Article Title (Size 12; Bold; Times New Roman) www.jsser.org Journal of Social Studies Education Research SosyalBilgilerEğitimiAraştırmalarıDergisi 2019:10 (3),176-192 Reading Habits, Grammatical Knowledge, Creative Thinking, and Attainment in Academic Writing: Evidence from Bengkulu University, Indonesia Erni Sukesi1, Emzir2 & Sabarti Akhadiyah3 Abstract This study aims to establish whether any correlation exists between (1) students’ reading habits, (2) knowledge of grammar, (3) creative thinking, and (4) academic writing. This study assessed 69 students from the English Department at the Faculty of Teacher Training and Education Sciences (FKIP), Bengkulu University, Indonesia, with them being selected through proportional random sampling as subjects for the study. A survey with test and questionnaire techniques was employed to collect data, which was then analyzed through multiple regression and correlation analysis. The results of the analysis suggest that positive correlations exist between (1) students’ reading habits and learning outcomes for academic writing, (2) knowledge of grammar and learning outcomes for academic writing, (3) creative thinking and learning outcomes for academic writing, and (4) students’ reading habits, knowledge of grammar, and creative thinking on the one hand, and student’s learning outcomes for academic writing on the other hand. Keywords: academic writing, reading habits, grammar knowledge, creative thinking Introduction This study examines the unsatisfactory academic writing abilities of students at the English Department of Bengkulu University, Indonesia. The academic writing ability of these students has been identified as being affected by grammatical knowledge, reading habits, and creative thinking. This study therefore aims to establish how these factors affect the students’ performance of academic writing. Steinlen (2018) suggests that students writing in an English as a foreign language (EFL) classroom context should show an awareness of their own communicative goals, the reader, and the writing context. Academic writing is a major challenge for many students in Indonesia, as well as many EFL students around the world. EFL writing is useful in two respects: First, it motivates students to think, organize their ideas, and develop the ability to summarize, analyze 1 Doctor Candidate, Universitas Negeri Jakarta & Universitas Bengkulu, Indonesia; email: ernimuryono@gmail.com 2 Prof. Dr. Universitas Negeri Jakarta, Indonesia; email: emzir.unj@unj.ac.id 3 Prof. Dr. Universitas Muhammadiyah Prof. Dr. HAMKA, Jakarta, Indonesia. mailto:emzir.unj@unj.ac.id Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2019: 10(3),176-192 and criticize. Second, it strengthens how students learn, think, and reflect on the English language (Rao, 2007). During undergraduate education, writing is one of the fundamental channels for transmitting existing knowledge in most academic fields. The college composition or first-year writing classes of undergraduate programs represent an initial step in learning academic writing, and acquiring professional writing skills is quite a substantial achievement. At the same time, however, becoming a competent writer can be a demanding process for first-year students and their teachers because it embodies various components (e.g., vocabulary, grammar, citation procedures, genre variations, etc.), but gaining such competencies in this productive skill will stand the test of time (Tanyer, 2015). Breuer (2017) advocates that writing academic texts in one’s native language (L1) and in a foreign language (FL) places high cognitive demands on students. In order to cope with these demands, students should learn to adapt their writing methods flexibly to their tasks, depending on the language and the genre they are writing in. The ability to write is also related to a student’s level of knowledge of English grammar. Indeed, the grammatical knowledge of students has a very close relationship with their writing abilities. This accords with the principle of transfer of learning, which states that the learning-transfer process will run smoothly when there are similarities between the skills being studied and the existing skills of students. Grammatical knowledge is a basic capital for students when improving their writing skills. With this basic capital, students will feel confident in their abilities and always be optimistic about every learning activity, which ultimately invokes a desire to achieve the best-possible learning outcomes. Students with a good knowledge of grammar tend to have good writing skills as well. Another factor that affects students’ ability is their ability to think creatively, which in turn influences the ability to identify, summarize, or explain a problem. Writing encourages creative thinking. In addition, reading and writing self-efficacy have been recognized as b e i n g related to, and predictors of, writing performance (Tanyer, 2015; Prat-Sala & Redford, 2012; Shell, Murphy & Bruning, 1989). As reading academic texts and writing essays are two essential components of undergraduate programs, discovering and discussing a belief in reading and writing ability becomes valuable (Tanyer, 2015). Drawing on the above background, this study asks the following research questions: Sukesi, et al. 178 1) Is there any relationship between reading habits and academic writing attainment? 