Doctoral students’ perceptions of the English language proficiency completion criteria in Iran: making a case for English for General Academic Purposes (EGAP)

IF 1.9 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Fateme Chahkandi
{"title":"Doctoral students’ perceptions of the English language proficiency completion criteria in Iran: making a case for English for General Academic Purposes (EGAP)","authors":"Fateme Chahkandi","doi":"10.1108/jarhe-02-2024-0094","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>This study set out to investigate PhD students’ perceptions of the criteria for showcasing English proficiency as part of the requirements for completing PhD programs in Iranian universities. The criteria included The Ministry of Science, Research, and Technology (MSRT) test, an English for Academic Purposes (EAP) program, achieving the minimum score on the English section of the doctoral entrance exam, and gaining approval from supervisors regarding students’ proficiency.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>Qualitative data were collected by conducting interviews with 19 PhD students as well as a corpus of 325 students’ commentaries posted on an online forum. The data were then analyzed using the constant comparison method (Creswell, 2013).</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>Students held mixed feelings in relation to the new completion requirements and in particular, the MSRT test. However, they advocated egalitarian, objective, and need-responsive measures, which were better mirrored in the EAP program.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Research limitations/implications</h3>\n<p>The findings were discussed with reference to the predictive validity, authenticity, and construct relevance of the MSRT test and the EAP program. Despite the absence of quantitative data on the comparability of high-stakes tests and the EAP program, the study offers implications for testing agencies, academic institutions, and tertiary students.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>A multitude of PhD students and candidates are affected by the results of the new policy. Accordingly, gaining a better understanding of students’ perceptions may assist policymakers in reconsidering their policies, if necessary.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":45508,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education","volume":"61 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jarhe-02-2024-0094","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

This study set out to investigate PhD students’ perceptions of the criteria for showcasing English proficiency as part of the requirements for completing PhD programs in Iranian universities. The criteria included The Ministry of Science, Research, and Technology (MSRT) test, an English for Academic Purposes (EAP) program, achieving the minimum score on the English section of the doctoral entrance exam, and gaining approval from supervisors regarding students’ proficiency.

Design/methodology/approach

Qualitative data were collected by conducting interviews with 19 PhD students as well as a corpus of 325 students’ commentaries posted on an online forum. The data were then analyzed using the constant comparison method (Creswell, 2013).

Findings

Students held mixed feelings in relation to the new completion requirements and in particular, the MSRT test. However, they advocated egalitarian, objective, and need-responsive measures, which were better mirrored in the EAP program.

Research limitations/implications

The findings were discussed with reference to the predictive validity, authenticity, and construct relevance of the MSRT test and the EAP program. Despite the absence of quantitative data on the comparability of high-stakes tests and the EAP program, the study offers implications for testing agencies, academic institutions, and tertiary students.

Originality/value

A multitude of PhD students and candidates are affected by the results of the new policy. Accordingly, gaining a better understanding of students’ perceptions may assist policymakers in reconsidering their policies, if necessary.

博士生对伊朗英语水平结业标准的看法:为通用学术英语(EGAP)提供依据
目的 本研究旨在调查博士生对英语能力展示标准的看法,这些标准是完成伊朗大学博士课程要求的一部分。这些标准包括科学、研究和技术部(MSRT)测试、学术英语(EAP)课程、达到博士入学考试英语部分的最低分数,以及获得导师对学生英语水平的认可。研究结果学生们对新的毕业要求,尤其是 MSRT 考试的看法不一。然而,他们主张采取平等、客观和满足需求的措施,而这些措施在 EAP 项目中得到了更好的体现。研究局限性/影响研究结果在讨论 MSRT 测试和 EAP 项目的预测有效性、真实性和建构相关性时进行了讨论。尽管缺乏有关高风险测试和 EAP 项目可比性的量化数据,但本研究为测试机构、学术机构和高校学生提供了启示。因此,更好地了解学生的看法有助于政策制定者在必要时重新考虑其政策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education
Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
11.80%
发文量
63
期刊介绍: Higher education around the world has become a major topic of discussion, debate, and controversy, as a range of political, economic, social, and technological pressures result in a myriad of changes at all levels. But the quality and quantity of critical dialogue and research and their relationship with practice remains limited. This internationally peer-reviewed journal addresses this shortfall by focusing on the scholarship and practice of teaching and learning and higher education and covers: - Higher education teaching, learning, curriculum, assessment, policy, management, leadership, and related areas - Digitization, internationalization, and democratization of higher education, and related areas such as lifelong and lifewide learning - Innovation, change, and reflections on current practices
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信