* Corresponding author IJEE (Indonesian Journal of English Education), 10(1), 2023, 126-143 P-ISSN: 2356-1777, E-ISSN: 2443-0390 | DOI: http://doi.org/10.15408/ijee.v10i1.31848 This is an open access article under CC-BY-SA license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/) Available online at IJEE (Indonesian Journal of English Education) Website: http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee THE EFFECTIVENESS OF MIND MAPPING IN CONSTRUCTING ARGUMENTS IN WRITING AN ARGUMENTATIVE TEXT Eva Rosita, Sisilia Setiawati Halimi* Universitas Indonesia, Indonesia (sshalimi@gmail.com) Received: 07th April 2023; Revised: 25th May 2023; Accepted: 28th June 2023 ABSTRACT The ability to compose and develop ideas in argumentative writing has become a challenge for grade XI students in a private high school in Indonesia, and mind mapping is believed in the literature to be a potential strategy to overcome the challenge. This mixed-method experimental study, therefore, was designed to examine the effectiveness of mind mapping as a prewriting strategy. The study's results, which compared the pre-test and post-test scores analyzed using the Nonparametric-Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test, showed a significant value in the experimental group with Asymp Sig. (two-tailed) 0.003<0.05. The participants also expressed their perceptions of the mind-mapping features through a questionnaire and interview. Data analysis conducted using In Vivo coding in this research showed that the mind-mapping elements with the most significant influence on content exploration, text structure, convenience and interest in writing, time efficiency, and thinking skills were keywords, colors, and branches. Nevertheless, three participants said they did not make any progress for several reasons. The significant finding and the vast majority of positive opinions indicated that mind mapping was an effective strategy for developing ideas in argumentative writing. In further research, it would be interesting to explore how this strategy could be applied to a larger learning community by combining it with other strategies to improve learning outcomes. Key Words: Argument; argumentative text; mind mapping; perception ABSTRAK Tantangan pada penulisan teks argumentatif yang dihadapi pelajar kelas XI di sebuah Sekolah Menengah Atas (SMA) swasta di Indonesia terletak pada kemampuan menyusun dan mengembangkan gagasan. Maka, kendala tersebut diatasi melalui studi eksperimental menggunakan metode campuran dengan menerapkan prewriting berbentuk mind mapping. Hasil penelitian berupa perbandingan nilai pre-test dan post-test yang dianalisis menggunakan Nonparametric-Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test menunjukkan nilai yang signifikan pada experimental group dengan Asymp.Sig.(2-tailed) 0.003<0.05. Partisipan kemudian mengungkapkan persepsinya terhadap penggunaan mind mapping melalui kuesioner dan wawancara yang dianalisis menggunakan teknik In Vivo coding. Dari hasil analisis, diketahui bahwa kata kunci, warna, dan cabang merupakan komponen mind mapping yang paling berdampak pada eksplorasi konten, struktur teks, kemudahan dan minat menulis, efisiensi waktu, serta keterampilan berpikir. Meskipun demikian, terdapat 3 orang partisipan yang mengungkapkan bahwa mereka tidak merasakan perkembangan karena penyebab tertentu. Signifikansi hasil penelitian dan persepsi yang mayoritas positif menyiratkan bahwa mind mapping merupakan strategi yang cocok untuk mengembangkan gagasan pada penulisan teks argumentatif. Maka, pada penelitian selanjutnya, menarik untuk melihat fungsi mind mapping pada komunitas belajar yang lebih besar dan menggabungkannya dengan strategi lain untuk mengoptimalkan hasil belajar. Kata Kunci: Argumen; teks argumentatif; mind mapping; persepsi How to Cite: Rosita, E., Halimi, S. S. (2023). The Effectiveness of Mind Mapping in Constructing Arguments in Writing an Argumentative Text. IJEE (Indonesian Journal of English Education), 10(1), 126-143. doi:10.15408/ijee.v10i1.31848. mailto:sshalimi@gmail.com IJEE (Indonesian Journal of English Education), 10(1), 2023 127-143 http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee | DOI: http://doi.org/10.15408/ijee.v10i1.31848 P-ISSN: 2356-1777, E-ISSN: 2443-0390 | This is an open access article under CC-BY-SA license INTRODUCTION In teaching writing, teachers have a responsibility to help students create a text composition by giving them explicit and systematic guidance (Poch et al., 2020). It is essential to implement appropriate writing techniques to assist students in composing a text either by providing a model (Keen, 2021), assigning a pre-task (Johnson, 2014), or using a prewriting activity (Ellis, 2021). Therefore, teachers must fully understand the target audience, the purpose, and the function of the text beforehand (Bachani, 2015). In Indonesia, particularly at the senior high school level, which implements a national curriculum, students learn how to write various kinds of text types, which are getting more complex; one of the most challenging ones is argumentative text writing. It requires higher-order thinking skills (Chen et al., 2021) as it involves a cognitive process to think analytically and to organize creative and critical ideas (Aziz & Ahmad, 2017). However, in general, students' cognitive abilities at this level have not developed optimally. They still have limited ideas and cannot state logical arguments. This problem was also encountered by the students in grade XI in one of the private schools in Indonesia. This was identified through observation of the process and the