Learner Agency in L2 Assessment: A Sociolinguistic Investigation of EFL Oral Presentation Perceptions

Authors

  • Mashael Abdullah Alshammari

    English Language Department, College of Arts, Jouf University, Sakaka 72388, Saudi Arabia
  • Hissah Mohammed Alruwaili

    English Language Department, College of Arts, Jouf University, Sakaka 72388, Saudi Arabia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i10.10393
Received: 7 June 2025 | Revised: 25 June 2025 | Accepted: 5 August 2025 | Published Online: 26 September 2025

Abstract

Existing L2 assessment frameworks inadequately represent cultural specificity, affective-technological interactions, and integrated theoretical approaches. This quantitative investigation examines learner agency in EFL oral presentation assessment through an integrated framework combining van Lier's ecological approach, Norton's investment theory, and Kasper and Rose's interlanguage pragmatics. Undergraduate EFL learners at a Saudi university completed a validated questionnaire examining affective variables, interlanguage processing, technological preferences, and assessment literacy. Statistical analysis revealed three patterns challenging Western-centric autonomy models. First, anxious investment  patterns showed learners experiencing pre-presentation anxiety while maintaining assessment engagement, with anxiety positively correlating with strategic preparation behaviours, extending Norton's investment theory to cultural contexts where identity aspirations override emotional comfort. Second, overwhelming preference for computer-mediated assessment correlated with environmental control desires, self-assessment capabilities, and anxiety management, demonstrating that technological affordances enhance rather than compromise authentic learner agency. Third, sophisticated assessment literacy combined with collaborative learning preferences revealed collective autonomy—culturally specific expressions integrating individual metacognitive competence with traditional values emphasising social learning. Cross-construct analysis revealed systematic relationships supporting integrated theoretical explanations, with cultural factors mediating relationships between individual capabilities and environmental preferences. Findings challenge deficit models, instead supporting culturally responsive frameworks that recognize cultural specificity as a scholarly strength. The research contributes theoretical understanding while informing evidence-based practices for inclusive L2 assessment design through hybrid approaches integrating technological affordances, collaborative scaffolding, and identity construction within culturally appropriate frameworks.

Keywords:

cultural Responsiveness; Anxious Investment; Collective Autonomy; Technology-mediated Assessment; Oral Presentation

References

[1] Kim, K.-R., 2020. Oral Presentations as an Alternative Approach to Enhance L2 Learning and Communication Skills. Journal of Digital Convergence. 18(7), 111–122. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14400/JDC.2020.18.7.111

[2] De Grez, L., Valcke, M., Roozen, I., 2014. The differential impact of observational learning and practice-based learning on the development of oral presentation skills in higher education. Higher Education Research & Development. 33(2), 256–271. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2013.832155

[3] Benson, P., 2011. Teaching and Researching Autonomy in Language Learning, 2nd ed. Pearson Education: Harlow, United Kingdom. pp. 7–248.

[4] Little, D., 2007. Language Learner Autonomy: Some Fundamental Considerations Revisited. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching. 1(1), 14–29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2167/illt040.0

[5] Patri, M., 2002. The influence of peer feedback on self- and peer-assessment of oral skills. Language Testing. 19(2), 109–131. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1191/0265532202lt224oa

[6] Al-Nouh, N.A., Abdul-Kareem, M.M., Taqi, H.A., 2015. EFL College Students’ Perceptions of the Difficulties in Oral Presentation as a Form of Assessment. International Journal of Higher Education. 4(1),136–150. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v4n1p136

[7] Alenezi, S., 2020. Exploring the Factors Affecting Saudi University Students’ In-Class Willingness to Communicate in English. International Journal of English Linguistics. 10(5), 75–88. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v10n5p75

[8] Alrasheedi, S., 2020. Investigation of Factors Influencing Speaking Performance of Saudi EFL Learners. Arab World English Journal. 11(4), 66–77. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol11no4.5

[9] Bachman, L.F., Palmer, A.S., 1996. Language Testing in Practice. Oxford University Press: Oxford, United Kingdom. pp. 3–354.

