ENGINEERING LECTURERS’ PERCEPTIONS TOWARDS EFFECTIVE CONCLUSION SECTION IN ENGINEERING FINAL YEAR PROJECT PRESENTATION
Abstract
Final year project presentation (FYPP) assessment in the engineering field aims to evaluate students’ comprehension in the principles and concepts learnt and its application in resolving problems through engineering projects.The components assessed in FYPPs include the presentation slides that comprise introduction, content and conclusion sections. Many studies have emphasised the significance of the conclusion section in project presentations; however, there has not been much research that explores the students' knowledge and practice on conclusion moves in their FYPPs from the FYPP lecturers’ perspective. Therefore, this qualitative study, through focus group interviews, explored the perceptions of 12 engineering lecturers from a private higher institution in the east coast region of Malaysia. These lecturers, who were also the students’ FYP supervisors were asked about the students’ overall performance in delivering FYPP conclusion section, the significance of the conclusion section and the challenges faced by engineering undergraduates when presenting their conclusion section. The findings indicate that the lecturers rated students' conclusion presentations as average. The findings reveal that for the lecturers, the conclusion section is significant as it is part of the FYPP assessment rubric and it reflects students’ critical thinking and problem solving skills. In addition, the key challenges faced by students in presenting an effective conclusion section were the English language barriers and obliviousness of the essential elements of a conclusion section. Pedagogical implications include providing training that highlights the importance of the conclusion section in FYPPs, and all the moves necessary in the conclusion section.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Bhattacharyya , E. (2014). A case study of stakeholder perceptions on communicative competence in engineering technical oral presentation. PhD Thesis, University Malaya. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/268876116.pdf
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2023). Toward good practice in thematic analysis: avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing researcher. In International Journal of Transgender Health (Vol. 24, Issue 1, pp. 1–6). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1080/26895269.2022.2129597
Carter-Thomas, S., & Rowley-Jolivet, E. (2020). Three minute thesis presentations: recontextualisation strategies in doctoral research. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 48, 100897. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2020.100897
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research Design, Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods. In SAGE Publication (Fifth Edit). SAGE. https://doi.org/10.1891/9780826146373.0007
Dannels, D. P. (2009). Features of success in engineering design presentations: a call for relational genre knowledge. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 23(4), 399–427. https://doi.org/10.1177/1050651909338790
Dudley-Evans, T. (1998). Genre analysis: a Key to a Theory of ESP? (pp. 3–11). Birmingham: University of Birmingham.
Duff, P. A. (2010). Language socialization into academic discourse communities. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 30, 169–192. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190510000048
Ferreira, M. A. C., Mesquita, de M. A., Côrtes, G. A. C., & Caldas, T. L. (2017). Fear of public speaking: perception of college students and correlates. Journal of Voice, 31(1), 127.e7-127.e11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2015.12.012
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2019). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed.). New York: McGrawHill. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
Fuad, N. I. A., Seliman, S., & Ahmad Fuad, N. I. (2009). The genre of q&a sessions of oral presentations delivered by students enrolled in english for workplace communication (Vol. 16). 16. UTM: Universiti Teknologi Malaysis.
Grieve, R., Woodley, J., Hunt, S. E., & McKay, A. (2021). Student fears of oral presentations and public speaking in higher education: a qualitative survey. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 45(9), 1281–1293. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2021.1948509
Hyland, K. (2008). Small bits of textual material: a discourse analysis of Swales’ writing. English for Specific Purposes, 27(2), 143–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2006.10.005
Hyon, S. (2018). Introducing genre and english for specific purposes. London: Routledge.
Loi, C. K., Lim, J. M. H., & Wharton, S. (2016). Expressing an evaluative stance in english and malay research article conclusions: international publications versus local publications. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 21, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.08.004
Maktiar Singh, Kuldip Kaur (2019) A genre analysis of academic oral presentations of ESL undergraduates at a public university in Malaysia. Doctoral thesis, Universiti Putra Malaysia.
Mohamed, A.-A., & Asmawi, A. (2018). Understanding engineering undergraduates ’ technical oral presentation : challenges and perspectives. International Journal of Language Education and Applied Linguistics, 08(July), 41–53. http://ijleal.ump.edu.my/
Mohd Radzuan, N. R., & Kaur, S. (2011). Technical oral presentations in english: qualitative analysis of malaysian engineering undergraduates’ sources of anxiety. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 29(2010), 1436–1445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.383
Morita, N. (2000). Discourse socialization through oral classroom activities in a tesl graduate program. TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 279–310. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587953
Qiu, X., & Kevin Jiang, F. (2021). Stance and engagement in 3 mt presentations: how students communicate disciplinary knowledge to a wide audience. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 51, 100976. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2021.100976
Sabri, Suryani & Yu Qin, T. (2014). Communication apprehension among nilai college students. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 5(5). https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.5n.5p.46
Seliman, S. (1995). Engineering research presentations three units of analysis, presented at the annu. Meeting of teachers of english to speakers of other languages. Long Beach, CA, Mar./Apr. 26–1, 1995.
Srinon, U., & Sucharitrak, S. (2020). An analysis of generic structure potential (gsp) of thai undergraduate students’ oral english presentation : a genre perspective. In Integrated Social Science Journal. https://so02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/isshmu/article/download/243836/165428/848315
Stapa, M., Murad, N. A., & Ahmad, N. (2014). Engineering technical oral presentation: voices of the stakeholder. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 118, 463–467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.02.063
Subedi, K. R. (2021). Determining the sample in qualitative research. Scholars’ Journal, 4. https://www.nepjol.info/index.php/scholars
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings (first, Vol. 1). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Yaakob, S. (2013). A Genre Analysis and Corpus Based Study of University Lecture Introductions. http://etheses.bham.ac.uk/5241/1/Yaakob14PhD.pdf
Zappa-Hollman, S. (2007). Academic presentations across post-secondary contexts: the discourse socialization of non-native english speakers. Canadian Modern Language Review, 63(4), 455–485. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.63.4.455
Zareva, A. (2016). Multi-word verbs in student academic presentations. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 23, 83–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2016.07.001
Zhu, X. M. (2005). Developing oral presentation skills in elt classroom. CELEA Journal (imonthly), 28(2), 118–120. https://researchparks.innovativeacademicjournals.com/index.php/IJIE/article/download/3411/3535
DOI: https://doi.org/10.30743/ll.v7i2.8217
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Fakultas Sastra
Universitas Islam Sumatera Utara (UISU), Medan
Jl. Sisingamangaraja Teladan Medan 20217
Telp. (061) 7869911, e-mail: language_literacy@sastra.uisu.ac.id