Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Mutiara Azny
22220088Abstract & conclusion:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dkwB0nQqKatTsPKzc-ypqSzww6B_4jUm/view?usp=drivesdkMutiara Azny
222200088Link Article
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1KkWgfhde-oni2TcFsPGOpKJD1zzUizuVMutiara Azny
22220088Link Article
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1KkWgfhde-oni2TcFsPGOpKJD1zzUizuVMutiara Azny
22220088Proposed Title: Students’ Speaking Anxiety in English Class: Exploring the Contributing Factors
Target Journal: Project Journal
Background:
1. The importance of speaking skill in English learning and common difficulties faced by students.
2. Introduction to the issue of speaking anxiety and its impact on students’ performance.
3. Review of previous studies and identification of research gap related to speaking anxiety.
4. Focus of this study in helping teachers understand and reduce students’ anxiety in speaking English.Research Questions: What are the factors contributing to students’ speaking anxiety in English class?
Objectives of the study: To identify and describe the factors that contribute to students’ speaking anxiety in English class.
Methodological approach:
1. Research Design: Qualitative Descriptive
2. Participants: Students of IKIP Siliwangi
3. Data Collection: Questionnaires and interview
4. Data Analysis: Thematic AnalysisMutiara Azny (22220088)
Nina Permatasari (22220066)Mind map link
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1bpvgsd9oU0WB9yVs411BsDQNxtKOheM1Mutiara Azny (22220088)
1. From the interview with Mr. Yana, several ideas clearly align with the journal guidelines. Both emphasize that a good scientific article must show strong coherence between each section – from the introduction to the discussion – and that every part must contribute to one main idea. He also underlines the importance of literacy and continuous reading of published journals, which is consistent with guidelines requiring writers to use recent and credible sources.
However, there are some differences in practice. While journal guidelines strictly instruct writers to follow the template, structure, and word limits from the beginning, Mr. Yana suggests that writers should focus on developing ideas first, and only later adjust their manuscript to the specific journal’s format. In addition, his suggestion to change journals when reviewers’ comments conflict with the writer’s viewpoint reflects a more flexible and practical mindset than the formal guidelines, which encourage negotiation and revision instead of moving to another outlet.2. Many practices observed in sample journal articles reflect what Mr. Yana discussed in the interview. For Instance, the identification of research gaps in the introduction clearly shows awareness of differences between existing studies and the researcher’s focus – an idea Mr. Yana emphasized as essential. The sample articles also show the integration of relevant literature throughout the discussion, which aligns with his view that critical analysis should always be supported by references.
However, some contrasting practices appear as well. In published journal articles, citation tools and plagiarism checkers are systematically used, while Mr. Yana focuses more on understanding the editor and reviewer’s expertise and maintaining ethical writing behavior rather than relying heavily on software. Additionally, sample articles usually apply the journal format from the start, while Mr. Yana recommends adjusting formatting only after the writing process is complete.3. Several challenges mentioned by Mr. Yana are also discussed, directly or indirectly, in journal materials. One major challenge he mentions is starting the writing process, which he overcomes by simply “writing whatever comes to mind first” before revising and consulting with experienced authors. This strategy corresponds to the drafting and revising steps described in academic writing guides. Another difficulty he identifies is handling feedback from reviewers and editors. Journal materials also provide strategies for this, such as carefully responding to comments and improving clarity and methodology before resubmission.
Furthermore, both the interview and the materials highlight the importance of ethical writing. Mr. Yana warns about using AI-generated text and stresses the need for paraphrasing and referencing from real, published articles. This is consistent with the journal’s emphasis on originality, proper citation, and avoiding plagiarism. His advice to strengthen academic literacy and maintain ethical awareness echoes the same standards promoted in formal journal guidelines.4. From both the interview with Mr. Yana and the journal materials, it can be seen that high-quality scientific writing is built on literacy, coherence, and ethics. Both emphasize that every section of an article must connect clearly to the main idea and be supported by relevant, recent references. They also highlight the importance of originality, critical thinking, and honesty in citation and paraphrasing.
However, there are some differences. Mr. Yana focuses more on flexibility and process, encouraging writers to develop their ideas freely first and adjust to journal standards later, while journal guidelines stress structure, format, and precision from the beginning. His advice is more practical and experience-based, while journal rules are more formal and technical.
