Theme system analysis in Indonesian EFL vocational high school students’ descriptive texts

Shania Afina Barkah

Abstract


Coherence and cohesion are some aspects that create clarity and readability of genres from academic and workplace contexts. Therefore, ESP teachers need to pay attention to students’ abilities in this matter and take quick actions to improve them, such as by conducting a theme system analysis. For this reason, this study aimed to analyze how Indonesian EFL vocational high school students use themes and thematic progression in their descriptive texts. Six texts were analyzed using qualitative content analysis by presenting the frequency analysis of theme choice and thematic progression and creating meaningful inferences through the obtained data. They were obtained through participants who were categorized into low, middle, and high achievers based on their academic performance in ESP class. The results show a discrepancy in the ability to utilize theme choice and thematic progression between participants in the high achiever category and participants from the low and middle achiever categories. Furthermore, this data also found one extended finding in which only 4 out of 6 texts were able to achieve the purpose of descriptive texts. It indicates how some participants have not fully grasped the characteristics of descriptive texts. Therefore, these findings create several pedagogical implications for educational institutions and the Indonesian government. 

Keywords


Descriptive texts; theme system analysis; vocational high school

References


Albino, G. (2017). Improving readability in an explicit genre-based approach: The case of an EFL workplace context. RELC Journal, 48(3), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688216684279.

Almeida, L. M. D. S., Becker, K. H., & Villanueva, I. (2020). Engineering communication in industry and cross-generational challenges: An expository study. European Journal of Engineering Education, 46(3), 389-401. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2020.1737646.

Beer, D., & McMurrey, D. (2013). A guide to writing as an engineer (4th ed.). New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.

Bui, H. P. (2022). Viatnamese EFL students’ use and misconceptions of cohesive devices in writing. SAGE open, 12(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221126993.

Carter, R., & McCarthy, M. (2006). Cambridge grammar of English: A comprehensive guide. Spoken and written English grammar and usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Chang, P., & Lee, M. (2019). Exploring textual and interpersonal themes in the expository essays of college students of different linguistic backgrounds. English for Specific Purposes, 54, 75-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2019.01.002.

Daneš, F. (1974). Functional sentence perspective and the organization of the text. In F. Daneš (Eds.), Papers on Functional Sentence Perspective (pp.106-128). Prague: Academia.

Derewianka, B., & Jones, P. (2016). Teaching language in context (2nd ed.). Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

Devira, M. (2017). Acquisition of academic literacy in an engineering communication course: integration of English for Specific Purposes (ESP) and Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL). Studies in English Language and Education, 4(1), 38-53). https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v4i1.7003.

Eggins, S. (2004). An introduction to systemic functional linguistics (2nd ed.). London: Continuum International Publishing Group.

Emilia, E. (2011). Pendekatan genre-based dalam pengajaran bahasa Inggris: Petunjuk untuk guru. Bandung: RIZQI press.

Emilia, E. (2014). Introducing Functional Grammar. Bandung: PT. Dunia Pustaka Jaya.

Emilia, E., Habibi, N., & Bangga, L. A. (2018). An analysis of cohesion of exposition texts: An Indonesian context. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 7(3), 515-523. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v7i3.9791.

Fontaine, L. (2013). Analysing English grammar. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Forey, G. (2004). Workplace texts: Do they mean the same for teachers and business people? English for Specific Purposes, 23(4), 447-469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2004.01.003.

Forman, J., & Damschroder, L. (2007). Qualitative content analysis In L. Jacoby., & L. A. Siminoff (Eds.), Empirical Methods for Bioethics: A Primer (pp.39-62). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1479-3709(07)11003-7.

Given, L. M. (2008). The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods. California: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Green, C. F., Christopher, E. R., & Mei, J. L. K. M. (2000). The incidence and effects on coherence of marked themes in interlanguage texts: A corpus-based enquiry. English for Specific Purposes, 19(2), 99-113. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(98)00014-3.

Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.

Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar (3rd ed.). London: Arnold.

Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2014). An introduction to functional grammar (4th ed.). New York: Routledge.

Hawes, T., & Thomas, S. (1997). Problems of thematisation in student writing. RELC Journal, 28(2), 35-55. https://doi.org/10.1177/003368829702800203.

Hawes, T. (2015). Thematic progression in the writing of students and professionals. Ampersand, 2, 93-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amper.2015.06.002.

Hynd, C. R., & Chase, N. D. (1991). The relation between text type, tone, and written response. Journal of Reading Behavior, 23(3), 281-306. https://doi.org/10.1080/10862969109547743.

Jalilifar, A. (2010). Thematization in EFL students’ composition writing and its relation to academic experience. RELC Journal, 41(1), 31-45. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688210362621.

JDIH Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan. (n.d.). Peraturan menteri pendidikan dan kebudayaan Indonesia nomor 37 tahun 2018 https://jdih.kemdikbud.go.id/sjdih/siperpu/dokumen/salinan/Permendikbud%20Nomor%2037%20Tahun%202018.pdf.

Kailani, A. (2017). A systemic functional linguistics analysis of cohesion and coherence in written nursing care reports. International Journal of Educational Best Practices, 1(2), 1-23. https://www.neliti.com/publications/271020/a-systemic-functional-linguistics-analysis-of-cohesion-and-coherence-in-written#cite.

Khan, M., Chan, M. Y., Ali, A. M., Isa, M. M., Narayanan, P., Bakar, Z. A., … Hod, R. (2021). Theme choice in oral case presentations: Differences between medical novices and experts. English for Specific Purposes, 63, 107-119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2021.05.001.

Krippendorff, K. (2019). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (4th ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Leong, A. P., Toh, A. L. L., & Chin, S. F. (2018). Examining structure in scientific research articles: A study of thematic progression and thematic density. Written Communication, 35(3), 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088318767378.

Morley, G. D. (2000). Syntax in functional grammar: An introduction to lexicogrammar in systemic linguistics. London: Continuum.

Nafisah, N., & Kurniawan, E. (2007). Writing: English for general communication. Bandung: UPI Press.

Rizki, M., Hidayat, D. N., Husna, N., & Alek. (2022). Discourse analysis of grammatical cohesion devices in student explanation texts. Journal of English Education and Development, 6(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.31605/eduvelop.v6i1.1545.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2025 Shania Afina Barkah