outcomes of the writing activities. The students found that argumentative writing was difficult. Therefore, this experimental study was conducted o an experimental group of 15 students and a control group of 9 students to determine the effectiveness of mind mapping as a prewriting strategy when students were developing argumentative texts. A mind map is a conceptual diagram (Wette, 2017) that was first introduced by Tony Buzan (Sbaa et al., 2022) and is often used as a strategy for learning writing (O'hara & Budiyono, 2019). Using the shapes, keywords, branches, line connectors, and other components in a mind map makes organizing ideas and creating a well- structured text easier. It accommodates thinking processes by exposing relevant detailed information, organizing or clustering, and linking ideas (Buzan & Buzan, 2009). Applying the mind-mapping strategy in writing practices improves students' ability to organize ideas and articulate them in the text (Wette, 2017) because it implements an associative memory model. It accommodates the information processing in the brain and forms interconnections between neurons (Swestyani et al., 2018). Mind mapping enables the activation of the http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee IJEE (Indonesian Journal of English Education), 10(1), 2023 128-143 http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee | DOI: http://doi.org/10.15408/ijee.v10i1.31848 P-ISSN: 2356-1777, E-ISSN: 2443-0390 | This is an open access article under CC-BY-SA license left brain, which is linked to language processing, and the right brain, which is connected to creativity. Thus, mind mapping in the classroom is ideal because it balances the students' brain functions (Jensen, 2008). Some prior research has revealed that mind mapping is an effective strategy in teaching writing. At the high school level, it is used as a brainstorming strategy for writing various text types (Riswanto & Putra, 2012). When writing challenges increase, such as in argumentative texts at the university level, the mind mapping strategy can produce a cohesive text (Saputra et al., 2021). Writing essays with a mind map also provides a concrete structure for a specific topic, which enables students to distinguish positive from negative ideas (Vijayavalsalan, 2016). The mind mapping strategy used in the teaching process has proven effective in increasing the motivation and participation of both high and low- motivated students. A study of students learning to write a hortatory exposition in a vocational high school showed that the mind-mapping strategy positively improved students' post-test results (Ernidawati & Sutopo, 2017). The study revealed that applying the mind map reduced some psychological problems related to EFL self-efficacy and self- confidence in writing (Alluhaybi, 2015). Using the strategy in writing encouraged students to engage in dynamic idea exploration and discussion. Those who previously were worried and doubtful were better at developing ideas (Saed & AL-Omari, 2014). This brainstorming strategy impacted the students' positive attitudes toward writing (DePorter & Hernacki, 2005). The role of mind mapping as a potential strategy that can be applied to a classroom context was a solution to the problems underlying this research. This research aimed to determine the implication of using the mind mapping strategy on the experimental group participants' argument development in composing an argumentative text. The strategy's effectiveness was found by observing the difference between the pre-test and post-test scores of the group of students who used mind mapping and those who did not. This study also revealed the participants' perception of mind mapping as an argumentative text prewriting strategy. METHOD This research employed a mixed method approach (Creswell, 2015), http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee IJEE (Indonesian Journal of English Education), 10(1), 2023 129-143 http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee | DOI: http://doi.org/10.15408/ijee.v10i1.31848 P-ISSN: 2356-1777, E-ISSN: 2443-0390 | This is an open access article under CC-BY-SA license presenting both qualitative and quantitative data. The methodology used included the research design, site and participants, data collection, and analysis. Research design This mixed-method research used a pragmatic worldview as the guiding philosophy. This philosophy emphasizes that the research is problem-centered and practice-oriented and results from implementing a strategy into action (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The quantitative objective of this study was to discover the effectiveness of mind mapping as a prewriting strategy and to find the score difference between participants who used mind mapping and those who did not use it. The students' perceptions of mind mapping were then presented qualitatively. The research design used in this study refers to Creswell (2015). The study started by exploring prior research about using mind mapping as a prewriting strategy. Then, pre-test, intervention, and post-test were conducted on experimental and control groups. The findings of the study were explained qualitatively. The experimental method applied was quasi-experimental as it used a non- equivalent control (comparison) group design because the participants came from two existing classes that could not be randomized (Blair, 2016). Research site and participants The study was conducted in two classes of grade XI students in a private high school in Indonesia, one as the control group and the other as the experimental group. The