iafor

journal of education
undergraduate education
Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021
Editor: Joseph (José) McClanahan
Editor-in-Chief: Joseph Haldane

ISSN: 2187-0594

iafor
IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education
Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

IAFOR Publications
The International Academic ForumIAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education
Editor
Joseph (José) McClanahan
Creighton University Omaha, Nebraska, USA
Associate Editor
Huiyuan Ye
Southern New Hampshire University, USA
Editor-in-Chief
Joseph Haldane
The International Academic Forum

Published by The International Academic Forum (IAFOR), Japan
IAFOR Publications, Sakae 1-16-26-201, Naka-ward, Aichi, Japan 460-0008

Executive Editor: Yvonne Masters
IAFOR Journals Administrator: Ruth Mund
Publications Manager: Nick Potts
IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education
Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021
Published October, 2021
IAFOR Publications © Copyright 2021
ISSN: 2187-0594
ije.iafor.org

Cover Image: Jacob Lund, ShutterstockIAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education
Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021
Edited by Joseph (José) McClanahan
Associate Editor: Huiyuan Ye

Foreword
As we emerge from the global pandemic, we reflect on the differences and changes we havewitnessed in our personal and professional lives, and those of our colleagues and students.
Many current undergraduates around the world have had little or no experience of what it is or
was to attend classes onsite, and with face-to-face interaction with their professors, instructors,
and peers. Educational systems have been forced to adopt and adapt to new processes andsystems, aided by technologies, as have undergraduate research programmes and initiatives.
I am the co-author of the “Japan chapter” of the forthcoming Cambridge Handbook of
Undergraduate Research (Cambridge University Press, 2022), along with Professors Reiko
Yamada, Grant Black, and José McClanahan, also the editor of this undergraduate education
issue of the IAFOR Journal of Education. Between the first draft and the final draft of thewriting of the chapter we were forced to acknowledge that the depictions we were giving ofpractices pre-COVID-19 may no longer accurately reflect the state of undergraduate researchby the time of publication. The brave new world of undergraduate education is finding its way
in the context of a brave new world of the post-pandemic, where uncertainty seems the only
certainty.
This issue of IAFOR Journal of Education offers an amazingly diverse sweep of undergraduate
education, with papers offering fascinating international comparative and contrastive insightsfrom Vietnam, Malaysia, Iraq, Portugal and the UK.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank the editor and associate, the reviewers, and theauthors for their work on this issue.
I hope you enjoy reading the articles presented in this issue.
Joseph Haldane
Editor-in-Chief
IAFOR Journal of Education

Editorial Advice
Preparing a submission to the IAFOR Journal of Education is more than writing about yourresearch study: it involves paying careful attention to our submission requirements. Different
journals have different requirements in terms of format, structure and referencing style, among
other things. There are also some common expectations between all journals such as the use ofgood academic language and lack of plagiarism. To assist you in reaching the review stage forthis or any other peer-reviewed journal, we provide the following advice which you should
check carefully and ensure that you adhere to.
1. Avoiding Plagiarism
Plagiarism is a practice that is not acceptable in any journal. Avoiding plagiarism is the cardinalrule of academic integrity because plagiarism, whether intentional or unintentional, ispresenting someone else’s work as your own. The IAFOR Journal of Education immediately
rejects any submission with evidence of plagiarism.
There are three common forms of plagiarism, none of which are acceptable:
1. Plagiarism with no referencing. This is copying the words from another source (article,
book, website, etc.) without any form of referencing.
2. Plagiarism with incorrect referencing. This involves using the words from anothersource and only putting the name of the author and/or date as a reference. Whilst not as
grave as the plagiarism just mentioned, it is still not acceptable academic practice.
Direct quoting requires quotation marks and a page number in the reference. This isbest avoided by paraphrasing rather than copying.
3. Self-plagiarism. It is not acceptable academic practice to use material that you havealready had published (which includes in conference proceedings) in a new submission.
You should not use your previously published words and you should not submit about
the same data unless it is used in a completely new way.
2. Meeting the Journal Aims and Scope
Different journals have different aims and scope, and papers submitted should fit the specificjournal. A “scattergun” approach (where you submit anywhere in the hope of being published)
is not sound practice. Like in darts, your article needs to hit the journal’s “bullseye”, it needs
to fit within the journal’s interest area. For example, a submission that is about building bridges,
will not be acceptable in a journal dedicated to education. Ensure that your paper is clearly
about education.
3. Follow the Author Guidelines
Most journals will supply a template to be followed for formatting your paper. Often, there will
also be a list of style requirements on the website (font, word length, title length, page layout,
and referencing style, among other things). There may also be suggestions about the preferred
structure of the paper. For the IAFOR Journal of Education these can all be found here:
https://iafor.org/journal/iafor-journal-of-education/author-guidelines/

4. Use Academic Language
The IAFOR Journal of Education only accepts papers written in correct and fluent English ata high academic standard. Any use of another language (whether in the paper or the referencelist) requires the inclusion of an English translation.
The style of expression must serve to articulate the complex ideas and concepts being presented,
conveying explicit, coherent, unambiguous meaning to scholarly readers. Moreover,manuscripts must have a formal tone and quality, employing third-person rather than firstperson standpoint (when feasible), placing emphasis on the research and not on unsubstantiatedsubjective impressions.
Contributors whose command of English is not at the level outlined above are responsible forhaving their manuscript corrected by a native-level, English-speaking academic prior to
submitting their paper for publication.
5. Literature Reviews
Any paper should have reference to the corpus of scholarly literature on the topic. A review ofthe literature should:
•
•
•
•
•

Predominantly be about contemporary literature (the last 5 years) unless you are
discussing a seminal piece of work.
Make explicit international connections for relevant ideas.
Analyse published papers in the related field rather than describe them.
Outline the gaps in the literature.
Highlight your contribution to the field.

Referencing
Referencing is the main way to avoid allegations of plagiarism. The IAFOR Journal of
Education uses the APA referencing style for both in-text citations and the reference list. If
you are unsure of the correct use of APA please use the Purdue Online Writing Lab (Purdue
OWL), – https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/ – which has excellent examples
of all forms of APA referencing. Please note APA is used for referencing not for the generalformat of the paper. Your reference list should be alphabetical by author surname and include
DOIs whenever possible.
This short guide to getting published should assist you to move beyond the first editorial review.
Failure to follow the guidelines will result in your paper being immediately rejected.
Good luck in your publishing endeavours,
Dr Yvonne Masters
Executive Editor, IAFOR Journal of Education

Table of Contents
From the Editor
Joseph (José) McClanahan

1

Notes on Contributors

3

Gender Discrepancies in Online English Learning in Vietnam Amidst the
COVID-19 Pandemic
Dao Thi Hong Van
Ha Hoang Quoc Thi

7

Do Cognitive Dispositions and Gender Matter in Applicationsof Culturally Relevant Pedagogy? A Pilot Study at an Iraqi University
Maura Pilotti
Khadija El Alaoui
Yalda Razmahang
Zaynab El Bernoussi
Saya Abdulrahman

29

Exploring the Relationship between Socioemotional Skills and DecisionMaking Styles in Health Students
Cândida G. Silva
Sara Gordo
Ana Cristina Rodrigues
Carolina Henriques
Marlene Rosa

49

Using Padlets as E-Portfolios to Enhance Undergraduate Students’Writing Skills and Motivation
Eleni Meletiadou

67

The Code-Switching Phenomenon during Oral Presentations
among the Business Programme StudentsFrankie Subon
Siti Sarah Mohd Tarmim

85

Reviewers

101

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

From the Editor
As we complete our second issue of Undergraduate Education for the IAFOR Journal of
Education, I am acutely aware of how much the educational environments have changed overthe last two years. Many of us had expected that 2021 would bring positive changes, leaving
the pandemic behind us. Yet we are still in the clouded midst of a worldwide pandemic, wherecolleges and universitas are struggling to think of innovative ways to reach and engage ourstudents now and into the future. Many questions rise to the forefront: How has technology
helped or hindered our efforts? Will the classroom forever be changed? Or, is COVID-19 a“blip” in our academic journey that has forced us to reflect more fully on how and what we do
as educators? These questions bring forth real concern and contemplation for teachers,
professors, and students.
During these complicated times, I am reminded of bell hooks pioneering book, Teaching toTransgress: Education as the Practice of Freedom1 (1994). Here she writes that “the classroom
remains the most radical space of possibility in the academy” (12). When she wrote thiscollections of essays, she wanted educators to think about the “renewal and rejuvenation of ourteaching practices” (12). Nearly thirty years later, we hear the echoes of her words as we
confront the challenges before us in our own classrooms today. Everyday educators are
rethinking and reimagining new ways of reaching out to our students who – at the same time –are experiencing new obstacles to their learning. Whether it is access to reliable internet
connections or insecurities about their own personal well-being or mental health, our students
must confront a new set of paradigms as they embark on their journey of learning. Educators
also must deal with similar complicated issues. In some cases, the proverbial academic bubble
that we once found our Universities and Colleges in has now popped. While remote learning
or web-based teaching does not replace this “radical space of possibility” found in our inperson learning spaces, I still believe that we continue to do what we have always done: create
spaces, places, and curriculum to meet our students and all of their complexities where they
are so that they can excel in all aspects of their lives.
As a group we build on the work of researchers and academics who came before us andcollaborate current colleagues who work with us now. As such, I hope the information foundin this issue will help us reflect a little more about how and what we do. While we still value
traditional academic spaces, our world now has porous boundaries that reach all areas in thisworld. As such, I am pleased to introduce you to five studies that embrace new ideas bythinking about distinct ways of connecting with students in undergraduate education, linking
ideas from across these borders. The first article, “Gender Discrepancies in Online English
Learning in Vietnam Amidst the COVID-19 Pandemic”, the authors reveal how genderdifferently assess (and value) online learning and what are some of the root causes for thesevariances. In the second article, “Do Cognitive Dispositions and Gender Matter in Applicationsof Culturally Relevant Pedagogy? A Pilot Study at an Iraqi University”, the authors examine
how personal backgrounds shaped academic success in the context of a Cultural Relevant
Pedagogy. Their results demonstrate how this pedagogy benefits from paying close attention
to the individual student, taking into account the cognitive and demographic variables. The
third article, “Exploring the Relationship between Socioemotional Skills and Decision-Making
Styles in Health Students”, the authors explore the correlations between socioemotional skills
and decision-making styles in undergraduate students of health. In the fourth one, the author
study how the use of tablets to improve their motivation and their writing ability among
1 hooks, bell. (1994) Teaching to Transgress: Education as the Practice of Freedom. Routledge.

1

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

undergraduate students. Finally, in the article, “The code-Switching Phenomenon during Oral
Presentations among the Business Programme Students”, the authors focus on students ininternational business and the impact and role of code-switching plays in their business courses
taught in English, seeking answers to why this phenomenon exists among these students.
These five articles represent a plurality found in our global undergraduate education landscape
today. It is my sincere desire that you will find them insightful and useful for you and yourcolleagues. As we move forward, we strive to always realize our overriding academic
objectives: creating a positive, intellectual, and fulfilling undergraduate educational experiencefor our students.
Joseph (José) McClanahan
Editor, IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education
undergrad.editor.joe@iafor.org

2

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Notes on Contributors
Article 1: Gender Discrepancies in Online English Learning in Vietnam Amidst the
COVID-19 Pandemic
Dao Thi Hong Van is an independent researcher in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam. She graduatedwith her Master’s degree in Principles and Methods in English Language Education. Having
more than ten years of teaching experience, she is keen on studying innovative teaching
methods, which helps her bring engaging presentations to many international conferences andworkshops. Her academic interest areas vary from distance education to technology-basedteaching techniques, English teaching methods, teaching career, and professional development.
Email: vandth10@fe.edu
Ha Hoang Quoc Thi is a lecturer in Information Technology at Can Tho University, Vietnam.
He is pursuing his PhD degree at the Technical University of Ostrava, Czech Republic. With
more than fifteen years of teaching experience, he has joined a lot of fields of research,especially integrating technology into teaching in different subjects. His research interest areas
are not limited to his areas of expertise but technology-based teaching techniques and distancelearning. He is also keen on partaking in international conferences and workshops.
Email: hhqthi@ctu.edu.vn
Article 2: Do Cognitive Dispositions and Gender Matter in Applications of Culturally
Relevant Pedagogy? A Pilot Study at an Iraqi University
Dr Maura A. E. Pilotti is a cognitive psychologist whose research interests include learningand memory processes across the lifespan. Currently, her research focuses on the interrelationsof memory, language, and emotion. She received her PhD in Cognitive Psychology from theCity University of New York (USA). Institutional affiliation: Prince Mohammad Bin Fahd
University (PMU).
Email: mpilotti@pmu.edu.sa
Dr Khadija El Alaoui is a scholar of American Culture whose specializations encompass
History, and Peace and Justice Studies. Currently, her research focuses on the history of the
Arab and Western worlds, human diversity, and cultural practices. She received her PhD in
American Studies from the University of Dresden (Germany). Institutional affiliation:
American University of Iraq Sulaymani (AUIS).
Yalda Razmahang is a scholar of Cultural Heritage. Her work currently focuses on assessing
cultural heritage in post-conflict Iraq. She received her MA in Archaeology and History from
Lyon 2 University, where she digitized ancient sculptures to study prehistoric gender relationsin the Near East. She is currently a PhD candidate in Archaeology at Lyon 2. Institutional
affiliation: American University of Iraq Sulaymani (AUIS).
Dr Zaynab El Bernoussi is a scholar of Political and Social Sciences. Her work focuses on
the politicization of dignity, Global South cooperation, and bioethical issues. She is a memberof the executive committee of the Global South Caucus of the International Studies Association(ISA). She received her PhD from the Catholic University of Louvain (Belgium). Institutional
affiliation: International University of Rabat (UIR).

3

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Saya Omar Abdulrahman is a researcher who combines an interest in International Studies
with her training in Medical Science. She is a member of the NGO Kurdistan Society forCancer Patient Support. Institutional affiliation: American University of Iraq Sulaymani(AUIS).
Article 3: Exploring the Relationship between Socioemotional Skills and DecisionMaking Styles in Health Students
Dr Cândida G. Silva holds a degree in Mathematics and Computer Sciences (University of
Minho, 2003), a post-graduation in Bioformatics (University of Lisbon, 2004), and a PhD in
Chemistry (Cheminformatics) (University of Coimbra, 2010). Her academic and scientificbackground includes the participation in national and international interdisciplinary projects inthe areas of pre-clinical and clinical sciences, science education, engagement, andcommunication. With a vast experience in teaching, in the last 5 years she has been teachingtransversal subjects to undergraduate health students. Member of the Gym2BeKind project
team focused on the training of communication and decision-making abilities in undergraduate
health students. She authors/co-authors several papers published in scientific journals andconference proceedings.
Dr Sara Gordo finished holds a degree in Psychology (2007), a master’s degree in ClinicalPsychology and Psychotherapies (2009). In 2016, she completed PhD in Clinical
Neuropsychology at the University of Salamanca. She has 10 years of experience teachingundergraduate health students, and since 2020 she is a member of the Gym2BeKind project
team focused on the training of socio-emotional skills in undergraduate health students.
Dr Ana Cristina Oliveira Rodrigues completed a BSc and PhD in Biology at the Faculty of
Sciences and Technology, University of Coimbra. She has more than 15 years’ experienceteaching transversal subjects to undergraduate health students and is a member of the
Gym2BeKind project team focused on the training of communication and decision-making
abilities in undergraduate health students.
Dr Carolina Henriques completed a MSc, PhD, and a Post-Doc in Nursing. With more than
13 years’ experience teaching transversal subjects to undergraduate health students, in herclasses she has sought to develop new models of pedagogical innovation, seeking the academic
and professional success of students. She is a member of the Gym2BeKind project teamfocused on the training of communication and decision-making abilities in undergraduate
health students.
Dr Marlene Rosa finished her degree in physiotherapy in July 2005, completing her master's
degree in Motor Development by 2008 at the University of Porto, Portugal. In 2015, shecompleted a PhD in Health Technologies at the University of Aveiro (in cooperation with the
University of Southampton). She is the coordinator of an academic project focused on the
training of communication and decision-making abilities in undergraduate health students(Gym2BeKind). She is an author of different scientific papers addressing the challenges ofteaching transversal skills in undergraduate education in health curricula.
Email: marlene.rosa@ipleiria.pt

4

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Article 4: Using Padlets as E-Portfolios to Enhance Undergraduate Students’ Writing
Skills and Motivation
Dr Eleni Meletiadou is a Senior Lecturer in Business and Management at London
Metropolitan University Guildhall School of Business and Law. She is an enthusiastic peer
learning, writing and assessment scholar and an award-winning researcher and adviser withover 20 years of international experience. She is an established academic writer and haspresented her work in various international conferences. She is the Chair of the European
Association for Educational Assessment (AEA-Europe) Inclusive Assessment SIG.
Email: elenim@outlook.com
Article 5: The Code-switching Phenomenon during Oral Presentations among theBusiness Programme Students
Dr Frankie Subon is a senior lecturer at the Department of English, HELP University,
Malaysia. He has vast experience in teaching English as a second language (TESL) andeducation subjects at various levels of education from primary school to tertiary level. He holds
a PhD in Education by Research and has a keen interest in research areas on second language
acquisition, sociolinguistics, psychology, and education. In his research work, he has publishednumerous research articles related to these areas of interests. Passionate about vocabularyacquisition research, he develops a model called the Contextualised Word Family Model(CWF) of direct vocabulary acquisition. Optimistically, he is looking forward to leveraging his
knowledge, expertise, and experience as a dynamic academic and researcher.
Email: frankie.s@help.edu.my
Siti Sarah Mohd Tarmim is a teacher intern. She is in her final year at Management andScience University, Malaysia, pending completion of a Bachelor of Education in Teaching
English as a Second Language (TESL). She is keen to explore more into other fields ofsociolinguistics in future, especially on how technology can affect language development inchildren.
Ms Olivia Boukydis MSW, RSW, obtained her BASc (Hons.) in Family & Community Social
Services from the University of Guelph, Canada, and her Social Service Worker diploma from
Humber College Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning, Canada. She received hermaster’s degree in Social Work from the University of New England, USA, and is a registeredsocial worker in Ontario, Canada. Olivia spent nine years working as a social worker in
Ontario’s healthcare system, supporting older adults living with complex and chronic healthconditions. She currently holds a dual position at the University of Guelph-Humber as SeniorResearch Supervisor in the Soka Education Research Centre on Global Citizenship and faculty
member in the Family and Community Social Services program. Olivia is also a PhD student
at Lancaster University, UK, in the Department of Educational Research, Education and Social
Justice program.
Email: olivia.boukydis@guelphhumber.ca

5

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

6

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Gender Discrepancies in Online English Learning in Vietnam Amidst the
COVID-19 Pandemic
Dao Thi Hong Van
FPT University – Can Tho Campus
Vietnam
Ha Hoang Quoc Thi
School of Education – Can Tho University
Vietnam7

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Abstract
This study was conducted to investigate the impact of gender in learning English online in
Vietnam under the impact of COVID-19 pandemic. 1118 students from nine universities andtwelve high schools in the Mekong Delta joined in the research. The study indicated genderequality in online education by revealing few discrepancies in the two genders’ perceptions
about barriers to online learning, excepting for problems about technical skills, cost, and accessto the Internet. The results of the mixed-method study which focuses more on quantitative
approach also revealed the impacts of perceived barriers on their future online learning
readiness through Discriminant Analysis and Chi-square Tests, in which gender had no impact
on students’ online learning decisions. Qualitative analysis also revealed the influences of
economic conditions and regions as additional barriers in addition to the six factors being
confirmed from Berge’s framework (2005) including (1) Administrative issues, (2) Social
interaction, (3) Academic skill, (4) Technical skills, (5) Learners’ motivation, and (6) Cost andaccess to the Internet.
Keywords: COVID-19 pandemic, gender discrepancies, online English learning, online
learning, online learning barriers

8

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

As a primary solution for education worldwide in the early time of the COVID-19 pandemic,
online learning proved its prominent features in supporting the continuity of the humanlearning mindset (Anh, 2020; Anh & Duc, 2020). As a report by UNESCO, the pandemic had
imposed the greatest interruption in educational history worldwide, leaving its adverse effects
on 1.6 billion learners (equivalent to 94% learners on Earth) from more than 190 institutionsof different levels (Toshiyuki, 2020). The application of online learning in that era helps tosolve learning needs while ensuring time of training and graduation. Being on the mainstreamof education in the world, Vietnam has an enormous impetus in applying online education
throughout the country during quarantine periods. (Nha, 2020) quotes a compliment of
UNICEF about “efforts by the Vietnamese education sector in prevention and response to
COVID-19 set great examples for many other countries.”
To a large number of city students, accessing online learning becomes the best way foreducation in the context of “stay-at-home isolation”, but it is an extreme barrier for the ones
living in remote areas, where the infrastructure and Internet access seem to be limited (Anh,2020). From another perspective, gender has also caused a lot of challenges for online learning
implementations, especially because females often lack confidence and experience with it(Grundy & Grundy, 1996). Similarly, a lot of researchers reported women’s disadvantages incomputing classrooms (McSporran & Young, 2001), quoting (Cole et al., 1994), Spender(1997) said: “males dominate the classrooms and male priorities have shaped the subject’s
image.”The Mekong Delta, where the three main ethnics Kinh – Chinese – Khmer live together, is oneof the regions which has been affected invasions from China for centuries, and the successive
rules of France, Japan, and the U.S until 1975. Those brought the locals a diversity of cultural
influences in addition to the conserved cultural identity of Vietnamese people. Among them,
Confucianism had imposed a strong impact. Historians recorded the effect of Confucianism
doctrines on women’s restriction, leading them to have an inferior social status and having theirwhole lives depended on male family members (Vu & Yamada, 2020). According to Rosenlee(2006), women were banned from taking imperial examinations (p.129); and therefore, literary
learning was only a reservation for male privilege. Since the famous proclaim of Mao Zedong
in the 1920s: “women hold up half of the sky”, the status of women in the society in Vietnam
and other Confucianism-affected countries had only been improved (Vu & Yamada, 2020).
To deal with the urgent call for switching to online education due to the pandemic, the Mekong
Delta, with those above-mentioned geographical features and demographics, has had toconfront a plethora of challenges to fulfill the educational mission. Questions about which
obstacles, as well as gender issues, provoke our curiosity the most. Based on that foundation,
the research has been done to determine their answers, in addition to bridging the reflection to
the reality between what has been existing in the home country to the present status of women’s
educational rights. To the scope of our research, the only concentration is placed on universities
and high school students in the Mekong Delta of Vietnam, who are learning English as a school
subject during the spreading time of Coronavirus in the early of the year 2020.
Literature Review
Online Learning
Online learning is also well-known as web-based learning, Internet-based learning, virtual
learning, cyber learning, net-based learning, and is also a subset of distance learning (Urdan &Weggen, 2000). It is an educational system in which the Internet facilitates teaching and9

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

learning in a new learning condition, where teachers and learners are physically separated(Newby et al., 2000). According to Allen and Seaman (2007), online learning is defined basedon 80%+ of learning content delivered online. Smart and Cappel (2006) have a similar
definition while considering online learning as instructions distributed to learners
electronically via the Internet, Intranet or multimedia platforms like CD or DVDs. The
concepts of synchronous and asynchronous online learning are used to refer to the two different
types of learning, in which synchronous refers to a must of learning where teachers and students
are asked to work together at the same time, and asynchronous provides online learning
opportunities with no time restriction and teachers and learners are not required to be online
simultaneously (Hrastinski, 2008).
Regarding strengths of online learning, Dabbagh and Bannan-Ritland (2005) reported its
existence with all dynamic, unbound, and the practice of diversity pedagogical active learningand learner-centered approach in comparison to practices of physical classrooms with fixed
time and face-to-face interactions between teachers and learners (Barker, 2003; Browne, 2005).
Online learning is also highlighted by its flexibilities (Atack, 2003; Fish, 2016; Horspool &Lange, 2012; Platt et al., 2014; Sargeant et al., 2004; Wyatt, 2005) and convenience fordisadvantaged learners with problems in family and health issues (Dyrbye et al., 2009; Kokko
et al., 2015), and also the proliferation and popularity (Landrum et al., 2020).
While leaving those impressive outstanding perspectives, much research also reports a wide
range of challenges stakeholders face with this virtual learning. Muilenburg and Berge (2005)
pointed out the lack of social interaction as the most decisive student barrier to online learning,
followed by administrative and instructor issues and time and support for the study. Learnermotivation came closely, and the minor impacts belong to technical problems and cost-related
issues. Mullen and Tallent-Runnels (2006), otherwise, found that affective supports –“communication from instructors to students that the students are important and valued
individuals”, cause the most extreme barriers (p. 258).
Online Learning in Vietnam Amidst the COVID-19 Pandemic
Online learning existed in Vietnam since the arrival of the Internet in the 20th century. Its
popularity among students, however, has just become wildly visible in recent years under theenforcement of Ministry of Education and Training (MOET) in Vietnam about online
education (Ha, 2020). Also under Ha’s statement, many universities and high schools started
deploying this style of learning variously in accordance with their educational purposes. When
Vietnam and the whole world confronted the widespread infection of Coronavirus, the spirit of“continuing to learn despite school closure” (Nha, 2020) inspired educators and learners toencounter online learning while simultaneously fighting the COVID-19 pandemic. It can beconsidered that the quarantine time during the first quarter of the year 2020 in the South ofVietnam was the first time all learners in the Mekong Delta have experienced online education.
This is primarily a way to confront the disease; and yet, it opened the new door for Vietnamese
education after all. Employing online learning becomes the more significant since it provides
the practical reasons for all stakeholders to have in-time implementations, especially to foster
online learning in our digital era.
Measurements of Online Learning Difficulties – Berge’s Theoretical Framework (2005)
Inheriting previous studies of Garland (1993), Muilenburg and Berge (2001), and Schilke(2001), the study of Muilenburg and Berge (2005) was conducted to investigate student barriers
to online learning in the United States. In that study, the authors revealed 45 items being usedin the questionnaire as their research instrument. These were categorized into the seven groups

10

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

of barriers, directly causing difficulties for distance learners at different levels and ages. Details
about them will be presented in Figure 1 as below.
Figure 1
Berge’s Review of Literature Framework (2005)
Garland (1993)• Situational barriers• Institutional barriers• Dispositional barriers• Epistemological barriers• Technical barriers (added by Schilke, 2001)

Berge’s review of literature for framework’s organization (2005)

Berge’s framework (1995)

Muilenburg & Berge(2001)

Berge & Mrozowski(2001)

Pilot study
Muilenburg & Berge (2005)

A questionnaire of 61 items

15 items dropped
1 item added

6 factors• Time/ interruption• Infrastructure/support devices• Motivation• Prerequisite skills• Technical• Social factors

Significant differences in learners’ attitude:ü Gender (Chen, 2000; Teo & Lim, 2000; Young, 2000).
ü Age (Rekkedal, 1993)
ü Ethnicity (Owens, 1998; Branden & Lambert, 1999; Chen, 1999)
ü Ability & Confidence in online learning (Koohang, 1989; Hara, 1998)
ü Types of institutions (Rekkedal, 1983; Sheets, 1992; Mungania, 2003)
ü Learning effectiveness in online environment (Mungania, 2003)

Main study
Muilenburg & Berge (2005)

Research’s findings

A questionnaire of 47 items

A questionnaire of 45 items

8 factors• Time & support for studies• Administrative• Students’ motivation• Academic skills• Technical skills• Cost & Access to the Internet• Technical problems• Social interaction

Muilenburge & Berge (2005) added :ü learning enjoyment in the classroom
ü number of online course completed
ü number of online course dropped
ü likelihood of taking a future courseü whether students experienced prejudicial treatment

11 independent variables in Muilenburg & Berge’s study (2005)

Aims of this Study
This study was done in order to find the discrepancies between university male and female
students in Vietnam when learning English as a Foreign Language (EFL) online amidst the
COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, we clarified the differences about online learning obstacles
perceived by the two genders; secondly, efforts were made to point out whether gender makes
differences in students’ readiness to take future online English courses. As a point of departure,
we used previous literature about online education and its discrepancies in terms of gender toreveal the results of this study which are expected to reflect the reality of online learning andits gender-related issues in Vietnam.
To address these purposes, the following research questions are:•••

What differences are there between male and female EFL learners’ perceptions towardbarriers in learning English online?
To what extent do these perceived barriers affect male and female EFL students’readiness of taking future English online courses?
Does gender matter in students’ readiness of taking future English online courses?

