T 3.1 Brainstorming
In this stage, students are encouraged to activate their prior knowledge about the structure of a scientific article. Before learning about Swales’ theory of rhetorical moves, students will reflect on what they already know from reading journal articles and from their own writing experience. The brainstorming activity aims to help students recognize the common sections of a scientific article (Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, and Conclusion) and identify the possible elements, purposes, and challenges in each section. This initial exploration will serve as a foundation for understanding how these elements are systematically organized and explained in Swales’ theoretical framework.
Worksheet 3.1 – Brainstorming the Structure of a Scientific Article
Instructions:
Individually, recall and brainstorm what you usually find in each section of a scientific article. Write down key elements, their purpose, and examples if possible. Afterward, discuss with peers to compare and complete the table.
| Section |
Possible Elements |
Purpose |
Notes/Examples |
| Abstract |
………………………. |
………………………. |
………………………. |
| Introduction |
………………………. |
………………………. |
………………………. |
| Methods |
………………………. |
………………………. |
………………………. |
| Results |
………………………. |
………………………. |
………………………. |
| Discussion |
………………………. |
………………………. |
………………………. |
| Conclusion |
………………………. |
………………………. |
………………………. |
T 3.2 Individual Exploration
In this stage, students are provided with two articles from reputable journals in the field of English Language Teaching. They are required to carefully analyze each section of the articles (Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, and Conclusion) by identifying the rhetorical moves and steps using Swales’ genre analysis framework (e.g., the CARS model for Introductions and common moves for other sections). The purpose of this activity is to help students recognize how scientific articles are structured in authentic publications and to notice similarities, differences, and specific rhetorical elements across the two samples.
Worksheet 3.2 – Analyzing the Structure of Scientific Articles (Based on Swales’ Move Analysis)
-
Instructions:
1. Read the two assigned journal articles carefully:
2. For each section of the article (Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusion), identify the rhetorical moves and steps following Swales’ genre analysis framework (e.g., CARS model for Introductions, common moves in Abstracts, Results, and Discussion).
3. Note the communicative purpose of each move and how it is realized in the text (e.g., through linguistic features, discourse markers, or citation practices).
4. Compare the two articles by highlighting similarities and differences in terms of structure, rhetorical organization, and style.
5. Create a Google Document, and summarize your analysis in the table provided below. Then share the link in the discusion forum below using the following format
| Section |
Moves Identified |
Article 1 |
Article 2 |
Similarities and Differences |
| Abstract |
|
|
|
|
| Introduction |
|
|
|
|
| Methods |
|
|
|
|
| Results and Discussion |
|
|
|
|
| Conclusions |
|
|
|
|
6. If needed, you may use the following sample of analysis.
| Section |
Moves Identified (Swales) |
Article 1: Realization in Text |
Article 2: Realization in Text |
Similarities / Differences |
| Abstract |
Moves 1–5 |
Move 1: “This study examines students’ writing difficulties…”
Move 2: “Despite increasing use of digital media, limited attention has been given to multimodal writing…”
Move 3: “The present study investigates…”
Move 4: “Data were collected from 50 students…”
Move 5: “Findings suggest QuiryThink model improved engagement.” |
Move 1: “Writing skills remain a key issue in higher education…”
Move 2: “Few studies have addressed the integration of inquiry-based models with digital tools…”
Move 3: “This article explores the use of…”
Move 4: “Using surveys and interviews…”
Move 5: “Results highlight positive effects on collaboration.” |
Both abstracts include all moves. Article 1 emphasizes engagement, while Article 2 focuses more on collaboration. |
| Introduction |
Moves 1–3 (CARS) |
Move 1: Establishing territory – “Writing for publication is essential for academic success.”
Move 2: Establishing a niche – “However, few studies focus on Indonesian EFL learners’ challenges.”
Move 3: Occupying the niche – “This paper investigates the rhetorical moves…” |
Move 1: “Academic writing is a crucial skill in higher education worldwide.”
Move 2: “Research rarely examines the role of interactive media in writing instruction.”
