Home Scaffolding Students’ Self-Assessment of Their English Essays with Annotated Samples: A Mixed-Methods Study
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Scaffolding Students’ Self-Assessment of Their English Essays with Annotated Samples: A Mixed-Methods Study

  • Ying Xu

    Ying Xu is an associate professor of English (applied linguistics) at South China University of Technology. He obtained his Ph.D. degree from Guangdong University of Foreign Studies in 2014. His research efforts have focused on language testing and assessment.

     EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: January 17, 2020
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill
Author Information
Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics
From the journal Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics Volume 42 Issue 4

Abstract

This paper aims to investigate the effectiveness of rubric-referenced student self-assessment (SSA) on students’ English essay writing by employing a two-group pre-post-quasi-experimental research design. The method was tested on 54 students at a Chinese university. During a 17-week experiment, the experimental group (EG) received the rubric and annotated samples, while the comparison group (CG) received only the rubric in self-assessment. Data sources included students’ scores in the pre-test and post-test and interviews. Quantitative findings indicated that the EG made significantly stronger progress than the CG in the post-test. Interview results suggested that annotation-based rubric-referenced SSA can help students understand the task requirements, initiate their self-regulatory behaviors, and improve their self-assessment confidence, although students still wanted to receive assistance from teachers partly due to the Confucian-heritage culture settings in China. The findings are discussed in terms of the design features of sample annotations within the framework of self-regulated learning (SRL), as well as the implications of using this method in the classroom.

Keywords: self-assessment; rubric; sample annotations; self-regulated learning

This study is supported by The Research Project of Philosophy and Social Science of Ministry of Education of China [Grant No. 17YJC740102] and Guangdong Provincial Teaching Award Nurturing Project (Name: Developing the Self-Assessment System of Writing for the National Quality Course of College English at South China University of Technology).

About the author

Ying Xu

Ying Xu is an associate professor of English (applied linguistics) at South China University of Technology. He obtained his Ph.D. degree from Guangdong University of Foreign Studies in 2014. His research efforts have focused on language testing and assessment.

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Professor Luke Harding at Lancaster University in the UK for his valuable feedback in writing this paper. Special thanks also go to the anonymous reviewers and editors of Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics.

References

Alderson, J. C. (1991). Bands and scores. In J. C. Alderson & B. North (Eds.), Language testing in the 1990s (pp. 71-86). London: Macmillan.Search in Google Scholar

AlFallay, I. (2004). The role of some selected psychological and personality traits of the rater in the accuracy of self- and peer-assessment. System 32(3), 407-425.10.1016/j.system.2004.04.006Search in Google Scholar

Andrade, H. (2010). Students as the definitive source of formative assessment: Academic self-assessment and the self-regulation of learning. In H. Andrade & G. J. Cizek (Eds.), Handbook of formative assessment (pp. 90-105). London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203874851Search in Google Scholar

Andrade, H. G. (2001). The effects of instructional rubrics on learning to write. Current Issues in Education 4(4), 1-21.Search in Google Scholar

Andrade, H. G., & Boulay, B. A. (2003). Role of rubric-referenced self-assessment in learning to write. The Journal of Educational Research 97(1), 21-30.10.1080/00220670309596625Search in Google Scholar

Andrade, H. L., Du, Y., & Mycek, K. (2010). Rubric-referenced self-assessment and middle school students’ writing. Assessment in Education: Principle, Policy & Practice 17(2), 199-214.10.1080/09695941003696172Search in Google Scholar

Andrade, H. L., Du, Y., & Wang, X. (2008). Putting rubrics to the test: The effect of a model, criteria generation, and rubric-referenced self-assessment on elementary school students’ writing. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice 27(2), 3-13.10.1111/j.1745-3992.2008.00118.xSearch in Google Scholar

Andrade, H. L., Wang, X., Du, Y., & Akawi, R. L. (2009). Rubric-referenced self-assessment and self-efficacy for writing. The Journal of Educational Research 102(4), 287-302.10.3200/JOER.102.4.287-302Search in Google Scholar