11

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Research Methodologies
A mixed-method study which focused primarily on a quantitative approach would be appliedin our context. The mixed-method orientation helps provide a more profound and broader
understanding of the phenomenon than the research being done with only a quantitative or
qualitative approach (Hurmerinta-Peltomäki & Nummela, 2006). Additionally, O’Cathain etal. (2010) believe that integration helps persuade readers to be more confident in the finding
and conclusions researchers draw in the study.
In this study, the first focus would be addressing online learning barriers and how they areperceived by male and female learners. An adaptation of Berge’s framework (2005) would beapplied to confirm the obstacles that Vietnamese students face when learning online; especiallywith their answers from the interviews, extra barriers are hoped to be discovered after
qualitatively analyzing. To raise the appropriateness of Berge’s framework in 2005, an
Exploratory Factor Analysis with Principle Axis Factoring and Promax rotation method would
be run.
The first research question was to evaluate the discrepancies between males’ and females’
perceptions toward online learning barriers. Means for each factor were processed by SPSS.
An independent sample T-test was then run to compare means of each between male and female
learners.
In line with the second research aim, we provided predictions about the readiness of taking
future online courses between male and female learners, under the impact of perceived barriers.
Discriminant analysis, therefore, has been applied twice, separately on each gender. Next, Chisquare Tests would be employed to provide the first confirmation about the relation between
genders and online learning readiness based on the students’ answers: “Yes” or “No” for thequestion: “Are you be ready to take future online courses?” Details about the research model
will be presented in Figure 2.
Figure 2
Research Model of the Quantitative Approach12

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Participants
1118 students studying English as a Foreign Language at nine universities and twelve highschools in the Mekong Delta, participated in the research. While being invited to complete thequestionnaire launched on Google Form from April to July 2020, the students were learning
English as a compulsory subject online synchronically to meet requirements of MOET in
Vietnam due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Among them, there are 683 female
students (61.1%) and 435 male students (38.9%). Proportions of gender and participants
contributed by universities and high schools as well as their ethics would be illustrated in Figure 3.
Figure 3
A Description of Participants According to their Institutions and Ethics (N=1118)

Research Instruments
Berge’s theoretical framework (2005) about student online learning barriers is used as theresearch instrument in our study, with some minor adjustments to fit our context. Basically, thenumber of 45 items in the questionnaire received the deletion of four issues; in which, three ofthem are related to technical issues because they are widely discussed and become predictablein many research. Therefore, we reserved our concerns on other factors and made efforts inseeking new ones. Furthermore, when almost participants are at the age of 15 to 22, the item
“fear family life will be disrupted” has been removed due to its inappropriateness. The
remaining 41 items were translated and a Vietnamese version was formed to ease online
learners’ reading and understanding. They were asked to rate all statements in their rightfeelings in the 1-5 Likert Scale, ranging from completely agree to completely disagree.
Cronbach Alpha was used to check the reliability of the 41-item questionnaire. Table 1 showsthat all values are over 0.6 and the Correlated Item-Total Correlations are over 0.3. According
to Nunnally and Bernstein (2007), the questionnaire is qualified to be studied in our context.

13

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Table 1
Cronbach Alpha of Each Cluster in the Questionnaire
Clusters
Administrative/Instructors’ issues
Social interaction
Academic skills
Technical skills
Learners’ motivation
Time and support for study
Cost and access to the Internet

Number of items
11
06
06
06
05
04
03

Cronbach Alpha
0.89
0.86
0.91
0.92
0.76
0.76
0.80

Findings
This section firstly reported an overview of EFL learners’ perception toward online learning
barriers in terms of gender. Its following sections revealed the results of Discriminant Analysis
as the impact of those perceived barriers on male and female students’ readiness of taking
future English online courses. In search of finding the effect of gender, once again, theprediction of this matter would be presented through the result of Chi-square Tests. Combining
with content analysis of qualitative data from answers of the interviews, the findings would
provide significance of the whole research.
Discrepancies between Male and Female Students’ Perceptions Toward Online Learning
Barriers
An Exploratory Factor Analysis with Principal Axis Factoring extraction and Promax rotation
was used in the study. After deleting all items being loaded into more than one item or itemswith loadings of 0.5 and greater, the remaining 28 out of 41 items were loaded into six groupsof barriers to online learning (see Figure 4). Noticeably, while the study of Muilenburg andBerge (2005) admitted the classification of the seven groups of factors, the same framework
applied to the Vietnamese context figured out the existence of six groups and eliminated all
four items in time and support for the study.
Figure 4
A Description of Factors Affecting Online Learning Barriers from Berge’s Framework (2005)
to the Current Study

14

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

To investigate the differences between male and female students’ perceptions about online
learning barriers, independent sample T-tests were run to analyze and compare the means ofeach factor between the two genders. At first glance, female learners perceived more extreme
levels of difficulties than their male counterparts. The chart also indicated that both genders
ranked all hindrance factors similarly through their ratings on the questionnaire. Specifically,
Figure 5 shows that cost and access to the Internet caused the most difficulties, where thehighest means of 3.29 and 3.13 for schoolboys and schoolgirls, showed respectively. As canbe seen from the chart, social interaction closely stands for the second position with 3.13 forfemales and 3.07 for male learners.
Regarding the two genders’ perception, the results of the Independent Sample T-test pointed
out the two groups of factors, namely, cost and access to the Internet (p=0.003) and technicalissues (p=0.001), had created light discrepancies, but statistically significance between maleand female learners toward online learning barriers. These two factors had caused greater
impacts on females’ virtual learning than that of the counterpart, which figures correspondingly
stood at 3.29 and 2.58 for females: and 3.13 and 2.42 for males.
Figure 5
Mean Scores of Perceived Barriers Between Male and Female EFL Learners

15

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Table 2Discrepancies Between Male and Female EFL Learners’ Perception Toward Online Learning
Barriers

Technical skills
Administrative andinstructors’ issues
Social interaction
Academic skills
Cost & Access to theInternet
Learner Motivation

FemaleMale
FemaleMale
FemaleMale
FemaleMale
FemaleMale
Female
Male

Means

SD

2.58
2.42
2.67
2.63
3.13
3.07
2.65
2.59
3.29
3.13
2.91
2.85

0.78
0.77
0.68
0.71
0.81
0.87
0.77
0.85
0.84
0.89
0.83
0.88

tvaluesSig (2tailed)

df

3.23

0.001

925.7

0.98

0.331

892.8

1.11

0.277

874.5

1.19

0.233

1116

3.05

0.003

884.8

1.13

0.264

886.028

Qualitative Reports on Males and Females’ Perceptions about Learning English Online
in Connection with Perceived Barriers
Informal interviews were done on the sixty-seven volunteers of the total of 1118 who filled out
the questionnaire. 20/67 of them were male (29.9%) and 47 were female (70.1%). They wereready to support the research with qualitative questions by chatting online in the average timeof fifteen minutes per student. The whole process took five weeks for collecting data from theiranswers. The discussed issues fundamentally were based on students’ insights of their
judgments about online learning barriers, in addition to sharing about their perceptions that acheck on the 1-5 Likert Scale seems to be unable to expose perfectly. Moreover, students werealso invited to state their opinions about online lessons in learning English. To start with theresults, it was relatively surprising with the longer and stronger explanations that most female
students expressed their barriers on the items related to technical issues, cost, and access to theInternet. Male students voiced lighter attitudes toward similar concerns. It logically supports
the females’ quantitatively high ratings from the questionnaire.
(a) Learning English Online: The Reception from Students
When being asked to describe a process of an online English lesson and present their own
opinions about whether students are experiencing a traditional or modern learning method,
surprisingly, all respondents described a similar motif (Figure 6). They believed to a certain
degree that they were studying in a traditional way, and there were not as many differencescompared to their on-campus lessons. 31/67 participants revealed that this was the first timethey have encountered online learning and so have their teachers. They continually started byrepeating the same phrases: “Can you hear me clearly?” until all students say they are OK with
the Internet connection. Students have carefully revised the previous lessons with teachers’
instructions before moving on to the new ones. Being similar to learning in the physicalclassroom, students are guided to practice the new structure with friends and teachers, withlimited time and cyber-space interaction. They also felt it hard to have group and paired works
for free practices like they did at school. The lessons normally end by teachers’ wrapping up
and the saying goodbye time for everybody.

16

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Figure 6
A typical Online English Lesson in the Mekong Delta in the Context of COVID-19 Pandemic

43/67 students said they were learning traditionally but with a lack of social interaction between
teachers and students as well as among other students. 22/67 respondents said they were not
motivated while learning English online because they could not interact with their teachers or
their friends. Sometimes they could not ask teachers anything which lead them tomisunderstand, and subsequently, they fell behind the others and became lost afterward.
Respondent #891 said:…It seems that my teacher uses less spoken English than she teaches in theclassroom. My friends often said they did not understand their teachers and theyneeded a lot of translation. Personally, I am not in their favor. I still prefer learning
English by hearing English regularly, especially from my teacher’s instructions…
In contrast, some students claimed that learning English online was a modern learning stylesince they had to study with technology, computers, and especially learning from a distance.
16/67 students welcome online learning by stating that technology will be a must in the future,so getting acquainted with them right now is ideal enough.
(b) Cost and Access to the Internet
The invited 67 volunteers had strong arguments both “for” and “against” online learning underthe effects of cost-related issues and Internet connection in their learning process. Both genders
complained about the interruption or the lag in Wi-Fi as well as money spent on 3G for online
learning. Male students paid attention to the cost of Internet payment as strongly as the female
students. When asked specifically about how much money they spent, only one male
respondent #259 said he had to pay VND 200.000 a month (approximately $10), while there
were seven female students specified the number of VND 30.000 a month, VND 210.000 amonth, and VND 15.000 a day. Similarly, respondent #413 living in the countryside has thesame problem: “My town does not have the Internet. I have to use 3G, and hence, its signal is
not good enough”.
…There were two lessons when there was power outage. My phone did not connect
with 3G and I had to register for the new package. It took VND 40.000 for an online
lesson. My teacher forced us to be present if we did not want to be punished. I was
bored actually. (Female respondent #655)…I am living in remote area; therefore, the Wi-Fi connection is not strong enough.
Can you pay attention to the lesson well if you have to log in Zoom five times for a
forty-five-minute lesson? I missed at least 10 to 15% the content for each lesson.
(Female respondent #478)

17

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

…Students have to pay a lot, and some students even pay for the new installation fee.
(Female respondent #215)(c) Technical Problems
Both male and female students who supported online learning believed in the vital existenceof technology, and they awarded their recognitions by accepting all technical challenges. The
male respondent #103 strongly opposed all barriers related to technical issues. He stated that:…Today, IT comes to secondary students as a compulsory subject. Some are evenprofessional in the uses of Offices, including some online skills through social
networks like Zalo and Facebook. Assisted functions for searching by voices andimages, which benefits users a lot whenever there are problems. All barriers can be
surpassed easily if everyone gives it a try.
In addition to the expert students in technology, who were keen on learning with the online
system, 15/67 students admitted that they lack understanding in ICT and were totally
technophobic. Being blind with technology was not only the confession of the female students– as common sense of human bias – but also of male students. They both confessed that they
had a strict limitation in learning new things, especially for technological aspects. However,
the results showed that more females voiced concerns about technical problems than males,
which numbers are 20 and seven respectively.
(d) Academic Skills
When being asked about difficulties in learning English online, a majority of students said theyfound it hard to understand their teachers’ instructions; and a lack of confidence in answering
everything in English existed as well. Participant #625 noted:“I totally agree with I am not good at listening, speaking, and writing. When myteacher asked me, I was confused a lot and I turn off my camera quickly as a way toescape; to be honest, I sometimes blamed it on technical problems or the Wi-Fi waslag.”
Similarly, there are other ten participants said they felt the more convenient with learning
English reading online.
Regarding interactive activities, half of the participants felt it hard to be engaged in a lively
atmosphere of the English class as they experienced in physical classrooms. Some joined live
games such as Quizzez, Kahoot, and Quizlet with less excitement than when they have had
face-to-face competition with other classmates. Problems with interaction also lead todifficulties in the efficiency of learning English online. The 67 informants of the qualitative
research said they were not able to send their facial expressions to their teachers on time.
Respondent #676 shared:…When we studied in the classrooms, just by observing our facial expressions, ourteachers would immediately repeat their lessons until we felt happier with it. Whenwe were in this virtual environment, sometimes any of us could not hear the teachers
due to Internet connection issues; no one dared to ask. We were too shy. And we wereafraid of being laughed by the other.

18

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Conversely, 17/67 informants said they felt happy with learning English online where they
could hear the teacher clearer because no one turned on the microphones. Moreover, informant#176 judged there was no discrepancies in terms of learning English offline or online; and theirlanguage skills were enough to accept and respond to the new concepts from their teachers.
It can be concluded that English learning and online instructions has further areas that need tobe researched. The current findings provided certainty of learners’ language proficiency andlearners’ styles affect their “mood” in joining online classrooms. It is also inconvincible toconclude the preferences between male and female learners in learning English online. Those
who made a great contribution or those who had developed gaps in learning should be studiedin further research.
(e) Other Extra-factors from the Qualitative Approach
By taking the content analysis, the results showed that there was a great repetition of thefollowing terms: “remote areas”, “countryside”, and “economic condition”. A discovery of
new factors influencing online learning of Vietnamese students, therefore, was recorded.
As regards geographical features, with not many big cities in the Mekong Delta, the region has
a lot of remote areas where Internet has a long way to go to provide reliable service. Many
towns have only just gotten electricity within the last decade, which helps people imagine how
poor the conditions of these students have for learning in this region. Most universities arelocated in the city center, with facilities that are almost fully equipped. Therefore, somestudents living in the countryside feel a big gap in learning conditions in the urgent call for
online learning throughout the country. 35/67 respondents said not all students have alreadypossessed smartphones, laptops, and Wi-Fi for their study.
• …Economic status is different among people. (respondent #398)• …Finding a stable network in rural areas is a big challenge. (respondent #634)• …Not everyone has enough condition to study online. If the game station does not open
on the day I study, how can I study?” (respondent #1088)
Online Learning Barriers versus Male and Female EFL Students’ Online Learning
Readiness
To clarify the influential degree of perceived barriers to the readiness of taking future distancecourses of male and female learners, Discriminant Analyses were run separately for eachgender. Table 3 provides the number of male and female participants with statistics on thefrequency of “Yes” or “No” answers for the question “Would you like to take future online
courses?”. Due to these two options, there is only a canonical discriminant function being usedin the analysis. In this study, the function of both male and female students accounts for 100%
discriminating ability of the discriminating variables, in which eigenvalues of the male result
is 0.314 with its canonical correlation is 0.489. It helps to explain the 23.9% variance ofdependent variables. Figures for females are presented as 0.268, 0.46, and 21.2%
correspondingly.
Regarding the Wilk’s Lambda of both male and female analyses, figures for males are writtenwith 0.761 and p = .000, and the ones for females are 0.789 and p =.000. These help to confirm
the statistical significance of these analyses in our context.

19

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Table 3Frequencies of “Yes” and “No” answers for online learning readiness (N=1118)

Male (n=435)
Female (n=683)

Yes
260
394

No
175
298

It in-line with the impacts found in the hindrance factors between male and female learners
who are ready to continue studying future online courses and those who are unready. As canbe seen from Figure 7, it is obvious to conclude that learner motivation has the most impact on
both males’ and females’ decisions, with Discriminant Scores (DS) presented at 0.61 and 0.56,
respectively. Following this factor, Social Interaction (DS=0.5) becomes the second influential
factor for male students while the counterpart finds it a problem to continue learning online
due to Cost and Access to the Internet (DS=0.45), before admitting the impact of Social
interaction as the third influential factor (DS=0.27). Having the least impact on causing
discrepancies between the two decisions, female students put the influence of Administrativeand instructors’ issues to the back of the list of barriers while males’ readiness does not depend
really much on Academic Skills (DS=0.06)
Figure 7
Standardized Canonical Discriminant Function Coefficients

Regarding 435 male participants, 175 students (40.2%) answered “No” for the questions about
online readiness; and the other 260 (59.8%) said “Yes”. As a result of Classification tables, it
is knowledgeable that:••

Among 175 students who said “No”, 121 of them are predicted unready for future
distance courses.
Among 260 students who said “Yes”, 197 of them are predicted to be ready for future
distance courses.

20

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education•

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

The percentage of original grouped cases correctly classified is 72.2%.

In terms of female learners, there is a total of 684 participants and 289 “No” answers (42.2%),
and 394 “Yes” answers (57.6%).
•••

Among 289 females who said “No”, 212 of them are predicted to be unready for future
distance courses.
Among 394 females who said “Yes”, 280 of them are predicted to be ready for future
distance courses.
The percentage of original grouped cases correctly classified is 72.0%.

Gender versus Online Learning ReadinessTo examine whether gender has an impact on online learning readiness, Chi-square Tests wererun based on statistics of numbers of male and female students and their judges on being readyor unready to take future online courses. Its details being shown in Table 4 revealed that the
Asymptotic Significance (2-sided) is 0.491, greater than 0.05, so the null hypothesis was
accepted. It means that gender has no influence on EFL students’ online learning readiness.
Table 4Chi-Square Tests
Pearson Chi-SquareContinuity Correctionb
Likelihood Ratio
Fisher's Exact Test
Linear-by-Linear
Association
N of Valid Cases

Value
.475a
.393
.476

df
1
1
1

Asymptotic Significance (2-sided)
.491
.531
.490

.475

1

.491

1118

a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 180.54.

Discussion
Learning online during the COVID-19 pandemic has created a great impetus for students
throughout the nation and worldwide to receive a mainstream of education. Learning English
online on a large scale at this time, with its own distinguished features, had already received
early judgments from their learners. In addition to students’ responses to online learning
obstacles on a range of items of Berge’s framework (2005) regarding cost and access to theInternet, technical problems, learner motivation, social interaction, administrative or
instructors’ issues, and academic skills; qualitative findings, on the one hand, reveal the impactof economic condition and geographical features as additional barriers; on the other hand, it
exposes students’ perception toward their teachers’ teaching techniques. Through thecomprehensive reflections of learners both on qualitative and quantitative aspects, it positively
provides for the educator an overview about what and how to do to realize online learning in
Vietnamese context.
Gender Discrepancies in Students’ Perception Toward Online Learning Barriers
The findings provided a comparison between males’ and females’ perceptions toward online
learning barriers. There are two out of six factors remaining after EFA which propose thediscrepancies between the two genders, namely technical problems and cost and access to the21

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Internet. For these factors, female students tend to perceive more levels of difficulties thanmales. It can be concluded that females in our circumstances have higher evaluations on theissues related to Internet access, fee, and problems about online learning techniques. A
confirmation of McSporran and Young (2001) is in this study with reports on women’s
disadvantages are present in learning with computers. However, the current study recorded
similarities when a lot of men are given the same statements about ICT lack of knowledge as
the women. It is a discovery that helps strengthen a balanced attitude between the two genders
when learning English online. With regards to the other barriers, namely learner motivation,
administrative or instructors’ issues, academic skills, and social interaction, there are nodiscrepancies in perceptions between the two genders. It is quite different from studies ofAshong et al. (2012), which admitted to a higher level of women’s positive perceptions onteacher support and student interaction. Yet, it is in agreement with Price (2006) which testified
to the effect of “women’s access to technology and enrolment on the online version of thecourse was comparable to men’s” (p.353).
With respects to students’ comments about a model English online lesson, it can be seen that
almost all teachers accidentally performed traditionally when teaching, where students wanted
to welcome innovative teaching methods like they were gaining on campus. By pointing out a
lot of predictable teaching scenarios, students exposed their expectations in more interesting
lessons, where they could acquire language more effectively. For some other students, they felt
it was difficult because they were not proficient enough in the four skills comprising listening,reading, speaking, and writing, especially with the typing skill included. They believed learning
English online to be much more difficult. These concerns would be a problem that the study
helps to reflect and expect solutions from educators who want to motivate online teaching in
the home country.
Gender Issues and the Readiness of Online English Learning in the Future
Regarding students’ online learning readiness, the results re-confirmed the good promise of
online education in Vietnam (Van & Thi, 2021) by the approval of both genders, though there
are still remarkable numbers of students being in the opposite spectrum. Both males andfemales in high school and universities in this study are given the same learning opportunitiesin learning, and they all face similar challenges as well as gaining benefits. The number of 46
students’ claims had contributed to enlightening the future of teaching English online in
Vietnam; for instance, 30/67 respondents believed in the necessary of joining online learning
as an adaptation to the development technology and society. “It is just the matter of time, as
well as the matter of earliness or lateness.”, said respondent #889. This is also the reasons why
they expose a wide range of difficulties, sometimes with extreme positions. Yet in the end, they
still would volunteer for online learning in the future.
Gender Equality in Online Learning amidst the COVID-19 Pandemic
Being completely different from the reality of educational rights of women in Vietnam in thepast, the result of the study is the best evidence for the improvement of gender inequality,
especially in the context of the COVID-19 outbreak. It erases the images of women whoselearning rights were restricted by the effect of Confucianism thousand years ago (Vu &Yamada, 2020), which was testified by the readiness of both males and females students inlearning in the disadvantaged conditions with positive ratings and comments when being asked
about obstacles while learning English online. Moreover, the result of Chi-square tests leading
to a conclusion that gender has no impacts on learners’ future decisions, help to shorten thebias suspicion of human about women ability in learning with technology (Blum, 1999;

22

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Bostock et al., 1987; Brosnan & Davidson, 1996; Perry & Greber, 1990; Rosen et al., 1987). It
also opens the door for online learning to be enhanced with the support of both genders.
Pedagogical Implications
To deal with the urgent call for online learning in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, theresearch contributes to the literature about the readiness of learning English online of students
in Vietnam in terms of gender. It helps to provide insights into males and females’ attitudes
toward accepting online education or not. The reflection of both quantitative and qualitative
results toward learning English online becomes extremely important for all stakeholders,
especially when promoting online learning and other technology-based learning practices into
the region. Additionally, it provides implications for researchers, course providers, and course
designers (Lowes et al., 2016), who become extended stakeholders when creating the programs
that serve the learning needs of female and male students.

23

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

References
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2007). Online nation: Five years of growth in online learning.
ERIC. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED529699.pdf
Anh, D. K. (2020). Việt Nam: COVID-19 và thách thức đối với ngành Giáo Dục. Friedrich
Ebert Stiftung. Accessed October 2, 2021 from https://www.fes-vietnam.org/vi/vnnews-events-publications-detail/viet-nam-COVID-19-va-thach-thuc-doi-voi-nganhgiao-duc/
Anh, N. T. L., & Duc, H. M. (2020). Đào tạo trực tuyến trong các trường đại học ở Việt Namhiện nay: Thực trạng và giải pháp nâng cao chất lượng. Cong Thuong Industry andTrade Magazine. Accessed October 2, 2021 from https://tapchicongthuong.vn/baiviet/dao-tao-truc-tuyen-trong-cac-truong-dai-hoc-o-viet-nam-hien-nay-thuc-trang-vagiai-phap-nang-cao-chat-luong-75924.htm
Ashong, C. Y., Commander, N. E., & Teaching. (2012). Ethnicity, gender, and perceptions of
online learning in higher education. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning, 8(2).
Atack, L. (2003). Becoming a web‐based learner: Registered nurses’ experiences. Journal ofadvanced nursing, 44(3), 289-297. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.2003.02804.x
Barker, A. (2003). Faculty development for teaching online: Educational and technologicalissues. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 34(6), 273–278.
https://doi.org/10.3928/0022-0124-20031101-10
Blum, K. D. (1999). Gender differences in asynchronous learning in higher education:
Learning styles, participation barriers and communication patterns. Journal ofasynchronous learning networks (JALN), 3(1), 46-66. Accessed October 2, 2021 fromhttps://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/66c4/7c2b615d95f3e76ade45da1d0bec3899fb5f.pdf
Bostock, S. J., Seifert, R. V., & McArdle, J. (1987). The effects of learning environment andgender on the attainment of computer Literacy. Studies in the Education of Adults,
19(1), 37-45. https://doi.org/10.1080/02660830.1987.11730478
Brosnan, M. J., & Davidson, M. J. (1996). Psychological Gender Issues in Computing.
Gender, Work & Organization, 3(1), 13–25.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.1996.tb00045.x
Browne, E. (2005). Structural and pedagogic change in further and higher education: A casestudy approach. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 29(1), 49–59.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03098770500037754
Cole, A., Conlon, T., Jackson, S., & Welch, D. (1994). Information technology and gender:
Problems and Proposals. Gender and Education, 6(1), 77–86.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0954025940060106
Dabbagh, N., & Bannan-Ritland, B. (2005). Online learning: Concepts, strategies, andapplication. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.
Dyrbye, L., Cumyn, A., Day, H., & Heflin, M. (2009). A qualitative study of physicians’
experiences with online learning in a masters degree program: Benefits, challenges,
and proposed solutions. Medical Teacher, 31(2), e40-e46.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590802366129

24

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Fish, L. A. (2016). A Preliminary Study of Changes in Online Graduate Business Student
Perceptions Over a Course. Business Education Innovation Journal, 8(2), 41–50.
Accessed October 2, 2021 from http://www.beijournal.com/images/V8N2_85.pdf
Garland, M. R. (1993). Student perceptions of the situational, institutional, dispositional andepistemological barriers to persistence. Distance Education, 14(2), 181–198.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0158791930140203
Grundy, A. F., & Grundy, J. (1996). Women and computers. Intellect Books, Exeter.
Ha, C. (2020). 92 Universities Applying Online Learning. VTC News. Accessed October 2,2021 from https://vtc.vn/92-truong-dai-hoc-ap-dung-hinh-thuc-day-truc-tuyenar535639.html
Horspool, A., & Lange, C. (2012). Applying the scholarship of teaching and learning:Student perceptions, behaviours and success online and face-to-face. Assessment &Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(1), 73–88.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2010.496532
Hrastinski, S. (2008). Asynchronous and synchronous e-learning. Educause Quarterly, 31(4),51–55.
Hurmerinta-Peltomäki, L., & Nummela, N. (2006). Mixed methods in international businessresearch: A value-added perspective. Management International Review, 46(4), 439–
459. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11575-006-0100-z
Kokko, T., Pesonen, H., Kontu, E., & Pirttimaa, R. (2015). Why study online in upper
secondary school? Qualitative analysis of online learning experiences. Human
Technology: An Interdisciplinary Journal on Humans in ICT Environments, 11(1),57–70. https://doi.org/10.17011/ht/urn.201505061740
Landrum, B., Bannister, J., Garza, G., & Rhame, S. (2020). A class of one: Students’satisfaction with online learning. Journal of Education for Business, 96(2), 82–88.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2020.1757592
Lowes, S., Lin, P., & Kinghorn, B. R. (2016). Gender differences in online high school
courses. Online Learning, 20(4), 100–117. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v20i4.1049
McSporran, M., & Young, S. (2001). Does gender matter in online learning? ALT-J, 9(2), 3–
15. https://doi.org/10.1080/0968776010090202
Muilenburg, L., & Berge, Z. L. (2001). Barriers to distance education: A factor‐analytic
study. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(2), 7–22.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08923640109527081
Muilenburg, L. Y., & Berge, Z. L. (2005). Student barriers to online learning: A factor
analytic study. Distance Education, 26(1), 29–48.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910500081269
Mullen, G. E., & Tallent-Runnels, M. K. (2006). Student outcomes and perceptions of
instructors' demands and support in online and traditional classrooms. The Internetand Higher Education, 9(4), 257–266.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2006.08.005
Newby, T., Stepich, D., Lehman, J., & Russell, J. (2000). Instructional technology forteaching and learning: Designing instruction, integrating computers, and using media(2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Merrill.

