Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Topic: Move Analysis of Literature Review
Topic: Move Analysis of Literature Review
Section: 4thB-Evening
Article 1
Although academic and social adjustment challenges related to English proficiency and cultural
differences are evident, findings are inconclusive regarding the effects of proficiency (as
measured by test scores) on academic achievement (e.g., see Berman & Cheng, 2001; Messner &
Liu, 1995; Stoynoff, 1997). This study focuses on perceptions of students and faculty regarding
the significance of English skills on academics, social life, and overall adjustment. It is based on
the premise that interaction with competent speakers of a language has positive effects on
acquisition (Long, 1996). Meaningful input at the approximate level of the learner or just beyond
is theorized to be central to acquisition (Krashen, 1985), whereas output provides learners with a
way of testing their hypotheses about the target language (Swain, 1995).
Qualitative report:
Step 2: Centrality
Researcher makes its centrality known by, with the significance in academics.
“This study focuses on perceptions of students and faculty regarding the significance of
English skills on academics, social life, and overall adjustment.”
Step 3: Reviews
Researcher establishes wider area of his interest by explaining references from existing work,
and evaluates what is known earlier for research titles.
Meaningful input at the approximate level of the learner or just beyond is theorized to be
central to acquisition (Krashen, 1985), whereas output provides learners with a way of
testing their hypotheses about the target language (Swain, 1995).
(e.g., see Berman & Cheng, 2001; Messner & Liu, 1995; Stoynoff, 1997). (Long, 1996),
(Krashen), 1985, (Swain, 1995).
“Findings are inconclusive regarding the effects of proficiency (as measured by test scores)
on academic achievement (e.g., see Berman & Cheng, 2001; Messner & Liu, 1995; Stoynoff,
1997)”
“It is based on the premise that interaction with competent speakers of a language has
positive effects on acquisition (Long, 1996).”
“Whereas output provides learners with a way of testing their hypotheses about the target
language (Swain, 1995).”
“Regarding the significance of English skills on academics, social life, and overall
adjustment.”
Article 2
Modern learning theory emphasizes the situated and social nature of meaning making, by which
“mind, behavior, perception and action are wholly integrated” (Jonassen & Land, 2012, p. VI).
Children are natural learners and inherently seek to learn things that matter in their immediate
everyday world. To support children’s learning, adults make connections between new situations
and familiar ones, focus children’s attention, structure experiences, and organize the information
children receive, while helping them develop strategies for intentional learning and problem
solving (Bransford, Brown, Cocking, and National Research Council [NRC], 2000).
Qualitative report:
Step 1: Generalization
”Children are natural learners and inherently seek to learn things that matter in their
immediate everyday world.”
Step 2: Centrality
“Modern learning theory emphasizes the situated and social nature of meaning making, by
which “mind, behavior, perception and action are wholly integrated” (Jonassen &
Land, 2012, p. VI).”
Step 3: Reviews
While helping them develop strategies for intentional learning and problem solving
(Bransford, Brown, Cocking, and National Research Council [NRC], 2000).
” (Jonassen & Land, 2012, p. VI). (Bransford, Brown, Cocking, and National Research
Council [NRC], 2000).
Researcher adds his own theory into the existing argument on the topic.
“To support children’s learning, adults make connections between new situations and
familiar ones, focus children’s attention, structure experiences, and organize the
information children receive”.
Researcher makes a broader outline sketch about his review on the theory.
“While helping them develop strategies for intentional learning and problem solving.”
Article 3
It is the function of the (Standard English) ideology that the ELT profession recognizes “am
bilingualism” as the goal of second language acquisition, “fossilization” as the ultimate fate of
second language learners, and “interlanguage” as the variety spoken by nonnative speakers.
These constructs—am bilingualism, interlanguage, and fossilization—provide a habit of thought.
Soon after being introduced, they are understood as mathematical axioms, above debate; the
assumptions shared are not propositions to be defended or attacked (cf. Bhatt 2001b, Kachru
1988, 1996). The assumptions form part of the “tacit dimension” of scholarly understanding. In
reality, however, these assumptions consecrate linguistic and cultural privilege. Even where
learners meet the criterion of functional bilingualism, trivial dichotomies such as
proficiency/competence and standard/nonstandard are created by the profession and then used as
an alibi for maintaining linguistic ethnocentrism disguised with concerns over intelligibility
among the English-using population (Bhatt 1995a, 2001b, Kachru & Nelson 1996, Lippi-
Green 1997). The learners are thus confined to lifelong apprenticeship in the second language
without any hope for sociolinguistic emancipation (Tollefson 1991, 1995).
Step 1: Generalization
Step 2: Centrality
It is the function of the (Standard English) ideology that the ELT profession recognizes
“am bilingualism”
Step 3: Reviews
However, these assumptions consecrate linguistic and cultural privilege. Even where
learners meet the criterion of functional bilingualism, trivial dichotomies such as
proficiency/competence and standard/nonstandard are created by the profession and then
used as an alibi for maintaining linguistic
Soon after being introduced, they are understood as mathematical axioms, above debate;
the assumptions shared are not propositions to be defended or attacked (cf. Bhatt
2001b, Kachru 1988, 1996).
The learners are thus confined to lifelong apprenticeship in the second language without
any hope for sociolinguistic emancipation (Tollefson 1991, 1995).