EFL Reading Comprehension Assessment: Some Grassroots’ Voices

Some Grassroots’ Voices

  • Lilik Ulfiati Prodi. Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, FKIP, Universitas Jambi
Keywords: EFL, Likert Scale, Reading Comprehension Assessment


This small scale case study analyses one of the most debated parts in the field of teaching English as a Foreign Language (EFL); and that is, the teachers and students’ perceptions and beliefs of EFL reading comprehension assessment at a major university in Indonesia. The research study involved, randomly selected five EFL teachers and ninety-six EFL students between the period of January and May in Academic Year 2017/2018. Twenty-item Likert scale questionnaires were distributed to the students. Moreover, semi-structured interviewed was done to collect the data from the teachers. Data analysis using descriptive qualitative methods indicate that EFL students need detailed elaboration of their reading practices in answering comprehension questions. Informing their reading results or scores only does not help them very much to practice the reading comprehension skills needed to comprehend the texts. Furthermore, the data indicate that EFL teachers encounter obstacles when they monitor various reading tasks and activities are benefit the students. They tended to assess the students’ reading comprehension based on the final correct answers achieved at the end of exercises.


Download data is not yet available.


[1] Ahmadi, M.R., Ismail, H.N & Abdullah, M. K. (2013). The importance of metacognitive reading strategy awareness in reading comprehension. English Language Teaching, 6(10). doi:10.5539/elt.v6n10p235
[2] Ahmadi, M. R., Hairul, N. I., & Pourhossein, A. G. (2012). Impacts of learning reading strategy on students’ reading comprehension profi-ciency. The International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 1(1), 78-95.
[3] Brown, H. D. (2004). Language assessment: Principles and classroom practices. Longman, Pearson Education, Inc.
[4] Cahyono, B.Y & Widiati, U. 2006. The teaching of EFL reading in the In-donesian context: The state of the art. TEFLIN, 17(1)
[5] Collins, J., & OBrien, N. (2003). The greenwood dictionary of education. USA, Westport: Greenwood Press.
[6] Crooks, T. (2001). The validity of formative assessment. Paper present-ed to the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, University of Leeds.
[7] Charvade, M. R, Jahandar, S & Khodabandehlou, M. (2012). The impact of portfolio assessment on EFL learners’ reading comprehension ability. English Language Teaching, 5(7).
[8] Eskey, D. E. (2005). Reading in a Second Language. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Book on Second Language Learning and Teaching (pp. 563-579). Mah-wah, NJ: Erlbaum.
[9] Firmanto, S. O. (2005). Students behavior of reading comprehension: Expectations and follow up. Paper presented at LIA International con-ference, Jakarta.
[10] Grabe, W. (2004). Research on teaching reading. Annual Review of Ap-plied Linguistics, 24, 44-69.
[11] Grabe, W. (2009). Reading in a second language: Moving from Theory to Practice. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
[12] Gipps, C. (1994). Beyond testing: A theory of educational assessment. London: Falmer Press.
[13] Gough, P. B. (1972). One Second of Reading. In J. F. Kavanaugh, & I. C. Maltingly (Eds.), Language by Ear and Eye (pp. 331-358). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
[14] Hosseini, H & Ghabanchi, Z. (2014). The effect of portfolio assessment on EFL learners’ reading comprehension and motivation. English Language Teaching Journal, 7(5). doi:10.5539/elt. v7n5p110
[15] Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. London: Continuum.
[16] Iftanti, E. (2012). A survey of the English reading habits of EFL students in Indonesia. TEFLIN Journal, 23(2)
[17] Nunan, D. (2001). Second language teaching and learning. Boston. Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
[18] Sajadi, F., & Oghabi, M. (2011). Relation between instructors’ objective needs and students’ subjective needs: The case of Iranian post graduate students. The Asian ESP Journal, 7(4), 123-152.
[19] Kazemi, M., Hosseini, M., & Kohandani, M. (2013). Strategic reading in-struction in EFL contexts. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3(12), 2333-2342. doi:10.4304/tpls.3.12.2333-2342
[20] Khonamri, F., & Karimabadi, M. (2015). Collaborative strategic reading and critical reading. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 5(7), 1375-1382. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0507.09
[21] Lodico, M. G., Spaulding, D. T., & Voegtle, K. H. (2010). Methods in educa-tional research: From theory to practice. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons.
[22] Nalliveettil, G. M. 2014. Assessing reading strategies of engineering stu-dents: Think aloud approach. English Language Teaching Journal, 7(5), doi:10.5539/elt.v7n5p38
[23] National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scien-tific research literature on reading and its implications for reading in-struction. Reports of the subgroups (NIH Publication No. 00-4754). C: U.S. Government Printing Office.
[24] Pressley, M. (2000). What should comprehension instruction be the in-struction of? In M. L. kamli, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers Mahwah, New Jersey.
[25] Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2002). Dynamic testing: The nature and measurement of learning potential. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer-sity Press.
[26] Talebinejad, M. R, Sadeghdaghighi, A, & Liaghat, F. (2015). Application of reading strategies: A comparative study between Iranian and Indian EFL students. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 5(2), 356-363. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0502.16
[27] Tang, L. 2016. Exploration on cultivation of critical thinking in college intensive reading course. English Language Teaching, 9(3). doi: 10.5539/elt.v9n3p18 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/elt.v9n3p18
How to Cite
Ulfiati, L. (2018). EFL Reading Comprehension Assessment: Some Grassroots’ Voices. International Journal of Language Teaching and Education, 2(3), 315-324. https://doi.org/10.22437/ijolte.v2i3.5123