25

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Nha, P. X. (2020). Minister of Education and Training Phung Xuan Nha requests UNICEF’s
support in distance learning. UNICEF (VietNam). Accessed October 2, 2021 fromhttps://www.unicef.org/vietnam/stories/minister-education-and-training-phung-xuannha-requests-unicefs-support-distance-learning
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, C. (2007). IH (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill, c1994. Accessed October 2, 2021 fromhttps://lib.ugent.be/catalog/rug01:000331515
O’Cathain, A., Murphy, E., & Nicholl, J. (2010). Three techniques for integrating data in
mixed methods studies. Bmj, 341, c4587. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c4587
Perry, R., & Greber, L. (1990). Women and computers: An introduction. Signs: Journal ofwomen in Culture and Society, 16(1), 74–101. https://doi.org/10.1086/494646
Platt, C. A., Raile, A., & Yu, N. (2014). Virtually the same? Student perceptions of theequivalence of online classes vs. face-to-face classes. Journal of Online Learning andTeaching, 10(3), 489–503. Retrieved on Oct 2, 2021 fromhttps://www.researchgate.net/publication/271205198_Virtually_the_same_Student_p
erceptions_of_the_equivalence_of_online_classes_vs_face-to-face_classes
Price, L. (2006). Gender differences and similarities in online courses: challenging
stereotypical views of women. 22(5), 349–359.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2006.00181.x
Rosen, L. D., Sears, D. C., & Weil, M. M. (1987). Computerphobia. Behavior Research
Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 19(2), 167–179.
https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03203781
Rosenlee, L. H. L. (2006). Confucianism and Women: A Philosophical Interpretation. SUNY
Press. Retrieved on Oct 2, 2021 from https://books.google.com.vn/books?id=WV0nQEACAAJ
Sargeant, J., Curran, V., Jarvis‐Selinger, S., Ferrier, S., Allen, M., Kirby, F., & Ho, K.
(2004). Interactive on‐line continuing medical education: Physicians' perceptions andexperiences. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 24(4), 227–
236. https://doi.org/10.1002/chp.1340240406
Schilke, R. A. (2001). A case study of attrition in web-based instruction for adults: Updating
Garland's model of barriers to persistence in distance education. Northern Illinois
University.
Smart, K. L., & Cappel, J. J. (2006). Students’ perceptions of online learning: A comparative
study. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 5(1), 201-219.
https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3524610
Spender, D. (1997). The position of women in Information Technology-or who got there firstand with what consequences? Current Sociology, 45(2), 135–147.
https://doi.org/10.1177/001139297045002008
Toshiyuki, M. (2020). Dịch COVID-19 ảnh hưởng đến gần 1,6 tỉ người học. Tuoitreonline.
Retrieved on Oct 2, 2021 from https://tuoitre.vn/the-gioi-nhu-toi-thay-ky-2-dichCOVID-19-anh-huong-den-gan-1-6-ti-nguoi-hoc-20200827094736097.htm
Urdan, T. A., & Weggen, C. C. (2000). Corporate E-learning: Exploring a New Frontier.
W.R. Hambrecht.

26

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Van, D. T. H., & Thi, H. H. Q. (2021). Student barriers to prospects of online learing in
Vietnam in the context of Covid-19 Pandemic. Turkish Online Journal of Distance
Education, 22(3), 110–123. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.961824
Vu, T. M., & Yamada, H. (2020). The legacy of Confucianism in gender inequality in
Vietnam. MPRA Paper 101487, University Library of Munich, Germany. Retrieved
October 2, 2021 from https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/id/eprint/101487
Wyatt, G. (2005). Satisfaction, academic rigor and interaction: Perceptions of online
instruction. Education (Chula Vista), 125(3), 460–468.
Corresponding Author: Dao Thi Hong Van
Email: vandth10@fe.edu.vn

27

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

28

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Do Cognitive Dispositions and Gender Matter in Applicationsof Culturally Relevant Pedagogy? A Pilot Study at an Iraqi University
Maura Pilotti
Prince Mohammad Bin Fahd University, Saudi Arabia
Khadija El Alaoui
American University of Iraq Sulaimani, Iraq
Yalda Razmahang
American University of Iraq Sulaimani, Iraq
Zaynab El Bernoussi
International University of Rabat, Morocco
Saya Abdulrahman
University of Iraq Sulaimani, Iraq

29

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Abstract
The present pilot study examines the extent to which particular individual differences (i.e.,
general self-efficacy, goal orientation, and decision-making styles) may shape academic
success in courses conforming to the principles of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy (CRP). Endof-semester course grades were used as a coarse, institutionally mandated measure of academic
success. Gender differences were observed. For female students, a learning orientation was
related to academic success. However, female students’ academic success was also related totheir reliance on specific decision-making styles (i.e., vigilance and hyper-vigilance). Male
students’ academic success was not significantly related to any of the individual difference
measures. These findings suggest that applications of CRP may benefit from the recognition of
students’ preexisting dispositions and that such dispositions may differ between sexes. A
discussion follows regarding how information regarding students’ preexisting differences may
benefit CRP instruction.
Keywords: academic success, culturally relevant pedagogy, cognitive dispositions, higher
education

30

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Instruction is situational. Its effectiveness is shaped by the interplay between instructor andstudents (Farias et al., 2010). In the present study, we ask whether particular students’dispositions are related to institutionally mandated performance measures (i.e., end-ofsemester class grades) when the instruction in a college course conforms to the principles ofCulturally Relevant Pedagogy (CRP).
CRP is an instructional practice whose overreaching aim is to enable learners to become
informed and engaged intellectually, emotionally, socially, and politically. It rests on three key
objectives for all learners, which are (a) academic success, (b) cultural competence, and (c) andsociopolitical consciousness, each supported by CRP’s reliance on the nurturing of criticalanalysis skills. Academic success refers to the “intellectual growth that students experience asa result of classroom instruction and learning experiences” (Ladson-Billings, 2014, p. 75).
More practically, it is what “students know and can do as a result of pedagogical interactions
with skilled teachers” (Ladson-Billings, 2006, p. 34). CRP relies on the belief that all learners
are capable of academic success if adequate opportunities and tools are given, highexpectations are set, and students take responsibility for their learning. Cultural competenceentails learning that acknowledges and honors students’ values, experiences, and sense of self
(Howard, 2003) and, by doing so, promotes awareness of cultural diversity. Sociopoliticalconsciousness specifically reflects the use of critical thinking skills to examine, deconstruct,and evaluate existing societal systems and the knowledge upon which they rely, with theprospect of contributing to the development of alternative theoretical constructs and tools.
In essence, CRP does not merely rest on good intentions, but on instructors who translate
intentions into actions, and who are aware of how their identity, life experience, knowledge,
and institutional role may limit and bias their instruction as well as impact teaching and learningin their courses (Brown-Jeffy & Cooper, 2011). It also relies heavily on active learning, which
entails instructional methods that engage students in the learning process. In short, CRP
requires learners to do meaningful activities and reflect on what they are doing. For example,
Lee (2006) suggests the development of instruction that links students’ everyday knowledge(including cultural scripts and experiences) to traditional academic subject matters. Her work
specifically focuses on teaching strategies for literary analysis that rely on students’ cultural
frames of reference so that students can easily transfer the acquired skills to unfamiliar texts.
Similarly, Camp & Oesterreich (2010) report on the value of drawing on life experiences ofinjustice as a means to promote and practice inquiry-based learning among one’s students.
Although it is a challenging proposition to implement, CRP is believed to be an effective
pedagogy for facilitating learning inside and outside the classroom, providing students withdiverse opportunities to acquire and demonstrate knowledge, helping students to appreciate
their culture in relation to dominant cultural frames, and enhancing engagement and classroom
management (Howard & Rodriguez-Scheel, 2017; Pilotti & Al Mubarak, 2021; Siwatu, 2007;
Walker, 2019). CRP has attracted strong advocates among instructors who are looking foralternatives to traditional teaching methods, while skeptical instructors regard CRP as justanother educational fad (Royal & Gibson, 2017). However, most of the research on theeffectiveness of CRP tends to rely on interviews and observations, and to focus on the logistics
and challenges of the implementation of such pedagogy, thereby resulting in largely descriptive
studies (Morrison et al., 2008; Young, 2010) where instructors’ experiences take the spotlight.
Action research methodologies have had limited use at best (Lee, 1998; Pilotti & Al Mubarak,
2021; Sheets, 1995).

31

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Although the effectiveness of CRP is intended to be measured through the lenses of its threeobjectives (i.e, academic success, cultural competence, and sociopolitical consciousness),
students’ academic success is generally the objective that takes the center stage for both
detractors and proponents of CRP (Royal & Gibson, 2017; Schmeichel, 2012). In the current
educational environment, academic decision-making practices are largely structured aroundgrades (Kohn, 1993), which epitomize easily accessible, and widespread measures of
performance. Grades are used as scorecards of students’ abilities and knowledge that canqualify or disqualify them as holders of a degree, a scholarship, financial aid, and so on.
Namely, irrespective of the broad definition that CRP gives to academic success, grades stillmatter as performance indices of the extent to which students have achieved the predefined
standards mandated by the institution of higher learning in which they are enrolled. Thus, it is
not unlikely for research on CRP to rely on grades as coarse measures of academic success(Dee & Penner, 2017; Gao, 2014; Parker & Rosenthal, 2011). Yet, the extent to which theeffectiveness of CRP (as narrowly measured by grades) is modulated by specific students’cognitive dispositions remains unclear, especially among students from historicallymarginalized communities. Preexisting differences (if related to performance) may facilitate or
weaken the application of CRP to a college course. As such, an educator’s awareness ofstudents’ cognitive dispositions and their relevance to academic success can inform his/herteaching and dictate remedial adjustments. In the case study described below, we examine threekinds of cognitive dispositions: self-efficacy, goal orientation, and decision-making styles. The
rationale for their selection is their purported relationship with academic performance asmeasured by grades.
Self-efficacy is generally defined as an individual’s level of confidence in his/her ability to
execute actions or attain particular performance outcomes (Bandura, 1977; Bandura & Schunk,1981). Self-efficacy is born of prior experiences of success and is assumed to influence theinitiation of intentional actions, the amount of effort applied to attain desired outcomes, andthe persistence with which actions are performed in the face of challenges and obstacles(Bandura, 1977; Pajares, 1996). Its relationship with performance has been reported to be either
positive (Bouffard-Bouchard, 1990; Lane & Lane, 2001) or negative (Vancouver et al., 2002),
depending on whether it fosters effort and persistence or over-confidence (Moores & Chang,2009).
The term goal orientation refers to the ways students may approach a course in which they areenrolled and its demands. The course may be seen as an opportunity to acquire knowledge andskills (i.e., learning or mastery orientation) or as an opportunity to acquire a good grade thatbolsters students’ GPA, which is judged as a valid reason, in and of itself, for enrolling in thecourse (i.e., grade or performance orientation). Evidence regarding the relationship between
goal orientation and academic performance is mixed. Studies have reported a positive
relationship with learning orientation (Coutinho, 2007; D’Lima et al.. 2014; Eison, 1982;
Schraw et al., 1995; VandeWalle et al., 2001), and a negative relationship with gradeorientation (Beck et al., 1991), but mixed or contradictory findings have also surfaced (Becket al., 1991; Elliot & Church, 1997; Harju & Eppler, 1997; Harris & Harris, 1987; Page &Alexitch, 2003).
Decision-making styles are patterns used to make decisions, usually under conditions of
uncertainty (Janis & Mann, 1977). According to Mann et al. (1997), they include vigilance,
hyper-vigilance, buck-passing, and procrastination. Vigilance reflects a disposition to gather
all relevant information, as well as examine and evaluate the available alternatives carefully
and without prejudice before making a choice. Vigilance is considered ideal for generating

32

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

sound and rational decisions. Hyper-vigilance refers to a disposition to choose a course ofaction frantically and hastily without considering all information available about options andtheir likely consequences. Defensive avoidance, which involves trying to escape the perceived
burden of choosing something over something else, characterizes the remaining types. It may
entail either procrastinating or transferring the responsibility for making decisions to someone
else (i.e., buck-passing). Studies have reported performance to be positively related to vigilance(Kornilova et al., 2018) and negatively related to procrastination (Sagone & Indiana, 2021;
Steel, 2007), but its relationship with the other decision-making styles remains undetermined.
Too often, the evidence concerning the relationship between learners’ performance anddispositional differences does not situate such differences within any particular instructionalmodel. In CRP-related research, a few exceptions exist though, but they are limited toaddressing some particular objective or aspect of CRP. For instance, Ballen et al. (2017)
reported that self-efficacy accounted for performance gains in the context of instruction
encouraging active learning, which is a key aspect of CRP. Folk (2018) found that students
who exhibited a learning orientation were the only students who displayed critical, analytical,
and reflective modes of thinking, which represent the cornerstone of academic success for
CRP. Evidence may also illustrate the undesirable outcomes of instructional approaches thatnegate core principles of CRP. For example, Taggart (2017) found that cultural discontinuity,which CRP opposes, was inversely related to students’ grade point average (GPA). Cultural
discontinuity is “a school-based behavioral process where the cultural value-based learning
preferences and practices of many ethnic minority students—those typically originating fromhome or parental socialization activities—are discontinued at school” (Tyler et al., 2008, p.
281).
In light of the scant evidence regarding the role of cognitive dispositions in applications of
CRP, it is reasonable to ask whether there is indeed a relationship between particular cognitive
dispositions and performance (as measured by class grades) in CRP-compliant courses.
Hypotheses may be informed by the extent to which cognitive dispositions are assumed tomatch the principles that define and structure CRP instruction in the classroom. For instance,
based on the notion that CRP is a pedagogy of empowerment and engagement (LadsonBillings, 1994), it is reasonable to expect that, in CRP-compliant courses, class grades would
be positively related to self-efficacy as well as learning orientation. Because CRP emphasizes
learners’ strengths in critical thinking, offers students intellectual challenges within acooperative and supportive learning environment that minimizes stress and anxiety, it is also
reasonable to expect that class grades would be positively related to vigilance, but negatively
related to hypervigilance and defensive avoidance modes.
To offer an adequate test of CRP, the present pilot study targets college students of theKurdistan Region of Iraq, who are an under-represented population in educational research.
Their society is shaped by patriarchal and collectivistic values defined along ethnic andreligious lines. In such a society, gender is an unavoidably relevant demographic dimension,even among young college students. Across Iraq, including the Kurdistan region, access touniversity education by women has steadily improved (Al-Ali, 2008; Masika et al., 2014).
Structural barriers, however, are embedded in cultural practices that define gender roles,
thereby continuing to curtail women’s educational and professional opportunities (Metcalfe
2008; Soltanpanah et al., 2018). Thus, the present pilot study also examines whether genderdifferences exist in the relationship between particular cognitive dispositions of students whoare enrolled in CRP-compliant courses and class grades. The scant extant evidence does notprovide clear guidance as to how the position of dominance given to males in Iraqi society

33

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

might shape self-efficacy, goal orientation, and decision-making styles. Evidence from theKurdistan Region exists though that test anxiety is higher in female students than male students(Faqe et al., 2016), leading to the prediction that females might display lower self-efficacy thanmales, adopt a performance orientation according to which grades are paramount, and rely
more often on hyper-vigilance styles in decision making. Whether purported cognitive
differences in dispositions might relate differently to the academic performance of females andmales is a matter to be investigated.
In sum, the present study is guided by two key interrelated questions: What are the dispositions
that characterize this sample of female and male students (e.g., general self-efficacy, goal
orientation, and decision-making styles)? Do individual differences in the selected dimensions
contribute to female and male students’ class performance (as measured by end-of-semester
grades) differently?
MethodSampleThe sample consisted of 166 students (104 males and 62 females) enrolled in one of three
undergraduate courses (History of the Modern World, Comparative Political Systems, andInternational Relations) offered by a university in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq. The university
relies on a US curriculum and requires instructors to follow a student-centered approach to
instruction. The uneven number of males and females reflects the university's enrollment rates,
thereby underscoring the barriers that women encounter in entering higher education within apatriarchal system that favors men for intellectual and professional pursuits. Participation
complied with the guidelines of the Office for Human Research Protections of the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services and with the American Psychological Association’s
ethical standards in the treatment of research participants. Twenty-four additional students
were excluded for early withdrawal or for failing to complete one or more of the surveys uponwhich the study relied.
Procedure and Materials
The present pilot study was conducted in the field. As a result, the participants were students
enrolled in actual courses. Students qualified for participation by virtue of being enrolled in
one of the courses selected for the study. They were assessed on actual tests and homeworkassignments, thereby making performance assessment relevant to them. Within the timeframeof a semester, students completed the assignments and tests on which class grades, used asindices of academic performance, were based. No student in the sample was enrolled in morethan one of the selected classes. Convenience sampling was used to select 3 courses taught by
the same 2 instructors: History of the Modern World (5 sections), Comparative Political
Systems (1 section), and International Relations (1 section). Courses were selected to include
students from across the university (History of the Modern World) as well as to ensure adequate
representation of the political science major, one of the main constituents of the curriculum of
the university (Comparative Political Systems and International Relations). The curriculum ofeach course was intended to emphasize the acquisition and practice of basic academic skills(e.g., writing, speaking, reasoning, etc.) within a specific domain of knowledge, and theacquisition of knowledge within that domain. Course selection also ensured uniformity of themeasurement of performance across the entire semester. Each course consisted of a midterm
and a final test as well as an assignment before and an assignment after the midterm. Test
questions and assignments embraced all of the six types of information acquisition andprocessing highlighted by Bloom’s taxonomy of human thinking (Anderson & Krathwohl,

34

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

2001; Bloom, 1956, 1976; Krathwohl, 2002). Namely, assessment required remembering,understanding, application, analysis, evaluation, and synthesis/creation of work. In addition tocontent, these courses were selected for their adequate enrollment, the consent of the
instructors, the adoption of CRP instruction, and the unlikely overlap of students.
The instructors were recognized by their colleagues and students as thoughtful, studentcentered educators of Middle Eastern descent. Peer observations and evaluations qualified
them as learning-oriented educators (Farias et al., 2010) whose instruction was CRP-compliant.
That is to say, the instructors were described as emphasizing collaboration and mutual support
among students, offering plentiful developmental feedback, setting high standards, making aneffort to include in their instruction local knowledge and facts, and using grades asopportunities to further learning. Their responses to the LOGO F scale of Eison et al. (1993)
supported peer observations and evaluations. The scale assessed their attitudes towards grade
and learning on a 5-point Likert scale from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5), as wellas their behaviors towards learning and grades on a five-point scale from never (1) to always(5). Instructors reported engaging in behaviors consistent with a learning orientation more often
than behaviors consistent with a grade orientation. Similarly, they advocated more strongly
learning-oriented attitudes than grade-oriented ones.
After students had the opportunity to acclimate to the course in which they enrolled and tounderstand its requirements, they were asked to complete three questionnaires as part of a selfassessment protocol: The New General Self-Efficacy (NGSE) questionnaire (Chen et al., 2001;
Chen et al., 2000), the attitude portion of the LOGO II questionnaire (Eison & Pollio, 1985;
1989; Eison et al. 1983) and the Melbourne Decision-Making (DM) questionnaire (Mann etal., 1997; see Appendix A). Students were assured that the data from the questionnaires would
be used to understand learning and teaching in the class and that their responses would remain
confidential.
The NGSE questionnaire was used to measure students’ general confidence in their ability todeal with a broad range of challenges (Bandura, 1989). For each of the eight statements ofconfidence that the questionnaire contained, students indicated the extent of their agreement or
disagreement on a scale from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5) with 3 serving as theneutral point (Cronbach's Alpha = .82). The attitude portion of the LOGO II questionnaire
comprised 8 statements expressing a learning orientation and 8 statements expressing a gradeorientation to be rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale from “strongly agree” (4) to “strongly
disagree” (0) with the neutral point set at 2 (Cronbach's Alpha = .76; Eison et al., 1983). The
Melbourne Decision-Making questionnaire was intended to measure decision-making styles,
including vigilance (6 items), hyper-vigilance (5 items), procrastination (5 items), and buckpassing (6 items). In the questionnaire, each item described a particular way people approach
decision making. Students were asked to indicate the extent to which each statement applied
to them on a 3-point Likert-type scale, including “true for me” (2), “sometimes true” (1), and“not true for me” (0; Cronbach's Alpha = .81).
Results
The analyses described in this section answer two key interrelated questions: What are thedispositions that characterize this sample of female and male students (e.g., general selfefficacy, goal orientation, and decision-making styles)? Do individual differences in theselected dimensions contribute to female and male students’ class performance (as measured

35

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

by end-of-semester grades) differently? All the results of inferential statistics discussed below
are considered significant at the .05 level.
Assessment of Individual Differences
Students’ ratings of the 8 items of the NGSE scale were averaged. The mean was treated as anindex of general self-efficacy. Students’ ratings of the items of the LOGO II scale endorsing
grades were subtracted from those endorsing learning to create a preference score. Thus, apositive (+) score signified a preference for learning whereas a negative (-) score signified apreference for grades. A zero indicated no inclination for either orientation. Students’ ratingsof the DM questionnaire were organized into clusters illustrating four distinct styles (as per
Mann et al., 1997): vigilance, hyper-vigilance, procrastination, and buck-passing. Each style
was the average of the students’ ratings of the items that pertained to it. Descriptive statistics
are displayed in Table 1.
Table 1
Mean and Standard Error of the Mean (SEM) of Class Performance and Ratings of SelfEfficacy, Goal Orientation, and Decision-Marking Styles

Performance (potential range: 0-100)
Self-Efficacy (potential range: 1-5)
Goal Orientation (potential range: 04)
Preference for Learning
Decision-Making (potential range: 02)
Vigilance
Hyper-vigilance
Procrastination
Buck-Passing

FemaleMean
SEM
72.85 2.087

Male
Mean
74.88

SEM
1.363

Mean
74.12

2.01 0.068

1.98

0.051

1.99

0.35 0.091

0.40

0.068

0.38

1.65
1.15
0.84
0.63

1.66
1.03
0.75
0.69

0.033
0.039
0.046
0.046

1.66
1.09
0.78
0.66

0.041
0.050
0.062
0.065

Separate one-way ANOVAs were performed on end-of-semester class grades (serving as ameasure of academic success), self-efficacy beliefs, and learning preferences with gender as
the independent variable to determine the presence or absence of gender differences in thesample of participants. The type of undergraduate course was not included in the analyses as avariable because it failed to differentiate students.
Female and male students did not differ in academic success, F < 1, ns. End-of-semester class
grades were distributed almost evenly across all performance levels: A (i.e., 90-100) = 15.67%,
B (i.e., 80-89) = 25.30%, C (i.e., 70-79) = 22.89%, D (i.e., 60-69) = 21.08%, and F (i.e., below60) =15.06%. There were no gender differences in self-efficacy beliefs, F < 1, ns. Important tonote is that 97.59% of the self-efficacy ratings were below or equal to the neutral point of 3,
suggesting that students’ self-efficacy beliefs were low overall. There were also no genderdifferences in preference for learning, F < 1, ns. Interestingly, 66.87% of the students expresseda preference for learning over grades, 25.90% expressed the opposite preference, and 7.23%
had no preference at all.

36

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

A 4 (decision-making style) X 2 (gender) mixed factorial ANOVA was conducted on theratings of the DM questionnaire. A main effect of decision-making style was observed, F(3,492) = 232.13, MSE = .130, p < .001, ηp2= .586, but without a main effect of gender or asignificant interaction, Fs ≤ 1.96, ns. Pair-wise comparisons, adjusted for experiment-wisealpha through the Bonferroni correction, illustrated the extent of students’ reliance on decisionmaking styles. Overall, vigilance was the most likely used style, ts ≥ 14.45, p < .001. Hypervigilance was favored over buck-passing and procrastination, and buck-passing was the least
used style, ts ≥ 3.24, p ≤ .001.
Assessment of the Contribution of Individual Differences to Performance
Linear regression analyses were conducted between end-of-semester class grades as theoutcome variable and individual difference measures to understand the extent to which eachmeasure made an independent contribution to female and male students’ grades. Table 2
illustrates the results of these analyses. For female students, class performance increased withthe endorsement of a learning orientation over a grade orientation, and with the adoption ofvigilance and hyper-vigilance as decision-making styles. For male students, class performance
was not significantly related to any cognitive dimension.
Table 2
Linear Regression Analyses Between Performance and Self-Efficacy, Preference for Learning,and Decision-Making Styles
B
Female Students
Constant
Self-Efficacy
Preference for Learning *Vigilance *Hyper-Vigilance *Procrastination
Buck-Passing
Male Students
Constant
Self-Efficacy
Preference for Learning
Vigilance
Hyper-Vigilance
Procrastination
Buck-Passing

Std. Error Beta

t

Sign.

20.7656.003
7.040
15.267
13.265-1.443-2.58515.921
4.353
2.806
6.483
6.279
5.164
5.199

.197
.308
.299
.315
-.043
-.080

1.379
2.509
2.355
2.112
-.280
-.497

ns
.015
.022
.039
ns
ns

63.337
1.607
2.632
3.530
2.517
-7.259
6.270

9.526
2.803
2.191
4.379
4.393
3.797
3.492

.060
.131
.086
.071
-.246
.211

.573
1.201
.806
.573
-1.912
1.796

ns
ns
ns
ns
ns
ns

Discussion
The findings of the current study can be summarized in three main points. First, there were no
gender differences in the selected cognitive dimensions and academic success (as measured by
end-of-semester class grades). Most students exhibited overall low self-efficacy beliefs and apreference for learning. Students also expressed a preference for a vigilant decision-making
style over the other styles, suggesting the use of a practice that CRP nurtures. Yet, other lessideal decision-making practices were not entirely discounted.

37

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Second, there were gender differences in the contribution of cognitive dimensions to academic
success. Females’ performance benefited from a learning orientation and the adoption ofvigilance and hyper-vigilance in making decisions. Earlier studies had also reported a positive
relationship between academic performance and vigilance (Kornilova et al., 2018), as well as
academic performance and learning orientation (Coutinho, 2007; D’Lima et al.. 2014; Eison,
1982; Schraw et al., 1995; VandeWalle et al., 2001). However, the positive relationshipbetween academic success and hyper-vigilance was unexpected since this type of decisionmaking style is thought to embody a disposition to choose a course of action frantically andhastily without considering all information available, thereby potentially disrupting
performance (Filippello, 2013; Pilotti, 2021). Yet, it is important to note that the female
students of our sample have faced trauma and hardship arising from war, ethnic conflict, andtraditional gender-role stereotypes, whose toll adds to the multiple demanding, and often
conflicting obligations in their quotidian life (i.e., attending to their studies, families’ household
needs and business, etc.). Thus, hyper-vigilance may become an unavoidable way to approachdaily obligations, an approach that mirrors a multi-tasking skill under time constraints. In thisregard, Johnston et al. (1997) has argued that hyper-vigilance is an adaptive decision-making
strategy in many real-life demanding situations that do not offer decision-makers the luxury of
implementing the more elaborate and time-consuming analytical practices characteristic ofvigilance. Under such conditions, it is an adaptive strategy that reflects an attempt by decisionmakers to preserve effective performance as well as to moderate effort (Payne et al., 1992).
Interestingly, although males displayed a pattern somewhat similar to that of females, nosignificant contribution of any of the selected cognitive dimensions was obtained. The moreopaque predictors of males’ academic success may be accounted for by their limited
willingness to share their attitudes in a culture where men are expected to be in control.
Third, only 63.86% received a C grade or higher. In higher education, academic success isordinarily expressed as A, B, or C grades, while D and F grades are interpreted as indices offailing since they are below the minimum grade point average (the equivalent of a C grade)
required for graduation. Thus, if the institutionally mandated cumulative index of academic
success (i.e., end-of-semester class grades) is considered, CRP failed to promote theperformance of 36.14% of the enrollees. However, the broader impact of CRP on students’learning might not have been captured by this index, as time constraints due to family and work
obligations might be the primary culprit of unsuccessful performance. Its broader impact wasreflected in students’ evaluations at the end of the semester, which illustrated an overall andconsistent appreciation for the mode and content of the instruction received. In theirevaluations, students considered several criteria, including engagement, learning, andinstruction (e.g., content coverage, organization, guidance, assessment, and human rapport).
Both personalized comments and ratings, by and large, reflected students’ confidence in thequality of the learning acquired. Increased interest in the subject matter they studied was also
reported. Most students admitted to having been challenged by the course materials and thedepth of the assessment protocols implemented. Yet, students recognized the high standards
set by the course in which they were enrolled and expressed the belief that effort was key inmeeting these standards and overcome the challenges that they might present. Some noted thatchallenges were not perceived as impossibilities, but rather as obstacles to overcome or novel
problems to solve because support was deemed to be available from the instructor andclassmates. Students’ largely positive evaluations could be interpreted as the byproduct of theconstructive and collaborative interpersonal atmosphere created by the instructors’ reliance on
CRP. Because evaluations were anonymous, their link to performance remained unassessed.