Babaii, E., Taghaddomi, S., & Pashmforoosh, R. (2016). Speaking self-assessment: Mismatches between learners’ and teachers’ criteria. Language Testing 33(3), 411-437.10.1177/0265532215590847Search in Google Scholar

Barkhuizen, G. (1998). Discovering learners’ perceptions of ESL classroom teaching/learning activities in South African context. TESOL Quarterly 32(1), 85-108.10.2307/3587903Search in Google Scholar

Bell, A., Mladenovic, R., & Price, M. (2013). Students’ perceptions of the usefulness of marking guides, grade descriptors and annotated exemplars. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 38(7), 769-788.10.1080/02602938.2012.714738Search in Google Scholar

Benson, P. (2001). Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning Harlow: Longman.Search in Google Scholar

Benson, P., & Voller, P. (1997). Autonomy and independence in language learning New York: Addison Wesley Longman.Search in Google Scholar

Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1993). Surpassing ourselves: An inquiry into the nature and implications of expertise Chicago: Open Court.Search in Google Scholar

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3(2), 77-101.10.1191/1478088706qp063oaSearch in Google Scholar

Brookhart, S. M. (2013). How to create and use rubrics for formative assessment and grading Alexandria, VA: ASCD.10.4135/9781452218649.n15Search in Google Scholar

Brown, A. (2005). Self-assessment of writing in independent language learning programs: The value of annotated samples. Assessing Writing 10(3), 174-191.10.1016/j.asw.2005.06.001Search in Google Scholar

Brown, G. T. L., & Harris, L. R. (2013). Student self-assessment. In J. H. McMillan (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of research on classroom assessment (pp. 367-393). Thousand Oaks: Sage.10.4135/9781452218649.n21Search in Google Scholar

Butler, Y. G., & Lee, J. (2010). The effects of self-assessment among young learners of English. Language Testing 27(1), 5-31.10.1177/0265532209346370Search in Google Scholar

Carless, D. (2011). From testing to productive student learning: Implementing formative assessment in Confucian-heritage settings London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed Methods Approaches (3rd ed.). London: Sage.Search in Google Scholar

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Search in Google Scholar

Dawson, P. (2017). Assessment rubrics: Towards clearer and more replicable design, research and practice. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 42(3), 347-360.10.1080/02602938.2015.1111294Search in Google Scholar

Goodrich, H. (1996). Student self-assessment: At the intersection of metacognition and authentic assessment Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.Search in Google Scholar

Handley, K., & Williams, L. (2011). From copying to learning: Using exemplars to engage students with assessment criteria and feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 36(1), 95-108.10.1080/02602930903201669Search in Google Scholar

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research 77(1), 81-112.10.3102/003465430298487Search in Google Scholar

Hendry, G. D., Armstrong, S., & Bromberger, N. (2012). Implement standards-based assessment effectively: Incorporating discussion of exemplars into classroom teaching. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 37(2), 149-161.10.1080/02602938.2010.515014Search in Google Scholar

Hendry, G. D., Bromberger, N., & Armstrong, S. (2011). Constructive guidance and feedback for learning: The usefulness of exemplars, marking sheets and different types of feedback in a first year law subject. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 36(1), 1-11.10.1080/02602930903128904Search in Google Scholar

Jafarpur, A. (1991). Can naive EFL learners estimate their own proficiency? Evaluation & Research in Education 5(3), 145-157.10.1080/09500799109533306Search in Google Scholar

Jafarpur, A., & Yamini, M. (1995). Do self-assessment and peer-rating improve with training? RELC Journal 26(1), 63-85.10.1177/003368829502600104Search in Google Scholar

Jin, Y. (2011). Fundamental concerns in high-stakes language testing: The case of the College English Test. Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics 15(2), 71-83.Search in Google Scholar

