Document Type: Original Article

Authors

Department of English, Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran

Abstract

According to Montano and Kasprzyk (2008), attitude is determined by the individual's beliefs about outcomes or attributes of performing the behavior (behavioral beliefs), weighted by evaluations of those outcomes or attributes. This study examined Iranian EFL learners’ attitudes toward the Task-Based Language Assessment (TBLA) and the traditional assessment concerning their General English achievement. One hundred EFL students from Islamic Azad University of Zarghan, Fars Province with the age range of 20-35, participated in this study. The data were gathered using an attitude questionnaire. Frequency Analysis and chi-square were used to show the learners' attitudes towards the task-based assessment in General English ability. Regarding the attitude questionnaire, EFL learners had positive attitudes towards the TBLA utilization in improving their General English achievement and most of the students were satisfied with learning English through the TBLA.

Keywords

1. Introduction

Assessment is one of the essential components in the process of language teaching and learning in the classroom context, and when it is not done appropriately or if it does not meet the requirements and the expectations of both students and teachers, it may impede the process of learning. (Koné, 2015).  As Cheng, Rogers, and Hu (2004) stated, ''every model of the teaching-learning process requires that teachers base their decisions–instructional, grading, and reporting–on some knowledge of the students' attainment of and progress towards desired learning outcomes'' (p. 361).  "Language classrooms strive to involve and support learners in the learning process. Instructional tasks are essential components of the language learning environment, and ''hold a central place'' in the learning process" (Ellis, 2003, p.1).   

Additionally, while some researchers suggest that the traditional methods include prescribed steps that provide teachers with a clear schedule of what they should do (Rivers, cited in Skehan, 1996), other researchers emphasize the importance of task-based approaches to communicative instruction which leave teachers and learners freer to find their own procedures to maximize communicative effectiveness (Gass & Crookes, cited in Skehan, 1996; Prabhu, 1987; Long & Crooks, 1991; Nunan, 1989). Therefore, against this backdrop, the present study sought to investigate Iranian EFL learners’ attitudes towards the effects of TBLA on their reading comprehension ability.

This study investigated Iranian EFL learners’ attitudes towards the effects of TBLA on their general English ability. Task-based tests require students to engage in some sorts of behavior which are goal-oriented target language use outside the language test situation. Performances on these tasks are then evaluated according to real-world criterion elements and criterion levels. Task-based language teaching challenges all areas of the EFL curriculum. This assessment is done by recognizing that knowledge of vocabulary and grammar is not sufficient to use a language to achieve social communicative goals. However, there are a few research studies on the use of task-based assessment in testing General English achievement. The principal concern of this assessment framework is to measure the learners’ performance on authentic tasks that are close to real-life tasks rather than exclusively concerning theoretical constructs to be measured. Furthermore, Norris (2009) argued the TBLA is closely related to strengthening task-based language classrooms and task-based language programs by providing rich information needed to support language learning and foster learners' abilities to do things with language. Thus, this study sought to investigate EFL learners' attitudes toward the TBLA in improving their General English achievement.

 

2. Literature Review

2.1. Task-based Assessment

The Task-Based Language Assessment (TBLA) is ''the process of evaluating, a set of explicitly stated criteria, and the quality of the communicative performances elicited from learners as part of goal-directed, meaning-focused language use requiring the integration of skills and knowledge'' (Brindley, 1994, p.74).  The TBLA can be attributed to such factors as the alignment of task-based assessment with task-based instruction, positive 'washback' effects of assessment practices on instruction, and the limitations of discrete-skills assessments, or DSAs (Long & Norris, 2000). They mentioned that DSAs focus on the knowledge of language per se, exercising points of lexicon, syntax, and comprehension with discrete and largely decontextualized test items. Recognizing the fact that knowledge of vocabulary and grammar (linguistic competence) is not sufficient to use a language to achieve ends in social situations, the TBLA broadens consideration to the social context of language use (sociolinguistic competence); pragmatic considerations in using language to achieve goals (strategic competence); and familiarity with forms, customs and standards of communication above the level of sentences (discourse competence).

The task-based language assessment (TBLA) grows from the observation that mastering the grammar and lexicon of a language is not sufficient for using a language to achieve ends in social situations. Language use is observed in settings that are more realistic and complex than in discrete skills assessments, and typically require the integration of limited, social, and pragmatic knowledge along with knowledge of the formal elements of language. The challenges of complex performance-based assessments are not, of course, unique to language testing. Similar motivations, and similar difficulties with design and application are the topic of much discussion in educational measurement more generally (e.g., McNamara, 2001).

