Document Type : Research article


1 Ph.D. Candidate in TEFL, Department of English Language Teaching, Ardabil Branch, Islamic Azad University, Ardabil, Iran

2 Department of English Language Teaching, Ardabil Branch, Islamic Azad University, Ardabil, Iran

3 Assistant Professor, Department of English Language Teaching, Ardabil Branch, Islamic Azad University, Ardabil, Iran


The present study was an attempt to investigate the perceptions of cognitively more and less active EFL learners about using the ENGAGE Model, as an innovation, in the EFL classroom. The participants of the study were 10 intermediate level male EFL learners in a language institute in Iran who were randomly selected out of 60 homogeneous participants of the study. Of the 10 participants, 5 were cognitively more active and 5 cognitively less active individuals. They were selected based on their answers to a validated cognitive profile questionnaire. An interview guide was used to elicit the perspectives of cognitively more and less active EFL learners on the ENGAGE Model in the EFL classroom. The findings of the study showed that the cognitively more active learners enjoyed the ENGAGE Model class more than the cognitively less active ones. Likewise, the cognitively more active learners benefited from the course more than their counterparts in the cognitively less active camp. They assessed themselves more positively in terms of L2 speaking and writing. Both cognitively more and less active learners mentioned that they liked the ENGAGE Model classroom and found it more engaging than the other methods they had experienced before. However, the cognitively less active learners reported exhaustion, saying that the assignments were beyond their ability and that they could not cope with all of them. The findings have practical implications for EFL classrooms.