participants came from various backgrounds, which influenced their language proficiency; for example, some students had grown up speaking English, had taken English course classes, or had even lived abroad. In contrast, some participants were not accustomed to speaking English because their previous schools had not adequately accommodated L2 learning. The description of the participants is presented below in Table 1. Table 1. Participant description Group Gender Proficiency Level Experimental Group (class XI, N=15) Male, N=9 Female, N=5 Low, N=4 Intermediate, N=6 Advanced N=5 Control Group (class XI, N=9) Male, N=5 Female, N=4 Low, N=4 Intermediate, N=3 Advanced N=2 The proficiency level was based on the conversion of school exam scores in http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee IJEE (Indonesian Journal of English Education), 10(1), 2023 130-143 http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee | DOI: http://doi.org/10.15408/ijee.v10i1.31848 P-ISSN: 2356-1777, E-ISSN: 2443-0390 | This is an open access article under CC-BY-SA license the previous semester, which referred to the minimum mastery criteria of the English subject. The table above shows three proficiency levels among the participants: low, intermediate, and advanced. Despite the different numbers of participants in the experimental and control groups, the distribution of proficiency was balanced. The distribution of language proficiency levels was based on the result of the student's previous semester scores, whose interval was modified from the minimum criteria score for the English subject. Data collection and analysis The data collected in this study consisted of the participants' mind maps and argumentative texts, the answers to a questionnaire, and the answers to an interview. The experimental group participants' mind- mapping assignment results, analyzed using Ohassta's rubric (2004), revealed that implementing mind mapping in the prewriting stage helped the participants develop arguments in writing argumentative texts. The argumentative texts in both groups were then evaluated using the argumentative text rubric (Tucker, 2012). A rater with 15 years of experience teaching English at high school and certified by Buzan SupermapTM training assessed these assignments. In order to determine the effectiveness of using the mind mapping strategy, the pre-test and post- test scores of the experimental and control group participants were compared using the SPSS 29.0 Nonparametric-Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test. This data analysis technique assumed that there was a significant difference between the pre-test and post-test results in research involving a small number of participants. Then, the closed-ended questionnaire instrument (Nunan & Bailey, 2009) was distributed to acquire the students' perceptions of mind mapping as an argumentative text prewriting strategy. The questionnaire was delivered through Google Forms and analyzed using SPSS 29.0 Descriptive Statistics. Finally, additional data were obtained from face-to-face interviews with all experimental group participants. The interview was aimed to explore and discover participants' perceptions of the mind-mapping strategy they had used. The interview data were analyzed using NVivo 12 software using In Vivo coding technique. http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee IJEE (Indonesian Journal of English Education), 10(1), 2023 131-143 http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee | DOI: http://doi.org/10.15408/ijee.v10i1.31848 P-ISSN: 2356-1777, E-ISSN: 2443-0390 | This is an open access article under CC-BY-SA license FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION Findings The ability of the participants to create a mind map during the prewriting stage of writing their argumentative texts was analyzed using Ohassta's rubric (2004). It demonstrated their skill level with the prewriting technique. The rubric's scale ranged from levels 1- 4. Level 4 represented the highest ability to create a mind map in terms of drawing a central image, exploring with adequate knowledge, selecting the appropriate keywords, using color/code/ connection, and developing a good flow of ideas. On the contrary, level 1 in the rubric represented the lowest ability to create mind maps. The participants' mind-mapping ability level, analyzed by Ohassta's rubric (2004), can be observed in Table 2. The experimental group participants in this study achieved level 3 in developing mind maps based on the depth of knowledge, central images, keywords, and colors/codes/ \connections criteria. They demonstrated a wide range of content development when creating a mind map. They also showed the ability to select keywords that implied their content comprehension. Furthermore, the participants also created images related to the main idea and consistently used colors/codes and connections in the mind map. Meanwhile, the participants achieved level 4 on the ideas flow criteria. The flow of ideas from complex to simple was stated clearly and accurately. They could connect the ideas from the center of the mind map. Table 2. Participants' mind map ability level Part ici- pan t Level of mind map Depth of knowl edge Cen tral pict ure Key word Color / code/ conne ction Ide as flo w S1 3 3 2 3 4 S2 3 2 2 3 4 S3 3 3 4 4 4 S4 3 4 3 3 4 S5 3 3 2 3 4 S6 3 4 3 3 4 S7 2 1 1 2 3 S8 3 3 4 3 4 S9 2 4 3 3 4 S10 3 3 4 3 4 S11 3 3 4 4 4 S12 2 3 3 2 3 S13 3 4 4 4 4 S14 3 3 4 4 4 S15 3 3 4 3 4 Mea n 2,8 3,1 3,1 3,1 3,9 The participants' levels indicated that they understood how mind maps worked and could use them consistently. The