Kostons, D., van Gog, T., & Paas, F. (2012). Training self-assessment and task-selection skills: A cognitive approach to improving self-regulated learning. Learning and Instruction 22(2), 121-132.10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.08.004Search in Google Scholar

Kumaravadivelu, B. (1991). Language learning tasks: Teacher intention and learner interpretation. ELT Journal 45(2), 98-107.10.1093/elt/45.2.98Search in Google Scholar

Kuo, I. (2011). Student perceptions of student interaction in a British EFL setting. ELT Journal 65(3), 281-290.10.1093/elt/ccq063Search in Google Scholar

Ley, K., & Young, D. (2001). Instructional principles for self-regulation. Educational Technology Research and Development 49(2), 93-103.10.1007/BF02504930Search in Google Scholar

Li, J., & Lindsey, P. (2015). Understanding variations between student and teacher application of rubrics. Assessing Writing 26, 67-79.10.1016/j.asw.2015.07.003Search in Google Scholar

Little, D. (1991). Learner autonomy: Definitions, issues and problems Dublin: Authentik.Search in Google Scholar

Luoma, S., & Tarnanen, M. (2003). Creating a self-rating instrument for second language writing: From idea to implementation. Language Testing 20(4), 440-465.10.1191/0265532203lt267oaSearch in Google Scholar

Mayo, E. (1949). Hawthorne and the Western Electric Company: The social problems of an industrial civilization London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Muijs, D. (2004). Doing quantitative research in education with SPSS London: Sage.10.4135/9781849209014Search in Google Scholar

Nicol, D., & 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), 199-218.10.1080/03075070600572090Search in Google Scholar

Orsmond, P., & Merry, S. (2011). Feedback alignment: Effective and ineffective links between tutors’ and students’ understanding of coursework feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 36(2), 125-136.10.1080/02602930903201651Search in Google Scholar

Orsmond, P., Merry, S., & Callaghan, A. (2004). Implementation of a formative assessment model incorporating peer and self-assessment. Innovations in Education and Teaching International 41(3), 273-290.10.1080/14703290410001733294Search in Google Scholar

Orsmond, P., Merry, S., & Reiling, K. (2002). The use of exemplars and formative feedback when using student derived marking criteria in peer- and self-assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 27(4), 309-323.10.1080/0260293022000001337Search in Google Scholar

Panadero, E. (2011). Instructional help for self-assessment and self-regulation: Evaluation of the efficacy of self-assessment scripts vs. rubrics Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.Search in Google Scholar

Panadero, E., & Alonso-Tapia, J. (2013). Self-assessment: Theoretical and practical connotations; When it happens, how is it acquired and what to do to develop it in our students? Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology 11(2), 551-576.10.14204/ejrep.30.12200Search in Google Scholar

Panadero, E., Brown, G. T. L., & Strijbos, J. W. (2016). The future of student self-assessment: A review of known unknowns and potential directions. Educational Psychology Review 28(4), 803-830.10.1007/s10648-015-9350-2Search in Google Scholar

Panadero, E., & Jonsson, A. (2013). The use of scoring rubrics for formative assessment purposes: A review. Educational Research Review 9, 129-144.10.1016/j.edurev.2013.01.002Search in Google Scholar

Panadero, E., & Romero, M. (2014). To rubric or not to rubric? The effects of self-assessment on self-regulation, performance and self-efficacy. Assessment in Education: Principle, Policy & Practice 21(2), 133-148.10.1080/0969594X.2013.877872Search in Google Scholar

Panadero, E., Tapia, J. A., & Huertas, J. A. (2012). Rubrics and self-assessment scripts effects on self-regulation, learning and self-efficacy in secondary education. Learning and Individual Differences 22(6), 806-813.10.1016/j.lindif.2012.04.007Search in Google Scholar

Paris, S. G., & Paris, A. H. (2001). Classroom applications of research on self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist. 36(2), 89-101.10.1207/S15326985EP3602_4Search in Google Scholar

