Menulis Karya Ilmiah
1. Identitas Mata Kuliah
Nama Mata Kuliah : Menulis Karya Ilmiah
Kode Mata Kuliah : PIN 410
Dosen
: Setyawan Pujiono, M.Pd.
Jumlah SKS : 4 sks, T=2, P=2
Prodi : Jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra Indonesia
2.
Kompetensi
Mahasiswa diharapkan terampil menulis beberapa jenis karya ilmiah analitik-argumentatif: esai,
makalah seminar, artikel jurnal ilmiah, artikel opini surat kabar, dan skripsi.
3. Indikator pencapaian
Setelah menempuh mata kuliah ini mahasiswa mampu menulis beberapa jenis penulisan karya
ilmiah dengan tingkat kemampuan minimal 75%.
4. Deskripsi mata kuliah
Matakuliah Ketrampilan Berkarya Prodi Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra Indonesia merupakan mata
kuliah kompetensi utama mahasiswa Jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra Indonesia berbobot 4
sks. Matakuliah ini memakai pendekatan genre dan pendekatan proses di dalam proses-belajar
mengajar menulis karya ilmiah. Garis besar materi meliputi: komunitas wacana ilmiah, penulisan
karya ilmiah analitik-argumentatif: esai, makalah seminar, artikel jurnal ilmiah, artikel opini surat
kabar (teori dan praktik latihan), dan skripsi; pengajaran penulisan karya ilmiah; evaluasi
penulisan karya ilmiah; dan penelitian dalam penulisan karya ilmiah.
5. Pokok Bahasan dan Rincian Pokok Bahasan
1.
a) Pengantar perkuliahan: deskripsi tugas dan pembobotan tugas, ujian tengah semester dan
akhir semester, referensi wajib dan penunjang; portfolio.
b) Komunitas wacana (
discourse community
), komunitas profesional (
professional
community
),
2. Pendekatan PBM menulis karya ilmiah berdasarkan genre (tujuan genre
–
konteks budaya-,
register
–
konteks situasi-, struktur skematik dan ciri kebahasaan) dan atau retorika.
3. Pendekatan PBM menulis ilmiah berdasarkan proses (evaluasi, proses penulisan: tahap
pra-penulisan, tahap penulisan dan tahap pasca-penulisan).
4. Evaluasi dalam keterampilan menulis (holistic, analytical, primary trait; portfolio) bagi jenis
tulisan ilmiah.
5. Model-model retorika (oriental, linear, Semit, Rusia, Roman): oriental vs linear.
6. Tahap pra-penulisan: eksplorasi, brainstorming, pengembangan bentuk tulisan.
7. Tahap penulisan:
a) Struktur esai pada umumnya, genre esai argumentatif (pengenalan awal).
b) Perbandingan struktur esai pendek dan panjang.
a) Pembacaan peer essay dan peer editing (isi tulisan, kohesi dan koherensi, mekanik),
b) Dinamika konferensi
9. Tulisan deskriptif vs tulisan analitik-argumentatif
10. a) Plagiarism.
b) Pengembangan bukti: kutipan, ringkasan, referensi.
c) Latihan mengembangkan bukti suatu topik penulisan.
11. a) Genre penulisan karya ilmiah (tugas-tugas perkuliahan, termasuk di dalamnya pemahaman
pertanyaan atas tugas yang diberikan) dan genre karya ilmiah analitik-argumentatif dalam
bentuk esai, artikel jurnal ilmiah, artikel opini surat kabar, makalah seminar, dan skripsi.
b) Lembar analisis genre analitik-argumentatif
c) Latihan: mencari model tulisan analitik-argumentatif, menganalisisnya berdasarkan struktur
skematik (termasuk di dalamnya penalaran) dan ciri kebahasaan (bahasa karya ilmiah)
d) Latihan penulisan analitik-argumentatif: esai, makalah seminar, artikel jurnal ilmiah, artikel
opini surat kabar, disertai peer editing dan konferensi (jika perlu).
13. Pengajaran penulisan karya ilmiah: pendekatan dan strategi.
14. Penelitian dalam penulisan karya ilmiah.
6. Kegiatan Pembelajaran
a) Pembelajaran teori.
b) Latihan: pencarian model tulisan analitik-argumentatif dan analisis karakter tulisan (struktur
skematik dan ciri kebahasaan).
c) Latihan penulisan analitik-argumentatif.
c) Latihan editing dan latihan mengevaluasi tulisan analitik-argumentatif.