In the task-based language assessment (TBLA) language use is observed in settings that are more realistic and complex than in discrete skills assessments, and which typically require the integration of topical, social and pragmatic knowledge along with knowledge of the formal elements of language. But designing an assessment is not accomplished simply by determining the settings in which performance will be observed.  The TBLA raises questions of just how to design complex tasks, evaluate students’ performances and draw valid conclusions from there. With an increasing interest in assessing learners’ communicative and authentic language use, TBLA (Norris, 2002; Norris, Brown, Hudson, & Yoshioka, 1998; Brown, Hudson, Norris & Bonk; 2002) has been introduced. While traditional language assessment is concerned with the construct to be measured first, the TBLA primarily focuses on whether examinees can engage in meaningful language communication and a fundamental question of "why and how task-based assessments are being used in contexts?" (Norris, 2002, p. 52). The principal concern of this assessment framework is to measure learners’ performance on authentic tasks that are close to real-life tasks rather than exclusively concerning with theoretical constructs to be measured.

When it comes to assessment uses, both formative and summative assessments are emphasized in the TBLA depending on motivations of implementation of the TBLA, namely intended uses of evaluation. Furthermore, Norris (2009, p.578) argued  the TBLA is closely related to strengthening task-based language classrooms and task-based language programs by providing rich information needed to support language learning and foster learners' abilities to do things with language.

The principal concern of this assessment framework is to measure learners’ performance on authentic tasks that are close to real-life tasks rather than exclusively concerning with theoretical constructs to be measured. Additionally, in the fields of education and applied linguistics, it is widely believed that testing influences teaching and learning. This influence is referred to as 'wash-back' (Wall & Alderson, 1993), 'backwash' (Hughes, 2003, cited in Bailey, 1996), or 'test impact' (Bachman & Palmer, 1996). McEwen (1995) described the effect mechanism when he stated: "what is assessed becomes what is valued, which becomes what is taught" (p.42).

The degree of washback varies over time following the status of the test, the status of the language being tested, the purpose of the test, the format of the test and skills tested (Shohamy, Donitsa-Schmidt, & Ferman, 1996). According to Eckstein and Noah (1993), the majority of washback studies have focused on the positive or negative consequences of standardized tests; however, washback exists in any assessment including the TBLA in which test results affect test-takers' future course of development and learning, and thus are regarded as high-stakes tests.

Despite the TBLA's unique strengths, it is not immune from constraints and criticism. In the performance assessment literature in general, issues of ensuring reliability and validity have been discussed mainly due to fewer tasks which also causes an inferential process and generalization of learners` performance from fewer tasks (Brindley, 1994; Shepard, 1990).

 

2.2. General English (English for General Purposes)

English for General Purposes (EGP) provides basic knowledge and skills of English language at a school level where the occupational/professional and higher educational orientations of the students are not defined properly (Potocar, 2002). According to Widdowson (1983 cited in Ajideh, 2009), EGP is aim-oriented which does not equate the specification of objective to aim – an educational operation – dealing with the development of general capacity. EGP teacher is involved in an “educational operation equipping learners with a general capacity to cope with undefined eventualities in future” (Ajideh, 2009, p.163).

 

2.3. Attitude in Language Teaching

Researchers in the fields of psychology and education, especially language learning, consider several definitions of attitude which mention different meanings from different contexts and perspectives .Based on the theory of planned behavior, Montano and Kasprzyk (2008) stated:

Attitude is determined by the individual's beliefs about outcomes or attributes of performing the behavior (behavioral beliefs), weighted by evaluations of those outcomes or attributes. Thus, a person who holds strong beliefs that positively valued outcomes will result from performing the behavior will have a positive attitude toward the behavior. Conversely, a person who holds strong beliefs that negatively valued outcomes will result from the behavior will have a negative attitude (p. 71).

Gardner (1985) also pointed out that attitude is an evaluative reaction to some referent or attitude object, inferred by the individual's beliefs or opinions about the referent. Attitude is thus linked to a person's values and beliefs and promotes or discourages the choices made in all realms of activity, whether academic or informal.