Patri, M. (2002). The influence of peer feedback on self- and peer-assessment of oral skills. Language Testing 19(2), 109-131.10.1191/0265532202lt224oaSearch in Google Scholar

Peterson, E. R., & Irving, S. E. (2008). Secondary school students’ conception of assessment and feedback. Learning and Instruction 18(3), 238-250.10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.05.001Search in Google Scholar

Pintrich, P. R., & Zusho, A. (2007). Student motivation and self-regulated learning in the college classroom. In P. R. Perry & J. C. Smart (Eds.), The scholarship of teaching and learning in higher education: An evidence-based perspective (pp. 731-810). New York: Springer.10.1007/1-4020-5742-3_16Search in Google Scholar

Popham, W. J. (1997). What’s wrong - and what’s right - with rubrics. Educational Leadership 55, 72-75.Search in Google Scholar

Qin, X. (2008). New century College English zooming in: An integrated English course Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.Search in Google Scholar

Reddy, Y. M., & Andrade, H. (2010). A review of rubric use in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 35(4), 435-448.10.1080/02602930902862859Search in Google Scholar

Reitmeier, C. A., & Vrchota, D. A. (2009). Self-assessment of oral communication presentations in food science and nutrition. Journal of Food Science Education 8(4), 88-92.10.1111/j.1541-4329.2009.00080.xSearch in Google Scholar

Reynolds-Keefer, L. (2010). Rubric-referenced assessment in teacher preparation: An opportunity to learn by using. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation 15(8), 1-9.Search in Google Scholar

Ross, S. (1998). Self-assessment in second language testing: A meta-analysis and analysis of experiential factors. Language Testing 15(1), 1-20.10.1177/026553229801500101Search in Google Scholar

Rust, C., Price, M., & O’Donovan, B. (2003). Improving students’ learning by developing their understanding of assessment criteria and processes. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 28(2), 147-164.10.1080/02602930301671Search in Google Scholar

Sadler, D. R. (2009). Grade integrity and the representation of academic achievement. Studies in Higher Education 34(7), 807-826.10.1080/03075070802706553Search in Google Scholar

Stiggins, R. J. (2001). Student-involved classroom assessment (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall Inc.Search in Google Scholar

Sun, R., Merrill, E., & Peterson, T. (2001). From implicit skills to explicit knowledge: A bottom-up model of skill learning. Cognitive Science 25(2), 203-244.10.1207/s15516709cog2502_2Search in Google Scholar

Sundeen, T. H. (2014). Instructional rubrics: Effects of presentation options on writing quality. Assessing Writing 21, 74-88.10.1016/j.asw.2014.03.003Search in Google Scholar

Taras, M. (2010). Student self-assessment: Processes and consequences. Teaching in Higher Education 15(2), 199-209.10.1080/13562511003620027Search in Google Scholar

Wang, W. (2016). Using rubrics in student self-assessment: Student perceptions in the English as a foreign language writing context. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 41(8), 1-13.10.1080/02602938.2016.1261993Search in Google Scholar

Wiggins, G. (1998). Educative assessment: Designing assessments to inform and improve student performance San Francisco: Jossey Bass.Search in Google Scholar

Wollenschläger, M., Hattie, J., Machts, N., Möller, J., & Harms, U. (2016). What makes rubrics effective in teacher-feedback? Transparency of learning goals is not enough. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 44-45 1-11.10.1016/j.cedpsych.2015.11.003Search in Google Scholar

Zhang, J. (2009). Exploring rating process and rater belief: Seeking the internal account for rater variability Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies, Guangzhou.Search in Google Scholar

Zhang, J. (2016). Same text different processing? Exploring how raters’ cognitive and meta-cognitive strategies influence rating accuracy in essay scoring. Assessing Writing 27(4), 37-53.10.1016/j.asw.2015.11.001Search in Google Scholar

Zimmerman, B. J., & Moylan, A. R. (2009). Self-regulation: Where metacognition and motivation intersect. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 299-315). New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Appendix A. The five writing tasks used in the study

  • Write an essay about human relationships in our society. The following hints might serve as a guide:

  1. The problems existing in the relationships between people in our society

  2. The negative results such problems may bring about to our society

  3. What you can do to establish a harmonious society as a student

  • In Unit 2, Helen Keller reminds us of a common phenomenon, “It is human, perhaps, to appreciate little that which we have not.”

