Oxford University Press

English Language Teaching Global Blog


Leave a comment

Adaptive testing in ELT with Colin Finnerty | ELTOC 2020

OUP offers a suite of English language tests: the Oxford Online Placement test (for adults), the Oxford Young Learners Placement Test, The Oxford Test of English (a proficiency test for adults) and, from April 2020, the Oxford Test of English for Schools. What’s the one thing that unites all these tests (apart from them being brilliant!)? Well, they are all adaptive tests. In this blog, we’ll dip our toes into the topic of adaptive testing, which I’ll be exploring in more detail in my ELTOC session. If you like this blog, be sure to come along to the session.

The first standardized tests

Imagine the scene. A test taker walks nervously into the exam room, hands in any forbidden items to the invigilator (e.g. a bag, mobile phone, notepad, etc.) and is escorted to a randomly allocated desk, separated from other desks to prevent copying. The test taker completes a multiple-choice test, anonymised to protect against potential bias from the person marking the test, all under the watchful eyes of the invigilators. Sound familiar? But imagine this isn’t happening today, but over one-and-a-half thousand years ago.

The first recorded standardised tests date back to the year 606. A large-scale, high-stakes exam for the Chinese civil service, it pioneered many of the examination procedures that we take for granted today. And while the system had many features we would shy away from today (the tests were so long that people died while trying to finish them), this approach to standardised testing lasted a millennium until it came to an end in 1905. Coincidentally, that same year the next great innovation in testing was established by French polymath Alfred Binet.

A revolution in testing

Binet was an accomplished academic. His research included investigations into palmistry, the mnemonics of chess players, and experimental psychology. But perhaps his most well-known contribution is the IQ test. The test broke new ground, not only for being the first to attempt to measure intelligence, but also because it was the first ever adaptive test. Adaptive testing was an innovation well ahead of its time, and it was another 100 years before it became widely available. But why? To answer this, we first need to explore how traditional paper-based tests work.

The problem with paper-based tests

We’ve all done paper-based tests: everyone gets the same paper of, say, 100 questions. You then get a score out of 100 depending on how many questions you got right. These tests are known as ‘linear tests’ because everyone answers the same questions in the same order. It’s worth noting that many computer-based tests are actually linear, often being just paper-based tests which have been put onto a computer.

But how are these linear tests constructed? Well, they focus on “maximising internal consistency reliability by selecting items (questions) that are of average difficulty and high discrimination” (Weiss, 2011). Let’s unpack what that means with an illustration. Imagine a CEFR B1 paper-based English language test. Most of the items will be around the ‘middle’ of the B1 level, with fewer questions at either the lower or higher end of the B1 range. While this approach provides precise measurements for test takers in the middle of the B1 range, test takers at the extremes will be asked fewer questions at their level, and therefore receive a less precise score. That’s a very inefficient way to measure, and is a missed opportunity to offer a more accurate picture of the true ability of the test taker.

Standard Error of Measurement

Now we’ll develop this idea further. The concept of Standard Error of Measurement (SEM), from Classical Test Theory, is that whenever we measure a latent trait such as language ability or IQ, the measurement will always consist of some error. To illustrate, imagine giving the same test to the same test taker on two consecutive days (magically erasing their memory of the first test before the second to avoid practice effects). While their ‘True Score’ (i.e. underlying ability) would remain unchanged, the two measurements would almost certainly show some variation. SEM is a statistical measure of that variation. The smaller the variation, the more reliable the test score is likely to be. Now, applying this concept to the paper-based test example in the previous section, what we will see is that SEM will be higher for the test takers at both the lower and higher extremes of the B1 range.

Back to our B1 paper-based test example. In Figure 1, the horizontal axis of the graph shows B1 test scores going from low to high, and the vertical axis shows increasing SEM. The higher the SEM, the less precise the measurement. The dotted line illustrates the SEM. We can see that a test taker in the middle of the B1 range will have a low SEM, which means they are getting a precise score. However, the low and high level B1 test takers’ measurements are less precise.

Aren’t we supposed to treat all test takers the same?

                                                                                            Figure 1.

How computer-adaptive tests work

So how are computer-adaptive tests different? Well, unlike linear tests, computer-adaptive tests have a bank of hundreds of questions which have been calibrated with different difficulties. The questions are presented to the test taker based on a sophisticated algorithm, but in simple terms, if the test taker answers the question correctly, they are presented with a more difficult question; if they answer incorrectly, they are presented with a less difficult question. And so it goes until the end of the test when a ‘final ability estimate’ is produced and the test taker is given a final score.