De Bot, Lowie and Verspoor (2005) believed that "teachers, learners, and researchers will all agree that a high motivation and a positive attitude towards a second language and its community help second language learning" (p. 72). According to Baker (1988), attitudes are not subject to inheritance because they are internalized predispositions. Attitudes towards a particular language might be either positive or negative. Some learners may have a negative attitude towards the second language and want to learn it to prevail over people in the community, but positive attitude strengthens the motivation. Some individuals might generate neutral feelings. Attitudes towards language are likely to have been developed by learners’ experiences. They may change during the passage of time. It could refer to both attitudes towards language learning and attitudes towards the members of a particular speech community. Brindley (1989) claimed that attitudes towards a language are often mirrored in the attitudes towards the members of that speech community.    

Traditional assessment has sought to determine how well students know the meanings of the grammatical structures and how well they use the grammar. These goals, whether they are achieved during a communicative event or a traditional test, still do not focus on how well the learner can communicate. If we were to assume that language did exist in the physical domain and that people used language to communicate, then these tests would be validly assessing what learners know. Since we know it does not, we should assess learners directly on how well they communicate based on the outcome of communicative events. The Task-based assessment (TBA) is an assessment method that can determine how well the students communicate. Mislevey, Steinberg, and Almond (2002) noted that task-based assessment gives a better definition of what a language learner can do:  the TBLA (task-based language assessment) broadens consideration to the social context of language use (sociolinguistic competence), pragmatic considerations in using language to achieve goals (strategic competence) and familiarity with forms, customs, and standards of communication above the level of sentences (discourse competence).

Chalak (2015) focused on improving reading comprehension ability through Task-based Instruction (TBI). The participants of the study were 135 Iranian female students at different levels selected from high schools in Isfahan, Iran, through a quasi-experimental design. The participants were divided into four groups, two control groups (CGs) and two experimental groups (EGs). They participated in a pretest, the instruction, and a posttest. The participants in EGs were taught through TBI, while CGs were exposed to a traditional method. The comparison between CGs and EGs were made through paired sample t-tests. The results revealed that the students in EGs outperformed CGs. The difference between the two grades was also investigated by independent samples t-test. The results showed that students at first-grade outperformed fourth graders. The findings suggested that using flexible and interactive tasks in English classes improves reading comprehension ability of Iranian EFL learners.

Keyvanfar and Modarresi (2009) found out whether using task-based reading activities has any impact on the development of text comprehension in Iranian young learners studying English as a foreign language at the beginner level. Two groups of 25 students aged 11 to 13, were the participants of the study. Having instructed the experimental group with four task types and the control group with classical reading activities, the researcher compared the reading performance of the two groups through a t-test which, not surprisingly, manifested the better performance of the experimental group. A follow-up reading test also showed that the experimental group still enjoyed a higher level of reading skill after one month. Furthermore, the scores gained from the four task types were compared and it was concluded that the students performed better in tasks which involved creativity and gave them the experience of playing.

Kiany, Albakhshi and Akbari (2011) set out a study to examine washback effects of ESP tests on teaching ESP at Iranian universities. In doing so, data were collected through a questionnaire and classroom observations. The questionnaire was administered to 45 subject specialists teaching at Iranian universities. 10 other ESP teachers were also observed. The data were analyzed through descriptive and inferential statistics. Surprisingly enough, the results indicate that the ESP tests have fallen short of the goal. That is, these tests do not lead to innovation in teaching ESP, not do they influence teachers' teaching activities and ESP contents.

Fang-Jinang's (2005) study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of implementing TBA in a Taiwanese primary school, and her results showed that both the control group and the experimental groups (TBA) improved after the instruction. Another study by Jahangard (2010) conducted on high school students to find whether students who gain lexical knowledge through the translation method can transfer their knowledge to reading comprehension showed that a significant improvement in the reading scores of the learners in Grades One and Two after the vocabulary instruction treatments were introduced.

To fill the gaps in the literature, the current study set out to examine if EFL learners have positive attitudes towards the TBLA in improving their General English achievement and accordingly answer the following research question: Do Iranian EFL learners have positive attitudes towards the TBLA in improving their General English achievement?

 

3. Methodology

3.1. Design and Context of the Study

In order to test the hypothesis, this study employed a non-experimental design.  It used qualitative methods to elicit the EFL learners’ attitudes on the effect of TBLA in improving their General English achievement. Task-based assessments were the independent variables of and the learners' attitude was the dependent variable of this study. This study was done in Zarghan Islamic Azad University.

