The Role Macrosystems as Main Proponent of the Ecology Approach in Scientific Writing Learning



Abstract Views
178

Downloads
203

Citations

Share

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

Submitted Apr 18, 2023
Published May 22, 2023
10.24018/ejedu.2023.4.3.663

Abstract viewed = 178 times

Table of Contents

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

The ecological approach is very appropriate for understanding mental, psychosocial, and linguistic development. The aims of this study is to describe the perceptions of sociocultural ecology in agro-industrial societies and their impact on scientific writing competence. Data were obtained by observation and questionnaires on 90 students at the University of Jember as student representatives with an agro-industry environment and their involvement in research and learning texts about agro-industry in the field of writing. The results show that there are groups with high sociocultural ecological perception and knowledge values and groups with low perception and knowledge values. To see the urgency of perception and knowledge of scientific writing competence, these students took a writing test and then the results were examined in terms of reasoning, text organization skills, and procedural knowledge. After the statistical tests were carried out, it was concluded that the perception and knowledge of the agro-industry macrosystem had a significant effect on students' reasoning abilities, significance (sig) 0.032 <0.05; does not have a significant effect on text organization competence with a significance value (sig) 0.067 > 0.05; and has a significant effect on procedural knowledge with a significance value (sig) 0.032 <0.05. These results indicate that the scientific productive competence of language with an ecological approach from the macrosystem aspect needs to pay attention to creativity. Greater efforts are needed to improve the development of writing on the components of unity, continuity, completeness, sequence, and point of view consistency.