38

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Recommendations
Although the uncovered pattern of contributions to performance may not generalize to other
under-represented student populations, they contain two key messages for instructors who rely
on CRPs or who may consider the adoption of CRP: (a) Applications of CRP, albeit wellexecuted, do not entail academic success (as measured by grades) for all students, especiallywhen most of them possess low self-efficacy. Failures, although painful, can be powerfulmotivators for both educators and students to initiate a critical self-examination of the
instruction that was available inside and outside the classroom to determine the sources of any
mismatch between course demands and students’ performance. A review of students’ academic
history and focus groups with selected students can offer valuable information to educators.
Corrective actions can then be undertaken in future offerings of a course to target students at
risk. For instance, among the remedial actions contemplated for the sample of participants ofour pilot study, more flexible time constraints for course completion would need to beconsidered. (b) Knowing students’ cognitive dispositions at the early stages of a course can, toa certain extent, inform teaching. For instance, awareness of a student’s low self-efficacy
allows instructors to structure their feedback by emphasizing the things that the student has
accomplished while highlighting remedies for the things that he/she has not accomplished. The
latter includes assuring the student that he/she is capable of reaching the expected standards
and that capability is indeed malleable and subject to improvement through effortful action(Cohen et al., 1999). Bandura (1997) noted that one’s self-efficacy beliefs are developed fromfour sources, each one a potential target of intervention: mastery experiences (i.e., experiencesof successful performance), vicarious experiences (i.e., the observation of examples of thesuccessful completion of a task, such as a test or an assignment), social persuasions (i.e.,
feedback, including judgment and appraisal from instructors or other significant others), andemotional arousal (i.e., emotions and physical sensations experienced during task completion).
Similarly, knowledge of a student’s orientation prioritizing grades over learning can beaddressed by instructors at the start of the semester and reinforced with additional feedback
focused on providing detailed and helpful comments. Feedback is intended to clarify what toimprove and how to do it, must contain a reminder of the high standards to be reached, as wellas the assurance that the student is fully capable of achieving them (Anding, 2005). Lastly,
decision-making training may be considered for students at risk of academic failure under theassumption that optimal decision-making habits can be taught (Baron & Brown, 2012). Yet, itis necessary to recognize that although vigilance is a desirable strategy, hyper-vigilance is not
symptomatic of a general breakdown in performance. Instead, it may be viewed by students as
an adaptive response to the challenging demands of college life. Thus, understanding when andwhere hyper-vigilance instead of vigilance is used may offer useful insights into the featuresof the academic conditions that trigger it (Ding et al., 2020), which educators can utilize tointroduce changes to class activities meant to reduce stress and anxiety.
Conclusion
CRP offers instructors and students opportunities to make teaching and learning meaningful,empowering, and engaging (Gay, 2018). Although a compelling case can be made for theimportance of CRP as a way to rethink instruction to improve the educational performance ofdiverse student populations, gaps in educational outcomes of underserved populations remain(Howard & Rodriguez-Scheel, 2017). Furthermore, there may be limitations to applications of
CRP (e.g., to what extent individual dispositions shape the effectiveness of CRP?), which need
to be recognized and addressed through action research. The latter is a disciplined process of39

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

inquiry conducted by instructors who desire to improve and/or refine their instructional actions(Manfra, 2019). Our study demonstrates that attention to individual differences, involving
cognitive and demographic variables, may be a fruitful area of inquiry for action research.
Although institutions of higher learning are faced with larger systemic challenges arising fromthe socio-political context in which they exist (O’Connor, 2020), the classroom is an excellent
place to start restructuring academia to ensure an equitable and sustainable education for all(Focht & Bell, 2018).

40

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

References
Al-Ali, N. (2008). Iraqi women and gender relations: Redefining difference. British Journalof Middle Eastern Studies, 35(3), 405–418.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13530190802525155
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching andassessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Harlow, UK:
Longman.
Anding, J. (2005). An interview with Robert E. Quinn. Entering the fundamental state ofleadership: Reflections on the path to transformational teaching. Academy ofManagement Learning and Education, 4(4), 487–495.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2005.19086790
Ballen, C. J., Wieman, C., Salehi, S., Searle, J. B., & Zamudio, K. R. (2017). Enhancing
diversity in undergraduate science: Self-efficacy drives performance gains with active
learning. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 16(4), ar56.
https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-12-0344
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. American Psychologist, 44(9),1175–1184. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.44.9.1175
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W.H. Freeman and Company
Bandura, A., & Schunk, D. H. (1981). Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic
interest through proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 41(3), 586–598. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.41.3.586
Baron, J., & Brown, R. V. (2012). Teaching decision-making to adolescents. New York, NY:
Routledge.
Beck, H. P., Rorrer-Woody, S., & Pierce, L. G. (1991). The relations of learning and gradeorientations to academic performance. Teaching of Psychology, 18(1), 35–37.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328023top1801_10
Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Cognitive domain. New
York, NY: McKay.
Bloom, B. S. (1976). Human characteristics and school learning. McGraw Hill.
Bouffard-Bouchard, T. (1990). Influence of self-efficacy on performance in a cognitive task.
The Journal of Social Psychology, 130(3), 353–363.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1990.9924591
Brown-Jeffy, S. & Cooper, J. E. (2011). Toward a conceptual framework of culturally
relevant pedagogy: An overview of the conceptual and theoretical literature. Teacher
Education Quarterly, 38(1), 65–84.
Camp, E. M., & Oesterreich, H. A. (2010). Uncommon teaching in commonsense times.
Multicultural Education, 17(2), 20–26.
Chen, G., Gully, S. M., & Eden, D. (2001). Validation of a new general self-efficacy
scale. Organizational Research Methods, 4(1), 62–83.
https://doi.org/10.1177/109442810141004

41

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Chen, G., Gully, S. M., Whiteman, J.-A., & Kilcullen, R. N. (2000). Examination ofrelationships among trait-like individual differences, state-like individual differences,and learning performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(6), 835–847.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.6.835
Cohen, G. L., Steele, C. M., & Ross, L. D. (1999). The mentor’s dilemma: Providing criticalfeedback across the racial divide. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25(10),1302–1318. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167299258011
Coutinho, S. A. (2007). The relationship between goals, metacognition, and academic
success. Educate~, 7(1), 39–47.
Dee, T. S., & Penner, E. K. (2017). The causal effects of cultural relevance: Evidence froman ethnic studies curriculum. American Educational Research Journal, 54(1), 127–
166. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831216677002
Ding, N., Xu, X., Yang, H., Li, Y., & van Heughten, P. (2020). Decision-making styles ofChinese business students. Journal of Education for Business, 95(6), 351–358.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2019.1654968
D’Lima, G. M., Winsler, A., & Kitsantas, A. (2014). Ethnic and gender differences in firstyear college students’ goal orientation, self-efficacy, and extrinsic and intrinsic
motivation. The Journal of Educational Research, 107(5), 341–356.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2013.823366
Eison, J. A. (1982). Educational and personal dimensions of learning- and grade-oriented
students. Psychological Reports, 51(3), 867–870.
https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1982.51.3.867
Eison, J. A., Janzow, F., & Pollio, H. R. (1993). Assessing faculty orientations towards
grades and learning: Some initial results. Psychological Reports, 73(2), 643–656.
https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1993.73.2.643
Eison, J. A., & Pollio, H. R. (1985). A multidimensional approach to the definition of college
students' learning styles. Journal of College Student Personnel, 26(5), 434–443.
Eison, J. A., & Pollio, H. R. (1989). LOGO II bibliographic and statistical update. Cape
Girardeau, MO: Southeast Missouri State University, Center for Teaching and
Learning.
Eison, J. A., Pollio, H. R., & Milton, O. (1983). Manual for use with LOGO-II. Knoxville, TN:
Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange.
Elliot, A. J., & Church, M. A. (1997). A hierarchical model of approach and avoidanceachievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(1), 218–
232. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.1.218
Faqe, C. K., Moheddin, K. R., & Kakamad, K. K. (2016). Reducing test anxiety among 12th
grade students: Iraqi Kurdistan Region/Soran City as an example. Journal of
Education and Practice, 7(27), 69–75.
Farias, G., Farias, C. M., & Fairfield, K. D. (2010). Teacher as judge or partner: The dilemmaof grades versus learning. Journal of Education for Business, 85(6), 336–342.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08832321003604961
Filippello, P., Sorrenti, L., Larcan, R., & Rizzo, A. (2013). Academic underachievement, self
esteem and self-efficacy in decision making. Mediterranean Journal of ClinicalPsychology, 1(3), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.6092/2282-1619/2013.1.934

42

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Focht, W., & Bell, D. V. (2018). Why education for sustainable human and environmental
systems?. In W. Focht, M. A. Reiter, P. A. Barresi, & R. C. Smardon (Eds.),
Education for sustainable human and environmental systems (pp. 3–18). London,
UK: Routledge.
Folk, A. (2018). Drawing on students’ funds of knowledge: using identity and lived
experience to join the conversation in research assignments. Journal of Information
Literacy, 12(2), 44–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.11645/12.2.2468
Gao, S. (2014). Relationship between science teaching practices and students’ achievement in
Singapore, Chinese Taipei, and the US: An analysis using TIMSS 2011 data.
Frontiers of Education in China, 9(4), 519–551. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03397039
Gay, G. (2018). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. New York,
NY: Teachers College Press.
Harju, B. L., & Eppler, M. (1997). Achievement motivation, flow and irrational beliefs intraditional and nontraditional college students. Journal of Instructional
Psychology, 24(3), 147–157.
Harris, C. M., & Harris, J. S. (1987). Learning Orientation and Academic Achievement(Report No. ED 283 107). U.S. Department of Education.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED283107.pdf
Howard, T. C. (2003). Culturally relevant pedagogy: Ingredients for critical teacher
reflection. Theory into Practice, 42(3), 195–202.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4203_5
Howard, T., & Rodriguez-Scheel, A. (2017). Culturally relevant pedagogy 20 years later:
Progress or pontificating? What have we learned, and where do we go? Teachers
College Record, 119(1), 1–32.
Janis, I. L., & Mann, L. (1977). Decision making: A psychological analysis of conflict,choice, and commitment. New York, NY: Free press.
Johnston, J. H., Driskell, J. E., & Salas, E. (1997). Vigilant and hypervigilant decisionmaking. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(4), 614–622.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.4.614
Kohn, A. (1993). Punished by rewards: The trouble with gold stars, incentive plans, A's,
praise, and other bribes. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Kornilova, T. V., Chumakova, M. A., & Krasavtseva, Y. V. (2018). Emotional intelligence,patterns for coping with decisional conflict, and academic achievement in crosscultural perspective (evidence from selective Russian and Azerbaijani student
populations). Psychology in Russia: State of the Art, 11(2), 114–133.
https://doi.org/10.11621/pir.2018.0209
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into
Practice, 41(4), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African American
children. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2006). Yes, but how do we do it? Practicing culturally relevantpedagogy. In J. Landsman & C. W. Lewis (Eds.), White teachers/diverse classrooms:
A guide to building inclusive schools, promoting high expectations, and eliminating
racism (pp. 29–42). Sterling, VA: Stylus.

43

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Ladson-Billings, G. (2014). Culturally relevant pedagogy 2.0: a.k.a. the remix. Harvard
Educational Review, 84(1), 74-84.
https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.84.1.p2rj131485484751
Lane, J., & Lane, A. (2001). Self-efficacy and academic performance. Social Behavior andPersonality: An International Journal, 29(7), 687–693.
https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2001.29.7.687
Lee, C. D. (1998). Culturally responsive pedagogy and performance-based assessment.
Journal of Negro Education, 67(3), 268–279. https://doi.org/10.2307/2668195
Lee, C. D. (2006). “Every good-bye ain’t gone”: Analysing the cultural underpinnings ofclassroom talk. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 19(3), 305–
327. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518390600696729
Manfra, M. M. (2019). Action research and systematic, intentional change in teachingpractice. Review of Research in Education, 43(1), 163–196.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X18821132
Mann, L., Burnett, P., Radford, M., & Ford, S. (1997). The Melbourne Decision Making
Questionnaire: An instrument for measuring patterns for coping with decisional
conflict. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 10(1), 1–19.
https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(199703)10:1<1::AID-BDM242>3.0.CO;2-X
Masika, R., Wisker, G., Dabbagh, L., Akreyi, K. J., Golmohamad, H., Bendixen, L., &Crawford, K. (2014). Female academics’ research capacities in the Kurdistan regionof Iraq: Socio-cultural issues, personal factors and institutional practices. Gender and
Education, 26(1), 52–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2013.873391
Metcalfe, B. (2008). Women, management, and globalization. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(1), 85–100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9654-3
Moores, T. T., & Chang, J. C. J. (2009). Self-efficacy, overconfidence, and the negative
effect on subsequent performance: A field study. Information & Management, 46(2),69–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2008.11.006
Morrison, K. A., Robbins, H. H., & Rose, D. G. (2008). Operationalizing culturally relevantpedagogy: A synthesis of classroom-based research. Equity & Excellence in
Education, 41(4), 433–452. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665680802400006
O’Connor, K. (2020). Constructivism, curriculum and the knowledge question: tensions andchallenges for higher education. Studies in Higher Education. Advance online
publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2020.1750585
Page, S., & Alexitch, L. R. (2003). Learning-and grade-orientation, sex, and prediction of self
reported academic performance. Psychological Reports, 92(1), 320–324.
https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.2003.92.1.320
Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational
Research,66(4), 543–578. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543066004543
Parker, T. C. T., & Rosenthal, R. (2011). Sustainable equity: Avoiding the pendulum effect in
the life sciences. In Forum on Public Policy Online (Vol. 2011, No. 2). Oxford, UK:
Oxford Round Table.
Payne, J. W, Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. J. (1992). Behavioral decision research: A
constructive processing perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 43, 87—131.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.43.020192.000511

44

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Pilotti, M. A. E. (2021). Is academic success just a matter of showing up? A study of thecontribution of individual differences and attendance to performance. In I. A.
Sánchez, P. Kommers, T. Issa, & P. Isaías (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th International
Conference on Educational Technologies (pp. 116–126). Lisbon, PT: IADIS Press.
Pilotti, M. A. E., & Al Mubarak, H. (2021). Systematic versus informal application ofculturally relevant pedagogy: Are performance outcomes different? A study ofcollege students. Journal of Culture and Values in Education. Advance online
publication. https://doi.org/10.46303/jcve.2021.1
Royal, C., & Gibson, S. (2017). They schools: Culturally relevant pedagogy under siege.
Teachers College Record, 119(1), 1–25.
Sagone, E., & Indiana, M. L. (2021). Are decision-making styles, locus of control, andaverage grades in exams correlated with procrastination in university
students? Education Sciences, 11(6), 300. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11060300
Schmeichel, M. (2012). Good teaching: An examination of culturally relevant pedagogy as anequity practice. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44(2), 211–231.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2011.591434
Schraw, G., Horn, C., Thorndike-Christ, T., & Bruning, R. (1995). Academic goal
orientations and student classroom achievement. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 20(3), 359–368. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1995.1023
Sheets, R. H. (1995). From remedial to gifted: Effects of culturally centered pedagogy.
Theory Into Practice, 34(3), 186–193. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849509543678
Siwatu, K. O. (2007). Preservice teachers’ culturally responsive teaching self-efficacy andoutcome expectancy beliefs. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(7), 1086–1101.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2006.07.011
Soltanpanah, J., Parks-Stamm, E. J., Martiny, S. E., & Rudmin, F. W. (2018). A crosscultural examination of the relationship between egalitarian gender role attitudes andlife satisfaction. Sex Roles, 79(1), 50–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-017-0859-3
Steel, P. (2007). The nature of procrastination: A meta-analytic and theoretical review ofquintessential self-regulatory failure. Psychological Bulletin, 133(1), 65–94.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.133.1.65
Taggart, A. (2017). The role of cultural discontinuity in the academic outcomes of Latina/ohigh school students. Education and Urban Society, 49(8), 731–761.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124516658522
Tyler, K. M., Uqdah, A. L., Dillihunt, M. L., Beatty-Hazelbaker, R., Conner, T., Gadson, N.,
Henchy, A., Hughes, T., Mulder, S., Owens, E., Roan-Belle, C., Smith, L., & Stevens,
R. (2008). Cultural discontinuity: Toward a quantitative investigation of a major
hypothesis in education. Educational Researcher, 37, 280–297.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X08321459
Vancouver, J. B., Thompson, C. M., Tischner, E. C., & Putka, D. J. (2002). Two studies
examining the negative effect of self-efficacy on performance. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 87(3), 506–516. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.3.506
VandeWalle, D., Cron, W. L., & Slocum, J. W., Jr. (2001). The role of goal orientation
following performance feedback. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(4), 629–
640. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.4.629

45

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Walker, A. (2019). Culturally relevant pedagogy, identity, presence, and intentionality: A
brief review of literature. Journal of Research Initiatives, 4(3), 1–13.
Young, E. (2010). Challenges to conceptualizing and actualizing culturally relevantpedagogy: How viable is the theory in classroom practice?. Journal of Teacher
Education, 61(3), 248–260. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487109359775
Corresponding author: Maura Pilotti
Email: mpilotti@pmu.edu.sa

46

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Appendix A
NGSE Questionnaire (Chen et al., 2021, p. 79)
I will be able to achieve most of the goals that I have set for myself.
When facing difficult tasks, I am certain that I will accomplish them.
In general, I think that I can obtain outcomes that are important to me.
I believe I can succeed at most any endeavor to which I set my mind.
I will be able to successfully overcome many challenges.
I am confident that I can perform effectively on many different tasks.
Compared to other people, I can do most tasks very well.
Even when things are tough, I can perform quite well.
The Attitude Portion of the LOGO II Questionnaire
Easy classes that are not pertinent to my educational goals generally bore me.
I get annoyed when lectures or class presentations are only rehashes of easy reading
assignments. I enjoy classes in which the instructor attempts to relate material to concerns
beyond the classroom.
I appreciate the instructor who provides honest and detailed evaluation of my work thoughsuch evaluation is sometimes unpleasant.
I am more concerned about seeing which questions I missed than I am with finding out mytest grade.
I find the process of learning new material fun.
An instructor's comments on an essay test mean more to me than my actual test score.
I prefer to write a term paper on interesting material than to take a test on the same general
topic.
I dislike courses in which a lot of material is presented in class, or in readings, that does notappear on exams.
I do not find studying at home to be interesting or pleasant.
Instructors expect too much out-of-class reading and study by students.
I think that without regularly scheduled exams I would not learn and remember very much.
Written assignments (i.e., homework, projects, etc.) that are not graded are a waste of a
student's time.
I think it is unfair to test students on material not covered in class lectures and discussions,even if it is in reading assignments.
I dislike courses which require ungraded out-of-class activities.
I think grades provide me a good goal to work toward.
Note: The term “teacher” in the original scale was changed to “instructor”
DM Questionnaire (Mann et al., 1997, p.12) with items organized by patterns
Vigilance
I like to consider all of the alternatives.
I try to find out the disadvantages of all alternatives.
I consider how best to carry out a decision.
When making decisions, I like to collect a lot of information.
I try to be clear about my objectives before choosing.
I take a lot of care before choosing.

47

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Buck-passing
I avoid making decisions.
I do not make decisions unless I really have to.
I prefer to leave decisions to others.
I do not like to take responsibility for making decisions.
If a decision can be made by me or another person, I let the other person make it.
I prefer that people who are better informed decide for me.
Procrastination
I waste a lot of time on trivial matters before getting to the final decision.
Even after I have made a decision, I delay acting upon it.
When I have to make a decision, I wait a long time before starting to think about it.
I delay making decisions until it is too late.
I put off making decisions.
Hypervigilance
Whenever I face a difficult decision, I feel pessimistic about finding a good solution.
I feel as if I am under tremendous time pressure when making decisions.
The possibility that some small thing might go wrong causes me to swing abruptly in mypreference.
I cannot think straight if I have to make a decision in a hurry.
After a decision is made, I spend a lot of time convincing myself it was correct.

48

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Exploring the Relationship between Socioemotional Skills andDecision-Making Styles in Health Students
Cândida G. Silva
School of Health Sciences, Polytechnic of Leiria, Leiria, Portugal
Center for Innovative Care and Health Technology (ciTechcare), Polytechnic of Leiria, Portugal
Coimbra Chemistry Centre, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal
Sara Gordo
School of Health Sciences, Polytechnic of Leiria, Leiria, Portugal
Center for Innovative Care and Health Technology (ciTechcare), Polytechnic of Leiria, Portugal
Ana Cristina Rodrigues
School of Health Sciences, Polytechnic of Leiria, Leiria, Portugal
Center for Innovative Care and Health Technology (ciTechcare), Polytechnic of Leiria, Portugal
Carolina Henriques
School of Health Sciences, Polytechnic of Leiria, Leiria, Portugal
Center for Innovative Care and Health Technology (ciTechcare), Polytechnic of Leiria, Portugal
Marlene Rosa
School of Health Sciences, Polytechnic of Leiria, Leiria, Portugal
Center for Innovative Care and Health Technology (ciTechcare), Polytechnic of Leiria, Portugal

49

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Abstract
Higher education in health study programs is particularly focused on the development oftechnical skills, despite there being a consensus on the importance of training students
regarding socioemotional and life skills. The aim of this study was to characterize and explore
correlations between socioemotional skills and decision-making styles in undergraduate healthstudents. Undergraduate students (18–25 years old) were recruited at a School of Health
Sciences in Portugal. Participants were characterized in terms of sociodemographic data,socioemotional skills (Study on Social and Emotional Skills questionnaire) and decisionmaking styles (Melbourne Decision Making questionnaire). Descriptive statistics andcorrelations between questionnaires´ subscales were calculated. Students presented higherscores in tolerance (34.8±3.4), cooperation (34.7±2.4), empathy (31.1±3.2), vigilance(16.0±1.9), and procrastination (9.9±2.1). Assertiveness presented negative correlations withbuck-passing (rho=-0.43, p<0.01) and procrastination (rho=-0.38, p<0.01) and positive
correlation with vigilance (rho=0.22, p=0.03). Students demonstrated higher values in
empathy, cooperation, and tolerance skills, meaning they tend to be kind and care for others’
well-being. Vigilance style is related to assertiveness characterizing hard working leaders able
to pay attention to others’ needs. Training that involves socioemotional skills might be crucial
for the style of decision-making in future health professionals.
Keywords: decision-making styles, health students, interdisciplinary study programs,socioemotional skills

50

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Introduction
Higher education in health study programs is particularly focused on technical skills
development, despite there being a consensus on the importance of training students in regard
to socioemotional and life skills (Ribeiro, Severo, & Ferreira, 2016; Rodríguez-Nogueira,Moreno-Poyato, Álvarez-Álvarez, & Pinto-Carral, 2020). In this context, it is crucial to include
the training of transversal skills in the academic curriculum of health students, as these skills
can facilitate interpersonal relationships, accountability, and decision-making in a clinicalsetting (Çinar, Dinler, & Yakut, 2019). The quality of interpersonal relationships in healthprofessionals relies on socioemotional skills, and it is reflected in ineffective or effective
communication. Ineffective communication can make patients feel anxious, uncertain, andgenerally unsatisfied with their care, while it is also linked to increased stress, lack of job
satisfaction, and emotional burnout amongst health professionals (Moore, Rivera, Bravo-Soto,
Olivares, & Lawrie, 2018).
The care, respect, and tolerance that occur while a health professional is taking care of someone
are strong indicators of quality in health practices (Gazarian et al., 2021). For example, theability to establish an empathic relationship between health professionals and patients is a key
transversal skill that might be crucial not only to encourage patients’ adherence to treatments
but also to promote patients’ outcomes (Moudatsou, Stavropoulou, Philalithis, & Koukouli,2020). In fact, for attaining high standards in patients’ care, it is essential to include social skills
training for stimulating the inter-professional working performance (Singh & Salisbury, 2019;
Wang, Shi, Bai, Zheng, & Zhao, 2015). In addition, when a health professional uses nonassertive communication, this might happen because of low self-image and confidence, whichconsequently can hamper shared decision-making and decrease patients’ empowerment(Pakarinen, Parisod, Smed, & Salanterä, 2017). Another important social skill for healthprofessionals is cooperation, which characterizes the ability to coordinate decisions and actions
through constructive dialogue. This skill is one of the most important elements forinterprofessional and multidisciplinary efficient work in health teams (Molleman, Broekhuis,
Stoffels, & Jaspers, 2008). Interestingly, the higher the complexity of the health care is, themore important is cooperation (Jünger, Pestinger, Elsner, Krumm, & Radbruch, 2007).
Training adaptable and innovative health professionals was identified as an urgent need inbiomedical fields (Rodríguez, Díez, Pérez, Baños, & Carrió, 2019; Royce, Hayes, &Schwartzstein, 2019; Scott, Leritz, & Mumford, 2004). To reach this profile, healthprofessionals should develop skills such as creativity, critical thinking, and problem solving
and be specially trained in flexible and open environments (Rodríguez et al., 2019; Royce etal., 2019; Scott et al., 2004). These skills are major contributors for decision-making by healthcare professionals, which is particularly characterized by low level of structuredness (Brock etal., 2013; Morley & Cashell, 2017; O’Daniel & Rosenstein, 2008; Pitel & Mentel, 2017). Poor
decision-making abilities may prejudice team collaboration between health professionals,
having impact in the quality of care (Brock et al., 2013; Morley & Cashell, 2017; O’Daniel &Rosenstein, 2008). Therefore, further understanding of the major coping patterns in decisionmaking in this field, including their associated risks and advantages, should be recommended
earlier in undergraduate study programs (Pitel & Mentel, 2017).
Previous studies already discussed the importance of socioemotional skills and decisionmaking styles for high quality practices in health care. Most of these studies focused on realclinical settings, such as palliative care and chronic diseases (Bloomer et al., 2018;
Kryworuchko, Strachan, Nouvet, Downar, & You, 2016). Fewer studies focused on analysing

51

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

these skills in undergraduate health students, mainly characterising these abilities in the context
of a specific study program (e.g., nursing) (K. L. Brooks & Shepherd, 1990; Expósito, JiménezRodríguez, Agea, Izquierdo, & Costa, 2019; Mauriz, Caloca-Amber, Córdoba-Murga, &Vázquez-Casares, 2021; Noohi, Karimi-Noghondar, & Haghdoost, 2012). However,socioemotional and decision-making skills are particularly relevant in multi-disciplinary
scenarios (Chong, Aslani, & Chen, 2013; Hofstede et al., 2013; Soukup et al., 2018;
Uitdewilligen & Waller, 2018), providing crucial abilities, for example in the registration andmanagement of interprofessional clinical information. As such, before starting to think about
interdisciplinary educational programs for health students, it would be important tocharacterize students’ socioemotional and decision-making profiles (Gordon, Hill, Stojan, &Daniel, 2018). Therefore, this study aimed to characterize socioemotional skills and decisionmaking styles in undergraduate health students at a Portuguese health school withinterdisciplinary health programs. As a secondary objective, this study explored possible
correlations between students’ decision-making styles and socioemotional skills.
Methodology
A descriptive quantitative cross-sectional study was conducted using self-report high-quality
instruments, allowing the characterization of students’ socioemotional skills and decisionmaking styles, and establishing relationships between them.
Participants and Setting
Data were collected between October and November 2020 at the School of Health Sciences of
the Polytechnic Institute of Leiria. A call for participation was posted in the school’s
community website targeting undergraduate students. Students interested in participating wereinvited to provide informed consent through an electronic form. Respondents under 18 andover 25 years old were excluded. Eligible students received an online link providing access to
the questionnaires used for data collection. All electronic data collection procedures weredelivered using Google Forms.
Sociodemographic QuestionnaireSociodemographic characterization of the recruited students was based on the following
variables: age (years), sex (female; male), study program, and academic year of the study
program (1st year; 2nd year; 3rd year, 4th year).
Study on Social and Emotional Skills
The Study on Social and Emotional Skills (SSES) instrument was developed to assess socialand emotional skills in children and young people and how they interact with their life contexts,
namely regarding family, at school, and in the community (Kankaraš & Suarez-Alvarez, 2019).
For this purpose, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)
proposed the development of an instrument that assesses these skills to characterize thesocioemotional domain of children and young people around the world.
In its original version, the SSES evaluated 15 social and emotional competences. After theliterature review process, 14 of the competencies assessed by the instrument were added tocontribute to the assessment of the program's target competencies. Thus, the SSES instrument
was organized into subdomains or dimensions of the target competencies (Chernyshenko,
Kankaraš, & Drasgow, 2018; Kankaraš, Feron, & Renbarger, 2019).

52

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Each subdomain consists of eight items, corresponding to eight questions, which are randomly
reorganized. The final full version of SSES has 12 sets of eight items each, making a total of
96 items. Each item is evaluated on a 5-point Likert scale: 1 corresponds to “Strongly disagree”
and 5 corresponds to “Strongly agree”. For this study, seven subdomains were selected,(assertiveness (ASS), cooperation (COO), creativity (CRE), empathy (EMP), sociability(SOC), tolerance (TOL), and trust (TRU)). For each of subdomains selected, a final score wascalculated as the sum of the corresponding items after inverting the values associated withitems ASS5, COO4, CRE3, CRE7, CRE8, EMP8, SOC4, TOL6, and TRU5. The final score ofeach subdomain ranged between 8 and 40 points. Higher values represent a higher degree on
the domain being evaluated.
This instrument was designed to allow the triangulation of information between parents andchildren/young people, with a version for parents/guardians and another for children/young
people. However, given that the participants were students of a higher education institution,
the parents’ version of the instrument was not used. The SSES instrument is applicable tostudents between the ages of 8 and 25 years, approximately. The response time limit for this
instrument is expected to be a maximum of thirty minutes.
Melbourne Decision Making Questionnaire
The Melbourne Decision Making Questionnaire (MDMQ) (Mann, Burnett, Radford, & Ford,1997) is an improvement of the Flinders Decision Making Questionnaire (FDMQ) developedby Mann (1982), which intended to identify the decision-making styles based on several
patterns of coping behavior. MDMQ showed itself to be applicable to different ages andgenders and can be easily and quickly applied. MDMQ is available in European Portuguese toevaluate stress-related patterns while making decisions, enabling comparison within andbetween different subjects, which is not only useful for training purposes but also for otherstudies of decision-making (Filipe, Alvarez, Roberto, & Ferreira, 2020). MDMQ characterizes
attitudes, behaviors, or thoughts of individuals concerning decision-making by evaluating the
respondent’s rating to 22 statements using a 3-points Likert scale (1—not true about me; 2—sometimes true; 3—true about me). These 22 statements are organized in four subscales:
vigilance (six statements), buck-passing (six statements), hypervigilance (five statements), andprocrastination (five statements). Vigilance reflects a careful and well-planned approach todecision-making, while hypervigilance is associated with impulsive and unplanned actions in
the face of the decision-making situation (Cotrena, Branco, & Fonseca, 2017). On the other
hand, procrastination and buck-passing are linked with defensive and evasive attitudes toward
decision-making.
For each MDMQ subscale, a final score was calculated as the sum of the corresponding
statements. For vigilance and buck-passing, the final score value ranged between six and 18
points; for hypervigilance and procrastination, the final score value ranged between five and
15 points. Higher values represent a higher degree on the subscale being evaluated.
Statistical analysis
Descriptive statistics of sociodemographic and academic data, social emotional skills (SSES),
and decision-making styles (MDMQ) are presented as absolute and relative frequencies or asmean and standard deviation (SD) as appropriate. To explore the relationship between SSES
subdomains and MDMQ decision-making subscales, Spearman’s correlation coefficients (rho)were calculated. Correlations values were interpreted as follows: 0-0.09 negligible correlation;
0.1-0.29 weak correlation; 0.3-0.49 moderate correlation; 0.7-0.89 strong correlation; 0.9-1
very strong correlation (Cohen, 1988).

