Kemampuan Analisis Artikel Ilmiah Mahasiswa PGMI IAIN Sorong


  • Oki Sandra Agnesa Fakultas Tarbiyah IAIN Sorong
  • Dita Purwinda Anggrella UIN Surakarta


Kata Kunci:

Article Analysis Skills, Rhetorical Moves, Scientific Articles.


The ability to analyze scientific articles is important for students to have to complete their studies. This study aimed to describe the ability to analyze scientific articles of fifth-semester students of PGMI IAIN Sorong, which was measured based on the ability to recognize the rhetorical move of articles. The research design was in the form of a survey with a sample of 28 students. The study results, which were analyzed using the percentage technique, showed that the analytical ability of the fifth-semester students of PGMI IAIN Sorong was still low in identifying the rhetorical movement of articles. The objective aspect (85.71% correct answer) and conclusion (75% correct answer) are the easiest aspects to identify, followed by the implication aspect (53.57% correct answer), while the motive, support, counterargument, and refutation aspects (0% correct answer)  could not be identified.

Biografi Penulis

Oki Sandra Agnesa, Fakultas Tarbiyah IAIN Sorong

PGMI, Fakultas Tarbiyah IAIN Sorong

Dita Purwinda Anggrella, UIN Surakarta

PGMI, Fakultas Tarbiyah, UIN Surakarta


Björk, B. C., Welling, P., Laakso, M., Majlender, P., Hedlund, T., & Gudnason, G. (2010). Open Access To The Scientific Journal Literature: Situation 2009. PLoS ONE, 5(6).

Castles, A., Rastle, K., & Nation, K. (2018). Ending the Reading Wars: Reading Acquisition From Novice to Expert. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 19(1), 5–51.

Coil, D., Wenderoth, M. P., Cunningham, M., & Dirks, C. (2010). Teaching the process of science: Faculty perceptions and an effective methodology. CBE Life Sciences Education, 9(4), 524–535.

Fang, Z. (2005). Scientific literacy: A systemic functional linguistics perspective. Science Education, 89(2), 335–347.

Fausan, M. M., Susilo, H., Gofur, A., Sueb, & Yusop, F. D. (2021). The scientific literacy performance of gifted young scientist candidates in the digital age. Cakrawala Pendidikan, 40(2), 467–498.

Gillen, C. M. (2006). Criticism and Interpretation: Teaching the Persuasive Aspects of Research Articles. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 5(1), 34–38.

Goldman, S. R., & Bisanz, G. L. (2002). Toward a functional analysis of scientific genres: Implications for understanding and learning processes. In J. Otero, J. A. León, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), The Psychology of Science Text Comprehension. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers., 19–50.

Gormally, C., Brickman, P., & Lut, M. (2012). Developing a test of scientific literacy skills (TOSLS): Measuring undergraduates’ evaluation of scientific information and arguments. CBE Life Sciences Education, 11(4), 364–377.

Hendrayatno, A., Widodo, A., Riandi, R., & Muslim, M. (2022). Students’ Argumentation in Science Lessons: How effective is Rebuttal Analysis Framework in Representing the Complexity of Classroom Argumentation? Science & Education.

Hidayat, T., Rustaman, N., & Siahaan, P. (2021). Developing Students’ Research Skills with Adapted Primary Literature. Thabiea : Journal of Natural Science Teaching, 4(2), 121–135.

Hoskins, S. G., & Gottesman, A. J. (2018). Investigating Undergraduates’ Perceptions of Science in Courses Taught Using the CREATE Strategy. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 19(1), 1–10.

Hoskins, S. G., Lopatto, D., & Stevens, L. M. (2011). The C.R.E.A.T.E. approach to primary literature shifts undergraduates’ self-assessed ability to read and analyze journal articles, attitudes about science, and epistemological beliefs. CBE Life Sciences Education, 10(4), 368–378.

Howard, K. N., Stapleton, E. K., Nelms, A. A., Ryan, K. C., & Segura-Totten, M. (2021). Insights on biology student motivations and challenges when reading and analyzing primary literature. PLoS ONE, 16(5 May 2021), 1–19.

Hubbard, K. E., & Dunbar, S. D. (2017). Perceptions of scientific research literature and strategies for reading papers depend on academic career stage. PLoS ONE, 12(12), 1–16.

Kararo, M., & McCartney, M. (2019). Annotated primary scientific literature: A pedagogical tool for undergraduate courses. PLoS Biology, 17(1), 1–9.

Koeneman, M., Goedhart, M., & Ossevoort, M. (2013). Introducing Pre-university Students to Primary Scientific Literature Through Argumentation Analysis. Research in Science Education, 43(5), 2009–2034.