 

3.2. Participants

To fulfill the research goal, 100 male and female intermediate Iranian EFL students from General English courses at   Zarghan Islamic Azad University, Fars Province with the age range of 20-35 participated in this study. All these participants, who were supposed to be at the intermediate level, were given a pretest that was a General English test to guarantee their homogeneity. Based on the results of the pretest, the scores obtained by the students fell within the range of 64 to 73 (out of 100) implying that the EFL learners were at the intermediate level. To provide a good touchstone against which the performance of the learners would be evaluated, the group of participants including 100 male and female intermediate Iranian EFL students were invited to participate in the study. Then they were divided into two groups, 50 in the experimental and 50 in the control group. Table 1 demonstrates the demographic data of the participants.

 

Table 1

Demographic Background of the Participants

No. Of Students

100           

Gender

50 Males & 50 Females

Native Language

Persian

Field of Study

Different Fields of Studies

Institute/High School

Zarghan Islamic Azad University

Academic Year

2016-2017

3.3. Instruments

One learner questionnaire was selected based on General English and the attitudes of the learners toward task-based assessment, which was adopted from Gardner's (1985), AMTB. Gardner's Attitude/Motivation Test Battery (AMTB) (Gardner, 1985) were used, ranging from ‘Strongly Agree’ to ‘Strongly Disagree’. The questionnaire had 20 items and it was reported to have good reliability and validity (Gardner, 1985). The questionnaire was prepared and reviewed by two professors holding Ph.D. in EFL teaching methodology before the treatment. The clarity of each item and the appropriateness of the individual items concerning the topic were confirmed. The revised form of the questionnaire was given to the experts to ensure the content validity and face validity of it. The piloting of the first draft of the questionnaire was to test the internal reliability. Cronbach's alpha (a=.80) was calculated for the questionnaire to gauge the internal reliability (see Appendices A & B).

   

3.4. Data Collection Procedure                                                                

To answer the research question of the present research, the researcher administered the questionnaires to the learners in the experimental group, both males and females. As the participants were all students of different majors and not fluent in English, the questionnaire was translated into Persian. The students were asked to complete the questionnaire in the class before the last session of the semester. They were also asked to check the questions carefully and read them thoroughly. It should be mentioned that some minor changes were made in the wordings of the questionnaire based on the focus of the present study by using synonyms to make it more comprehensible for the Iranian students. Respondents were informed that the questionnaire was related to the assessment method and they had to answer the questions based on their attitudes towards it. Respondents were also informed that the information they gave were kept confidential and used only for research purposes.

 

3.5. Data Analysis Procedure

To answer the research question of the present study, a Frequency Analysis was used to show the learners' attitudes towards the task-based assessment in their General English achievement. A survey questionnaire was administered to all of the student participants (N=100) to obtain their attitudes towards the task-based assessment after the treatment. This part was a 20-item survey questionnaire to show learners' attitudes towards the task-based assessment (see Appendices A & B: English & Persian Versions). The survey questionnaire was aimed at measuring students' attitudes on the task-based assessment, and learners responded to each item statement by indicating their agreement: Strongly Disagree (1), Moderately Disagree (2), Slightly Disagree (3), Slightly Agree (4), Moderately Agree (5) and Strongly Agree (6). As it follows, Table 1 shows the descriptive statistics of students' attitudes towards task-based assessment. Moreover, Chi-square test was conducted to examine learners' agreement with the task-based assessment. Table 2 shows Chi-square test of strongly disagree and strongly agree.

 

4. Results

The quantitative findings of this research revealed that students had a positive attitude towards the task-based assessment in learning General English courses at the university. Hence, the strongest gain for the students of this study was the improvement of their general English achievement and also, it might indicate that use of the task-based assessment had positive effects on their learning.   The results of this investigation are based on the performance of the participants who took part in the research and should not be overgeneralized to the whole population of Iranian university students unless more studies in line with the previous studies may lead to more generalizability of the results.

 

Table 2

 Descriptive Statistics of Students' Attitudes towards Task-Based Assessment (N=50)

 

N

Minimum

Maximum

Mean

Std. Deviation

Strongly Disagree

20

.00

21.00

7.8500

8.88094

Moderately Disagree

20

.00

17.00

6.3500

6.65918

Slightly Disagree

20

.00

14.00

6.3500

5.03958

Slightly Agree

20

.00

14.00

8.2500

4.77796

Moderately Agree

20

1.00

19.00

9.4000

6.53251

Strongly Agree

20

.00

22.00

11.6000

9.61578

Valid N (Listwise)

20

 

 

 

 

 

According to the tabulated data in Table 2, strongly agree (11.60) and moderately agree (9.40) had the highest mean scores in comparison to other items. The mean scores of moderately disagree (6.35) and slightly disagree (6.35) were the same. Based on the frequencies of the students' agreement with task-based assessment, Table 2 revealed that the majority of the students agreed with the task-based assessment during the term in improving their General English achievement and they had a positive view towards this type of assessment.

