STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION ON ABSTRACT SELF ASSESSMENT USING

SYSTEMIC AND FUNCTIONAL GRAMMAR

By Didi Sukyadi (Indonesia Education

University) Fiftinova (University of Sriwijaya)

ASIA TEFL CONFERENCE

BANGKOK 7-9 AUGUST 2009

IntroductionIntroduction

• This study explored students’ perception on the use of Systemic Functional Grammar for students’ self assessment. Specifically, this study seeks what aspect of functional grammar which becomes their primary concern when evaluating their writing.

• Rationale: • The major contribution of systemic functional grammar

(SFG) to the teaching writing skill (Halliday: 1994). • The Importance of Self Assessment• There are still limited studies on SFG framework for self

assessment.

ObjectivesObjectives

1) To identify students’ perception on the function of functional grammar for self-assessment (Is there any difference before and after students learn SFG? Does the way they see their writing change?

2)To identify aspects of functional grammar which is used by students as self-review checklist. (How do students of higher level education assess their writing by using SFG approach)

SignificanceSignificance

• This study will give information how students of higher level education choose and produce meaning.

• Another significant aspect of this study is that students of English education program could use it as a reflection or reflective thinking.

• Through this study, teachers will be aware of the importance of functional grammar in many aspects of language learning. They can apply it to the teaching of language skills, assessment, and to the selection of teaching materials.

Literary ReviewLiterary Review

• Self assessment (Brown ( 2004: 270), Dickinson, 1987; Richard and Frye 1992; Vygotsky 1962 as cited in Wray 1994 as cited in Srimavin and Darasawang, 2004)

• Self assessment as part of adults learners learning (Brown, 2004)

• Self assessment in writing (Brown, 2004)

• Previous Research

Literary ReviewLiterary Review

• Systemic Functional Linguistics:

1) Definition

2) Context of situation

3) Context of culture• Systemic Functional Grammar

1) Transitivity

2) Mood

3) Theme- Rheme system

MethodologyMethodology

• Setting and Participants• Survey

1. Questionnaire: Adapted Amadeus Self-Review from Aluisio, Sandra Maria & Gantenbein 2. Interview

• Documentation of students’ texts

ResultResult

• Through the analysis, it is found that all participants had positive attitudes towards the use of SFG for their self-evaluation.

• They said that their abstract writing before learning SFG is bad, but after that they considered their writing as a better one.

• One participant claims that before learning SFG, she did not know what to evaluate. This indicates that SFG provides an effective analysis-tool for self-assessment.

Conclusion Conclusion

• Students of high level education feel satisfied with the existence of Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG). Most of them believe that SFG is helpful for self-assessment. So far, they evaluate their writing by seeing the macro level or the schematic structure of their writing. Also, they review the cohesiveness and the coherence of their text.

• The result above also indicates that by using SFG, students are able to have self-assessment even though the lecturer does not invite them to do so. Naturally, they become aware what is right for their writing. However, in the future, it is suggested that lecturers or teachers asks their students to have self-assessment to their writing by using systemic functional grammar approach. They can analyze their writing by using transitivity, modality and theme-rheme system as well as schematic structure of a text in order to evaluate their writing product.

Appendices-Interview GuidelinesAppendices-Interview Guidelines

Question No. 1 to 8 deal with respondent perception on their abstracts before being introduced to Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG):

1) How did you assess your abstract before studying SFG? 2) Do you thing your abstract was good?3) Why do you think that your abstract was good?4) Or why do think that your abstract was poor?5)What information did you include in your abstract?6)What were the procedures and stages that you went through when writing your abstract?7) What did you look at when writing an abstract? Did you pay your attention on lexical choice, grammatical feature, or punctuation?8) How did you organize information in your abstract?

Interview GuidelinesInterview Guidelines

Question No. 9 to No. 14 deal with the respondents’ perception on their abstract after being introduced to SFG:9)In what semester did you study functional grammar?10) Did you consider that the abstract you wrote was good?11) What are the contribution of SFG on how you wrote your abstract?12)How did you develop your ideas in your abstract?13)How did you discuss those topics?14)How did you express you ideas or your assessment towards the abstract?15)Hoe did you develop the coherence and unity of your abstract?16)How did you use logical connection?

Questionnaire: Adapted Amadeus Self-Review from Aluisio, Questionnaire: Adapted Amadeus Self-Review from Aluisio, Sandra Maria & GantenbeinSandra Maria & Gantenbein

1. Structure : Components and Strategies Student

A

Student

B

Student

C

Introduction research topic from the research area * * *

Familiarizing terms or objects or processes *

Argumenting about the topic prominence * * *

2. Review Strategies

Historical reviews * * *

Current Trends * * *

General to Particular ordering for citations * * *

Progress in the area

Requirements for the progress in the area

State of the art

Compounding review of the literature and their

gaps

* * *

Citations grouped by approaches

3. Gap Strategies

Unresolved conflict or problem among previous

studies

* * *

Restrictions in previous approaches * * *

Raising Questions * * *

4. Purpose Strategies

Indicating the main purpose * * *

Solving a conflict among the authors

Presenting a novel approach or methodology or

technique

* * *

Presenting an improvement of a research topic *

Presenting an extension of a previous author’s work *

Presenting an alternative approach *

Presenting a comparative approach *

Specifying the purpose * * *

Introducing more purposes *

5. Methodology Strategies

Listing Criteria or Conditions * * *

Describing materials and methods * * *

Justifying choices for materials and methods * * *

6. Result Strategies

Presenting results * * *

Commenting on the results * * *

7. Value Strategies

Stating the value of the work * * *