Designing and Validating a Model for Successful English Learning: How Socially-Mediated Testing Can Make a Difference
محورهای موضوعی : Research in English Language Pedagogy
Fatemeh Sadat Alamdar
1
(
Department of English Language, Qeshm Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qeshm, Iran
)
Shahram Afraz
2
(
Department of English Language, Qeshm Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qeshm, Iran
)
Fazlollah Samimi
3
(
Department of English, Bandar-Abbas Branch, Islamic Azad University, Bandar-Abbas, Iran
)
کلید واژه: Learning, Testing, Socially-Mediated, Student, Vygotsky,
چکیده مقاله :
In this study, the investigator sought to explore the perceptions and attitudes of Iranian English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners towards the use of Socially Mediated Testing (SMT) in their English learning process. The primary aim was to identify the factors that significantly influence their learning experience when using SMT. The research process began with in-depth interviews of 50 EFL learners, aiming to gain a qualitative understanding of their thoughts and experiences with SMT. Based on the insights obtained from these interviews, the researcher developed a questionnaire tailored to capture the nuances of these learners' experiences. This questionnaire, consisting of 25 items, was then distributed to a larger sample of 475 EFL students. In the end, the researcher was able to identify four variables after using exploratory factor analysis to identify the factors. The 25-item questionnaire was then given to 785 EFL students, who chose each item on a Likert scale. The factor structure of the instrument was verified by the researcher using structural equation modeling (SEM). To determine if the suggested model matched the data, the researcher used the measurement with the best fit. The fit indices were estimated using the original EFA structure, which contained four factors and 25 elements. As a result, the researcher created a model that can be used as a respectable foundation for SMT research that will take place in Iran in the future, where such specific insights are unavailable in this politically distinct EFL setting.
In this study, the investigator sought to explore the perceptions and attitudes of Iranian English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners towards the use of Socially Mediated Testing (SMT) in their English learning process. The primary aim was to identify the factors that significantly influence their learning experience when using SMT. The research process began with in-depth interviews of 50 EFL learners, aiming to gain a qualitative understanding of their thoughts and experiences with SMT. Based on the insights obtained from these interviews, the researcher developed a questionnaire tailored to capture the nuances of these learners' experiences. This questionnaire, consisting of 25 items, was then distributed to a larger sample of 475 EFL students. In the end, the researcher was able to identify four variables after using exploratory factor analysis to identify the factors. The 25-item questionnaire was then given to 785 EFL students, who chose each item on a Likert scale. The factor structure of the instrument was verified by the researcher using structural equation modeling (SEM). To determine if the suggested model matched the data, the researcher used the measurement with the best fit. The fit indices were estimated using the original EFA structure, which contained four factors and 25 elements. As a result, the researcher created a model that can be used as a respectable foundation for SMT research that will take place in Iran in the future, where such specific insights are unavailable in this politically distinct EFL setting.
Abbasian Boroojeni, F., Tavakoli, M., & Vahid Dastjerdi, H. (2017). Washback Effect of General English Test of Ph.D. Entrance Exam on Science and Humanities Students: Perceptions and Practices. Journal of Research in Applied Linguistics, 8(1), 109-132. doi: 10.22055/rals.2017.12615
Alemi, M. (2015). The impact of dynamic assessment on Iranian EFL students' writing self-assessment. Teaching English Language, 9(1), 145-169.
Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 261e271.
Arceneaux, P. C., & Dinu, L. F. (2018). The socially mediated age of information: Twitter and Instagram as tools for information dissemination in higher education. New Media & Society, 20(11), 4155-4176.
Bahador, H., & Mofrad, M. H. (2020). Classroom dynamic assessment of EFL learners' oral production: A case of female intermediate learners. Language Teaching Research Quarterly, 18, 83-97.
Bakhoda, I., & Shabani, K. (2019). Enhancing L2 learners' ZPD modification through computerized-group dynamic assessment of reading comprehension. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 13(1), 31-44.
Black, P. Wiliam, D. (1998) Assessment and Classroom Learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1).
Brown, S., & Knight, P. (1994). Assessing learners in higher education. Psychology Press.
Curry, N., Mynard, J., Noguchi, J., & Watkins, S. (2017). Evaluating a self-directed language learning course in a Japanese university. International Journal of Self-Directed Learning, 14(1), 17-36.