7. Evaluasi (meliputi teknik dan bobot)
a) Kuis dan tugas latihan (termasuk responsi) (20%)
b) Test tengah semester (25%)
c) Tugas akhir (25%)
d) Tes akhir semester (30%)
Catatan: semua tugas dikumpulkan dalam portfolio mahasiswa masing-masing
.
8. Sumber Bahan
TEORI MENULIS
1. Achmadi, Muchsin. (1988). Materi dasar pengajaran komposisi bahasa Indonesia. Jakarta: Depdikbud Dikti.
2. Beaven, Mary H. Individualized goal setting, self-evaluation, and peer evaluation dalam Cooper, Charles R and Odell, Lee (Eds). Evaluating writing: describing, measuring, judging. New York: SUNY Buffalo hal. 135-156.
3. Bernhardt, Stephen. 1986. Applying a functional model of language in the writing classroom dalam Couture, Barbara (Ed) Functional approaches to writing. Research perspective. London: Frances Pinter (Publishers) hal. 186 -196.
4. Birnbaum, June Cannel. Reflective thought: the connection between reading and writing. dalam Peterson, Bruce T and Strnglass (Ed) Transactions in reading and writing. Illinois, USA: the National Council of Teachers in English hal. 15 - 29.
6. Bloor, Merriel adan St. John, Maggie Jo. 1990. Project writing: the marriage of process and product. dalam Robinson, Pauline C (Ed) Academic writing: process and product. ELT Documents 129. Hongkong: Modern English Publications and the British Council hal. 85-94.
7. Brookes, Arthur dan Grundy, Peter. 1990. Activating the learner‟s contribution in the development of
academic writing skills dalam Robinson, Pauline C (Ed) Academic writing: process and product. ELT Documents 129. Hongkong: Modern English Publications and the British Council hal. 100-108. 8. Bhatia, Vijay K. 1999. Integrating products, processes, purposes and participants dalam Candlin,
Christopher and Hyland, Ken Writing: text processes and practices. New York and London: Longman hal. 21-38.
9. Christie, Frances. 1986. Writing in schools: generic structures as ways of meaning dalam Couture, Barbara (Ed) Functional approaches to writing. Research perspective. London: Frances Pinter (Publishers) hal. 221-239.
10. Curriculum Branch Education Department of Western Australia. 1985. Writing K7 Teachers notes. 11. Dudley-Evans, Tony. 1990. A consideration of the meaning of „discuss‟ in examination questions dalam
Robinson, Pauline C (Ed) Academic writing: process and product. ELT Documents 129. Hongkong: Modern English Publications and the British Council 47-52.
12. De Toye, Lela M. 1993. Writing a student profile dalam Gill, Kent (Ed) Process and portfolios in writing instruction. Classroom practices in teaching English Vol 26. Illinois, USA: the National Council of Teachers in English hal. 26-29.
13. Dougherty, Barbey. Writing plans as strategies for reading, writing, revising dalam Peterson, Bruce T and Strnglass (Ed) Transactions in reading and writing. Illinois, USA: the National Council of Teachers in English hal. 82-96.
14. Flynn, Thomas dan King, Mary. 1993. Dynamics of the writing conference. Social and cognitive interaction. Illinois, USA; National Council of Teacher Composition.
15. Hamp_Lyons, Liz. 1990. The product before: task-related influences or the writer dalam Robinson, Pauline C (Ed) Academic writing: process and product. ELT Documents 129. Hongkong: Modern English Publications and the British Council hal. 35-46.
16. http://webster.commnet.edu/mla_original. A guide for writing research papers based on Modern Language Association (MLA) Documentation.
17. Hult, Christine A. 1986. Global marking of rhetorical frame in text and reader evaluation dalam
Couture, Barbara (Ed) Functional approaches to writing. Research perspective. London: Frances Pinter (Publishers) hal. 154-166.
18. Harber, Mary (Ed). (1993). Manual on scientific writing. Victoria: TAFE Publication.
19. Hartfiel, V. Faye et al. (1985). Learning ESL composition. Massachusetts: Newbury House Publisher, Inc.
20. Hedge, Tricia (1989). Writing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
21. Ingalls, Bob. 1993. Interviewing portfolio dalam Gill, Kent (Ed) Process and portfolios in writing instruction. Classroom practices in teaching English Vol 26. Illinois, USA: the National Council of Teachers in English hal. 63-68.