Move 3: “Therefore, this study develops and evaluates the QuiryThink model.” |
Both follow CARS structure, but Article 1 focuses on Indonesian learners while Article 2 highlights interactive media. |
| Methods |
Moves 1–8 |
Move 1 (Participants): “50 undergraduates from a private university…”
Move 2 (Instruments): “A questionnaire and rubric were used…”
Move 3 (Procedure): “The study followed the ADDIE model…” |
Move 1: “The study involved 2 classes of English majors…”
Move 2: “Data collection instruments included surveys and interviews…”
Move 3: “The intervention lasted 14 weeks…” |
Both articles present participants, instruments, and procedure. Article 1 provides more detail about the rubric, Article 2 about the duration. |
| Results |
Moves 1–2 |
Move 1: “Students reported higher motivation and improved writing skills…”
Move 2: “Table 2 shows significant improvement in cohesion scores.” |
Move 1: “Survey data indicated stronger collaboration…”
Move 2: “Figure 1 presents the increase in peer feedback activities.” |
Article 1 emphasizes skills, Article 2 emphasizes collaboration. |
| Discussion |
Moves 1–4 |
Move 1: “These findings confirm prior research on inquiry-based learning…”
Move 2: “The use of QuiryThink differs from previous digital writing studies…”
Move 3: “Pedagogically, this suggests…”
Move 4: “Nevertheless, the small sample size is a limitation.” |
Move 1: “This study aligns with theories of transformative learning…”
Move 2: “Unlike earlier models, QuiryThink integrates design thinking explicitly…”
Move 3: “This provides teachers with a new pathway…”
Move 4: “Further studies with larger samples are needed.” |
Both contain all four moves. Article 1 makes connections to inquiry learning, Article 2 to transformative learning. |
| Conclusion |
Moves 1–3 |
Move 1: Summarizing results – “The study showed that QuiryThink enhanced student engagement and writing outcomes.”
Move 2: Pedagogical implications – “This model may serve as a reference for EFL academic writing courses.”
Move 3: Future research – “Further studies should test its effectiveness across institutions.” |
Move 1: “Results confirmed positive impact on collaboration and motivation.”
Move 2: “Integrating inquiry and design thinking can enrich EFL pedagogy.”
Move 3: “Longitudinal studies are recommended to explore sustainability.” |
Both articles include all moves. Article 1 emphasizes writing outcomes, while Article 2 focuses on collaboration and sustainability. |
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
T 3.3 Sharing and Discussion
In this stage, students move from analyzing published articles and rhetorical moves to planning their own research writing. Students are asked to create a draft research outline that will serve as the foundation for their future scientific article. The outline should start from a clear research title and expand into the main components of a research plan, including the background of the study, problem statement, objectives, methods, and expected outcomes. At this stage, the focus is on drafting ideas in a structured way rather than achieving perfection. Students will first draft individually, then refine their outline based on feedback from peers and the lecturer. This process helps them learn how to transform abstract knowledge into a concrete research plan while practicing clarity, organization, and critical thinking.
1. Title Page
According to Paiva et al., (2012), title is the most important element of a manuscript. Grant (2013) suggested that article titles should be concise, informative, and, where appropriate, give details of the research design. Thus, the purpose a title is to attract the readers in order to be interested in reading the paper. If a title is not informative, it cannot be indexed in the proper databases (Haggan, 2004). Furthermore, Swales and Feak (2004, p. 278) specified three requirements for decent research report titles: (1) the title should indicate the topic of the study; (2) the title should indicate the scope of the study; (3) the title should be self-explanatory to readers in the chosen area. This indicates that the title summarizes the main idea or ideas of your study.
Before writing a scientific article, the first step to consider is preparing the title page. This page serves as the main identity of the paper and should be arranged neatly, clearly, and in accordance with the guidelines of the target journal or institution. The essential components commonly included in a title page are the article title, author’s name, institutional affiliation, and author’s contact information. The following image illustrates the key elements that should be presented on a title page.
2. Styles of title
When creating the title of a scientific paper, it is important to pay attention to the writing style. A good title not only reflects the content of the study but also attracts readers’ interest. Common styles of titles include:
- Declarative title. These titles state the main findings or conclusions of the research directly. They provide readers with a clear idea of the study’s outcome at first glance. Example: “Contextual situation can promote prospective teachers’ creativity in posing mathematical problems.”
- Descriptive or Neutral Titles. These titles simply describe the subject matter of the article without revealing the results. They tend to be more neutral and objective, focusing only on the topic under discussion. Example: “Effects of contextual situation on prospective teachers’ creativity in posing mathematical problems.
- Interrogative (Question) Titles. These titles present the subject of the article in the form of a question, sparking curiosity and inviting readers to explore the answer in the paper. Example: “Can contextual situation promote prospective teachers’ creativity in posing mathematical problems?”
- Compound Titles. These titles usually combine two parts: a general phrase followed by a colon and a more specific statement. They may also start with a short question followed by a descriptive phrase. Example: “Contextual Situation and Creativity: Exploring Prospective Teachers’ Problem-Posing Skills.”
Worksheet 3.3 – Drafting Your Research Outline
-
You are going to prepare a draft outline for a qualitative research project. This task is meant to help you practice planning a study that uses questionnaire, interview, and observation as instruments. The outline will later be refined through peer and lecturer feedback.
1. General Guidelines
- Your research must be qualitative.
- Your data collection instruments are limited to questionnaire, interview, and observation.
- Your topic should be related to English Language Education, focusing on teaching, learning, curriculum, models, media, or strategies.
- You will choose one topic from the provided list (grouped into five main categories), and then create 4 different styles of title for it.