participants' average http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee IJEE (Indonesian Journal of English Education), 10(1), 2023 132-143 http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee | DOI: http://doi.org/10.15408/ijee.v10i1.31848 P-ISSN: 2356-1777, E-ISSN: 2443-0390 | This is an open access article under CC-BY-SA license achievement level implied that they could create an ideal mind map in prewriting an argumentative text. However, during the practice, the participants still received feedback and corrections regarding the length of the keywords, the limited development of branches, and the color settings while creating the mind maps. Thus, to determine the effectiveness of this strategy, a pre-test and post-test were conducted on the experimental and control groups. The results analyzed by SPSS 29.0 Nonparametric-Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test are presented in Table 3. After three argumentative writing practice sessions, 11 of the 15 experimental group participants who used mind mapping in the prewriting activity had higher post-test scores, with an average increase of 6.95 points and a favorable rating of 76.50. One participant's score decreased by an average of 1.50 points, and 3 participants had identical scores as their pre-test. The control group showed different results. The post-test scores of 7 out of 9 participants increased by an average of 5.21 points and a positive rating of 36.50. The scores of 2 participants in this group decreased, with an average of 4.25 points and a negative rating of 8.50. Table 3. Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test of the experimental and control group pre-tests and post-tests Ranks Group Pre-test - Post- test N Me an Ran k Sum of Ran ks Experimenta l group Negativ e Ranks 1 a 1.50 1.50 Positive Ranks 1 1 b 6.95 76.5 0 Ties 3 c Total 1 5 Control group Negativ e Ranks 2 a 4.25 8.50 Positive Ranks 7 b 5.21 36.5 0 Ties 0 c Total 9 a. Post-test < Pre-test b. Post-test > Pre-test c. Post-test = Pre-test Although most participants in both groups had increased post-test scores, the experimental group participants' scores were 1.74 points higher than that of the control group. The average difference in post-test score reduction in the experimental group was 2.75 points lower than in the control group. The statistical result of the analysis using the SPSS 29.0 Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test is shown in Table 4. http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee IJEE (Indonesian Journal of English Education), 10(1), 2023 133-143 http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee | DOI: http://doi.org/10.15408/ijee.v10i1.31848 P-ISSN: 2356-1777, E-ISSN: 2443-0390 | This is an open access article under CC-BY-SA license Table 4. Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test's statistics of the experimental and control group pre-test and post-test Test Statistics (Experimental group) Test Statistics (Control group) Post- test- Pre- test Post- test- Pre-test Z -2.955b Z -1.663b Asymp.Si g. (2-tailed) .003 Asymp.Sig. (2-tailed) .096 a. Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test a. Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test b. Based on opposing ranks. b. Based on negative ranks. The hypothesis is accepted in the Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test if the Asymp.Sig. The value is 0.05. In contrast, the hypothesis is rejected if the Asymp.Sig.>0.05. As a result, the experimental group statistical test output of Asymp.Sig. (2-tailed) 0.003 indicated that the hypothesis was accepted, i.e., that there was a significant difference in value between the experimental group participants' pre-tests and post-tests. Meanwhile, the hypothesis in the control group was rejected because the statistical test was Asymp.Sig.(2-tailed) 0.096>0.05. This implied that no significant difference existed between the pre-test and post- test scores of the control group participants. In conclusion, it is feasible to state that the mind-mapping strategy significantly improved the experimental group participants' writing skills. The experimental group participants' perceptions of mind mapping as an argumentative text prewriting strategy were collected through a questionnaire and interviews. The two instruments had two variables that focused on how they perceived the benefits and which component of this mind-mapping strategy contributed the most to the argument development. The data from the questionnaire were analyzed using SPSS 29.0 Descriptive Statistics, and the results are shown in Table 5. Table 5. Questionnaire Descriptive Statistics Varia ble Descriptive Statistics Que stion s N Mi ni m u m M ax im u m Mea n Std.De viatio n Mind map's benefi ts Q3 15 3 5 4.13 .516 Q4 15 3 5 4.13 .516 Q5 15 3 5 4.33 .617 Q9 15 3 5 4.13 .743 Q13 15 3 5 4.40 .632 Q14 15 3 5 4.27 .704 Q15 15 4 5 4.47 .516 Q16 15 3 5 4.27 .704 Q17 15 3 5 4.07 .799 Q18 15 3 5 4.07 .799 Q20 15 3 5 4.13 .834 Vali d N (list wise ) 15 Mind Q1 15 3 5 4.40 .632 http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee IJEE (Indonesian Journal of English Education), 10(1), 2023 134-143 http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee | DOI: http://doi.org/10.15408/ijee.v10i1.31848 P-ISSN: 2356-1777, E-ISSN: 2443-0390 | This is an open access article under CC-BY-SA license Varia ble Descriptive Statistics Que stion s N Mi ni m u m M ax im u m Mea n Std.De viatio n map's comp onent s Q2 15 3 5 4.40 .632 Q6 15 3 5 4.47 .743 Q7 15 3 5 4.33 .724 Q8 15 4 5 4.53 .516 Q10 15 2 5 4.20 .862 Q11 15 3 5 4.33 .617 Q12 15 3 5 4.27 .594 Q19 15 4 5 4.67 .488 Vali d N (list wise ) 15 The questionnaire consisted of 11 questions about the benefits of mind mapping and 9 questions about the mind map components that were useful for developing ideas. The participants selected an option based on their opinion from a Likert scale with options ranging from 1 (strongly disagree), 2 (disagree), 3 (neutral), 4 (agree), and 5 (strongly agree). Based on the average range of 4.07 to 4.67 in Table 5, we can conclude that the participants generally expressed positive opinions by selecting the 'agree and strongly agree' options. The questionnaire results were triangulated with the interview findings. It was analyzed using Nvivo 12 with the In Vivo technique by determining the nodes and child nodes based on the words that appeared most frequently in the interviews. Figure 1 illustrates the visualization of the nodes and child nodes' connection. Figure 1. NVivo Visualization Table 6. NVivo mapping Nodes Child nodes Participant The most effective mind map components Keyword S2, S3, S4, S5, S6, S7, S8, S9, S11, S12, S13 Branches S1, S9, S10, S11 Colors S4, S7, S9, S11, S14, S15 The benefits of a mind map Text structure S2, S5, S7, S10, S11 Writing interest S2, S7 Thinking abilities S4, S5 Writing convenience S1, S6, S8, S12 Exploration of content S4, S5, S6, S10, S11, S12, S13 Time efficiency S9, S10, S11 Not seeing any progress. S3, S14, S15 http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee IJEE (Indonesian Journal of English Education), 10(1), 2023 135-143 http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee | DOI: http://doi.org/10.15408/ijee.v10i1.31848 P-ISSN: 2356-1777, E-ISSN: 2443-0390 | This is an open access article under CC-BY-SA license A connecting line in the NVivo 12 visualization indicates the connection between cases (student 1/ S1 – student 15/ S15), nodes, and child nodes. Each formed connection represents a sentence about nodes and child nodes from the interview transcription. Table 6 below shows the mapping of nodes and child nodes to make it easier to understand Figure 1. Table 6 shows the two research- related nodes (1) the most effective mind map components and (2) the benefits of mind mapping. The child nodes formed in the mind map components that were most effective in assisting participants in developing ideas were (1) keywords, (2) colors, and (3) branches. Meanwhile, the benefits of the mind mapping strategy mentioned by the participants consisted of (1) exploration of content, (2) text structure, (3) writing interest, (4) time efficiency, (5) writing convenience, and (6) thinking abilities; however, some of them also said they (7) did not feel they had made any progress. The relationship between the two nodes in the data provided an overview of how the participants perceived the use of mind maps when writing argumentative texts. Discussion This section outlines the effectiveness of Buzan's mind mapping as a prewriting strategy for developing arguments in argumentative text writing. The results show how the participants implemented the strategy and its impact on the post-test outcomes. Furthermore, this part also explains the students' perspective of the mind-mapping strategy. The discussion emphasizes how the research findings support or complement prior studies. Mind Mapping as a Prewriting Strategy At the beginning of the exercise, the participants first learned how to create a handwritten mind map. They developed mind maps by exploring information through various academic and popular literature on the Internet. The participants in Saputra et al.'s study (2021) also applied similarly and utilized digital sources to find supplementary material. One sample of a participant's handwritten mind map in this research is illustrated in Figure 2. http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee IJEE (Indonesian Journal of English Education), 10(1), 2023 136-143 http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee | DOI: http://doi.org/10.15408/ijee.v10i1.31848 P-ISSN: 2356-1777, E-ISSN: 2443-0390 | This is an open access article under CC-BY-SA license Figure 2. A sample of a handwritten mind map Figure 2 displays how the participant first put down the main topic, followed by the subtopics. Further, the branches were written clockwise to make it easier for the brain to separate similar ideas and scopes, and each group had a similar color. The flow of ideas from general to specific was represented by the shape of branches curved from thick to thin. The information became more complex and detailed as additional branches were formed. This participant's technique was close to the one that Buzan introduced. As all participants had a common interest in technology, they were also introduced to digital mind mapping through various apps such as Xmind and Canva. The samples of Xmind and Canva mind maps which were created by the participants in this study, are shown in Figures 3 and 4. Figure 3. A sample of an Xmind digital mind map Figure 4. A sample of the Canva digital mind map Figures 3 and 4 show that the participants could create mind maps independently. Although using a digital mind map was operated based on a similar principle that Buzan introduced, each application had its unique features. The participants had different preferences when creating mind maps, whether done manually by handwriting or digitally by using an application. Despite the difference, the benefits of both mind mapping creation methods http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee IJEE (Indonesian Journal of English Education), 10(1), 2023 137-143 http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee | DOI: http://doi.org/10.15408/ijee.v10i1.31848 P-ISSN: 2356-1777, E-ISSN: 2443-0390 | This is an open access article under CC-BY-SA license were the same; the participants used mind maps as a prewriting strategy to explore ideas that impacted text quality and time efficiency. By using the mind maps in the prewriting stage, the participants could complete writing assignments within 90 minutes. This showed that they had made significant progress because most participants could not complete their assignments on time. The most critical aspect of producing the mind maps was how the participants used them to express their thoughts on a particular topic. This point was also stated by Saputra et al. (2021) that the mind map components helped students express their ideas. They generally demonstrated this ability during the mind-mapping exercise process and showed a capability to implement the mind- mapping components based on Buzan's procedure. Mind Map Implications of mind mapping for Argumentative Text Writing Overall, the participants demonstrated adequate skills when creating a mind map. The experimental group participant post-test results improved significantly after using mind maps to construct arguments in their argumentative texts. In contrast, there was no significant increase in scores among the control group participants. This finding showed that mind mapping was more effective as a prewriting strategy than other methods. Aligned with the experimental study by Riswanto & Putra (2012), mind mapping increased the participants' post-test scores. The ability to create an appropriate mind map influenced the depth of content, the direction of developing ideas, and the efficiency of time when the participants wrote argumentative texts. This affected the significance of the increased scores of participants who used mind mapping during the prewriting stage. Mind mapping, as well as improving writing scores, also had a positive impact on participant attitudes toward writing. Even though argumentative text writing in senior high school was considered difficult, the participants found it easier to write after they first created a mind map to write the text. As the participants were able to develop complex writing, they developed a more positive attitude toward productive skills learning (Vijayavalsalan, 2016). http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee IJEE (Indonesian Journal of English Education), 10(1), 2023 138-143 http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee | DOI: http://doi.org/10.15408/ijee.v10i1.31848 P-ISSN: 2356-1777, E-ISSN: 2443-0390 | This is an open access article under CC-BY-SA license Participant Perceptions about the Benefits of Mind Mapping The participants shared 7 benefits of mind mapping as explained in the findings. They stated that the structure of the argumentative text was affected by the argument framework they developed in the mind map. Based on the questionnaire, 46.7% of the participants agreed, and another 46.7% strongly agreed that grouping ideas on the mind map branches made writing more accessible. This finding supports Vijayavalsalan's (2016) study, which claimed that mind mapping increases thinking capacity by allowing students to categorize ideas orderly and logical. The participants could better distinguish the ideas for their text through their mind map's precise structure. The keywords from each mind map branch were transformed into well- structured text. This writing development made the participants aware of their improvement and helped them gain better confidence in writing. However, there are some noteworthy points to consider; even though mind mapping supported the text structures, specific skills were required to connect each idea. Participants had to be able to turn the keywords into sentences and ensure that all information was linked together. Mind mapping, in terms of content exploration, allowed the participants to express and categorize all their ideas following the writing plan. 40% of the participants said they strongly agreed, and 33.3% agreed that they came up with new ideas while making mind maps. The content exploration stage started by choosing a topic and was followed by the participants exploring various sources, mainly through technology, to search for data that would be developed in the mind map. Developing well-classified and structured ideas enabled the participants to write more quickly. Forty-six point seven percent (46.7%) of the participants strongly agreed, and 40% agreed they could use their time more efficiently. Compared to other prewriting strategies, the clear-listed points on the mind map prevented time wasted due to a writing block. The mind map strategy reduced the participants' burden when writing texts. 