A clear pattern that appears from both sources is that good writing requires continuous reading, revising, and reflecting. Writers must combine creativity with ethical awareness to produce clear, coherent, and original work. In short, high-quality scientific writing results from the balance between technical accuracy and intellectual discipline.Conclusion:
Based on the results of the interview, it can be concluded that success in writing scientific articles largely depends on consistent reading habits, critical thinking skills, ad a comprehensive understanding of the dynamics of academic publication. Writers must maintain a balance between originality of ideas, adherence to scientific standards, and the ethical use of technology. Strong academic literacy and a systematic writing process serve as the key foundations for producing high-quality scholarly works that are competitive at both national and international levels.Mutiara Azny (22220088)
Nina Permatasari (22220066)
Reres Azma (22220098)After our group discussed further with our lecturer, these are the results of the final questions about academic writing and journal article publication that we will use to interview our lecturer, so that we can find out more about how to make academic writing and journal article publication well and correctly.
Category 1 – Process (Steps in writing a scientific article)
1. How can a writer make sure each part of a research article (introduction, method, result, discussion) connects clearly and supports the main idea?
2. What should an author do when reviewers’ comments disagree with their ideas – accept the changes or defend their argument? Why?Category 2 – Quality (Characteristics of a high-quality scientific article)
3. How do you check that your article offers fresh ideas and useful results, and how do you clearly show your own thoughts in it?
4. How do you organize complex ideas in your article so that readers from different backgrounds can easily understand?Category 3 – Challenges (Common obstacles faced by writers and their solutions)
5. What is the main difficulty you face when writing a scientific article, and how do you solve it?
6. How do you manage your time and communication with the editor or journal staff to ensure the submission process goes smoothly and your article gets accepted?Category 4 – Resources (Support, Media, or Tools Needed for Writing)
7. How does the availability of reference books and online journals help students improve the quality of their academic writing?
8. What strategies can students use to make the best use of available writing tools or media, such as citation managers or grammar checkers, when preparing their research papers?Category 5 – Structure & Content (Main components of a Research Article (RA) in English Language)
9. Why must the introduction clearly state the research gap?
10. How does the discussion section show critical thinking?Mutiara Azny (22220088)
Nina Permatasari (22220066)Based on our group discussion about writing scientific articles, we collaboratively created several questions related to five main categories: Process, Quality, Challenges, Resources, and Structure & Content. Each question was designed to encourage critical thinking and reflection on how to write and evaluate a scientific article effectively in the field of English Language Education.
Category 1 – Process (Steps in writing a scientific article)
1. Why is planning important in writing a scientific article?
2. How can revising improve your research paper?
3. How can collaboration with others enhance your article-writing process?Category 2 – Quality (Characteristics of a high-quality scientific article)
1. Why does clarity matter in a scientific article?
2. How can evidence strengthen the quality of your writing?
3. How can critical thinking help you produce a more credible scientific article?Category 3 – Challenges (Common obstacles faced by writers and their solutions)
1. How can fear of making mistakes limit writing progress?
2. What’s the best way to turn writer’s block into creativity?
3. How does feedback help writers overcome their challenges?Category 4 – Resources (Support, Media, or Tools Needed for Writing)
1. How do online tools shape your writing quality?
2. Why is peer review a valuable writing resource?
3. Which tool would you choose to improve coherence, and why?Category 5 – structure & Content (Main components of a Research Article (RA) in English Language)
1. Why must the introduction clearly state the research gap?
2. How does the discussion section show critical thinking?
3. What makes a conclusion meaningful in a research article?Mutiara Azny
222200881. Writing scientific article is very important for English education students because it helps us develop critical thinking, academic writing, and research skills. Through the process of writing, we learn how to organize ideas logically, use evidence to support our arguments, and communicate professionally in English. It also allows us to contribute to the development of English teaching and learning by sharing our findings and experiences with other educators.
to find journal articles, I used Google Scholar because it provides access to many academic journals related to English language teaching, especially topics like anxiety, motivation, and classroom strategies.2. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1YNxl-7bdMPeJ_0WBJFzFGN_TpbMwE0AL?usp=sharing
3. The most difficult part for me to understand is usually the Methodology section, especially when the researchers explain statistical analysis or complex research designs. Sometimes, the authors use technical terms like t-count, significance value, correlation coefficient, or Likert scale, which can be confusing if we are not familiar with research terminology.
However, in qualitative studies like Wirentake (2025), the methodology is easier to follow because it focuses on interviews and observations rather than statistical analysis.4. In my opinion, reading journal articles greatly helps me enhance my academic writing skills. Through reading, I can observe how professional researchers organize their ideas, build logical arguments, and maintain coherence in their writing. It also exposes me to a variety of academic expressions and vocabulary that I can apply in my own writing. Moreover, by analyzing how authors present data and discuss findings, I learn how to write more critically and objectively. Overall, reading journal articles helps me understand what good academic writing looks like and motivates me to improve my own work.