2) Is there a correlation between grammatical knowledge and academic writing attainment? 3) Is there a relationship between creative thinking and academic writing attainment? 4) Is there a double relationship between reading habits, grammatical knowledge, and creative thinking on one hand and academic writing attainment on the other hand? Literature Review Writing Writing is defined as “a reflective activity that requires enough time to think about the specific topic and to analyse and classify any background knowledge. The writer needs a suitable language to structure these ideas in the form of a coherent discourse” (Chakraverty & Gautum, 2000, p. 34). Writing requires “a complex activity, a social act which reflects the writer’s communicative skills which is difficult to develop and learn, especially in an EFL context” (Shokrpour & Fallahzadeh, 2007, p. 17). Recently, Myhill (2009) views L1 writing as being composed of three domains: a cognitive psychological perspective, a sociocultural perspective, and a linguistic perspective. Writing has certain advantages over speaking. According to Manjet (2015), these advantages include the following: (i) writing is permanent, so it can be read over and over again; (ii) in terms of time, the author has sufficient time to plan, review, and revise his or her work; (iii) writing can overcome limitations in time and space between readers and authors; (iv) orthographically, writing can be perceived in terms of pressure, intonation, content, pause, and so on; (v) in terms of complexity, written language is more perfect than oral language; (vi) writing may be neatly arranged and more formal than spoken language; and (vii) written language tends to be more varied with more efficient and effective words than spoken language (Wiegle, 2002). The outcome of learning academic writing in this research refers to the ability of a student to write in the cognitive, sociocultural, and linguistic domains after completing the learning process. The purpose of teaching academic writing is to prepare students for the final task of writing a thesis. In this study, the outcomes of learning academic writing are gleaned from students’ thesis proposals. Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2019: 10(3),176-192 Reading Habits Reading habits have been identified as affecting the acquisition of academic writing skills. In general, the more frequently a student reads, the greater the level of academic writing he or she achieves. Understanding is obtained through mastering concepts as a reader. The relationship between reading and writing is very close, although not quite as closely related as listening and speaking. To be able to write well, we need to read a lot, and reading is the primary means for improving writing skill (Chettri & Rout, 2013). According to Chakraverty and Gautum, 2000), custom is a factor in a consistent life that is often reflected in an unconscious pattern, while habits are temporary and result in effectiveness or ineffectiveness. Habits are formed based on three things: science (related to the what and why), skills (related to the how), and desire (related to motivation). Muhamad (2014) divides and differentiates habits into two: (i) a reflex or automatic action that is a product of neuro-muscular organization and serves to defend or protect the subject and (ii) a patterned and learned action through repetitive activity. According to Akhadiah (2007), a human child is born with the potential to learn a language. With this potential, the child can learn any language. Language includes a set of habits, which are behavioral patterns that are formed in a neuro-muscular system accidentally or without full awareness. Akhadiah (2007) says that the understanding of a read text can be achieved through analytical activities, namely breaking down and fragmenting the text into smaller elements. Analytical activities should then be followed by a process of synthesis, namely unifying opinions by connecting them and then drawing conclusions based on part or all of the text. Reading comprehension activities are constructive, and for this reason, some background knowledge related to the topic of the text is needed to understand a written text completely and explicitly. A deep understanding of the reading will then result from appreciating the contents of the text in the form of a mental process to absorb the content or message and gain an impression of the text. Once this appreciation has been achieved, the reader is not only able to translate, interpret, and extrapolate the contents of the text—he or she is also able to incorporate meaning and value into this meaning. Understanding the text will also determine the reader’s attitude toward the content (Alogali, 2018; Muslim, 2014). Sukesi, et al. 180 Guy (1989, p. 164) suggests that reading is a complex activity because