Crusan, D. J., Plakans, L., & Gebril, A. (2016). Writing assessment literacy: Surveying second language teachers’ knowledge, beliefs, and practices. Assessing Writing, 28, 43 56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2016.03.001.
Daneshfar, S., & Moharami, M. (2018). Dynamic assessment in Vygotsky's sociocultural theory: Origins and main concepts. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 9(3), 600-607.
Daniels, H. (2007). Pedagogy. In H. Daniels, M. Cole, & J. Wertsch (Eds.), The Cambridge companion to Vygotsky (pp. 307-331). Cambridge University Press.
Dash, G., & Paul, J. (2021). CB-SEM vs PLS-SEM methods for research in social sciences and technology forecasting. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 173, 121092.
Derakhshan, A., Shakki, F., & Sarani, M. A. (2020). The effect of dynamic and non-dynamic assessment on the comprehension of Iranian intermediate EFL learners' speech acts of apology and request. Language Related Research, 11(4), 605-637.
Erbil, D. G. (2020). A review of flipped classroom and cooperative learning method within the context of Vygotsky theory. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1157.
Eslami-Rasekh, Z., & Valizadeh, K. (2004). Classroom Activities Viewed from Different Perspectives: Learners' Voice and Teachers' Voice. TESL-EJ, 8(3), n3.
Eun, B. (2019). The zone of proximal development as an overarching concept: A framework for synthesizing Vygotsky's theories. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 51(1), 18-30.
Feuerstein, R., Rand, Y. A., Hoffman, M. B., Egozi, M., Shachar-Segev, N., Idol, L., & Jones, B. (1980). Instrumental Enrichment Program.
Gholami Pasand, P., Amerian, M., Dowlatabadi, H., & Mohammadi, A. M. (2021). Developing EFL learners’ intercultural sensitivity through computer-mediated peer interaction. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 50(6), 571-587.
Guligers JTM, Bastiaens TJ, Kirschner PA, et al. (2006) Relations between student perceptions of assessment authenticity, study approaches, and learning outcome. Studies in Educational Evaluation 32(4): 381–400.
Haq, M. M. (2016). Students’ EFL learning obstacles and strategies in reading narrative text at the second grade of MTS RAUDLATUTTHOLIBIN NW PAOKMOTONG. The Indonesian Journal of Language and Language Teaching, 1(1), 10-10.
Hj Ramli, N. H., Alavi, M., Mehrinezhad, S. A., & Ahmadi, A. (2018). Academic stress and self-regulation among university students in Malaysia: Mediator role of mindfulness. Behavioral Sciences, 8(1), 12.
Imamura, Y. (2018). Adopting and adapting to new language policies in a self-access centre in Japan. Relay Journal, 1(1), 197-208.
Infante, P., & Poehner, M. E. (2019). Realizing the ZPD in second language education: The complementary contributions of dynamic assessment and mediated development. Language and Sociocultural Theory, 6(1), 63-91.
Irshad, S., Maan, M. F., Batool, H., & Hanif, A. (2021). Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD): An evaluative tool for language learning and social development in early childhood education. Multicultural Education, 7(6).
Jacobucci, R., Brandmaier, A. M., & Kievit, R. A. (2019). A practical guide to variable selection in structural equation modeling by using regularized multiple-indicators, multiple-causes models. Advances in methods and practices in psychological science, 2(1), 55-76.
Jung, Y. J. (2018). The role of socially-mediated alignment in the development of second language grammar and vocabulary: Comparing face-to-face and synchronous mobile-mediated communication.
Khodabandeh, F., & Naseri, E. (2020). Exploring the impact of common vs. restricted social networks on English foreign language learners' writing skill. Journal of Language Horizons, 4(2), 81-100.
L. Leite, W., Roy, S., Chakraborty, N., Michailidis, G., Huggins-Manley, A. C., D'Mello, S., ... & Jing, Z. (2022, March). A novel video recommendation system for algebra: An effectiveness evaluation study. In LAK22: 12th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference (pp. 294-303).
Law, K. M., Geng, S., & Li, T. (2019). Student enrollment, motivation, and learning performance in a blended learning environment: The mediating effects of social, teaching, and cognitive presence. Computers & Education, 136, 1-12.