53

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

All statistical analysis were performed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences(SPSS©) software Version 27.0 (IBM, Armonk, New York, USA). The level of statisticalsignificance was set to p≤0.05.
Results
Sociodemographic Characterization
In total, 97 (n=97) students volunteered for the study; from these, two did not provide complete
information and were excluded from the sample. Therefore, the final sample consisted of 95
students enrolled in undergraduate health study programs (bachelor; four-year study programs)
and higher technical courses (CTeSP; two-year study program). Table 1 presents students’sociodemographic and academic information. Students had a mean (±standard deviation (SD))
age of 20.28 (±2.90) years old and were mostly women (n=83, 87.4%). Most students wereenrolled in undergraduate study programs (n=89; 93.7%), with only six (6.3%) students
enrolled in the Assistive Health Products higher technical course. Distribution by
undergraduate study program was as follows: physical therapy (n=28, 29.5%), dietetics andnutrition (n=24, 25.3%), nursing (n=18, 18.9%), occupational therapy (n=18, 18.9%), andspeech therapy (n=1, 1.1%). Thirty-three (n=33, 34.7%) students were registered in the firstyear of the study program; 26.6% (n=25) were registered in the second year, 29.5% (n=28) inthe third year, and 9.5% of the students (n=9) were registered in the fourth year.
Table 1Sociodemographic and academic characterization (n=95)
Students
Age (years), Mean±SD
Sex, n (%)
FemaleMaleStudy Program, n (%)
Dietetics and nutrition
Nursing
Occupational therapy
Physical therapy
Speech therapy
Assistive health products
Academic Year, n (%)
1st year
2nd year
3rd year
4th year

20.28±2.90
83 (87.4)
12 (12.6)
24 (25.3)
18 (18.9)
18 (18.9)
28 (29.5)
1 (1.1)6 (6.3)33 (34.7)
25 (26.3)
28 (29.5)
9 (9.5)Abbreviations: SD, standard deviation

Social and emotional skills characterization. Table 2 summarizes the responses in theindividual items and the total score in the selected subdomains of SSES. Health students
presented higher total scores in tolerance (34.8±3.4), cooperation (34.7±2.4), and empathy(31.1±3.2), followed by creativity (29.1±4.7), trust (28.1±4.1), sociability (28.0±2.9), andassertiveness (22.7±5.9).

54

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Table 2Social and emotional skills characterization (n=95)
Item
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
TOTAL

ASS
3.1±0.92.7±1.0
3.1±0.8
2.9±0.92.8±1.0
2.5±1.0
2.9±1.0
2.3±0.922.7±5.9COO
4.8±0.4
4.3±0.5
4.1±0.5
2.3±0.9
4.7±0.5
4.4±0.6
4.3±0.6
4.5±0.534.7±2.4CRE
4.0±0.6
3.5±0.8
2.1±0.9
3.5±0.7
3.4±1.0
3.7±0.9
2.4±0.9
2.5±0.929.1±4.7

EMP
4.2±0.5
4.8±0.4
3.8±0.8
3.6±0.8
3.4±0.7
3.6±0.6
3.8±0.7
2.2±0.931.1±3.2SOC
3.6±0.8
3.2±0.8
4.7±0.5
3.6±1.1
4.0±0.7
4.2±0.7
3.4±1.0
2.5±1.0
28.0±2.9TOL
4.8±0.4
4.0±0.7
3.7±0.8
4.8±0.5
4.5±0.6
1.5±1.0
4.2±0.7
4.5±0.634.8±3.4TRU
3.6±0.7
3.5±0.9
3.9±0.6
3.3±0.9
3.1±0.9
4.2±0.7
3.2±0.9
3.5±0.728.1±4.1

Data are represented as mean ± standard deviation. ASS–assertiveness; COO–cooperation; CRE–creativity;
EMP–empathy; SOC–sociability; TOL–tolerance; TRU–trust. ASS1–I am a leader; ASS2–I want to command;
ASS3–I know how to convince others to do what I want; ASS4–I like to lead others; ASS5–I do not like to leada team; ASS6–I like to be leader in my class; ASS7–I like to be the leader of a group; ASS8–I am dominant, andI act as a leader. COO1–I like to help others.; COO2–I get along well with others; COO3–I work well with otherpeople; COO4–I start arguments with others; COO5–I treat others with respect; COO6–I am always willing tohelp my classmates; COO7–I am ready to help anybody; COO8–I am polite and courteous to others. CRE1–I find
new ways of doing things; CRE2–I am original, and new ideas always come up; CRE3–I have a hard time
imagining things; CRE4–I sometimes find a solution that other people do not see; CRE5–I like to invent things;
CRE6–I have a good imagination; CRE7–I find it difficult to imagine new things; CRE8–I am not very creative.
EMP1–I am helpful and unselfish with others; EMP2–It is important to me that my friends are okay; EMP3–I cansense how others feel; EMP4–I know how to comfort others; EMP5–I predict the needs of others; EMP6–I
understand what others want; EMP7–I am warm toward others; EMP8–I rarely ask others how they are feeling.
SOC1–I am outgoing and sociable; SOC2–I have many friends; SOC3–I like being with my friends; SOC4–I liketo be alone; SOC5–I like to talk to many different people; SOC6–I like to spend my free time with others; SOC7–
I make friends easily; SOC8–I have a hard time making friends. TOL1–I am interested in being friends withpeople from other cultures; TOL2–I ask questions about other cultures; TOL3–I feel comfortable in new culturalenvironments; TOL4–I want to travel to other countries; TOL5–I like to hear about other cultures and religions;TOL6–I am not interested in other countries and cultures; TOL7–I learn a lot from people of different beliefs;
TOL8–I like to learn about other countries and cultures. TRU1–I think that most of my colleagues keep theirpromises; TRU2–I believe that my friends will never betray me; TRU3–I believe that my friends keep my secrets;
TRU4–I believe that most people are kind; TRU5–I mistrust people; TRU6–I believe that other people will beable to help me; TRU7–I believe that most people are honest; TRU8–I trust others.

Responses to the items in subdomain tolerance showed that health students were inclusive(TOL1: 4.8±0.4) and open to knowing other countries and cultures (TOL4: 4.8±0.5; TOL6:
1.5±1,0). Cooperation outcomes revealed that health students like to help (COO1: 4.8±0.4) andrespect others (COO5: 4.7±0.5) while tending to avoid conflicts and arguments with others(COO4: 2.3±0.9). Empathy outcomes showed that the health students strongly agree that it isimportant to know that their friends are doing well (EMP2: 4.8±0.4) and assume themselves as
generous (EMP1: 4.2±0.5) and empathetic (EMP3: 3.8±0.8) to others. However, students
revealed difficulty in knowing how to comfort others (EMP4: 3.6±0.8) and in predicting what
others feel (EMP5: 3.4±0.7). In the responses to the items in the creativity subdomain, healthstudents were shown to enjoy finding new solutions (CRE1: 4.0±0.6) and to have a good
imagination (CRE6: 3.7±0.9) and creativity (CRE8: 2.5±0.9). Trust results showed thatstudents stated clearly that they can count on others to help them (TRU6: 4.2±0.7) and believein their friends (TRU3: 3.9±0.6). However, lower scores were observed in items about kindness(TRU4: 3.3±0.9), honesty (TRU7: 3.2±0.9), or trustfulness (TRU5: 3.1±0.9) of others.
Sociability outcomes indicated that health students enjoy spending time with their friends(SOC3: 4.7±0.5; SOC6: 4.2±0.7), and that they have no difficulty in making new friends(SOC8: 2.5±1.0). However, it seems to be difficult for them to assume they have many friends

55

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

(SOC2: 3.2±0.8). Finally, responses to the items in the assertiveness subdomain seemed to be
more diverse. Health students have difficulty in assuming a leader position (ASS1: 3.1±0.9)
and consider themselves not to have the persuasive ability to convince others (ASS3: 3.1±0.8).
Results also showed that participants do not like to be leaders of their class (ASS6: 2.5±1.0)
and do not consider themselves to be dominant (ASS8: 2.3±0.9).
Decision-Making Styles Characterization
The characterization of decision-making styles based on MDMQ can be found in Table 3.
Results obtained revealed that health students present higher scores in vigilance (16.0±1.9) andprocrastination (9.9±2.1) styles, followed by buck-passing (10.8±2.8) and hypervigilancestyles (8.4±1.9).
Table 3
Decision-making styles characterization based on MDMQ (Mann et al., 1997) (n=95)
MDMQ Statements
Mean±SD
Vigilance
16.0±1.9
2. I like to consider all the alternatives.
2.8±0.4
4. I try to find out the disadvantages of all alternatives.
2.6±0.6
6. I consider how best to carry out the decision.
2.7±0.5
8. When making decisions I like to collect lots of information.
2.5±0.6
12. I try to be clear about my objectives before choosing.
2.8±0.5
16. I take a lot of care before choosing.
2.7±0.5
Buck-passing
10.8±2.8
3. I prefer to leave decisions to others.
1.7±0.6
9. I avoid making decisions.
1.8±0.6
11. I do not like to take responsibility for making decisions.
1.8±0.6
14. If a decision can be made by me or another person, I let the other person
1.8±0.6
make it.
17. I do not make decisions unless I really must have to.
1.5±0.7
19. I prefer that people who are better informed decide for me.
2.1±0.7
Hypervigilance
8.4±1.9
5. I waste a lot of time on trivial matters before getting to the final decision.
2.0±0.7
7. Even after I have made a decision, I delay acting upon it.
1.9±0.7
10. When I have to make a decision, I wait a long time before starting to think
1.4±0.6
about it.
18. I delay making decisions until it is too late.
1.4±0.5
21. I put off making decisions.
1.7±0.6
Procrastination
9.9±2.1
1. I feel as if I’m under tremendous time pressure when making decisions.
2.3±0.5
13. The possibility that small things might go wrong causes-me to swing
1.8±0.6
abruptly in my preferences.
15. Whenever I face a difficult decision, I feel pessimistic about finding a good
1.9±0.7
solution.
20. After making a decision, I spend a lot of time convincing myself it was the
1.9±0.7
right decision.
22. I cannot think straight if I have to make decisions in a hurry.
2.0±0.7
Abbreviation: SD, standard deviation

56

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

In the vigilance style, health students were shown to consider several alternatives anddisadvantages (statement 2, 2.8±0.4) and to be clear about their objectives (statement 12,
2.8±0.5) before making a decision. Regarding the buck-passing style, data showed that students
prefer to let other people decide when they are better-informed (statement 19, 2.1±0.7). Resultson the procrastination style indicated that students feel tremendous pressure when they need tomake decisions (statement 13, 2.3±0.5) and do not feel comfortable when they must make rush
decisions (statement 22, 2.0±0.7). Finally, the results on the hypervigilance style revealed thatstudents waste significant time before making a decision (statement 5, 2.0±0.7), and even after
deciding, they take time to put it into practice (statement 7, 1.9±0.7).
Correlations Between Socio-Emotional Skills and Decision-Making Style
Table 4 presents the Spearman correlation coefficients (rho) between the total scores of socioemotional skills and decision-making styles. Statistically significant weak and moderatecorrelations can be observed between socio-emotional skills and decision-making styles.
Table 4
Correlations between socio-emotional skills (SSES) and decision-making styles (MDMQ)
Assertivenessp-value
Cooperation
p-valueCreativity
p-value
Empathyp-value
Sociability
p-value
Tolerance
p-valueTrustp-value

Vigilance
0.22*
0.03
0.18
0.09
0.15
0.14
0.24*
0.02
0.16
0.12
0.19
0.06
0.13
0.20

Buck-passing-0.43**
<0.01
0.01
0.93
-0.31**
<0.01
-0.20
0.06
-0.15
0.14
-0.21*
0.04
-0.11
0.28

Hypervigilance
-0.19
0.06
-0.14
0.18
-0.12
0.27
-0.14
0.17
0.01
090
-0.12
0.23
-0.30**<0.01

Procrastination-0.38**
<0.01
-0.02
0.89
-0.16
0.12
-0.11
0.29
0.02
0.88
0.05
0.64
-0.17
0.09

* Correlation is significant at the p-value≤0.05. ** Correlation is significant at the p-value≤0.01.

Assertiveness showed negative moderate correlations with buck-passing (rho=-0.43, p<0.01)
and procrastination (rho=-0.38, p<0.01) and a positive weak correlation with vigilance(rho=0.22, p=0.03). These results indicated that more assertive students tend to be less prone
to buck-passing and procrastination but more prone to vigilance in their decision-making style.
Creativity presented a negative moderate correlation with buck-passing (rho=-0.31, p<0.01).
Thus, students with higher creativity scores seem to be less willing to adhere to buck-passingin the process of making a decision.
A positive weak correlation was found between empathy and vigilance (rho=0.24, p=0.02),
that is, when empathy scores increased, vigilance scores also tended to increase. On the other
hand, tolerance showed a weak negative correlation with buck-passing (rho=-0.21, p=0.04),
meaning that students with higher scores in tolerance exhibited lower scores of buck-passing.
The negative moderate correlation between trust and hypervigilance (rho=-0.30, p<0.01)
indicated that students who trust others (higher scores in trust) seem to adopt a lesshypervigilant style (lower scores in hypervigilance) when making a decision.

57

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

No significant correlation was found between skills cooperation and sociability and MDMQ
decision-making styles.
Discussion
The main objective of this study was to characterize socioemotional skills and decision-making
styles in undergraduate health students at a Portuguese Health School with interdisciplinary
health programs. This study is a first step for the critical overview of Portuguese healthstudents’ profiles in terms of transversal competences. This critical overview is determinant
for guiding the experimentation of innovative learning methodologies to increase the students’performance as health care providers in collaborative and multidisciplinary scenarios.
The students involved in this study demonstrated higher values in empathy, cooperation, andtolerance skills. The strong evidence of these socioemotional skills demonstrates that students
are kind and care for others’ well-being. Gustin (2017) explained that empathy relates tocompassion, which is a core concept in caring science. The author stated that healthprofessionals need compassion for promoting high quality care but also to guarantee
professionals' well-being (Gustin, 2017). Furthermore, participants included in this study
valued the interconnection as well as the importance of teamwork and mutual help items in thecooperation domain of the SSES instrument. In fact, the constant changes in the health caresystem and the complex health needs of patients require effective communication, teamwork,
and interprofessional cooperation. According to Homeyer et al. (2018), health professionals
that demonstrate effective cooperation can understand roles and responsibilities to efficiently
communicate with peers and are most likely to feel increased job satisfaction. Finally, students
demonstrated that they are open to different points of view and value foreign people andcultures. In future health professionals, tolerance was associated with originality, higher mental
flexibility, openness to new ideas, and ethnic respect (Homeyer et al., 2018). Globally,
empathy, cooperation, and tolerance are extremely important skills in a clinical context, as they
are crucial for multidisciplinary teamwork, avoiding conflicts and fostering shared decisions.
Additionally, data from the present study demonstrated that one of the most evident decisionmaking styles was the vigilance style. This shows that health students can set high standards
for themselves, work hard, and focus their attention on the current tasks to achieve personalgoals (Cotrena et al., 2017). The results obtained also showed that vigilance is related toempathy and assertiveness, which means that leaders that can pay attention to the needs ofothers tend to make decisions using a vigilance style. In fact, empathy is related to cognitive
functioning that affects decision-making, as empathetic people are kind and compassionate,
which leads to the ability to listen to others’ needs, studying various alternatives andestablishing pros and cons before choosing without being domineering (Moore et al., 2018).
Ioannidou & Konstantikaki (2008) stated that vigilance associated with empathy is acharacteristic of emotional intelligence, describing it as a concept that involves skill and ability,
which allows one to better manage the emotions of oneself, others, and groups. Success indifferent aspects of human life requires more than a significant intelligence quotient, since weall know people who are academically brilliant but are socially and interpersonally unfit(Ioannidou & Konstantikaki, 2008). Emotional intelligence is something that can be learned,
thus it is important that young students in the health field exercise these skills, with the role ofteachers being extremely relevant, since much of the learning in these professions is also doneby modeling by experts (Goleman, 2001).

58

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Students who participated in the present study used procrastination as a decision style, whichindicates that they tend to feel pressure in decision-making and worry about being wrong
because they want to make the right decision (Cotrena et al., 2017). Procrastination is related
to assertiveness. In fact, being able to make the right decisions at the right time is a crucial partof leadership. Nevertheless, the lack of a proactive attitude can cause not only decisions getting
delayed but leaders failing to effectively make decisions about key challenges in health care.
Making decisions under pressure is a challenge in healthcare, thus assertiveness must be
worked on to avoid stressful situations that can lead to anxiety and burnout (Zavala, Day,
Plummer, & Bamford-Wade, 2018).
Studies on self-regulation theory versus externally regulated learning (de la Fuente-Arias,
2015, 2017) raised the hypothesis that a higher level of self-regulation is associated with alower level of procrastination and, consequently, a higher level of procrastination is related toa lower level of performance. Steel (2007) showed that procrastinating students tend to have ahigher number of negative results and lower average grades. In a study that involved 363
university students from two Colombian universities, Garzón-Umerenkova et al. (2018)
pointed out that low levels of self-regulation are commonly observed among students who
procrastinate. On the other hand, a negative association was found between procrastination andacademic performance, which highlights the impact of procrastination on students'
achievements (Garzón-Umerenkova & Flores, 2017).
Although buck-passing was not a dominant decision-making style for students that participatedin this study, significant and negative correlations with assertiveness, creativity, and tolerance
skills were observed. Previous studies observed that extraversion and openness to experience
negatives predict buck-passing (Foti & Hauenstein, 2007; Rahaman, 2014). Buck-passing is astyle that avoids decisions and responsibilities by delegating them to others. Delegation can
result in a better decision when someone is more knowledgeable, which allows people to feelsome relief and less responsible for negative outcomes (Brooks et al., 2015; Palmeira et al.,2015). Specifically, in health care contexts, it is important to be open to different points ofview, developing leadership and creative thinking, since these socioemotional skills predicthigher levels of job performance, adequate job attitudes, and an efficient team performance(Judge, Heller, & Mount, 2002).
In general, the results presented suggest that critical improvements are required on training
decision-making in future health professionals. In fact, designing interprofessional programs
to foster emergent and structured decision-making might be crucial in health students’ training.
In this context, innovative strategies have been proposed. For example, serious games wereexperienced for training decision making in students from biomedical courses, by involving
students and educators in the cocreation of game-based scenarios and decision-tree game flow
(Kaczmarczyk, Davidson, Bryden, Haselden, & Vivekananda-Schmidt, 2016). Also, virtual
reality has been explored for training teamwork, communication, and situation awareness, by
simulating scenarios of critical medical decisions that must be taken in a team context, withtime constraints and immediate feedback (Bracq, Michinov, & Jannin, 2019). Although, thesemethodologies can potentially advance clinical decision training in health students, this topic
has only been scarcely explored, and needs further investigation.
Although this study describes a relevant socioemotional and decision-making profile of healthstudents, which might contribute for designing education training programs, there arelimitations in methodology that need to be considered. First, the sample of students involvedin this study is small and provides an inadequate representation of the school’s students both59

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

in terms of distribution by program study and academic year of attendance. Second, data werecollected using self-reported instruments which may subject to several biases such as
exaggeration. Furthermore, SSES transcultural adaptation and validation into Portuguese are
ongoing tasks. Finally, some subdomains of SSES may not be the most suitable for the
population studied and the intended characterization. In particular, the subdomain tolerance
mainly focuses on interest and respect for other countries, cultures, and religions rather thanon essential competence for health professionals such as acceptance of the other, of a different
point of view, or of a behavior. In future studies, it would be interesting to include non-clinicalhealthcare students, as they have also an important role in planning health care programs, andthey are rarely considered in research studies. In addition, future research in this field could beparticularly focused on the importance of socioemotional and decision-making skills in healthcare provision during the COVID-19 crisis.
Conclusion
Socioemotional skills and decision-making styles were studied in undergraduate healthstudents at a Portuguese health school with interdisciplinary health programs. Students
demonstrated higher values in empathy, cooperation, and tolerance skills, which means thatthey tend to be kind and care for others’ well-being. The most evident decision-making style
was vigilance style, which is related to empathy and assertiveness, characterizing hard-working
leaders able to pay attention to others’ needs. The students also demonstrated use of
procrastination as a decision style, which might be a risk factor for academic negative results
and for lower response to health care challenges. Interestingly, negative correlations between
buck-passing and assertiveness, creativity, and tolerance skills highlight the importance of
training these emotional skills to avoid this decision-making style in future healthprofessionals. Understanding socioemotional and decision-making students’ profile is arelevant information for guiding the experimentation of innovative learning methodologies, inorder to increase the students’ performance as health care providers in collaborative andmultidisciplinary scenarios.

Funding. This work was funded by Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian through Gulbenkian
Academies for Knowledge Program (ref. Gym2BeKind) and by Portuguese national funds
provided by Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia (FCT) (UI/05704/2020).

60

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

References
Bloomer, M. J., Botti, M., Runacres, F., Poon, P., Barnfield, J., & Hutchinson, A. M. (2018).
Communicating end-of-life care goals and decision-making among a
multidisciplinary geriatric inpatient rehabilitation team: A qualitative descriptive
study. Palliative Medicine, 32(10), 1615–1623.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0269216318790353
Bracq, M., Michinov, E., & Jannin, P. (2019). Virtual reality simulation in nontechnical skills
training for healthcare professionals: A systematic review. Simulation in Healthcare :Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare, 14(3), 188–194.
https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0000000000000347
Brock, D., Abu-Rish, E., Chiu, C.-R., Hammer, D., Wilson, S., Vorvick, L., … Zierler, B.
(2013). Interprofessional education in team communication: working together toimprove patient safety. BMJ Quality & Safety, 22(5), 414–423.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2012-000952
Brooks, A. W., Gino, F., & Schweitzer, M. E. (2015). Smart people ask for (my) advice:
Seeking advice boosts perceptions of competence. Management Science, 61(6), 1421–
1435. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2014.2054
Brooks, K. L., & Shepherd, J. M. (1990). The relationship between clinical decision-making
skills in nursing and general critical thinking abilities of senior nursing students infour types of nursing programs. The Journal of Nursing Education, 29(9), 391–399.
https://doi.org/10.3928/0148-4834-19901101-05
Chernyshenko, O. S., Kankaraš, M., & Drasgow, F. (2018). Social and emotional skills forstudent success and well-being. (173).
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1787/db1d8e59-en
Chong, W. W., Aslani, P., & Chen, T. F. (2013). Multiple perspectives on shared decisionmaking and interprofessional collaboration in mental healthcare. Journal ofInterprofessional Care, 27(3), 223–230.
https://doi.org/10.3109/13561820.2013.767225
Çinar, M. A., Dinler, E., & Yakut, Y. (2019). The Effect Of Creative Drama On Empathic
Tendencies, Communication Skills And Critical Thinking Of Physiotherapy Students.
CBU International Conference Proceedings, 7, 711–716.
https://doi.org/10.12955/cbup.v7.1443
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). UnitedStates of America: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cotrena, C., Branco, L. D., & Fonseca, R. P. (2017). Adaptation and validation of the
Melbourne Decision Making Questionnaire to Brazilian Portuguese. Trends in
Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, 40, 29–37. https://doi.org/10.1590/2237-6089-2017-0062
de la Fuente-Arias, J. (2015). Competence of Learning, Study and Performance under
STRESS (CLSPS) Model. Self-Help Guide for University Students, Graduates andProfessional Examination Candidates. Education & Psychology I+D+I. Almería,
Spain.
de la Fuente-Arias, J. (2017). Theory of Self- vs. Externally-Regulated Learning(TM):
Fundamentals, Evidence, and Applicability. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1675.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01675

61

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Expósito, J. S., Jiménez-Rodríguez, D., Agea, J. L. D., Izquierdo, M. D. C., & Costa, C. L.
(2019). Impact of Socio-Emotional Skills On The Performance of Clinical Nursing
Practices. International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship, 16(1).
https://doi.org/10.1515/IJNES-2019-0064
Filipe, L. P., Alvarez, M.-J., Roberto, M. S., & Ferreira, J. A. (2020). Validation andinvariance across age and gender for the Melbourne Decision-Making Questionnaire
in a sample of Portuguese adults. Judgment and Decision Making, 15(1), 135–148.
Retrieved from http://journal.sjdm.org/19/190917/jdm190917.pdf
Foti, R. J., & Hauenstein, N. M. A. (2007). Pattern and variable approaches in leadership
emergence and effectiveness. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(2), 347–355.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.2.347
Garzón-Umerenkova, A., de la Fuente, J., Amate, J., Paoloni, P. V., Fadda, S., & Pérez, J. F.
(2018). A linear empirical model of self-regulation on flourishing, health,procrastination, and achievement, among university students. Frontiers in
Psychology, 9, 536. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00536
Garzón-Umerenkova, A., & Flores, J. G. (2017). Propiedades Psicométricas de la Versión en
Español de la Prueba Procrastination Assessment Scale-Students, PASS. Revista
Iberoamericana de Diagnóstico y Evaluación-e Avaliação Psicológica, 1(43), 149163. https://doi.org/10.21865/RIDEP43_149
Gazarian, P. K., Morrison, C. R. C., Lehmann, L. S., Tamir, O., Bates, D. W., & Rozenblum,
R. (2021). Patients’ and care partners’ perspectives on dignity and respect during
acute care hospitalization. Journal of Patient Safety, 17(5), 392–397.
https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000000353
Goleman, D. (2001). Emotional intelligence: Issues in paradigm building. In C. Cherniss &D. Goleman (Eds.), The emotionally intelligent workplace (p. 26). San Francisco,
USA: Jossey-Bass.
Gordon, M., Hill, E., Stojan, J. N., & Daniel, M. (2018). Educational interventions toimprove handover in health care: An updated systematic review. Academic Medicine,
93(8), 1234. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000002236
Gustin, L. W. (2017). Compassion for self and others as key aspects of well-being inchanging times. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences, 31(3), 427–433.
https://doi.org/10.1111/scs.12536
Hofstede, S. N., Marang-van de Mheen, P. J., Wentink, M. M., Stiggelbout, A. M.,
Vleggeert-Lankamp, C. L. A., Vliet Vlieland, T. P. M., & van Bodegom-Vos, L.
(2013). Barriers and facilitators to implement shared decision making in
multidisciplinary sciatica care: a qualitative study. Implementation Science : IS, 8, 95.
https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-8-95
Homeyer, S., Hoffmann, W., Hingst, P., Oppermann, R. F., & Dreier-Wolfgramm, A. (2018).
Effects of interprofessional education for medical and nursing students: enablers,barriers and expectations for optimizing future interprofessional collaboration - aqualitative study. BMC Nursing, 17, 13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-018-0279-x
Ioannidou, F., & Konstantikaki, V. (2008). Empathy and emotional intelligence: What is itreally about? International Journal of Caring Sciences, 1(3), 118.

