Achievement or proficiency? Just getting a pass is enough!
Article Sidebar
Published:
May 1, 2016
Updated:
2016-05-01
Versions:
2016-05-01 (1)
Main Article Content
Abstract
This paper discusses about the problems and limitations of the engineering students in gaining achievement and proficiency in language exams and realia. As the students aim at mere passing the subject, they are not able to develop proficiency to communicate in real situations. Due to the academic pressure in their disciplinary studies, engineering students pay little contribution for enhancing linguistic and communication skills. Qualitative ethnography research is conducted to understand the practical difficulties and learning experiences of the students. It is found that the motivation level of the students is low as far as language learning is concerned. The present research implies on the use of cognitive knowledge, discursive techniques and peer interaction in open tasks and suggests how it aids them to display better performances in both achievement and proficiency tests.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
Article Details
How to Cite
Al Muzzamil Fareen, J. (2016). Achievement or proficiency? Just getting a pass is enough!. Global Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 6(2), 72–84. https://doi.org/10.18844/gjflt.v6i2.980
Issue
Section
Articles
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (SeeThe Effect of Open Access).
References
Abedi, J. (2010). Performance assessments for English language learners. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education. 1-29.
Accessed on 18.10.12. Available at
http://scale.stanford.edu/system/files/performance-assessments-english-language-learners.pdf
Abedi, J., Hofstetter, C. H., & Lord, C. (2004). Assessment accommodations for English language learners: implications for policy-based empirical research. Review of Educational Research, 74 (1), 1-28. Accessed on: 12/10/2008.
Accessed at http://www.jstor.org/stable/3516059
Allen, W., & Waugh, S. (1986). Dealing with accuracy in communicative language teaching. TESL Canada Journal/Revue TESL Du Canada, Special Issue 1, 193-205.
Bachman, L.F. (1981). Formative evaluation in specific purpose program development. In R. Mackay & J. D. Palmer (Eds.), Language for specific purposes: Program design and evaluation (pp. 106-119). Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.
Binder, C., Haughton, E., & Bateman. B. (2002). Fluency: achieving true mastery in the learning process. 1-20. Accessed on 18.10.12.
Accessed at http://curry.edschool.virginia.edu/go/specialed/papers
Black. J. (1991). Performance in English skills courses and overall academic achievement. TESL Canada Journal/Revue TESL Du Canada, 9 (1), 42-56.
Bloom, M. (2007). Tensions in a non-traditional Spanish classroom. Language Teaching Research, 11, 85-102.
Bruton, A. (2005). Process writing and communicative-task-based instruction: many common features, but more common limitations? TESL-EJ, 9(3), 1-31.
Calderón, M. E. (1999). Promoting language proficiency and academic achievement through cooperation. ERIC Digest, EDO-FL-99-11, 1-2.
Callahan, R. M. (2006). The intersection of accountability and language: can reading intervention replace English language development? Bilingual Research Journal, 1-17.
Canale, M. & Swain, M. (1980) ‘Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing’, Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1–47.
Chudowsky, N., & Chudowsky, V. (2010). Has progress been made in raising achievement for English language learners? Center on Education Policy. 1-18.
Accessed on 18.10.12. Available at www. cep - dc.org
Cummins, J. (1984). Wanted: A theoretical framework for relating language proficiency to academic achievement among bilingual students. In C. Rivera (Ed.), Language proficiency and academic achievement (pp. 2-19). Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters Limited.
Cummins, J. (1992). Bilingual Education and English Immersion: The RamÃrez Report in Theoretical Perspective. Bilingual Research Journal, 16(1&2), 91-104.
Davies, A. (1991). Is proficiency always achievement? Melbourne Papers in Language Testing. 1-15.
Diffey, N. (1992). Second-language curriculum models and program design: recent trends in North America. Canadian Journal of Education, 17(2), 208-219.
Dzulkifli, M. A., & Alias, I. A. (2012). Students of low academic achievement – their personality, mental abilities and academic performance: how counsellor can help? International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 2(23), 220-225.
Fakeye, D. O., & Ogunsiji, Y. (2009). English language proficiency as a predictor of academic achievement among EFL students in Nigeria. European Journal of Scientific Research, 37(3), 490-495.
Feast, V. (2002). The impact of IELTS scores on performance at university. International Education Journal, 3(4), 70- 85.
Freeman,Y., Freeman, D., & Mercuri, S. (2003). Helping middle school and high school age English learners achieve academic success. NABE Journal of Research and Practice. 110-122.
Gil, L., & Bardack, S. (2010). Common assumptions and evidence regarding English language learners in the United States. American Institutes for Research, 1-25.
Hirsh, D. (2007). English language, academic support and academic outcomes: A discussion paper. University of Sydney Papers in TESOL, 2(2), 193-211.
