SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies / 2018 / Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 3

The relationship between Iranian EFL teachers’ reflective behavior and their proficiency level

İranlı EFL öğretmenlerinin yansıtıcı davranışları ve yeterlik düzeyleri arasındaki ilişki

Samad Mirza SUZANİ
Pages
24–36
Publication Date
2022-10-19
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Besides, among all subscalesof teachers' reflectivity, just cognitive and practical had a significant contribution in predicting the scoreson proficiency at p

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The present study aimed to investigate the relationship between Iranian EFL Teachers’ reflective behavior as wellas their gender and their proficiency level.
📊
Key Findings & Data:To this end, an IELTS test comprising four skills as well as the Language Teachers'Reflective Inventory (LTRI) were administered to 60 English teachers in three institutes in Shiraz, Iran.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Besides, among all subscalesof teachers' reflectivity, just cognitive and practical had a significant contribution in predicting the scoreson proficiency at p
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The present study aimed to investigate the relationship between Iranian EFL Teachers’ reflective behavior as wellas their gender and their proficiency level. It also aimed to probe sub-scales of teachers' reflectivity as the bestpredictors of teachers' proficiency to determine whether different aspects of teacher reflectivity, namely, practical,cognitive, metacognitive, affective, and critical reflection had a noticeable impact on the proficiency level ofIranian EFL teachers. To this end, an IELTS test comprising four skills as well as the Language Teachers'Reflective Inventory (LTRI) were administered to 60 English teachers in three institutes in Shiraz, Iran. The resultsrevealed a low positive relationship between reflectivity and teachers’ EFL proficiency. Besides, among all subscalesof teachers' reflectivity, just cognitive and practical had a significant contribution in predicting the scoreson proficiency at p

Özet

Bu çalışmada, İranlı EFL Öğretmenlerinin yansıtıcı davranışları ile cinsiyet ve yeterlilik düzeyleri arasındaki ilişki araştırılmıştır. Ayrıca öğretmenlerin yansıtıcılığının alt ölçeklerinin öğretmenlerin yansıtıcılığının en iyi yordayıcıları, yani pratik, bilişsel, üstbilişsel, duyuşsal ve eleştirel yansımalarını sorgulamaları amaçlanmıştır. İranlı EFL öğretmenlerinin İngilizce Öğretmenlerinin Yansıtıcı Envanteri (LTRI), Şiraz, İran'daki üç kurumda 60 İngilizce öğretmenine uygulanmıştır. Çalışmanın sonuçları, yansıtıcılık ile öğretmenlerin EFL yeterliliği arasında pozitif bir ilişki olduğunu göstermiştir. Ayrıca, öğretmenlerin yansıtıcılığının tüm alt ölçekleri arasında, sadece bilişsel ve pratik, p

🔖

Cite This Article

SUZANİ, S. M. (2022). The relationship between Iranian EFL teachers’ reflective behavior and their proficiency level. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 3, 24–36. https://ajindex.com/articles/564077

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Akbari, R. (2007). Reflections on reflection: A critical appraisal of reflective practices in L2 teacher education. System, 35, 192-207.
  2. Akbari, R. (2008). Transforming lives: Introducing critical pedagogy into ELT classrooms. ELT Journal, 62 (3), 276-283.
  3. Akbari, R., Behzadpoor, F., and Dadvand, B. (2010). Development of English language teaching reflection inventory. System 38, 1, 211–227.
  4. Andrews, S. (2001). The language awareness of the l2 teacher: Its impact upon pedagogical practice.Language awareness, 10 (2/3), 75-90.
  5. Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  6. Bachman, L. F. & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  7. Bartlett, L. (1990). Teacher development through reflective teaching. In J. C. Richards & D. Nunan (Eds.), Second language teacher education (pp. 202-214). New York: Cambridge University Press.
  8. Briguglio, C, and Kirkpatrick, A. (1996). Language teaching proficiency assessment: Models and options, Perth: NLLIA Center for Literacy, Culture and Language Pedagogy, Curtin University of Technology. Brookfield. S. (1995). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Brookfield, S. D. (2000). Transformative learning as ideology critique. In J. Mezirow and Associates (Ed), Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress (pp. 125–148). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Calderhead, J. and S. B. Shorrock (1997). Understanding teacher education: Case studies in the professional development of beginning teachers. London, Washington D. C. Falmer Press.
  9. Canale, M. (1983). From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy. In J. C. Richards & R. W. Schmidt, Language and communication. New York: Longman, 2-27.
  10. Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1981). A Theoretical Framework for Communicative Competence. In Palmer, A., Groot, P., & Trosper, G. (Eds.), The construct validation of test of communicative competence, 31-36.
  11. Chastain, K. (1989). The ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines: A selected sample of opinions, ADFL Bulletin, 20(2), 47-51.
  12. Cowan, J. (1998). On becoming an innovative university teacher: Reflection in action. Buckingham: Open University Press.
  13. Day, C. (1993). Reflection: A necessary but not sufficient condition for professional development, British Educational Research Journal, 19(1), 83-93.
  14. Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative pro