Students' Problems and Coping Strategies in Writing Undergraduate Theses

Ari Prasetyaningrum; St. Ayu Suraya; Zahratul Fikni; Lailawati Lailawati; Maman Asrobi

doi:10.24853/elif.7.2.131-140

Students' Problems and Coping Strategies in Writing Undergraduate Theses

Ari Prasetyaningrum, St. Ayu Suraya, Zahratul Fikni, Lailawati Lailawati, Maman Asrobi

Abstract

ABSTRACT

This study investigates the factors contributing to students' challenges in undergraduate thesis writing within the English Education Study Program at Hamzanwadi University, Nusa Tenggara Barat, Indonesia. It further explores the strategies students employ to overcome these challenges. A mixed-methods approach was adopted, involving 36 eighth-semester students as participants. Data were collected through a close-ended questionnaire and semi-structured interviews to provide quantitative and qualitative insights. The findings indicate that psychological factors were the most significant challenge (78.72%), followed by sociocultural factors (16.51%) and linguistic factors (4.7%). To address these difficulties, students employed coping strategies, including identifying novel research topics and ideas through online books and journals, particularly from recent publications (within five years), and grounding their research in real-world issues. They also reviewed previous undergraduate theses, relevant literature, and methodological texts to strengthen their research framework. Additional measures included attending webinars on research methodology, enhancing internal and external motivation, engaging in intensive discussions with supervisors, and leveraging digital tools such as Grammarly and Quillbot for grammatical refinement and paraphrasing to ensure academic integrity. These findings offer valuable insights into the challenges of thesis writing and highlight practical strategies for students and educators to enhance the thesis-writing experience in higher education.

Keywords

Problem, Coping Strategy, Undergraduate Thesis

Full Text:

Untitled

References

Andrade, M., & Evans, N. W. (2013). Principles and practices for response in second language writing: Developing self-regulated learners. Routledge.

Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2000). Tense and aspect in second language acquisition: Form, meaning, and use. Blackwell.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching (5th ed.). Pearson Education.

Budiharso, T. (2009). The rhetoric of research writing. UIN-Malang Press.

Canagarajah, S. (2016). Translingual practice: Global Englishes and cosmopolitan relations. Routledge.

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Springer.

DiCicco-Bloom, B., & Crabtree, B. F. (2006). The qualitative research interview. Medical Education, 40(4), 314–321. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02418.x

Dwihandini, L. A., Marhaeni, A. A. I. N., & Suarnajaya, I. W. (2013). Analysis of the factors affecting undergraduate students’ difficulties in writing thesis. Journal of Education and Practice, 4(17), 19–24.

Field, A. (2017). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (5th ed.). Sage Publications.

Heggen, K., Karseth, B., & Kyvik, S. (2010). The relevance of research for the improvement of education and professional practice. Higher Education, 60(2), 167–179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-009-9291-0

Hyland, K. (2013). Writing in the university: Education, knowledge, and reputation. Language Teaching, 46(1), 53–70. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444811000036

Ivankova, N. V., Creswell, J. W., & Stick, S. L. (2006). Using mixed-methods sequential explanatory design: From theory to practice. Field Methods, 18(1), 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05282260

Kirkwood, A., & Price, L. (2014). Technology-enhanced learning and teaching in higher education: What is ‘enhanced’ and how do we know? Learning, Media and Technology, 39(1), 6–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2013.770404

Lee, J. F., & Tajino, A. (2008). Understanding students’ perceptions of difficulty with academic writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(3), 198–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2008.02.001

Lestari, D. M. (2020). Students’ difficulties in writing undergraduate thesis at Muhammadiyah University in Bengkulu. Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, 2(1), 12–20.

Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847

Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42(5), 533–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y

Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4th ed.). Sage Publications.

Puspita, C. (2019). Factors influencing students’ difficulties in writing undergraduate thesis at IAIN Curup. Journal of English Language Studies, 4(1), 22–34.

Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2020). Research methods for business: A skill-building approach (8th ed.). Wiley.

Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press.

White, R., & Arndt, V. (1991). Process writing. Longman.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.24853/elif.7.2.131-140