Hogan, D. M. & Tudge, J. R. H. (1999). Implications of Vygotsky's theory for peer learning. In O'Donnell, A. M. & King, A (Ed). Cognitive perspectives on peer learning. The Rutgers Invitational Symposium on Education Series. (pp. 39-65). Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, xii, 358 pp.
Kiany, G. R. (1995). English proficiency & academic achievement in relation to extraversion-introversion: a preliminary study. 1-17. Accessed on 18.10.12.
Available at
http://www.essex.ac.uk/linguistics/publications/egspll/volume_1/pdf/REZAIKIANY.pdf
Leaver, B. L., & Shekhtman, B. (2002) Principles and practices in teaching superior-level language skills: Not just more of the same. In B. L. Leaver & B. Shekhtman (Eds.), Developing professional level language proficiency (pp. 3-33). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Light, R. L., Xu, M., & Mossop, J. (1987). English proficiency and academic performance of international students. TESOL Quarterly, 21(2), 251-261.
Liming, Y. (1990). The comprehensible output hypothesis and self-directed learning: a learner's perspective. TESL Canada Journal/Revue TESL Du Canada, 8(1), 9-26.
Maleki, A., & Zangani, E. (2007). A survey on the relationship between English language proficiency and the academic achievement of Iranian EFL students. Asian EFL Journal, 9(1), 86-96.
Man-fat Wu, M. (2008). Language learning strategy use of Chinese ESL learners of Hong Kong – Findings from a qualitative study. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 5(1), 68-83.
Morrow, K. (1979). Communicative language testing: Revolution or evolution? In C. J. Brumfit & K. Johnson (Eds.), The communicative approach to language teaching, (pp. 143-157). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Nel, N., & Müller, H. (2010). The impact of teachers’ limited English proficiency on English second language learners in South African schools. South African Journal of Education, 30, 635-650.
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. New York: Newbury House.
Song, X. (2005). Language learner strategy use and English proficiency on the Michigan English language assessment battery. Spaan fellow working papers in second or foreign language assessment, 3, 1-26. English Language Institute, University of Michigan.
Stern, H. H. (1983). Fundamental concepts of language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tschirner, E. (2004). Breadth of vocabulary and advanced English study: An empirical investigation. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 1(1), 27-39.
Turner, C.E., & Upshur, J.A. (1995). Some effects of task type on the relation between communicative effectiveness and grammatical accuracy in intensive ESL classes. TESL Canada Journal/Revue TESL Du Canada, 12(2), 18-31.
Wang, Q., & Castro, C. D. (2010). Classroom interaction and language output. English Language Teaching, 3(2), 175-186.
Weir, C. J. (1988). Communicative Language Testing: with special reference to English as a foreign language. Exeter: University of Exeter Press.
Zhu, W. (2004). Writing in business courses: An analysis of assignment types, their characteristics and required skills. English for Specific Purposes, 23, 111-135.
Accessed on 18.10.12. Available at
http://scale.stanford.edu/system/files/performance-assessments-english-language-learners.pdf
Abedi, J., Hofstetter, C. H., & Lord, C. (2004). Assessment accommodations for English language learners: implications for policy-based empirical research. Review of Educational Research, 74 (1), 1-28. Accessed on: 12/10/2008.
Accessed at http://www.jstor.org/stable/3516059
Allen, W., & Waugh, S. (1986). Dealing with accuracy in communicative language teaching. TESL Canada Journal/Revue TESL Du Canada, Special Issue 1, 193-205.
Bachman, L.F. (1981). Formative evaluation in specific purpose program development. In R. Mackay & J. D. Palmer (Eds.), Language for specific purposes: Program design and evaluation (pp. 106-119). Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.
Binder, C., Haughton, E., & Bateman. B. (2002). Fluency: achieving true mastery in the learning process. 1-20. Accessed on 18.10.12.
Accessed at http://curry.edschool.virginia.edu/go/specialed/papers
Black. J. (1991). Performance in English skills courses and overall academic achievement. TESL Canada Journal/Revue TESL Du Canada, 9 (1), 42-56.
Bloom, M. (2007). Tensions in a non-traditional Spanish classroom. Language Teaching Research, 11, 85-102.
Bruton, A. (2005). Process writing and communicative-task-based instruction: many common features, but more common limitations? TESL-EJ, 9(3), 1-31.
Calderón, M. E. (1999). Promoting language proficiency and academic achievement through cooperation. ERIC Digest, EDO-FL-99-11, 1-2.
Callahan, R. M. (2006). The intersection of accountability and language: can reading intervention replace English language development? Bilingual Research Journal, 1-17.
