English language learning
Shahram Ghahraki; Manssor Tavakoli; Saeed Ketabi
Abstract
Perhaps the degree of test difficulty is one of the most significant characteristics of a test. However, no empirical research on the difficulty of the MSRT test has been carried out. The current study attempts to fill the gap by utilizing a two-parameter item response model to investigate the psychometric ...
Read More
Perhaps the degree of test difficulty is one of the most significant characteristics of a test. However, no empirical research on the difficulty of the MSRT test has been carried out. The current study attempts to fill the gap by utilizing a two-parameter item response model to investigate the psychometric properties (item difficulty and item discrimination) of the MSRT test. The Test Information Function (TIF) was also figured out to estimate how well the test at what range of ability distinguishes respondents. To this end, 328 graduate students (39.9% men and 60.1% women) were selected randomly from three universities in Isfahan. A version of MSRT English proficiency test was administered to the participants. The results supported the unidimensionality of the components of MSRT test. Analysis of difficulty and discrimination indices of the total test revealed that 14% of the test items were either easy / very easy, 38% were medium, and 48% were either difficult or very difficult. In addition, 14% of the total items were classified as nonfunctioning. They discriminated negatively or did not discriminate at all. 7% of the total items discriminated poorly, 17% discriminated moderately, and 62% discriminated either highly or perfectly, however they differentiated between high-ability and higher-ability test takers. Thus, 38% of the items displayed satisfactory difficulty. Too easy (14%) and too difficult (48%) items could be one potential reason why some items have low discriminating power. An auxiliary inspection of items by the MSRT test developers is indispensable.
English language learning
Masumeh Sadat Seyyedrezaei; Mohammad Amiryousefi; Ana Gimeno-Sanz; Manssor Tavakoli
Abstract
The present study examined the comparative effects of Etherpad-based writing instruction and face-to-face writing instruction on EFL learners' writing quality and writing self-efficacy. It also aimed at finding the learners' attitude towards the influence of Etherpad and their reason for success/ failure ...
Read More
The present study examined the comparative effects of Etherpad-based writing instruction and face-to-face writing instruction on EFL learners' writing quality and writing self-efficacy. It also aimed at finding the learners' attitude towards the influence of Etherpad and their reason for success/ failure in this writing course. To this end, ninety students were selected through convenience sampling and randomly assigned to one of the two instruction groups. In addition to an IELTS writing task, Self-efficacy in Writing Scale (SWS) was administered. During the course, the students received instruction on writing an argumentative essay. After the treatment, the SWS and another IELTS writing task were given. Subsequently, a semi-structured interview was conducted with twenty Etherpad-based learners to find their attitudes towards the reason for their success/ failure and the effectiveness of Etherpad. The results revealed that the Etherpad-based group significantly outperformed the face-to-face group in the writing posttest and demonstrated a higher level of writing self-efficacy. The interview data showed that the students attributed their success to both internal and external factors. Whereas, they ascribed their failure to internal factors rather than external ones. It was also revealed that the students found Etherpad as a predictor of their success in writing performance.