62

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Judge, T. A., Heller, D., & Mount, M. K. (2002). Five-factor model of personality and job
satisfaction: a meta-analysis. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 530–541.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.3.530
Jünger, S., Pestinger, M., Elsner, F., Krumm, N., & Radbruch, L. (2007). Criteria forsuccessful multiprofessional cooperation in palliative care teams. Palliative Medicine,21(4), 347–354. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269216307078505
Kaczmarczyk, J., Davidson, R., Bryden, D., Haselden, S., & Vivekananda-Schmidt, P.
(2016). Learning decision making through serious games. The Clinical Teacher,13(4), 277–282. https://doi.org/10.1111/TCT.12426
Kankaraš, M., Feron, E., & Renbarger, R. (2019). Assessing students’ social and emotional
skills through triangulation of assessment methods. (208).
https://doi.org/10.1787/717ad7f2-en
Kankaraš, M., & Suarez-Alvarez, J. (2019). Assessment framework of the OECD Study on
Social and Emotional Skills. (207). https://doi.org/10.1787/5007adef-en
Kryworuchko, J., Strachan, P. H., Nouvet, E., Downar, J., & You, J. J. (2016). Factors
influencing communication and decision-making about life-sustaining technology
during serious illness: a qualitative study. BMJ Open, 6(5), e010451.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010451
Mann, L. (1982). Flinders Decision Making Questionnaires I and II. The Flinders Universityof South Australia, School of Social Sciences.
Mann, L., Burnett, P., Radford, M., & Ford, S. (1997). The Melbourne Decision Making
Questionnaire: An instrument for measuring patterns for coping with decisional
conflict. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 10(1), 1–19.
https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(199703)10:1<1::AID-BDM242>3.0.CO;2-X
Mauriz, E., Caloca-Amber, S., Córdoba-Murga, L., & Vázquez-Casares, A. M. (2021). Effectof Psychophysiological Stress and Socio-Emotional Competencies on the Clinical
Performance of Nursing Students during a Simulation Practice. International Journalof Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(10), 5448.
https://doi.org/10.3390/IJERPH18105448
Molleman, E., Broekhuis, M., Stoffels, R., & Jaspers, F. (2008). How health care complexity
leads to cooperation and affects the autonomy of health care professionals. HealthCare Analysis : HCA : Journal of Health Philosophy and Policy, 16(4), 329–341.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-007-0080-6
Moore, P. M., Rivera, S., Bravo-Soto, G. A., Olivares, C., & Lawrie, T. A. (2018).
Communication skills training for healthcare professionals working with people whohave cancer. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 7(7), CD003751.
https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003751.pub4
Morley, L., & Cashell, A. (2017). Collaboration in Health Care. Journal of Medical Imaging
and Radiation Sciences, 48(2), 207–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmir.2017.02.071
Moudatsou, M., Stavropoulou, A., Philalithis, A., & Koukouli, S. (2020). The Role ofEmpathy in Health and Social Care Professionals. Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland),
8(1). https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare8010026

63

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Noohi, E., Karimi-Noghondar, M., & Haghdoost, A. (2012). Survey of critical thinking andclinical decision making in nursing student of Kerman University. Iranian Journal of
Nursing and Midwifery Research, 17(6), 440–444.
O’Daniel, M., & Rosenstein, A. H. (2008). Professional Communication and Team
Collaboration. In Patient Safety and Quality: An Evidence-Based Handbook for
Nurses. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21328739
Pakarinen, A., Parisod, H., Smed, J., & Salanterä, S. (2017). Health game interventions toenhance physical activity self-efficacy of children: a quantitative systematic review.
Journal of Advanced Nursing, 73(4), 794–811. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.13160
Palmeira, M., Spassova, G., & Keh, H. T. (2015). Other-serving bias in advice-taking: Whenadvisors receive more credit than blame. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 130, 13–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2015.06.001
Pitel, L., & Mentel, A. (2017). Decision-making styles and subjective performance evaluationof decision-making quality among hospital nurses. Studia Psychologica, 59(3), 217.
https://doi.org/10.21909/sp.2017.03.742
Rahaman, H. M. S. (2014). Personality and decision making styles of university students.
Journal of the Indian Academy of Applied Psychology, 40(1), 138.
Ribeiro, L., Severo, M., & Ferreira, M. A. (2016). Performance of a core of transversal skills:
self-perceptions of undergraduate medical students. BMC Medical Education, 16, 18.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0527-2
Rodríguez-Nogueira, Ó., Moreno-Poyato, A. R., Álvarez-Álvarez, M. J., & Pinto-Carral, A.
(2020). Significant socio-emotional learning and improvement of empathy inphysiotherapy students through service learning methodology: A mixed methods
research. Nurse Education Today, 90, 104437.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2020.104437
Rodríguez, G., Díez, J., Pérez, N., Baños, J. E., & Carrió, M. (2019). Flipped classroom:
Fostering creative skills in undergraduate students of health sciences. Thinking Skills
and Creativity, 33, 100575. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TSC.2019.100575
Royce, C. S., Hayes, M. M., & Schwartzstein, R. M. (2019). Teaching Critical Thinking: A
Case for Instruction in Cognitive Biases to Reduce Diagnostic Errors and Improve
Patient Safety. Academic Medicine, 94(2), 187–194.
https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000002518
Scott, G., Leritz, L. E., & Mumford, M. D. (2004). The effectiveness of creativity training: A
quantitative review. Creativity Research Journal, 16(4), 361–388.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10400410409534549
Singh, J., & Salisbury, H. (2019). Attitudes and Perceptions of Non- Clinical Health Care
Students Towards Interprofessional Learning. Health, Interprofessional Practice and
Education, 3(4), eP1179. https://doi.org/10.7710/2159-1253.1179
Soukup, T., Lamb, B. W., Arora, S., Darzi, A., Sevdalis, N., & Green, J. S. (2018).
Successful strategies in implementing a multidisciplinary team working in the care ofpatients with cancer: an overview and synthesis of the available literature. Journal ofMultidisciplinary Healthcare, 11, 49–61. https://doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S117945

64

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Steel, P. (2007). The nature of procrastination: a meta-analytic and theoretical review ofquintessential self-regulatory failure. Psychological Bulletin, 133(1), 65–94.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.133.1.65
Uitdewilligen, S., & Waller, M. J. (2018). Information sharing and decision-making in
multidisciplinary crisis management teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
39(6), 731–748. https://doi.org/10.1002/JOB.2301
Wang, R., Shi, N., Bai, J., Zheng, Y., & Zhao, Y. (2015). Implementation and evaluation of
an interprofessional simulation-based education program for undergraduate nursing
students in operating room nursing education: a randomized controlled trial. BMC
Medical Education, 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/S12909-015-0400-8
Zavala, A. M., Day, G. E., Plummer, D., & Bamford-Wade, A. (2018). Decision-making
under pressure: medical errors in uncertain and dynamic environments. Australian
Health Review : A Publication of the Australian Hospital Association, 42(4), 395–
402. https://doi.org/10.1071/AH16088
Corresponding author: Marlene Rosa
Email: marlene.rosa@ipleiria.pt

65

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

66

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Using Padlets as E-Portfolios to Enhance Undergraduate Students’ Writing
Skills and Motivation
Eleni Meletiadou
London Metropolitan University, UK

67

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Abstract
Despite the increasing support for the use of e-portfolios, research on its utility is justbeginning to emerge. In terms of the current study, 200 students were asked to create digital
portfolios with Padlet, share their e-portfolios via their Virtual Learning Platform (VLE), andask for peer and lecturer feedback every time they completed a written task. Using a diagnostic
test and their final assignment, students had to write a reflective report at the beginning andthe end of an academic term. They also interacted every week using a forum created by theirlecturer to enhance collaboration and peer support. At the end of each interactive feedback
session, they had to reflect on their work and the feedback they received and post their selfreflections on the forum. Findings indicated that students managed to improve their writing
performance significantly and enhance their motivation towards writing and learning in
general due to this innovative alternative assessment method. This was evident from their final
reflective reports, their focus group discussions, and the anonymous feedback they provided
through Mentimeter. Students reported that they enjoyed this interactive experience which
was both engaging and rewarding. However, students expressed their wish for more support
when using IT tools and e-portfolios and asked to be guided to develop their writing andreflective skills and engage even more with their e-portfolios.
Keywords: e-portfolios, inclusive assessment, motivation, Padlet, undergraduate students,
writing performance68

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

The use of computer-assisted learning is undeniably helpful in making the learning process
more effective and meaningful among undergraduate learners in terms of developing theirwriting and professional skills (Jawaid & Tariq, 2018; Kongsuebchart, & Suppasetseree, 2018).
The increasing interest in the use of portfolio assessment emanates from the understanding thatit enhances students’ learning, facilitates lecturers, improves the assessment process (Yang etal., 2016), promotes self-regulated learning (Tur et al., 2019), improves student motivation(Beckers et al., 2016), and fosters reflection and metacognition (Weber & Myrick, 2018).
Barrett (2011) defines an e-portfolio as a collection of evidence of students’ learning journeyover time which may comprise text, pictures, videos, and students’ personal reflections. Eportfolios have been widely adopted as a learning and assessment tool in Europe, the United
Kingdom, and the United States (Barrot, 2021). Various studies report that the use of eportfolios promote reflection and even language learning. In terms of writing pedagogy,
researchers claim that e-portfolios facilitate the exchange of peer feedback (Hall & Townsend,2017). Despite the increasing support and interest for experimentation with e-portfolios,
research on its utility is just beginning to emerge (Mapundu & Musara, 2019) especially amidst
the COVID-19 crisis.
This article aims to explore whether e-portfolios can be used to improve undergraduate
students’ writing performance and motivation in Higher Education Institutions (HEI) sinceresearch in the use of Padlets as e-portfolios with undergraduate students is scarce in that
context. The study intends to address the following research questions:
1. What is the impact of Padlets, when used as e-portfolios, on undergraduate students’
writing performance?
2. What are undergraduate students’ perceptions of the impact of Padlets, when used as eportfolios, on their writing performance?
3. What are undergraduate students’ perceptions of the impact of Padlets, when used as eportfolios, on their motivation?
First, the recent literature regarding the use of e-portfolios to enhance undergraduate students’
writing proficiency and motivation will be presented to identify potential gaps in the literature.
Then, the methodology of the study and its outcomes will be thoroughly explored anddiscussed. Eventually, conclusions will be presented, the limitations of the study will be
examined and suggestions for future research as well as recommendations for the successful
implementation of e-portfolios in undergraduate education will be proposed.
Literature Review
The Impact of Padlets on Students’ Writing Skills
Padlet is a valuable device-agnostic tool for interaction on virtual wall that allows students toexpress their views on a specific topic more easily (Jaganathan, 2016). It can be used as an
online paper sheet on which learners can post any kind of content (e.g., pictures, videos, andtext) anywhere on this page and can be accessed by many users form various devices, such as,
laptop, desktop, tablet, or smartphone. Padlets enhance students’ motivation and creativity as
they allow them to take part in various collaborative activities safely (Fuchs, 2014). However,some researchers report that it can lead to cheating and may seem monotonous for somelearners (Wulandari, 2018).
There are several studies that have used e-portfolios in HEI but only one that has used Padlets
to enhance undergraduate students’ learning. Song (2021) used Padlets as e-portfolios in terms

69

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

of a module in a Polytechnic in Singapore to evaluate its effectiveness through 226 students’
perceptions using a survey. Findings indicated that Padlets could enhance learners’autonomous learning if students were carefully scaffolded and supported throughout theimplementation. This quantitative study highlights the need for qualitative studies which could
present the benefits and challenges of using e-portfolios with undergraduate students. The
current study intends to examine students’ perceived ease of use and usefulness, their
inclinations to use this technological tool as well as their perspectives while experimenting
with it.
Kongsuebchart and Suppasetseree (2018), who investigated the effects of a Weblog-based eportfolio on the English writing skills of forty-five Thai EFL undergraduate students reported
significant improvement of students’ writing skills and participants’ positive opinions towards
e-portfolios. However, they stressed that a prerequisite for the successful use of e-portfolios isfor all students to have a reliable Internet connection and suitable technology for learning. The
current study intends to explore the challenges of using e-portfolios with undergraduate
students in a European country as a means of improving their writing skills to compare
findings.
Furthermore, Ngui et al. (2020) explored the impact of implementing e-portfolios at a public
university in Malaysia and concluded that it contributed to the successful enhancement ofundergraduate students' writing skills. Students confessed that they improved their writing
skills considerably, but the researchers admitted that further research was necessary acrossother HEI for comparison. They claimed that a comparison of different case studies might
additionally reveal more development, strengths and challenges related to e-portfolio use.
Barrot (2019) also examined the effects of Facebook-based e-portfolios on 89 L2 English
students’ writing performance. The study emphasized the beneficial effects of e-portfolios due
to Facebook’s interactive features, flexibility, accessibility as well as its ability to expose
students to social pressure and increase their audience awareness. However, τhe researcher
highlighted the need for more qualitative data that would explore students’ experience in using
various online platforms as e-portfolios. These studies could also examine students’
psychological dimensions, such as attitudes towards writing or e-portfolios and motivation.
Barrot encourages researchers to use interviews or focus group discussions and adds that theuse of technology for educational purposes provides a rich area for future investigations.
Consequently, it should be treated as one of the core foci of any research agenda on technologyenhanced pedagogy. The current study will further explore some of the areas that Barrot has
highlighted in his study.
Finally, Karami et al. (2019) explored Iranian students’ perceptions of e-portfolios and theirimpact on students’ writing performance and revealed that e-portfolios had a significant effecton undergraduate students' writing achievement. They highlighted learners' positive attitude
towards the use of e-portfolios because of its accessibility, convenience, and the feedback they
could receive through it.
The Impact of Padlets on Students’ Motivation
The current study also intended to examine whether the use of Padlets as e-portfolios with
undergraduate students could enhance their motivation and autonomy as learners. The use of
Padlets as e-portfolios have never been explored before, to the knowledge of the present
researcher.

70

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

E-portfolio is an “alternative” form of assessment which helps learners develop their autonomy
and self-confidence as writers through interaction among each other especially when used in
combination with an online learning platform (Marín, 2020; Meihami et al., 2018; Nicholson,2018). As Chaudhuri and Cabau (2017) point out, helping people become aware of each other’sand one’s own learning fosters increased autonomous life-long learning. Undergraduate
students’ willingness to engage with e-portfolios and online learning platforms is going to be
explored as very little research has been conducted to examine their attitudes to date (Aygün& Aydın, 2016). A key feature of e-portfolios is that learners interact with each other as theycreate their e-portfolios, provide feedback to each other, and gain considerable benefits (Oh etal., 2020).
In the constructivist theory, learners should be conscious of their own learning process anddevelop their metacognitive skills so that they can control and evaluate their learning process
on their own. The social constructivist perspective on learning puts the learner at the centre of
the teaching, learning and assessment process, and the metacognitive functions are deemed as
crucial as learners should be able to build accorded new knowledge on their own (Hussain &Al Saadi, 2019). Nicol and Milligan (2006) propose principles for effective formative feedback
through alternative assessment methods such as e-portfolios which aim to enhance learning.
They claim that formative feedback should focus on self-regulation as learners need to set goals
and plan strategies to achieve them, manage their resources, and try to achieve their goals. They
also focus on learners’ critical appraisal (Nicol et al., 2014) and problem-solving skills (Hwanget al., 2014). In terms of the present research study, undergraduate students’ perceptions of theways in which e-portfolios may enhance their learning will be explored to supplement theexisting literature.
E-portfolio, one of the most prominent forms of formative assessment, helps learners develop
various learning strategies by fostering co-operative learning and self-management which is ahidden benefit of engaging the learner in his/her learning process (Cabau, 2017). Through selfand other-regulation which are fostered as students engage in e-portfolios, certain learning
processes which were in a state of development may have had an opportunity to mature andconsolidate, and new knowledge may have been generated (Segaran & Hasim, 2021; Lei &Chan, 2017).
Rokhsareh et al. (2015) investigated motivational factors of using e-portfolios fromundergraduate learners’ perspective. After interviewing 15 students from the chemicalengineering, civil engineering, and computing programs, the researchers identified a eightmotivational factors, that is, information quality, system quality, consequences of use, learnercompetence, social norms, positive feedbacks, ownership, and service quality. Since only 15
learners participated in the study, the researcher highlighted the need for future research studies
with larger sample size. Addressing that need for studies with more participants, the current
study explored 100 undergraduate students’ perceptions of e-portfolios.
In sum, there are several gaps in the literature regarding undergraduate students’ perceptionsof the impact of e-portfolios on students’ writing performance and their motivation as learners(Ifinedo, 2017; Yang et al., 2016). Although the use of e-portfolios is associated with numerous
benefits in relation to student writing performance (Aygün & Aydın, 2016) and motivation(Ciesielkiewicz, 2019), more research is needed to provide insights on undergraduate students’attitudes towards e-portfolios. The current study aimed at addressing various literature gaps
using a semi-experimental design, a focus group discussion, and a survey. There is still little

71

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

research on how to adapt this approach (e-portfolios) to address the needs of undergraduate
students worldwide (Hall & Townsend, 2017).
Consequently, the current study explored the use of e-portfolios as an innovative learning andassessment method with undergraduate students in HEI. The aim was to examine
undergraduate students’ perceptions of the usefulness of e-portfolios in terms of enhancing
students’ writing performance and motivation towards learning.
Methodology
Participants
The current study engaged 200 students, aged 19-35, in using Padlets to create e-portfolios andinteract with each other with the aim of improving their writing skills and motivation as learners
for approximately four months (13 weeks in total) in terms of a general Academic Writing
Skills Module at the University of Nicosia, Cyprus. The participants formed six mixed-ability
groups of local and international students (Table 1). This was their first year at the university
and students found writing a rather challenging task. Students had to develop their academic
skills in terms of a module which asked them to produce a variety of written tasks and include
them in their e-portfolios. Students attended two 60-minute classes per week, used the samematerial and were taught by the same lecturer who was also the researcher of this study. Thesestudents had to present English language qualifications as a pre-requisite to start their degree
which classified them as upper intermediate stage (B2) EFL learners according to the Common
European Framework of Reference (CEFR) (Council of Europe, 2001). The lecturer asked
students to provide anonymous feedback every two to three weeks using Mentimeter. The
lecturer also conducted regular group discussions to identify any challenges that the students
may have been facing and provide the necessary support. Participation in the discussions andthe provision of feedback was optional. The lecturer asked for the students’ permission to use
their feedback and marks. The students provided their oral consent since the lecturer ensured
confidentiality and anonymity of their responses. The lecturer also informed the University andwas granted their approval.
Table 1
Demographic Details and Characteristics of Participating Students
Students

Frequency

Male

76

Female124

High-achievers

14

Medium-achievers

118

Low-achievers

68

GenderClass rank

Instruments and Procedure
Students had to write a pre-test which was a reflective report (Figure 1). In that report, they had
to reflect on their experiences in terms of writing and assessment so far and discuss those that72

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

had a significant impact on their lives. Students then received training in how to use Padlets as
e-portfolios and were given several samples to understand what they should do. They firstcreated a free account and started building their portfolios choosing the background, headings,
texts, videos, or pictures they wanted to include which were relevant to the topics and wereasked to upload their texts on their portfolios and share the link with their lecturer and peers
asking for feedback. In terms of this module, students had to develop their writing skills.
Students received instruction regarding report writing and were asked to prepare a reportchoosing one topic from the five provided by the lecturer i.e., the importance of diversity andinclusion. Students uploaded their work on their Padlet and used a forum on their VLE toexchange ideas and share the links of their e-portfolios on Padlet. The module tutor played therole of e-portfolio moderator facilitating students’ interaction and engagement, providing input
when students made mistakes as they discussed various concepts or deviated from the topic of
the main discussion. She even had to play the role of a judge resolving conflicts or
misunderstandings.
Figure 1
Implementation Cycle

Pre-test (Reflective
report)Reflective report

ArticleTraining (e-portfolios)

Argumentative
essay

Students received their final mark by the lecturer who provided a mark for all written texts, anargumentative essay, an article and two reflective reports. Students received instruction
regarding the different genres (article, essay, report). They also had to write a self-reflective
report at the end of the implementation explaining what they have gained from the wholeexperience and whether they liked it or not and why. Students were also encouraged to offer
suggestions for improvement of the e-portfolio implementation. This report served as a posttest and both tests (pre- and post-test) were evaluated taking into consideration the same
marking scheme which was prescribed and approved by the University after negotiation ofminor elements with the students.
Students invited their peers to provide either written or oral feedback in the form of a shortvideo taking into consideration the marking rubric that was used in terms of this module. The

73

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

lecturer negotiated the marking scheme with the students and made some minor changes toallow students to engage even more in the intervention since they felt they owned theassessment criteria as they were able to change them even slightly. They were asked to provide
up to five suggestions for improvement and indicate up to five strengths of their peers’ texts
for two of their peers. To make sure that all students received the same amount of feedback,students could provide feedback on their peers’ Padlets on a first comes first served basis.
Therefore, once 2 students had provided feedback on one draft, no additional feedback could
be provided by other students. They just had to pick another student.
Students explored these topics in the face-to-face setting and online, and based on theirconversations, they were asked to provide anonymous feedback addressing three mainquestions regarding each topic (one topic was covered in two-three weeks) in the form ofassignment. The specific questions were: (1) What have you learnt of the topics that we
explored? (2) What are your personal perceptions of the issues examined? and, (3) How does
the above learning contribute to your development and growth as undergraduate learners? It
was determined that the assignments should be between 600 and 700 words. All these data
were utilized to answer all research questions. Students had also to post their views (50 words)
related to discussions during the lectures and tutorials.
Students were promised to get 10% of the overall marks as a kind of reward if they provided
kind, honest, detailed, thoughtful and helpful feedback. The lecturer and the author of the text
indicated whether they thought the student had really read the text, reflected on it, and provided
valuable feedback. Students were provided the same kind of feedback from their peers andlecturer and were then asked to reflect on the feedback and make revisions. They wereencouraged to take into consideration only the suggestions that they thought would really help
them improve their work.
In terms of exploring students’ attitudes, data were collected from students’ final reflection
essays, the lecturer’s field notes from observations and focus group discussions, and students’anonymous feedback through Mentimeter as students were asked to provide feedback
regarding the process of the implementation every two to three weeks. The overall aim was totriangulate the data, identify and determine the themes, and establish reliability of the datacollected (Nowell et al., 2017). The researcher analysed all data using thematic analysis. (Terryet al., 2017). Data analysis included specifying the units of analysis coding data, sorting codes,
and generating themes (Deterding & Waters, 2021). She also had an assistant who analysed
20% of the data which were chosen randomly to enhance the reliability of the analysis. The
researcher and the assistant went through 20% of the data and identified recurring themes. They
then used a small phrase to describe the theme. They found themes in four categories which
will be presented below.
Findings and Discussion
Impact on Students’ Writing Performance
The current study explored the impact of e-portfolio assessment on students’ writing
performance by comparing students post- versus pre-tests. The students had to write a reflective
report before and after the implementation. The researcher scored all reports and a second
assessor with a PhD in Applied Linguistics, blindly scored 20% of all pre- and post-test reports
using the same marking rubric after receiving training on how to rate other students by the
researcher. The interrater agreement was 95% and any disagreements were discussed and74

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

resolved between the coders (Belotto, 2018). The outcomes of students’ writing pre- and posttests can be seen in Table 2.
Table 2Students’ Writing Pre- and Post-Test Scores

Experimental groups

Pre-test

M
29.88

SD
14.99

Control groups

Post-test
Pre-test

54.54
22.88

9.95
15.05

Post-test

25.01

14.79

A paired t-test was conducted to explore experimental groups students’ progress and showedthat there was a statistically significant difference between students' pre-test (M = 29.88, SD =14.99, n = 100) and post-test (M = 54.54, SD = 9.95, n = 100) on writing performance (t (99)
= 23.02, p < .05) (Cohen's d: 1.93). A similar test was performed for the control groups, and it
showed that the difference between students’ pre-test (M=22.88, SD=15.05, n=100) and posttest (M=25.01, SD=14.79, n=100) and post-test was not statistically significant (t (99) = 1.8,
p< .05) (Cohen's d: 0.14). Cohen’s effect size value (d = 1.93) suggested a “large” effect sizeand high practical significance for the experimental groups and a rather “low” effect size (d =0.14) for the control groups.
An independent samples t-test was performed which indicated that students who were involvedin the e-portfolio assessment scored higher than student who submitted their work as separate
assignments and that this difference in performance was statistically significant t (198) = 8.064,
p=0.004<.05. Then, a Levene’s test was performed in Excel and the p value was .004<.05
which indicates a violation of the assumption that the variance is equal across the control andexperimental groups and indicates that the difference between the variances is statisticallysignificant.
Perceived Impact on Students’ Writing Skills
Our study indicated that students appreciated the fact that they could easily store their workand add various elements to make it more attractive to potential readers, i.e., add podcasts.
They were able to identify their strengths and weaknesses more easily and check whether they
were able to improve their work as one student reports:
I love the fact that I can always look back at my work and see the progress I
have made. I can also have a look at peers’ and my lecturers’ comments andkeep them into consideration when I am writing something new. I also enjoy
adding mew elements to my e-portfolio i.e., my own podcasts. The wholeexperience is so engaging and interactive.
Since peer feedback was used as part of this alternative assessment method that promotes
assessment for learning, students were able to engage in a productive dialogue by providing
comments and suggestions for improvement to their peers. Students also thought that they wereable to develop their linguistic abilities as they were looking for material and ideas, weremonitoring their work and engaging with each other’s texts. They were also able to develop
content knowledge in a variety of fields which would be valuable for the rest of their modules.

75

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Moreover, they seemed more engaged with developing ways in which they could learn more
effectively rather than accumulating information and memorizing it as is often the norm at thislevel. They were able to change their mindsets (Kabilan & Khan, 2012) and become more
actively involved in their own learning.
I was so bored when I was asked to write an assignment and submit it. Several
module lecturers ask me to write similar assignments. This is demotivating
really. With e-portfolios, I can decide what I want to do and how to do it andadd images and videos. I love sharing my work with others and having a lookat their work as I can get new ideas which help me improve my writing skills.
Students were able to produce better and longer texts and improve various aspects of writing,that is, mechanics and grammar. They felt that they could produce more complex sentences
and use new vocabulary since they were able to explore various texts and their peers’ work as
well. One of the students claimed:
Exams are so boring. We have to memorise a lot of information and just use
them during the exam. Nobody remembers anything afterwards. Assignments
are also boring as we do not use any creative skills and we do not interact with
our peers. In portfolios, students can also include their reflections and allow
the lecturer to take them into consideration when he/she marks our assignment.
Our lecturer can also detect how he/she can improve his/her teaching practices,
what we like and what we hate. As a result, he/she may improve the wholelearning procedure.
Students felt that they could easily monitor their work and gradually improve their academic
performance. They could also include aspects of their personality in their portfolios as they
were able to combine text with, for example, infographics. As a result, they could engage others
to read their texts and they could also re-read and reflect on their work with the aim to increase
their writing proficiency through peer and self-assessment (Yang et al., 2016).
Finally, in terms of e-portfolios, the lecturer also stressed the significance of process writingand encouraged students to revise their work reflecting on the feedback they received. Eachtime, they received feedback on their work, they were asked to check older versions of theirwork, organise their thoughts and make all necessary changes as they focused on improving
different aspects in their writing. As they enhanced their writing skills, students also developed
various other professional skills such as reflection and critical thinking.
Benefits Related to Students’ Motivation
According to students’ feedback, e-portfolios seemed to boost students’ motivation as they
allowed students’ complete development. Students had to combine a variety of skills, forexample, creativity, autonomous critical thinking, good judgement, sensitivity, and aesthetic
appreciation at the same time as they allow students to use a variety of resources and combine
them in unique ways according to their own personality and taste.
We are bored to death. We either sleep on our desks or play video games during
the lectures. We are demotivated as everything is so repetitive. Same
assignments for all modules. No possibility of choosing our topic or of doing
something more creative. Portfolios are so much more inclusive. Every student
has an opportunity to succeed rather than fail. So, no student is left behind.

76

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Students found e-portfolios extremely interesting and motivating as assessment and learning
tools as they seemed to engage more actively and deeply in their own learning, understandwhat is expected from them and set their own short and long-term goals. Affective assessment
provided by peers also enhanced their writing performance and provided additional insights
into their own challenges indicating solutions that the lecturer may never have thought of. Oneof the participants reports:
I don’t mind devoting time while I work on my e-portfolio as I am free to do
whatever I want. I love this sense of freedom and personal responsibility as
well. I am also flattered when my peers are impressed by my work and ask forsuggestions to improve their own e-portfolios.
Students appreciated the fact that their lecturers could evaluate both the process and the final
product and give them credit for their efforts. Lecturers could also intervene, provide additional
support and guidance, and praise learners for their efforts. Students believed that e-portfolios
were more comprehensive and meaningful since they allowed students to show their efforts
and add their personal touch (Jawaid & Tariq, 2018). Finally, e-portfolios allowed students tofamiliarise themselves with the assessment criteria helping them reflect on their work after
receiving multiple feedback.
Perceived Challenges Relevant to Students’ Writing Skills
Students claimed that their lecturer had to check peer feedback to make sure students assesseach other’s work correctly as students expressed some complaints. They reported that thelecturer might also be influenced when students used other interactive material such as videos
and pictures in their e-portfolios. Consequently, lectures might provide more marks than theywould have if they had assessed the written text only. A student complained that:
I think my lecturer is unfair. I do not have time to find material to make my eportfolio more interactive. I think that has an impact on my grade. This isunfair.
The literature also claims that e-portfolios are often invalid and unreliable (Dune et al., 2018).
Students in the current study also detected that some of their peers had a tendency to repeat
themselves and paraphrase or even plagiarise as they did not have enough time to spend whenworking on their portfolios (also in Yang et al., 2016).
Perceived Challenges Related to Students’ Motivation
Significant challenges are reported in the literature regarding the reliability of e-portfolios. The
assessment criteria should be clear, and e-portfolios should be used in combination with some
final examination as students feel that is fairer. Some students have negative attitudes towards
this approach as it requires higher involvement, more time spent to improve digital skills(Kongsuebchart & Suppasetseree, 2018) and facing various challenges, i.e., problems withinternet connection, facilities, and resources to prepare the material to include in the eportfolios etc. Time constraints that students have is also an issue as well as workload
constraints from other modules as a participant indicates:
I really find it hard to understand the rules of the game and the assessment
criteria. Thank God, we also have the final exams. I also find it hard to use eportfolios without proper guidance and support. I am not proud of my digitalskills. I need help.

77

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Unreliable internet connection or software issues may hinder students as they try to engage in
online discussion in the fora and they might lose unsaved work or be unable to post theircontributions to online discussions. This is a very frustrating experience for students, but the
recent COVID-19pandemic has taught people to be more patient and resourceful. Few mature
students also described their own challenges:“I am not good with computers. I do not have the time to develop both my digital
and writing skills, not in just 12 weeks. I also find it difficult to understand how
Padlets work. They are not that user-friendly.
Implications
The current study confirms what was reported in the literature but also indicates several usefulimplications. For instance, when using e-portfolios, lecturers must ensure that the assessment
criteria used are crystal clear to enhance the reliability of the e-portfolio approach (Barrot,
2021). This should be used in conjunction with other summative forms of assessment.
However, it should count for at least 50% of the overall final grade to be meaningful forstudents to engage in it as it is demanding in terms of time and overall effort. Lecturers andmodule leaders should carefully check the timing of submitting the e-portfolio, arrange sessions
for students about paraphrasing and plagiarism providing acceptable and unacceptable example
with reasons and strategies to avoid them (Barrett, 2011). They should also train students towork independently and reward them for their efforts. Students should understand why it isimportant to be able to create an e-portfolio. This can be used for e-branding purposes as they
will be looking for a job after their graduation. Lecturers should also allow students to work on
a variety of topics to avoid repetition, make sure they engage all learners, provide meaningful
feedback and clear suggestions for improvement.
There are also implications for researchers who wish to explore alternative assessment methods
even further. The current study has several limitations as it explored the use of e-portfolios
with a small number of students in a specific context for only one semester. Future researchshould be more thorough and explore the use of e-portfolios at a large scale in undergraduate
education for a longer time frame. It could also examine its impact on other skills, i.e., oral,
and professional skills.
Universities should also make sure that all students are provided with access to the internet,
laptops, and any other resources necessary to design and complete their e-portfolios and grant
extensions if there are unexpected problems, i.e., inability to join a specific network (Lei et al.,2017). They must provide professional development courses to train their staff in using
alternative assessment methods, such as e-portfolios, to help students take responsibility for
their own learning and develop various skills necessary to thrive in the current highly
competitive world.
There are also implications for undergraduate students who should be less timid and willing to
make their e-portfolios available to other people such as family, friends, and employers as they
can show the range of skills people may possess, how creative and/or reflective they are andask for feedback as there is always room for improvement. Another suggestion forimprovement would be to try to increase the ways in which students engage in collaboration
by designing group e-portfolios and fostering ongoing interaction by using additional resources
for example, a group on Facebook or twitter. This would enable more people to get involved
in discussions around various topics and contribute their ideas and experiences. In the long78

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

term, these exchanges could help students enrich their e-portfolios, improve their writing skills,
increase their motivation as learners and expand their network (Cabau, 2017).
Moreover, taking into consideration the findings of the current study, the implementation of eportfolios should be more structured so that students could easily understand the rules andfollow them (Barrot, 2019). To address ethical issues, there should be frequent supervision of
the procedure and open communication as well as severe penalties for academic offenders. Eportfolios allow students to have a voice and express their feelings, ideas, and concerns. These
can then be taken into consideration to enhance students’ overall experience. A brilliant idea
would be to decrease students’ burden by allowing them to produce one portfolio for all
modules they have every semester or one portfolio for the whole duration of their BA studies.
This would allow students to improve their work by interacting with one another and decrease
the number of exams and assignments they have focusing on the process as well as the final
product.
In sum, the aim of this study was to explore undergraduate learners’ perceptions of Padlets
when used as e-portfolios and their learning benefits especially in terms of enhancing students’
writing skills and attitudes towards learning. Understanding their perspectives can lead to
improvements in the implementation of e-portfolios, further the HEI’s mission, and ultimately
benefit all stakeholders.
Conclusion and Recommendations
The current study explored the use of Padlets as e-portfolios with undergraduate students.
Students insisted that they should have clear assessment system (well-developed rubrics withidentifiable criteria) explaining expected contribution and participation and that the emphasisshould be on the quality rather than quantity of contributions and interaction as e-portfolios
need to be directly aligned with their intended purpose. Validity should also be reflected in thefocus of evaluation for any decision to be fair and accurate. To increase the reliability of thewhole procedure, the focus should be on the process rather than the product by observing
students’ contribution and overall performance.
Writers’ rapid growth was discernible in their e-portfolios, their engagement with the forum
and the quality of feedback they provided. However, lecturers should help their students
develop a deeper understanding of their expectations as writers, enhance their critical thinking
and assessment skills and challenge their existing beliefs about learning. Students should be
encouraged to check their peers’ e-portfolios and contribute in terms of interactive activities
by negotiating meaning and form, identifying problems, and providing solutions andsuggestions for improvement of their peers’ e-portfolios. They should also exchange points ofview in a civilised and constructive way and share ideas which will help their peers grow as
writers. Using e-portfolios has helped these learners gradually improve their writing skills in
so many ways, that is, by increasing understanding of ways in which they can improve theirwriting efficacy; enhancing linguistic abilities and improving their so called “soft skills”;
improving their content knowledge as regards various topics; developing their digital skills,
autonomy and interpersonal skills, and managing to move from a fixed to a growth mindset.
Educators encounter various challenges when implementing e-portfolios as they must train
students to develop their critical thinking, reflective and digital skills and develop an openness
towards other people’s ideas and perceptions. Course leaders should be knowledgeable andexperienced when using e-portfolios. They should supervise the whole procedure closely and79

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

intervene to make sure all students reap their benefits. Experienced lecturers can engage
learners in interaction, encourage peer learning and promote learning how to learn taking into
consideration students’ unique character. Students should be trained systematically for a long
period and supported by peers and their lecturers. Students gradually learn how to fill their own
gaps, organise their ideas and never give up.
The present study has also indicated that other types of assessment can also help in triangulating
data from the e-portfolios as continuous assessment is necessary. Lecturers should motivate
learners to increase both quality and quantity of their e-portfolios and help them realise theirown reasons why they should try to improve their writing skills by engaging actively in the eportfolio experience. Students should engage in continuous learning and show flexibility invarious socio-cultural contexts as they will need to continuously add knowledge and skills to
become competitive in the employment market and find a career-enhancing position.
The current study stressed that as students often get confused, each e-portfolio should have a
specific aim and help students set their own goals, refine their skills, and reflect on how they
can improve. Students can then engage in a variety of ways to improve their work, observe
others, critically reflect on their work, try out new things, fail, adapt and be flexible but mostof all think critically and grow within a community of learners who help each other to reach
their own personal learning goals.
Currently, the advantages and disadvantages of developing e-portfolios from the student
perspective have been largely ignored (Aygün & Aydın, 2016). Educators need to understandwhat aspects of e-portfolios promote learning especially in terms of students’ writing skills andenhance their motivation (Ciesielkiewicz, 2019). Therefore, more research and educational
projects that utilize e-portfolios as a learning tool are needed to help practitioners have a clearer
picture of its benefits in the long run as an alternative assessment method that promotes
inclusive learning.

80

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

References
Aygün, S., & Aydın, S. (2016). The use of e-portfolios in EFL writing: a review of literature.
ELT Research Journal, 5(3), 205–217.
Barrett, H. C. (2011). Balancing the two faces of e-portfolios, Education for a digital world:
Advice, guidelines, and effective practice from around the globe (2nd Ed.). British
Columbia. Retrieved from https://electronicportfolios.org
Barrot, J. S. (2021). Effects of Facebook-based e-portfolio on ESL learners’ writing
performance. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 34(1), 95–111.
https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2020.1745822
Barrot, J. S. (2019). Facebook as an e-portfolio platform in the EFL/ESL writing classrooms.
In S Ballweg & B. Kühn (Eds.), Portfolioarbeit im kontext von sprachenunterricht,(pp. 115-130). Universitätsverlag Göttingen.
Beckers, J., Dolmans, D., & Van Merriënboer, J. (2016). E-portfolios enhancing students’
self-directed learning: A systematic review of influencing factors. Australasian
Journal of Educational Technology, 32(2). https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.2528
Belotto, M. J. (2018). Data analysis methods for qualitative research: Managing thechallenges of coding, interrater reliability, and thematic analysis. Qualitative Report,
23(11), 2622–33. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2018.3492
Cabau, B. (2017). E-portfolio as a tool to respond higher education ambitions and societal
expectations. In T. Chaudhuri & B. Cabau (Eds.), E-Portfolios in higher education a
multidisciplinary approach, (pp. 141-154): Nature Singapure.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3803-7_10
Chaudhuri, T., & Cabau, B. (Eds.). (2017). E-portfolios in higher education: A
multidisciplinary approach. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3803-7
Ciesielkiewicz, M. (2019). The use of e-portfolios in higher education: From the students'
perspective. Issues in Educational Research, 29(3), 649–667.
Council of Europe. (2001). Common european framework of reference for languages:
Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Deterding, N. M., & Waters, M. C. (2021). Flexible coding of in-depth interviews: A twentyfirst-century approach. Sociological Methods & Research, 50(2), 708–739.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124118799377
Dune, T., Crnek-Georgeson, K., Bidewell, J., Firdaus, R., John, J. R., & Arora, A. (2018).
Undergraduate health science students’ development of reflective practice oncommunication skills via e-Portfolios. Journal of University Teaching & Learning
Practice, 15(3), 5. https://doi.org/10.53761/1.15.3.5
Fuchs, B. (2014). The writing is on the wall: Using padlet for whole-class engagement.
University of Kentucky.
Hall, J. M., & Townsend, S. D. C. (2017). Using critical incidents and e-portfolios tounderstand the emergent practice of Japanese student-teachers of English. Teaching
and Teacher Education, 62, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.10.017
Hussain, R. M. R., & Al Saadi, K. K. (2019). Students as designers of E-book for authentic
assessment. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 16(1), 23–48.
https://doi.org/10.32890/mjli2019.16.1.10.32890/mjli2019.16.1.1

81

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Hwang, G. J., Hung, C. M., & Chen, N. S. (2014). Improving learning achievements,
motivations and problem-solving skills through a peer assessment-based gamedevelopment approach. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62(2),129–145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-013-9320-7
Ifinedo, P. (2017). Students’ perceived impact of learning and satisfaction with blogs. The
International Journal of Information and Learning Technology. 72, 189–199.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.049.
Jaganathan, S. (2016). Edmodo and Padlet as a collaborate online tool in enriching writing
skills in language learning and teaching. Accessed fromhttps://www.researchgate.net/publication/302472966_Edmodo_and_Padlet_as_a_coll
aborative_online_tool_in_Enriching_Writing_Skills_in_Language_Learning_and_Teaching.
Jawaid, F. Y. N. A. A., & Tariq, H. J. J. (2018). Challenges to computer assisted language
teaching at university level. International Journal, 6(2), 188–197.
Kabilan, M. K., & Khan, M. A. (2012). Assessing pre-service English language teachers'
learning using e-portfolios: Benefits, challenges and competencies gained. Computers& Education, 58(4), 1007-1020. https://doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.11.011
Karami, S., Sadighi, F., Bagheri, M. S., & Riasati, M. J. (2019). The impact of application ofelectronic portfolio on undergraduate English Majors' writing proficiency and theirself-regulated learning. International Journal of Instruction, 12(1), 1319–1334.
https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12184a
Kongsuebchart, J., & Suppasetseree, S. (2018). The effect of a weblog-based electronic
portfolio on Thai EFL undergraduate students’ English writing skills. Computer
Assisted Language Learning-Electronic Journal, 19(2), 28–46.
Lei, C., & Chan, C. K. (2017). Developing regulation strategies through Computer-supported
knowledge building among tertiary students. In C. Lei & Carol K. K. Chan.
Promoting spontaneous use of learning and reasoning strategies, (pp. 172–192).
Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315564029-12
Mapundu, M., & Musara, M. (2019). E-Portfolios as a tool to enhance student learning
experience and entrepreneurial skills. South African Journal of Higher Education,
33(6), 191–214. https://doi.org/10.20853/33-6-2990
Marín, V. I. (2020). Research-based learning in education studies: Design inquiry usinggroup e-portfolios based on blogs. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology,
36(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.4523
Meihami, H., Husseini, F., & Sahragard, R. (2018). Portfolio-based writing instruction as avenue to provide corrective feedback on EFL learners’ writing performance. Journalof Modern Research in English Language Studies, 5(3), 136–119.
Ngui, W., Pang, V., Hiew, W., & Wah, L. K. (2020). Exploring the impact of e-portfolio on
ESL students’ writing skills through the lenses of Malaysian undergraduates.
Computer-Assisted Language Learning Electronic Journal, 21(3), 105–121.
Nicol, D., & Milligan, C. (2006). Rethinking technology-supported assessment in terms of
the seven principles of good feedback practice. In C. Bryan & K. Clegg (Eds.),
Innovative assessment in Higher Education, (pp. 1–14). London: Routledge.

82

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Nicol, D., Thomson, A., & Breslin, C. (2014). Rethinking feedback practices in higher
education: A peer review perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education,
39(1), 102–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.795518
Nicholson, D. T. (2018). Enhancing student engagement through online portfolio assessment.
Practitioner Research in Higher Education, 11(1), 15–31.
Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis:
Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative
Methods, 16(1), 1609406917733847. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847
Oh, J. E., Chan, Y. K., & Kim, K. V. (2020). Social media and e-portfolios: Impacting design
students' motivation through project-based learning. IAFOR Journal of Education,
8(3), 41–58. https://doi.org/10.22492/ije.8.3.03
Rokhsareh, M., Azizah, A. R., & Mojib, M. (2015). Electronic portfolio motivational factors
from students’ perspective: A qualitative study. Knowledge Management & ELearning, 7(2), 265–279. https://doi.org/10.34105/j.kmel.2015.07.017
Segaran, M. K., & Hasim, Z. (2021). Self-regulated learning through e-portfolio: A metaanalysis. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 18(1), 131–156.
https://doi.org/10.32890/mjli2021.18.1.6
Song, B. K. (2021). E-portfolio implementation: Examining learners’ perception of
usefulness, self-directed learning process and value of learning. Australasian Journalof Educational Technology, 37(1), 68–81. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.6126
Terry, G., Hayfield, N., Clarke, V., & Braun, V. (2017). Thematic analysis. In C. Willig &W. Stainton Rogers (Eds.), The sage handbook of qualitative research in Psychology,
2nd edition (pp. 17–37). London: Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526405555.n2
Tur, G., Urbina, S., & Forteza, D. (2019). Rubric-based formative assessment in processeportfolio: Towards self-regulated learning. Digital Education Review, 35, 18–35.
Wulandari, R. (2018). English language education department of a private university
students’ perception on using Padlet in improving writing skills. [Unpublisheddoctoral Dissertation], Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta.
Weber, K., & Myrick, K. (2018). Reflecting on reflecting: Summer undergraduate research
students' experiences in developing electronic portfolios, a meta-high impact practice.
International Journal of ePortfolio, 8(1), 13–25.
Yang, M., Tai, M., & Lim, C. P. (2016). The role of e‐portfolios in supporting productive
learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47(6), 1276–1286.
Corresponding author: Eleni Meletiadou
Email: elenim@outlook.com

83

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

84

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

The Code-Switching Phenomenon during Oral Presentations
among the Business Programme StudentsFrankie Subon
HELP University, Malaysia
Siti Sarah Mohd Tarmim
Management and Science University, Malaysia

85

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Abstract
In Malaysia, English as a second language is used as a medium of instruction in mostinstitutions of higher learning. Although it is compulsory to use English as a medium of
instruction for all academic programmes, code-switching is still prevalent in the classroom
for instance during an oral presentation. This phenomenon is also common among the students
in the bachelor’s degree in International Business (BIB) at a private university in Selangor,
Malaysia that became the context of this study. Hence, this research aimed to explore the BIB
students’ perceptions on the utilisation of code-switching during oral presentations, and to
identify the frequency of its usage in their speech. The participants of this study were 203
students from the Faculty of Business Management and Professional Studies (FBMP) of a
private university in Selangor, Malaysia, who are currently doing their bachelor’s degree inInternational Business. The research instrument employed was a questionnaire that wasaccessible through a google form link by all the 203 students. Descriptive statistics were run
to analyse the data collected. The findings of this study revealed that the students perceived
positively the use of code-switching during oral presentations. Majority of them agreed thatthey code-switched to overcome their lack of proficiency in English such as limited
vocabulary, and to ease their oral presentations. Most of the students admitted they frequently
code-switched during oral presentations. From these findings, important implications andrecommendations for future research were elucidated.
Keywords: code, code-switching, language alternation, oral presentation, second language
acquisition86

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

A code denotes a language or a variation of language or rather any kind of system applied forcommunication (Wardhaugh, 2006). When people choose to communicate, he believes that a
specific code (a particular language, dialect, register, style, or variety) must be opted. In speech,
more than one code may be used, especially by individuals who have expertise or skills in morethan one language. People can and will change from one code to another, as the need arises.
This practice is known as code switching. Meyerhoff (2006, p. 116) simplifies the definition
by claiming that “code switching is the alteration across sentences or clause boundaries
between varieties or codes.” Rodman (2011, p. 461) notes that “code switching is a bilinguallike speech style in which fluent speakers switch languages between or within phrases. As
quoted by Alang and Idris (2018), in classrooms around the world, code-switching is stillwidely practised, particularly where a second language such as English is used as a medium of
instruction in the classroom. Similarly, it is a common phenomenon in multilingual
communities including Malaysia, which extends from everyday life and work environments toclassrooms where a particular language has been developed as the language of instruction(Ting, 2002). Malay, Mandarin, Tamil, and a variety of languages spoken by indigenous groups
are among the native languages spoken in Malaysia. Code switching is typical among teachers
and learners in the Malaysian ESL classroom because of its usefulness in resolving the potential
communication and understanding issues that may arise from the limited language abilities ofthe learner and the linguistic context of the individual learner (e.g., Auerbach, 1993; Cook,
2001; Carless, 2007; Ellis & Shintani, 2013; Macaro, 2005). Although it works for several
purposes in the language classroom, when students use L1 or the native language some teachersor lecturers also feel uneasy or guilty (Butzkamm, 2003).
In higher education institutions, communication in the classroom usually takes place throughan oral presentation, which is either between students and students or between a lecturer andstudents. Educators or lecturers utilise almost entirely oral presentations when giving theirlessons in front of the class. An oral presentation has also become a part of the assessment for
students as they are required to present their work. In oral presentations, the students
occasionally switch their language when delivering information about their assignments andprojects. Past research showed that code-switching is perceived as a natural learning processespecially in a bilingual academic setting (Cook, 2001). He also recognises that “bilingual or
trilingual learners prefer this mode of discussion as they are at ease as they code-switch as theyneed”.
The role of code-switching in education has been discussed in a growing number of research
papers. Nevertheless, students’ and educators’ perceptions towards code-switching areimportant factors that must be thoroughly considered before using code-switching as a mediumof communication as well as an instructional tool. Recently, Alang and Idris (2018) claim that
there is a lack of studies looking at university students’ perceptions towards their lecturers’
code-switching practice, particularly in institutions where English is used as the medium of
instruction. Moreover, in the current literature, these perceptions are not adequately discussed
especially during oral presentation (Selamat, 2014). In the context of the present study, codeswitching is also practised among the Faculty of Business Management and Professional
Studies (FBMP) students especially during oral presentation. Most subjects at the FBMP
require the students to do oral presentation as part of the class learning activities and one
important component of their assignment and project. Karimah (2019) denotes that oralpresentation in tertiary level education could not be separated from the students. The oralpresentations can either be individual or group presentations and the students are expected toclarify the subject-matter during the presentation. This activity is usually followed by aquestion and answer (Q&A) session. No studies on code-switching related to oral presentations

87

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

involving students from a business programme have been conducted so far in Malaysia.
Therefore, this present study aims at exploring the Bachelor in International Business (BIB)
students’ perceptions on the use of code-switching during oral presentations. There are two
research questions in this study: (1) What are the perceptions of BIB students on using codeswitching during oral presentations? and (2) How frequently do BIB students code-switch intheir speech?
Literature Review
Code-switching is a common phenomenon in the classroom especially in Malaysia
educational setting. Both students and lecturers typically switch from English to their first
language (L1) when the needs arise for them to do so. According to Mokhtar (2015), one of
the beliefs is that the use of code-switching in a classroom serves as a method for teaching
and learning. He also contends that since 2008, the medium of instruction for Mathematics,
Science and technical subjects in university level has changed from Malay to English. In termsof writing, these university lecturers, especially those who are non-English major, may be
proficient in English, however they are not used to teaching in English. Thus, they may beless proficient in speaking skill. Therefore, they prefer to code-switch between Malay andEnglish most of the time to solve this problem. However, students are also having a hard timeto speak fully in English, hence, they code-switch as well. As this study focuses on Malaysian
higher education institution students, it is best to use the word code-switching to refer to theshift and transition, between two languages of English and Malay or Bahasa Melayu as
mentioned by Mokhtar (2015).
The phenomenon of language alternation is very much debatable and can be seen based on its
pros and cons. According to Üstunel (2016), from affirmatives’ point of view, it is agreeable
that code-switching helps to integrate the teaching and learning process. Therefore, the notion
is viewed as a chance to integrate the right purpose of code-switching rather than the barrier
it gives. This is supported by Enama (2016) where she believes that the presence of L1 shouldbe there during language learning as in one framework to avoid problem in utilising L1
because it acts as the right purpose in classroom to students. Moreover, some researchers
believe that by having language alternation in interaction would give a great impact to thestudents in terms of self-efficacy such as their confidence level as well as motivation. As
explained by Peregoy and Boyle (2013), confidence, security, motivation, and friendship are
all aided by L1 in the teaching and learning process. L1 use in the EFL classroom finallyallows students to be in a relaxed environment where they are free to share their minds without
having to adhere to a rigid policy of only speaking English. This environment has prompted
the affirmative to have confidence that code-switching is very beneficial for both ends,
teachers and students in the classroom.
On the contrary, Sridhar (1996) states that the negative views in the use of code-switching as
an act of laziness, sloppiness as well as any other weaknesses during the process of teaching
and learning or as mentioned by Brown (2006), lack competency. This conception appears
due to the lack of confidence on the use of L1 as the cost it may take. The presence of the L1
would, sadly, shade the goal of language teaching. When compared to a class that utilises
English most of the time, the misuse of code-switching will eventually have an impact on
students’ ability to optimise their use of the English language (Jingxia, 2010). Long-term
language alternation often allows errors to be mistaken for normal types of language without
the person understanding it. There are always two sides of the coin, and past studies revealed
disparities in their findings depending on the contexts and participants of their studies. Hence,

88

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

more research especially in the Malaysian educational contexts are beneficial to clear doubtson the need to utilise code-switching in the classroom.
In Malaysia, past literature on code-switching revealed that researchers employed various
research designs in their studies – quantitative (e.g., Nordin, Ali, Zubir & Sadjirin, 2013;
Alang & Idris, 2018)), qualitative (e.g., Arumugam, Kaur, Supramaniam, & Thayalan, 2017),
and mixed method (Mokhtar, 2015; Sardar, Ali Mahdi & Subakir Mohd, 2015; Ariffin &Husin, 2011). Apparently, regardless of the research contexts and participants involved, mostof these studies showed that educators and learners have positive attitudes and perceptions on
the use of code-switching in the classroom although they may have different motives. Ariffin
and Husin (2011) who conducted a study in Malaysian public university where English isused as the medium of instruction for all courses taught, discovered that the presence of codeswitching phenomena was connected to the linguistic skills of the educators as well as thestudents’ own, and with the aim of fostering positive learning environment. On the other hand,
Sardar, Ali Mahdi, and Subakir Mohd (2015) who utilised questionnaire survey and audio
tape recording in their case study, disclosed that Iraqi students in Malaysia primarily useddifferent types of code-switching to claim the identity of the group and because of a lack ofEnglish vocabulary. On the other hand, Mokhtar (2015) conducted a study among lecturers
and students from an engineering department of polytechnic to discover whether the lecturers’
beliefs align with their practices in their daily teaching. He discovered that reiteration andmessage qualification mechanisms were often used by the lecturers when code-switching andintended mainly to increase their students’ comprehension and save time from a longexplanation whenever the students are doubtful. The students also viewed that the use of codeswitching helped them to understand the lesson better.
Further research that employs quantitative design also supports earlier findings that students
have positive attitudes towards the utilization of code-switching in the classroom. For
example, Nordin, Ali, Zubir and Sadjirin (2013) performed a survey to identify ESL learner’s
attitudes on the use of code-switching by English language educators at the university level.
The researchers discovered that majority ESL learners have positive attitude towards codeswitching, and they also claimed that codeswitching helps them to understand the target
language. This is apparently useful for students who do not take English as their major andsome of them are prone to code-switching due to their lack of English language (L2) fluency.
When they communicate, they tend to alternate from L2 to L1 to convey messages
understandably. Nordin et al. (2013) also quoted that when the situation needs the use of thefirst language in the classroom to encourage students to feel more secure in mastering English,
the use of code-switching is appropriate.
Similarly, studies also ascertain students have positive attitudes towards the utilisation ofcode-switching by their lecturers. A survey conducted by Alang and Idris (2018) involving
45 respondents consisting of diploma students from three different faculties found that
lecturers occasionally code-switched for several academic purposes particularly involving
difficult words, struggling students, assessment matters and class assignments. The students
also perceived positively their lecturers’ code-switching practice as they like the class better,they feel more relaxed, and they believe that they obtain more input regarding the subject andimprove their achievement. Moreover, the students believe code-switching is necessary toensure their comprehension of the lesson and to clarify explanation. Hence, they have nevermisjudged their lecturers’ code-switching practice as a sign of language incompetence.
This sense of upstanding feeling towards their lecturers’ code-switching practice supports

89

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Krashen’s (1982) claim that educators presume students’ level of anxiety is lowered if they
are allowed to switch to their native language throughout the learning process which indirectly
produce stress-free environment. This finding is also supported by Argellan’s, Mohammed’s
and Krishnansamy’s (2019) study that involved both 40 international and local students in aclass. The results showed that code switching is employed by both teachers and students tofunction various purposes in ESL classroom. It was found that code exchanging is normallyutilised by the educators to encourage and enhance learners’ understanding of the target
language and to create a more relaxed learning environment. Similarly, code exchanging isutilised by learners as a learning technique to gain clarity of the information conveyed by theirlecturers.
The above past studies have revealed that code-switching is an effective classroom
instructional and learning approach. This is also supported by Manty and Shah (2017) who
conducted a study among 85 TESL undergraduate students, discovered that students havemixed perception towards the use of L1 in English classroom settings. While TESL students
tended to use English in English classes, they also realised the value of L1 as a facilitative
method to clarify new points, to verify the meanings of words or definitions, and to complete
their tasks faster. In addition, due to the belief that the English language is a predominantly
educational endeavour, they also recognised the inclination to use L1 as a way of socialisingin the English classrooms. Using different participants, Arumugam et. al, (2017) conducted astudy among 33 Diploma in Engineering major students. The study employed a qualitative
method by conducting a group interview and they discovered that code-switching increased
academic discussion in group conversation and provided room for restricted proficient
students to achieve a greater understanding of the L2 discussion. Structured interview
responses also indicated that their academic discussion and speaking skills were sharpened by
the leeway to use L1 in the ESL classroom.
Although many research of code-switching phenomenon share many features, the frequency
of code switching is remarkably different (Bakaeva, 2010). This is most likely due to thedifferent contexts where the studies are conducted, and the participants involved.
Surprisingly, limited studies have been conducted on the frequency of code-switching among
university students especially in the Malaysian context. Some studies anticipate that codeswitching is frequently utilised by bilingual speakers in a conversation with other speakers
for certain interactional purposes (Shin, 2010; Eldin, 2014; Toribio & Bullock, 2012). In
Malaysia, code-switching is also frequently practised by both educators and learners. Ariffin
and Husin. (2011) state that the language policy (English as a medium of instruction) at
tertiary level was not completely adhered to as code-switching and code-mixing of Bahasa
Melayu (L1) and English (L2) are frequently practised by both the educators and learners in
the classroom. However, Yazdi and Bakar (2014) who conducted a comparative study on
code-switching and willingness to communicate among four pairs of female Iranian and
Malaysian students at a private university in Kuala Lumpur found that the Iranians had higher
tendency to code-switch to their own language. Thus, there are variations in the codeswitching frequency depending on the research contexts and the participants involved.
Evidently, code-switching phenomenon frequently happens among educators and students at
both private and public universities. Argellan, Mohammed & Krishnansamy (2019) who
conducted a study on code switching phenomenon in English Language classrooms at a
private university found that most of their respondents strongly agreed and preferred frequent
code switching for communicating knowledge. A qualitative study by Ariffin and Husin(2011) at a public university in Malaysia also revealed that the mixture of Malay (Bahasa

90

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Melayu) and English was a very common practice in most of the lectures. Quite a recent
finding by Arumugam, Kaur, Supramaniam and Thayalan’s (2017) qualitative study on code
switching in ESL speaking class of a public university found that code switching from L2 to
L1 was very frequent among the learners and less with the instructor although they have
similar L1. Apparently, codeswitching occurs frequently because the learners are not fluent
in the target language especially when they feel incompetent or lack confidence in conveying
information in the target language (Liebscher & Dailey-O’Cain, 2005). The findings by
Barbu, Gillet and Poncelet (2020) indicated that the language-switching frequency is directly
linked to interlocutors’ cognitive flexibility skills.
Although there are many advantages of code-switching as revealed in past studies, there arealso some conflicting views on the need to code-switch. For example, Fareed et al. (2016)claim that some students lamented that the educators’ code-switching limits their exposure to
English. Regardless of its pros and cons, it is proven by Sardar et al. (2015) that the lack ofEnglish vocabulary can lead to code-switching. There are no definite findings on learners’
attitudes and perceptions towards the employment of code-switching in the classroom. Thereis still a lack of research in this field of research (Alang & Idris, 2018) especially in Malaysian
contexts. In view of this gap and the urge to find answers for why the BIB students utilise
code-switching in the classroom especially during oral presentations even though English is
implemented as the medium of instruction, have led to this present research. Therefore,
identifying the BIB students’ perceptions on code-switching during oral presentations could
provide answers for why they code switch; is it due to their lack of English proficiency? Or
is it due to their low self-confidence, high anxiety level, and so on?
Research Methods
Research Design
This is a descriptive research design that employs the quantitative research method to gather
data and generate analyses of results. The main rationale of employing this design is a large
and representative number of samples can be employed to participate in the study. Furthermore,
the quantitative research approach applies statistics for the precise measurement of the numeric
data (Marczyk, DeMatto, & Festinger, 2005, p. 17) that can positively determine the validity
and reliability of the data obtained.
ParticipantsThis study employed convenience sampling method. There were two main justifications for
employing this type of non-probability sampling method in this study. First, it was convenient
to use during the current Covid-19 pandemic as it enabled the sample to be taken from a groupof people who were easy to contact or to reach. Hence, any participants of the targeted
population who were available could participate in the study voluntarily. Secondly, this study
did not take the respondents’ demographic information as its variables, therefore any
respondents could participate in the study. The population of this research study comprised of
425 Bachelor in International Business (BIB) students from the Faculty of Business
Management and Professional Studies (FBMP) of a private university in Selangor, Malaysia.
By applying the precise procedures of Solvin’s formula, at 95% of confidence level andconsidering the margin of error of 5%, the calculation resulted in 203 students were requiredas the participants for the actual study.

