Getting Ready To Conduct Scientific Writing: Academic Search Engine As Personal Learning Environment (PLE) Assistance
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59024/bhinneka.v1i2.285Keywords:
Academic Search Engine, Personal Learning Environment, Scientific Writing.Abstract
At the point when the students are assessed, they are demanded to work to publish scientific writing. This study investigates the process of constructing scientific writing as well as the academic search engine that is frequently used by graduate students in building their papers. Later on, this study also discloses the factor of using repeated platforms. A personal learning environment helps the students to connect both inside and outside the classroom learning by employing digital tools. This paper presents a case study exploring the steps of conducting scientific writing, the academic search engine mostly used by students, and the factors in deciding the platform. Eighteen graduate students majoring in the English education department were the participants of this study. The data was collected through class observation, questionnaires, and semi-structured interviews. The result shows several steps to construct scientific writing including readiness, composing the article, getting ready for publication, distribution, and development. While Google Scholar (100%), Web of Science (94.7%), and online library (63.2%) are the top three online platforms as the academic search engine they used to search for references to build arguments for their scientific writing. Some factors why those platforms become highly beneficial are exposed by the participants such as their pertinence, reference quality, and publication impact. This study is expected to provide certain considerations for students or scholars about utilizing several online platforms and some reasons behind which is beneficial to build scientific writing publications.
References
Adlington, J., & Benda, C. (2005). Checking under the hood: Evaluating Google Scholar for reference use. In W. Miller & R. Pellen (Eds.), Libraries and Google (pp.135–148). Binghamton, NY: Hawthorn Press.
Association for Student Teaching. (1968). Yearbook, vol. 47. Association for Student Teaching, Washington.
Attwell, G. (2007). ‘Personal learning environment – the future of learning?’ eLearning Papers, vol.2.
Beel, J., Gipp, B., & Wilde, E. (2010). Academic Search Engine Optimization (aseo) optimizing scholarly literature for google scholar & co. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, January 2010
Bloemer, J., & Kasper, H. (1995). The complex relationship between consumer satisfaction and brand loyalty. Journal of Economic Psychology, 16, 311– 329.
Brown, S. (2010). ‘From VLEs to learning webs: the implications of Web 2.0 for learning and teaching’, Interactive Learning Environments, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 1-10.
Callicott, B., & Vaughn, D. (2005). Google Scholar vs. library scholar: Testing the performance of Schoogle. Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 10(3/4), 71–88.
Cathcart, R., & Roberts, A. (2005). Evaluating Google Scholar as a tool for information literacy. Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 10(3/4), 167– 176.
Cooke, R., & Donlan, R. (2008). Thinking inside the box: Comparing federated search results from Google Scholar, Live Academic Search and Central Search. Journal of Library Administration, 46(3), 31–42.
Cothran, T. (2011). Google Scholar acceptance and use among graduate students: A quantitative study. Library & Information Science Research 33, 293-301
Dabbagh, N & Kitsantas, A. (2012). Personal Learning Environments, social media, and self regulated learning: A natural formula for connecting formal and informal learning’, The Internet and Higher Education, 15(1) 3-8.
Ehlers, U & Carneiro, R. (2008). Personal learning environments’, eLearning Papers, vol. 9.
Flavián, C., Guinalíu, M., & Gurrea, R. (2006). The role played by perceived usability, satisfaction and consumer trust on website loyalty. Information Management, 43(1), 1–14.
Giglierano, J. (2008). Attitude of OhioLINK librarians toward Google Scholar. Journal of Library Administration, 47(1/2), 101–113.
Haya, G., Nygren, E., & Widmark, W. (2007). Metalib and Google Scholar: A user study. Online Information Review, 31, 365–375.
Hartman, K., & Mullen, L. (2008). Google Scholar and academic libraries: An update. New Library World, 109(5/6), 211–222.
Howland, J. L., Wright, T. C., Boughan, R. A., & Roberts, B. C. (2009). How scholarly is Google Scholar? A comparison to library databases. College and Research Libraries, 70, 227–234.
