proficiency levels

Code-switching (CS), an alternation between two or more languages or language varieties, has long been researched in language education. A great number of studies by applied linguists have explored the reasons for, and the potential usages of code-switching in foreign language education over the past years. This study explores the perceptions of English language learners across various proficiency levels concerning teachers’ use of CS, in this case Farsi in English classrooms. It also examines the roles and functions of CS in the classroom. Fifty teachers and 105 language learners from University of Tehran Language Center (UTLC) in Tehran, Iran were involved in this study. The necessary data were obtained through questionnaires. The results suggested that the Elementary (EL) learners seem to benefit from the teachers' use of first language in class, whereas English-only classroom is preferred by Intermediate (IN) and Upper Intermediate (UI) ones. It was also revealed that maximum exposure of the learners to the target language seems necessary. The results suggest that, concerning the learners' levels (EL, IN and UI), teachers’ and learners’ Code Switching can work as a useful language teaching strategy. The findings of this study can have implications for English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classrooms and can be used by language teachers.

Placing non-native speakers of English into appropriate classes involves mapping placement test scores onto proficiency levels based on predetermined cut scores. However, studies on how to set boundaries for different levels of proficiency have been lacking in the language testing literature. A top-down approach to standard setting in which a panel of experts set cut scores has dominated the typical standard setting procedure. A less utilized approach is to proceed bottom-up by clustering learners based on test scores. The purpose of this study was to fill this gap by examining Education Testing Services (ETS)’s mapping of TOEFL® iBT Test scores to the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) levels. The study examined TOEFL® iBT score data from ICNALE (International Corpus Network of Asian Learners of English) and conducted optimal Kernel Density Estimation to find peaks in the distribution of test scores. In addition to the number of peaks, the local minima of the resulting distribution were chosen as boundaries of cut scores for delineating different ability groups. This method of separating scores, also known as contrasting groups, finds clusters of test takers based on maximum differences in scores. The results showed that ETS’ guide for cut scores linking to CEFR levels was comparable to Kernel Density Estimation with some exceptions, namely two out of three cut scores were found to be similar. Implications are discussed in terms of test-centered versus examinee-centered method of standard setting and the need to consider the demographics of the examinee population in determining cut scores.

The current study aimed to investigate EFL teachers’ use of different corrective feedback types in face-to-face and online classes across levels of proficiency, as well as their perceptions of the use of corrective feedback (CF) in their classrooms. To this end, six teachers (three face-to-face and three online) from two language schools were selected as the participants based on convenience sampling. It’s worth noting that in terms of design, the current investigation qualifies as a case study. In an attempt to triangulate data collection, both observation and interview were used as the instruments for data collection. In so doing, each teacher’s class was observed for two sessions, and the interaction between learners and each teacher was audio-recorded. Furthermore, structured interviews were conducted with the participants following observations. The study was guided by Lyster and Ranta’s (1997) and Sheen’s (2011) framework for CF types. As the findings revealed, recast was the most commonly used CF type in elementary and intermediate levels in both classroom modes, as well as the advanced face-to-face class, with the only exception being the advanced online class in which elicitation featured as the most preferred feedback type. Furthermore, the results of the interview data revealed that all teachers had positive perceptions of using CF in EFL classrooms. The findings offer some fruitful implications for EFL teachers who are engaged with face-to-face or online modes of instruction, particularly as they highlight the importance of offering more explicit CF types to bring about more noticing and uptake.