Critical Journal Review

Lecturer: Winda Setiasari, SS. M.Hum, PhD.

Arranged by:

Amelia Agatha Siagian (2183131027)

FRENCH EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM

FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS

STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN

2021
 FOREWORD

First of all, I thank God that with His grace the author can complete this
Critical Journal Review paper to fulfill the assignment of the English course. The
author also thank Mrs. Winda Setiasari, SS. M.Hum, PhD as the English lecturer
who has given this assignment to us.

The author hopes that this paper can be useful in order to add insight and
knowledge of readers. The author is also fully aware that in this paper there are
shortcomings, therefore, we hope that there will be criticism and suggestions for
improving the papers that we have made in the future. Hopefully this simple paper is
understandable for anyone reading it and can be of use.

Medan, February 2021

Author

i
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

FOREWORD...................................................................................................................i

TABLE OF CONTENTS..............................................................................................ii

CHAPTER I PRELIMINARY

1.1 Background….....................................................................................................1
1.2 Objectives………………………………….……………………......………..1
1.3 Journal Identity...................................................................................................1

BAB II JOURNAL REVIEW………………………………………………….....…2

BAB III CONCLUSION AND RECOMENDATIONS

3.1 Conclusion……………………........................................................................6
3.2 Recomendations……………………...............................................................6

BIBLIOGRAPHY.......................................................................................................iii

ii
 CHAPTER I

PRELIMINARY

1.1 Background
Critical journal review is analyzing, assessing, and evaluating the
strengths and weaknesses of the journal, how the contents of the article can
affect our thinking and increase understanding. Through a critical journal
review, we test the author's mind based on the point of view on knowledge and
experience.

1.2 Objectives

1. Review a material journal by summarizing the journal.

2. Find out information on the topic contained in the journal.
3. Train self to think critically in finding the information given in the journal.

1.3 Journal Identity

Identity
Title Translanguaging in English
academic writing
preparation

Journal type International Journal of

Pedagogies and Learning
Volume and Number  Volume 10, No. 1
Year  2016
Authors  John Adamson and David
Coulson

CHAPTER II

1
 JOURNAL REVIEW

Abstact We investigate translanguaging (i.e. the co-use of

first and second languages) in a Content and
Language Integrated Learning course, as a
pragmatic means to promote the skill of young
university students in extended critical academic
writing. We aimed to prepare new undergraduate
students (n = 180) for courses where partial English-
medium instruction is typical, rather than full
immersion. This means that both Japanese and
English may be used in the teaching and completion
of regular classes. Data from students’answers to
questionnaires and their written work over a three-
year period demonstrate (a) how translanguaging
facilitates completion of tasks and (b) the
appearance of positive perceptions of students
toward this policy. Further, content and language
assessment criteria in writing, and the strategic use
of Japanese language reading related to class
themes, resulted in improved outcomes for most
students of lower proficiency. Awareness of
translanguaging among the students led to improved
written work, and this enhanced authenticity and
relevance to local purposes. Conclusions indicate
that translanguaging in a partial English-medium
context reflects the growing realities of English use
as a Lingua Franca.
Preliminary This study focuses on translanguaging in a Content
and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) English

2
language preparation course in a Japanese
university. Translanguaging means “the adoption of
bilingual supportive scaffolding practices” (Doiz,
Lasagabaster, & Sierra, 2013, p. 218), in this case,
using students’ L1 (Japanese) with their L2
(English) to negotiate complex academic tasks and
understand and convey meaning. The lecture
preparation class takes place in Japan, where local
academic norms of practice take precedence over
English immersion practice (Brown & Adamson,
2012).
The purpose of the class in focus, which takes the
form of academic lecture training (including
listening, note-taking, critical thinking skills
development, and essay writing), is to prepare first-
year students for English-medium instruction (EMI).
Starting from the second year, content lectures for
economics, politics, and regional development
themes are regularly delivered in English or a hybrid
of English and some Japanese. Brown and Adamson
(2012) reported on the beliefs of these area
specialists about language preparation for EMI,
specifically that both Japanese and English ability
for in-class interaction and writing (through the use
of multilingual citations) is a key competence for
students. Research into students’ perceptions of our
bilingual approach to writing training in this class
revealed some positive feedback, particularly among
lower proficiency students (Adamson & Coulson,
2014). Building on these studies, this research

3
 examines the extent to which students engage in the
translanguaging process and their perceptions of that
process to write academic reports.
In light of the trend in Japanese tertiary education
toward EMI, the role of the students’ L1 (Japanese)
in academic writing preparation remains under-
researched in this particular context.
First, we give an overview of the context of the
study and next review the literature in
translanguaging, writing and literacy development,
and CLIL, paying attention to the local context.
How data from questionnaires and written reports
were analyzed will be outlined and followed by
presentation of findings and discussion. Conclusions
focusing on research questions and implications for
practice will be drawn.
Journal Methodes The authors were interested in gauging student
feelings toward this "student perceptions of the
CLIL approach" methodology. The author then
simultaneously progressed into more specific areas
of inquiry associated with course delivery, including
that of student portfolio use and this current study
of L1 use and translanguaging. The questionnaires
were primarily developed to address issues
surrounding student perceptions of the course, yet,
due to the open-ended nature of some questions,
frequently revealed perceptions related to language
use.
Journal Analysis  The strengths of the research
1. This research used good and correct

4
 language
2. The method used by authors is very excellent
3. There are concrete datas in this research
 The weakness of the research
1. This research has too many theories

CHAPTER III
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

3.1 Conclusion

5
 This journal used good and correct language and the authors used the
excellent methods for their research, but there are too many theories in it. This
journal is worth for reading to increase reader’s knowledge.

3.2 Recomendations
This is the result of the paper that the author made, if there are mistakes
and deficiencies in this paper. As a writer, I really accept suggestions and
criticism in order to improve the next assignments. The author suggests the
writer of the "Translanguaging in English academic writing preparation"
journal to reduce theories in further research.

6
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjpl20

iii