Helms-Park, R., Radia, P., & Stapleton, P. (2007). A preliminary assessment of Google Scholar as a source of EAP students' research materials. Internet and Higher Education, 10(1), 65–76.
Kesselman, M., & Watstein, S. B. (2005). Google Scholar and libraries: Point/counterpoint. Reference Services Review, 33, 380–387.
Lewison, G. (2001). Evaluation of books as research outputs in history of medicine. Research Evaluation, 10(2), 89-95.
Liber, O & Johnson, M. (2008). Personal Learning Environments’, Interactive Learning Environments, vol. 16, no. 1.
Milligan, C, Beauvoir, PH, Johnson, M, Sharples, P, Wilson, S & Liber, O 2006, ‘Developing a Reference Model to Describe the Personal Learning Environment’ in W Nejdl and K Tochtermann,(eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4227, pp 506-511, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
Mullen, L., & Hartman, K. (2006). Google Scholar and the library web site: The early response by ARL libraries. College and Research Libraries, 67, 106–122.
Neuhaus, C., Neuhaus, E., & Asher, A. (2008). Google Scholar goes to school: The presence of Google Scholar on college and university web sites. Journal of Academic of Librarianship, 34(1), 39–51.
Neuhaus, C., Neuhaus, E., Asher, A., & Wrede, C. (2006). The depth and breadth of Google Scholar: An empirical study. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 6(2), 127–141.
Nielsen, J. (2005). Usability 101: Introduction to usability.
Oliver, R. L. (1980). A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decision. Journal of Marketing Research, 17, 460–469.
Olivier, B & Liber, O. (2001). Lifelong learning: The need for portable Personal Learning Environments and supporting interoperability standards’, The JISC Centre for Educational Technology Interoperability Standards, Bolton Institute, Bolton, UK.
Ponsford, B. C., & vanDuinkerken, W. (2007). User expectations in the time of Google: Usability testing of federated searching. Reference Services Quarterly, 12(1/2), 159-178.
Schaffert, S & Hilzensauer, W. (2008). On the way towards Personal Learning Environments: Seven crucial aspects’, eLearning Papers, vol. 9 .
Severance, C, Hardin, J & Whyte, A 2008, ‘The coming functionality mash-up in Personal Learning Environments’, Interactive Learning Environments, 16(1), 47-62.
Shankar, V., Smith, A. K., & Rangaswamy, A. (2003). Customer satisfaction and loyalty in online and offline environments. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 20, 153–175.
Srinivasan, S. S., Anderson, R., & Ponnavolu, K. (2002). Customer loyalty in e- commerce: Anexploration of its antecedents and consequences. Journal of Retailing, 78, 41–50.
Taraghi, B, Ebner, M, Schaffert, S 2009, ‘Personal Learning Environments for Higher Education: A Mashup Based Widget Concept’, Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Mash-Up Personal Learning Environments MUPPLE'09, Nice, France.
Tenopir, C. (2005). Google in the academic library. Library Journal, 130(2), 32.
Thomas, P.R., & Watkins, D.S. (1998). Institutional research rankings via bibliometric analysis and direct peer review: A comparative case study with policy implications. Scientometrics 41(3), 335-355.
Ullrich, C, Borau, K, Luo, H, Tan, X, Shen, L & Shen R. (2008). Why Web 2.0 is Good for Learning and for Research: Principles and Prototypes’, 17th International World Wide Web Conference, Beijing, China.
Walters, W. H. (2009). Google Scholar search performance: Comparative recall and precision. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 9(1), 5–24.
Wixom, B. H., & Todd, P. A. (2005). A theoretical integration of user satisfaction and technology acceptance. Information Systems Research, 16, 85–102.
York, M. (2005). Calling the scholars home: Google Scholar as a tool for rediscovering the academic library. In W. Miller & R. Pellen (Eds.), Libraries and Google, 117–133. Binghamton, NY: Hawthorn Press.
