Article Sidebar

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 3 Download : 4

Main Article Content

Abstract

Writing academically and reading are parts of literacy that it is embedded in higher education. Therefore, it is important to assess how students’ ability can develop critical thinking regarding specific issues using hedging language. The purpose of this study was to evaluate students' critical thinking skills by looking at how effectively they hedgingly constructed their writings. Moreover, this study also explored the students' viewpoints about the use of hedging in their academic pursuits. This research employed a qualitative approach. The data was collected from students’ essays from the English Department in Surabaya and the results of a semi-structured interview with three students. Hyland (1998) identified eight categories of hedging, which were used in the text analysis. The study's findings demonstrate that students employed the majority of hedging strategies when writing their essays. However, the most used is modal auxiliaries, which focus more on the specific subject being taught and utilize a variety of tools to communicate their ideas. Moreover, it is found that different students provided varied reasons for employing hedging, such as reducing criticism, avoiding precision methods, or maintaining a particular writing style. Overall, the research underscores the multifaceted role of hedging in shaping both the content and perception of students' academic essays.

Keywords

Academic literacyEssayingHedgingWriting

Article Details

How to Cite
Dewi, R. F., Andania, R. A. ., & Tlonaen, Z. A. . (2024). Academic Literacy Practices: The Language of Hedging in Indonesian EFL Students’ Essays. Inspiring: English Education Journal, 7(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.35905/inspiring.v7i1.8961
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Alonso, R. A. (2019). A multicompetence perspective of hedging in second language academic writing. Journal of Linguistics, Philology, and Translation, 45, 58–78. https://doi.org/10.7764/onomazein.45.02
  2. Andrews, R. (2015). Critical Thinking and/or Argumentation in Higher Education. In The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Thinking in Higher Education (p. 49). USA: Palgrave Macmillan.
  3. Anggerani, A., Mujahidah, M., Hidayat, W., & Asni, Y. (2022). The Effect of Project-Based Learning (PBL) on Lessons Written in The Second Grade of SMPN 1 Parepare. Inspiring: English Education Journal, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.35905/inspiring.v5i1.2531
  4. Barton, D. (2017). Literacy: An Introduction to the ecology of written language. UK: John Wiley & Sons.
  5. Bean, J. C. & Melzer, D. (2021). Engaging ideas: The professor’s guide to integrating writing, critical thinking and active learning in the classroom. UK: John Wiley & Sons.
  6. Byrnes, J. P. & Wasik, B. A. (2019). Language and literacy development: What educators need to know. New York: The Guilford Publications.
  7. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational Research. Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. UK: Pearson.
  8. Cu, S. K. W., Reynolds, R. B., Tavares, N. J., Notari, M., & Lee, C. W. Y. (2017). 21st century skills development through inquiry-based learning. Springer.
  9. Firoozjahantigh, M., Ebrahim, E. F., & Marzban, A. (2021). Investigating the effect of process-based instruction of writing on the IELTS writing task two performance of Iranian EFL learners. Cogent Education, 8. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.1881202
  10. Franek, R., O’Toole, K., & Aliperti, P. (2014). College Essay That Made A Difference. The Princeton Review. USA: Random House Publishing.
  11. Hyland, K. (1998). Boosting, hedging, and the negotiation of academic knowledge. Text & Talk, 18(3), 349–382. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.1998.18.3.349
  12. Kucer, S. B. (2014). Dimensions of literacy. A conceptual base for teaching reading and writing in school settings. New York: Routledge.
  13. Lestari, S., & Nurhamdah, N. (2019). Improving The Ability in Writing Paragraph at The Second Grade Students of SML Negeri 5 Pinrang Through Paraphrasing Technique. Inspiring: English Education Journal, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.35905/inspiring.v2i1.1264
  14. Lillis, T. & Tuck, J. (2016). Academic literacies: a critical lens on writing and reading in the academy. In The routledge handbook of English for academic purposes (p. 30). New York: Routledge.
  15. Min, S., Paek, J. K., & Kang, Y. (2019). Exploring the use of hedges and stance devices in relation to Korean EFL learners’ argumentative writing qualities. English Teaching, 74(1), 3–23. https://doi.org/10.15858/engtea.74.1.201903.3
  16. Molle, D., Sato, E., Boals, T. & Hedgspeth, C. A. (2015). Multilingual Learners and academic literacies. sociocultural contexts of literacy development in adolescents. New York: Routledge.
  17. Musa, A. (2014). Hedging in academic writing: A pragmatic analysis of English and Chemistry masters’ theses in Ghanaian universities. English for Specific Purposes World, 42(5), 1–26.
  18. Petchkij, W. (2019). Explicit teaching of hedges: bringing hedging in academic writing into the Thai EFL Classroom. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 16(1), 95–113.
  19. Radojicic, S., & Novakov, P. (2022). Hedging and boosting strategies in linguistics and geography – A case study of student perception. Folia Lingustica et Litteraria, 42(1), 243–260.
  20. Sahib, H. & Rahayu, K. M. H. (2022). Hedging system of modal auxiliary on English as Foreign Language (EFL) journal papers. International Journal of Education and Humanities, 1(1), 48–57. https://doi.org/doi:https://doi.org/10.56314/ijoleh.v1i1.41
  21. Weideman, A. & Dyk, V. (2014). Academic literacy: Test your competence. Forthcoming from ICELDA. USA: Geronimo Distribution.
  22. Wingate, U. (2018). Academic literacy across the curriculum: Towards a collaborative instructional approach. Language Teaching, 51(3), 349–364. https://doi.org/doi:10.1017/S0261444816000264