it depends on one’s language skills and the level of one’s reasoning. Necessary skills include: (i) making conclusions about the meaning of words and handling unknown vocabulary; (ii) understanding the information explicitly expressed in the text; (iii) understanding the information implicitly conveyed in the text; (iv) understanding the conceptual meaning; and (v) interpreting the text in the light of other content outside the text. Grammatical Knowledge Suriasumantri (2000) suggests that natural phenomena, according to the old assumption as adopted by empiricists, are obtained through the five human senses (e.g., by seeing, feeling, etc.). The various characteristics of natural phenomena are therefore experienced repeatedly, resulting in the drawing of conclusions and generalizations. In acquiring such knowledge, the individual has a rational mind, so if someone expresses his knowledge, but it is difficult to be accepted by this rational mind, the idea cannot be classed as knowledge. Besides being obtained through experience, knowledge can also be acquired through learning. According to Winkel (1996), learning is a mental activity that actively interacts with the environment to bring about changes in knowledge, understanding, skills, and attitudes in the learner (Winkel, 1996). According to Malik (1994), learning is a form of growth as new changes occur in people as they gain new experiences. It is further explained that learning activities can be broken down into three groups, namely (i) learning aimed at modifying behavior, (ii) learning aimed at understanding the symptoms of the environment, and (iii) learning in a broader sense, such as improving the career quality of the learner. Schrampfer’s (1999) material for grammatical knowledge includes verb tenses, subject–verb agreements, nouns, pronouns, modals, the passive voice, infinitives, gerunds, coordinating conjunctions, conditional sentences, supplementary grammar units, contractions, preposition combinations, and verb forms. These materials are formed into structured sentences. According to Brinton (1984), a mastery of grammar is very important in writing. The ability to structure language plays a role in both fluency in speaking and writing skills. The knowledge of grammar in this study is reflected in students’ grammar knowledge scores as measured by TOEFL tests. Learning outcomes in this cognitive domain include (i) knowledge, (ii) understanding, (iii) application, (iv) analysis, (v) synthesis, and (vi) evaluation related to verb Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2019: 10(3),176-192 tenses, subject–verb agreements, nouns, pronouns, modals, the passive voice, gerunds, infinitives, coordinating conjunctions, conditional sentences, supplementary grammar units, contractions, preposition combinations, and verb forms that are applied into sentence patterns. Creative Thinking According to Ghokale (1995), the ability to think creatively comes from (i) an attitude in individuals to solve problems they face, (ii) knowledge of methods for thinking logically and formulating appropriate arguments, and (iii) other skills that can help apply the knowledge they possess. Creative thinking is a persistent effort to test every belief or piece of knowledge in order to draw the right conclusions (Eragamreddy, 2013). According to Fisher (2001), creative thinking is a style of thinking that is used when facing various problems by focusing the mind, so people’s intellectual abilities can be enhanced. Furthermore, Ghokale (1995) suggests that improving an individual’s ability for creative thinking can be achieved by (i) recognizing the problem, (ii) using the right tools to solve the problems being faced, (iii) collecting all information, (iv) recognizing unstated assumptions and values, (v) using the right language, (vi) interpreting data, (vii) evaluating each statement, (viii) recognizing the relationships between each statement so they can be logically accepted, (ix) making conclusions and generalizations, (x) testing those conclusions, (xi) reconstructing these conclusions with broader knowledge and experience, and (xii) making more accurate conclusions or statements and comparing them with the life events of other people. According to Paul (2000), the ability to think creatively can be improved by holding group discussions, increasing fieldwork practices, and adapting to technological advances, so students can solve the problems they face. According to Douglas (2000), creative thinking comprises (i) identifying problems, (ii) grouping each type of statement, (iii) identifying stakeholders and the failure experienced by others, (iv) identifying a methodology, and (v) framing personal opinions and acknowledging other perspectives. Fisher (2001) maintains that the ability to think creatively is very closely related to the ability to act creatively, so it can be said that creativeness and creative thinking is a process that comprises flexible thinking, the ability to develop ideas, independent consideration, resilience in work, and selectivity in accepting the opinions of others. Operationally, creativity is an