    

Table 3

 Chi-Square Tests of Strongly Disagree and Strongly Agree

 

Value

df

Asymptotic Significance (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square

42.956a

24

.010

Likelihood Ratio

41.267

24

.016

Linear-by-Linear Association

18.469

1

.000

N of Valid Cases

20

 

 

a. 35 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .10.

 

As shown in Table 3, Pearson Chi-square is .010 (Asymptotic Significance (2-sided) > 0.05) for strongly disagree and strongly agree. It is inferred that there is not a statistically significant association between strongly disagree and strongly agree. Table 4 shows chi-square test of moderately disagree and strongly agree. 

 

Table 4

Chi-Square Tests of Moderately Disagree and Strongly Agree

 

Value

df

Asymptotic Significance (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square

68.611a

48

.027

Likelihood Ratio

55.326

48

.218

Linear-by-Linear Association

16.678

1

.000

N of Valid Cases

20

 

 

a. 63 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .05.

 

As shown in Table 4, Pearson Chi-square is .027 (Asymptotic Significance (2-sided) > 0.05) for strongly disagree and strongly agree. It is inferred that there is not a statistically significant association between moderately disagree and strongly agree. Table 5 shows chi-square test of slightly disagree and strongly agree.

 

Table 5

 Chi-Square Tests of Slightly Disagree and Strongly Agree

 

Value

df

Asymptotic Significance (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square

67.778a

42

.007

Likelihood Ratio

49.275

42

.205

Linear-by-Linear Association

16.593

1

.000

N of Valid Cases

20

 

 

a. 56 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected number is .05.

 

As presented in Table 5, Pearson Chi-square is .007 (Asymptotic Significance (2-sided) < 0.05) slightly disagree and strongly agree. It is inferred that there is a statistically significant relationship between somewhat disagree and strongly agree. Table 6 shows chi-square test of slightly agree and strongly agree.

 Table 6

Chi-Square Tests of Slightly Agree and Strongly Agree

 

Value

df

Asymptotic Significance (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square

70.556a

56

.091

Likelihood Ratio

56.372

56

.461

Linear-by-Linear Association

17.455

1

.000

N of Valid Cases

20

 

 

a. 72 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .05.

 

Table 6 illustrated that Pearson Chi-square is .091 (Asymptotic Significance (2-sided) > 0.05) slightly agree and strongly agree. It is inferred that there is not a statistically significant relationship between slightly agree and strongly agree. Finally, Table 7 shows chi-square test of moderately agree and strongly agree.

 

 Table 7

 Chi-Square Tests of Moderately Agree and Strongly Agree

 

Value

Df

Asymptotic Significance (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square

67.222a

56

.145

Likelihood Ratio

53.600

56

.566

Linear-by-Linear Association

16.736

1

.000

N of Valid Cases

20

 

 

a. 72 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .05.

                                                              

As illustrated in Table 7, Pearson Chi-square is .145 (Asymptotic Significance (2-sided) > 0.05) for strongly disagree and strongly agree. It is inferred that there is not a statistically significant association between strongly disagree and strongly agree.

 

5. Discussion  

 To answer the proposed research question regarding learners' attitude towards task-based language assessment, the students were given a twenty-item survey questionnaire. Firstly, the results showed that the students had positive attitude towards the tasks given in each session. Further research could concentrate on the aspect of motivation, in order to clarify to what extent motivation is variable and dynamic and can be promoted through different aspects of task design.

Secondly, the overall implementation of the TBLA took place solely in the classroom in the academic context for learning General English. In further studies, it would be beneficial to have ESP students to do role play tasks. Hopefully, there would be a chance soon to investigate the application of the TBLA in other aspects related to English language teaching and learning such as listening comprehension, writing and speaking. It is going to add higher value to the dominant theme of the TBLA to find out the gender's role when it is applied in different parts of Iran. Replication of this study in different settings will increase the reliability of the findings.