[10] Brown, H.D., Abeywickrama, P., 2019. Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom Practices, 3rd ed. Pearson Education: Harlow, United Kingdom. pp. 1–19.

[11] Fulcher, G., 2024. Practical Language Testing. Routledge: London, United Kingdom. pp. 3–65.

[12] Bandura, A., 1991. Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 50(2), 248–287. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90022-L

[13] Rahmania, F.N., 2020. EFL Students’ Self-Efficacy and Online Presentation Performance: A Correlational Study. RETAIN. 8(2), 66–75. Available from: https://ejournal.unesa.ac.id/index.php/retain/article/view/33434 (cited 21 February 2025).

[14] Tailab, M., Marsh, N., 2020. Use of Self-Assessment of Video Recording to Raise Students’ Awareness of Development of Their Oral Presentation Skills. SSRN Electronic Journal. 10(1), 90–101. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3499175

[15] Pawlak, M., Kruk, M., 2022. Individual Differences in Computer Assisted Language Learning Research. Routledge: London, United Kingdom. pp. 1–171.

[16] Hodges, C.B., Moore, S., Lockee, B., et al., 2020. The Difference Between Emergency Remote Teaching and Online Learning. In: Martindale, T., B. Amankwatia, T., Cifuentes, L. (eds.). Handbook of Research in Online Learning. BRILL:Leiden, Netherlands. pp. 511–522. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004702813_021

[17] Kasper, G., Rose, K.R., 2002. Pragmatic Development in a Second Language. Blackwell: Oxford, United Kingdom.

[18] Bardovi-Harlig, K., 2003. Pragmatics and Second Language Acquisition. In: Doughty, C.D., Long, M. (eds.). The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition. Blackwell: Oxford, United Kingdom. pp. 672–696.

[19] Ishihara, N., Cohen, A.D., 2010. Teaching and Learning Pragmatics: Where Language and Culture Meet. Pearson Education: Harlow, United Kingdom.

[20] Dörnyei, Z., 2009. The L2 Motivational Self System. In: Dörnyei, Z., Ushioda, E.(eds.). Motivation, Language Identity and the L2 Self. Multilingual Matters: Clevedon, United Kingdom. pp. 9–42.

[21] Douglas, D., 2000. Assessing Languages for Specific Purposes. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, United Kingdom.

[22] Oskarsson, M., 1984. Self Assessment of Foreign Language Skills: A Survey of Research and Development Work. Council for Cultural Co-operation: Strasbourg, France.

[23] Lantolf, J.P., Beckett, T.G., 2009. Sociocultural theory and second language acquisition. Language Teaching. 42(4), 459–475. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444809990048

[24] van Lier, L., 2000. The Ecology of Language Learning: Practice to Theory, Theory to Practice. Prefabrics. 4(2), 1–14. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.07.005 (cited 3 March 2025).

[25] Norton, B., Toohey, K., 2011. Identity, language learning, and social change. Language Teaching. 44(4), 412–446. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444811000309

[26] Mohammed Alruwaili, H., 2024. Language Learning Experiences and Learners’ Agentic Responses: Exploring Potential Spaces for Using English. Forum for Linguistic Studies. 6(6), 1088–1102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v6i6.7548

[27] Norton, B., 2013. Identity and Language Learning: Extending the Conversation, 2nd ed. Multilingual Matters: Clevedon, United Kingdom.

[28] Darvin, R., Norton, B. 2016. Investment and language learning in the 21st century. Language et société.157(3), 19–38. Available from: https://shs.cairn.info/journal-langage-et-societe-2016-3-page-19?lang=en (cited 18 February 2025).

[29] Clément, R., Dörnyei, Z., Noels, K.A., 1994. Motivation, Self‐confidence, and Group Cohesion in the Foreign Language Classroom. Language Learning. 44(3), 417–448. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1994.tb01113.x

[30] Zimmerman, B.J., 2000. Self-Efficacy: An Essential Motive to Learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology. 25(1), 82–91. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1016

[31] Alali, H.K., Alruwaili, H.M., 2024. Imagined Identities and Investment in English-as-a-Foreign-Language Learning by Saudi Students in Technical Training Contexts. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics. 10(2), 32–46. Available from: https://ejal.info/article-view/?id=738 (cited 3 March 2025).