Krufka, A., Kenyon, K., & Hoskins, S. (2020). A Single, Narrowly Focused CREATE Primary Literature Module Evokes Gains in Genetics Students’ Self-Efficacy and Understanding of the Research Process. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 21(1).

Lammers, A., Goedhart, M. J., & Avraamidou, L. (2019). Reading and synthesizing science texts using a scientific argumentation model by undergraduate biology students. International Journal of Science Education, 41(16), 2323–2346.

Nelms, A. A., & Segura-Totten, M. (2019). Expert–novice comparison reveals pedagogical implications for students’ analysis of primary literature. CBE Life Sciences Education, 18(4), 1–12.

Ness, M. (2016). When Readers Ask Questions: Inquiry-Based Reading Instruction. The Reading Teacher, 70(2), 189–196.

Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (2003). How Literacy in Its Fundamental Sense Is Central to Scientific Literacy. Science Education, 87(2), 224–240.

Probosari, R. M., Widyastuti, F., Sajidan, Suranto, & Prayitno, B. A. (2019). Students’ argument style through scientific reading-based inquiry: Improving argumentation skill in higher education. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2194(December 2019).

Rahmasiwi, A. (2020). Profil Kemampuan Membaca Artikel Penelitian Mahasiswa Pascasarjana Tahun Pertama Pendidikan Biologi Universitas Negeri Malang. Jurnal Education and Development, 8(3), 64–68.

Rosalia, R., & Fuad, A. J. (2019). Peran Dosen dalam Meminimalisasi Perilaku Plagiasi Mahasiswa. Indonesian Journal of Islamic Education Studies (IJIES), 2(1), 61–77.

Saefi, M., Suwono, H., & Susilo, H. (2017). Studi Komparatif Tiga Strategi Pembelajaran Ditinjau Dari Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis Mahasiswa Biologi. Jurnal Pendidikan: Teori Penelitian Dan Pengembangan, 2(5), 637–645.

Shi, H., & Wannaruk, A. (2014). Rhetorical structure of research articles in agricultural science. English Language Teaching, 7(8), 1–13.

Sholihah, U. (2018). Teknik peer-review melalui google docs: alternatif piranti kolaborasi dalam menulis. Widya Wacana, 13(2), 61–68. Pangolin National Conservation Strategy and Action Plan %28LoRes%29.pdf%0A

Sunggingwati, D. (2017). Reading and Writing Skills of Scientific Articles for Undergraduate Students: Benefits and Challenges BT - Proceedings of the International Conference on Learning Innovation (ICLI 2017). 167–171.

Syazali, M., Affandi, L. H., Nursaptini, N., Rahmatih, A. N., & Astria, F. P. (2020). Preliminary Analysis Kesulitan Mahasiswa S-1 PGSD dalam Mereview Artikel Ilmiah pada Jurnal. Progres Pendidikan, 1(3), 177–184.

Tenopir, C., King, D. W., Edwards, S., & wu, L. (2009). Electronic journals and changes in scholarly article seeking and reading patterns. Aslib Proceedings, 61(1), 5–32.

Van Lacum, E. B., Ossevoort, M. A., & Goedhart, M. J. (2014). A teaching strategy with a focus on argumentation to improve undergraduate students’ ability to read research articles. CBE Life Sciences Education, 13(2), 253–264.

van Lacum, E., Koeneman, M., Ossevoort, M., & Goedhart, M. (2016). Scientific Argumentation Model (SAM): A Heuristic for Reading Research Articles by Science Students BT - Insights from Research in Science Teaching and Learning: Selected Papers from the ESERA 2013 Conference (N. Papadouris, A. Hadjigeorgiou, & C. P. Constantinou (eds.); pp. 169–183). Springer International Publishing.

van Lacum, E., Ossevoort, M., Buikema, H., & Goedhart, M. (2012). First Experiences with Reading Primary Literature by Undergraduate Life Science Students. International Journal of Science Education, 34(12), 1795–1821.

von Aufschnaiter, C., Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2008). Arguing to learn and learning to argue: Case studies of how students’ argumentation relates to their scientific knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 101–131.

Yen, M.-H., Wang, C.-Y., Chang, W.-H., Chen, S., Hsu, Y.-S., & Liu, T.-C. (2018). Assessing Metacognitive Components in Self-Regulated Reading of Science Texts in E-Based Environments. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16(5), 797–816.

Zhang, J., Luo, X., Lu, L., & Liu, W. (2014). An Acquisition Model of Deep Textual Semantics Based on Human Reading Cognitive Process. International Journal of Cognitive Informatics and Natural Intelligence, 6(2), 82–103.