Self-Efficacy (SE) and Motivation of the Indonesian Teacher Educator Authors (TEAs) in Writing Articles for Publication: The Bloom Digital Taxonomy (BDT) Perspective

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

Background: Writing articles is inevitable for Teacher Educator Authors (TEAs) at the university level, and many studies reported writing articles for publication. However, self-efficacy (SE) and motivation in writing scientific articles by higher education teachers remained unexplored compared to the Bloom Digital Taxonomy (BDT).

Purpose: This study explored self-efficacy (SE) as well as intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (IM & EM) in writing articles for publication by Teacher Educator Authors (TEAs) in the light of the Bloom Digital Taxonomy (BDT). Furthermore, it measured how prior empirical evidence and current findings are presented in the Bloom Digital Taxonomy (BDT).

Method: The design used qualitative descriptive content data from an ethnographic study, and 21 Teacher Educator Authors (TEAs) of English in Indonesia with specific characteristics were purposively selected. The participants constituted state and private universities in Java, Sumatra, Borneo, and Celebes. Data were collected through questionnaire, in-depth interviews, and electronic observation. The participants were then requested to complete a Google Form, and directly interviewed electronically and physically. The questionnaire data were subsequently addressed in the in-depth interview. This study utilised the Criteria Content Analysis (CCA) method and exploratory-provisional coding to analyse the transcription data.   

Results: The results showed that self-efficacy (SE) features were mainly related to profession, self-development, and attributes of Teacher Educator Authors (TEAs). Furthermore, self-esteem, expertise markers, and a way to learn dominated intrinsic motivation (IM), while appreciation, shaping expertise, and seeking dignity dominated the extrinsic. The findings were in the high order of affective skills (HOAs) with valuing (A3) and internalising (A5). The study had practical implications that writing for scholarly publications should inevitably be part of the curriculum in higher education, and grants should increase to maintain the internalisation of Teacher Educator Authors (TEAs) in producing articles. In addition, the results contributed to the theoretical implication that HOAs, valuing, and internalising dominated roles in creating quality articles at any level.