ability that reflects fluency, flexibility, and originality in thinking, as well as the ability to elaborate, develop, enrich, Sukesi, et al. 182 and detail an idea. Thus, creative thinking is an ability that reflects flexibility in thinking, the ability to develop ideas, courage in establishment, independence in consideration, resilience in work, and selectivity in accepting others’ opinions. Methods Design and Setting This research was conducted among the English Department of FKIP (Faculty of Teaching and Educational Sciences) University of Bengkulu over eight months. The research stages included: (i) development of the survey, (ii) testing of the instrument, (iii) data collection, (iv) data analysis, and (v) the drawing of conclusions from the research results. This research applied the survey method with the correlation technique, being designed to establish the relationship between the three independent variables and the one dependent variable. The independent variables comprised reading habits (X1), knowledge of grammar (X2), and creative thinking (X3), while the dependent variable was the outcome of learning academic writing (Y). To this end, the following research hypotheses were proposed: 1) There is a positive relationship between reading habits and academic writing attainment. 2) There is a positive relationship between grammatical knowledge and academic writing attainment. 3) There is a positive relationship between creative thinking and academic writing attainment. 4) There is a positive relationship between reading habits, grammatical knowledge, and creative thinking combined and academic writing attainment. Sample The population for this study was 345 students, from which 20% (69 students) were selected for the sample using the proportional random sampling technique. The sample’s students had completed the Writing I, Writing II, and Writing III courses in the English Department of the University of Bengkulu. Procedures The data in this study were collected using questionnaires to assess reading habits and creative thinking, while TOEFL test results were used to evaluate grammatical knowledge. Academic Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2019: 10(3),176-192 writing was assessed in terms of students’ thesis proposals. The questionnaires to capture data about reading habits and creative thinking were structured on the Likert scale. The preparation of each questionnaire was based on indicators for each construct and then developed into statements. They were then tested to determine the validity and reliability of the instrument. Data Analysis Techniques We used the Statistical Program for Social Science (SPSS) software for windows version 11.01 to analyze the data. Descriptive analysis was performed to establish the average, standard deviation, frequency distribution, mode, and median, as well as to build histograms for scores for reading habits, grammatical knowledge, creative thinking, and the outcomes of learning academic writing. In addition, inferential analysis was used in this study with the aim of using the research results for hypothesis testing with generalization. In the early stages of testing, the analytical requirements were used to test the assumptions. The requirements that needed to be met before performing regression and correlation analysis for hypothesis testing were: (i) the sample had to be taken randomly and meet a minimum size; (ii) for each predictor price group X, respondent Y must be independent and normally distributed; and (iii) the between variables must be the same. Thus, the analysis requires a normality test, a linearity test, and a multicollinearity test. The normality test aims to test whether the sample follows a distribution that is close to the normal distribution of the population. One technique that is used to perform normality testing involves estimation error followed by a Lilliefors test. A linearity test is performed in order to learn whether or not there is a linear relationship between the independent variables and the dependent variable. It can also indicate the level of deviation in the relationships between variables. Before testing the hypotheses, a calculation of the correlation coefficient between the independent variables was performed with the aim of determining whether there is a high correlation coefficient between the independent variables to be regressed. Once all the analytical requirements were met, hypothesis testing was performed. The collected data was therefore analyzed through a regression analysis technique, namely multiple regression. Sukesi, et al. 184 Findings Results of the Requirements Analysis The normality test was used to see the frequency deviations from the theoretical frequencies. To test the assumption of normality, the non-parametric, one-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was applied (Table 1). If p is greater than 0.05, the distribution is normal, while if p is less than 0.05, it indicates the distribution is not normal. Table 1. Normality test Variable Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z p Remark Reading habits 0.652 0.789 Normal