digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id
understandable by the readers because the students used simple sentences and familiar words in their writing. But, almost students do not write the
concluding statement in the end of their writing. Whereas, the criteria of conclusion in the highest score according to the researcher’s assessment
rubric are the conclusion summarize the key points without repeating previous sentences, underscore the importance of the opinion, and ends
with appropriate concluding sentence. But, the result of the students’ writing conclusion did not effectively capture opinion. The last is
students’ ability in writing response, a half the number of students who joined CALL 2 course is only respond with minimal effort such as said
“good job” or said “thanks”, that comment cannot build the students’ critical thinking. This is happened because almost students log in to
Schoology two or one days before the deadline. So, the students do not have much time to give comment or to discuss about the issues on
Schoology.
B. Suggestion
Regarding the result of this research, this suggestion is for the lecturer. The lecturer should give feedback to the students’ opinion on Schoology’s
comment and discusses it with the students about the mistake that the students have. For other researchers who plan to conduct a research related to this
digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id
study, the researchers are suggested to conduct new study with different elements of this study such as: how often the students participated in giving
comment in online discussion or the difficulties that faced by the students in online learning.
digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id
REFERENCES
Arnaudet, Martin L. 1981. Paragraph Development: A Guide for Students of English as a Second Language. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Inc., Englewood Cliffs
Beatty, Ken. 2003. Teaching and Researching Computer-Assisted Language Learning. London UK: Pearson Education.
Chapell, Mark S, Willis F. Overton. Development of Logical Reasoning and the School Performance of African American Adolescents in Relation to
Socioeconomic Status, Ethnic Identity, and Self-Esteem. Journal of Black Psychology, vol. 28 no.4, November 2002 295-317
CSSC. Element of Persuasive. Davis, Nunan. 2003. Practical English Language Teaching. Boston: McGraw Hill
Publishing. Denzin, N.K.and Lincoln, Y.S. 2000. Handbook of Qualitative Research, 2
nd
edition, Thousand Oaks,CA: SAGE Publication.
Diniya, Tabah Ghifari. 2013. An Analysis on Students Ability and Difficulty in Writing Narative Text. Bandung: Indonesia University of Education.
Dowden, Bradley H. 2011. Logical Reasoning. California USA: Bradley Dowden. Fadilah, Nurul. 2014. An Error Analysis of Using Cohesive Devices In Writing
Narrative Text at the Second Year Students of SMPN 5 Surabaya. Surabaya: Perpustakaan UIN Sunan Ampel Surabaya.
Fahim, Mansoor. 2012. The Effect of Critical Thinking on Developing Argumentative Essay by Using Tree Diagram by Iranian EFL University Students. Journal of
Language Teaching and Research, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 632-638 Gusman, Elvina. 2014. Analysis of Students’ Cause and Effect Essay Writing at Batu
Sangkar. Vol. 2 No. 1 Harmer, Jeremy. 2001. The Practice of English Language Teaching. New York:
Longman. Hurley, A Introduction of Logic, Second Edition.
Jones, Rebecca., Finding The Good Argument OR Why Bother With Logic. Parlor Press.
digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id
Jr. L.E. Modesitt. The “Factsheet” approach as a Tool for Teaching Logical Writing. Writing Across the curriculum, Vol. III, No. 1
Kinneavy. 2010. Teaching Argument for Critical Thinking and Writing: An introduction. The University of Chicago
Knox, Charlotte. 2013. Backwards Planning for Success with Writing with the new California Common Core Standards OpinionArgument Writing Packet
Grades 3-6, p. 45 www.knoxeducation.com
Layaalia, Indah Nova. 2015. The Students’ Ability in Writing Argumentative Essay at English Teacher Education Department of the State Islamic University of
Sunan Ampel Surabaya. Surabaya: Perpustakaan UIN Sunan Ampel Surabaya. Lie, Anita. 2013. Social Media in a Content Course for The Digital Natives. Teflin
Journal, vol. 24 no. 1 Nurhayati, Yanti. 2012. The Error Analysis on The Use of Cohesive Devices in
English Writing Essay among the Seventh Semester Students of English Department of STAIN Salatiga in the Academic Year 20112012. Salatiga:
STAIN Salatiga.
Rex, Lesley A., Ebonyh Elizabeth Thomas, and Steven Engel. Applying Toulmin: Teaching Logical Reasoning and Argumentative Writing. English Journal
99.6 2010: 55-61. Available at: http:digitalcommons.wayne.educoe_ted2
Ritchie, Jane, Jane Lewis. 2003. Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers. London: SAGE Publication
Rokhmah, Nurul Lailati. 2008. Students’ Capability in Writing Persuasive Essay at The Second Year in SMU Muhammadiyah 1 Lasem. Surakarta: Universitas
Muhammadiyah Surakarta. Salmon, Merrilee H. 2002. Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking 4
th
ed.. California USA: Wadsworth.
Savage, Alice, Masoud Shafiei. 2007. Effective Academic Writing 1 the Paragraph. New York: Oxford University Press.
Scott, Darrell, Robert J. Marzano. 2014. Awaken the Learner: Finding the Source of Effective Education. New York: Marzano Research.
Sulistiawati, Endang. 2015. The Students Ability to Write Logical Argument on Writing Argumentative Writing At English Teacher Education Department Of
Faculty Of Education And Teacher Training Of State Islamic University
