From self-regulated learning to computer-delivered integrated speaking testing: Does monitoring always monitor?
Despite the salience of monitoring in self-regulated learning (SRL) and foreign and/or second language (L2) speech production in non-testing conditions, little is known about the metacognitive construct in testing contexts and its effects on learner performance. Given the reciprocal effects between...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Frontiers in psychology 2023-02, Vol.14, p.1028754-1028754 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | eng |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Despite the salience of monitoring in self-regulated learning (SRL) and foreign and/or second language (L2) speech production in non-testing conditions, little is known about the metacognitive construct in testing contexts and its effects on learner performance. Given the reciprocal effects between L2 testing and L2 learning, a research effort in monitoring working in speaking tests, in particular computer-delivered integrated speaking tests, a testing format that has been advocated as an internal part of L2 classroom instruction and represents the future direction of L2 testing, is warranted. This study, therefore, serves as such an effort through investigating the use of monitoring by 95 Chinese English as foreign language (EFL) learners on a self-reported questionnaire after they performed three computer-delivered integrated speaking test tasks. Descriptive analysis followed by Hierarchical Linear Modelling (HLM) testing reveals that monitoring was used in a high-frequency manner, but it exerted no substantial effects on learner performance. Primarily, the results are expected to provide pedagogical implications for SRL: while fostering self-regulating learners, especially self-monitoring L2 speakers, it is necessary for L2 teachers to purposefully reduplicate testing conditions in their classroom instructions for helping the self-regulating learners be equally self-regulating test-takers. Moreover, the results are hoped to offer some insights into L2 testing through the perspective of self-monitoring, one proposed component of strategic competence, a construct that has been extensively acknowledged to reflect the essence of L2 testing. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1664-1078 1664-1078 |