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

Social values in the VUCA era can be adapted as self-understanding values to survive in various lines. Social categorization is a fundamental process that has important implications for various social phenomena. The role of social categories does not refer to a particular identity. Language learning that applies pragmatic aspects must accommodate assessments that refer to achieving the attitudes needed to face the VUCA era. This research will describe the discourse analysis assessment and observe its implications accurately. This research involved students from Indonesian, English, and Elementary School Teacher Education study programs in the Teacher Training and Education Faculty at Jember University. The results of this research illustrate the application of assessment aspects, namely determining relevant context, determining text implications by comparing social phenomena, conveying understood social values, and abstracting their components in a comment. This research shows that the role of assessment using context-focus reframing is very much needed in learning discourse analysis. Student answers indicate reasoning, accuracy of social values, accuracy of text structure, and argumentation through relevant statements as evaluation to support the comprehensive critical phase of the text after going through the literal and inference phases. In the next stage, perception scores regarding the VUCA era will be obtained based on the texts used as assessment material. This research shows students’ positive response to the assessment through context-focused reframing and character embedding through arguments to show attitudes through the question, “What are the implications for the VUCA era?”.

Introduction

Social values in the VUCA era can be adapted to survive on various fronts. Social categorization is a fundamental process that has important implications for various social phenomena (Bodenhausen & Peery, 2009). Social category roles do not refer to specific identities. On the other hand, identity will appear clear and dominant if a social function is carried out well. Therefore, this change makes things fair for those who can fight and survive, not those who do not accept change.

The conditions of this VUCA context or volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity (Macket al., 2016) have made social conditions change in life and perspective. The easiest indicator to observe is the way of communicating. In various sharper ways, there is a pseudo-identity, described as the impact of rapid advancement in wireless communications and network technology (Singhet al., 2019). Ways of communicating, whether consciously or not, have changed a person’s personality according to their social needs. It is a challenge for society to change their social distance into a person who can fulfill what they want.

In a country with a sociocultural context that discusses ethics, values, and religiosity a lot, ways of communicating are an important part that cannot be ignored. All social groups view it as important, but some social groups discuss it as the main thing and even change their ways of socializing and educating their children. For example, previously government-owned schools in Indonesia were sufficient and representative to teach children about ethics, politeness, and knowledge. Now, in line with increasing information and statements of concern about moral decadence, which seems to be a ghost for parents, they (parents) choose schools based on religion and strengthen them with religious education. This is a good thing because it has a good impact. However, the essence of this problem is not how the guarantee can reassure parents of religion-based education but rather how education must ensure that they retain their character based on positive sociocultural values in any condition. Education is part of business, too, and it is a way of spreading propaganda.

From the explanation above, there needs to be an idea that the focus of understanding social values is not a group of children or people, not because of anxiety or because of up-grading of knowledge. However, it is a priority to advance human civilization with its humanity. One part that can approach all of this is education, which provides awareness of social interaction. Various sciences teach this, including those closer to it, namely linguistics, with the study of pragmatics and discourse analysis.

Triadic in pragmatics provides education on three semiotic relationships: the sign vehicle, the target (the designatum), and the interpreter. From this conception, Morris distinguishes three dimensions of semiosis, namely the syntactic dimension, which is the formal relationship of signs with other signs; the semantic dimension, which is the relationship of signs with their objects; and the pragmatic dimension, which is the relationship of signs with their interpreters (Arafah & Hasyim, 2019). Morris (Bogdanović, 2020) defines semantics as the study of the signification of signs and interpretant behavior without signification, while pragmatics is defined as the study of the origins, use, and influence (effect, impression) of signs in the interpreter’s behavior as a whole. In other words, understanding pragmatics means understanding the background of utterances, the use of utterances, and the impact of using utterances.

John L. Austin has three speech-act theory classifications: locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary. Locutionary is an act of producing words or a series of words (language), illocutionary is an action that displays the use of words or a series of words (language) behind a locutionary action, and perlocutionary is an action aimed at achieving a certain effect in behind elocutionary and illocutionary actions. Illocutionary actions have a force, while perlocutionary actions have an effect (Arafah & Hasyim, 2019). In the text, the author codes his speech actions through presuppositions. Readers must understand the context to recognize presuppositions in the text.