Grammatical knowledge 1.116 0.166 Normal Creative thinking 0.488 0.971 Normal Academic writing 1.348 0.053 Normal The result of normality test indicates that the variables for reading habits, grammatical knowledge, creative thinking, and academic writing follow a normal distribution. A further test was conducted to determine the linearity of the relationship between the independent variable and the dependent variable. This linearity test also shows the level of deviation from a linear relationship. If the linearity value p is less than 0.05, the relationship is linear, while if the value deviation from linearity p is greater than 0.05 then the relationship is not linear. Table 2. Linearity test Variable F P Remark Reading habits–academic writing 11.005 0.002 Linear Grammar knowledge–academic writing 10.394 0.002 Linear Creative thinking–academic writing 15.080 0.001 Linear Table 2 shows that reading habits, grammar knowledge, and creative thinking (all when paired with academic writing) have a linearity value p less than 0.05, indicating that the relationship is linear. A multicollinearity test looks to see whether there is a high degree of correlation between the independent variables. If such a correlation exists, then there is what is called a multicollinearity problem, which a good regression model should not have. To test for the presence or absence of multicollinearity, we can apply collinearity diagnostics on the tolerance column or read the value of VIF (Variance Inflation Factor). If the VIF value is below 10, the Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2019: 10(3),176-192 regression model does not have a multicollinearity problem, while a tolerance value under 1 also indicates there is no multicollinearity problem. See table 3. Table 3. Multicollinearity test Variable Collinearity Statistic Remark Tolerance VIF Reading habits 0.938 1.066 No multicollinearity Grammar knowledge 0.954 1.048 No multicollinearity Creative thinking 0.966 1.035 No multicollinearity Results of Hypothesis Testing The four research hypotheses tested in this research were: 1) There is a positive relationship between reading habits and academic writing attainment. 2) There is a positive relationship between grammatical knowledge and academic writing attainment. 3) There is a positive relationship between creative thinking and academic writing attainment. 4) There is a positive relationship between reading habits, grammatical knowledge, and creative thinking combined and academic writing attainment. The results of the full-model regression testing for the relationship of the independent variables (reading habits, grammatical knowledge, and creative thinking combined) with academic writing are shown in Table 4. Table 4. Regression analysis with the full model Variable F R2 p Reading habits (X1) Grammatical knowledge (X2) Creative thinking (X3) Attainment in academic writing (Y) 11.024 0.337 0.000 Table 4 shows that reading habits, grammatical knowledge, and creative thinking combined has a very significant relationship (F = 11.024, R2 = 0.337, and p = 0.000) with the attainment of academic writing. This means that the major hypothesis in this research is accepted. Following this, the staged regression analysis revealed the results presented in Table 5. Table 5. Staged regression analysis Variable Beta t p Reading habits (X1)–academic writing (Y) 0.238 2.285 0.026 Sukesi, et al. 186 Grammar knowledge (X2)–academic writing (Y) 0.256 2.481 0.016 Creative thinking (X3)–academic writing (Y) 0.374 3.640 0.001 Based on table 5, the following statements can be made: 1) There is a positive and significant correlation between reading habits (X1) and academic writing (Y) among the students of the Department of English at FKIP University of Bengkulu, with beta = 0.238, t = 2.285, and p = 0.026. 2) There is a positive and significant relationship between grammatical knowledge (X2) and academic writing (Y) among the students of the English Department at FKIP University of Bengkulu, with beta = 0.256, t = 2.481, and p = 0.016. 3) There is a positive and very significant relationship between creative thinking (X3) and academic writing (Y) among the students of the Department of English at FKIP University of Bengkulu, with beta = 0.374, t = 3.640, and p = 0.001. Discussion This study demonstrates that there is a very significant correlation between reading habits, grammatical knowledge, and creative thinking and the attainment of students’ academic writing. These factors predict students’ academic writing achievement by 33.7 percent, with the remaining 66.3 percent being explained by other factors that influence students’ academic writing learning outcomes. Amabile (1993) argues that other factors may lead to high or low individual writing skills, such as (i) cognitive ability; (ii) personal characteristics related to self-discipline, sincerity in the face of frustration, and independence; (iii) intrinsic motivation, as this greatly affects a person’s ability by inspiring an individual spirit to learn as much as possible and acquire knowledge and skills relevant to the problem at hand, so the