6.  Conclusion                

As regards the research question of this study, EFL learners had positive attitudes towards the TBLA in improving their General English achievement. To answer this research question, frequencies of responses were calculated for all items of the 20-item survey questionnaire. As illustrated in Table 2, learners had a positive attitude towards the task-based assessment in improving their General English achievement. Based on the findings of the present study, several conclusions can be drawn. The analysis of attitude questionnaire illustrated that the students preferred the implementation of the TBLA in learning General English. Frequencies of responses revealed that learners more agreed with the task-based assessment in improving their General English and less agreed with the traditional assessment. Thus, EFL learners had positive attitudes towards the TBLA utilization in developing their General English achievement and they supported the integration of the TBLA in General English courses.

This study was designed to foster English language learning for 100 undergraduates in Zarghan Islamic Azad University. Accordingly, a replication of this study with other groups of students at the same university or another university in Iran may provide further insightful evidence about the applicability of TBLA in teaching and learning language proficiency. Besides, it is recommended to conduct a study which tracks language learning over a longer period.

Furthermore, the results of this study suggested that most students preferred to learn new materials via new methods or be involved in various classroom activities instead of attending classes with monotonous methods of teaching.Lastly, the present study has provided useful insights into the utilization of the TBLA in assessing learners' improvement in General English.    

The scope of the study was confined to 100 EFL students from one university from the Islamic Azad University in Zarghan. For this study, only sophomores and juniors, between 20 and 35 years of age, majoring in different fields of study in the academic year of 2016-2017 were included. The results of this study may not be generalizable to the greater populations. However, the results of the survey may be generalizable to other communities that share the same conditions and characteristics as the university system that was studied. The nature of the study variables may come into question. The study was limited to the examination of TBLA in learning ESP courses.

 

 

 

 

Appendix A

Attitude Questionnaire (English Version)

 

Student's Name: -------------------------------

PART ONE: Demographic Profile

Please read the statements below carefully and select the appropriate choices.

A) Gender:

1. Female

2. Male

B) Specialization: ……………………….


C) Year of study:

1. First year

2. Second year

3. Third year

 

PART TWO: Attitude Questionnaire

The following questions ask about your motivation in and attitude towardGeneral English achievement via task-based assessment. Remember there are no right or wrong answers; just answer as accurately as possible. Use the scale below to answer the questions.

 

 1= Strongly Disagree, 2= Moderately Disagree, 3= Slightly Disagree, 4 = Slightly Agree,

5= Moderately Agree, 6= Strongly Agree

No.

Items

1

2

3

4

5

6

1

I don’t get anxious when I have to answer General English questions in my English class.

 

 

 

 

 

 

2

I look forward to going to English class because I do various activities in my English class.

 

 

 

 

 

 

3

I have a strong desire to give different roles in my English class.

 

 

 

 

 

 

4

My English class is really a waste of time because I cannot answer General English questions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

5

I would rather spend more time in my English class and less in other classes because I get involved in doing various tasks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

6

I enjoy the activities of our English class much more than those of my other classes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

7

I get nervous if I have to answer General English questions in final exam.

 

 

 

 

 

 

8

It worries me that other students in my class seem to do General English tasks in English better than I do.

 

 

 

 

 

 

9

I feel confident when asked to answer General English questions after talking about reading topic.

 

 

 

 

 

 

10

I look forward to going to English class because I prepare some questions about reading topics for giving role as an interviewer.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

11

I am very interested in working with my classmates in different groups in my English class.

 

 

 

 

 

 

12

It embarrasses me to volunteer General English answers in our English class.

 

 

 

 

 

 

13

I make a point of trying to understand English reading topics for helping my classmates in groups.

 

 

 

 

 

 

14

I don’t understand why other students feel nervous about giving roles in different topics in my class.

 

 

 

 

 

 

15

It embarrasses me to volunteer doing various tasks and activities in my English class.

 

 

 

 

 

 

16

When I have a problem understanding something in my English class, I have my classmate in our group for help.

 

 

 

 

 

 

17

I would really like to learn how to make questions about different topics when I read English texts in my English class.

 

 

 

 

 

 

18

My English class is really a waste of time because I cannot give roles and defend my viewpoints.

 

 

 

 

 

 

19

I tend to give up and not pay attention to reading tasks when I don’t understand reading topics.

 

 

 

 

 

 

20

Making questions about reading topics is not enjoyable to me.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix B

Attitude Questionnaire (Persian Version)

 

پرسشنامه مربوط به نگرش دانشجویان درس زبان عمومی

نسبت به ارزیابی فعالیت محور در کلاس

نام دانشجو................................

الف- مشخصات فردی

لطفاً جملات زیر را با دقت بخوانید و پاسخ دهید.

-         جنسیت           مذکر*                        مونث *

-         رشته تحصیلی ......................................