Binet’s adaptive test was paper-based and must have been a nightmare to administer. It could only be administered to one test taker at a time, with an invigilator marking each question as the test taker completed it, then finding and administering each successive question. But the advent of the personal computer means that questions can be marked and administered in real-time, giving the test taker a seamless testing experience, and allowing a limitless number of people to take the test at the same time.

The advantages of adaptive testing

So why bother with adaptive testing? Well, there are lots of benefits compared with paper-based tests (or indeed linear tests on a computer). Firstly, because the questions are just the right level of challenge, the SEM is the same for each test taker, and scores are more precise than traditional linear tests (see Figure 2). This means that each test taker is treated fairly. Another benefit is that, because adaptive tests are more efficient, they can be shorter than traditional paper-based tests. That’s good news for test takers. The precision of measurement also means the questions presented to the test takers are at just the right level of challenge, so test takers won’t be stressed by being asked questions which are too difficult, or bored by being asked questions which are too easy.

This is all good news for test takers, who will benefit from an improved test experience and confidence in their results.

 

                                                                                            Figure 2.


ELTOC 2020

If you’re interested in hearing more about how we can make testing a better experience for test takers, come and join me at my ELTOC session. See you there!

 


Colin Finnerty is Head of Assessment Production at Oxford University Press. He has worked in language assessment at OUP for eight years, heading a team which created the Oxford Young Learner’s Placement Test and the Oxford Test of English. His interests include learner corpora, learning analytics, and adaptive technology.


References

Weiss, D. J. (2011). Better Data From Better Measurements Using Computerized Adaptive Testing. Testing Journal of Methods and Measurement in the Social Sciences Vol.2, no.1, 1-27.

Oxford Online Placement Test and Oxford Young Learners Placement Test: www.oxfordenglishtesting.com

The Oxford Test of English and Oxford Test of English for Schools: www.oxfordtestofenglish.com


Leave a comment

Global Skills and Digital Literacies | ELTOC 2020

 

Global Skills

You’ve probably heard of 21st-century skills, also known as ‘global skills’. These are the skills, competences and attitudes considered important in our increasingly globalised world. As educators, we are increasingly expected to help our students develop them, whatever subject we may teach. Global skills cover several areas – for example, communication and collaboration, creativity and critical thinking, intercultural competence and citizenship, emotional self-regulation and well-being – and, of course, digital literacies.

Global skills are clearly interconnected, and digital literacies can be seen as a thread that runs through all of them.

Defining digital literacies

What exactly are digital literacies? You’ll notice that I use the term ‘literacies’ in the plural, rather than ‘literacy’ in the singular, although you will come across both terms. This is in keeping with current theoretical views of literacies as a complex plural concept, rather than a single skill or ‘thing’ to be learned (e.g. Lankshear and Knobel, 2011).

If you google the term digital literacies, and you will find many possible definitions. Many define digital literacies as finding and analysing information online, or of knowing how to use computers; others define digital literacies in terms of employability. Although these are all important areas within digital literacies, we prefer a broader definition, as follows:

Digital literacies (are) the individual and social skills needed to effectively interpret, manage, share and create meaning in the growing range of digital communication channels.

Dudeney, Hockly & Pegrum, 2013:2

This view of digital literacies includes the ability to not only use hardware and software safely and appropriately (‘computer’ or ‘IT’ skills), and the ability to find, share and create information (‘information literacy’), but also the ability to deploy a range of social and communication skills in using technologies to create meaning and to communicate with others in socially and contextually-appropriate ways. This definition covers not just skills and knowledge, but also attitudes and social abilities; it conceptualises digital literacies as not just a means to an end but as an integral part of living and communicating in a digitally globalised world.

Digital literacies and English language teaching

Definitions are all very well, but what do digital literacies mean for the English language teacher? Surely our job is to teach language, rather than digital skills? The answer is that it is relatively easy to combine a focus on English language with a focus on digital literacies, within a communicative language teaching approach. We can divide digital literacies into several key areas or domains (communication, information, collaboration, and redesign), and within that, identify more specific digital literacies (Dudeney, Hockly & Pegrum 2018). For example, we can talk about data literacy, mobile literacy, information literacy, and many more. Once we’ve broken down the concept of digital literacies into smaller and more manageable subskills (or literacies), we can then choose to focus on some of themin the English language classroom, alongside work on the language itself. Clearly, we want to focus on those digital literacies that are of most relevance to our students and our teaching context.

