Quantitative Research Literacy Among Iranian EFL Teachers at Different Levels of Education: Revelations for Policy Makers and Program Developers
محورهای موضوعی : نشریه زبان و ترجمه
Alireza Zaker
1
(Department of Teaching English and Translation, Karaj Branch, Islamic Azad University, Karaj, Iran)
کلید واژه: reflectivity, quantitative research, teacher training, research literacy,
چکیده مقاله :
ELT practitioners are expected to adopt the role of reflective practitioners, engaging in a thorough and analytical examination of their teaching practice. This is achieved through the undertaking of research, with systematic research being recognized as a crucial endeavor in implementing reflectivity within the ELT field. Concurrently with the proliferation of several novel problems and methodologies in the realm of research within ELT contexts, the act of conducting research in ELT has evolved into a multifaceted endeavor. The data for this study were gathered from 717 EFL instructors, consisting of 581 females (81%) and 136 males (19%). The participants included individuals with B.A., M.A., and Ph.D. degrees, with an average age of 25. The Quantitative Research Literacy (QRL) questionnaire, developed by Zaker and Nosratinia (2021), was utilized as the primary instrument for data collection. The utilization of the non-parametric Welch's ANOVA test and the Games-Howell post-hoc technique revealed a statistically significant disparity in the mean score on the QRL measure across participants with Ph.D., M.A., and B.A. degrees. Specifically, Ph.D. level participants exhibited a notably higher average score compared to both M.A. level and B.A. level players. Additionally, upon conducting a Welch's ANOVA and subsequently applying the Games-Howell post-hoc procedure, it was observed that the participants exhibited the highest level of proficiency in developing research topic knowledge. Conversely, the participants displayed the lowest level of knowledge in the area of data analysis. This study finishes by engaging in a comprehensive discussion of the findings and providing some recommendations.
ELT practitioners are expected to adopt the role of reflective practitioners, engaging in a thorough and analytical examination of their teaching practice. This is achieved through the undertaking of research, with systematic research being recognized as a crucial endeavor in implementing reflectivity within the ELT field. Concurrently with the proliferation of several novel problems and methodologies in the realm of research within ELT contexts, the act of conducting research in ELT has evolved into a multifaceted endeavor. The data for this study were gathered from 717 EFL instructors, consisting of 581 females (81%) and 136 males (19%). The participants included individuals with B.A., M.A., and Ph.D. degrees, with an average age of 25. The Quantitative Research Literacy (QRL) questionnaire, developed by Zaker and Nosratinia (2021), was utilized as the primary instrument for data collection. The utilization of the non-parametric Welch's ANOVA test and the Games-Howell post-hoc technique revealed a statistically significant disparity in the mean score on the QRL measure across participants with Ph.D., M.A., and B.A. degrees. Specifically, Ph.D. level participants exhibited a notably higher average score compared to both M.A. level and B.A. level players. Additionally, upon conducting a Welch's ANOVA and subsequently applying the Games-Howell post-hoc procedure, it was observed that the participants exhibited the highest level of proficiency in developing research topic knowledge. Conversely, the participants displayed the lowest level of knowledge in the area of data analysis. This study finishes by engaging in a comprehensive discussion of the findings and providing some recommendations.
Altamimi, K. (2006). Dynamic Assessment of listening comprehension in second language learning (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, University Park.
Ableeva, R., & Lantolf, J. (2011). Mediated dialogue and the micro genesis of second language listening comprehension. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18, 133-149.
Allal, L., &Pelgrims Ducrey, G. (2000). Assessment "of"- or "in"- the zone of proximal development. Learning and Instruction, 10, 137-152.
Bell, P. (2001). Representation and ways of knowing: Three issues in second language acquisition. In N. Ellis (Ed.), Explicit and implicit learning of languages (pp. 549–569). London: Academic Press.
Cho, L. and Krashen, S. (1994). The Significance of Learners’ Errors. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 5 (2), 161–169.
Constantino, B. (1994). The differential role of comprehension and production practice. Language Learning, 51 (3), 81–112.
Day, J. and Bamford, T. (1998). Does form-focused instruction affect the acquisition of implicit knowledge? A review of the research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24 (3), 223–236.
Dörnyei, Z. (2001). The motivational basis of language learning tasks. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 137-158). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Ellis, R. (2008). The Study of second language acquisition. New York: Oxford University Press.
Elly, F. and Mangubhai, S. (1983). Dynamic Assessment in Practice: Clinical and Educational Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Grigorenko, E. L. & Sternberg, R. G. (2002). Dynamic testing: The nature and measurement of learning potential. New York: Cambridge University.
Hayashi, D. (1999). Interactive assessment: A special issue. The Journal of Special Education, 26 (3), 233-234.
Hedge, P. (1985). Teaching and learning in the language classroom. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Isavi, L. (2012). The impacts of adding dynamic assessment components to a computerized preschool language screening test. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 22 (4), 217-226.
Kozulin, A., & Garb, E. (2002). Dynamic assessment of EFL text comprehension of at-risk students. School Psychology International, 23, 112-127.
Lantolf, J. P. (2000). Language competence: Implications for applied linguistics – A sociocultural perspective. Applied Linguistics, 27, 717-728.
Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2004). Dynamic assessment of L2 develop-ment: bringing the past into the future. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1 (2), 49-72.
Lidz, C. S., & Gindis, B. (2003). Dynamic assessment of the evolving cognitive functions in children. In A. E. Kozu-lin, J. S. Brown, S. M. Miller, C. Heath, B. Gindis, & V. S. Ageyev (Eds.), Vygotsky's educational theory in cultural context (pp. 99-116). Cambridge, UK, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2008). Sociocultural theories and the teaching of second languages. London: Equinox.
Mardani, M and Tavakoli, T. (2011). What’s in a ZPD? A case study of a young ESL student and teacher interacting through dialogue journals. Language Teaching Research, 4 (2), 95-21.
Mason, F. and Krashen, S. (1997). Second Language Learning Theories. London: Hodder Arnold Press.
Robb, T. and Susser, K. (1989) The role of classroom assessment in teaching and learning. Los Angeles: University of California.
Salas, K. Gonzales, T. and Assael, B (2010). Foreign languages for younger children: Trends and assessment. Language Teaching & Linguistics: Abstracts, 10, 5-25.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Teo, Y. (2012). A case study of dynamic assessment in EFL process writing. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 33(1), 24-40.
Zoghi, B. and Malmeer, J (2013). The impact of assessment on student learning: how can the research literature practically help to inform the development of departmental assessment strategies and learner-centered assessment practices? Active Learning in Higher Education, 3 (2), pp. 145-158.
