WHICH ONE IS BETTER BETWEEN PAPER-BASED OR COMPUTER-BASED TOEFL?: TEST TAKERS’ PERSPERCTIVES
Abstract
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Abdulloh, A., Sarsono, S., & Basuki, S. (2021). Preparing PBT TOEFL prediction: An
experience of online teaching TOEFL preparation. Journal of English Language
and Literature (JELL), 6(1), 59–68. https://doi.org/10.37110/jell.v6i1.116
Agusta, A. R. (2022). Development of learning outcomes assessment instruments using computer based test (CBT). Edumaspul: Jurnal Pendidikan, 6(1), 255–267. https://doi.org/10.33487/edumaspul.v6i1.3070
Al-Amri, S. (2007). Computer-based vs. paper-based testing: Does the test administration mode matter. Proceedings of the BAAL Conference 2007, 101–110.
Amelia, R., & Harmaini, F. (2020). Development of web-based TOEFL learning media (E-TOEFL) using moodle at Universitas Bung Hatta. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 990(1), 012002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/990/1/012002
Aryadoust, V., Ng, L. Y., Foo, S., & Esposito, G. (2022). A neurocognitive investigation of test methods and gender effects in listening assessment. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(4), 743–763. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1744667
Barkaoui, K. (2017). Examining repeaters’ performance on second language proficiency tests: A review and a call for research. Language Assessment Quarterly, 14(4), 420–431. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2017.1347790
Bridgeman, B., Cho, Y., & DiPietro, S. (2016). Predicting grades from an English language assessment: The importance of peeling the onion. Language Testing, 33(3), 307–318. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532215583066
Brooks, L., & Swain, M. (2014). Contextualizing performances: Comparing performances during TOEFL iBT TM and real-life academic speaking activities. Language Assessment Quarterly, 11(4), 353–373. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2014.947532
Fleckenstein, J., Leucht, M., & Köller, O. (2018). Teachers’ judgement accuracy concerning CEFR levels of prospective university students. Language Assessment Quarterly, 15(1), 90–101. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2017.1421956
Ginther, A. (2001). Effects of the presence and absence of visuals on performance on TOEFL ® CBT listening-comprehension stimulate. ETS Research Report Series, 2001(2), i–43. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2333-8504.2001.tb01858.x
Ihlenfeldt, S. D., & Rios, J. A. (2022). A meta-analysis on the predictive validity of English language proficiency assessments for college admissions. Language Testing, 026553222211123. https://doi.org/10.1177/02655322221112364
Isbell, D. R., & Kremmel, B. (2020). Test review: Current options in at-home language proficiency tests for making high-stakes decisions. Language Testing, 37(4), 600–619. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532220943483
Ivanova, R., & Ivanov, A. (2021). Online reading skills as an object of testing in international english exams (ielts, toefl, cae). International Journal of Instruction, 14(4), 713–732. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2021.14441a
Jeong, H. (2014). A comparative study of scores on computer-based tests and paper-based tests. Behaviour & Information Technology, 33(4), 410–422. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2012.710647
Kristanti, F. (2019). Contemporary role of English in the academic world. English Language and Literature: Their Contemporary Roles, 7–13.
Lee, S., & Winke, P. (2018). Young learners’ response processes when taking computerized tasks for speaking assessment. Language Testing, 35(2), 239–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532217704009
Monfils, L. F., & Manna, V. F. (2021). Time to achieving a designated criterion score level: A survival analysis study of test taker performance on the TOEFL iBT ® test. Language Testing, 38(1), 154–176. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532220940709
Netta, A., & Trisnawati, I. K. (2019). Acehnese undergraduate students’ strategies in preparing for TOEFL prediction: A preliminary study. Englisia Journal, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.22373/ej.v7i1.5779
Noubandegani, P. A. (2012). Students’ perceptions of computerized TOEFL test. Language Testing in Asia, 2(2), 73. https://doi.org/10.1186/2229-0443-2-2-73
Papageorgiou, S., & Manna, V. F. (2021). Maintaining access to a large-scale test of academic language proficiency during the pandemic: The launch of TOEFL iBT Home Edition. Language Assessment Quarterly, 18(1), 36–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2020.1864376
Pratiwi, D. I., Atmaja, D. S., & Prasetya, H. W. (2021). Multiple E-Learning technologies on practicing TOEFL structure and written expression. JEES (Journal of English Educators Society), 6(1), 105–115. https://doi.org/10.21070/jees.v6i1.1194
Putri, R. E., & Syarif, H. (2021). Students’ needs for TOEFL preparation course at university. Proceeding of International Conference on Language Pedagogy (ICOLP), 1(1), 171–182. https://doi.org/10.24036/icolp.v1i1.37
Rifiyani, A. J., Widowati, D. R., Ni’mah, D., & Ubaidillah, M. F. (2022). To read on-screen or printed texts? A quantitative study into EFL students’ reading achievement. International Journal of Education and Learning, 4(3), 191–201.
Salma, N. F. (2018). Almost everything about TOEFL PBT.
Sawaki, Y., & Sinharay, S. (2018). Do the TOEFL iBT ® section scores provide value-added information to stakeholders? Language Testing, 35(4), 529–556. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532217716731
Sinclair, J., Larson, E. J., & Rajendram, S. (2019). “Be a machine”: International graduate students’ narratives around high-stakes English tests. Language Assessment Quarterly, 16(2), 236–252. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2019.1628238
Suryani, N. Y. (2021). The effectiveness of virtual classroom in TOEFL preparation. Acitya: Journal of Teaching and Education, 3(2), 198–209. https://doi.org/10.30650/ajte.v3i2.2199
Syakur, A. (2019). Application of e-learning as a method in educational model to increase the TOEFL score in higher education. Journal of Development Research, 3(2), 111–116.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.17509/e.v22i2.56033
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2023 EDUTECH
Ciptaan disebarluaskan di bawah Lisensi Creative Commons Atribusi-BerbagiSerupa 4.0 Internasional.