22. James, K. 1990. EAP -> ESP – self sustaining growth dalam Robinson, Pauline C (Ed) Academic writing: process and product. ELT Documents 129. Hongkong: Modern English Publications and the British Council hal. 75-84.
23. Jones, Bill dan Johnson, Roy. 1990. Making the grade. A study programme for adult students Vol II Thinking and writing. Manchester and New York: Manchester Univ. Press.
24. Meyers, Bonnie J.F. 1984. Reading research and the composition teachers.The importance of plans
dalamMc. Kay. , Sandra. (Ed) Composing in a second language. Massachusets: Newbury House Publisher. Hal. 63 – 143.
25. Kaplan, Robert B. 1984. Cultural thought patterns in intercultural-education dalam McKay, Sandra Composing in a second language. Rowley, London: Newburry House Publisher, Inc. hal. 43-65. 26. Keraf, Gorys. (1983). Argumentasi dan narasi. Jakarta: Penerbit PT Gramedia.
27. Keraf, Gorys. (tahun berapapun). Komposisi. Flores: Nusa Indah
28. Kirszner, Laurie G and Mandell, Stephen R. (1978) Basic college writing. New York: W.W. Norton & Company Inc.
30. Martin, James R. dan Rothery, Joan. 1986. What a functional approach to the writing task can show teachers about “good writing” dalam Couture, Barbara (Ed) Functional approaches to writing. Research perspective. London: Frances Pinter (Publishers) hal. 241-262.
31. McCrimmon, James M (1972). Writing with a purpose –Fifth edition. U.S.A: Florida State University. 32. Oshima, Alice and Hogue, Alice (1991). Writing academic English. California: Addison-Wesley Publishing
Company.
33. Parera, Jos Daniel. (1984). Belajar mengemukakan pendapat. Jakarta: Penerbit Erlangga.
34. Peters, Pamela. 1986. Getting the theme across: a study of dominant function the academic writing of university students dalam Couture, Barbara (Ed) Functional approaches to writing. Research
perspective. London: Frances Pinter (Publishers) hal. 169-182.
35. Rifai, Mien A. (1995). Pegangan gaya penulisan, penyuntingan dan penerbitan karya ilmiah Indonesia. Yogyakarta: Gadjah Mada University Press.
36. Sharp, Anne. 1993. Portfolios: From negative to positive dalam Gill, Kent (Ed) Process and portfolios in writing instruction. Classroom practices in teaching English Vol 26. Illinois, USA: the National Council of Teachers in English hal. 72-74.
37. Randsdell, D.R. 1993.Teachers as writers dalam Gill, Kent (Ed) Process and portfolios in writing instruction. Classroom practices in teaching English Vol 26. Illinois, USA: the National Council of Teachers in English hal. 30-34.
38. Swales, John M. and Feak, Christine B. (1994). Academic writing for graduate students. Essential tasks and skills. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
39. Tierney, Robert J and Leys, Margie. 1986. What is the value of connecting reading and writing dalam Petersen, Bruce T and Strnglass, Marylin S (Ed) Transactions in reading and writing. Illinois, USA: the National Council of Teachers in English hal. 15 - 29.
40. White, Ronald V. 1990. Academic writing: process and product dalam Robinson, Pauline C (Ed) Academic writing: process and product. ELT Documents 129. Hongkong: Modern English Publications and the British Council hal. 4-16.
41. Weir, Cyril. 1990. Academic writing- can we please all the people all the time? dalam Robinson, Pauline C (Ed) Academic writing: process and product. ELT Documents 129. Hongkong: Modern English Publications and the British Council hal. 17-34.
42. Wharton, Sue dan Edge, Julian. 2001. Pattern of text in teacher education dalam Scott, Mike dan Thompson, Geoff. Pattern of text. In honour of Michael Hoey. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company
PENGAJARAN MENULIS
43. Davies, Florence. 1990. Designing a writing syllabus in English for academic purposes: process and product dalam Robinson, Pauline C (Ed) Academic writing: process and product. ELT Documents 129. Hongkong: Modern English Publications and the British Council hal. 130-142.
