درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

The distribution of the allophones of /?/in certain contexts involves free variation and gradient preferences. An organized survey was conducted to elicit the judgments of 37 native Persian speakers concerning the well-formedness of /?/allophonic behavior in five different phonological positions. The results showed that the differences in judgment between the various categories are not just the result of random variations, but are an authentic reflection of the underlying structural differences. Following Boersma and Hayes (1999) and Hayes (2000), a stochastic model is proposed within optimality theory to account for the gradient judgments involved. The model assumes that constraints are arranged along a continuum of constraint strictness, with a band of strictness value assigned to each. When the strictness bands of two constraints overlap, then both rankings of the two constraints are equally available for the generation of outputs, yielding free variant forms. However, when a particular form can be generated only by assigning a constraint a strictness value (/?/ or /??/) within a designated “fringe” of the strictness band, the model generates the form marked with an intermediate degree of well-formedness.

This mini-corpus, cross-linguistic, comparative, and norm-referenced study intends to render the most frequently and oft-used affixes in the written descriptive tasks in the performance of English language materials developers (ELMDs) and Iranian English language undergraduates (IELUs). Samples of writings of both groups were studied and analyzed through affixation principles. The frequency of nearly 63 affixes both inflectional and derivational morphemes was taken into account. The statistical analysis showed a highly significant correlation (.86) with (.75) coefficient determination (shared variance) between the performance of IELUs and ELMDs. The result of the study bears approximately a close resemblance to the findings by Bauer et al.(1982), Fry and Kress (2006), Honig, Diamond, Gutlohn, and Mahler (2000), and White, Sowell, and Yanagihara (1989). Finally, the implications of the study were taken into account.

Investigating the “knowing”, a module of the KARDS model proposed by Kumaravadivelu (2012) for teacher education, of Iranian teachers of learner autonomy, this study is an attempt to illuminate some of the yet unexplored areas of teachers’ various types of knowledge of learner autonomy. Furthermore, it attempts to illustrate how Iranian Non-EFL teachers’ knowing affects their practices with regard to learner autonomy and how this could differ from that of Iranian EFL teachers. To that end 112 EFL and Non-EFL teachers were purposefully cluster-sampled. Based on convenient sampling but only after data saturation was reached were 12 teachers interviewed. Based on the result of the interviews and the data gleaned from the literature a questionnaire was developed. The sample were asked to complete the questionnaire and then through negative case analysis some were interviewed. The questionnaire tapped into the social, political, psychological and personal aspects of learner autonomy. The results indicated the informants, be it EFL or non-EFL, found learner autonomy to be a psychological construct, which can be traced back to their personal knowledge. Finally, with regard to the feasibility and desirability of learner autonomy implementation in the education system, the informants see learner autonomy as more of a desirable concept than feasible. It is hoped that teachers and teacher educators find the results as well as the suggestions-for-action made at the end of the study helpful and that the results have tangible implications for the Iranian education system when fed into professional development activities and strategic planning.

Using a mixed methods design, the present study attempted to identify the factors influencing Iranian untrained EFL raters in rating group oral discussion tasks. To fulfil this aim, 16 language learners of varying proficiency levels were selected and randomly assigned to groups of four and performed a group discussion task. Thirty two untrained raters were also selected based on their volunteer participations. They listened to the audio files of the group discussions and assigned a score of one to six to each language learners based on their own judgments. They also provided comments on each language learners’ performance pointing to why they assigned such scores. The researchers had an interview with the raters after the rating session as well. The quantitative phase investigated whether linguistic features of accuracy, fluency, complexity and amount of talk were attended to by the raters in terms of having any relationship to the scores the raters assigned. Speech rate as an index of fluency and amount of talk turned out to be significantly correlated with the scores. Of more importance was the qualitative phase with the aim of identifying other factors that may account for the scores. The comments provided by the raters on each score and the interviews were codified based on Content Analysis (CA) approach. It was found that the raters attend not only to the linguistic features in rating oral group discussions, but they are also sensitive to the interactional features like the roles the participants take in groups tasks and the overall interaction patterns of the groups. The findings of this study may shed light on group oral assessment in terms of training the raters rating group oral tests and developing rating scales specific for group oral assessment.