10.71528/

Developing Interactive Tasks in Iranian EFL Students’ Self-Monitoring, Self-Regulation, and Willingness to Address Communication Using ICT Tools

PDF
  • Fereshte Abkhoo1,
  • Roya Baharlooei*1,
  • Hadi Salehi1,
  • Omid Tabatabaei1,
  1. English Department, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran

Received: 2022-04-12

Revised: 2022-06-12

Accepted: 2022-08-09

Published in Issue 2022-12-01

Copyright (c) 2024 Journal of New Trends in English Language Learning (JNTELL)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

Abkhoo, F., Baharlooei, R., Salehi, H., & Tabatabaei, O. (2022). Developing Interactive Tasks in Iranian EFL Students’ Self-Monitoring, Self-Regulation, and Willingness to Address Communication Using ICT Tools. Journal of New Trends in English Language Learning (JNTELL), 1(4), 79-107. https://doi.org/10.71528/
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

PDF views: 202

Abstract

This mixed-methods design study has been conducted to gain insights into the developing interactive tasks in Iranian EFL students in terms of
self-monitoring, self-regulation, and willingness to communication within the educational system. The study collected data using the
questionnaires measuring self- monitoring scale (SMS), self-regulated language learning scale (SRLLS), and willingness to communicate (WTC)
to compute the differences in interactive scores of 40 students in an experimental group with the interactive scores of 40 students in a control
group. The study adopted a qualitative interview-based methodology with EFL learners took part in the investigation and the extent to which
they could achieve and receive the instruction with significant findings. Accordingly, the study as personality assessment developed the semi-structured interviews with 40 students in an experimental group and 40 students in a control group to explore students’ motivational beliefs and
their attitudes towards interactive tasks influencing their performance in learning and assist them to communicate successfully. As the results of
the study, using the independent sample t-test, the interactive tasks could facilitate the suitable training and professional development. The major
finding of the study was related to the influence of interactive activities in improving positive attitudes towards interactive tasks and was beneficial
to language learning. Based on the attitudinal analysis as the results of this study, using the Transcribed Interview Sample with coding (an extract)
clearly identified that students with the interactive tasks mainly outperformed those with the regular instruction. Furthermore, the findings of the
research indicated that students’ achievement was improved in terms of their motivation, autonomy, and empowerment as contributed to their
learning. However, this study revealed that teachers could increase the academically collaborative talk as well as social- emotional behavior of
students in their teaching and learning environments to share feeling safe-taking risks, and enjoying constructive effects.

Keywords

  • Interactive task, Self-monitoring strategy, Self-regulation strategy, Willingness tocommunicate strategy, Empowerment
PDF