73.3% of the participants strongly agreed with the statement, and 20% agreed. Since a brief overview of the ideas to be developed was already available, the participants enjoyed the writing process more. It dispelled their previous thought of argumentative writing as a complex skill. In line with a study conducted by Saed & AL-Omari (2014), the participants eventually had http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee IJEE (Indonesian Journal of English Education), 10(1), 2023 139-143 http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee | DOI: http://doi.org/10.15408/ijee.v10i1.31848 P-ISSN: 2356-1777, E-ISSN: 2443-0390 | This is an open access article under CC-BY-SA license better motivation because they could overcome writing difficulties and produce more organized texts. The findings of this study also support the results of the previous research by Ernidawati & Sutopo (2017), who discovered that both high and low-motivated students could use a mind map to develop ideas in writing. However, some participants in this study thought that the mind map was ineffective for them. The factors could be related to their proficiency level and learning modality. If the participants lack language skills, they are likely unable to create mind maps and prefer to develop ideas by stacking notes. Participants Perceptions About the Most Effective Mind Map Components Even though Buzan & Buzan (2009) stated that ideally, a mind map contained branches, pictures, colors, keywords, and symbols, this research showed that the participants only used three of the components effectively, namely (1) the keywords, (2) colors, and (3) branches. The keywords in the mind map assisted them in widening their arguments. Using the keywords made developing sentences in the text more accessible, according to 47% of the participants who agreed or strongly agreed with this statement. They overcame writing challenges and could recall the sources they had read. Since each word in the mind map could be interpreted from different angles, it helped to strengthen participants' critical thinking and creative writing abilities. The participants mentioned that the mind map's branches, in addition to the keywords, were essential for the creation of ideas. Sixty percent (60%) strongly agreed, while 33.3% agreed that they could develop more branches in their mind maps after repeatedly practicing. The mind map's branches contained the main points of arguments that they would explain in the text. The connection between the branches and the main topic also helped them comprehend the direction of the development of their writing. The branches made it simpler to comprehend how the various components of the mind map connected. The other component mentioned by the participants as the most substantial one in the mind map was colors. The mind map had color groupings that represented a topic development. Since each group of branches shared the same color, it was easier for the brain to concentrate on related claims, making the idea clusters stand out clearly. The variety of colors http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee IJEE (Indonesian Journal of English Education), 10(1), 2023 140-143 http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee | DOI: http://doi.org/10.15408/ijee.v10i1.31848 P-ISSN: 2356-1777, E-ISSN: 2443-0390 | This is an open access article under CC-BY-SA license also increased writing motivation, especially for visual learners. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTION The result of this experimental study provides an overview of the potential of mind mapping as a prewriting strategy when writing argumentative texts. Related to the research applied, the use of mind mapping at the prewriting stage contributed to a significant impact on the post-test scores of the experimental group participants. Thus, the implications of the various components in the mind map were proven to uplift the quality of the argumentative texts produced and were a good strategy for developing ideas. The participants shared their perceptions of the most effective mind map components when developing ideas and the impact felt after using the strategy. Overall, most participants mentioned that they had significantly improved their writing skills, and it was easier to write an argumentative text by creating mind maps in the prewriting stage. This research also found that the participants only needed 2-3 components of keywords, branches, and colors to create effective mind maps. When using a mind map and its components, the participants practiced exploring content which involved thinking skills to organize their ideas in a clear structure. The concrete structure in the mind map helped the participants distinguish the ideas in the text. When the writing structure is presented in a systematic flow, it is easier for participants to develop their ideas, which also impacts time efficiency. Due to the various advantages of mind mapping, it is recommended to implement this strategy in the classroom writing processes. It enables students to write an informative and firmly structured text. Mind mapping can be classified as a student-oriented strategy because it allows students to explore the information they want to know freely. Therefore, they can find and learn new knowledge independently. The participant perspectives on mind mapping in this study showed the importance of considering the application of mind mapping in writing practice. It is necessary because the participants might have their own learning modalities and preferences affecting their writing. Mind mapping would be preferable among the participants with visual learning modality. On the other hand, http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee IJEE (Indonesian Journal of English Education), 10(1), 2023 141-143 http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee | DOI: http://doi.org/10.15408/ijee.v10i1.31848 P-ISSN: 2356-1777, E-ISSN: 2443-0390 | This is an open access article under CC-BY-SA license participants with different learning modalities, such as auditory and kinesthetic, might choose different ways to develop ideas before writing the text. These factors must be considered so that mind mapping can be used effectively in a classroom setting by paying attention to all students' learning characteristics. If there are 3 writing exercises, the teachers can probably direct the students to create a mind map in 1-2 prewriting activities to combine various brainstorming strategies, especially mind mapping. Long-term use of mind mapping has the potential to help students understand material with higher complexity. In future research, it would be interesting to test the mind mapping strategy in larger groups and combine it with other strategies to contribute to student writing skills development. REFERENCES Alluhaybi, M. (2015). Psychology and EFL writing. