View in EDS

Linking Words, Linking Minds: Conjunctions as Cognitive Markers of Critical Thinking in Indonesian Junior-High Essays.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Linking Words, Linking Minds: Conjunctions as Cognitive Markers of Critical Thinking in Indonesian Junior-High Essays.
Authors: Wahid, Abdul1 abdulwahid@unsimuh.ac.id, Syamsuri, Andi Sukri2 sukri.syamsuri@uin-alauddin.ac.id, Muhsin, Muh. Arief1 arief.m@unismuh.ac.id, Rahim, Abd. Rahman1 abrarunismuh65@gmail.com, Hasrianti, Andi2 andi.hasrianti@uin-alauddin.ac.id
Source: International Journal of Humanities Education. Jun2026, Vol. 24 Issue 1, p71-97. 27p.
Subject Terms: *Critical thinking, *Conjunctions (Grammar), *Teaching models, *Discourse analysis, *Literacy, Cognitive linguistics, Essays
Abstract: In the contemporary information age, critical thinking is a vital competency for navigating complex, dynamic knowledge environments. This study examines how Indonesian junior-high students deploy conjunctions in descriptive essays and how these micro-linguistic choices index dimensions of critical thinking. Ninety-six Grade-VIII students at SMP Negeri 1 Balikpapan wrote essays under standardized classroom conditions; after plagiarism (<30%) and length (>100 words) screening, eightythree texts were analyzed. Using an iterative qualitative content analysis, conjunctions were coded as additive, adversative, causal, temporal, or conditional, and surrounding clausal units were mapped to ten critical-thinking categories. Inter-rater reliability on 20% of the corpus reached κ = 0.82. Information synthesis dominated (22.3%), followed by evaluation (16.0%) and cause-and-effect (14.9%); argument construction (9.6%), problem-solving (8.5%), exemplification (7.4%), analytical reasoning (6.4%), generalization (5.3%), aspirational expression (5.3%), and creativity (4.3%) comprised the remainder. To contextualize aggregate patterns, we report descriptive (non-inferential) subgroup summaries by writing proficiency (lower/medium/higher--27/28/28), which indicate monotonic increases in conjunction density and type--token ratio with proficiency. We interpret conjunction use as a candidate, context-sensitive indicator--a trace of cognitive organization--rather than a causal determinant, noting the limits of the singlesite, observational design. Pedagogically, the findings support an integrated framework that embeds explicit attention to conjunctions within genre-based writing and reasoning scaffolds (e.g., criteria-based evaluation, counterargument routines, reflective dialogue). Future work should triangulate these indicators with psychometric measures (e.g., Cornell Critical Thinking Test), extend to multimodal/genre-comparative analyses, and pursue longitudinal or multi-site designs to test generalizability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of International Journal of Humanities Education is the property of Common Ground Research Networks and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Education Research Complete
Description
Abstract:In the contemporary information age, critical thinking is a vital competency for navigating complex, dynamic knowledge environments. This study examines how Indonesian junior-high students deploy conjunctions in descriptive essays and how these micro-linguistic choices index dimensions of critical thinking. Ninety-six Grade-VIII students at SMP Negeri 1 Balikpapan wrote essays under standardized classroom conditions; after plagiarism (<30%) and length (>100 words) screening, eightythree texts were analyzed. Using an iterative qualitative content analysis, conjunctions were coded as additive, adversative, causal, temporal, or conditional, and surrounding clausal units were mapped to ten critical-thinking categories. Inter-rater reliability on 20% of the corpus reached κ = 0.82. Information synthesis dominated (22.3%), followed by evaluation (16.0%) and cause-and-effect (14.9%); argument construction (9.6%), problem-solving (8.5%), exemplification (7.4%), analytical reasoning (6.4%), generalization (5.3%), aspirational expression (5.3%), and creativity (4.3%) comprised the remainder. To contextualize aggregate patterns, we report descriptive (non-inferential) subgroup summaries by writing proficiency (lower/medium/higher--27/28/28), which indicate monotonic increases in conjunction density and type--token ratio with proficiency. We interpret conjunction use as a candidate, context-sensitive indicator--a trace of cognitive organization--rather than a causal determinant, noting the limits of the singlesite, observational design. Pedagogically, the findings support an integrated framework that embeds explicit attention to conjunctions within genre-based writing and reasoning scaffolds (e.g., criteria-based evaluation, counterargument routines, reflective dialogue). Future work should triangulate these indicators with psychometric measures (e.g., Cornell Critical Thinking Test), extend to multimodal/genre-comparative analyses, and pursue longitudinal or multi-site designs to test generalizability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:23270063
DOI:10.18848/2327-0063/CGP/v24i01/71-97