درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

Supervisor’s feedback is both a naysaying and a puzzling concern that has always tormented academics in higher education. Particularly, written feedback on pre-final or final versions of a submitted doctoral dissertation is indisputably the most significant step toward granting a doctoral student supervisee the right to defend his/her research project. It also constitutes a rich source on how students are to academically go about writing their dissertation and even go public as they are supposed to produce one or two articles before their vivas. The present research explores the written comments provided by supervisors on Moroccan doctorate supervisees’ dissertations. It principally focuses on both overall and in-text comments and whether they serve as feed-back to take corrective actions for the errors made, feed-up to focus on strategies to attain the academic goal, or feed-forward to be proactive and avoid disturbances that might affect the quality of the final work. A total of 40 supervisees from the English department at FLLA, Ibn Tofail University belonging to Language and Society Research Laboratory participated in the study. Data were collected using an online questionnaire through available Google forms platform. The results revealed that the total majority of supervisees tended to get a mixture of written remarks with a central focus on the quantity rather than on form. This is therefore a plus as to the agreement as well as the variance of the Moroccan supervisors in the use of these evaluation criteria while evaluating their supervisees’ doctoral dissertations targeting different types of feedback with a huge focus of the cyclicity of their utilization.

Over the past decades, writing assessment research has been concentrating on alternative methods with a social-oriented view of assessment, including dynamic assessment (DA). Given the lack of research juxtaposing the interventionist and interactionist DA frameworks in the area of narrative writing, this study sought to compare the effectiveness of Brown’s graduated prompts model vs. Poehner’s model in the development of one-paragraph narrative essays in terms of grammatical accuracy. The study followed a quasi-experimental design, with 15 Iranian EFL learners selected via convenient sampling from among the female students of a language institute in Tehran. The participants were then randomly divided into three groups: Interventionist group, in which mediation was based on Brown’s model in the sandwich format; interactionist group, where mediation was done using Poehner’s model in the cake format; and non-dynamic assessment (NDA) control group with no mediation involved. The research consisted of three pilot sessions and eleven sessions as the main phase. To analyze the data, both descriptive and non-parametric inferential statistics were run. The results conceded the superiority of both DA approaches to NDA, whereas no significant difference was observed between the two DA groups in their general performance on narrative tasks. However, the analysis of the number and types of required mediational moves over the DA sessions indicated the superiority of the interactionist model to interventionist framework in the development of grammatical accuracy in narrative paragraphs. The study offers some theoretical and pedagogical repercussions for educators, curriculum designers, and L2 teachers.

Considering the body of research on the intersection of psychology and assessment that suggests assessment is not only under the influence of the model against which a translation is assessed, the present study aimed to investigate the role of raters’ personality traits in their assessment. It was also intended to see if the application of an agreed-upon unified assessment tool could change the way evaluations are made, and if this possible change is the same among raters with different personality traits. To this end, seven raters were asked to score an English text translated by 23 students twice with an interval of at least two weeks. In the first scoring, they were asked to assess the way they usually did with no specific guidelines. However, the second assessment was done through the application of an agreed-upon model. Moreover, the raters were scored on the personality traits of agreeableness and conscientiousness as it is believed that these two traits are predictors of leniency. The data analyzed revealed (1) a significant correlation between the raters’ score on agreeableness and the scores they assigned to the translations, and (2) a significant negative correlation between the raters’ score on conscientiousness and the scores they assigned to the translations. This proved that more agreeable less conscientious raters are prone to be more lenient. The value of Cronbach alpha also revealed that more conscientious less agreeable raters were more consistent in their assessments in both rounds of scoring. This, however, turned out not to be the case for less conscientious raters.

Toulmin's (1958) model of argumentation and Abdi et al.'s (2010) model of metadiscourse, mapped onto Grice's (1975) Cooperative Principle, are both attempts to elaborate on the process and contribute to the goal of obtaining persuasion. This study is an attempt to integrate the use of metadiscursive and argument strategies to provide a common logical rationale for their employment. Through a qualitative investigation of 40 ELT research articles (RAs), we propose a convergent framework for employing CP-based metadiscourse and argumentation model in RA arguments. As a result, endophoric markers were identified to be used as warrants to meet quantity, while transitions, frame markers, and code glosses were found to be employed as conclusions and data to fulfill manner. Furthermore, evidentials were found to be employed in conclusion, backing, and warrant; hedges were seen to be used as qualifiers; and finally, disclaimers were recognized to be employed in rebuttals; to meet quality. The findings reveal that argumentations are built metadiscursively which has implications for writers and educators. For writers, it could help to develop a deeper understanding of the positive role of metadiscursive strategies in RA arguments and as such could guide a more efficient employment of it to facilitate persuasion. For educators, the findings could provide a model for building and ensuring basic logical and rhetorical characteristics of an argument in academic writing. 

Recent developments in technology have affected various aspects of human life, including education. These technological advancements have resulted in the introduction of new trends in teaching methodology. These trends include pure online instruction, mixed online and face-to-face instruction (blended), etc. In order to identify the efficacy of such kinds of instruction in comparison with traditional methods, this quasi-experimental study was conducted to explore the effects of virtual vs. blended-language instruction on the development of listening and reading skills by Iranian intermediate EFL learners. To achieve this goal, 60 intermediate EFL learners were selected to participate in two experimental (virtual and blended) and one control (traditional face-to-face) groups. After the provision of the treatments in experimental (reading and listening through virtual and blended methods of instruction) and control (reading and listening through traditional method) groups, a post-test was conducted to measure the attainment of the participants in each language skill.  The results revealed that both virtual and blended methods of instruction could lead to better reading and listening performances. However, the difference between the effect of each treatment was more tangible in one skill scores (reading in the virtual group and listening in the blended group). The point worth noting is that the blended group could significantly outperform the other two groups. Comparing the results of all post-tests in reading and listening, it was revealed that blended instruction could result in better reading and listening; however, reading skill was more affected due to the higher mean difference between pre-test and post-test scores. This study has some implications for language teachers in taking advantage of technology in education in a balance with their traditional styles of teaching.