Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
> Move 1: Establishing a Territory
– Step 1A (Topic Generalizations): Paragraphs 1–3
The opening paragraphs present general definitions related to the topic. The author explains that in today’s fast-paced information era, critical thinking is no longer optional but essential. This idea is then connected to critical writing, which is viewed as a means for students to process and express their ideas critically. The purpose of this section is to establish the importance of the topic and gain the reader’s agreement that it is a significant issue in modern education.– Step 1B (Reviewing Literature): Paragraphs 4–5
In these paragraphs, the author reviews previous studies and presents empirical evidence from earlier researchers (e.g., Yundayani et al., 2017). The discussion highlights how prior research has demonstrated that critical writing plays an important role in helping students evaluate and filter information. This section aims to provide a theoretical foundation and show that the topic has been widely studied with meaningful findings.> Move 2: Establishing a Niche
– Step 1A (Indicating a Gap): Paragraph 6
The author identifies a gap in the existing literature by pointing out that, although critical writing has been widely researched, there is still limited attention given to its application in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) contexts. This indicates that previous studies are not fully comprehensive, and there is a need for more focused research in this specific area.> Move 3: Presenting the Present Work
– Step 1 (Announcing Purposes): Paragraph 7
The author clearly states that the purpose of the study is to explore critical writing practices within the EFL context. This helps define the main focus and direction of the research.– Step 2 (Summarizing Methods): Paragraph 7
A brief description of the research method is also provided, indicating that the study employs a survey research design. This informs readers about how the data were collected.– Step 6 (Stating Value/Significance): Paragraph 7
Finally, the author highlights the significance of the study by explaining that the findings may contribute to improving educational practices, particularly by assisting policymakers in developing more effective learning systems. This emphasizes the practical value of the research.1.Yes, I have studied it.
2.a. From what I understand, the interview results are generally similar to the journal guidelines. Both explain that a scientific article needs a clear structure like introduction, method, results, and discussion. They also agree on the importance of valid data, correct citations, and using academic language.
The difference is that the interviews focus more on real situations, such as the need for multiple revisions, waiting for reviewer feedback, and problems with time management. On the other hand, journal guidelines focus more on technical requirements like format, word limits, and templates.b. The sample articles show that good scientific writing should be clear, direct, and well-organized. The titles are simple, the abstracts are straight to the point, and the discussions are structured clearly. This supports what we found in the interviews about the importance of clarity and systematic writing.
However, the difference is that published articles look more perfect and organized, while in reality, many writers still face difficulties during the writing process, especially in organizing ideas and writing clearly.c. Yes, there are some connections. For example, problems with citations are addressed in the guidelines through clear rules and the use of tools like reference managers. Difficulties in explaining data can be solved by using tables or figures. Also, issues with article length can be managed by following the recommended structure for each section.
3. Identify key similarities, differences, and patterns
The similarities show that good scientific writing requires a clear structure, valid data, proper citations, and the use of academic language. The differences are that journal guidelines focus more on rules and standards, while interviews show real challenges like revisions, time pressure, and writing difficulties. Sample articles represent the final result after all revisions.
The pattern shows that writing a high-quality scientific article is not only about following the rules, but also about practicing, revising, and improving the writing continuously.1. After reviewing and comparing with other groups, we found that the process of writing a scientific article starts with choosing an interesting topic and searching for relevant references through platforms like Google Scholar or Consensus. The topic should have enough supporting references to make it easier to develop.
Then, the writer decides the title, method, and starts writing based on the journal format. After finishing, the article is submitted to a journal and goes through editor screening, peer review, revision, and finally acceptance or rejection. The common pattern is that this process is long, structured, and revision is always a normal part.2. A high-quality scientific article should have a clear research gap, novelty, valid data, a clear method, a systematic structure, sufficient references, and a low plagiarism level (usually under the required limit such as 20%).
The challenges faced by authors include choosing a topic, finding suitable references, writing in academic English, avoiding plagiarism, and dealing with revisions from reviewers. Most difficulties happen at the beginning stage and during revision.3. From our interview and discussion, writers need access to references such as Google Scholar and tools like Mendeley, Grammarly, and Google Translate. Guidance from lecturers or supervisors is also very important. The main components of a scientific article include research gap, references, method, structure, and correct citations. Usually, around 20 or more references are needed, preferably from the last five years, depending on journal rules.
In general, successful writing depends on good references, useful tools, and academic support, while editors and reviewers play an important role in improving article quality through feedback and revision.– Andina Ramadhania (24220106)
– Deraya Nurfadila (24220093)
– Indriyani Julianti (24220073)
– Keysha Agatha Meilany (24220008)category 1: Process
3. Based on your experience, which step in the scientific writing process is the most challenging?
ID: Berdasarkan pengalaman Anda, langkah mana dalam penulisan artikel ilmiah yang paling sulit bagi penulis?Category 2: Quality
3.How can we determine if our article meets journal standards, such as those of a SINTA 4 journal?
ID: Bagaimana cara mengetahui apakah artikel yang kita tulis sudah memenuhi standar jurnal, seperti jurnal SINTA 4?Category 3: Challenges
2.How can writers overcome difficulties in writing using academic English?
Bagaimana penulis dapat mengatasi kesulitan dalam menulis bahasa akademik berbahasa Inggris?
3. What advice would you give to writers whose articles have been rejected?
ID: Apa saran yang akan Anda berikan kepada penulis yang artikelnya ditolak?Category 4: Resources
3. What kind of support do novice writers need to improve their writing skills?
ID: Dukungan seperti apa yang dibutuhkan penulis pemula untuk meningkatkan keterampilan menulis mereka?Category 5: Structure & Content
1. Which part of a scientific article is the most critical for a reviewer’s assessment?
ID: Bagian mana dari artikel ilmiah yang paling krusial bagi penilaian seorang reviewer?1. I had an experience reading a journal article about the use of TikTok in learning English. I read it a few weeks ago when I was assigned to find a journal article title. I accessed the article through Google Scholar. I felt interested because the topic matched my own experience learning English with the help of TikTok. However, I also felt confused because some parts used academic language that was difficult to understand.
2. The experience was memorable because the topic was related to my daily life and learning experience. It was also challenging because the article used formal academic language and some unfamiliar research terms.
3. The methodology section is usually the most difficult for me because it contains technical terms and complex explanations about research methods.
4. Reading journal articles helps me understand how to write in academic style, organize ideas clearly, and use appropriate vocabulary. This helps me improve my academic writing skills.