ACADEMIC WRITING

ACADEMIC WRITING
by
ANSELMUS SAHAN
Lecturer of Writing and Literature Timor University, Kefamenanu, Timor, East Nusa Tenggara Province

The following is a simple example of summarizing thesis done on the basis of some leading questions which can help us to direct our attention. You will find that each part of a thesis will be questioned and those questions are really important for us to understand what one has written in his/her thesis and whether it follows academic rules.




THESIS SUMMARY
Thesis Title:
Interactional Modifications of Indonesian Learners of English in Negotiating Meanings in a Small Group Discussion
By Ngasben Egar (2003)
There are eleven pages required before the chapters. The following is a brief description related to those pages and their roles in exposing the substance of the Thesis. I have to note down that the order of the pages before chapters is not in accordance with the Order stated in “Pedoman Penulisan Tesis dan Disertasi Pascasarjana, Universitas Negeri Semarang, 2003 dan Panduan Penulisan Karya Ilmiah, Universitas Negeri Semarang, 2008”. Therefore, I will explain them as what they are in the Thesis.
Cover page. This page is usually not given page. It aims to publish the title of the Thesis as stated above, the English Studies Program as the addressee the Thesis is submitted, and the writer.
Abstract. This page contains the main substance of the Thesis such as the Title, the research question, related references, technique data gathering (data collection), data analysis, the results of the Thesis and simple suggestion (hope sometimes).
Approval page. This page covers the title of the Thesis and the Supervisors (I and II). It aims to show that as a scientific writing and a final report, it should be written under some supervisors (in this case two supervisors) who are formally assigned to supervise the student who is writing a Thesis.
Certification page. This page plays an important role to declare to English Studies Program and all reading in the future that the Thesis is really written on the basis of the writer’s own idea. While other opinions or findings included in the Thesis are quoted or cited in accordance with ethical standards.
The Thesis Committee. This page contains the Team of the Thesis Committee involving the Head of the Team, the Secretary, and three member examiners. The team gives examination to the Thesis writer after she/he has conducted the field research. It indicates that before publishing the Thesis, it should be examined and signed by the supervisors.
Acknowledgements. This page starts with the praise to God because of His help for the writer that enables him to complete his Thesis writing. It also addresses thanks to many people, including his supervisors and his mates who have involved and contributed him from the beginning until the end of his thesis writing.
Dedication page. It contains inner heart feeling to assert that because of the help from his family, he then dedicates the Thesis to his family covering his parents, his wife, his children and relatives. In other words, he wants to view it as a great gift for his supporters.
Table of Contents. It consists of the order of the Thesis writing, from the pages before the chapters until the appendixes. Generally, the order is based on the strict rule as stated in the “Panduan Penulisan Karya Ilmiah, Program Pascasarjana Universitas Negeri Semarang, 2003 dan Pedoman Penulisan Tesis dan Disertasi, Program Pascasarjana Universitas Negeri Semarang, 2008”.
List of Tables. This contains names of the tables stated in all pages of the Thesis. It aims to help reader to find fast the information needed form the Thesis.
List of Figures. This contains names of the figures stated in all pages of the Thesis. It aims to help reader to find fast the information needed form the Thesis and to understand it.

The Introduction of this Thesis commences:
1) with the main objectives of language teaching as stated by Finnonchiaro and Bonomo (1973), Paulston and Bruder (1976) about communicative competence, Agustien (1997) who quoted Nunan (1994) about Indonesian learners of English, the objectives of teaching and learning English in Indonesia as stated in the 1994 English Basic Course Outline, the policy (the status of English in Indonesia as a foreign language) and the objectives of English teaching, particularly speaking skill at English Department of IKIP PGRI Semarang;
2) The Indonesian learners difficulties in expressing themselves and this is supported by the writer’s own observation that the learners have a tendency to use different ways (or “interactinal strategies as asserted by Long, 1983 or “interactional modifications” as promoted by Pica and Doughty, 1985 and Ellis, 1990) in negotiating meanings.
3) specifically to focuses on the dominant interactional modifications performed by the learners when they interact in a small group discussion. Based on the difficulties found during observation, the writer conducted his study to know more the interactional modification the learners did.
Now, I would like to comment that the ideas shared in Background support the Research Question: What interactional modifications do the Indonesian learners of English use to negotiate meanings in a small group discussion? And Research Question supports the rest parts of Introduction Chapter which provide adequate evidences or reasons.

