Irawati, Enny (2008) Prewriting and drafting strategies of graduate students in writing term papers in English: a case study / Enny Irawati. Doctoral thesis, Universitas Negeri Malang.
Full text not available from this repository.Abstract
Some graduate students majoring in English Education programs did not have any experience in writing papers in English. It was necessary to study how these inexperienced graduate student writers managed the paper writing assigned by their lecturers. The study employ the cognitive process approach because it aimed at disclosing mental operations the students engaged in while writing. By examining the students thinking while writing the strategies they employed to complete the assignment might be revealed. This study focuses on strategies employed by graduate (S2) students of English Education Program during the prewriting and drafting stage when they are writing term papers in English. Its purpose is to identify and describe the strategies they employed during those two stages. It takes a qualitative design with two graduate (S2) students of English Education Program of 2006 class of Advanced Linguistics of State University of Malang as its subjects. From the entrance test of the Graduate Program conducted at June 2006 both subjects were identified as the top fifth students in the result of the test but they had little experience in writing papers in English.For the purpose of the study they were classified as inexperienced writers. The primary data for the strategies used at prewriting stage were statements produced by the subjects during open-ended interviews done formally and informally . The primary data for strategies used at the drafting stage were protocols from the subjects think-aloud activities when they were drafting their term papers. The supporting data for further clarification were researcher s observation notes protocols of interviews and quality of written papers produced by both subjects. The findings show that at the prewriting stage the two subjects employed different strategies. D employed an interactive or emergent planning where ideas were not worked out sufficiently and did not result in a hierarchical outline. W on the other hand employed a semi-advanced planning where there were attempts to work out ideas into an outline. At the drafting stage D employed a search and a copying strategies in an undirectional way which suggested that the absence or very simple outline produced at the prewriting stage provided little guidance for the drafting stage. Some insights however occurred during drafting which led to remapping and reorganizing. Unlike D W employed a more effective strategy where the drafting process was dictated by the outline produced at the prewriting stage which suggested why the drafting was more directional and less halting although some insights appeared during drafting which led to remapping and reorganizing suggesting the employment of an interactive strategy. In addition to the general strategy employed by both subjects there were also local strategies which were used to manage the moment-to-moment steps as the drafting proceeded to the completion of term papers. The local strategies employed were cognitive metacognitive writing and other strategies. (1) Cognitive strategies. D who employed predominantly a search strategy in planning could be seen to employ cognitive strategies in the following order from the most frequently used to the least resourcing reasoning note taking grouping analyzing recording visualizing hypothesizing and imagining and the rest unused categories of exemplification elimination summarizing and verbalizing. W who employed a a more effective strategy could be seen to employ the cognitive strategies in the following order from the most frequent to the least resourcing grouping analysing verbalizing reasoning elimination summarizing exemplification comparing hypothesizing visualizing note taking recording and imagining. (2) Metacognitive strategies. D who employed predominantly search strategy during drafting could be seen to employ metacognitive strategies in the following order from the most frequent to the least self monitoring advance preparation self evaluation delayed production avoiding advance organizer self management and selective attention. W who employed a more effective strategy could be seen to employ metacognitive strategies in the following order from the most frequent to the least self evaluation self monitoring advance preparation advance organizer avoiding selective attention and delayed production. (3) Writing strategies. D who employed predominantly a search strategy in planning could be seen to employ writing strategies in the following order from the most frequent to the least rehearsing editing and revising. W who employed a more effective strategy in drafting could be seen to employ writing strategies in the following order from the most frequent to the least editing revising and rehearsing. (4) Other strategies. D who employed predominantly a seacrh strategy in planning could be seen to employ other strategies in the following order from the most frequently used to the least exclamation affective deferral social and audience awareness. W who employed a more effective strategy could be seen to employ other strategies in the following order from the most frequently used to the least affective social and audience awareness. The conclusions derived from the findings are (1) when composing term papers in English graduate students should carry out the the prewriting stages properly because what they do at that stage would influence the process at the drafting stage (2) when writing a highly conventionalized academic text like term papers employing an interactive strategy at the prewriting stage is ineffective because it provides the student with little guidance to carry out drafting and would likely lead to low quality papers (3) inexperienced graduate students tendency to employ ineffective strategy at prewriting and drafting stages might be caused by their deficits in topic knowledge genre knowledge linguistic knowledge audience knowledge and task schema. The deficits in those components might be attributed to their limited experience in writing papers. Considering the findings and conclusions derived from the study it is suggested that graduate students are provided with instructions on using an advanced strategy when writing academic texts. To other researchers it is suggested to employ more varied data collection methods when conducting future studies on graduate students writing processes.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Subjects: | L Education > L Education (General) |
| Divisions: | Fakultas Sastra (FS) > Departemen Sastra Inggris (ING) > S3 Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris |
| Depositing User: | Users 2 not found. |
| Date Deposited: | 26 Jun 2008 04:29 |
| Last Modified: | 09 Sep 2008 03:00 |
| URI: | http://repository.um.ac.id/id/eprint/64384 |
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |