Abstract
This study explores the usage of transitional markers in the 25-research outputs of the senior high school from North Central Mindanao College in Maranding, Lala, Lanao del Norte. The study aimed to explore the inaccurately and accurately used transitional markers. The study employed qualitative research design, and conducted content analysis on the research output of the students to determine the accuracies and inaccuracies on the usage of the transitional markers. Findings revealed that students generally excel in using basic transitional markers. Conclusive terms such as "Lastly" and "Therefore" are used effectively to summarize discussions, while "Because" is aptly employed to indicate reasons. Markers for adding information, like "Additionally" and "Also," and those for contrasting ideas, such as "However" and "But," are used correctly, enhancing the clarity and richness of the text. However, more complex markers, including "Thus" and "Consequently," show varied accuracy, with "Thus" often misapplied. Inaccuracies were most prevalent, with markers like "Thus" and "Therefore" used incorrectly in conclusions and "Meanwhile" in contrasting ideas. Elaborative markers "Also" and "In addition" were frequently misused, and inferential markers "Hence" and "Thus" showed significant inaccuracies. These challenges suggest a need for targeted instruction to improve the correct application of these transitional tools. It was concluded that while students possess a foundational competence in using transitional markers, there is a clear requirement for further guidance on more sophisticated markers. An intervention lesson exemplar was developed to address these inaccuracies and enhance the overall quality of students' writing.