  1. Do you think some college students have a similar attitude toward life?

  2. What would you like to say to the students who are not sufficiently appreciative of what they have now but idle away their time on campus?

    Write an essay of about 150 words with the tips given above.

  • Write about one of your best friends according to the outline below:

  1. A brief introduction to the friend

  2. Why you have become friends

  3. The influence of the friendship on your life

  • Write an essay about your favorite sports team. The following hints may be of some help.

  1. What is your favorite sports team?

  2. Why do you like it so much?

  3. Do you always support the team?

  • Based on what you have learned from Unit 5, write an essay about the moral condition of our society. Your essay may cover the following points:

  1. Some cases which show that mutual trust is lacking in our society

  2. Consequences of the absence of mutual trust

  3. What we can do to improve the situation or to enhance mutual trust

Appendix B. The CET4 writing rubric

Essays are rated on a holistic rubric of 15. There are five score bands, namely, band 2 (1-3), band 5 (4-6), band 8 (7-9), band 11 (10-12), and band 14 (13-15). Raters should first identify a score band for a particular essay according to the band descriptors and may plus or minus 1 point if the essay is a little better or poorer than a typical essay of that band.

  • Band 2 – Seriously disorganized and underdeveloped. Language used is mostly broken with a great number of linguistic errors, the majority of which are severe errors.

  • Band 5 – Mostly relevant to the topic. Inadequate development of ideas and lack of coherence. There are considerable severe linguistic errors.

  • Band 8 – Mostly relevant to the topic. Ideas are generally clear with occasional breakdowns in coherence. There are considerable linguistic errors, some of which are severe errors.

  • Band 11 – Relevant to topic. Ideas are clearly developed with coherence. There are a limited number of linguistic errors.

  • Band 14 – Relevant to topic. Ideas are clearly developed with unity and coherence. There are little language errors except several minor ones.

Appendix C. An example of annotated sample essay

The 14-point Sample Essay of Unit 1, Book 2
1. With the fast pace of modernization and urbanization, the traditional virtues and ethical codes between people are sadly forgotten. People tend to be suspicious of others and distrust others. Consequently, with the lack of security, people choose to withdraw and turn a blind eye to others’ issues, resulting in an indifferent and unhealthy relationship.In Para. 1, the problem of lackingtrust in the society is introduced,and this forms a foundation for itsanalysis and solutions in the next two Paragraphs. This paragraph is fluent in language, clear inidea, and logical in the internalstructure.
2. It’s beyond doubt that the negative relationship has brought a large quantity of unfavorable consequences. Affected by the distrust in our relationships, our offspring will be more isolated and lonely, so their health is more likely to be harmed and their skills of expressing themselves will be challenged. Also, when we lose sight of faith and trust between people, the morale and orientation of our society will be wronly directed, which hinders the healthy development of our society.Paragraph 2 analyzes the problemboth at individual and societallevels, which makes argumentationquite powerful.
3. As the problem becomes so serious, I feel obliged to assume the responsibility as a student. Firstly, I will start with myself to be an honest and trustworthy person. Secondly, I will drawsome posters reflecting the virtues between people so as to provide them with a sense of security and satisfaction. Finally, I will make desperate effort to call on the people around to place faith in others and also be trustworthy. Though the effort I made is extremely tiny, I am convinced that a harmonious society will be eventually achieved with joint effort.Solutions are proposed in Para. 3. The author explains how to better human relationship by takinghimself/herself as the example. The whole passage reads smoothly.
Note: Red highlights are severe errors, which may impede understanding; brown highlights minor errors, which may not impede understanding; green highlights good usage of language.
A 14-point essay’s image: (1) clear and effective content structure; (2) strong argumentation with clear logic and ample supporting evidence; (3) no severe grammatical errors; (4) adequate command of complex sentences; (5) good range of sentence patterns and vocabulary.
The decision-making process: (1) scan the whole passage for its surface features (the essay is reasonably paragraphed and with acceptable length); (2) read the essay with various interpretational strategies. First, classify errors in the passage (only one spelling error). It shows that the writer has demonstrated good control of language. The language in the whole essay is accurate and appropriate. The use of fixed phrases and collocations are also grammatically correct. Second, the whole passage reads smoothly and is easy to understand. Third, the passage keeps to the point, and develops coherently with a clear route, from raising the problem, analyzing it, to proposing solutions. Last, it can be concluded that the writer has excellent writing skill; (3) make the decision that the writer deserves a14.

