IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/eltjnl/v9y2016i5p98.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of Native and Non-native English Language Teachers’ Evaluation of EFL Learners’ Speaking Skills: Conflicting or Identical Rating Behaviour?

Author

Listed:
  • Emrah Ekmekci

Abstract

Assessing speaking skills is regarded as a complex and hard process compared with the other language skills. Considering the idiosyncratic characteristics of EFL learners, oral proficiency assessment issue becomes even more important. Keeping this situation in mind, judgements and reliability of raters need to be consistent with each other. This study aims to compare native and non-native English language teachers’ evaluation of EFL learners’ speaking skills. Based on the oral proficiency scores in the final exam conducted at a state university in Turkey, the study analysed the scores given by native and non-native English language teachers to 80 EFL students attending preparatory classes in the 2014-2015 academic year. 3 native and 3 non-native English language teachers participated in the study. Data were collected through an analytic rating scale and analysed with the help of independent samples t-test and Pearson product-moment correlation test. Pearson product-moment correlation test (calculated as 0,763) indicated that the raters had high inter-rater reliability coefficients. T-test results revealed that there is no statistically significant difference in the total scores given by both groups of teachers. The study also investigated the different components of speaking skills such as fluency, pronunciation, accuracy, vocabulary, and communication strategies with regard to the existence of significant difference between the scores. The only component which created a statistically significant difference was found to be pronunciation, which was expected prior to the research. In line with the overall findings of the study, it can be concluded that native and non-native English language teachers display almost identical rating behaviour in assessing EFL students’ oral proficiency.

Suggested Citation

  • Emrah Ekmekci, 2016. "Comparison of Native and Non-native English Language Teachers’ Evaluation of EFL Learners’ Speaking Skills: Conflicting or Identical Rating Behaviour?," English Language Teaching, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 9(5), pages 1-98, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:ibn:eltjnl:v:9:y:2016:i:5:p:98
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/download/58797/31510
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/view/58797
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ian Walkinshaw & Duongthi Hoang Oanh, 2014. "Native and Non-Native English Language Teachers," SAGE Open, , vol. 4(2), pages 21582440145, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kim Hua Tan & Michelle Elaine anak William Jospa & Nur-Ehsan Mohd-Said & Mohd Mahzan Awang, 2021. "Speak like a Native English Speaker or Be Judged: A Scoping Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-16, December.
    2. Soyhan Egitim & Travis Garcia, 2021. "Japanese University Students’ Perceptions of Foreign English Teachers," English Language Teaching, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 14(5), pages 1-13, May.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ibn:eltjnl:v:9:y:2016:i:5:p:98. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.