Studies in English Language and Education
Studies in English Language and Education (SiELE) is a peer-reviewed academic journal published by the Department of English Education, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Syiah Kuala, Banda Aceh, Indonesia. The journal presents research and development in the field of teaching and learning of English language, general linguistics and literature. Authors must register to this journal before submitting their work and they must follow the Author Guidelines of the journal. Submissions that do not adhere to the guidelines provided will be rejected. Please submit your article through the online submission of this journal. You may address further inquiries to the Editor at sielejournal@usk.ac.id. From 2014-2020, SiELE Journal published twice a year, in March and September. From 2021 onwards, it publishes three times a year in January, May, and September. The journals have a policy of “Zero Tolerance on Plagiarism”. We recommend that authors check their articles with plagiarism prevention tools (ithenticate.com, turnitin.com, etc.) before submission.
Articles
10 Documents
Search results for
, issue
"Vol 1, No 2 (2014)"
:
10 Documents
clear
<![CDATA[Assessing Writing: A Review of the Main Trends ]]>
<![CDATA[Mohammad Ali Salmani Nodoushan]]>
<![CDATA[ Studies in English Language and Education Vol 1, No 2 (2014) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Universitas Syiah Kuala ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (385.483 KB)
|
DOI: 10.24815/siele.v1i2.1831
<![CDATA[As a language skill, writing has had, still has and will continue to have an important role in shaping the scientific structure of human life in that it is the medium through which scientific content is stored, retained, and transmitted. It has therefore been a major concern for writing teachers and researchers to find a reliable method for evaluating and ensuring quality writing. This paper addresses the different approaches to scoring writing and classifies them into a priori scoring systems (including holistic and analytic scoring), and a posteriori trait-based scoring systems (including primary-trait and multiple-trait scoring).]]>
<![CDATA[The Effect of the Peer-Review Technique on Students’ Writing Ability ]]>
<![CDATA[Martin Kustati]]>;
<![CDATA[Yuhardi Yuhardi]]>
<![CDATA[ Studies in English Language and Education Vol 1, No 2 (2014) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Universitas Syiah Kuala ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (614.581 KB)
|
DOI: 10.24815/siele.v1i2.2671
<![CDATA[The aim of this study was to investigate if there could be a significant positive effect by using Peer-Review Technique (PRT) on students‟ ability in writing English. An experimental research method was used in this study. A writing test based on the indicators of Jacobs et al. (1981) was completed by 65 undergraduate students in English from the English Department at the Faculty of Education and Teacher Training in the State Institute for Islamic Studies “Imam Bonjol‟ at Padang. The students were divided into two groups: an experimental group (n=33) and a control group (n=32). Both groups were similar in terms of academic level, the given writing task and their target language [English] proficiency. The experimental participants were introduced to Peer-Review Technique in essay writing sessions whilst the control group participants were taught through the teacher’s traditional feedback (TTF) whereby students worked individually to produce their texts. The findings showed that PRT gave a significant improvement effect on the students‟ writing abilities. This study is expected to serve as (1) data for further developing PRT; (2) input for lecturers in writing to develop more effective and innovative learning; and (3) additional material for the development of critical and cooperative learning theories in teaching writing.]]>
<![CDATA[A Study of Error Analysis from Students’ Sentences in Writing ]]>
<![CDATA[Rizki Ananda]]>;
<![CDATA[Sofyan A. Gani]]>;
<![CDATA[Rosnani Sahardin]]>
<![CDATA[ Studies in English Language and Education Vol 1, No 2 (2014) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Universitas Syiah Kuala ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (577.61 KB)
|
DOI: 10.24815/siele.v1i2.1828
<![CDATA[This study was to investigate the types of sentence errors and their frequency made by first grade students from a high school in Banda Aceh in their writing of English. The participants for this study were 44 first graders chosen by random sampling. The research method used was quantitative as the data was analyzed with a statistical procedure. The data was obtained from written tests for a descriptive text entitled “My school” of 120-140 word length. This study found that three out of four sentence errors in the students’ writing were fragmented sentences whilst nearly a quarter of the errors were run-on or comma splice sentences. There were only a few choppy sentence errors and no stringy sentence errors. The data revealed five types of fragmented sentences: these were the absence of a subject, the absence of a verb, the absence of both a subject and a verb, the absence of a verb in a dependent clause, and the absence of an independent clause.]]>