Canale, M. & Swain, M. (1980) ‘Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing’, Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1–47.
Chudowsky, N., & Chudowsky, V. (2010). Has progress been made in raising achievement for English language learners? Center on Education Policy. 1-18.
Accessed on 18.10.12. Available at www. cep - dc.org
Cummins, J. (1984). Wanted: A theoretical framework for relating language proficiency to academic achievement among bilingual students. In C. Rivera (Ed.), Language proficiency and academic achievement (pp. 2-19). Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters Limited.
Cummins, J. (1992). Bilingual Education and English Immersion: The RamÃrez Report in Theoretical Perspective. Bilingual Research Journal, 16(1&2), 91-104.
Davies, A. (1991). Is proficiency always achievement? Melbourne Papers in Language Testing. 1-15.
Diffey, N. (1992). Second-language curriculum models and program design: recent trends in North America. Canadian Journal of Education, 17(2), 208-219.
Dzulkifli, M. A., & Alias, I. A. (2012). Students of low academic achievement – their personality, mental abilities and academic performance: how counsellor can help? International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 2(23), 220-225.
Fakeye, D. O., & Ogunsiji, Y. (2009). English language proficiency as a predictor of academic achievement among EFL students in Nigeria. European Journal of Scientific Research, 37(3), 490-495.
Feast, V. (2002). The impact of IELTS scores on performance at university. International Education Journal, 3(4), 70- 85.
Freeman,Y., Freeman, D., & Mercuri, S. (2003). Helping middle school and high school age English learners achieve academic success. NABE Journal of Research and Practice. 110-122.
Gil, L., & Bardack, S. (2010). Common assumptions and evidence regarding English language learners in the United States. American Institutes for Research, 1-25.
Hirsh, D. (2007). English language, academic support and academic outcomes: A discussion paper. University of Sydney Papers in TESOL, 2(2), 193-211.
Hogan, D. M. & Tudge, J. R. H. (1999). Implications of Vygotsky's theory for peer learning. In O'Donnell, A. M. & King, A (Ed). Cognitive perspectives on peer learning. The Rutgers Invitational Symposium on Education Series. (pp. 39-65). Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, xii, 358 pp.
Kiany, G. R. (1995). English proficiency & academic achievement in relation to extraversion-introversion: a preliminary study. 1-17. Accessed on 18.10.12.
Available at
http://www.essex.ac.uk/linguistics/publications/egspll/volume_1/pdf/REZAIKIANY.pdf
Leaver, B. L., & Shekhtman, B. (2002) Principles and practices in teaching superior-level language skills: Not just more of the same. In B. L. Leaver & B. Shekhtman (Eds.), Developing professional level language proficiency (pp. 3-33). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Light, R. L., Xu, M., & Mossop, J. (1987). English proficiency and academic performance of international students. TESOL Quarterly, 21(2), 251-261.
Liming, Y. (1990). The comprehensible output hypothesis and self-directed learning: a learner's perspective. TESL Canada Journal/Revue TESL Du Canada, 8(1), 9-26.
Maleki, A., & Zangani, E. (2007). A survey on the relationship between English language proficiency and the academic achievement of Iranian EFL students. Asian EFL Journal, 9(1), 86-96.
Man-fat Wu, M. (2008). Language learning strategy use of Chinese ESL learners of Hong Kong – Findings from a qualitative study. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 5(1), 68-83.
Morrow, K. (1979). Communicative language testing: Revolution or evolution? In C. J. Brumfit & K. Johnson (Eds.), The communicative approach to language teaching, (pp. 143-157). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Nel, N., & Müller, H. (2010). The impact of teachers’ limited English proficiency on English second language learners in South African schools. South African Journal of Education, 30, 635-650.
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. New York: Newbury House.
Song, X. (2005). Language learner strategy use and English proficiency on the Michigan English language assessment battery. Spaan fellow working papers in second or foreign language assessment, 3, 1-26. English Language Institute, University of Michigan.
Stern, H. H. (1983). Fundamental concepts of language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tschirner, E. (2004). Breadth of vocabulary and advanced English study: An empirical investigation. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 1(1), 27-39.
Turner, C.E., & Upshur, J.A. (1995). Some effects of task type on the relation between communicative effectiveness and grammatical accuracy in intensive ESL classes. TESL Canada Journal/Revue TESL Du Canada, 12(2), 18-31.
Wang, Q., & Castro, C. D. (2010). Classroom interaction and language output. English Language Teaching, 3(2), 175-186.
Weir, C. J. (1988). Communicative Language Testing: with special reference to English as a foreign language. Exeter: University of Exeter Press.
Zhu, W. (2004). Writing in business courses: An analysis of assignment types, their characteristics and required skills. English for Specific Purposes, 23, 111-135.