Digital literacies activity: memes

Here is one simple example of an activity that can develop our students’ digital literacies in the area of redesign: working with memes in the English language classroom.  An Internet meme is an image, text or video that is shared via the Internet, added to or changed by users, and then shared again. Understanding and creating memes is an example of remix literacy. Remix literacy is the ability to re-purpose or change already-made digital content to create something new. In class, show your learners a few examples of recent or famous image memes and ask them to describe (or show) other image memes that they know about. Put your learners into pairs, and assign each pair a meme. Ask your learners to visit the site to research their assigned meme, and to also create their own version of the meme. Your learners can create their meme on paper, or if they have access to Internet-connected laptops/mobile devices, they can use a meme generator site to create their meme electronically. Regroup your learners and ask them to share what they found out about their meme, and to share their version of it. To round up the activity, ask your learners to vote on which meme they thought was the most interesting, original, political, unusual or funny. The activity provides learners with reading, speaking and writing practice, all within a focus on remix literacy.


ELTOC 2020

I hope this is useful. I’ll be expanding on this in my upcoming session at ELTOC 2020. I look forward to seeing you there!


Nicky Hockly is the Director of Pedagogy of The Consultants-E, an award-winning online training and development organisation. She has worked in the field of English Language Teaching since 1987, is an international plenary speaker, and gives workshops and training courses for teachers all over the world. Nicky writes regular columns on technology for teachers in ETP (English Teaching Professional) magazine, and in the ELTJ (English Language Teaching Journal).


References

Dudeney, G., Hockly, N. & Pegrum, M. (2013). Digital Literacies. London: Routledge.

Dudeney, G., Hockly, N. & Pegrum, M. (2018). Digital Literacies Revisited. The European Journal of Applied Linguistics and TEFL, 7, 2, 3-24.

Lankshear, C. & Knobel, M. (2011). Literacies: Social, cultural and historical perspectives. New York: Peter Lang.

 


Leave a comment

Combining the Four Cs | ELTOC 2020

Here we’ll discuss the role of creativity, critical thinking, communication and collaboration in the English language classroom, and suggest some practical ideas for giving students a challenging new take on these familiar concepts.

Global Skills

Life in the twenty-first century can be complex and stressful. Many of the interpersonal and interactive skills that we need in our everyday lives – things such as digital literacies, intercultural competence, and emotional self-regulation – have not always been formally taught in schools. The movement to embrace Global Skills in education is now looking to change that.

OUP’s Position Paper on Global Skills is a concise guide for empowering students inside the classroom – and beyond. It acts as a guide for teachers who would like to help equip their students with strategies for dealing with the challenges and opportunities of twenty-first century life.

From Four Cs to five skills clusters

Global Skills include Communication and Collaboration and Creativity and Critical Thinking as two of the key skills clusters, and these are concepts which will already be familiar to anyone who is acquainted with the Partnership for 21st Century Learning, in which they were grouped together as Learning Skills and referred to as The Four Cs.

OUP’s Global Skills are made up of five distinct skills clusters. If you would like to know more about the other three skills clusters of Global Skills – which are Intercultural Competence and Citizenship, Emotional Self-Regulation and Wellbeing, and Digital Literacies – see the OUP Position Paper.

Fresh perspectives

The skills of communication, collaboration, creativity and critical thinking are as important as ever, not only because they can have a positive impact on language proficiency, but also because they can be applied to the challenges of everyday life.

Communication and Collaboration

Why are they grouped together in Global Skills?

Learning to communicate involves being able to negotiate meaning – something which requires interacting with another person or people. And when we collaborate with someone else, both in the classroom and in real-life contexts, there is usually communication involved. The two skills therefore connect, and can very often be dependent on each other.

Pairwork and groupwork

The easiest way to generate conditions for collaboration is to get students to work together in pairs or in small groups. In order to ensure that there is communication as well, students need to share or exchange ideas in some way. Let’s look at a simple example.