[32] Bachman, L.F., 1990. Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing. Oxford University Press: Oxford, United Kingdom.

[33] Hasrol, S.B., Zakaria, A., Aryadoust, V., 2022. A systematic review of authenticity in second language assessment. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics. 1(3), 100023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2022.100023

[34] O’Sullivan, B., 2013. Issues in Assessing Speaking in a Second Language. In: Geranpayeh, A., Taylor, L. (eds.). The Handbook of Language Testing. Springer: New York, United States. pp. 234–246.

[35] Alcón‐Soler, E., Martínez‐Flor, A., 2008. Investigating Pragmatics in Foreign Language Learning, Teaching and Testing. Multilingual Matters: Clevedon, United Kingdom. pp. 153–201.

[36] Wang, Y., Derakhshan, A., Ghiasvand, F., et al., 2024. Exploring Chinese and Iranian EAP students’ oral communication apprehension in English: A cross-cultural mixed-methods study. System. 125, 103437. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2024.103437

[37] Lin, J., Wang, Y., 2025. Exploring Chinese university students’ foreign language enjoyment, engagement and willingness to communicate in EFL speaking classes. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications. 12(1), 650. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-04948-z

[38] Thomas, J., 1995. Meaning in Interaction: An Introduction to Pragmatics. Longman: London, United Kingdom.

[39] Blum‐Kulka, S., House, J., Kasper, G., 1989. Cross‐Cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies. Ablex Publishing: Norwood, MA, United States.

[40] Davies, A., 2007. An Introduction to Applied Linguistics: From Practice to Theory, 2nd ed. Edinburgh University Press: Edinburgh, United Kingdom.

[41] Cohen, A.D., 2005. Teaching and Assessing L2 Pragmatics: What Can We Expect from Learners? Springer: New York, NY, United States.

[42] Horwitz, E.K., Horwitz, M.B., Cope, J., 1986. Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety. The Modern Language Journal. 70(2), 125–132. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1986.tb05256.x

[43] Macintyre, P.D., Clément, R., Dörnyei, Z., et al., 1998. Conceptualizing Willingness to Communicate in a L2: A Situational Model of L2 Confidence and Affiliation. The Modern Language Journal. 82(4), 545–562. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1998.tb05543.x

[44] Dornyei, Z., Ryan, S., 2015. The Psychology of the Language Learner Revisited. Routledge: London, United Kingdom.

[45] Hu, L., Wang, Y., 2023. The predicting role of EFL teachers’ immediacy behaviors in students’ willingness to communicate and academic engagement. BMC Psychology. 11(1), 318. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-023-01378-x

[46] Csizér, K., Kormos, J., 2009. Learning Experiences, Selves and Motivated Learning Behaviour: A Comparative Analysis of Structural Models for Hungarian Secondary and University Learners of English. In: Dörnyei, Z., Ushioda, E. (eds.). Motivation, Language Identity and the L2 Self. Multilingual Matters: Clevedon, United Kingdom. pp. 98–119.

[47] Ushioda, E., 2008. Motivation as a Socially Mediated Process. In: Lantolf J.P., Poehner M.E. (eds.). Sociocultural Theory and the Teaching of Second Languages. Equinox: Sheffield, United Kingdom. pp. 90–103.

[48] Zou, D., Luo, S., Xie, H., et al., 2022. A systematic review of research on flipped language classrooms: theoretical foundations, learning activities, tools, research topics and findings. Computer Assisted Language Learning. 35(8), 1811–1837. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1839502

[49] Chapelle, C., Chapelle, C.A., 2001. Computer applications in second language acquisition. Cambridge university press: Cambridge, UK. pp. 156–194.

[50] Warschauer, M., 2003. Technology and Social Inclusion: Rethinking the Digital Divide. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, United States. pp.81–103.