<![CDATA[The Role of Negotiation of Meaning in L2 Interactions:An Analysis from the Perspective of Long’s Interaction Hypothesis ]]>
<![CDATA[Masrizal Masrizal]]>
<![CDATA[ Studies in English Language and Education Vol 1, No 2 (2014) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Universitas Syiah Kuala ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (578.949 KB)
|
DOI: 10.24815/siele.v1i2.1829
<![CDATA[This study examines how negotiation of meaning contributes to second language interaction. The discussion in this study is based on Michael H. Long’s 1996 Interaction Hypothesis suggesting that environment contributes to the development of second language acquisition. Long proposes that environmental contributions to acquisition are mediated by selective attention and the learner’s processing capacity during negotiation for meaning. To support this belief, recent empirical studies are also presented in this article. Three negotiation for meaning strategies are discussed in this study to mirror and provide evidence for Long’s proposal, including several excerpts from conversations collected from daily natural conversations and other recorded sources. The strategies include (1) clarification requests, (2) confirmation checks, and (3) comprehension checks. The study has been able to prove that learner’s L2 acquisition takes advantage of environmental contributions mediated by selective attention and the learner’s developing L2 processing capacity brought together during negotiation of meaning.]]>
<![CDATA[Managing an Effective English Language Laboratory in a Polytechnic ]]>
<![CDATA[Marlina Marzuki]]>
<![CDATA[ Studies in English Language and Education Vol 1, No 2 (2014) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Universitas Syiah Kuala ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (289.05 KB)
|
DOI: 10.24815/siele.v1i2.1830
<![CDATA[Polytechnic graduates are required to have applied skills as well as communication skills in English. In most of the polytechnics in Indonesia, English courses are served as compulsory courses for students and in some institutions language laboratories are established in order to support their students. To run an effective language laboratory there are, at least four aspects that need to be considered, namely lab facilities, standard operating rules, students, and lab coordinators. Of all the agents, lab coordinators are classified as internal factors that can easily be empowered by the institutions in the management of the language lab. This paper aims to discuss leadership and management roles in improving an English Language Laboratory. The discussions are based on literature reviews, personal experiences and observations gained by the author whilst working at Politeknik Negeri Lhokseumawe for the last decade plus perceptions of teachers and administrators who have worked in the lab. Regarding the leadership and management in the language laboratory there are four items that should be improved: management of leadership, professional development, rewards, and the concept of educational management.]]>
<![CDATA[The Role of Negotiation of Meaning in L2 Interactions:An Analysis from the Perspective of Long’s Interaction Hypothesis ]]>
<![CDATA[Masrizal Masrizal]]>
<![CDATA[ Studies in English Language and Education Vol 1, No 2 (2014) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Universitas Syiah Kuala ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.24815/siele.v1i2.1829
<![CDATA[This study examines how negotiation of meaning contributes to second language interaction. The discussion in this study is based on Michael H. Long’s 1996 Interaction Hypothesis suggesting that environment contributes to the development of second language acquisition. Long proposes that environmental contributions to acquisition are mediated by selective attention and the learner’s processing capacity during negotiation for meaning. To support this belief, recent empirical studies are also presented in this article. Three negotiation for meaning strategies are discussed in this study to mirror and provide evidence for Long’s proposal, including several excerpts from conversations collected from daily natural conversations and other recorded sources. The strategies include (1) clarification requests, (2) confirmation checks, and (3) comprehension checks. The study has been able to prove that learner’s L2 acquisition takes advantage of environmental contributions mediated by selective attention and the learner’s developing L2 processing capacity brought together during negotiation of meaning.]]>
<![CDATA[Managing an Effective English Language Laboratory in a Polytechnic ]]>
<![CDATA[Marlina Marzuki]]>
<![CDATA[ Studies in English Language and Education Vol 1, No 2 (2014) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Universitas Syiah Kuala ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.24815/siele.v1i2.1830