Recalling an image

Show students the image below and ask them to pay attention to the small details. (Image source: Oxford Discover Futures, SB1, p86)

After about thirty seconds, remove the picture from view and get students into pairs. Thirty seconds is not very long, which means that students will probably have only a partial memory of the poster. Ask them to work together and recall as much as they can. Ask if they can remember:

  • the words on the poster – and the colour of each word
  • the shape of the figure – and what each ‘body part’ consists of

Some students are more observant than others – but the ones who remember the most do not always have the English with which to express all the information. For this reason, it is likely that students will use L1 to negotiate the answers to the prompts as they gather the English words that they need in order to complete their lists.

Communication and collaboration in action

This simple task mirrors real-life situations in which we need the help of someone else in order to piece together information and fill in the gaps with our own knowledge. The transfer of information is ‘communication’. The pair work is ‘collaboration’. Students help each other as they complete the task, while also checking each other, and correcting each other, as appropriate. Communication and collaboration go hand in hand.

Creativity and Critical Thinking

Why are they grouped together?

Creativity is the art of thinking – it is based on inspiration, intuition and subjective expression. Critical thinking is the science of thinking – it is based on reason, analysis, and evidence-informed judgements. As skills, they are complementary aspects of thinking outside the box, whether that involves coming up with something new, or seeing something that others have missed. Again, let’s take a look at a simple example.

Comparing posters

Show students all four of the posters related to diet shown below. (Image source: Oxford Discover Futures, SB1, p86)

Now give them the following statements to discuss. Ask them to express their ideas, listen to each other’s views, and then try to reach an agreement, by modifying the statements, if necessary.

  • the posters have nothing in common
  • the posters appeal to emotions, not intellect
  • the posters are intended for children
  • the most effective poster is poster ____
  • the least effective poster is poster ____

Finally, ask them to come up with a new poster of their own, designed to raise awareness of the importance of a healthy diet.

Creativity and Critical Thinking in action

The prompts above do more than check students’ comprehension of the posters; they engage their critical faculties, too. The statements are likely to be divisive, and students might well disagree with each other. Establishing the truth of what they can agree on will require negotiation and compromise, as well as creative recasting of some of the statements. Most interestingly, students will have to consider whether they want to change their initial beliefs in the light of information received from others. That is the kind of critical thinking that can be reached through communicative, collaborative classroom processes.

The final task – the design of a new poster – is an example of a creative task that extends naturally out of the tasks that have preceded it. The task combines language skills and non-language skills, so all students have a chance to make a meaningful contribution. Done collaboratively, it will generate further opportunities for communication, collaboration and critical thinking, too.

Double duty

We don’t need extra lessons to teach global skills, nor do we need to separate language skills from global skills. The activities above demonstrate that the learning tasks of the classroom can be asked to perform double duty: to generate opportunities to practise language and to develop students’ global skills.


ELTOC 2020

I hope this is useful. I’ll be expanding on this in my upcoming session at ELTOC 2020. I look forward to seeing you there!


Edmund Dudley is a teacher trainer, materials writer and teacher of English with more than 25 years of classroom experience. Based in Budapest, he has extensive experience of teaching EFL at both primary and secondary levels. He works with teachers from around the world as a freelance teacher trainer and as a tutor at the University of Oxford’s ELT Summer Seminar. He is the author of ETpedia Teenagers (2018, Pavilion Publishing) and co-author of Mixed-Ability Teaching (2015, Oxford University Press).

 


1 Comment

How can we assess global skills? | ELTOC 2020

Global Skills puzzle pieceWe all want our students to develop the global skills needed for modern life and work. We know that our teaching style, our classroom organisation, and what we expect of our students are critical in this. If we want our students to be collaborative and creative we have to provide opportunities for cooperation and problem-solving. However, any attempt to assess these skills raises ‘why?’ and ‘how?’ questions. During my session at ELTOC 2020, I will seek to answer some of these. In the meantime, here’s a brief summary of my approach:

Why do we need to assess this kind of learning?

  1. To signal its importance in the modern world. Language learning cannot be separated from functioning effectively in society. Global skills encourage sensitivity to the needs of others, problem-solving, and how to communicate effectively with those from different cultures. Assessing global skills shows we value them.
  2. To convince students, particularly those who are driven by external rewards, that these skills are important and should be attended to.
  3. Because their assessment helps students know how well they are doing in these skills. It becomes the basis of feedback to students on how well they are doing and what they need to do next to improve.

How do we assess global skills?

Global skills are broad and complex so we need to assess them in ways that does justice to this. If we want to capture performance in a global skill, some conventional assessment methods might not be fit-for-purpose. A multiple-choice test assessing creativity (and there have been some) won’t capture what is important. Nor would giving a mark for social responsibility and well-being be appropriate.