Understanding pragmatics will enable us to understand society’s sociocultural values, the best way to communicate, and choose the best attitude. That is a big challenge in education in the current VUCA era, where people no longer think about the impact of speech or the context of how the speech or text exists. The result of what is done is the goal. On the one hand, a country with a literacy level of people’s reading interest is only 0.001 percent. This means that out of 1,000 Indonesians, only 1 person reads diligently (Damarjati, 2023). Indonesia’s digital literacy is also quite low, namely 62%. That is very low compared to Asian countries (Anam, 2023). The meaning of all this is that Indonesia still needs a good change in the situation. On the one hand, Indonesian people are quite high social media users. Therefore, there needs to be a balanced understanding of positive values to make the younger generation wiser in social interactions.

Pragmatics provides alternative strategies for increasing understanding of context to provide education on how to understand speech and expressions and provide appropriate responses in certain situations. The Vuca era, with high levels of social interaction, has impacted moral decadence. Pragmatics can be the primary medium for building the humanistic character of students (Uripet al., 2019). In communication in the Cyber society, various research shows that there is impoliteness and misunderstanding, which are deliberate negative responses with specific social impacts (Natesyaet al., 2022; Sibaraniet al., 2022). This research uses the paradigm that language education has the task of improving the way of thinking or mental attitude in communicating and building a strong personality, including a resilient attitude or being able to survive in difficult situations and not giving up easily. It is amazing if learning can instill positive character and even social change.

This research provides an overview of promoting social values comprehension in pragmatics learning, which can be done by reframing the focus of discourse context or speech segments. This research describes the “what beyond the text” assessment component by asking about the context that needs to be considered. The understood context consists of SPEAKING or setting participants, act, key, instruments, norms, and genre. Through reframing, students will identify and observe what context needs to be considered and get a share in determining social values that will provide messages in thinking and behaving in the VUCA era.

Methods

Research Procedure

This research describes (1) the initial and general description of the results of applying assessment with context-focus reframing based on student responses and (2) the application of context-focus reframing to answer the question “What beyond the text” in pragmatic assessment to instill social values, (3) implications for understanding social values through context-focus reframing. All three will explain how pragmatics learning and the question component “What are the implications for the VUCA era?” can promote an understanding of social values.

Research shows applying an approach in assessment to understand the social values needed to face the Vuca Era.

In the first stage, students will receive an assessment of social values and ask them to answer as usual based on the context in short answer questions. Then, they were asked to respond to these social values.

In the second stage, students receive questions using a context-focus reframing model on what is beyond the text by completing several reframing stages before answering the social values they will write about. After that, they will describe what social value they have.

These two assessments were carried out at Jember University using a hybrid model. Previously, lecturers at the University of Jember and the State University of Surabaya validated the test model offline in stage two. Tests are applied in class. The online test is implemented using Google Forms. The test material has several themes related to social values. The theme includes respecting diversity, preserving the environment, and attitudes toward social, economic, and technological change. These three themes are very representative of providing education in the VUCA era.

Research Subjects

The students involved in the research were 90. They were in third and fourth-year positions at Jember University. The basic concept of this research is assessment for learning. In this way, they will get meaningful information from the assessments. They consist of students from the Indonesian, English, and Elementary Teacher Education departments. These three study programs have language lecture subjects with various concentrations in character education and the use of language in social life. The comparison is 40% from the Indonesian language education department, 40% from English language education, and 20% from elementary school teacher education.

Data Collection Methods

Data was collected by giving two tests: a test without context-focused reframing and a second with context-focused reframing. 40% of test participants attended class, and 60% took the test online—the test instrument questions understanding the social values found in text or conversation.

Research Instrument

This research instrument consists of two types of questions. First, the test answers questions on social values and comments based on the case. The characteristics of the first type of question can be observed in Table I.

Discourse theme Questions about context Questions about social values
“Explain the context and presuppositions in the text.” “Explain social values in the text, provide comments.”
Unity in diversity (Subtheme: Religious tolerance)
Effort in winning competitions and facing tasks (Subtheme: Resilience)
Language as a tool of social control (Subtheme: Responding to negative comments from netizens)
Language as a tool of social control (Subtheme: Interaction with family and surrounding environment)
Table I. Characteristics of the Test Questions in Type 1

The next assessment is context-focused reframing (see Table II). In this assessment, there are several stages that students need to carry out. At this stage, students take the test by (1) reading dialogue or text and (2) determining the context focus of the SPEAKING context (setting, participant, act, key, informant, instruments, norm, and genre; Johnstone & Marcellino, 2010). This focus must be thought about and deconstructed in students’ minds by relating it to several events outside the text or dialogue. After that, students can explain their values and comments after the “reframing” stage in the second step.

