Test-taking Strategies and EFL Learners’ Performance on the Reading Sub-test of Iranian Universities PhD Entrance Exam

International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research

مقاله 5، دوره 7، شماره 27، اسفند 2019، صفحه 71-85   

نوع مقاله: Research Papers

نویسندگان

Elahe Nikneshan¹؛ Hossein Barati^{* 2}

¹Department of English, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran

²Hossein Barati*, Associate Professor, Department of English, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran: English Department, Faculty of Foreign Languages, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran [e-mail]

چکیده

The present study was an attempt to investigate the validity of the English section of Iranian Universities PhD Entrance Exam in TEFL. To this end, 15 EFL learners from university of Isfahan who were in their last semester of that MA education were invited to contribute to the study. A group of 5 university lecturers were also asked to support the study as expert judges. A TOEFL reading paper was used to divide the participants into three ability groups, each consisting of five learners. Think-aloud study was used to find out the strategies each ability group used when completing the test. All the participants completed the reading section of the PhD Entrance Exam while verbalizing their thoughts. The verbal reports were transcribed and coded based on Barati’s (2005) taxonomy of Test-taking strategies. The Chi- square analysis of the think aloud protocols revealed that Monitoring and Evaluation strategies were used significantly more than other strategies by all ability groups. Moreover, the results indicated that the high ability group of test takers were more successful compared with others in maneuvering among different type of strategies. Further, different patterns of strategy use were observed in the three ability groups. The findings of the present study may be of interest to the PhD Entrance Exam developers as well as EFL material designers and classroom instructors.

کلیدواژه‌ها

strategy؛ test-taking strategies؛ Taxonomy؛ Think-aloud Protocol؛ validity

مراجع

 Abbasian Boroojeni F., Tavakoli, M., & Vahid Dastjerdi., H. (2017). Washback effect of general English test of Ph.D. entrance exam on science and humanities students: Perceptions and practices. Journal of Research in Applied Linguistics, 8(1), 109-132. 

Ahmadian, M., Poulaki, S., & Farahni, E. (2016). “Reading Strategies Used by High Scoring and Low Scoring IELTS Candidates: A Think-aloud Study”. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(2,): 408-416. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0602.25

Anderson, J. R. (1983). “A spreading activation theory of memory.” Journal of verbal learning and verbal behaviour, 22: 261-295.

Anderson, N. J. (1991). Individual differences in strategy use in second language reading and testing. Modern Language Journal, 75, 460-472.

Anderson, N. J., Bachman, L. F., Perkins, K., and Cohen, A. (1991). “An exploratory study into the construct validation of a reading comprehension test: triangulation of data sources.” Language Testing, 8 (1): 41-66.

Anderson, N. J. (2002). The role of metacognition in second language teaching and learning. Retrieved December

Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bachman, L. F. and Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Brown, H. D. (2004). Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom Practices. London: Longman

Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (2010). Language assessment in practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Barati, H. (2005). Test-taking strategies and the assessment of reading skills: an approach to construct validation. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. University of Bristol. UK.

Bemani Naeimi, M., & Rezaei, R. (2015). Examining and Dealing with the Issue of Reading Strategy Use by Iranian EFL Learners.The Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal,15 (2), 182-195

Block, E. L. (1992). See how they read: comprehension monitoring of L1 and L2 readers. TESOL Quarterly, 26(2), 119-143. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3587008

Cohen, A. D. (1984). On taking language tests: What the students report. Language Testing, 1(1), 70-81. [Online] Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/026553228400100106 (August 19, 2011).

Cohen, A. D. (1998). Strategies in learning and using a second language. England: Addison Wesley.

Cohen, A. D. (1998a). Strategies in learning and using a second language. London: Longman.

Cohen, A. D. (2012). Test-taking strategies and task design, 263-277.

Dehieb-Henia, N. (2003). Evaluating the effectiveness of metacognitive strategy training for reading research articles in an ESP context. Journal of English for Specific Purposes, 22, 387–417. Dodeen, H., 2009. Test-related characteristics of UAEU students: Test-anxiety, test-taking skills, guessing, attitudes toward tests, and cheating. Journal of Faculty of Education, 26(1): 31-66

Dodeen, H., (2009). Test-related characteristics of UAEU students: Test-anxiety, test-taking skills, guessing, attitudes toward tests, and cheating. Journal of Faculty of Education, 26(1): 31-66

Dreyer, C., & C. Nel (2003). “Teaching reading strategiesand reading comprehensionwithin a technology-enhancedlearning environment”. System31: 349-365

Gafourinia, N., & Afgari, A. (2013). “The Interaction between Cognitive Test-Taking Strategies, Reading Ability, and Reading Comprehension Test Performance of Iranian EFL Learners”. English Language Teaching, 6(8)

Ghafourina, N., & Afghari, A. (2014). The Interaction among Using Test-Taking Strategies, Level of Language Proficiency, and Test Performance. IJRELT, 1 (3), 83-94

Kashkouli, Z., & Barati, H. (2013). Type of test-taking strategies and task-based reading assessment: A case in Iranian EFL learners. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 70(25), 1580-1589.

Kashkouli, Z., Barati, H., & Nejad Ansari (2015). An investigation into the test-taking strategies employed for a high-stake test: Implications for test validation. International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, 2015 July, 4(3), 61-72

Liu, H. (2015). Use of Learning Strategies by EFL Learners: A Study of How It Relates to Language Proficiency and Learner Autonomy. International Journal of English Linguistics, 5(2): 21-35

O’Malley, C., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition.

Phakiti, A. (2003). “A closer look at the relationship of cognitive and metacognitive strategy use to     EFL reading achievement test performance.” Language Testing, 20 (1): 26-56

Phakiti, A., 2008. Construct validation of Bachman and Palmer’s (1996) strategic competence model over time in EFL reading tests. Language Testing, 25(2): 237-249

Purpura, J. (1999). Strategy use and second language test performance: A structural equation modeling approach. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Relates to Language Proficiency and Learner Autonomy. International Journal of English Linguistics, 5(2): 21-35

Pour-Mohammadi, M., & Abidin, M. J. Z. (2011a). Test-taking strategies, schema theory and reading comprehension test performance. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 1(18), 237-243

Sheorey, R., & MokhtariK. (2001). Differences in the metacognitive awareness of Reading strategies among native and non-native readers. System, 29, 431–449. doi: 10.1016/S0346-251X(01)00039-2

Steinagel, L. O. (2005). The effects of reading and reading strategy training on lower proficiency level second language learners. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Brigham Young University.

Vahidi, S. (2006). Test-taking strategies in completing a close test

Wanger. E. (2006). Can the search for “fairness” be taken too far? Columbia University Working Papers in TESOL & Applied Linguistics, 6(2).

Yang, G. (2004). The relationship between readers’ beliefs and reading strategies. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. State University of New York at Buffalo.

Zhang, L., & Seepho, S. (2013). Metacognitive strategy use and academic readiachievement: Insights from a Chinese context, Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 10(1), 54-64.