Language. Sidney: Primary English Teaching Association.

Gibbons, Paul. (2009). English Learners Academic Literacy and Thinking. Portsmouth: Heinemann.

Glatthorn, Allan A & Joyner, Randy L. (2005). Writing the Winning Thesis or

Dissertation. California: Corwin Press

Grabe, William & Kaplan, Robert B. (1996). Theory and Practice of Writing. Essex: Addison Wesley Longman.

Hart, Chris. (1998). Doing a Literature Review. London: Sage.

Hart, Chris. (2005). Doing Your Masters Dissertation. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Halliday, M.A.K. (1994). Functional Grammar. London: Arnold.

Heigham, Juanita & Croker, Robert A. (2009). Qualitative Research in Applied

Linguistics. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Hammond, J. (2001). Scaffolding Teaching and Learning in Language and

Literacy Education. Newtown: Primary English Teaching Association.

Hillier, Hilary. (2004). Analysing Real Texts: Research Studies in Modern English

Language. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Hancock, Joelie & Leaver, Christine. (2006). Teaching Strategies for Literacy. Australia: Australian Literacy Educators’ Association Ltd.

Hogan, K. & Pressley, P. (1997). Scaffolding Student Learning: Instructional

Approaches and Issues. Canada: Brookline Books, Inc.

Holliday, Adrian. (2007). Doing and Writing Qualitative Research. London: Sage Publications.

Hyland, Ken. (2002). Teaching and Researching Writing. Malaysia: Longman. Hyland, Ken. (2004a). Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interactions in Academic

(25)

100 Hyland, Ken (2004b). Genre and Second Language Writing. Melbourne: The

University of Michigan Press.

Hyland, Ken & Hyland, Fiona. (2006). Feedback in Second Language Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Iwamoto, Noriko. (2001). Stylistic and Linguistic Analysis of a Literary Text

Using Systemic Functional Grammar. Retrieved on April 7, 2010 from

http://human.kanagawa-u.ac.jp/gakkai/publ/pdf/no162/16209.pdf. Jiao, Qun. G, Onwuegbuzie, Anthony. J, & Waytowich, Vicki L. (2008). The

Relationship between Citation Errors and Library Anxiety: An Empirical Study of Doctoral Students in Education. Information Processing and

Management, Volume 44, Issue, March 2008, Pages 948-956. Retrieved on

May 10, 2009 from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science.

Jogthong, Chalermsri. (2001). Research Article Introduction in Thai: Genre

Analysis of Academic Writing. Dissertation, West Virginia University.

Retrieved on April 8, 2010 from http://202.28.199.34/multim/3049280.pdf. .

Kareviati, Evi. (2004). Exploring Students’ Difficulties in Writing Academic

Paper. Bandung: Unpublished Thesis at UPI, English Study Program.

Knapp, Peter & Watkins, Megan. (2005). Genre, Text, Grammar: Technologies

for Teaching and Assessing Writing. Sidney: UNSW Press.

Kress, Gunter. (1982). Learning to Write. New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Kress, Gunter. (1985). Linguistics Processes in Sociocultural Practice. Geelong:

Deakin University Press.

Kroll, Barbara. (1990). Second Language Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kroll, Barbara. (1990). Second Language Writing: Research Insights for the

Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kvale, Steiner. (1996). Interviews. California: Sage Publications.

Lee, Nancy Shzh-chen & Tajino, Akira. (2008). Understanding Students'

Perceptions of Difficulty with Academic Writing for Teacher Development: A Case Study of the University of Tokyo Writing Program. Retrieved on

(26)

101 Leo, Susanto. (2007). English for Academic Purpose: Essay Writing. Yogyakarta:

Andi.

MacArthur, Charles A, Graham, Steve, & Fitzgerald. (2006). Handbook of

Writing Research. New York: The Guilford Express.

Manoa Writing Program, University of Hawai’i. (1997-2008). Writing &

Research: What Students Like about Research Projects. Retrieved on May

18, 2009 from http://www.mwp.hawaii.edu/resources/wm3.htm

Marshall, Catherine & Rossman, Gretchen B. (2006). Designing Qualitative

Research. California: Sage Publications, Inc.

Martin, J.R., Matthiessen MIM, Christian, & Painter, Clare. (1997). Working with

Functional Grammar. New York: St Martin’s Press, Inc.

Martin J.R. & Rose, David. (2007). Working with Discourse: Meaning Beyond the

Clause. London: Continuum.

Martin, J.R. & Rose, David. (2007). Interacting with Text: the Role of Dialogue in Learning to Read and Write. Foreign Studies Journal, Beijing 2007.

Retrieved on April 2004, from: http://www.readingtolearn.com.au/pdf. Martin, J.R. & Rose, David. (2008). Genre Relations. London: Equinox

Publishing Ltd.

Maxwell, Joseph A. (1996). Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive

Approach. California: Sage Publications.

Moreale, Emanuela & Vargas, Maria. (2003). Genre Analysis and the Automated

Extractaction of Arguments from Student Essays. Knowledge Media

Institute (KMi), The Open University, Milton Keynes, England. Retrieved April 8, 2010 from

http://kmi.open.ac.uk/projects/akt/publication-pdf/CAA-2003_Moreale_Vargas-Vera.pdf.

.

Mu, Congjun & Carrington, Suzanne. (2007). An Investigation of Three Chinese Students' English Writing Strategies. TESL-EJ (June 2007, Volume 11,

Number 1). Retrieved on August 13, 2010 from http.TESL-EJ 11_1 -- An

Investigation of Three Chinese Students' English Writing Strategies.htm Murray, Rowena & Moore, Sarah. (2006). The Handbook of Academic Writing.