Discourse theme Context-focused reframing Questions about context Questions about social values
What context stands out from this discourse? What real events can be used as a reference? Are there any socio-cultural values that can be linked to this text? What are the context and presuppositions in the text? What and how is the social value of this text?
Unity in diversity (Subtheme: Religious tolerance)
Effort in winning competitions and facing tasks(Subtheme: Resilience)
Language as a tool of social control (Subtheme: Responding to negative comments from netizens)
Language as a tool of social control (Subtheme: Interaction with family and surrounding environment)
Table II. Content of the Context-Focused Reframing Stag

The test stage consists of reading activities (see Fig. 1), carrying out context-focus reframing, explaining social values, and compiling abstractions.

Fig. 1. Reading activities.

Data analysis was done by observing the quality of students’ answers through the assessment rubric (see Table III). The rubric applied is given a score of 1 to 3 (insufficient, sufficient, and good), with a description that needs to be written for the lecturer’s consideration. The rubric contains (1) reasoning, (2) accuracy of social values found, (3) accuracy of explanation, and (4) explanation with appropriate event context.

Elements of assessment Rubric description Score
1 2 3
Reasoning Exposing causal relationships and accuracy in explaining the core of the problem
Accuracy of determining social value Identify and analyze the social values studied
Accuracy of explanation Explain in detail and accurately
Relationship of statements with other contexts as evaluation Evaluate based on the context of other phenomena and appropriate socio-cultural values
Table III. Rubric Assessment

Students have been informed of this assessment rubric, and it is stated as a condition for taking the test. Contextual reframing is an important aspect of the assessment that carries out analysis. The analysis was carried out qualitatively by examining phenomena based on pedagogical concepts, especially aspects of discovery (inquiry).

Research Results

In this section, the results of the application and discussion of the findings of the application of context reframing in pragmatic assessment are discussed. The results of this study discuss the research focus (1) important aspects in assessment using context reframing, (2) the role of context reframing in completing SPEAKING studies used in learning the meaning and intent of texts, (3) recommendations and significance of applying context reframing as an assessment alternative.

Context Reframing as an Alternative Assessment Unit

The test results show the significance of context reframing in the assessment. In the first test, students answered questions without the context reframing step. The questions did not refer to probing with detailed context reframing. Of the 90 students who answered the question, 55, or 49.5%, said they had difficulty developing ideas to demonstrate social values. The assessment results showed weaknesses in the accuracy of determining social value and difficulties in showing the relationship of statements with other contexts as evaluation. Their reasoning is quite good: exposing causal relationships and accurately explaining the problem’s core. They can show rationalization between sentences. The following are student score data on the first test (without context reframing) and the second (via context reframing).

The test results show that, in general, students have good reasoning and sufficient ability to explain. Regarding accuracy in social value, they have doubts about answering. This also happens to their ability to construct relationships of statements with other contexts as evaluation. These results show that reasoning abilities must be supported by understanding the context. Students need to get a set of reference questions or descriptions of thought patterns to understand the context and phenomena behind the text. The test results show that students’ abilities were 70% in the first test, and in the second test, reasoning abilities moved to 80%. The ability to explain social values in the first test was low at 25%. The accuracy of text structure in the first test was 60%, and in the second test, 80%. Then, at the end of the process of compiling relevant statements about the implications of the text, the first test is 40%, and the second test is 70%.

This research is only a preliminary illustration to show the effectiveness of context reframing. Of course, this assessment needs to be studied more analytically. This test is applied to get students’ initial responses before getting the test guided by context reframing and after getting questions guided by context reframing in the learning cycle model. This is an action carried out and described as a good practice learning activity.

Description of the Results from Test I

The characteristics of reasoning without context reframing action show contextual reasoning. Students make the relationship between sentences the focus of the context. This shows an understanding of pragmatic semantics and accuracy of determining social value in Test I shows weaknesses in students’ ability to explain what social values can be understood as components of understanding in the VUCA era. The data in Fig. 2 shows that 25% of students understand social values and explain based on general things they know. Students’ ability to explain their answers is also weak in the aspect of the relationship of statements with other contexts as evaluation. It shows that the understood context has not been linked to the text that is read. The key to their problem is their weakness in criticizing the text and building a mindset regarding the discourse context. On the topic of unity in diversity, they see it as a motto, nationalism, and the material studied at school is based on the theme of Pancasila (the foundation of the Indonesian state). Therefore, the social value obtained from the text becomes weak and lacks focus because the presuppositions contained in the text are not understood. The text used in Test I is given below:

Fig. 2. Discourse comprehension ability scores.

