From Task Completion to Claim Calibration: Cycle 1 Design-Based Research on Scientific Writing Scaffolding

Muhammad Syaiful Nurasman; Sri Nur Yuliyawati; Hazma Hazma; Tedy Heriyadi

doi:10.61255/jupiter.v4i5.1592

Authors

Muhammad Syaiful Nurasman Politeknik Negeri Bandung https://orcid.org/0009-0004-6307-0513
Sri Nur Yuliyawati Politeknik Negeri Bandung
Hazma Politeknik Negeri Bandung
Tedy Heriyadi Politeknik Negeri Bandung

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.61255/jupiter.v4i5.1592

Keywords:

Design-Based Research, Scientific Writing, Vocational Higher Education, Instructional Scaffolding, Claim Calibration

Abstract

Scientific writing is a core academic competency in vocational higher education, yet instructional support remains inconsistent in Indonesia's Diploma-4 (D4) programmes, which favour applied and technical competencies. This paper reports Cycle 1 of a Design-Based Research project that aimed to design, implement, and evaluate a six-stage scaffolding workflow (P1–P6) embedded in the Indonesian Language course across three D4 programmes (accounting, engineering, and tourism) at a single vocational polytechnic in Indonesia. Data comprised 26 fully coded artefacts from six purposively selected focal groups and one additional stage-specific comparative artefact, field notes, and a reflection questionnaire completed by 72 of 180 enrolled students (40% response rate), analysed through qualitative content analysis supported by peer debriefing with one independent reviewer. The scaffold supported students through the structural sequence of mini-research writing but did not yet adequately scaffold claim calibration, variable operationalisation, and peer evaluation. Premature causal, correlational, and significance claims appeared in 12 of 26 coded artefacts (46%), concentrated at the interpretation stage, while indicator-item misalignment emerged as a persistent operationalisation bottleneck. Students rated the initial framing stage as least demanding, yet artefact analysis suggested it may be analytically the most consequential for later claim-calibration difficulties, tentatively termed the P1 paradox. Perceptions data suggest peer-review quality may have been constrained by inadequate feedback architecture, though the data cannot rule out a competence deficit as a contributing explanation. Five tentative design principles for Cycle 2 are proposed, targeting claim calibration, phenomenon framing, indicator traceability, peer-review criteria, and worked-example fading.

Abstract views: 9 ,

PDF downloads: 0

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Anderson, T., & Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-based research: A decade of progress in education research? Educational Researcher, 41(1), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X11428813

Anggraeni, C. W., Mujiyanto, J., Rustipa, K., & Widhiyanto. (2025). Effects of utilizing self-regulated learning-based instruction on EFL students’ academic writing skills: A mixed-method investigation. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 10, Article 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-024-00317-6

Barbara, S. W. Y., Afzaal, M., & Aldayel, H. S. (2024). A corpus-based comparison of linguistic markers of stance and genre in the academic writing of novice and advanced engineering learners. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11, Article 284. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02757-4

Bassett, M., & Macnaught, L. (2025). Embedded approaches to academic literacy development: A systematic review of empirical research about impact. Teaching in Higher Education, 30(5), 1065–1083. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2024.2354280

Carless, D., & Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: Enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8), 1315–1325. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354

Doo, M. Y., Bonk, C. J., & Heo, H. (2020). A meta-analysis of scaffolding effects in online learning in higher education. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(3), 60–80. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v21i3.4638

Hammond, J., & Gibbons, P. (2005). Putting scaffolding to work: The contribution of scaffolding in articulating ESL education. Prospect, 20(1), 6–30.

Hidayat, R., Utomo, W. T., & Rahmawati, Y. (2023). Analisis kebutuhan mata kuliah Bahasa Indonesia program studi D-3 Perhotelan berdasarkan outcome-based education. Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa Dan Sastra Indonesia Undiksha, 13(4), 272–284. https://doi.org/10.23887/jpbsi.v13i4.69839

Hoadley, C., & Campos, F. C. (2022). Design-based research: What it is and why it matters to studying online learning. Educational Psychologist, 57(3), 207–220. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2022.2079128

Hyland, K. (2007). Genre pedagogy: Language, literacy and L2 writing instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(3), 148–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.07.005

Lingard, L. (2020). The academic hedge Part I: Modal tuning in your research writing. Perspectives on Medical Education, 9(2), 107–110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-019-00559-y

Malecka, B., Boud, D., & Carless, D. (2022). Eliciting, processing and enacting feedback: Mechanisms for embedding student feedback literacy within the curriculum. Teaching in Higher Education, 27(7), 908–922. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2020.1754784

McKenney, S., & Reeves, T. C. (2018). Conducting educational design research (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315105642

Nurasman, M. S., Firmansyah, B., & Nasution, N. (2026). PjBL in academic writing instruction in higher education: Challenges, strategies, and synthesis of empirical findings. Bahtera: Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa Dan Sastra, 25(1), 51–61. https://doi.org/10.21009/bahtera.251.06

Putera, Z. F., & Shofiah, N. (2021). Model kurikulum kompetensi berpikir pada pembelajaran Bahasa Indonesia di perguruan tinggi vokasi. Metalingua: Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa Dan Sastra Indonesia, 6(1), 29–36. https://doi.org/10.21107/metalingua.v6i1.10094

Putera, Z. F., Suyono, S., Rofiuddin, A., Harsiati, T., & Shofiah, N. (2025). Critical writing patterns and learning strategies among vocational college students: Evidence from thesis writing. Jurnal Pendidikan Vokasi, 15(2), 166–177. https://doi.org/10.21831/jpv.v15i2.76100

Republik Indonesia. (2012). Undang-Undang Nomor 12 Tahun 2012 tentang Pendidikan Tinggi [Law Number 12 of 2012 on Higher Education], Pasal 35 ayat (3) dan ayat (5). Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2012 Nomor 158.

Stubley, R., & Papen, U. (2026). Writing in vocational disciplines: Values, practices and post-compulsory teacher education. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 78(4), 645–661. https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820.2025.2597333

Syahril, Purwantono, Wulansari, R. E., Nabawi, R. A., Safitri, D., & Kiong, T. T. (2022). The effectiveness of project-based learning on 4Cs skills of vocational students in higher education. Journal of Technical Education and Training, 14(3), 29–37. https://doi.org/10.30880/jtet.2022.14.03.003

Taub, M., Banzon, A. M., Outerbridge, S., Walker, L. R., Olivera, L., Salas, M., & Schneier, J. (2023). Towards scaffolding self-regulated writing: Implications for developing writing interventions in first-year writing. Metacognition and Learning, 18(3), 749–782. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-023-09357-8

Wienanda, W. K., Harnita Sari, Y. I., Liani, T. A., & Utami, A. P. (2021). Menulis untuk publikasi: “Punya ide, tapi sulit menuliskannya” — analisis kebutuhan mata kuliah academic writing. Jurnal Vokasi Indonesia, 9(1), 13–21. https://doi.org/10.7454/jvi.v9i1.217