Instead, we will need to use more informal ways of gathering evidence in order to make more general holistic judgements about progress. These are the result of regular observations of student performance and continuous monitoring of their progress. This does not involve lots of extra record-keeping by teachers, it relies on their professional skills of both knowing what the skills involve and informally monitoring individuals’ performance.

As part of our students’ development of global skills we can put the responsibility for gathering evidence of performance on the students. What can they claim they have done to demonstrate a particular cluster of skills? Can they provide evidence of, for example, of creativity and communication? The very act of doing this may be evidence of emotional self-regulation and wellbeing.  

One of the best ways of capturing their achievements is for students to develop individual portfolios. These can be electronic, paper-based, or a blend of both. The aim is to demonstrate their development in each of the global skill clusters. The teacher’s role is to judge, along with their own observations, the student’s progress in skill development. This then provides an opportunity for feedback on where a student has reached and what steps could be taken to progress further.

How should we approach this more holistic approach to the assessment of global skills?

  1. Keep it simple

Our suggestion[i] is that we use just three classifications for each cluster of skills: working towards; achieved; exceeded. Each of these may generate specific feedback – what more is needed; where to go next; how to improve even further.

  1. Trust teacher judgement

The evidence for these holistic judgements comes from the teacher’s own informal evaluation of what is seen, heard and read in the classroom and outside. This is more dependable than narrow standardised skills because of the multiple and continuous opportunities for information gathering. These judgements require teachers to utilise and develop their skills of observation and continuous assessment.

  1. Continuously sample student performance

This does not mean informally assessing every student on every occasion, it involves focusing on different students on different occasions so that, over time, we will have monitored all our students’ performance.

  1. Use any assessments formatively

The purpose of the assessments is to inform students of their performance and to use our judgements to provide feedback on what to do next. The classifications should be used to encourage further development rather than as summative grades.


ELTOC 2020

I hope this is useful. I’ll be expanding on this in my upcoming session at ELTOC 2020. I look forward to seeing you there!


Gordon Stobart is Emeritus Professor of Education at the Institute of Education, University College London, and an honorary research fellow at the University of Oxford. Having worked as a secondary school teacher and an educational psychologist, he spent twenty years as a senior policy researcher. He was a founder member of the Assessment Reform Group, which has promoted assessment for learning internationally. Gordon is the lead author of our Assessment for Learning Position Paper.

[i] ELT Expert Panel (2019) Global Skills: Creating Empowered 21st Century Citizens Oxford University Press


Leave a comment

Well-being, Intercultural Competence and Citizenship in ELT | ELTOC 2020

We are living in exciting times! As language teachers, we are in a privileged position to open up our learners to new ideas and instil important human values while at the same time teaching them a new language that will provide access to a whole new global world! Many of you are probably already aware of the notion of integrating academic content and language learning; that is, integrating non-linguistic and linguistic aims in sustainable ways that do not compromise the development of either skillset or overburden us as educators. In this blog, and especially in my ELTOC presentation with Oxford University Press on February 28, I would like to introduce you to the idea of using the same interweaving of linguistic and nonlinguistic goals in your language teaching—but in this case, the nonlinguistic goals include emotional self-regulation, intercultural competence and citizenship.

Emotional Self-Regulation

According to the Position Paper, Global Skills: Creating Empowered Citizens for the 21st Century (2019), emotional self-regulation is the ability to recognize, identify, and understand one’s emotions and their functions. It includes an awareness of regulation strategies for managing emotions appropriately and it is a basis for wellbeing. Wellbeing involves being able to find supportive social connections and a sense of purpose. It also entails awareness of and engagement in positive physical and mental health practices

However, added benefits surface beyond mere human contentment when teachers focus on their learners’ emotions.  Recent research suggests that attending to the socio-emotional domains of the whole person enhances learning in traditional subjects and academic achievement and promotes positive capabilities in the future workplace (Caprara, Barbaranelli, Steca, & Malone, 2006; Sammons et al., 2007 Judge & Bono, 2001; Judge, Thoresen, Bono, & Patton, 2001). This means that when we interweave well-being goals in our language teaching, we actually improve learning as well!  How amazing is that!  If you would like to find out more information about this marriage of well-being with language learning, what we are calling ‘Positive Language Education’, click here.