“Differences in ethnicity, religion, and racial groups no longer need to be a problem if we realize that Indonesia is a diverse or diverse country. Difference is beautiful is a sentence that cannot be considered an everyday sentence. In that sentence, we have the challenge of accepting differences. There are many problems because we feel our tribe is more worthy than others. If all humans were aware that God must have a reason why someone was created in tribe A, with skin colour B, and culture C. Humans are born with the culture that exists, these are all valuable values that must be realized. Do not insult and degrade other tribes, other religions, and other cultures because we have the same human rights.” (Text I)

In this text, students see advice and motivation to respect other people regardless of ethnicity, religion, race, and issues of origin and ethnicity. Students see this as an implication of Indonesia as a region with varied ethnicities and cultures.

Description of the Results from Test II

The second test showed that students’ descriptions, expositions, and arguments about “what the implications are in the VUCA era” were increasingly critical and creative. The results of student work for Test 1 show students’ ability to expose the implications of the VUCA era, especially in cyber society, which uses language directly but does not need to show oneself or one’s body. Efforts to show presuppositions in the text were responded to well. Based on Text I, students show that presuppositions arise from the statement in Text I. These presuppositions are (1) there are problems triggered by differences in ethnicity, religion, and race, (2) there are social groups who feel that their tribe has higher value and is more worthy than other tribes, (3) there are groups that are not yet aware of human rights.

Through these presuppositions (from Table I), students are guided to know what is happening and then use technological media to look for news, phenomena, or facts. Thus, students have applied the environment as a learning resource to strengthen their understanding of discourse when faced with social values and phenomena and have to explain argumentative statements about implications. This shows a development towards critical thinking in analysis and evaluation.

The assessment in this topic shows that there are learning cycle steps completed by this assessment. In general, these steps are first to explore materials, then to construct a concept, and finally to apply or extend the concept to other situations (Marek, 2008). This step is implemented by making efforts for students to conduct assessments by finding the right context, accurately showing social values, and explaining the implications in the VUCA era through sentences related to social phenomena. This assessment represents the suitability of steps in the learning cycle, learning from the environmental context and critical thinking.

Application of Context Reframing Assessment

Implementing the context reframing assessment is carried out using cycle learning. In this discussion, this model is not the focus. What is focused on is the discussion of the reframing stage in the assessment. However, the reframing stage is carried out in the learning cycle syntax. The reframing stage carried out by students is the learning cycle model stage, which consists of the phases outlined in Fig. 3.

Fig. 3. Chart of the seven stages/phases of the learning cycle.

In the elicitation phase, the lecturer asks questions. In this case, the lecturer asks questions about context in determining meaning and the role of context in determining the type and function of speech. The next phase is the engagement phase, in which the lecturer arouses interest by presenting pictures and exposition of the text or discourse that will be assigned and relating it to everyday contexts. In the exploration phase, students formulate hypotheses and record identification results. In the explanation phase, the lecturer explains the context and the context of linguistic elements (deixis, implicature, and speech acts used) and discusses cases in discourse as reframing. In the elaboration phase, students do reframing. Students apply context-focused reframing by formulating the concept of what context stands out and needs to be studied, other events that can be referred to, and socio-cultural values that can be linked to the observed text. In the evaluation phase, students convey the results of their understanding of the context’s meaning and the socio-cultural values that have been successfully understood from the question text. In the extension phase, students and lecturers conceptualize context analysis and social values that can be applied in the VUCA era. Students compose text abstractions in this phase by connecting them with several real events. They will develop concepts of discourse, context, and critical reading and analyze social phenomena.

These steps are formulated based on learning research using the learning cycle model conducted by Aprianingsihet al. (2020) and Harefa (2020). The learning cycle model is a set of activity stages that, in turn, contribute to the mastery of competencies that need to be achieved by students in activity-oriented teaching and learning activities (Harefa, 2020) or in a short phrase, it can be referred to as a model based on a constructivist layer. Discourse learning requires these layers to support thinking skills and critically convey ideas and opinions based on facts. Moreover, proof in the extended phase will help students develop an objective attitude in assessing texts. Students must stand up because the lecturer is the facilitator in class (Febriani & Al Ghozali, 2020). Learning by strengthening cognitive aspects based on the environment is the focus of the learning cycle (Asmuni, 2020). In discourse analysis and pragmatics, environmental meaning is supported by understanding the context. Exploring the context in this research was carried out by reframing.