New York: Open University Press, McGraw-Hill Education.

Murrow, Patricia. (2005). Analysis of Grammatical Errors in Student’ Writing:

Indicators for Curricula Development. Retrieved on April 19, 2009 from

(27)

102

.Nga, Nguyen Thi Hong. (2009). Academic English at Tertiary Level: What, Why, How.

VNU Journal of Science, Foreign languages 25 (2009) 112-117. Retrieved on April 8, 2010 from http://www.js.vnu.edu.vn/nn_2_09/b6.pdf.

.

Nunan, David & Bailey, Kathleen M. (2009). Exploring Second Language

Classroom Research. Canada: HEINLE Cengage Learning.

Oliver, Paul. (2004). Writing Your Thesis. London: Sage Publications Limited. Onwuegbuzie, Anthony J. 2002. Writing a Research Proposal: The Role of

Library Anxiety, Statistic Anxiety, and Composition Anxiety. University of

Central Arkansas: USA. Retrieved on May 10, 2009 from

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science.

Onwuegbuzie, Anthony. J. & Jiao, Qun. G. (1998). The Relationship between Library Anxiety and Learning Styles among Graduate Students: Implication for Library Instruction. Library & Information Science Research, Volume

20, issue 3, 1998, Pages 235-239. Retrieved on May 10, 2009 from

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science.

Onwuegbuzie, Anthony. J. & Jiao, Qun. G. (2004). Information Search

Performance and Research Achievement: An empirical test of the Anxiety-Expectation Mediation model of library anxiety. Journal of the American

Society for Information Science and Technology, 55: 41–54. doi: 10.1002/asi.10342. Retrieved on May 10, 2009 from

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science.

Oshima, Alice & Hogue, Ann. (1999). Writing Academic English. London: Addison Wesley Longman.

Paltridge, Brian. (1997). Genre, Frames, and Writing in Research Settings. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Paltridge, Brian & Starfield, Sue. (2007). Thesis and Dissertation Writing in a

Second Language. New York: Routledge.

Pearce, Lynne. (2005). How to Examine a Thesis. New York: Open University Press, McGraw-Hill Education.

Ravelli, Louise J. & Ellis, Robert A. (2004). (Editor). Analyzing Academic

Writing. London: Continuum.

Richards, J.C. & Burns, A. (2009). The Cambridge Guide to Second Language

(28)

103 Rose, David. (2006). Literacy and Equality. In Proceedings of the National

Conference on Future Directions in Literacy. A. Simpson (ed.). Sydney:

University of Sydney, 188-203 Retrieved on April 24, 2010 from

http://www.readingtolearn.com.au/pdf/Literacy%20and%20equality.pdf. Rose, David, Lui-Chivizhe, L., McKnight, A. & Smith, A. (2004). Scaffolding Academic Reading and Writing at the Koori Centre. In Australian Journal

of Indigenous Education, 30th Anniversary Edition. Retrieved on April 24,

2010 from

http://www.readingtolearn.com.au/pdf/Scaffolding%20Academic%20Litera

cy%20at%20the%20Koori%20Centre.pdf

Rodrigues, Dawn & Rodrigues, Raymond J. (2003). The Research Paper: A

Guide to Library and Internet Research. New Jersey: Pearson Education,

Inc.

Swales, John M. (1990). Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research

Setting. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Swales, John M. (1996). Occluded Genres in the Academy: the Case of the

Submission Letter. Amsterdam

Swales, John M. (2004). Research Genres: Exploration and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Swales John M. & Feak, Christine B. (2000). English in Today’s Research Word. Michigan: The University of Michigan Press.

Swales John M. & Feak, Christine B. (2004). Academic Writing for Graduate

Students. Michigan: The University of Michigan Press.

Tollefson, Steve. (2002). Encouraging Student Writing. Office of the Assistant Vice Provost, Undergraduate Education, University of California, Berkeley. Retrieved on April 19, 2009 from http://teaching.berkeley.edu

Schofield, Vicky. (2004). How to Write a Research Proposal. Birmingham City University. Retrieved on May 10, 2010 from

www.nrf.ac.za/yenza/research/proposal.htm

Travers, Max. (2001). Qualitative Research through Case Studies. London: Sage Publications.

Unsworth, Len. (2000). (Editor). Researching Language in Schools and

Communities: Functional Linguistic Perspectives. London: TJ International

Referensi

Dokumen terkait

Kemudian dikurangi pajak 15 % tiap bulan (Rp. 3.600.000,- Jika dikalkulasi dalam setahun pegawai tersebut mempunyai kelebihan harta sebesar Rp.. Sedangkan infak dan shadaqah dalam

a) Pihak-pihak yang berakad disyaratkan telah baligh dan berakal. b) Kedua belah pihak yang berakad menyatakan kerelaannya untuk melakukan akad ijarah. c) Manfaat yang

Merupakan standar yang diturunkan dari kinerja pusat tanggung jawab lain atau perusahaan- perusahaan lain dengan industri yang sama. Kinerja dari satu kantor cabang penjualan

Menurut Ikin Solikin (2015), ukuran perusahaan yang besar menunjukkan perusahaan mengalami perkembangan sehingga investor akan merespon positif dan nilai perusahaan

[r]

control group will be assessed using traditional assessment (paper and pencil test) and.. the experimental group will be assessed using performance based

Pada penulisan ilmiah ini, penulis mencoba menerapkan suatu aplikasi secara komputerisasi pada agen minuman SUGIARTI yang digunakan untuk pencatatan penjualan mereka.

Untuk mengatasi hal tersebut digunakankanlah suatu sistem yang disebut cognitive radio, dimana rentang band frekuensi bebas.. digunakan pengguna lain ( secondary