RHETORICAL STRUCTURE OF DISCUSSION SECTIONS IN UNDERGRADUATE THESES WRITTEN BY STUDENTS OF THE ENGLISH TADRIS STUDY PROGRAM AT IAIN CURUP

This study addressed significant gaps in understanding undergraduate
thesis discussion structures, particularly within specific institutional
contexts. Existing research predominantly describes rhetorical moves
without fully exploring students' writing processes or their critical reliance on
guidance and references. This research investigated rhetorical structures in
35 English Tadris undergraduate thesis discussion sections (2020-2024)
and examined students' sources of guidance and references through semi-
structured interviews with seven recent graduates. The findings revealed
that, firstly, Move 2 (reporting results) was present in all discussion sections,
confirming its obligatory status. Move 1 (introducing the discussion chapter)
(89%), Move 3 (summarizing results) (66%), and Move 4 (Commenting on
Results) (86%) were conventional. Within Move 4, Step A (interpreting
results) was conventional (63%), but Steps B (comparing results with
literature) (54%) and C (accounting for results) (40%) were optional. Step D
(evaluating results) was absent. Additionally, Move 5 (summarizing the
study), 6 (evaluating the study), and 7 (deductions from the study) were rare
(29%, 6%, and 23% respectively), indicating limited engagement with
higher-order analysis and evaluation. Furthermore, the analysis of rhetorical
moves from 2020-2024 revealed that fundamental moves like Move 2
remained obligatory, while critical and evaluative moves were mostly
optional. However, a positive trend emerged in the increasing
conventionality of Move 4 Step A (Interpreting results). Thirdly, interviews
revealed that students predominantly relied on previous theses as structural
and content blueprints, and supervisor feedback for direct content
development. Formal instructional sources, such as university guideline
books (for content) and academic writing classes, were largely underutilized
due to a reported absence of explicit rhetorical instruction.
Keywords: Rhetorical Structure, Discussion Section, Undergraduate
Thesis. Academic Writing, Thesis Discussion section,
IAIN Curup