The learning cycle is a way to structure inquiry (Marek, 2008). Structuring inquiry in university learning requires special stimuli that help students conduct investigations and develop critical thinking.

This lesson’s context reframing assessment rubric consists of suitability for determining context, suitability of other texts used as comparisons, and accuracy in showing relationships between texts with facts and reasoning. For example, in analyzing the discourse of the young generation as a social group that carries out many white group actions, or in Indonesian, it is called the white group (not using voting rights to have a president and people’s representatives in general elections), students must show the context by reframing well.

Statements in the discourse must be exposed in detail regarding (1) the number of young people who are in the white group based on statistical data, (2) the context of the answers to perceptions of the young generation who are in the white group, (3) relationship between discourses on the same theme. One of the discourses was one party’s concern about the young generation’s low willingness to vote. In this way, students can show what is meant by the statement about the young generation as a social group that carries out many white group actions. Students must learn to look critically at the meaning of political news that discusses white groups. Therefore, they must be able to provide statements based on statistical data. Statistical data on the influence of the white group on election results must be revealed in detail. They need to look at political parties’ concerns about increasing white groups. This news could also have implications for advising the younger generation to learn democracy in Indonesia. Students must also see the possibility of diverting political issues so that there are core problems that are being covered up through white group issues.

Next, to get a score in the pragmatics assessment, students must write “what the implications are in the VUCA era”. The implications in this assessment are language structure and characteristics and the implications of social values (see Table IV).

Implication based on discourse Social value discourse
• Opinions are presented like facts in news sentences, not question sentences.
• Deixis refers to a group of people (the younger generation) who are absurd because it is not clear where and who. • The younger generation must be critical in becoming citizens, especially in elections.
• Mental verbs are indicated by affirm, state, and estimate, which show that this is not a valid fact.
• In a news story, argumentation and persuasion play a big role in conveying interest.
Table IV. Discourse Implications

At least there are neutral social values that can be expressed. In the VUCA era, attitudes that show volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity must be responded to positively.

The Advantages of Context-Focus Reframing Actions in Learning

To discuss context reframing, we can look at Piaget’s theory of cognitive development (Huitt & Hummel, 2003) Piaget’s theory focuses on theories of development and learning. Development focuses on learner abilities, learning focuses on realizing these abilities, and education, in theory, is extrinsic. Cognitive and behavioural theories reflect the emergence of various psychological structures, units, or organized thought patterns that influence how students interpret information (Lefa, 2014).

Cognitive development learning features can be integrated into the context-focused reframing method (see Table V). Context is important in discourse analysis (Bhatiaet al., 2008). In language, there are important connections among saying (informing), doing (action), and being (identity). Context is an important notion for understanding language-in-use and the nature of discourse analysis (which is, after all, the study of language-in-use; Gee, 2014). This concept shows that context knowledge consists of several levels (see Fig. 4).

Theoretical framework Framework’s learning features
Piaget’s concept of context(Lefa, 2014) • Providing a variety of experiences
• Interaction with the environment
• Providing a variety of experiences
Context reframing in discourse analysis • Text and context exploration
• Context reframing
• Social value abstraction
Table V. Integration of Piaget’s Cognitive Development Theory into the Context-Focused Reframing Method

Fig. 4. Context understanding levels.

Context reframing is at the same level as context implication, a fundamental text element. To reach this level, students must understand the previous three levels and apply the text and context exploration, reframing, and social value abstraction stages.

To effectively communicate, students must be able to reframe the context of a given phenomenon, particularly in the areas of Ends (E), Act (A), and Key (K). Reframing the context involves understanding the underlying meaning of the text. According to Brassell and Rasinski (2008), reading well means comprehending written text and deriving meaning from it. Reframing the context requires inferential understanding, which leads to critical comprehension. Fig. 5 highlights three levels of reading comprehension: literal, inferential, and critical. While inferential understanding is typically sufficient, it may also lead to critical comprehension.

Fig. 5. Three-level taxonomy of comprehension (Brassell & Rasinski, 2008).

