Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.408
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jomantara International Journal of Art and Culture
Puncochar, Judith
Unknown Affiliation
Arts Humanities Languange, Linguistic, Communication & Media Social Sciences Other

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
Enhancing Student Engagement and Writing in Language Education Puncochar, Judith
JOMANTARA Vol. 5 No. 1 (2025): Vol. 5 No. 1 January 2025
Publisher : Universitas Pasundan

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.23969/jijac.v5i1.22324

Abstract

The topic of eliminating vague terms in student writing is used to exemplify three powerful instructionalmethods in language education: extensive instructor feedback, iterative draft writing, and student peer review. Together, these three teaching methods increase clarity of student writing and reduce the considerable time needed for effective instructor feedback. The instructor provided biweekly feedback on cumulative drafts written by each individual student. Instructor feedback drew student attention to vague pronouns with one-to-many representations (e.g., “this” and “that” [i.e., “ini” and “itu” in Bahasa Indonesia]). Students removed vague terms, edited sentences with more descriptive terms, and wrote a new section for their next draft. The process of instructor feedback and student editing and adding new writing was repeated throughout the semester. Near the end of the semester, students use their knowledge and writing skills in a structured peer review guided by a rubric. Ninety percent of students claimed removing vague terms was the most important writing strategy that they had learned during their academic careers. The three instructional methods of instructor feedback, student cumulative practice with writing, and student peer review apply to a variety ofsubjects, topics, and themes with a goal of improving student writing in language education.
Teaching and Assessing Analytical Thinking Puncochar, Judith
JOMANTARA Vol. 5 No. 2 (2025): Vol. 5 No. 2 July 2025
Publisher : Universitas Pasundan

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.23969/jijac.v5i2.31148

Abstract

The focus of this paper is on the pivotal role of analytical thinking in student education, irrespective of the curriculum. Teaching analytical thinking is a vital instructional skill and a foundation of student learning. Instructors should be well-versed in teaching analytical thinking, as it forms the bedrock of critical thinking and problem-solving. Despite not being explicitly listed as one of the seven high-impact teaching practices in undergraduate education by Chickering & Gamson (1987), critical thinking and analytical thinking are frequently cited as Student Learning Outcomes in academic courses and programs in the United States (Grandinetti & Puncochar, 2019; Peñaloza & Puncochar, 2019; Puncochar, Barch, Albrecht, & Klett, 2018). University instructors often claim that they incorporate critical thinking into their teaching to improve student learning outcomes (Janssen et al., 2019). In 2014, Oceans of Data outlined the specific skills and knowledge required to compete in a big-data-centered economy. Analytical thinking ranked highest in both knowledge AND skills. The results were validated by nearly 100 data analyst peers (see Krumhansl, 2016). Although analytical thinking ranked higher than critical thinking in both knowledge and skills, this paper posits that analytical thinking is a necessary precursor to critical thinking and problem-solving.
Co-Authors