مطالب

Essay genres are often employed to assess learning at higher education. Students are sometimes required to write essay in examinations and assignments. The expectations of assessors in writing essays are students’ ability to present analytical and reasoned arguments and to engage with alternative viewpoints. In fact, in evaluating essays, assessors consider the extent to which a student is able to meet these expectations. However, students may have challenges meeting these expectations and instructors, particularly instructors in the discipline, may not be prepared to provide students with an explicit linguistic description of how these expectations are met. Thus, this study draws from Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) to scaffold students’ challenges in meeting the expectations of essay genre. In fact, it uses Dreyfus et al’s (2010) 3 x 3 linguistic toolkit to analyze essays written by postgraduate students in the department of English at one university in India. The 3 x 3 linguistic toolkit is used to zoom in student’s challenges in controlling the resources of SFL’s three metafunctions (ideational, interpersonal, and textual) at the level of whole text, paragraph, and sentence. After the analysis, the findings revealed that students face challenges controlling the resources of the three modes of meaning at all levels. These challenges include difficulties in grammar, lexical choices, punctuation, following expected organization, answering the question, the use of signposts to create a coherent text, and the use of engagement resources to develop a consistent argument. This study has implications for teaching and assessing academic writing.

The primary aim of this study was to open up new ways with which teachers could help learners improve their knowledge of vocabulary via collocation activities. This study investigated the effect of collocation activities on Iranian intermediate EFL learners’ vocabulary knowledge in order to solve their vocabulary problems. To this end, 60 female students from Pardis Institute in Lahijan, Iran participated in this study. They were divided into two groups of 30, one as an experimental group that received collocation activities as the treatment and a control group which received traditional method of vocabulary instruction. The researchers used a quasi-experimental, pre-test/post-test control group design. The data were analyzed using an Independent Samples T-test and a series of paired Samples T-tests. The findings of this study showed that collocation activities improved significantly participant learners’ vocabulary knowledge. The findings from paired-sample t-test indicated that the learners in the experimental group outperformed the control group in vocabulary knowledge.

Interlanguage pragmatics has attracted considerable attention in recent years. One strand of interlanguage pragmatics research includes studies comparing the effectiveness of implicit versus explicit teaching on the development of pragmatics. Many studies, although inconclusively, have shown the superior effect of explicit teaching of pragmatics, but few have focused on finding ways to improve the implicit teaching of pragmatics. The present study attempted to unfold the effect of collaborative dialogue on the quality of implicit teaching of request (head act and preparator). To this end, 28 participants (19 to 33 years old, intermediate) majoring in English (freshman and junior) were divided into two groups. The experimental group (n=14) had the opportunity to complete the tasks collaboratively and the control group (n=14) were not provided with any specific pragmatic instruction. The instructional procedure included four successive sessions of teaching request in situations where the sociological parameters were systematically varied. For the purpose of data collection, the classes were audio-recorded and a pretest-posttest design for discourse completion task (DCT) was adopted. For the purpose of data analysis, target request head acts and preparators were scored and also the audio recordings of classes were transcribed and the process of learning during treatment was checked in detail. The findings indicated that the experimental group outperformed the control group in producing target preparators and head acts. And evidence of noticing the pragmatic forms namely noticing unnoticed forms, noticing the gap, and negotiation of form was observed during the collaborative task. This study suggests that teachers may need to provide learners with the opportunities for collaborative tasks along with input enhancement tasks in order to improve the pragmatic knowledge of the learners.

Despite appealing notion of research based language teaching, we argue that scientific way of conducting research on English language teaching (ELT) is problematic since it ignores language learners’ subjectivity, instructors’ professionalism, practitioners’ culture and learning particularity. Positivists pedagogical arguments neglect the social nature of meaning making instructional practices and emphasize objectivity and measurability criteria which lead to instrumental rationality. A critical discourse analysis of practical arguments proposed in pedagogical implications section of empiricist research articles revealed that positivists assumptions manifest themselves as the rules and regulations of carrying out scientific research. These yardsticks give power to the neoliberal tendencies to present reasons as premises of arguments to restrict and control the agency of ELT teachers as well as to deprofessionalize them. Since there is a close affinity between this paradigm world views and neoliberal policies, positivists research articles lead to the domination of neoliberalism on TEFL discourse. This indicates the ideological function of the article genre and awareness of that is crucial for the sake of democratic and fair education.

Prior research has yielded mixed results regarding what contributes psychometrically sound multiple-choice (MC) items. The purpose of the present study was, therefore, twofold: (a) to compare 3-, 4-, and 5-option multiple-choice (MC) tests in terms of psychometric characteristics, and (b) to investigate the relationships between three MC tests and five personality traits. To that end, 150 students were asked to answer three stem equivalent MC item tests. A Big Five Inventory was used to find students’ personality traits. Moreover, an attitude questionnaire was utilized to seek students’ opinions of these three MC tests. The results of one-way repeated measures ANOVA revealed statistically significant differences for item difficulty, while no statistically significant differences were found for item discrimination and reliability across three MC tests. The results of the Pearson correlation showed no correlation between personality traits and three different versions of MC tests. The results of the attitude questionnaire indicated mixed views towards MC tests. The findings of this study suggest that test developers consider statistical, affective, and contextual factors in order to develop different formats of MC tests.