Conclusion

The research explains two things: First, the results of applying tests with context reframing and without context reframing. In that case, we only get an initial picture of students’ tendencies to perceive context reframing as a way to understand texts and carry out discourse analysis assessments more accurately. Second, this research discusses why there is a good response from student test results to reframing content. This is discussed descriptively from the components of providing a variety of experiences, interaction with the environment, and providing a variety of experiences. In the learning cycle syntax, context reframing is applied. Context reframing shows Piaget’s phases of knowledge construction, the level of context understanding from literal, inferential, to critical comprehension. Students need to work on the context reframing stage to implement assessments that produce understanding scores in the VUCA era. Thus, what is written as a reflection on one’s attitude towards the VUCA era is based on critical thinking and understanding the context. This exposure is an alternative to add positive character values in facing the VUCA era and, on the one hand, improves critical argumentation.

References

  1. Paling rendah di ASEAN, tingkat literasi digital RI Cuma 62% [Lowest in ASEAN, RI’s digital literacy level is only 62%]. CNBC Indonesia. 2023;.
     Google Scholar
  2. Pengaruh model pembelajaran learning cycle 7e terhadap hasil belajar dan motivasi siswa kimia kelas x sman 1 brang rea tahun pelajaran 20119/2020 [The effect of the learning cycle 7E learning model on the learning outcomes and motivation of Class X chemistry students at SMAN 1 brang rea for the 20119/2020 academic year]. Spin Jurnal Kimia & Pendidikan Kimia. 2020;2(2):146-62.
     Google Scholar
  3. Linguistic functions of emoji in social media communication. Opcion. 2019;35(24):558-74.
     Google Scholar
  4. Penerapan model pembelajaran learning cycle 5e untuk meningkatkan aktivitas dan penguasaan konsep siswa pada mata pelajaran PAI dan budi pekerti di SMA negeri 1 selong [Application of the learning cycle 5e learning model to improve student activity and concept mastery in Islamic education and character subjects at SMA negeri 1 selong]. Jurnal Penelitian dan Pengembangan Pendidikan. 2020;7(3).
     Google Scholar
  5. Advances in Discourse Studies. Routledge Press; 2008.
     Google Scholar
  6. Social categorization and stereotyping in vivo: The VUCA challenge. Social and Personality Psychology Compass. 2009;3(2):133-51.
     Google Scholar
  7. Philosophical implications of Morris’ semiotic theory. Filozofija i Društvo. 2020;31(1):108-25.
     Google Scholar
  8. Comprehension that Works: Taking Students Beyond Ordinary Understanding to Deep Comprehension. Shell Education; 2008.
     Google Scholar
  9. Tingkat literasi Indonesia sebetulnya tidak buruk-buruk amat, tapi. [Indonesia’s literacy level actually isn’t very bad, but. ] Barisan. 2023;.
     Google Scholar
  10. Peningkatan sikap tanggung jawab dan prestasi belajar melalui model pembelajaran kolaboratif tipe cycle 7E [Increasing the attitude of responsibility and learning achievement through the 7E cycle type collaborative learning model]. Premiere Educandum: Jurnal Pendidikan Dasar dan Pembelajaran. 2020;10(2):175-86.
     Google Scholar
  11. An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Methods. Routledge; 2014.
     Google Scholar
  12. Peningkatan prestasi belajar ipa siswa pada model pembelajaran learning cycle dengan materi energi dan perubahannya [Improving students’ science learning achievement in the learning cycle learning model with energy materials and its changes]. Trapsila: Jurnal Pendidikan Dasar. 2020;2(1):25-36.
     Google Scholar
  13. Piaget’s theory of cognitive development. Educational Psychology Interactive. 2003;3(2):1-5.
     Google Scholar
  14. Sage Handbook of Sociolinguistics. Sage; 2010.
     Google Scholar
  15. The piaget theory of cognitive development: Educational implications. Educational Psychology. 2014;1(1):1-8.
     Google Scholar
  16. Managing in a VUCA World. Springer; 2016.
     Google Scholar
  17. Why the learning cycle?. Journal of Elementary Science Education. 2008;20(3):63-9.
     Google Scholar
  18. Impoliteness on Youtube comments towards yusuf mansur about investment scam. Jurnal Pendidikan dan Konseling (JPDK). 2022;4(5):5863-7.
     Google Scholar
  19. Impoliteness strategies on anies baswedan’s Twitter comments. Jurnal Pendidikan dan Konseling (JPDK). 2022;4(5):5109-16.
     Google Scholar
  20. Pseudo-identity based secure communication scheme for vehicular ad-hoc networks. 2019;:1-6.
     Google Scholar
  21. The role of pragmatics in developing humanistic character of french language students. 2019;:551-6.
     Google Scholar