References

  1. Al-Zahrani, M. Y., & Al-Bargi, A. (2017). The impact of teacher questioning in creating interaction
  2. in EFL: A discourse analysis. English Language Teaching, 10(6), 135-150.
  3. Barjesteh, H., Vaseghi, R., & Neissi, S. (2012). Iranian EFL learners’ willingness to communicate
  4. across different context-and receiver-types. International Journal ofEnglish Linguistics, 2,
  5. -54.
  6. Bolino, M. C., Long, D., & Turnley, W. (2016). Impression management in organizations:Critical
  7. questions, answers, and areas for future research. Annual Review of Organizational
  8. Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 3, 377-406.
  9. Bono, J. E., & Vey, M. A. (2007). Personality and emotional performance: Extraversion,
  10. neuroticism, and self-monitoring. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 12, 177-
  11. Brown, H. (2007). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. Pearson, New York:Longman.
  12. Developing Interactive Tasks in Iranian EFL Students’ Self-Monitoring …
  13. Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching. White Plains, NY: Addison
  14. Wesley Longman.
  15. Cameron, C. E., & Morrison, F. J. (2011). Teacher activity orienting predicts preschoolers'
  16. academic and self-regulatory skills. Early Education & Development, 22(4), 620-648.
  17. Cao, Y. (2014). A sociocognitive perspective on second language classroom willingness to
  18. communicate. TESOL Quarterly 48. 789–814
  19. Cazan, A. M., & Aniei, M. (2010). Motivation, learning strategies and acadmic adjustement.
  20. Romanian Journal of Experimental Applied Psychology, 1(1), 61-69
  21. Cleary, T. J., Callan, G. L., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2012). Assessing self-regulation as a cyclical,
  22. context-specific phenomenon: Overview and analysis of SRL micro analytic protocols.
  23. Education Research International, 2012, 1-19. doi:10.1155/2012/428639.
  24. Cohen, A. D., & Macaro, E. (2007). Language learner strategies: Thirty years of research and
  25. practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  26. Denscombe, M. (2003). The Good Research Guide for Small-scale Social Research Projects
  27. (second ed.). Buckingham: Open University Press.
  28. Dörnyei, Z. (2009). The psychology of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University
  29. Press.
  30. Ennis, R. P., Lane, K. L., & Oakes, W. P. (2018). Empowering teachers with low-intensitystrategies
  31. to support instruction: Self-monitoring in an elementary resource room. Preventing School
  32. Failure, 62, 176–189. doi:10.1080/1045988X.2017.1408055.
  33. Eisenberg, N., Hofer, C., Sulik, M. J., & Spinrad, T. L. (2014). Self-regulation, effortful control,
  34. and their socioemotional correlates. Handbook of emotion regulation, 2, 157-172.
  35. Fang, R., Landis, B., Zhang, Z., Anderson, M. H., Shaw, J. D., & Kilduff, M. (2015). Integrating
  36. personality and social networks: A meta-analysis of personality, network position, and
  37. work outcomes in organizations. Organization Science, 26, 1243-1260.
  38. Han, Y. (2014). Foreign Language Vocabulary Learning Strategies: Patterns of use amongcollege
  39. students. (Published doctoral dissertation). Auburn University. Alabama.
  40. Harmer, J. (2001). The practice of English language teaching. Pearson, New York: Longman.
  41. Hitotuzi, N. (2005). Teacher Talking Time in the EFL Classroom Tiempo de participación oral del
  42. profesor en el aula de inglés como lengua extranjera. Profile.6 (1), 97-106.
  43. Kogani Baharvand, P., Rezaee, A., & Valadi, A. (2015). The relationship between language
  44. learner‘s willingness to communicate and their oral language proficiency to gender
  45. differences. International Journal of Applied Linguistic & English Litrature,4(5), 147-153.
  46. Le, V. C., & Rendaya, W. A. (2017). Teachers' English proficiency and classroom language use:
  47. A conversation analysis study. RELC Journal, 48(1), 67-81.
  48. Little, B. R. (2011). Personal projects and free traits: Personality and motivation reconsidered.
  49. Retrieved July 07, 2012, from http://ww w.brianrlittle. com/articles/p ersonal-projec tsand-freetraits/# more-196.
  50. MacIntyre, P. D., & Doucette, J. (2013). Willingness to communicate and action control, System,
  51. ,161-171.
  52. MacIntyre, P. D., & Doucette, J. (2010). Willingness to communicate and action control, System,
  53. , 161-171.
  54. McClelland, M.M. & Cameron, C.E. (2012). Self-regulation in early childhood: Improving
  55. conceptual clarity and developing ecologically valid measures. Child Development
  56. Perspectives 6 (1), 136-142.
  57. Meloy, F, A. (2009). Self-Regulated Learning, Academic Outcomes, and the Student Learning
  58. Experience in a Second-Degree Accelerated Baccalaureate Nursing Program.
  59. Unpublished doctoral Dissertation, college of nursing and health professions,Pennsylvania.
  60. Muijs, D., & Reynolds, D. (2010). Effective teaching: Evidence and practice. London: Sage
  61. Publications.
  62. Mystkowska-Wiertelak, A., & Pawlak, M. (2016). Designing a Tool for Measuring the
  63. Interrelationships between L2 WTC, Confidence, Beliefs, Motivation, and Context. Second
  64. Language Learning and Teaching, 19-37. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-30373-4_2.
  65. Panadero, E. (2017). A review of self-regulated learning: Six models and four directions for
  66. research. Frontiers in Psychology, 8(422). doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00422.
  67. Richards, J., & Rodgers, T. (2004). Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge:
  68. Cambridge University Press.
  69. Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Fan, X., Chiu, Y. J., & You, W. (2007). The contribution of the Responsive
  70. Classroom Approach on children's academic achievement: Results from a three-year
  71. longitudinal study. Journal of School Psychology, 45(4), 401-421.
  72. Rock, M.L. (2005). Use of Strategic Self-monitoring to Enhance Academic engagement,
  73. productivity, and accuracy of students with and without exceptionalities. Journal ofPositive
  74. Behavior Interventions, 7 (1), 3- 16.
  75. Rose, H. (2012). Reconceptualising strategic learning in the face of self-regulation: Throwing
  76. language learning strategies out with the bathwater. Applied Linguistics, 33 (1), 92–98.
  77. Savignon, S. J. (2007). Beyond communicative language teaching: What's ahead? Journal of
  78. Pragmatics, 39(1), 207-220.
  79. Sendjaya, S., Pekerti, A., Härtel, C., Hirst, G., & Butarbutar, I. (2016). Are authentic leadersalways
  80. moral? The role of Machiavellianism in the relationship between authentic leadership and
  81. morality. Journal of Business Ethics, 133, 125-139.
  82. Simonsen, B., Fairbanks, S., Briesch, A., Myers, D., & Sugai, G. (2008). Evidence-based practices
  83. in classroom management: Considerations for research to practice. Education and
  84. Treatment of Children, 31, 351–380.
  85. Sosik, J. J., & Dinger, S. L. (2007). Relationships between leadership style and vision content:The
  86. moderating role of need for social approval, self-monitoring, and need for social power.
  87. Leadership Quarterly, 18, 134-153.
  88. Todd, A.W., Horner, R. H., & Sugai, G. (1999). Self-monitoring and self- recruited praise: Effects
  89. on problem behavior, academic engagement, and work completion in a typicalclassroom.
  90. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 1, 66- 76.
  91. Van den Branden, K. (2006). Task-based language education. From theory to practice. Cambridge:
  92. Cambridge University Press.
  93. Developing Interactive Tasks in Iranian EFL Students’ Self-Monitoring …
  94. van Lier, L. (2001). Interaction in the language curriculum: Awareness, autonomy, and
  95. authenticity. London: Longman.
  96. Viswambharan, A. P. & Priya, K. R. (2016). Documentary Analysis as a QualitativeMethodology
  97. to Explore Disaster Mental Health: Insights from Analyzing Documentary on Communal
  98. Riots. Qualitative Research, 16(1) 43–59.
  99. Walsh, S. (2012). Conceptualizing classroom interactional competence. Novitas-Royal (Research
  100. on Youth and Language), 6(1), 1-14.
  101. Wang, Q. (2010). Classroom Interaction and Language Output. English Language Teaching. 3(2),
  102. -189.
  103. Wilmot, M. P., DeYoung, C. G., Stillwell, D., & Kosinski, M. (2016). Self-monitoring and the
  104. metatraits. Journal of Personality, 84, 335-347.
  105. Wolf, H., Spinath, F. M., Riemann, R., & Angleitner, A. (2009). Self-monitoring and personality:
  106. A behavioural-genetic study. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 25-29.
  107. Zarrianabadi, N & Abdi, R. (2011). Willingness to communicate and language learning
  108. orientations in Iranian EFL context. International Education Studies, 4(4), 206-214.
  109. Zimmerman, B. (2013). From cognitive modeling to self-regulation: A social cognitive careerpath.
  110. Educational Psychologist, 48(3), 135–147.
  111. Zohrabi, M. (2013). Mixed-Method Research: Instruments, Validity, Reliability and Reporting
  112. Findings. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3(2), 254–262.