Loading…

Models of assessment in the classroom: a comparative research of CALL-based vs. traditional assessment on vocabulary learning among Iranian EFL learners

There are a few empirical studies on comparative effects of CALL-based assessment and traditional assessment on Iranian EFL students’ vocabulary learning; therefore, the present research tried to fill this gap. To achieve this purpose, the NELT was administered to 89 EFL students, and 58 of them who...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Language Testing in Asia 2023-12, Vol.13 (1), p.43-22, Article 43
Main Authors: Shamshiri, Fatemeh, Esfahani, Fariba Rahimi, Hosseini, Seyed Esmail
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:There are a few empirical studies on comparative effects of CALL-based assessment and traditional assessment on Iranian EFL students’ vocabulary learning; therefore, the present research tried to fill this gap. To achieve this purpose, the NELT was administered to 89 EFL students, and 58 of them whose level of English proficiency was the intermediate were chosen for the target sample of the current research. Then, they were randomly divided into two groups of control and experimental, and a vocabulary pre-test was given to them. Next, the experimental group (EG) received a CALL-based assessment treatment, and the control group (CG) received a traditional-based assessment instruction. After instructing 100 new words to both groups, a vocabulary post-test was conducted, and an ANCOVA test and a paired samples t -test were utilized to analyze the scores of the pre- and post-tests. The gained outcomes indicated that the EG outstripped the CG on the post-test of vocabulary. It was concluded that using the CALL-based assessment was more useful than the conventional assessment for learning English vocabulary items. The research findings can be beneficial for EFL teachers, learners, and curriculum designers.
ISSN:2229-0443
2229-0443
DOI:10.1186/s40468-023-00259-9