Ecological-Themed POEW in English for Biology Academic Writing: A Mixed-Methods Pilot Study with Repeated Measures

Sianna Sianna; Nurzakiyah R; Khadijah Maming; Ilham Sahabuddin; Wahyuddin; Nurmadinah

doi:10.31605/eduvelop.v9i2.6693

Authors

Sianna Sianna English Education Program, Universitas Muhammadiyah Parepare, Indonesia
Nurzakiyah R Biology Education Program, University of Muhammadiyah Parepare, Indonesia
Khadijah Maming English Education Program, University of Muhammadiyah Parepare, Indonesia
Ilham Sahabuddin English Education Program, University of Muhammadiyah Parepare, Indonesia
Wahyuddin English Education Program, University of Muhammadiyah Parepare, Indonesia
Nurmadinah English Education Program, University of Muhammadiyah Parepare, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31605/eduvelop.v9i2.6693

Keywords:

POEW model, Academic writing, English for Biology, English for Specific Purposes, Ecological themes

Abstract

Academic writing poses persistent challenges for biology education students, who must navigate English accuracy, paragraph organization, and scientific reasoning simultaneously. This pilot mixed-methods study with repeated measures examined the implementation of an ecological-themed Predict-Observe-Explain-Write (POEW) model in an English for Biology course and explored students' perceptions of the learning process. Eight second-semester Biology Education students at Universitas Muhammadiyah Parepare, Indonesia, participated in a one-group repeated-measures design. The intervention comprised four 100-minute sessions, each addressing a distinct ecological theme (ecosystems, food chains/food webs, biodiversity, and environmental issues). Students completed academic paragraph-writing tasks at four time points (pretest, midtest, posttest, and two-week follow-up) and were scored using the ESL Composition Profile, while semi-structured interviews provided qualitative data analyzed thematically. The Friedman test revealed a significant difference across the four measurements, χ²(3) = 18.75, *p* < .001, Kendall's W = .78. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests indicated significant gains from pretest to posttest (Z = -2.521, *p* = .012) and from pretest to follow-up (Z = -2.394, *p* = .017), though the posttest-to-follow-up decline was not significant (Z = -1.751, *p* = .080). Interview data yielded three themes: vocabulary and pronunciation support, improved paragraph organization and idea mapping, and difficulties during the prediction stage due to limited ecological vocabulary. Theoretically, this study contributes to the integration of inquiry-based learning principles with ESP pedagogy by demonstrating how a staged cognitive sequence (POEW) can reduce the cognitive load of L2 academic writing. Practically, it offers a replicable instructional framework for EFL lecturers teaching scientific writing in biology education, with a specific emphasis on vocabulary scaffolding prior to prediction activities.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Dudley-Evans, T., & St. John, M. J. (1998). Developments in English for specific purposes: A multidisciplinary approach. Cambridge University Press.

Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1987). English for specific purposes: A learning-centered approach. Cambridge University Press.

Idris, F., Mohd Said, N. E., & Sulaiman, N. A. (2025). Content and language integrated learning (CLIL) and the acquisition of writing skills in secondary education: A systematic literature review. Journal of Education and Learning, 19(3). https://doi.org/10.11591/edulearn.v19i3.21974

Jacobs, H. L., Zinkgraf, S. A., Wormuth, D. R., Hartfiel, V. F., & Hughey, J. B. (1981). Testing ESL composition: A practical approach. Newbury House.

Karpudewan, M., Zain, A. N. M., & Chandrasegaran, A. L. (2017). Overcoming students' misconceptions in science: Strategies and perspectives from Malaysia. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3437-4

Montoya, O. I. R. (2023). Content and language integrated learning (CLIL) develops writing skills in English. Revista Chakiñan de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades, 20, 196-209. https://doi.org/10.37135/chk.002.20.11

Mufidah, I. L., & Dewi, A. R. (2021). Enhancing English writing skills through the POEW strategy. TRANS-KATA: Journal of Language, Literature, Culture, and Education, 2(1), 26-40. https://doi.org/10.54923/transkata.v2i1.48

Ningrum, R. W. (2023). Academic writing difficulties for Indonesian students in pursuing postgraduate studies abroad. Premise: Journal of English Education and Applied Linguistics, 12(1), 1-15.

Setyowati, L., & Sukmawan, S. (2020). Exploring the use of the ESL Composition Profile for college writing in the Indonesian context. Journal of English Language Teaching and Linguistics, 5(3), 361-373.

Sianna, S., & Syawal, S. (2017). The implementation of POEW in teaching writing. International Journal of Language Education, 1(1), 51-61. https://doi.org/10.26858/ijole.v1i1.2871

Susilawati, S. (2023). Integrating content and language to teach ESP online writing with the assistance of Google Docs. Journal of Languages and Language Teaching, 11(1), 42-55. https://doi.org/10.33394/jollt.v11i1.6617

Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem-solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257-285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4

Tekindur, A., & Kingir, S. (2024). Improving elementary students' science achievement, inquiry, and scientific writing skills through argument-based inquiry. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 40(5), 512-532. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2023.2286965

Wallwork, A. (2022). Writing an academic paper in English: Intermediate level. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-95615-8

Wellington, J., & Ireson, G. (2013). Science learning, science teaching (3rd ed.). Routledge.