44. Donovan, Timothy R and Mc Clelland, Ben W. 1980. Eight approaches to teaching composition. Illinois, USA; National Council of Teacher Composition .
45. F.S.C, Carl Koch dan Brazil, James M. 1978. Strategies for teaching the composition process. Illinois, USA: the National Council of Teachers in English.
46. Kroll, Barry M dan Schafer, John C. 1984. Error analysis and the teaching of composition dalam McKay, Sandra Composing in a second language. Rowley, London: Newburry House Publisher, Inc. hal. 135-144.
47. Myers, Greg. 1990. The social construction of science and the teaching of English: an example of research dalam Robinson, Pauline C (Ed) Academic writing: process and product. ELT Documents 129. Hongkong: Modern English Publications and the British Council hal. 143-150.
EVALUASI
49. Beach, Richard. 1989. Showing students how to assess; demonstrating techniques for responses in the writing conference dalam Anson, Chris M Writing and response. Theory, practice, and research. 50. Bertisch, Carol Ackerson. 1993. The portfolio as an assessment tool. dalam Gill, Kent (Ed) Process and
portfolios in writing instruction. Classroom practices in teaching English Vol 26. Illinois, USA: the National Council of Teachers in English hal. 54-59.
51. Cooper, Charles R. 1977. Holistic evaluation of writing dalam Cooper, Charles R and Odell, Lee (Eds). Evaluating writing: describing, measuring, judging. New York: SUNY Buffalo hal. 3-32.
52. Hendrickson, James M 1984. The treatment of error in written work dalam McKay, Sandra Composing in a second language. Rowley, London: Newburry House Publisher, Inc. hal. 145-159.
53. Gallehr, Donald R. 1993. Portfolio assessment in the college writing classroom dalam Gill, Kent (Ed) Process and portfolios in writing instruction. Classroom practices in teaching English Vol 26. Illinois, USA: the National Council of Teachers in English hal. 75-80.
54. Hughey, Jane et al. (1983). Teaching ESL Composition: principles and techniques. Massachusetts: Newbury House Publisher, Inc.
55. Jacobs, Holly J. (1981). Testing ESL composition: a practical approach. Massachusetts: Newbury House Publisher, Inc.
56. Lloyd-Jones, Richard. 1977. Primary trait scoring dalam Cooper, Charles R and Odell, Lee (Eds). Evaluating writing: describing, measuring, judging. New York: SUNY Buffalo hal 33-66.
57. Odell, Lee. 1977. Measuring changes in intellectual processes as one dimension of growth in writing
dalam Cooper, Charles R and Odell, Lee (Eds). Evaluating writing: describing, measuring, judging. New York: SUNY Buffalo hal 107-132.
58. Reigstad, Thomas J dan McAndrew, Donald N. 1984. Training tutors for writing conferences. Illinois, USA: the National Council of Teachers in English.
59. Sommer, Nancy. 1984. Responding to student writing dalam McKay, Sandra Composing in a second language. Rowley, London: Newburry House Publisher, Inc. hal. 160-169.
60. Spandel, Vicki and Stiggins, Richard J. 1990. Linking assessment and writing instruction. New York: Longman Ch. 1: Linking assessment and writing instruction, hal. 1-16; Ch 3:Holistic and analytical assessment; some comparison, hal 63-68; Ch 4: Assessment and the writing process, hal. 69-112, Ch. 5: Grading: what it will do and will not do, hal. 113-132; Ch.7 Development of criteria, hal. 148-165. 61. Strzepek, Joseph E dan Figgins Margo A. 1993. A polemic on evaluating writing dalam Gill, Kent (Ed)
Process and portfolios in writing instruction. Classroom practices in teaching English Vol 26. Illinois, USA: the National Council of Teachers in English hal. 47-53.
PENELITIAN
62. Hillocks, George. 1986. Research on the composing process Ch 1 - Research on written composition. New directions for teaching), hal. 1-59: Ch. 6- Criteria for better writing, hal 153-166; Ch. 8 – Results of the meta-analysis, hal. 187-219; Ch. 9 - Validity, implications, and recommendations, hal. 223-250. Illinois USA: The ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading and Communication Skills.
63. Kroll, Barbara. 1990. Second language writing. Research insight for the classroom. Cambridge: CUP. 64. Lauer, Janice dan Asher, J. William. 1988. Composition research. Empirical design. New York, Oxford:
