Chinese Students’ Perceptions of the Value of Test Preparation Courses for the TOEFL iBT: Merit, Worth, and Signi cance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Test preparation for high-stakes English language tests has received increasing research a ention in the language assessment feild; however, little is known about what aspects of test preparation students attend to and value. In this study, we considered the perspectives of 12 Chinese students who were enrolled in various academic programs in a Canadian university, and we examined their perceptions of the value of the TOEFL iBT test preparation courses they had taken prior to admission to that university. Drawing on Scriven’s (1998, 2007) model, which conceptualizes value as merit, worth, and significance, the thematic findings that emerged from the interviews were triangulated with document analysis and revealed that the value of TOEFL iBT test preparation courses was a ributed to (a) quality (merit), including teachers, instruction, and instructional content; (b) benefit (worth), such as efficiency and reorientation to the TOEFL iBT and English skills development; and (c) engagement and affective attainment (significance), in learning communities and sources of motivation. However, the perceived value varied among these students, and the factors related to such vari-ability included both internal factors (e.g., students’ motivations for taking test preparation courses) and external factors (e.g., limited time to prepare for the TOEFL iBT). Implications of the bene ts are discussed within the context of Chinese students in the Canadian academic milieu. La recherche dans le domaine de l’évaluation linguistique se penche de plus en plus sur la préparation aux examens d’anglais ā enjeux élevés. On connait mal, par contre, quels aspects de la préparation aux examens les étudiants trouvent importants et sur lesquels ils se concentrent. Dans ce e étude, nous avons considéré les perspectives de 12 étudiants chinois inscrits à divers programmes académiques dans une université canadienne et avons examiné leurs perceptions de la valeur des cours de préparation au TOEFL iBT qu’ils avaient passé avant d’être admis à l’université. Le modelé de Scriven (1998, 2007), qui conçoit la valeur comme étant le mérite et la signi cation, a servi d’inspiration. Les thèmes qui sont ressortis des entrevues ont été validés à partir d’une analyse documentaire; les résultats indiquent que la valeur des cours préparatoires au TOEFL iBT était a ribuée à (a) la qualité (le mérite), y compris les enseignants, l’instruction et le contenu instructif; (b) les avantages, tels l’e cacité et la réorientation vers le développement d’habiletés relatives à la langue anglaise et au TOEFL iBT; et (c)l’implication et la réalisation affective (signification) dans les communautés d’apprentissage et les sources de motivation. Toutefois, la valeur perçue variait d’un étudiant à l’autre, et les facteurs liés à ce e variabilité incluaient des facteurs internes (la motivation de suivre des cours préparatoires, par exemple) et des facteurs externes (contraintes de temps quant à la préparation aux examens). Nous en discutons les bienfaits et les répercussions dans le cas d’étudiants chinois dans le milieu académique canadien.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".