The Theoretical Framework developed in the chapter on Literature Review (in this Thesis uses Review of Related Literature) is by showing five main supporting ideas or concepts elaborated into five subchapters as described as follows.
4) Language acquisition covering (a) language devices (species-specific, specific for language learning, and prestructures, Klein 1990), (b) from first to second language acquisition and theories of second language acquisition;
5) Six dimensions of language acquisition namely: (a) propensity, (b) language faculty, (c) access, (d) structure of the process, (e) tempo of acquisition, and (f) end state.
6) Language as communication dealing with communicative competence and communicative strategies.
7) Classroom interaction covering input, interaction and language acquisition, and relationships between classroom interaction and language learning.
8) Previous research on classroom interaction such as Reid (1987), Chesterfield and Chesterfield (1985), Schesloff, et al (1977), Gaskil (1980), Kasper (1985), Allwright and Bailey (1994), Canale and Swain (1980), Long et al (1976), and Pica and Doughty (1985).
From the above explanation, I would like to state that the theoretical framework developed in the chapter on Literature Review is well scientific enough because each part supports each other. To prove my statement, I have to paraphrase what has been stated before, that the writer starts his writing with language acquisition; it is supported by the presence of six dimensions of language acquisition; it goes to the function of language as a communication means that needs communicative competence and communicative strategies; to realize the function of language, he comes to classroom interaction as the place of language use or learning; and finally, he presents some previous findings done by some researchers on classroom interaction.

There are four main parts included in the chapter on Methods (in this Thesis applies another term to name this chapter: Research Methodology) as follows:
9) Research design aims to state that the study used a descriptive method as its nature. By the way, all data needed before and after conducting the research were qualitative data and then analyzed descriptively.
10) Subjects of the Study are related to the learners who actively participate in the study and stood as the respondents. He only took one man and two women as the sources of information needed.
11) Data collection is related to data process, selection of information, one group involved, questions and answers, and recording.
12) Data analysis or actually Data analysis technique uses interactional modifications taxonomy developed by Pica and Doughty (1983) and Agustien (1992). Then, all moves are categorized into interactional features or modifications, and count the frequency distribution and the percentage of each category.
In this part, the writer tries to show clearly the relationship among each part and to strengthen his ideas, he starts the description by firstly stressing that the design adopted in his research is descriptive qualitative method because, on the basis of its nature, his research would collect the qualitative data and analyze them descriptively. The data needed were taken from three students of English Department, FKIP Universitas PGRI Semarang as the main sources of information. To those students, he monitored and observed how they used language in their discussion in a small group. The information was recorded, were analyzed using a data analysis technique “interactional modifications taxonomy”, categorized into interactional features or modifications, and counted the frequency distribution and the percentage of each category.

The question of this study or it states “Research Question”: What interactional modifications do the Indonesian learners of English use to negotiate meanings in a small group discussion? Based on the research question, the writer tried to analyze his data and the results of the analysis cover two main aspects:
13) The identified modifications that cover (a) clarification request, (b) confirmation checks, (c) comprehension checks, (d) self-repetitions consisting of repeating, preventive, and reacting, (e) other repetitions (repairing and repeating), (f) responses (repetition, confirmation and rejection), (g) appeal for help, (h) repetition request, (i) literal translation, (j) over-elaboration, (k) team effort, responses: acceptance, and (l) proposal.
14) Interactional modifications that cover the same elements as stated in point (2).

Pedagogical Implications
The results of this study propose that:
Comprehension is necessary for L2 learner acquisition;
Modifications help to make input comprehensible to an L2 learner; and
A situation in which the conversational patterns share a symmetrical role relationship that affords more appropriate for interactional relationship.
Theoretical Implications
The results indicate that the beginner learners have opportunities to negotiate meanings resulting in better comprehension, but have no apparent impact on acquisition; and
The results of the study may improve the learners comprehension in facing difficult materials.
There are two kinds of results: Firstly, the writer can expose identified modifications that cover (a) clarification request, (b) confirmation checks, (c) comprehension checks, (d) self-repetitions consisting of repeating, preventive, and reacting, (e) other repetitions (repairing and repeating), (f) responses (repetition, confirmation and rejection), (g) appeal for help, (h) repetition request, (i) literal translation, (j) over-elaboration, (k) team effort, responses: acceptance, and (l) proposal; and finally, interactional modifications that cover the same elements as stated in the first point.
Based on the data above, I can say that no quantitative data provided or found; only qualitative ones. The data support the findings and answer the research question. In addition, the data are presented into a sequence of event, starting from identified modifications to interactional ones.
Besides, this part presents pedagogical implications and theoretical ones. The writer propose that comprehension is necessary for L2 learner acquisition, modifications help to make input comprehensible to an L2 learner, and the modifications may come to realize in a situation in which the conversational patterns share a symmetrical role relationship that affords more appropriate for interactional relationship. While the theoretical implications suggested are that the results of the study found out the ways of the beginner learners to negotiate meanings and to improve the learners comprehension in facing difficult materials.

