ENHANCING SPOKEN ENGLISH PERFORMANCE THROUGH TEXT READING: EFL STUDENTS' PERCEPTIONS OF RUBRIC-BASED SELF-ASSESSMENT
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31851/y5ssvf89Keywords:
EFL students; qualitative research; rubric-based self-assessment; Spoken English performance; text readingAbstract
Spoken English proficiency is a fundamental component of communication in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) contexts; however, many learners struggle with speaking anxiety and limited awareness of their own progress. This study investigated EFL students’ perceptions of rubric-based self-assessment as a strategy for improving spoken English performance. Employing a qualitative descriptive approach, the research involved ten eleventh-grade students at SMAN 12 Semarang, Indonesia. The study was conducted over five days, beginning with a text-reading activity on Day 1, followed by three consecutive days of short speaking tasks during which participants recorded their performances and assessed their fluency, pronunciation, and intonation using an analytic rubric. The process concluded with a final text-reading task on Day 5. Data were gathered through self-assessment rubrics, researcher observation notes, and semi-structured interviews to explore students’ experiences, perceived challenges, and observed improvements. The data were analyzed thematically through processes of data condensation, data display, and conclusion drawing. The findings provide valuable insights into the effectiveness of rubric-guided self-reflection in enhancing learners’ awareness of their speaking abilities, addressing challenges in self-evaluation, and fostering greater learner autonomy in EFL speaking classrooms.
References
Agustini, N. P. L., Dewi, N. L. P. E. S., Paramartha, A. A. G. Y., & Wahyuni, L. G. E. (2024). Students’ perception and challenges on the use of self-assessment in English writing competence at junior high school. Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Undiksha, 12(1), 71–80. https://doi.org/10.23887/jpbi.v12i1.75375
Akramy, S. A. (2020). Speaking anxiety in an Afghan EFL setting: A case study of an Afghan university. Language in India, 20(12), 161–182.
AlAli, R., & Wardat, Y. (2024). Exploring students’ mathematical literacy: The role of self-efficacy and learning environment. Environment and Social Psychology, 9(8), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.59429/esp.v9i8.2838
Alfianti, M., & Aminin, Z. (2022). The implementation of self-assessment in EFL students speaking performance. JELTL: Journal of English Language Teaching and Linguistics, 5(2), 103–114. http://ejournal.lppm-unbaja.ac.id/index.php/jeltl/article/download/2043/1061
Andrade, H. L., & Valtcheva, A. (2009). Promoting learning and achievement through self-assessment. Theory Into Practice, 48(1), 12–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405840802577544
Anh, K. H., Dong, M. H., & Trang, N. H. (2022). An investigation into English-majored students’ self-assessment of their speaking performance. International Journal of Instruction, 15(3), 191–208. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2022.15311a
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Brown, G. T. L., Andrade, H. L., & Chen, F. (2015). Accuracy in student self-assessment: Directions and cautions for research. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 22(4), 444–457. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2014.996523
Dang, T. N., & Le, T. H. (2023). Students’ perceptions on using rubrics as a peer and self-assessment tool in EFL speaking courses. International Journal of TESOL & Education, 3(3), 119–136. https://doi.org/10.54855/ijte.23337
Denzin, N. K. (2009). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315134543
Fraga-Viñas, L., & Bobadilla-Pérez, M. (2025). Self-assessment with rubrics as a key tool in the EFL classroom for the new learning paradigms. MEXTESOL Journal, 49(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.61871/mj.v49n1-13
Huang, Y., & Gui, M. (2015). Articulating teachers’ expectations afore: Impact of rubrics on Chinese EFL learners’ self-assessment and speaking ability. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 3(3), 126–132. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v3i3.753
Kawulich, B. B. (2005). Participant observation as a data collection method. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 6(2), Article 43. https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-6.2.466
Kholmurodovna, M. D. S. (2024). Speaking fluency development in English as a foreign language (EFL) contexts. World Bulletin of Social Sciences, 32, 21–25.