Mallahi, O., & HOSSEINI, S. (2020). Predictors of performance of Iranian English language learners on speaking skill: A study of socially-oriented personal attributes. Iranian Journal of Learning and Memory, 3(9), 75-86.
McLeod, S. (2020). Lev Vygotsky's sociocultural theory.
Mohammadimoghadam, M. (2015). Effects of mediation on an EFL learner's grammar development: A case study of an EFL beginner student. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 192, 101-106.
Molenaar, P. C. (2019). Review of multivariate analysis with LISREL.
Moradian, M., Asadi, M., & Azadbakht, Z. (2019). Effects of concurrent group dynamic assessment on Iranian EFL learners’ pragmatic competence: A case of requests and refusals. Journal of Research in Applied Linguistics, 10(2), 106-135. doi: 10.22055/rals.2019.14720
Murphey, T. (2017). Provoking potentials: Student self-evaluated and socially-mediated testing. Revisiting EFL assessment: Critical perspectives, 287-317.
Mynard, J., & Kato(2016), S. Enhancing language learning beyond the classroom through advising. In The Routledge Handbook of Language Learning and Teaching Beyond the Classroom (pp. 244-257). Routledge.
Myyry, L., & Joutsenvirta, T. (2015). Open-book, open-web online examinations: Developing examination practices to support university students' learning and self-efficacy. Active Learning in Higher Education, 16(2), 119-132.
Nam, S. T., Kim, D. G., & Jin, C. Y. (2018). A comparison analysis among structural equation modeling (AMOS, LISREL, and PLS) using the same data. Journal of the Korea Institute of Information and Communication Engineering, 22(7), 978-984.
Newman, S., & Latifi, A. (2021). Vygotsky, education, and teacher education. Journal of Education for Teaching, 47(1), 4-17.
Pallant, J. (2007). SPSS survival manual: A step-by-step guide to data analysis using SPSS version
15. McGraw Hill.
Qiu, L., & Qi, L. (2020). E-learning assessment for tourism education LISREL assisted intercultural tourism perception and data integrated satisfaction perspectives. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 32(1), 89-108.
Rahimi, M., & Karkami, F. H. (2015). The role of teachers' classroom discipline in their teaching effectiveness and students' language learning motivation and achievement: A path method. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 3(1), 57-82.
Sadeghi, K., Azad Mousavi, M., & Javidi, S. (2017). Relationship between EFL learners’ self-perceived communication competence and their task-based and task-free self-assessment of speaking. Journal of Research in Applied Linguistics, 8(2), 31-50. doi: 10.22055/rals.2017.13090
Shevlin, M., & Miles, J. N. (1998). Effects of sample size, model specification, and factor loadings on the GFI in confirmatory factor analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 25(1), 85-90.
Shohamy, E. (2020). The power of tests: A critical perspective on the uses of language tests. Routledge.
Slavin, R. E. (1996). Research on cooperative learning and achievement: What we know, what we need to know. Contemporary educational psychology, 21(1), 43-69.
Sobol, I. M. (2018). A primer for the Monte Carlo method. CRC press.
Struyven K, Dochy F and Janssens S (2005) Students' perceptions about evaluation and assessment in higher education: A review. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 30(4): 325–42.
Torre, D. M., Schuwirth, L. W. T., & Van der Vleuten, C. P. M. (2020). Theoretical considerations on programmatic assessment. Medical teacher, 42(2), 213-220.
Ullman, J. B., & Bentler, P. M. (2003). Structural equation modeling: Wiley Online Library.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman (Eds & Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). Thinking and speech. In R. W. Rieber & A. S. Carton (eds.), The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky. Vol. 1. Problems of general psychology (pp. 39-285). Plenum.
Webber, K. L. (2012). The use of learner-centered assessment in US colleges and universities. Research in Higher Education, 53(2), 201–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-011-9245-0.
Yamashita, H. (2015). Affect and the development of learner autonomy through advising. Studies in Self Access Learning Journal, 6(1), 62-85. Retrieved from https://sisaljournal.org/archives/mar15/yamashita/ .
Youjun, T., & Xiaomei, M. (2022). Computational thinking: A mediation tool and higher-order thinking for linking EFL grammar knowledge with competency. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 46, 101143.
Zhang, C., Yan, X., & Wang, J. (2021). EFL teachers’ online assessment practices during the COVID-19 pandemic: Changes and mediating factors. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00589-3.