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 192, 371-378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro. 2015.06.053 Aziz, F. I. A., & Ahmad, U. K. (2017). Persuasive writing: How students argue. Sains Humanika, 9(4-2). https://doi.org/10.11113/sh.v9n 4-2.1356 Bachani, M. (2015). Teaching writing. Retrieved from http:/waymadedu. Org/StudentSupport/Teaching% 20Writing. Pdf. Blair, L. (2016). Choosing a methodology. In Writing a graduate thesis or dissertation, 4, 52- 53. Sense Publishers. Buzan, T., & Buzan, B. (2009). The mind map book: Unlock your creativity, boost your memory, change your life. BBC. Chen, H., Lewis, H., & Myhill, D. (2021). Fostering critical reasoning: Developing argumentative competence in early and middle primary years. The Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 44(2), 46–61. https://doi.org/10.3316/aeipt.22 9063 Creswell, J. W. (2015). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Pearson. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed). SAGE. De Potter, B., & Hernarcki, M. (2005). Quantum learning. Kaifa. Ellis, R. (2021). Does planning before writing help? Options for pre-task planning in the teaching of writing. ELT Journal. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccab 051 http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee https://doi.org/10.11113/sh.v9n4-2.1356 https://doi.org/10.11113/sh.v9n4-2.1356 https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccab051 https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccab051 IJEE (Indonesian Journal of English Education), 10(1), 2023 142-143 http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee | DOI: http://doi.org/10.15408/ijee.v10i1.31848 P-ISSN: 2356-1777, E-ISSN: 2443-0390 | This is an open access article under CC-BY-SA license Ernidawati, E., & Sutopo, D. (2017). Mind mapping and brainstorming strategies in students' writing with high and low interest. English Education Journal, 7(2), 168-174. https://doi.org/10.15294/eej.v7i2 .15740 Jensen, E. (2008). Brain-based learning. The new paradigm of teaching. Corwin Press. Johnson, M. D. (2014). Does planning really help?: Effectiveness of planning in L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Teaching & Research, 3(1), 107-118. Keen, J. (2021). Teaching writing: Process, practice, and policy. Changing English, 29(1), 24-39. https://doi.org/10.1080/1358684 X.2021.2008229 Nunan, D. & Bailey, K.M. (2009). Exploring second language classroom research. Cengage Learning. Ohassta. (2004). Mind map rubric. Ontario History and Social Sciences Teachers' Association. O'Hara, D., & Budiyono, B. (2019). Using mind mapping to improve argumentative writing score of eleventh graders. Magister Scientiae, 1(45), 106-122. Poch, A.L, Hamby, M., & Chen, X. (2020). Secondary teachers' beliefs about teaching writing to typically achieving and struggling adolescent writers. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 36(6), 497-520. https://doi.org/10.1080/1057356 9.2019.1666759 Riswanto & Putra, P. P. (2012). The use of mind mapping strategy in the teaching of writing at SMAN 3 Bengkulu, Indonesia. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 2(21), 60-18. Sbaa, M., Faouzi, L., Eljahechi, M., & Lghdaic, F. (2022). The mind map at the service of learning. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Analysis. 5(12), 3564-3581. https://doi.org/10.47191/ijmra/ v5-i12-37 Saed, H. A., & AL-Omari, H. A. (2014). The effectiveness of a proposed program based on a mind mapping strategy in developing the writing achievement of eleventh grade EFL students in Jordan and their attitudes towards writing. Journal of Education and Practice, 5, 88-109. Saputra, N., Setiyawan, D., & Sumarlam. (2021). The use of mind mapping model in learning argumentative essay writing. Budapest International Research and Critics Institute-Journal (BIRCI- Journal). https://doi.org/10.33258/birci.v4 i4.3060 Swestyani, S., Masykuri, M., Prayitno, B. A., Rinanto, Y., & Widoretno, S. (2018). An analysis of logical thinking using mind mapping. Journal of Physics. Conference Series, http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee https://doi.org/10.1080/1358684X.2021.2008229 https://doi.org/10.1080/1358684X.2021.2008229 IJEE (Indonesian Journal of English Education), 10(1), 2023 143-143 http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee | DOI: http://doi.org/10.15408/ijee.v10i1.31848 P-ISSN: 2356-1777, E-ISSN: 2443-0390 | This is an open access article under CC-BY-SA license 1022(1), 12020. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742- 6596/1022/1/012020 Tucker, C. R. (2012). Blended learning in grades 4-12: Leveraging the power of technology to create student-centered classrooms. Corwin. Vijayavalsalan, B. (2016). Mind mapping as a strategy for enhancing essay writing skills. The New Educational Review. 45. 137-150. https://doi.org/10.15804/tner.20 16.45.3.11 Wette, R. (2017). Using mind maps to reveal and develop genre knowledge in a graduate writing course. Journal of Second Language Writing, 38(58–71). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.20 17.09.005. http://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/ijee