Kohan, M., Changiz, T., & Yamani, N. (2023). A systematic review of faculty development programs based on the Harden teacher’s role framework model. BMC Medical Education, 23(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04863-4
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Nazri, M. A. (2025). Communication barriers in speaking: Challenges faced by Indonesian EFL learners. Journal of English Language and Education, 10(5), 134–143. https://doi.org/10.31004/jele.v10i5.1089
Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090
Nimehchisalem, V. (2018). Exploring research methods in language learning-teaching studies. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 9(6), 27–33. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.9n.6p.27
Panadero, E., & Alonso-Tapia, J. (2013). Self-assessment: Theoretical and practical connotations. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 11(2), 551–576. https://doi.org/10.14204/ejrep.30.12200
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Qassrawi, R. M., ElMashharawi, A., Itmeizeh, M., & Tamimi, M. H. M. (2024). AI-powered applications for improving EFL students’ speaking proficiency in higher education. Forum for Linguistic Studies, 6(5), 535–549. https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v6i5.6966
Saed, H. A., Haider, A. S., Al-Salman, S., & Hussein, R. F. (2021). The use of YouTube in developing the speaking skills of Jordanian EFL university students. Heliyon, 7(7), e07543. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07543
Saha, G. C., Akber, S. M., & Roy, A. (2023). Impact of outcome-based education (OBE) on learners’ performance in business courses. International Journal of Professional Business Review, 8(8), e02394. https://doi.org/10.26668/businessreview/2023.v8i8.2394
Santos, J., & Ramírez-Ávila, M. (2022). Improving speaking fluency through 4/3/2 technique and self-assessment. TESL-EJ, 26(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.55593/ej.26102a1
Shi, C., Kassim, A., Raha, N., & Radzuan, M. (2024). Improving EFL learners’ English public speaking performance through project-based learning strategy at tertiary level. Language Teaching Research Quarterly, 42, 126–144.
Sholah, H. M. (2019). Enhancing EFL learners’ writing skill via journal writing. Alsuna: Journal of Arabic and English Language, 2(2), 96–116. https://doi.org/10.31538/alsuna.v2i2.397
Sintayani, N. L., & Adnyayanti, N. L. P. E. (2022). The analysis of self-assessment effect on EFL students’ speaking performance. Journal of Educational Study (JoES), 2(1), 83–91. https://doi.org/10.36663/joes.v2i1.263
Stiggins, R. J., & Chappuis, J. (2005). Using student-involved classroom assessment to close achievement gaps. Theory Into Practice, 44(1), 11–18. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4401_3
Van Le, T. H., Pham, T. T. X., Than, T. H. G., & Nguyen, N. G. H. (2025). Enhancing EFL speaking skills through peer assessment: A case study at Tay Nguyen University. International Journal of TESOL & Education, 5(3), 97–111. https://doi.org/10.54855/ijte.25536
Wolf, K., & Stevens, E. (2007). The role of rubrics in advancing and assessing student learning. The Journal of Effective Teaching, 7(1), 3–14.
Xu, L., Naserpour, A., Rezai, A., & Namaziandost, E. (2022). Exploring EFL learners’ metaphorical conceptions of language learning: A multimodal analysis. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 51(2), 323–339. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-022-09842-2
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50031-7
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Bintang Di Langit Biru, Hendi Pratama
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright Notice
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
In order to assure the highest standards for published articles, a peer review policy is applied. In pursue of the compliance with academic standards, all parties involved in the publishing process (the authors, the editors and the editorial board and the reviewers) agree to meet the responsibilities stated below in accordance to the Journal publication ethics and malpractice statement.
Duties of Authors:
- The author(s) warrant that the submitted article is an original work, which has not been previously published, and that they have obtained an agreement from any co-author(s) prior to the manuscript’s submission;
- The author(s) should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal;
- The authors(s) make certain that the manuscript meets the terms of the Manuscript Submission Guideline regarding appropriate academic citation and that no copyright infringement occurs;
- The authors(s) should inform the editors about any conflict of interests and report any errors they subsequently, discover in their manuscript.
Duties of Editors and the Editorial Board:
- The editors, together with the editorial board, are responsible for deciding upon the publication or rejection of the submitted manuscripts based only on their originality, significance, and relevance to the domains of the journal;
- The editors evaluate the manuscripts compliance with academic criteria, the domains of the journal and the guidelines;
- The editors must at all times respect the confidentiality of any information pertaining to the submitted manuscripts;
- The editors assign the review of each manuscript to two reviewers chosen according to their domains of expertise. The editors must take into account any conflict of interest reported by the authors and the reviewers.
- The editors must ensure that the comments and recommendations of the reviewers are sent to the author(s) in due time and that the manuscripts are returned to the editors, who take the final decision to publish them or not.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a pre-publication manuscript (but not the Publisher final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