-         دانشجوی سال چندم هستید؟

-         سال اول *

-         سال دوم *

-         سال سوم *

دانشجویان عزیز:

پرسشنامة زیر در مورد نگرش و انگیزة شما نسبت به کلاس زبان عمومی مبتنی بر ارزیابی فعالیت محور است.

لطفاً توجه داشته باشید که در اینجا پاسخ صحیح یا غلطی وجود ندارد.

با توجه به شماره‌ها و مقیاس داده شده صحیح‌ترین گزینه را در مورد هر جمله انتخاب کنید.

 

 

ردیف

سوال

کاملاً مخالفم

نسبتاً مخالفم

کمی مخالفم

کمی موافقم

نسبتاً موافقم

کاملاً موافقم

1

من هنگام پاسخ دادن به سؤالات زبان عمومی در این کلاس انگلیسی عصبی نمی‌شوم.

 

 

 

 

 

 

2

من مشتاقانه برای شرکت در این کلاس زبان انگلیسی انتظار      می‌کشم چون در این کلاس فعالیت‌های مختلف و متنوعی انجام می‌دهم.

 

 

 

 

 

 

3

من مایلم که در کلاس،  نقش های مختلفی داشته باشم.

 

 

 

 

 

 

4

به نظر من شرکت در این کلاس اتلاف وقت است چون من قادر به پاسخگویی به سوالات زبان عمومی نیستم.

 

 

 

 

 

 

5

من ترجیح می‌دهم وقت بیشتری در این کلاس زبان انگلیسی و وقت کمتری را در کلاس‌های دیگر بگذرانم زیرا در این کلاس فعالیت‌های گروهی متنوعی انجام می‌دهیم.

 

 

 

 

 

 

6

من از فعالیت‌های این کلاس بیشتر از کلاس‌های دیگر لذت می‌برم.

 

 

 

 

 

 

7

فکر می‌کنم هنگام پاسخ دادن به سؤالات زبان عمومی در امتحان پایان ترم این درس عصبی می‌شوم.

 

 

 

 

 

 

8

این مسئله که سایر دانشجویان در پاسخگویی به سوالات زبان انگلیسی در این کلاس بهتر از من هستند مرا نگران می‌کند.

 

 

 

 

 

 

9

من در هنگام پاسخ دادن به سؤالات زبان عمومی بعد از بحث در مورد موضوع خاصی احساس اعتماد به نفس بالایی دارم.

 

 

 

 

 

 

10

من بی‌صبرانه برای شرکت در این کلاس انتظار می‌کشم و هر جلسه تعدادی سوال را که مرتبط با موضوع کلاس است به عنوان یک مصاحبه‌کننده از قبل آماده می‌کنم.

 

 

 

 

 

 

11

به شرکت در کار گروهی با همکلاسی‌هایم بسیار علاقه‌مندم.

 

 

 

 

 

 

12

این مسئله که لازم است من گاهی برای شرکت در پاسخ به پرسش‌های زبان عمومی داوطلب شوم من را آزار می‌دهد.

 

 

 

 

 

 

13

من تلاش می‌کنم تا مطالب مربوط به موضوع درسی را خوب بفهمم و بتوانم به همکلاسی‌هایم کمک کنم.

 

 

 

 

 

 

14

این برای من قابل درک نیست که چرا بعضی از دانشجویان هنگام گرفتن نقش در فعالیت‌های کلاسی دچار استرس و نگرانی می‌شوند.

 

 

 

 

 

 

15

این مسئله برای من سخت است که باید داوطلبانه فعالیت‌های مختلفی را در این کلاس انجام دهم.

 

 

 

 

 

 

16

زمانی که من با مشکلی در درس زبان عمومی مواجه شوم از یکی از همکلاسی‌هایم که در یک گروه هستیم کمک می‌گیرم.

 

 

 

 

 

 

17

من زمانی که یک متن انگلیسی را می‌خوانم بسیار علاقه‌مندم که بتوانم در مورد آن سوال بسازم.

 

 

 

 

 

 

18

این کلاس برای من اتلاف وقت است چون من قادر به اجرای هیچ نقشی و دفاع از نظراتم نیستم.

 

 

 

 

 

 

19

من زمانی که مطلبی را متوجه نمی‌شوم دیگر به ادامة مطلب توجهی ندارم و گوش نمی‌دهم.