91

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Research Instrument
This study utilised a questionnaire as instrument which was adapted from Al-Qaysi (2016).
The questionnaire consisted of three parts: Section A is a demographic of the respondents’details such as gender, age and years of study, Section B (9 items) is about the respondents’
perceptions on the use of code-switching during oral presentations and Section C (6 items) is
focusing on the frequency of respondents’ usage of code-switching in their speech. The 15
items were in Likert-scale format. For Section B, the participants were required to specify theirbest option from the scale of 1 - 5 (1- Strongly Disagree, 5- Strongly Agree) based on theirperceptions regarding code-switching usage in oral presentations and Section C, they wererequired to state from a scale of 1 - 5 (1- Never, 5- always) for how frequent they code-switch
in their speech. A pilot study was conducted using 30 respondents of the actual sample of thestudy. The result of pilot study revealed that the instrument acquired a good reliability with the
Cronbach Alpha of 0.86. Therefore, instrument is reckoned reliable and valid to be employed
for the main study’s research instrument.
Data Collection and Analysis Procedures
Due to the implementation of Movement Control Order (MCO) by the Malaysian government
during the current pandemic, the questionnaire was generated using Google Form and its online
link was distributed to the participants through WhatsApp, Instagram, Facebook, andTelegram. This was to ensure that the students could gain access to it. As part of the research
ethics, the participants were also required to sign the consent letter that was created together
with the questionnaire on google form. The data obtained from the questionnaire was analysedusing SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences) version 22.0 software, and the descriptive
statistics namely frequency and percentage were employed to identify the perceptions of the
BIB students as well as their frequency of code-switching usage during oral presentations in
the classroom.
Findings
Students’ Perceptions towards Code-switching during Oral Presentations
All the 203 BIB students responded to the questionnaire. There are 9 items in section B thatwere meant to identify the respondents’ perceptions on the use of code-switching during oralpresentations. The data was computed using SPSS version 22.0 and analysed using descriptive
statistics (frequency and percentage) to generate the results of the study. Table 1 shows thefrequency and percentage of the BIB students’ perceptions on the use of code-switching during
oral presentations.

92

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Table 1Students’ Perceptions Towards Code-Switching During Oral Presentations
Items1) I believe that code-switchingenhances my communication
skills in oral presentations.
2) I believe code-switching helps
me to develop my language skills
in oral presentations.
3) I believe that using codeswitching shows that I’m welleducated especially in oralpresentations.
4) I code-switch because I do notknow the word in English (L2)5) I found code-switching helps me
to convey new words easily.
6) I believe that code-switching
makes me feel more comfortable
and confident in oralpresentations.
7) I found that code-switchingallows me to express the ideasthat I can’t express in otherlanguage.
8) I believe code-switching fromthe mother tongue (L1) in oralpresentations helps me practise
the second language that I use.
9) I believe code-switching allows
me to understand better of thecontent I am presenting.

SD

D

N

A

SA

7
(3.4%)

24(11.8%)

38(18.7%)

82(40.4%)

52(25.6%)

5(2.5%)

21(10.3%)

41(20.2%)

81(39.9%)

55(27.1%)

41(20.2%)

58(28.6%)

30(14.8%)

50(24.6%)

24(11.8%)

8(3.9%)
5(2.5%)

16(7.9%)
21(10.3%)

30(14.8%)
35(17.2%)

63
(31%)
93
(45.8%)

86(42.4%)
49(24.1%)

7(3.4%)

23(11.3%)

33(16.3%)

89(43.8%)

51(25.1%)

4(2%)

17(8.4%)

24(11.8%)

68(33.5%)

90(44.3%)

4(2%)

25(12.3%)

43(21.2%)

83(40.9%)

48(23.6%)

8(3.9%)

19(9.4%)

44(21.7%)

82(40.4%)

50(24.6%)

Based on the results of the analysis above, majority of the BIB students had positive
perceptions towards code-switching during oral presentations. A majority agreed that codeswitching helped them to convey new words easily (93/45.8%), made them feel more
comfortable and confident (89/43.8%), helped them to practise the second language(83/40.9%), allowed them to understand better the content they were presenting (82/40.4%),
enhanced their communication skills (82/40.4%), and helped them to develop their language
skills in oral presentations (81/39.9%). In addition, a majority strongly agreed that codeswitching allowed them to express the ideas that they could not express in other language (90/44.3%), and they code-switched because they did not know the word in English (86/42.4%).
However, 41 students (20.2%) strongly disagreed and 58 (28.6%) disagreed that codeswitching showed that they were well-educated especially in oral presentations.
Students’ Frequency Rate of Code-switching in a Speech
There are only six items in section C that concerned students’ frequency rate of code-switchingin a speech. They were required to rate their frequency use of code-switching based 5 scales:
1- Never, 5- Always. The data was computed using SPSS version 22.0 and analysed using

93

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

descriptive statistics (frequency and percentage) to generate the results of the study. Table 2
shows the frequency and percentage of the BIB students’ frequency rate of code-switching
during oral presentations.
Table 2Students’ Frequency Rate of Code-switching in a Speech
Items1) I use code-switching in mydaily conversation.
2) I code-switch from English(L2) to my mother tongue (L1)in oral presentations tosimplify a theory or concept.
3) I prefer to use more L1 in oralpresentations when I do notknow the word in English
4) I use my mother tongue (L1)
more in a speech to ensure asmooth presentation.
5) I code-switch when I amaround my friends.
6) I tend to code-switch when I
am nervous during oralpresentations.

Never3(1.5%)

Rarely22(10.8%)

Sometimes

9(4.4%)

21(10.3%)

34 (16.7%)

88(43.3%)

51 (25.1%)

12(5.9%)

13(6.4%)

28 (13.8%)

63
(31%)

87 (42.9%)

6
(3%)

25
(12.3%)

32 (15.8%)

93(45.8%)

47 (23.2%)

8(3.9%)

19(9.4%)

40 (19.7%)

59(29.1%)

77 (37.9%)

8(3.9%)

28(13.8%)

42 (20.7%)

78(38.4%)

47 (23.2%)

28 (13.8%)

Often
90
(44.3%)

Always60 (29.6%)

The result of the analysis above shows that majority of the BIB students frequently codeswitched during oral presentations. They often code-switched to their mother tongue (L1) in aspeech to ensure a smooth presentation (93/45.8%), in their daily conversation (90/44.3%), tosimplify a theory or concept (88/43.3%), and when they were feeling nervous or anxious during
oral presentations (78/38.4%). Besides that, majority of them always code-switched to L1
during oral presentations when they did not know the word in English (87/42.9%) and when
they were around their friends (77/37.9%). Only a small number of between 3 (1.5%) to 12(5.9%) and between 19 (9.4%) to 28 (13.8%) BIB students had never and rarely code-switchedrespectively in all the 6 items.
Discussion
The present study’s findings validate the findings of some past studies. Majority of the BIB
students perceived positively towards the practice of code-switching during oral presentations.
These perceptions can be classified into two categories in terms of the benefits gained whenemploying code-switching during oral presentations. First, code-switching can overcome
students’ second language limitations. They approved that code-switching helped them toconvey new words easily. Furthermore, majority of the participants strongly agreed that codeswitching allowed them to express their ideas that they could not express in other language.
These findings align with Argellan et al. (2019) that the absence of at least one word in either
dialect can trigger code-switching in a variety of contexts. Thus, the inability to express
themselves in English has triggered the students to revert to their L1 during their oralpresentation. The inability to express themselves is also associated with the learners’ lack ofacademic vocabulary. This is expressed by Sardar, et. al. (2015) that code-switching often

94

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

occurs among students due to having limited vocabulary range. Hence, code-switching has
eliminated the learners’ language flaws in their oral presentations. They agreed that codeswitching from the mother tongue (L1) in oral presentations helped them to practise the second
language. Therefore, it helped them to develop their language skills, enabled them tounderstand better the content they were presenting. It can be concluded from the present study
that students can gain many positive benefits from code-switching during oral presentations.
Among others, code-switching practice can assist them in developing new vocabulary (Yana& Nugraha, 2019).
Second, utilising code-switching can boost learners’ self-esteem. A majority of the students
agreed that it made them feel more comfortable and confident in oral presentations andenhanced their communication skills. This reaffirms the finding by Hakim, Arflida, & Satriani,(2019) that code-switching boosts the learners’ confidence. Using the first language aids bothprocesses, teaching and learning such as confidence, security, motivation, and friendship(Peregoy & Boyle, 2013). Thus, L1 use in the classroom especially during oral presentations
eventually allows students to be in a more relaxed environment (e.g., Ariffin & Husin, 2011;
Argellan, Mohammed & Krishnansamy, 2019) where they are free to share their thoughts
without having to adhere to a rigid rule of only-speaking-English. In other words, language
alternation can intervene in the process of speaking English during oral presentations withconscious intention to ease communication. This finding has led to the affirmative belief thatcode-switching is beneficial to students especially during oral presentations because of themany advantageous it offered.
This present study’s findings also reveal that a majority of the participants frequently codeswitched during oral presentations. They always code-switched to L1 i.e., Bahasa Melayu when
they did not know the word in English. In addition, they frequently used it to simplify a theory
or concept. It can be deduced from these findings that the students resorted to their L1 when
they encountered problems in expressing their ideas in English. For example, students may beunable to recall relevant phrases or sentences in the target language, and talk in the target
language incorrectly, resulting in communication misunderstandings. Thus, to avoid thesemistakes, students frequently code-switch when they do not know certain words when they are
doing oral presentations. Hence, this is clear evidence for their deficiency in the second
language as Tabassum, Rafique, Akram and Khan (2020) also found that majority of students
alter their language code to overcome their incompetency in English language. As explained
by Eldridge (1996:305-307), students often have difficulty communicating due to a lack ofproficiency in the target language. Besides, according to him, the students switch languages
because they feel that they are more comfortable to use one language than the other, thus, theyusually shift into the language that they are more proficient in especially when they are anxious.
This statement supports the present finding that the respondents frequently code-switchedwhen they were nervous during oral presentations.
A majority of the respondents utilised their first language in a speech most of the time to ensure
a smooth presentation. According to Mokhtar (2015), students often take a long time to think
about the things they want to say, hence code-switching could save time in oral presentations
as well. This denotes that student code-switch to ensure an effective presentation and avoid
stuttering in in a speech. It enables them to understand the material provided, expand their
vocabulary, and make them more interested in interaction in the classroom (Harmilawati,2018). Although English is the medium of the instruction in the university, the respondents
would feel more at ease if they could code-switch when doing a presentation in front of an
audience and, at the same time deliver a better presentation without stuttering in a speech due

95

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

to limited vocabulary. This is because the way in which one expresses something is equallyimportant although not more essential than the content of one’s speech. For instance, if one
presented a topic with enthusiasm and clarity, the audience would be more likely to like it thanif someone covered more topics but murmured monotonously without clarity from their notes.
Thus, the respondents could have frequently code-switched to avoid such circumstances.
However, the high frequency rate of code-switching phenomenon among the respondents is
not only prevalent in oral presentations but also in their daily routine. This implies that codeswitching has become a habitual phenomenon among these respondents as they also frequently
code-switched in their daily conversation and when they were around their friends. This raises
a dilemma on whether this strategy should be approved, stopped, or ignored completely byeducators in the classroom? The findings of this present study have evoked important
implications especially for educators and students in higher learning institutions.
Educators and students alike must be aware of the advantages and disadvantages of employing
code-switching in the classroom. It is a beneficial strategy that can be employed in theclassroom to ease the learning process. Instead of seeing code-switching as an interfering factor
in acquiring a second or perhaps any foreign language, Skiba (1997) proposed that educators
regard it as “a system of interconnected languages that students are acquiring.” It is a vital
approach for an educational setting as well as for the “communicative competence strategy”(Van Dulm, 2007, p. 15) especially for interpersonal interactions (Faltis, 1989, as quoted by
Brice & Roseberry-McKibbin, 2001). Whereas the researcher has noted with this assertion toa large extent, it does not apply to those in other second language classrooms. The present
research study had used BIB students who are bilingual and able to speak both languages,
Bahasa Melayu (Malay), and English comprehensively. Nevertheless, considering that English
will be the most important language in their future field of employment once they graduate,
there would be a significant expectation that they should be able to speak fluently in English.
Most of this sample will certainly be venturing into professional business-related fields. They
will be most likely to face and engage in meetings with more experienced professionals in theirworkplace and sometimes will be dealing with international clients. Thus, it is imperative thatthey need to improve their English as well as participate in any related professional
development programmes to boost their confidence and communication skills in English.
Another important implication of the present findings is the need for educators and students topractise moderation when employing code-switching in the classroom. The present study
indicates that the respondents practised code-switching frequently during formal oralpresentations in the classroom. If this habit is not corrected, they may become worse and an
irreversible phenomenon. The process of self-correction will be impeded if they continue toseek shortcuts by shifting the second language to the first language rather than making positiveefforts to mastering proper English grammar and enhancing their vocabulary. This has raised
concern on whether code-switching is really a useful communication technique that students
should use in the classroom. This also raises the question of whether permitting the students tofreely alternate between their second language and targeted language especially in oralpresentation will improve their learning process” (Tiemer, 2004, p. 69). This entails the needfor future studies to explore more into this phenomenon. Although there are disadvantages in
employing this strategy in the classroom at times, the present study has revealed that it could
help the students to ease their communication and boost their self-esteem to convey theirmessage successfully so that the audience could comprehend the contents of their presentations
clearly. Besides, code-switching practice can be beneficial to the student’s learning and shouldbe employed in the classroom when teaching students with low proficiency in a second

96

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

language. However, educators and students must exercise control and it must not be permitted
to overwhelm the importance of using the target language especially during oral presentations.
Without any form of restrains, this code-switching phenomenon can become an ingrained habit
among students that will be difficult to get rid of in the long run.
Limitations
Like any other studies, the present study also has its own limitations. The main limitation is it
only involved students from one programme of study that is, the bachelor’s in International
Business. Thus, the findings may not be generalised to students of other programmes anddiscourse contexts. Secondly, it only explores about students’ perceptions on the use of codeswitching in oral presentations in classroom context. Nevertheless, it is envisaged that thefindings of the current study would give a meaningful foundation for future researchers toinvestigate more in-depth studies, perhaps on other aspects of code-switching in other fields
too.
Recommendations
Future researchers are recommended to employ a mixed methods research design so that
qualitative data can be used to support quantitative data. For example, interviews can be
conducted to obtain rich and authentic data from the respondents. Besides, they also can
explore into the employment of code-switching in other non-English programmes in their
universities with different demographic backgrounds. Apart from exploring code-switching inclassroom contexts, we are also passionate to investigate about the utilisation of code-switchingin text messages and postings on platforms like WhatsApp, Telegram, Facebook, Instagram,
etc. There are many exciting research areas related to code-switching that future research can
execute to conduct a more in-depth investigation particularly in the scope of Malaysian
contexts.
Conclusions
In conclusion, the participants of the present study perceive positively towards the use of codeswitching during oral presentations. They strongly approve that employing code-switchingenhances their oral presentations. However, the high frequency of use in code-switching among
these bachelor’s degree in Internal Business students is mainly due to their second language
deficiencies. This has raised a cause of concern on the long-term impact of this phenomenonon their English proficiency. Hence, it is implicated that educators and students alike need to
be aware of the advantages and disadvantages of this strategy and it is imperative for them toexercise control and moderation when employing this strategy in the classroom. Even though
Malaysians are required to study English for at least eleven years as a part of their formal
education, language alternation or code-switching still occurs among tertiary students in theclassroom especially during oral presentations. On that note, future researchers in the same
discourse community are encouraged to use the findings obtained as a guideline for more
impactful future studies.

Acknowledgments
We would like to express our heartiest gratitude to the Bachelor in International Business(BIB) students for their kind participation in this research.

97

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

References
Alang, N., & Idris, S. (2018). Students’ perception towards the use of code-switching inteaching and learning. Journal of Education and Social Sciences, 11(1), 1–9.
Al-Qaysi, N. J. (2013). Examining students' and educators' attitudes towards the use of codeswitching within higher educational environments in Oman. (Master dissertation, The
British University in Dubai). Accessed fromhttps://bspace.buid.ac.ae/bitstream/handle/1234/862/2014101051.pdf?sequence=1&isAll
owed=yArgellan, S., Mohammed, L. A. & Krishnansamy, N. (201(9). Code switching phenomenon in
English language classrooms at the tertiary level. International Journal of Managementand Human Sciences, 3(1), 35–42.
Ariffin, K., & Husin, M. S. (2011). Code-switching and code-mixing of English and Bahasa
Malaysia in content-based classrooms: Frequency and attitudes. The Linguistics Journal,5(1), 220–247.
Arumugam, N., Kaur, K., Supramaniam, K., & Thayalan, X. (2017). Code switching in ESL
speaking class: How & Why? Journal of Institutional Research South-East Asia, 15(1),121–132.
Auerbach, E. R. (1993). Re-examining English only in the ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly,27(1), 9–32. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586949
Bakaeva, N. (2010). A Quantitative Approach to Defining Code-switching Pattern. Journal of
Research in Social Sciences, 4(3). Retrieved fromhttps://www.academia.edu/2518120/A_quantitative_approach_to_defining_codeswitching_pattern
Barbu, C-A, Gillet, S. & Poncelet, M. (2020). Investigating the effects of language-switchingfrequency on attentional and executive functioning in proficient bilinguals. Frontiers in
Psychology, 11:1078. https://doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01078
Brice, A. & Roseberry-McKibbin, C. (2001). Choice of languages in instruction: One languageor two? Teaching Exceptional Children, 33(4), 10–16.
https://doi:10.1177/004005990103300402
Brown, H. Douglas. (2006). Principle of language learning and teaching. San Francisco.
Pearson.
Butzkamm, W. (2003). We only learn language once. The role of the mother tongue in FL
classrooms: death of a dogma. The Language Learning Journal, 28(1), 29–39.
https://doi: 10.1080/09571730385200181
Cook, V. (2001). Using the first language in the classroom. The Canadian Modern Language
Review, 57(3), 402–424.
Carless, D. (2007). Student use of the mother tongue in the task-based classroom. ELT Journal,
62(4), 331–338. https://doi: 10.1093/elt/ccm090
Eldin, A. A. T. S. (2014). Socio Linguistic Study of Code Switching of the Arabic Language
Speakers on Social Networking. International Journal of English Linguistics, 4(6), 78–
86. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v4n6p78
Eldridge, J. (1996). Code-switching in a Turkish secondary school. ELT journal, 50(4), 303–
311. https://doi:10.1093/elt/50.4.303
Ellis, R., & Shintani, N. (2013). Exploring language pedagogy through second language
acquisition Research. Accessed fromhttp://otago.eblib.com.au/patron/FullRecord.aspx?p=1331869
98

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Enama, P. R. B. (2016). The impact of English-only and bilingual approaches to EFL
instruction on low-achieving bilinguals in Cameroon: An empirical study. Journal of
Language Teaching and Research, 7(1), 19–30.http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/jltr.0701.03
Faltis, C. J. (1989). Code-switching and bilingual schooling: an examination of Jacobson’s new
concurrent approach. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 10(2),117–127. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.1989.9994368
Fareed, M., Humayun, S., & Akhtar, H. (2016). English language teachers’ code-switching inclass: ESL learners’ perceptions. Journal of Education Social Sciences, 4(1), 1–11.
https://doi:10.20547/jess0411604101
Hakim, B. M., Arflida, F. & Satriani, I. (2019). Students’ perception towards the use of codeswitching use in EFL classroom. Professional Journal of English Education. 2(3), 370–
375. https://doi:10.22460/project.v2i3.p371-376.
Harmilawati, H. (2018). Code-switching on students’ group presentation in EFL Classroom. LS
Journal on Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities, 297–308.
https://doi.org/10.34050/els-jish.v1i3.4862
Jingxia, L. (2010). Teachers’ code-switching to the L1 in EFL classroom. The Open Applied
Linguistic Journal, 3, 10–23. https://doi:10.2174/1874913501003010010
Karimah, A. (2019). Students’ talk on presentation: The combination of Indonesian affixationand English word. KnE Social Sciences / International Seminar on Language,
Education, and Culture, 71–76. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v3i10.3889
Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition: Oxford Pergamon.
Liebscher G and Daily-O’Cain J (2005). Learner Code-switching in the content-based foreign
language classroom. The Modern Language Journal [e-journal] 89(2).
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2005.00277.x
Macaro, E. (2005). Codeswitching in the L2 classroom: a communication and learning strategy.
In E. Llurda (Ed.), Non-native language teachers: perceptions, challenges, andcontributions to the professions (pp. 63–84). United States of America: Springer.
Manty, M. & Shah, P. M. (2017). Students’ perception: reasons and opinions on the use of first
language in English classrooms. Journal of Education and Social Sciences, 7(1), 90–96.
Marczyk, G., DeMatto, D. & Festinger, D. (2005). Essentials of research design andmethodology. John Wiley & Sons.
Meyerhoff, M. (2006). Introducing Sociolinguistics. New York: Routledge
Mokhtar, M. M. (2015). Lecturers' and students' beliefs in code-switching. A Malaysian
context. Teflin Publication Division. TEFLIN Journal, 26(1), 85–96.
http://dx.doi.org/10.15639/teflinjournal.v26i1/85-96
Nordin, N. M., Ali, F. D. R., Zubir, S. I. S. S., & Sadjirin, R. (2013). ESL Learners reactions
towards codeswitching in classroom setting. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences,90, 478–487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.07.117.
Peregoy, S. F. & O. F. Boyle. (2013). Reading, writing and learning in ESL: A resource bookfor teaching K-12 English learners (6th ed.). With contributions by Karen CadieroKaplan. Boston, MA: Pearson
Sardar, S. S., Ali Mahdi, A. A. & Subakir Mohd, Y. M. (2015) Code-switching in daily
conversations among Iraqi students in Malaysia. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ),
6(3), 309–319. http://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2834745
Selamat, J. T. (2014). Code switching in the Malaysian ESL Classroom. University of Otago.
99

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Shin, S-Y. 2010. The functions of code-switching in a Korean Sunday School. Heritage
Language Journal, 7(1), 91–116. https://doi.org/10.46538/hlj.7.1.5
Skiba, R. (1997). Code switching as a countenance of language interference. The internet TESL
journal, 3(10), 1–6.
Sridhar, K. (1996). Societal multilingualism. In N.H. Hornberger & S. McKay (Eds.)
Sociolinguistics and language teaching (pp. 47–70). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511551185.005
Tabassum, F., Rafique, H., Akram, N. & Khan, M. A. (2020). Functions of code switching in
the English language teaching classroom discourse: Perspectives of lecturers andstudents. International Journal of English Language and Linguistics Research, 8(2), 47–
65.
Tiemer, W. (2004). Code-switching repertoires in the language classroom: Contextualizationand the enactment of shared perceptions in the talk of language learners. Retrieved
from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses; 2004; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses(PQDT).
Ting, S.-H. (2002). Is English needed in a Malay workplace? RELC Journal, 33(1), 137–153.
https://doi: 10.1177/003368820203300108
Toribio, A. J., & Bullock, B. E. (Eds.). (2012). The Cambridge handbook of linguistic codeswitching. Cambridge University Press.
Üstunel, E. (2016). EFL classroom code-switching. Turkey: Palgrave Macmillan.
https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-55844-2
Van Dulm, O. (2007). The grammar of English-Afrikaans code switching. A feature checking
account. Doctoral Dissertation. Radboud University, Nijmegen.
Wardhaugh, R. (2006). An introduction to sociolinguistics. Malden, MA: Blacwell Publishing.
Yana & Nugraha, I. F. (2019). Students' perception on the use of code-switching in English
Classroom. Professional Journal of English Education. 2(2), 67–73.
https://doi:10.22460/project.v2i2.p167-174
Yazdi, S. Y. & Bakar, K. A. (2014). An observation account from EFL/ESL dyads: Codeswitching and willingness to communicate. International Journal of Education and
Literacy Studies, 2(1), 82–85. Accessed fromhttps://www.journals.aiac.org.au/index.php/IJELS/article/view/241
Corresponding author: Frankie Subon
Email: frankie.s@help.edu.my100

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 9 – Issue 5 – 2021

Reviewers – Volume 9 – Issue 5
The editorial team would like to thank the following reviewers for their contributions to thepeer review of this issue. Their dedication and assistance are greatly appreciated.
Associate Editor
Dr Huiyuan Ye, Southern New Hampshire University, USA
Senior Reviewers
Dr Ivy Chia, Singapore University of Social Sciences, Singapore
Dr Yanyue Yuan, NYU Shanghai, China
Dr Agnes Papadopolou, Ionian University of Greece, Greece
Reviewers
Dr Urarat Parnrod, Songkhla Rajabhat University, Thailand
Dr Philip Ajewole, Federal University Oye-Ekiti, Nigeria

101the iafor

journal of education

ISSN: 2187-0594