Conclusions. There are four conclusions drawn as follows:
15) There are thirteen interactional features than can facilitate learners to speak.
16) Those features perform various interactional modifications to negotiate meanings.
17) Modification features performed by the learners were dominated by the use of self-repetition, followed by clarification requests, response, comprehension checks, other repetitions, response: acceptance, proposal, comprehension, over-elaboration, repetition request, appeal for help, literal translation and team effort.
18) The interactional features performed by the learners in negotiating meanings are self-repetition or repeating, preventive and reacting, responses (repetition, confirmation, and rejection), other repetitions (repairing and reacting).
I have to criticize that the results of the study were not drawn on the basis of the scientific rules of drawing conclusions. Seen from the number of the Research Question, he presented four conclusions; in fact, there is only one problem or question to be answered. To be consistent, he should state only one conclusion; therefore, those four conclusions might be possibly combined into one only because they have the same elements. Or, if its possible, the Research Question should be added as many as the total number of the findings is. In other words, the conclusions do not summarize the main point of the Thesis.

Suggestions. There are three suggestions stated in this part as describes as follows:
19) Teacher should apply the best techniques and methods in teaching, particularly speaking skill.
20) Students/learners should realize that they need an improvement in their mastery of vocabulary and grammar.
21) Other people may the results of this study to conduct further research on the same problems.
The suggestions proposed are relevant to the findings, but not to the number of the conclusion. If he is really consistent, he should suggest one thing because he just stated only one Research Question. Viewed from the content of those suggestions, yes, they are still relevant to the conclusions.

Bibliography is appropriately written in accordance with the academic writing regulation in Post Graduate Programs of State University of Semarang or “Panduan Penulisan Karya Ilmiah, Universitas Negeri Semarang, 2008”.