For ELTOC 2020, I am going to provide hands-on teaching ideas for developing well-being and emotional self-regulation that include, among others:

*Working with learners’ signature strengths (for a preview: https://www.viacharacter.org/character-strengths)

*Gratitude and counting blessings

*Random acts of kindness

*Finding silver linings

Intercultural Competence

Intercultural competence, another element addressed in the Global Skills (2019) document mentioned above, addresses the abilities learners require to relate with diverse others. The ability to manoeuvre cultural differences peacefully and imaginatively is a survival issue to flourishing in a global world—and one that language learners in particular, must manage. Interestingly, being interculturally competent is intimately related to one’s emotional regulation. Although self-regulation includes one’s ability to look inward, recognize, and deal with one’s own emotions, intercultural competence is dependent upon being able to identify and work with the emotions of diverse others.  Because emotion is most accurately displayed through the nonverbal channel of communication, my ELTOC presentation will provide hands-on ideas about how teachers might raise their language learners’ awareness of the encoding and decoding of nonverbal behaviour, and thus becoming more interculturally competent.

The hands-on teaching ideas I will share include conveying and interpreting intercultural messages via the following codes:

  • Gesture
  • Facial expression
  • Vocal cues
  • Space and touch

Citizenship  

Social responsibility, both locally and globally, is at the heart of citizenship.  Inextricably intertwined with advocating for the elimination of discrimination and respect for diversity, it also encompasses sustainable living practices.  With that in mind, my ELTOC presentation in February will touch upon a variety of teaching ideas inspired by UNESCO’s 17 sustainability goals (https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/envision2030.html):

GOAL 1: No Poverty

GOAL 2: Zero Hunger

GOAL 3: Good Health and Well-being

GOAL 4: Quality Education

GOAL 5: Gender Equality

GOAL 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

GOAL 7: Affordable and Clean Energy

GOAL 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

GOAL 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure

GOAL 10: Reduced Inequality

GOAL 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

GOAL 12: Responsible Consumption and Production

GOAL 13: Climate Action

GOAL 14: Life Below Water

GOAL 15: Life on Land

GOAL 16: Peace and Justice Strong Institutions

GOAL 17: Partnerships to achieve the Goal


ELTOC 2020

I would like to end my blog by inviting you to join me on February 28, click the button below to sign up to the ELTOC 2020 waitlist! Sharing ideas about integrating notions of emotional self-regulation, intercultural communication and citizenship will not only be fun, but extremely informative – for both you and your learners. See you then!


Tammy Gregersen is currently teaching and researching at the American University of Sharjah where she also coordinates their Masters in TESOL program. She has co-authored/co-edited several books, with three more in press on topics such as individual differences, nonverbal communication, positive psychology in the language classroom and language teacher education.

Tammy has presented at conferences and taught in graduate programs across the globe which deems an incredible privilege because it taps into her passions for travelling and exploring new cultures.


References

  • Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Steca, P., & Malone, P. S. (2006). Teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs as determinants of job satisfaction and students’ academic achievement: A study at the school level  Journal of School Psychology, 44(6), 473–490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jsp.2006.09.001
  • Claxton, G. (2008). What’s the point of school?: Rediscovering the heart of education. Oneworld Publications.
  • Judge, T. A., & Bono, J. E. (2001). Relationship of core self-evaluations traits—self-esteem, generalized self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability—with job satisfaction and job performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 80–92. https:// doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.1.80
  • Judge, T. A., Thoresen, C. J., Bono, J. E., & Patton, G. K. (2001). The job satisfaction–job performance relationship: A qualitative and quantitative review. Psychological Bulletin, 127(3), 376–407. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.127.3.376
  • Mercer, S., MacIntyre, P.D., Gregersen, T., & Talbot, K. (2019). Positive Language Education: Combining Positive Education and Language Education. Theory and Practice of Second Language Acquisition, 4 (2), pp. 11–31.
  • Sammons, P., Day, C., Kington, A., Gu, Q., Stobart, G., & Smees, R. (2007). Exploring variations in teachers’ work, lives and their effects on pupils: Key findings and implications from a longitudinal mixed‐method study. British Educational Research Journal, 33(5), 681–701. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920701582264
  • Seligman, M. E. P., Ernst, R. M., Gillham, J., Reivich, K., & Linkins, M. (2009). Positive education: Positive psychology and classroom interventions. Oxford Review of Education, 35(3), 293–311. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054980902934563