- This topic has 52 replies, 21 voices, and was last updated 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
Instructions:
1. Read the two assigned journal articles carefully:
Article 1Article 22. 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. -
FARAH ASSYFA GAYO
22220053Link to the Report on Two-Article Analysis (Based on Swales’ Move Analysis):
https://drive.google.com/file/d/17QGvN7Bd-tS1NKisS9H31n6nWJqgvczJ/view?usp=sharing -
Syeifh Fahma Salsabila (22220097)
Here are the results of the Swales Move analysis from 2 articles:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1n6qsZOfeqVuAp8qTpC7zstvcKcsAzkB7FtSk22y9niY/edit?usp=sharing -
Delia Suci Maharani
22220079https://drive.google.com/file/d/1S5Vz5XkOD6YfNH6tKgch3MbpKzvJ1aQV/view?usp=sharing
-
Aulia Rahma Nurlita
22220057
Link the result of analysis 2 articles: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jGkHrwo392y-X2TDnFeRFGNYS64fzGhp/view?usp=sharing -
Rida Rahadathul Aisya Ardani
22220060
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1157SlJZD2IEINrImWnoPgpXKB3NUaLgvFdPZZkro71c/edit?usp=sharing -
-
Suci Samiarti
22220104https://drive.google.com/file/d/1bABdiLC0Sczo_sFyncRSXic6u7Zi3_jx/view?usp=sharing
-
-
Andina Fitri Irawan
22220121
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_9Yojs0Ldni7QGfcXsZ42iCZZVPO-mmy/view?usp=drivesdk -
Halda Vidya Srikandi Salsabila
22220069https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zuZZ_Kyt0HW2hsXaIE6FlkgFTitHf2-n/view?usp=drive_link
-
Halda Vidya Srikandi Salsabila
22220069
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zuZZ_Kyt0HW2hsXaIE6FlkgFTitHf2-n/view?usp=drive_link -
-
Reres Azma Melati Sukma
22220098
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bpmfMoLApcu3-xY7FvVNZ48kbRtk-dMz/edit -
Marisya Rahmawati
22220109
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LGUqCZkhSjEmwdwoZIHzidrLaTo-7UGT/view?usp=sharing -
Widya Aulia Octavia
22220089
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FLPjCyz672LY02YTICMsDqVw-s5ny9GL/view?usp=sharing -
-
-
-
-
Haifa Nenden Andriyana
22220064
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-7oQew4AKN8iSEVMSoHUc5hbOW98w5wu/view?usp=sharing -
Haifa Nenden Andriyana
22220064
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-7oQew4AKN8iSEVMSoHUc5hbOW98w5wu/view?usp=sharing -
Ratih Nurlita Niarti
22220063
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1LdhQpfbhMy_voaIc1vQMIjR4OYg06BcJ -
Ni Made Rintan Prameswari Santi Yuda
22220072
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1W6R3pXVQeBoe2fbsGVgha9FR7EndubBG/view?usp=drive_link -
Hanifah Nurul azijah
22220065
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1-gIK2FTStMKT3JCUCYOBSsZj82IbuBdI -
Kanna Ardanisa
22220083
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1MuBnHrjPZnnbMKSSYXg08lOJIcKQPAva
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.