individual can put forward ideas smoothly, solve problems with flexibility, and come up with original ideas and be able to elaborate them; and (iv) the social environment, namely the absence of pressure from it, such as in the form of oversight, assessment, or outside restrictions. According to Suryabrata (1998), factors that influence learning achievement can be classified into two groups, namely internal factors that originate within the individual (e.g., physiological and psychological factors) and external factors that come from outside the individual (e.g., social and non-social factors). Physiological factors relate to the physical state of the individual in the Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2019: 10(3),176-192 form of physical functions such as health, the five senses, and so on. Psychological factors are closely related to psychological aspects such as motivation, interests, talent, and cognitive ability. The social factors, meanwhile, refer to factors arising from fellow humans, whether or not immediately present. Non-social factors cannot be expressed through numbers, and they may include aspects like the weather conditions, the air quality, the study location, and the tools used for learning. According to Winkel (1996), individual writing skills are also determined by various factors: (i) student characteristics, including psychological and physical characteristics; (ii) teaching factors, such as knowledge of the subject matter, teaching skills, interests, motivation, attitudes, attention, health, and general physical condition; (iii) the material to be studied and the degree of difficulty and complexity; (iv) teaching media and its quality and application; (v) physical characteristics of the school, such as buildings and learning facilities; and (vi) environmental factors such as temperature, humidity, seasons, and climate. Observing the learning experience at the English Department of FKIP University of Bengkulu revealed that students’ writing abilities are still low. This has resulted from new lifestyle patterns, the environment, academic ability, teaching quality, and the facilities of the campus. There is a positive and significant correlation between reading habits and academic writing achievement in students, however, proving that well-read students will have a greater linguistic sense, and they will speak, write, and understand complex ideas better. Reading activities do require training, however, indicating a need for repetitive practice and habituation (Ramiyatun, 2003). Being fond of reading can be interpreted as having a sense of interest, and it indicates the emergence of a person’s attention and pleasure when engaging in reading activities. Having a diligent, intense attention helps individuals to deeply master a subject. When something becomes a personal habit or routine, it cannot be easily disturbed because it has become a personal pleasure to continuously engage in it. Therefore, a person with an automatic reading passion has often had this habit since childhood. The main purpose of reading, according to Guy (1989) and Douglas (2000, p. 87), is to seek and obtain information, including both the content and an understanding of its meaning. Meaning is closely related to the intent and purpose or intensity of a person in reading, so if a person has a reading habit, he or she will tend to have a brilliant thinking ability. Sukesi, et al. 188 A reading habit is key to gaining writing ability, because people who like to read will have a wider knowledge. The more knowledge a person has, the easier he or she will find it to write. There is also a positive and significant correlation between grammatical knowledge and academic writing learning outcomes in students, indicating that a mastery of grammar is very important when writing. The ability to structure words correctly is very instrumental in language, both in terms of spoken fluency and writing skills (Guy, 1989). According to Bee (2001), there are six ways to support the mastery of grammar among students: the use of scientific words, a willingness to follow scientific discussions, visits to libraries and other places of reading in spare time, positive reinforcement, and television viewing activities. Grammatical structuring by the students of the Department of English at FKIP University of Bengkulu is shown through sentence patterns, and such materials are introduced gradually to students with English majors from the first semester in the Structures I, II, and III courses. The grammatical knowledge possessed by students had a very close relationship with the outcome of learning academic writing. This accords with the principle of transfer of learning, which states that the learning process runs more smoothly when there are elements of similarity between the skills being studied and the existing skills of students. In the context of this research, the taught material deepens and extends students’ knowledge of grammar. It is also asserted that grammatical knowledge is a basic capital for students learning writing, because they will feel confident and optimistic in every learning activity, which in turn invokes a desire to achieve the best-possible learning outcome. There is a positive and very significant relationship between creative thinking ability and the student outcomes when learning academic writing, indicating that the ability to think creatively represents a mental style of solving various the problems encountered by focusing the mind and therefore improving the abilities of the individual (Fisher, 2001). According to Suharnan (1998), creative thinking involves a process of exploring and discovering new ideas in the mind, where the successful identification of ideas is achieved through the ease, clarity, and completeness of the mind when reimagining objects and situations that are relevant to the current problem. Being able to easily reimagine these previously experienced objects or events can help to discover new ideas. A creative thinking ability can also be developed through practice (Stenberg, 1995). Related to this Osborn (in Stenberg, 1995) claims that creativity can be improved by training in activities Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2019: 10(3),176-192 that can develop imagination. According to Paul (1990), students’ ability to think creatively can be improved by holding group discussions, increasing fieldwork practices, and adapting to technological advances, so students can solve the problems they face. Sternberg and Lubart (2001) maintain that the potential for creative thinking is in everyone but to varying degrees. Kuwato (1993), meanwhile, explains that creative thinking is continuous but varied. Students who have the ability to think with a high degree of creativity tend to have a desire to learn and a reasonable mind. They are eager to find something, tend to prefer hard and difficult tasks, be happy to solve problems, perform jobs passionately and with dedication, respond quickly, and answer questions, with them typically giving more answers than other students and being able to synthesize and observe implications. It can be concluded that a greater ability for creative thinking in students leads to a higher level of involvement in campus activities. Their outcomes from learning academic writing will also generally be better than those of students with not-so-creative thinking. Based on the discussion and research results given in this study, it can be said that greater reading habits positively affect the outcomes of learning academic writing. Likewise, the greater a student’s knowledge of grammar, the better the expected outcome from learning academic writing will be. In addition, a greater ability to think creatively supports a student’s ability to learn academic writing effectively. Conclusion and Suggestions In summary, the results of the analysis and the hypothesis testing of this study revealed the following findings: First, reading habits have a positive relationship with the outcomes of learning academic writing. This indicates that when students have strong reading habits, their resulting academic writing will also be stronger. Second, knowledge of grammar also has a positive relationship with learning academic writing. If therefore follows that if students’ knowledge of grammar is improved, their outcomes of learning academic writing will also increase. Third, creative thinking has a positive relationship with the outcomes of learning academic writing. This shows that if the creative thinking of students is improved, then their achievements in academic writing will also improve. Sukesi, et al. 190 Fourth, reading habits, grammatical knowledge, and creative thinking together have a positive relationship with the outcomes of learning academic writing. These three factors significantly determine and make a significant contribution to the outcomes of learning academic writing. In other words, they jointly enhance the learning of academic writing. Thus, to improve students’ learning outcomes for academic writing, especially those of the English Department at FKIP Bengkulu, it will be helpful to improve these three factors. Considering the results of the analysis, the following suggestions are offered: To encourage students to develop reading habits, we suggest setting reading assignments (e.g., reading lecture materials), providing alternative teaching materials, changing the presentation means, and requiring writing practice. To improve the grammatical knowledge of students for writing, lecturers should stimulate students’ curiosity by setting tasks related to grammar. Considering the importance of creative thinking, lecturers should improve the quality of their lectures, as well as strive to personally improve themselves through the learning of science and technology. The improvement of academic writing requires the integration of these internal and external factors. References Akhadiah, S. (2002). Bahasa: Pengembangan dan Pembelajaran. Jakarta: PPs Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. Alogali, A. (2018). World Englishes: Changing the Paradigm of Linguistic Diversity in Global Academia. Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 3(1), 54-73. Retrieved from http://ressat.org/index.php/ressat/article/view/342 Amabile, T. M. (1993). The Social Psychology of Creativity: a Componential Conceptualization, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 357-376. Bee, H. (2001). The Child Developing. New York: Harper and Row Publisher. Breuer, O. E. (2017). Revision process in first language and foreign language writing: differences and similarities in the success of revision process. Journal of Academic Writing, 7(1), 27-42. Brinton, Laurel J. (1984). The Structure of modern English, a Linguistic Introduction. Philadelphia: John Benjamin Publishing Company. Chakraverty, A. & Gautum, K. (2000). Dynamics of writing. Forum, 38(3). Chettri Kushmeeta & K. Rout. (2013). Reading Habits – An Overview. Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 14(6), 13-17. http://ressat.org/index.php/ressat/article/view/342 Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2019: 10(3),176-192 Douglas, N. L. (2000). Enemies of critical thinking: Lessons from social psychology research. Reading Psychology, 129-44. Eragamreddy, N. (2013). Teaching Creative Thinking Skills. Journal of English Language & Translation Studies, 2(4), 22-36. Fisher, A. (2001). Critical Thinking an Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gokhale, A. A., (1995). Collaborative Learning Enhances Critical Thinking, Journal of Technology Education, 2, 76-82. Guy, L. (1989). Reading Difficulties: Their Diagnosis and Correction. New Jersey: Prentice- Hall, Inc. Kuwato, T., (1994). Sex Role dan Kreativitas. Disertasi, Yogyakarta: Universitas Gadjah Mada. Malik, O. (1994). Metode belajar dan Kesulitan-kesulitan Belajar. Bandung: Tarsito. Manjet, K. M. S. (2015). International Graduate Students’ Academic Writing Practices in Malaysia: Challenges and Solutions. Journal of International Students. 5(1), 12-22. Myhill, D. (2009). Becoming a designer: Trajectories of linguistic development. In Bear, R., Myhill, D., Riley, J., Nystrand, M. The Sage Handbook of Writing Development. (402-13). London: Sage Publications. Muhammad, S. & Jawaid, A. S. (2015). Lack of Academic Writing Skills in English Language at Higher Education Level in Pakistan: Causes, Effects and Remedies. International Journal of Language and Linguistics 2(4), 132-163. Muslim, I. M. (2014). Helping EFL Students Improve their Writing. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 4(2), 67-79. Paul, R. (1990). Critical Thinking: What Every Person Needs to Survive in a Rapidly Changing World. Rohnert Park, CA: Center for Critical Thinking and Moral Critique. Prat-Sala, M., & Redford, P. (2010). The interplay between motivation, self-efficacy and approaches to studying. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 283–305. Ramiyatun, P., (2003). Hubungan Antara Konsep Diri Akademik dan Dukungan Sosial Keluarga dengan Minat Membaca Pelajar SLTP di SLTP 13 Yogyakarta. Tesis. Yogyakarta: Fakultas Psikologi UGM. Rao, Z. (2007). Training in brainstorming and developing writing skills. ELT Journal, 61(2). Schramfer, B. (1999), Understanding and Using English Grammar. New York: White Plains. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/249252609_Training_in_brainstorming_and_developing_writing_skills?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-1f72114cfc247aef10b4437e020e261e-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI2NjI5MTQwOTtBUzozNDk4MjgwMDI0MDIzMDRAMTQ2MDQxNjkwMzA0MA== https://www.researchgate.net/publication/249252609_Training_in_brainstorming_and_developing_writing_skills?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-1f72114cfc247aef10b4437e020e261e-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI2NjI5MTQwOTtBUzozNDk4MjgwMDI0MDIzMDRAMTQ2MDQxNjkwMzA0MA== Sukesi, et al. 192 Shell, D.F., Murphy, C.C., & Bruning, R.H. (1989). Self-efficacy and outcome expectancy mechanisms in reading and writing achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 91–100. Shokrpour, N., & Fallahzadeh, M. (2007). A Survey of the Students and Interns’ EFL Writing Problems in Shiraz University of Medical Sciences. Asian EFL Journal, 9(1). Steinlen, K. A. (2018). The development of German and English writing skills in a bilingual primary school in Germany. Journal of Second Language Writing, 39, 42-52. Sternberg, R. J. (1995). Implicit Theories of Intelligence, Creativity, and Wisdom. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 49(3), 607-627. Sternberg, R. J. & Lubart, T. L., (2001). Investing in Creativity, American Psychologist. 7, 677- 688. Suharman (1998). Pengaruh Pelatihan Imageri dan Penalaran terhadap Kreativitas Menurut Perspektif Perbedaan Individu. Disertasi. Yogyakarta: Universitas Gajah Mada. Suriasumantri, J. S. (2000). Filsafat Ilmu: Sebuah Pengantar Populer. Jakarta: Pustaka Sinar Harapan. Suryabrata, S. (1994). Pembimbing ke Psikodiagnostik. Yogyakarta: Raka Press. Edisi II. Tanyer, S. (2015). The role of writing and reading self-efficacy in the first-year preservice EFL teachers’ writing performance. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 199, 38–43. Winkel, W. S. (1996). Psikologi Pengajaran. Jakarta: PT. Gramedia Widiasarana Indonesia.