About the authors

D. Turmudi

Universitas Muhammadiyah Metro, Indonesia

Author for correspondence.
Email: tdeditur@gmail.com

M. I Dacholfany

Universitas Muhammadiyah Metro, Indonesia

Email: mihsandacholfany@gmail.com

U. Rasyidah

Universitas Muhammadiyah Metro, Indonesia

Email: ummirasyidah@yahoo.com

References

  1. Adanır, G. A., İsmailova, R., Omuraliev, A., & Muhametjanova, G. (2020). Learners' perceptions of online exams: A comparative study in Turkey and Kyrgyzstan. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(3), 1-17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v21i3.4679
  2. Alzubi, A. A. F., & Nazim, M. (2024). Students' intrinsic motivation (IM) in EFL academic writing: Topic-based interest in focus. Heliyon, 10(1), e24169. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e24169
  3. Board of Editors TEFLIN Journal. (2012). Writing for international publication: An interview with Nugrahenny T. Zacharias, Handoyo P. Widodo, and Willy A. Renandya. TEFLIN Journal, 23(2), 115-129. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15639/teflinjournal.v23i2/115-129
  4. Chen, W. (2021). Understanding students' motivation in L2 collaborative writing. ELT Journal, 75(4), 442-450. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccab027
  5. Chernick, V. (2012). How to get your paper accepted for publication.Paediatric Respiratory Reviews, 13(2), 130-132. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prrv.2011.02.004
  6. Chien, S.-C. (2019). Writing for scholarly publication in English for Taiwanese researchers in the field of English Teaching. SAGE Open, 9(3), 1-15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019870187
  7. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
  8. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macro theory of human motivation, development, and health. Canadian Psychology, 49(3), 182-185. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012801
  9. Deng, L., & Yuen, A. H. K. (2012). Understanding student perceptions and motivation towards academic blogs: An exploratory study. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(1), 48-66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.883
  10. Garrido, N. (2017). The method of James Spradley in qualitative research. Enfermería: Cuidados Humanizados, 6, 43-48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22235/ech.v6iEspecial.1450
  11. Hilton, J., Hilton, B., Ikahihifo, T. K., Chaffee, R., Darrow, J., Guilmett, J., & Wiley, D. (2020a). Identifying student perceptions of different instantiations of open pedagogy. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(4), 1-19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v21i4.4895
  12. Humphreys, G., & Wyatt, M. (2014). Helping Vietnamese university learners to become more autonomous. ELT Journal, 68(1), 52-63. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/cct056
  13. Hyland, K. (2016). Methods and methodologies in second language writing research. System, 59, 116-125. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.05.002
  14. Jiang, X., Borg, E., & Borg, M. (2017). Challenges and coping strategies for international publication: perceptions of young scholars in China. Studies in Higher Education, 42(3), 428-444. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1049144
  15. Keshavarz, M., & Ghoneim, A. (2021). Preparing educators to teach in a digital age.International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 22(1), 221-242. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v22i1.4910
  16. Kim, E. J. (2018). Scholarly publishing in Korea: Language, perception, practice of Korean university faculty. Publishing Research Quarterly, 34, 554-567. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-018-9602-3
  17. Komarraju, M., & Nadler, D. (2013). Self-efficacy and academic achievement: Why do implicit beliefs, goals, and effort regulation matter? Learning and Individual Differences, 25, 67-72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2013.01.005
  18. Legault, L. (2016).Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Encyclopedia of personality and individual differences (pp. 2416-2419). Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8
  19. Lei, J., & Jiang, T. (2019). Chinese university faculty' s motivation and language choice for scholarly publishing. Iberica, 38, 51-74.
  20. Lei, J., & Hu, G. (2019). Doctoral candidates' dual role as student and expert scholarly writer: An activity theory perspective. English for Specific Purposes, 54, 62-74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2018.12.003
  21. Limpo, T., & Alves, R. A. (2017). Relating beliefs in writing skill malleability to writing performance: The mediating role of achievement goals and self-efficacy. Journal of Writing Research, 9(2), 97-124. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2017.09.02.01
  22. Luik, P., & Lepp, M. (2021). Are highly motivated learners more likely to complete a computer programming MOOC? International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 22(1), 41-58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v22i1.4978
  23. Lunenburg, F. C. (2011). Self-efficacy in the workplace: Implications for motivation and performance.International Journal of Management Business and Administration, 14(1), 1-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/216507999103901202
  24. Magogwe, J. M., Ramoroka, B. T., & Mogana-Monyepi, R. (2015). Developing student-writers self-efficacy beliefs. Journal of Academic Writing, 5(2), 20-28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18552/joaw.v5i2.132
  25. Majhi, S., Baral, S., & Maharana, B. (2018). Perceptions of scholarly publishing in open access routes: A survey of LIS professionals in Odisha. Library Philosophy and Practice, 2117.
  26. Maniati, M., & Jalilifar, A. (2018). Strategies for publishing in English journals: A study of the perceptions of Iranian scholars. Learned Publishing, 31(4), 355-365. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1186
