EFL students’ difficulties in writing a research proposal
Open accessAbstract
This study aims to investigate EFL students’ difficulties in writing a research proposal by using Swales’ Create-A-Research-Space (cars) model and try to find out the students’ problems. This study was used as a qualitative research design. The subject of this study are twenty students and the instrument are students writing the research proposal, interview for the students and lecturer. The result of this research is the students’ problem in writing for their introduction for move 1 (75%) and for move 2 (55%), there are 4 (four) students having problems how to face the criteria for inclusion and exclusion from review was not justified and the literature review was not topic focused. Related to methodology, the choice of paradigm, methodology, data collection, and data analysis was not justified to answer the research questions (20%). Next, a detailed description of the research procedures, as well as an explanation of the reason for doing so, was not provided (15%). Continued to the detailed description of procedures and materials was not provided to allow for replication (15%). Moreover, a component of methodologies such as the research design, research site, and participants, data collection techniques, and data analysis is not included (15%). The last, for the references, were all student writing research proposals less to completed the way how to write a reference, such as uncompleted detailed related to sources. The biggest problem related to the students' ability to write a research proposal for the introduction. Some students face some difficulties in how to compose the background well, including introducing and reviewing items of previous research in the area, how to find a gap in the previous research and student's fewer references to quote.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Students often struggle to identify peer-reviewed, relevant, and current articles that support their research.
“students often struggle to identify peer-reviewed, relevant, and current articles that support their research.”
From Exploring the Role of Generative AI as a Research Assistant in Undergraduate Sociology Research Methods (2026) · cites this paper as Suryatiningsih, 2019
Suryatiningsih (2019) found that 20% of students failed to synthesize their sources into cohesive literature reviews, relying heavily on direct quotes.
“Suryatiningsih (2019) found that 20% of students failed to synthesize their sources into cohesive literature reviews, relying heavily on direct quotes.”
From Exploring the Role of Generative AI as a Research Assistant in Undergraduate Sociology Research Methods (2026) · cites this paper as Suryatiningsih, 2019
Students tend to rely on general search engines or cite studies without critically assessing the relevance of those studies to their overall research.
“They tend to rely on general search engines or cite studies without critically assessing the relevance of those studies to their overall research”
From Exploring the Role of Generative AI as a Research Assistant in Undergraduate Sociology Research Methods (2026) · cites this paper as Suryatiningsih, 2019
Students struggle with synthesizing relevant sources into a cohesive literature review.
“Students also struggle with synthesizing relevant sources into a cohesive literature review.”
From Exploring the Role of Generative AI as a Research Assistant in Undergraduate Sociology Research Methods (2026) · cites this paper as Suryatiningsih, 2019
Literature reviews are frequently limited to summaries, direct quotations, or listings of prior sources without proper integration.
“Studies show that literature reviews are frequently limited to summaries, direct quotations, or listings of prior sources without proper integration”
From Exploring the Role of Generative AI as a Research Assistant in Undergraduate Sociology Research Methods (2026) · cites this paper as Suryatiningsih, 2019
Research has consistently shown that students continue to face a range of challenges-such as difficulty formulating research questions, synthesizing literature, and selecting appropriate methodological approaches-despite instructional support, particularly among students who have not previously been exposed to a research methods course.
“research has consistently shown that students continue to face a range of challenges-such as difficulty formulating research questions, synthesizing literature, and selecting appropriate methodological approaches (Abdulai & Owusu-Ansah, 2014; Mali, 2023; Suryatiningsih, 2019).”
From Exploring the Role of Generative AI as a Research Assistant in Undergraduate Sociology Research Methods (2026) · cites this paper as Suryatiningsih, 2019
Students tend to default to convenience sampling without adequate justification or selecting a sampling technique that does not align with their research questions and hypotheses, leading to inconsistencies in their methodology and weak internal validity.
“students tend to default to convenience sampling without adequate justification or selecting a sampling technique that does not align with their research questions and hypotheses, leading to inconsistencies in their methodology and weak internal validity”
From Exploring the Role of Generative AI as a Research Assistant in Undergraduate Sociology Research Methods (2026) · cites this paper as Suryatiningsih, 2019
Cited by
Sorted by citations
EFL STUDENTS’ CHALLENGES IN WRITING RESEARCH PROPOSALS
Gai Mali, Y. C. (2023) · LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching · doi:10.24071/llt.v26i1.5296 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Wells, M. (2026) · Journal of Teaching and Learning with Technology · doi:10.14434/jotlt.v14i1.41671
- Authors
- Suryatiningsih, N.
- Corresponding author
- Suryatiningsih, Ninik
- Venue
- International Journal of Humanities and Innovation (IJHI)
- Published
- 2019-12-31
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 96-102
- ISSN
- 2614-6169 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2997103387
- Cited by
- 8
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2021: 1
- FWCI
- 2.80
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- International Journal of Humanities and Innovation (IJHI) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Discourse Analysis in Language Studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Academic Writing and Publishing
- Keywords
- research proposal writing, EFL learners, academic writing difficulties, research gap identification, citation practices
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