Summary:
Thesis Title:
Interactional Modifications of Indonesian Learners of English in Negotiating Meanings in a Small Group Discussion
By Ngasben Egar (2003)
The order of the pages before chapters in this Thesis is not in accordance with the Order stated in “Panduan Penulisan Karya Ilmiah, Universitas Negeri Semarang, 2008 dan Paedoman Penulis Tesis dan Disertasi, Program Pascasarjana, Universitas Negeri Semarang, 2003”. Cover Page states about the title of the Thesis, the English Studies Program as the addressee the Thesis is submitted, and the writer. It is followed by Abstract page containing the main substance of the Thesis such as the Title, the research question, related references, technique data gathering (data collection), data analysis, the results of the Thesis and simple suggestion (hope sometimes); Approval page covering the title of the Thesis and the Supervisors (I and II) that aims to show that as a scientific writing and a final report should be written under some supervisors (in this case two supervisors) who are formally assigned to supervise the student who is writing a Thesis; Certification page declaring to English Studies Program and all readers in the future that the Thesis is really written on the basis of the writer’s own idea; and Thesis Committee page containing the Team of the Thesis Committee that involves the Head of the Team, the Secretary, and three member examiners. The team gives examination to the Thesis writer after she/he has conducted the field research. It indicates that before publishing the Thesis, it should be examined and signed by the supervisors.
In the pages before chapters, there is an Acknowledgements page starting with the praise to God because of His help for the writer that enables him to complete his Thesis writing, and addressing thanks to many people, including his supervisors and his mates who have involved and contributed him from the beginning until the end of his thesis writing. It is followed by Dedication page containing inner heart feeling to assert that because of the help from his family, he then dedicates the Thesis to his family covering his parents, his wife, his children and relatives. In other words, he wants to view it as a great gift for his supporters; Table of Contents page that consists of the order of the Thesis writing, from the pages before the chapters until the appendixes. Generally, the order is based on the strict rule as stated in the “Pedoman Penulisan Tesis dan Disertasi Pascasarjana Universitas Negeri Semarang, 2003 dan Panduan Penulisan Karya Ilmiah, Universitas Negeri Semarang, 2008”.
It also appears List of Tables page containing names of the tables stated in all pages of the Thesis and aiming to help reader to find fast the information needed form the Thesis and List of Figures page that contains names of the figures stated in all pages of the Thesis, aiming to help reader to find fast the information needed form the Thesis and to understand it.
In The Introduction of this Thesis, it commences with the main objectives of language teaching as stated by Finnonchiaro and Bonomo (1973), Paulston and Bruder (1976) about communicative competence, Agustien (1997) who quoted Nunan (1994) about Indonesian learners of English, the objectives of teaching and learning English in Indonesia as stated in the 1994 English Basic Course Outline, the policy (the status of English in Indonesia as a foreign language) and the objectives of English teaching, particularly speaking skill at English Department of IKIP PGRI Semarang. It goes on the explanation about the Indonesian learners difficulties in expressing themselves and this is supported by the writer’s own observation that the learners have a tendency to use different ways (or “interactinal strategies as asserted by Long, 1983 or “interactional modifications” as promoted by Pica and Doughty, 1985 and Ellis, 1990) in negotiating meanings. Specifically it focuses on the dominant interactional modifications performed by the learners when they interact in a small group discussion. Based on the difficulties found during observation, the writer conducted his study to know more the interactional modification the learners did. I would like to comment that the ideas shared in Background support the Research Question: What interactional modifications do the Indonesian learners of English use to negotiate meanings in a small group discussion? And Research Question supports the rest parts of Introduction Chapter which provide adequate evidences or reasons.
The Theoretical Framework developed in the chapter on Literature Review (in this Thesis uses Review of Related Literature) is by showing five main supporting ideas or concepts elaborated into five subchapters, namely: Language acquisition, six dimensions of language acquisition, language as communication, classroom interaction and previous research findings. From the above explanation, I would like to state that the theoretical framework developed in the chapter on Literature Review is well scientific enough because each part supports each other. To prove my statement, I have to paraphrase what has been stated before, that the writer starts his writing with language acquisition; it is supported by the presence of six dimensions of language acquisition; it goes to the function of language as a communication means that needs communicative competence and communicative strategies; to realize the function of language, he comes to classroom interaction as the place of language use or learning; and finally, he presents some previous findings done by some researchers on classroom interaction.
There are four main parts included in the chapter on Methods (in this Thesis applies another term to name this chapter: Research Methodology) as follows: Firstly, research design aims to state that the study used a descriptive method as its nature. By the way, all data needed before and after conducting the research were qualitative data and then analyzed descriptively. Secondly, subjects of the Study are related to the learners who actively participate in the study and stood as the respondents. He only took one man and two women as the sources of information needed. Thirdly, data collection is related to data process, selection of information, one group involved, questions and answers, and recording. Finally, data analysis or actually Data analysis technique uses interactional modifications taxonomy developed by Pica and Doughty (1983) and Agustien (1992). Then, all moves are categorized into interactional features or modifications, and count the frequency distribution and the percentage of each category. In this part, the writer tries to show clearly the relationship among each part and to strengthen his ideas, he starts the description by firstly stressing that the design adopted in his research is descriptive qualitative method because, on the basis of its nature, his research would collect the qualitative data and analyze them descriptively. The data needed were taken from three students of English Department, FKIP Universitas PGRI Semarang as the main source of information. To those students, he monitored and observed how they used language in their discussion in a small group. The information was recorded, were analyzed using a data analysis technique “interactional modifications taxonomy”, categorized into interactional features or modifications, and counted the frequency distribution and the percentage of each category.
The question of this study or it states “Research Question”: What interactional modifications do the Indonesian learners of English use to negotiate meanings in a small group discussion? Based on the research question, the writer tried to analyze his data and the results of the analysis cover two main aspects: The identified modifications that cover twelve elements and interactional modifications that cover the same elements. It also presents pedagogical Implications and theoretical one.
There are two kinds of results: Firstly, the writer can expose identified modifications and interactional modifications. Based on the data above, I can say that no quantitative data provided or found; only qualitative ones. The data support the findings and answer the research question. In addition, the data are presented into a sequence of event, starting from identified modifications to interactional ones. Besides, this part presents pedagogical implications and theoretical ones. The writer propose that comprehension is necessary for L2 learner acquisition, modifications help to make input comprehensible to an L2 learner, and the modifications may come to realize in a situation in which the conversational patterns share a symmetrical role relationship that affords more appropriate for interactional relationship. While the theoretical implications suggested are that the results of the study found out the ways of the beginner learners to negotiate meanings and to improve the learners’ comprehension in facing difficult materials.
There are four conclusions drawn. I have to criticize that the results of the study were not drawn on the basis of the scientific rules of drawing conclusions. Seen from the number of the Research Question, he presented four conclusions; in fact, there is only one problem or question to be answered. To be consistent, he should state only one conclusion; therefore, those four conclusions might be possibly combined into one only because they have the same elements. Or, if its possible, the Research Question should be added as many as the total number of the findings is. In other words, the conclusions do not summarize the main point of the Thesis.
There are three suggestions stated in this part. The suggestions proposed are relevant to the findings, but not to the number of the conclusion. If he is really consistent, he should suggest one thing because he just stated only one Research Question. Viewed from the content of those suggestions, yes, they are still relevant to the conclusions.
Bibliography is appropriately written in accordance with the academic writing regulation in Post Graduate Programs of State University of Semarang or “Pedoman Penulisan Tesis dan Disertasi Pascasarjana, Universitas Negeri Semarang, 2003 dan Panduan Penulisan Karya Ilmiah, Universitas Negeri Semarang, 2008”.