Appendix D. The writing prompt in June 2012 administration of CET4

Directions: For this part, you are allowed 30 minutes to write a short essay entitled On Excessive Packaging. You should write at least 120 words but no more than 180 words.

  1. Nowadays there is a phenomenon of excessive packaging in many goods.

  2. Why does this phenomenon come up?

  3. What is your opinion and suggestion on this phenomenon?

Appendix E. The writing prompt in December 2011 administration of CET4

Directions: You’re allowed 30 minutes to write a short essay entitled Nothing Succeeds Without a Strong Will by commenting on the humorous saying, “Quitting smoking is the easiest thing in the world. I’ve done it hundreds of times.” You should write at least 120 words but no more than 180 words.

Published Online: 2020-01-17
Published in Print: 2019-11-26

© 2020 FLTRP, Walter de Gruyter, Cultural and Education Section British Embassy

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Rhetoric and Language Education
  3. Quintilian’s Institutes of Oratory: Classical Rhetoric and English Language Education in China
  4. What Characterizes Chinese Students’ Exposition Besides Deduction and Induction?: A Comparative Rhetoric Perspective
  5. Second Language Speaking
  6. Intelligibility in Chinese English Spoken in Central China
  7. Second Language Writing
  8. Metadiscourse Use in L2 Student Essay Writing: A Longitudinal Cross-Contextual Comparison
  9. A Corpus-Based Comparative Study on Lexical Bundles in Native and Chinese Scholars’ English Abstracts—Taking Linguistics and Chemistry as an Example
  10. Scaffolding Students’ Self-Assessment of Their English Essays with Annotated Samples: A Mixed-Methods Study
  11. Translation Studies
  12. On Translation of Cultural Images in Chang Hen Ge from the Perspective of Reception Theory
  13. 中文提要
https://doi.org/10.1515/CJAL-2019-0030
Keywords for this article
self-assessment; rubric; sample annotations; self-regulated learning

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Rhetoric and Language Education
  3. Quintilian’s Institutes of Oratory: Classical Rhetoric and English Language Education in China
  4. What Characterizes Chinese Students’ Exposition Besides Deduction and Induction?: A Comparative Rhetoric Perspective
  5. Second Language Speaking
  6. Intelligibility in Chinese English Spoken in Central China
  7. Second Language Writing
  8. Metadiscourse Use in L2 Student Essay Writing: A Longitudinal Cross-Contextual Comparison
  9. A Corpus-Based Comparative Study on Lexical Bundles in Native and Chinese Scholars’ English Abstracts—Taking Linguistics and Chemistry as an Example
  10. Scaffolding Students’ Self-Assessment of Their English Essays with Annotated Samples: A Mixed-Methods Study
  11. Translation Studies
  12. On Translation of Cultural Images in Chang Hen Ge from the Perspective of Reception Theory
  13. 中文提要
Sign up now to receive a 20% welcome discount
Institutional Access
How does access work?
Have an idea on how to improve our website?
Please write us.
© 2025 De Gruyter Brill
Downloaded on 20.11.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/CJAL-2019-0030/html?lang=en
Scroll to top button