Keywords: Ecology Approach Macrosystem Scientific Writing

References

  1. Anggraeni, E. (2017). Contextual-based knowledge creation for agroindustrial innovation. Gadjah Mada International Journal of Business, 19(2), 97–122.
     Google Scholar
  2. https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.057959931619723.
     Google Scholar
  3. Barrot, J. S. (2022). Social media as a language learning environment: a systematic review of the literature (2008-2019). Computer assisted language learning, 35(9), 2534-2562.
     Google Scholar
  4. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2021.1883673.
     Google Scholar
  5. Brannagan, K. B., Dellinger, A., Thomas, J., Mitchell, D., Lewis-Trabeaux, S., & Dupre, S. (2013). Impact of peer teaching on nursing students: perceptions of learning environment, self-efficacy, and knowledge. Nurse Education Today, 33(11), 1440-1447. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2012.11.018.
     Google Scholar
  6. Cáceres, A. M., Gândara, J. P., & Puglisi, M. L. (2011). Scientific writing and the Quality of papers: towards a higher impact. Jornal da Sociedade Brasileira de Fonoaudiologia, 23, 401-406. https://doi.org/10.1590/S2179-64912011000400019.
     Google Scholar
  7. Christensen, J. (2016). A critical reflection of bronfenbrenner’s development ecology model. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 69(1), 22-28. DOI: 10.33225/pec/16.69.22.
     Google Scholar
  8. Cuschieri, S., Grech, V., & Savona-Ventura, C. (2019). WASP (Write a Scientific Paper): Structuring a Scientific Paper. Early Human Development, 128, 114-117.
     Google Scholar
  9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2018.09.011.
     Google Scholar
  10. Davis, R. O., & Vincent, J. (2019). Sometimes more is better: agent gestures, procedural knowledge and the foreign language learner. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(6), 3252-3263. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12732.
     Google Scholar
  11. De La Paz, S. (2005). Effects of Historical Reasoning Instruction and Writing Strategy Mastery in Culturally and Academically Diverse Middle School Classrooms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(2), 139. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.97.2.139.
     Google Scholar
  12. Dowd, J. E., Duncan, T., & Reynolds, J. A. (2015). Concept maps for improved science reasoning and writing: complexity isn’t everything. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 14(4), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.15-06-0138.
     Google Scholar
  13. Doyle, W. (2006). Ecological approaches to classroom management. In Carolyn M. Evertson and Carol S. Weinstein, Handbook of Classroom Management (pp. 97-125) Routledge Handbooks Online. https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9780203874783.ch5.
     Google Scholar
  14. Ebadi, S., & Rahimi, M. (2018). An exploration into the impact of WebQuest-based classroom on EFL learners’ critical thinking and academic writing skills: A mixed-methods study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(5-6), 617-651.https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203874783.
     Google Scholar
  15. Ettekal, A. V., & Mahoney, J. L. (2017). Ecological systems theory. In Pepler, Kylie, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Out-Of-School Learning (pp. 57-64). Sage Publication.
     Google Scholar
  16. Farrell, K. J., Weathers, K. C., Sparks, S. H., Brentrup, J. A., Carey, C. C., Dietze, M. C., ... & San Clements, M. D. (2021). Training macrosystems scientists requires both interpersonal and technical skills. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 19 (1), 39-46. http:// https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.2287.
     Google Scholar
  17. Gal, T. (2017). An ecological model of child and youth participation. Children and Youth Services Review, 79, 57-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2017.05.029.
     Google Scholar
  18. Gastel, B., & Day, R. A. (2022). How to write and publish a scientific paper. ABC-CLIO.
     Google Scholar
  19. Gonzales, M. (2020). Systems thinking for supporting students with special needs and disabilities. Springer Publishing. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-981-33-4558-4_18.
     Google Scholar
  20. Isaeva, T., Malishevskaya, N., Goryunova, E., Lazareva, L., & Churikov, M. (2021). Psychological and pedagogical aspects of simulation technology at English lessons for future engineers of the agro-industrial complex. In E3S Web of Conferences (Vol. 273, p. 12011). EDP Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202127312011.
     Google Scholar
  21. Kolesnichenko, A., Kotliarenko, I., & Nikolaeva, E. (2023, February). Developing communicative skills of specialists of the agro-Industrial complex by means of information technologies. In XV International Scientific Conference “INTERAGROMASH 2022” Global Precision Ag Innovation 2022, Volume 1 (pp. 2249-2258). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-21432-5_246.
     Google Scholar
  22. Lau, J. (2014). Conceptualizing the counseling training environment using bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory. International Journal for the Advancement of Counselling, 36, 423-439.
     Google Scholar
  23. Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D., Arredondo, D. E., Blackburn, G. J., Brandt, R. S., Moffett, C. A., ... & Whisler, J. S. (1997). Dimensions of learning: Teacher's manual. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
     Google Scholar
  24. Melati, E. (2020). College student’s problems in writing paragraph (A Case study at fourth semester students of informatics management of Amik Mitra Gama). ELP (Journal of English Language Pedagogy), 5(1), 27-34.
     Google Scholar
  25. Newman, S. (2018). Vygotsky, Wittgenstein, and sociocultural theory. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 48(3), 350-368.
     Google Scholar
  26. Overgaard, M., & Mogensen, J. (2017). An integrative view on consciousness and introspection. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 8, 129-141.
     Google Scholar
  27. Pelger, S., & Nilsson, P. (2016). Popular science writing to support students’ learning of science and scientific literacy. Research in Science Education, 46, 439-456.
     Google Scholar
  28. Perron, N. C. (2017). Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory. In Wendy K Killiam, Suzanna Degges-White. College student development: Applying Theory to Practice on the Diverse Campus, (pp. 197-207).
     Google Scholar
  29. Prihatiningrum, B., Probosari, N., Sulistiyani, S., Setyorini, D., Budirahardjo, R., & Sukanto, S. (2022). The profile of oral and dental health of children in the agroindustrial environment in jember. Health Notions, 6(11), 458-463. https://doi.org/10.33846/hn61102.
     Google Scholar
  30. Rummler, K., Grabensteiner, C., & Schneider-Stingelin, C. (2020). Mobile learning for homework: Emerging cultural practices in the new media ecology. Comunicar, 28(65), 101-110. https://doi.org/10.3916/C65-2020-09.
     Google Scholar
  31. Saghafi, K., Adel, S. M. R., & Zareian, G. (2017). An ecological study of foreign language writing anxiety in English as a foreign language classroom. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 46(5), 424-440. https://doi.org/10.1080/17475759.2017.1367954.
     Google Scholar
  32. Sari, Y. I., Utomo, D. H., & Astina, I. K. (2021). The effect of problem based learning on problem solving and scientific writing skills. International Journal of Instruction, 14(2), 11-26. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2021.1422a.
     Google Scholar
  33. Siddiqui, K. A. (2020). Analyzing factors influencing the paragraph organization in english language writing of intermediate students. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 32(1), 99-106. http://www.isetl.org/ijtlhe/.
     Google Scholar
  34. Soares, D. A. (2019). Developing Language Literacy Through Literature to Agroindustrial Students. In Н.А. Степанова, Г.В. Ильина, И.А. Кувшинова, Н.И. Левшина, С.Н. Юревичn, Мир детства и образование (pp351-355). Изд-во Магнитогорск. гос. техн. ун-та им. Г.И. (Russian).
     Google Scholar
  35. Tudge, J. R., Mokrova, I., Hatfield, B. E., & Karnik, R. B. (2009). Uses and misuses of Bronfenbrenner's bioecological theory of human development. Journal of family theory & review, 1(4), 198-210.
     Google Scholar
  36. Tudge, J. and Rosa, E.M. (2023). Bronfenbrenner's ecological theory. In S. Hupp and J. Jewell, The Encyclopedia of Child and Adolescent Development (pp. 95-102).
     Google Scholar
  37. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119171492.wecad251.
     Google Scholar
  38. Wuryaningrum, R. (2022, November). Ekologi Sosiokultural Pembelajaran Wacana dalam Konteks Lingkungan Pertanian Industrial. In Prosiding Seminar Nasional Bahasa, Sastra, dan Seni 2 (pp 89-101). Universitas Negeri Jakarta.
     Google Scholar
  39. Wuryaningrum, R., Bektiarso, S., & Suyitno, I. (2020). The effects of knowledge-transforming text on elementary students' declarative, procedural knowledge, and motivation in environmental learning. International Journal of Instruction, 13(1), 567-586. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13137a.
     Google Scholar
  40. Yundayani, A., Susilawati, S., & Chairunnisa, C. (2019). Investigating the Effect of Canva on Students’writing Skills. English Review: Journal of English Education, 7(2), 169-176. https://doi:.org/10.25134/erjee. v7i2.1800.
     Google Scholar
  41. Zhang, H. (2019, June). Construction of Ecosystem Model of English Writing for Minority College Students. 2nd International Seminar on Education Research and Social Science (ISERSS 2019) (pp. 127-130). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/iserss-19.2019.86.
     Google Scholar
  42. Zhang, Y. L. (2018). Using Bronfenbrenner’s ecological approach to understand academic advising with international community college students. Journal of International Students, 8(4), 1764-1782. https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v8i4.230.
     Google Scholar