 

 

 

 

 

 

20

برای من ساختن سوال در مورد مطالب درسی کلاس اصلاً جالب و لذت‌بخش نیست.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ajideh, P. (2009). Autonomous learning and metacognitive strategies in
ESP Class. Journal of English Language Teaching, 2(1), 161-168.

Bachman, L. & Palmer, A. (1996). Language testing in practice: Designing and developing useful language tests. Oxford University Press.

Bailey, K (1996). Working for washback: A review of the washback concept in language testing. Language Testing, 13(3), 257-279.

Baker, C. (1988). Key issues in bilingualism and bilingual education. Multilingual matters 35. Clevedon, Avon: England.

Brindley, G. (1989). Outcomes-based assessment and reporting in language learning programs: A review of the issues. Language Testing 15(1), 45-85.

Brindley, G. (1994). Task-centered assessment in language learning: The promise & the challenge. In Bird, N., Falvey, P., Tsui, A., Allison, D. & McNeill, A., (Eds), Language & learning: papers presented at the Annual International Language in Education Conference (Hong Kong, 1993). Hong Kong: Hong Kong Education Department, 73–94.

Chalak, A. (2015). The effect of task-based instruction on reading comprehension of Iranian EFL learners. Applied Research on English Language, 4(1), 19-29

Cheng, L., Rogers, T., and Hu, H. (2004). ESL/EFL instructors’ classroom assessment practices: purposes, methods, and procedures. Language Testing, 21(3), 360-389.

De Bot, K., Lowie, W. & Verspoor, M. (2005). Second language acquisition: An advanced resource book. London: Routledge.

Eckstein, M. A., & Noah, H. J. (Eds.). (1993). Examinations: Comparative & international studies. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Gardner, R. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning. The role of attitudes and motivation. London: Edward Arnold.

Hughes, A. (2003). Testing for language teachers (2nd edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Keyvanfar, A. & Modaresi, M. (2009). The impact of task-based activities on the reading skill of Iranian EFL young learners at the beginner level. The Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2(1), 81-102.

Kiany, G. H., Albakhshi, G.  & Akbari, R. (2011). The washback effects of ESP tests on teaching ESP at Iranian universities. TELL, 5(1), 21-43.

Koné, K. (2015). The impact of performance-based assessment on university ESL learners` motivation. All theses, dissertations, and other capstone projects: A Collection of Scholarly and Creative Works for Minnesota State University, Mankato. Paper 402. http://cornerstone.lib.mnsu.edu/etds (September 13, 2016)

Long, M., & Crookes, G. (1991). Three approaches to task-based syllabus design. TESOL Quarterly, 26(1), 127-139.

Long, M. H. & Norris, J. M. (2000). Task-based language teaching and assessment. In Byram, M., (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language teaching (pp. 597-603). London: Routledge, 597-603

McEwen, N. (1995). Educational accountability in Alberta. Canadian Journal of Education, 20, 27-44.

McNamara, T. (2001). Language assessment as social practice: Challenges for research. Language Testing, 18(4), 333-350.

Montano, D. E. & Kasprzyk, D. (2008). Theory of reasoned action, theory of planned behavior, and the integrated behavioral model. In K. Glanz, B. Rimer & K. Viswanath (Eds.), Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice. (pp.67-96) San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass,.

Norris, J. M., Brown, J. D., Hudson, T. D., & Yoshioka, J. K. (1998). Designing second language performance assessment. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Norris, J. M. (2009). Task-based teaching and testing. In M. H. Long & C. J. Doughty (Eds.), Handbook of language teaching (pp. 578-594). Cambridge: Blackwell.

Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Potocar, M. (2002). ESP in Slovenian Secondary Technical and Vocational Education: English for Specific Purposes World, 1, online journal available at: http://www.espworld.info/Articles_1/esp.html (25.11.2017)

Prabhu, N. (1987). Second language pedagogy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Shepard, L. A. (1990). Inflated test score gains: Is the problem old norms or teaching the test? Educational Measurement, 9, 15-22.

Shohamy, E., Donitsa-Schmidt, S., & Ferman, I. (1996). Test impact revisited: Washback effect over time. Language Testing, 13(3), 298-317.

Skehan, P. (1996). Second language acquisition research and task-based instruction. In Willis, J., and Dave Willis (Eds.). Challenge and change in language teaching (pp. 17-30). Oxford: Heinemann.

Wall, D. & Alderson, J. C. (1993). Examining washback: The Sri Lankan impact study. Language Testing, 10, 41-69.

Widdowson, H. G. (1983). Learning Purpose and Language Use. Oxford: Oxford University

       Press.