[51] Thorne, S.L., 2010. Pedagogical and Praxiological Lessons from Internet-Mediated Intercultural Foreign Language Education Research. In: Guth, S., Helm, F. (eds.). Telecollaboration 2.0: Language, Literacies and Intercultural Learning in the 21st Century. Peter Lang: New York, NY, United States. pp. 2–30.

[52] Bui, H.P., Bang, T.C., 2024. Technology-Based Language Testing: Principles and Future Directions. In: Bui, H.P., Kumar, R., Kamila, N.K. (eds.). Innovations and Applications of Technology in Language Education. Auerbach Publications: New York, NY, United States. pp. 115–129. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003473916-9

[53] McNeil, L., 2018. Understanding and addressing the challenges of learning computer-mediated Dynamic Assessment: A teacher education study. Language Teaching Research. 22(3), 289–309. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168816668675

[54] Moorhouse, B.L., 2020. Adaptations to a face-to-face initial teacher education course ‘forced’ online due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Education for Teaching. 46(4), 609–611. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2020.1755205

[55] Dhawan, S., 2020. Online Learning: A Panacea in the Time of COVID-19 Crisis. Journal of Educational Technology Systems. 49(1), 5–22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239520934018

[56] Tsagari, D., Vogt, K., 2017. Assessment Literacy of Foreign Language Teachers around Europe: Research, Challenges and Future Prospects. Papers in Language Testing and Assessment. 6(1), 41–63. Available from: http://www.altaanz.org/uploads/5/9/0/8/5908292/5.si3tsagarivogt_final_formatted_proofed.pdf (cited 10 March 2025).

[57] Stiggins, R., 1995. Assessment literacy for the 21st century. Phi Delta Kappan. 77(3), 238–245. Available from: https://www.proquest.com/openview/420d00f4b01136f8d23c90af1e8936fd/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=41842 (cited 17 November 2024).

[58] Palfreyman, D.M., Benson, P., 2019. Autonomy and Its Role in English Language Learning: Practice and Research. In: Gao, X., Rea-Dickins, P. (eds.). Second Handbook of English Language Teaching. Routledge: London, United Kingdom. pp. 661–681.

[59] Little, D., 1991. Learner Autonomy: Definitions, Issues and Problems. Authentik: Dublin, Ireland.

[60] Little, D., Erickson, G., 2015. Learner Identity, Learner Agency, and the Assessment of Language Proficiency: Some Reflections Prompted by the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics. 35, 120–139. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190514000300

[61] Boud, D., 2000. Sustainable Assessment: Rethinking assessment for the learning society. Studies in Continuing Education. 22(2), 151–167. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/713695728

[62] Bárkányi, Z., 2025. Anxiety and Virtual Learning. In: Muñoz‐Basols M., et al. (eds.). Technology‐Mediated Language Teaching: From Social Justice to Artificial Intelligence. Open University Press: Milton Keynes, United Kingdom. pp. 137–159.

[63] Lazaraton, A., 2002. 2. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE APPROACHES TO DISCOURSE ANALYSIS. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics. 22, 32–51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190502000028

[64] Cohen, J., 2013. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences. Routledge: London, United Kingdom.

[65] British Association for Applied Linguistics, 2021. Recommendations for Good Practice in Applied Linguistics. BAAL: London, United Kingdom.

[66] World Medical Association, 2013. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. JAMA. 310(20), 2191–2194. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.281053

[67] Mackey, A., Gass, S.M., 2015. Second Language Research: Methodology and Design, 2nd ed. Routledge: London, United Kingdom. pp. 30–51.

Downloads

How to Cite

Alshammari, M. A., & Alruwaili, H. M. (2025). Learner Agency in L2 Assessment: A Sociolinguistic Investigation of EFL Oral Presentation Perceptions. Forum for Linguistic Studies, 7(10), 573–589. https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i10.10393

Issue

Vol. 7 , Iss. 10 (October 2025): In progress

Article Type

Article

License

Copyright © 2025 Mashael Abdullah Alshammari, Hissah Mohammed Alruwaili

Creative Commons License

This is an open access article under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) License.