  27. Mascle, D. D. (2013). Writing self-efficacy and written communication skills. Business Communication Quarterly, 76(2), 216-225. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1080569913480234
  28. Matthew B., M., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2015.975966
  29. McKinley, J. (2013). Displaying critical thinking in EFL academic writing: A discussion of Japanese to English contrastive rhetoric. In RELC Journal (vol. 44, issue 2, pp. 195-208). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688213488386
  30. Miles, D. A. (2017, August). A taxonomy of research gaps: Identifying and defining the seven research gaps. In Doctoral student workshop: Finding research gaps-research methods and strategies, Dallas, Texas, 2017.
  31. Mirovic, I., & Knezevic, L. (2018). Writing research articles in English: Perception and practice of Serbian writers. Scripta Manent, 13, 84-96.
  32. Munzenmaier, C., & Rubin, N. (2013). Perspectives on Bloom's Taxonomy: What is old is new again. The E-learning Guild Research, 1-14.
  33. Netolicka, J., & Simonova, I. (2017). SAMR model and Bloom's digital taxonomy applied in blended learning/teaching of general English and ESP. Proceedings of the 2017 International Symposium on Educational Technology (pp. 277-281). IEEE. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ISET.2017.68
  34. Nikcevic-Milkovic, A., Balenovic, K., & Brala-Mudrovčić, J. (2022). Self-regulated learning and sociodemographic factors in students' L1/L2 writing proficiency. Journal of Language and Education, 8(1), 100-116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2022.11581
  35. Pajares, F. (2003). Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, and achievement in writing: A review of the literature. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 19(2), 139-158. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10573560308222
  36. Pho, P., & Tran, T. (2016). Obstacles to scholarly publishing in the social sciences and humanities: a case study of Vietnamese scholars. Publications, 4(3), 19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/publications4030019
  37. Rathert, S., & Okan, Z. Z. (2015). Writing for publication as a tool in teacher development. ELT Journal, 69(4), 363-372. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccv029
  38. Saiful, J. A. (2020). Mobile teacher professional development (MTPD): Delving into English teachers' beliefs in Indonesia. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(4), 143-160. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v21i4.475
  39. Shehata, A. M. K., & Eldakar, M. A. M. (2018). Publishing research in the international context: An analysis of Egyptian social sciences scholars' academic writing behaviour. Electronic Library, 36(5), 910-924. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/EL-01-2017-0005
  40. Sujatha, R., & Kavitha, D. (2018). Learner retention in MOOC environment: Analysing the role of motivation, self-efficacy, and perceived effectiveness.International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication Technology, 14(2), 62-74. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/184685.
  41. Turmudi, D. (2017). Rethinking academic essay writing: Selected genres in comparison. Premise Journal, 6(2), 119-138. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24127/pj.v6i2.1052
  42. Turmudi, D. (2020a). English scholarly publishing activities in the industrial revolution 4.0: What, why, and how? English Language Teaching Educational Journal, 3(1), 52-63. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v3i1.1890
  43. Turmudi, D. (2020b). The experience and capability of the teacher-educator authors (TEAs) of Indonesia in writing articles for publication in the light of the Bloom's digital taxonomy [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Universitas Negeri Malang. http://repository.um.ac.id/263331.
  44. Turmudi, D., Saukah, A., & Cahyono, B. Y. (2020c). How do teacher-educator authors (TEAs) experience their professional development through writing for publications? International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 13(2), 965-988.
  45. Umamah, A., Khoiri, N. El, Widiati, U., & Wulyani, A. N. (2022). EFL university students' self-regulated writing strategies: The role of individual differences. Journal of Language and Education, 8(4), 182-193. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2022.13339
  46. van Blankenstein, F. M., Saab, N., van der Rijst, R. M., Danel, M. S., Bakker-van den Berg, A. S., & van den Broek, P. W. (2019). How do self-efficacy beliefs for academic writing and collaboration and intrinsic motivation (IM) for academic writing and research develop during an undergraduate research project? Educational Studies, 45(2), 209-225. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2018.1446326
  47. Wang, H. (2021). Exploring the relationships of achievement motivation and state anxiety to creative writing performance in English as a foreign language. Thinking Skills and Creativity, pp. 42, 1-29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100948
  48. Wardhana, D. E. C. (2022). Exploring the impact of process-genre approach on learners' academic writing and higher order thinking skills. Journal of Language and Education, 8(2), 140-153. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2022.12537
  49. Yicai, H., & Xueai, Z. (2021). A study of the relationship between non-English majors' vocabulary knowledge and English writing self-efficacy.International Journal of Liberal Arts and Social Science, 9(6), 65-76.
  50. Zheng, Y., & Guo, X. (2019). Publishing in and about English: challenges and opportunities of Chinese multilingual scholars' language practices in academic publishing. Language Policy, 18(1), 107-130. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-018-9464-8
  51. Abdulla, M. H., Brint, E., & Rae, M. K. (2021). Teaching physiology to medical students in the COVID-19 era with synchronous formative assessments utilizing simultaneous, combined Zoom and Socrative platforms. Scierea Journal of Education, 6(1), 12-32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54647/education88192

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.