- Before drafting your outline, you should also look at least 1–2 published journal articles with a similar theme as your chosen topic. These articles will serve as references and inspiration for your own study. To make it easier, please click and read the following sample articles: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1IJwHOz3VBkT2kFMJi9hPBOm7LfURCj93?usp=sharing
2. Choose the topic
Select one topic from the list below. The topics are divided into five main categories:
A. Teachers’ Challenges
1 . Challenges in implementing Kurikulum Merdeka in English teaching.
2. Difficulties teachers face in using digital media for academic writing instruction.
3. Barriers to applying Problems-based Learning in English lessons.
4. Challenges in integrating technology into speaking or writing activities.
B. Students’ Needs
5. Students’ needs for digital tools in English learning.
6. Students’ target needs in writing courses.
7. Students’ needs for teacher support in English for Specific Purposes.
C. Problems and Solutions
8. Problems in online English learning and suggested solutions.
9. Common difficulties in speaking
10. Barriers to collaboration in group writing projects and solutions.
D. Teachers’ Perceptions
11. Teachers’ perceptions of using multimodal texts in writing classes.
12. Teachers’ perceptions of integrating AI tools in English learning.
13. Teachers’ perceptions of online vs. face-to-face writing instruction.
14. Teachers’ voices on the implementation of Kurikulum Merdeka in English teaching.
15. Teachers’ voices on integrating 21st-century skills in English classes.
E. Students’ perceptions
16. Students’ perceptions of the usefulness of feedback in academic writing.
17. Students’ perceptions of learning English through social media platforms.
18. Students’ perceptions of learning English through social media platforms.
19. Students’ voices on using AI tools (e.g., ChatGPT) for English writing.
20. Students’ voices on online collaboration platforms (e.g., Google Docs, Padlet) for English writing projects.
3. Develop Four Title Styles
For the chosen topic, write four versions of your title: Descriptive title, Declarative title, Interrogative title, and Compound Title
4. Fill in the Draft Outline
| Section |
Your Draft |
| Proposed title |
|
| Target Journal |
|
| Background |
|
| Research Questions |
|
| Objectives of the study |
|
| Methodological approach |
|
After completing their draft research outline in Worksheet 3.3, students will enter the refining stage. In this phase, students exchange their draft outlines with peers and provide constructive comments. The purpose is to help each student identify strengths, weaknesses, and areas for improvement in their outline. Peer comments serve as a reflection tool, allowing students to see how their work is understood by others, while lecturer feedback provides additional academic guidance. This process mirrors the real practice of academic publishing, where manuscripts are refined through peer review before submission to journals.
In this stage, students are asked to:
- Read a peer’s outline carefully and provide at least three comments: one on clarity, one on coherence, and one on alignment with the target journal.
- Receive feedback from peers and reflect on which suggestions they will apply to improve their draft.
- Revise their draft research outline based on both peer and lecturer comments, producing a refined version for further development.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
T 3.4 Drafting and Refining
In this stage, students move from analyzing published articles and rhetorical moves to planning their own research writing. Students are asked to create a draft research outline that will serve as the foundation for their future scientific article. The outline should start from a clear research title and expand into the main components of a research plan, including the background of the study, problem statement, objectives, methods, and expected outcomes. At this stage, the focus is on drafting ideas in a structured way rather than achieving perfection.
Students will first draft individually, then refine their outline based on feedback from peers and the lecturer. This process helps them learn how to transform abstract knowledge into a concrete research plan while practicing clarity, organization, and critical thinking.
Expected Output:
A written draft research outline (1–2 pages) that includes at least:
- Proposed Title of the Research
- Background / Rationale
- Research Problem / Questions
- Objectives of the Study
- Methodological Approach (participants, data, instruments, procedures)
- Expected Contributions or Outcomes.
T 3.4 Assignment
Revise your research outline by applying feedback from peers and lecturer. Highlight changes and write a short reflection (150–200 words) on how the feedback improved your draft.
Follow-Up Activity: Wordwall Quiz on Article Title Styles
Platform: Wordwall – “THE STYLE OF TITLE” activity
Activity Type: Group Sort (categorization)
Description:
Students will participate in an interactive Wordwall activity where they will sort various sample article titles into categories based on their style: declarative, descriptive, interrogative, or compound. Examples include:
- Declarative Title: “Project-based Learning Improves Students’ Vocabulary in Junior High School”
- Descriptive Title: “An Analysis of Politeness Strategy in Spiderman Movie”
- Interrogative Title: “Do We Need Mother Tongue Language Maintenance in Aceh?”
- Compound Title: “Investigating Students’ Engagement in EFL Learning: Does it Improve Student Achievement?”
Instructions:
- Students access the Wordwall link: https://wordwall.net/resource/76844520
- They drag and drop each title into the appropriate category.
- The activity provides instant feedback—students learn whether their categorization is correct or needs review.