<![CDATA[Polytechnic graduates are required to have applied skills as well as communication skills in English. In most of the polytechnics in Indonesia, English courses are served as compulsory courses for students and in some institutions language laboratories are established in order to support their students. To run an effective language laboratory there are, at least four aspects that need to be considered, namely lab facilities, standard operating rules, students, and lab coordinators. Of all the agents, lab coordinators are classified as internal factors that can easily be empowered by the institutions in the management of the language lab. This paper aims to discuss leadership and management roles in improving an English Language Laboratory. The discussions are based on literature reviews, personal experiences and observations gained by the author whilst working at Politeknik Negeri Lhokseumawe for the last decade plus perceptions of teachers and administrators who have worked in the lab. Regarding the leadership and management in the language laboratory there are four items that should be improved: management of leadership, professional development, rewards, and the concept of educational management.]]>
<![CDATA[Assessing Writing: A Review of the Main Trends ]]>
<![CDATA[Mohammad Ali Salmani Nodoushan]]>
<![CDATA[ Studies in English Language and Education Vol 1, No 2 (2014) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Universitas Syiah Kuala ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.24815/siele.v1i2.1831
<![CDATA[As a language skill, writing has had, still has and will continue to have an important role in shaping the scientific structure of human life in that it is the medium through which scientific content is stored, retained, and transmitted. It has therefore been a major concern for writing teachers and researchers to find a reliable method for evaluating and ensuring quality writing. This paper addresses the different approaches to scoring writing and classifies them into a priori scoring systems (including holistic and analytic scoring), and a posteriori trait-based scoring systems (including primary-trait and multiple-trait scoring).]]>
<![CDATA[The Effect of the Peer-Review Technique on Students’ Writing Ability ]]>
<![CDATA[Martin Kustati]]>;
<![CDATA[Yuhardi Yuhardi]]>
<![CDATA[ Studies in English Language and Education Vol 1, No 2 (2014) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Universitas Syiah Kuala ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.24815/siele.v1i2.2671
<![CDATA[The aim of this study was to investigate if there could be a significant positive effect by using Peer-Review Technique (PRT) on students‟ ability in writing English. An experimental research method was used in this study. A writing test based on the indicators of Jacobs et al. (1981) was completed by 65 undergraduate students in English from the English Department at the Faculty of Education and Teacher Training in the State Institute for Islamic Studies “Imam Bonjol‟ at Padang. The students were divided into two groups: an experimental group (n=33) and a control group (n=32). Both groups were similar in terms of academic level, the given writing task and their target language [English] proficiency. The experimental participants were introduced to Peer-Review Technique in essay writing sessions whilst the control group participants were taught through the teacher’s traditional feedback (TTF) whereby students worked individually to produce their texts. The findings showed that PRT gave a significant improvement effect on the students‟ writing abilities. This study is expected to serve as (1) data for further developing PRT; (2) input for lecturers in writing to develop more effective and innovative learning; and (3) additional material for the development of critical and cooperative learning theories in teaching writing.]]>
<![CDATA[A Study of Error Analysis from Students’ Sentences in Writing ]]>
<![CDATA[Rizki Ananda]]>;
<![CDATA[Sofyan A. Gani]]>;
<![CDATA[Rosnani Sahardin]]>
<![CDATA[ Studies in English Language and Education Vol 1, No 2 (2014) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Universitas Syiah Kuala ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.24815/siele.v1i2.1828
<![CDATA[This study was to investigate the types of sentence errors and their frequency made by first grade students from a high school in Banda Aceh in their writing of English. The participants for this study were 44 first graders chosen by random sampling. The research method used was quantitative as the data was analyzed with a statistical procedure. The data was obtained from written tests for a descriptive text entitled “My school” of 120-140 word length. This study found that three out of four sentence errors in the students’ writing were fragmented sentences whilst nearly a quarter of the errors were run-on or comma splice sentences. There were only a few choppy sentence errors and no stringy sentence errors. The data revealed five types of fragmented sentences: these were the absence of a subject, the absence of a verb, the absence of both a subject and a verb, the absence of a verb in a dependent clause, and the absence of an independent clause.]]>