Adams, N. E. (2015). Bloom’s taxonomy of cognitive learning objectives. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA103(3), 152-166.
Akbari, Z. (2015). Current challenges in teaching/learning English for EFL learners: The case of junior high school and high school. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences199, 394-401.
Baker, F. S. (2015). Emerging realities of text-to-speech software for nonnative-English-speaking community college students in the freshman year. Community College Journal of Research and Practice39(5), 423-441.
Bakir, S. (2011). Is it possible to have students think creatively with the help of active learning techniques? Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 2533-2539.
Barrett, H. C., & Kurzban, R. (2006). Modularity in cognition: Framing the debate. Psychological Review113(3), 628-639.
Bell, D., & Kahrhoff, J. (2006). Active learning handbook. Institute for Excellence.
Borich, G. D. (2016). Observation skills for effective teaching: Research-based practice. Routledge.
Bowman, S. R., Angeli, G., Potts, C., & Manning, C. D. (2015). A large annotated corpus for learning natural language inference. Learning and Development, 25, 10-21.
Breen, M. P. (1987). Contemporary paradigms in syllabus design (Part II). Language Teaching20(3), 157-174.
Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching (5th ed.). Pearson, Education, Inc.
Burri, M., Chen, H., & Baker, A. (2017). Joint development of teacher cognition and identity through learning to teach L2 pronunciation. The Modern Language Journal101(1), 128-142.
Bygate, M. (1987). Speaking. Oxford University Press.
Bygate, M. (2018). Creating and using the space for speaking within the foreign language classroom. Speaking in a Second Language17, 153-166.
Cacioppo, J.T., Berntson, G.G., & Nusbaum, H.C. (2008). Neuroimaging as a new tool in the toolbox of psychological science. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17, 62-67.
Cacioppo, J. T., & Freberg, L. (2018). Discovering psychology: The science of mind. Cengage Learning.
Caine, G. (2018). Making connections between e-learning and natural learning. In C. J. Fitzgerald, S. Laurian-Fitzgerald, & C. Popa (Eds.). Handbook of research on student-centered strategies in online adult learning environments (pp. 1-15). IGI Global.
Cambourne, B. (1988). The whole story: Natural learning and the acquisition of literacy in the classroom. Scholastic, Inc.
Chomsky, N. (1979). Language and responsibility. Pantheon. 
Clarke, D. F. (1991). The negotiated syllabus: What is it and how is it likely to work? Applied Linguistics12(1), 13-28.
Coltheart, M. (2001). Assumptions and methods in cognitive neuropsychology. In B. Rapp (Ed.). The handbook of cognitive neuropsychology: What deficits reveal about the human mind (pp. 3-21). Psychology Press.
Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage publications.
Csizér, K. (2017). Motivation in the L2 classroom. In S. Loewen & M. Sato (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of instructed second language acquisition (pp. 418-432). Routledge.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2016). Research on teaching and teacher education and its influences on policy and practice. Educational Researcher45(2), 83-91.
Doughty, C. J. (2019). Cognitive language aptitude. Language Learning69, 101-126.
Ellis, R. W. (2003). Task-based language teaching and learning. Oxford University Press.
Esfandiari, S. (2020). Investigating the effect of using the ENGAGE Model on speaking and writing performance of cognitively more and less active EFL learners: A mixed-methods study. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Islamic Azad University, Ardabil Branch, Ardabil, Iran.
Eysenck, M. W., & Keane, M. T. (2018). Cognitive psychology: A student's handbook (7th ed.). Psychology Press.
Fodor, J. A. (1983). The modularity of mind. MIT Press.
Gilabert, R., & Barón, J. (2018). Independently measuring cognitive complexity in task design for inter-language pragmatics development. Task-Based Approaches to Teaching and Assessing Pragmatics, 10,159-190.
Glance, D., Rhinehart, A., & Brown, A. (2018). Learn, expand, engage: A model for teaching clinical skills in the helping professions. Adult Learning29(3), 104-114.
Goh, C. (2008). Metacognitive instruction for second language listening development: Theory, practice, and research implications. RELC Journal, 39(2), 188-213.
Halsey, R. W., Halsey, V. W., & Gaudette, R. (2018). Connecting Californians with the chaparral. In E. C.   Underwood, H. D. Safford, N. A. Molinari, & J. E. Keeley (Eds.), Valuing chaparral (pp. 295-322). Springer.
Halsey, V.W. (2011). Brilliance by design. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
Halsey, V. W., & Halsey, R. W. (2017). Connecting Californians with the Chaparral through the ENGAGE Model.
Harley, T.A. (2004). Does cognitive neuropsychology have a future? Cognitive Neuropsychology, 21, 3-16.
Hodge, D. C., Baxter Magolda, M. B., & Haynes, C. A. (2009). Engaged learning: Enabling self-authorship and effective practice. Liberal Education95(4), 16-23.
Housen, A., & Kuiken, F. (2009). Complexity, accuracy, and fluency in second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 461-473.
Housen, A., & Simoens, H. (2016). Introduction: Cognitive perspectives on difficulty and complexity in L2 acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38, 163-175.
Hyland, K. (2018). Meta-discourse: Exploring interaction in writing. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Jordan, A., Carlile, O., & Stack, A. (2008). Approaches to learning: A guide for teachers, a guide for educators. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).
Jupp, V. (Ed.). (2006). The Sage dictionary of social research. Sage.
Kilbourne, C. (2011). Connect, inspire, and ENGAGE: A model for improving safety training     
Kim, J., & Craig, D. A. (2012). Validation of a video-conferenced speaking test. Computer Assisted Language Learning25(3), 257-275.
Kim, S. C., Ecoff, L., Brown, C. E., Gallo, A. M., Stichler, J. F., & Davidson, J. E. (2017). Benefits of a regional evidence‐based practice fellowship program: A test of the ARCC Model. Worldviews on EvidenceBased Nursing14(2), 90-98.
Kojuri, J., Takmil, F., Amini, M., & Nabeiei, P. (2015). The use of Q2 engage model (EQ2) for educational scholarship at Shiraz University of Medical Sciences (SUMS). Medical teacher37(9), 885-886.
Kozulin, A. (2002). Sociocultural theory and the mediated learning experience. School Psychology International, 6(2), 125-136.
Kumaravadivelu, B. (2003). Beyond methods: Macrostrategies for language teaching. Yale University Press.
Kung, F. W. (2013). The more, the merrier? Bilingualism in an academic perspective: Exploring the implementation of English-medium instruction in Taiwanese tertiary education. Asian EFL Journal15(4), 8-36.
Leonard, K. R., & Shea, C. E. (2017). L2 speaking development during study abroad: Fluency, accuracy, complexity, and underlying cognitive factors. The Modern Language Journal101(1), 179-193.
Matsuno, S. (2009). Self-, peer-, and teacher-assessments in Japanese university EFL writing classrooms. Language Testing, 26, 75-100.
Muijs, D., & Reynolds, D. (2017). Effective teaching: Evidence and practice. Sage.
Nilson, L. B. (2016). Teaching at its best: A research-based resource for college instructors. John Wiley & Sons.
Nodine, T. R. (2016). How did we get here? A brief history of competency‐based higher education in the United States. The Journal of CompetencyBased Education1(1), 5-11.
Ockey, G. J., Koyama, D., Setoguchi, E., & Sun, A. (2015). The extent to which TOEFL iBT speaking scores are associated with performance on oral language tasks and oral ability components for Japanese university students. Language Testing32(1), 39-62.
Page, M.P.A. (2006). What can't functional neuroimaging tell the cognitive psychologist? Cortex, 42, 428-443.
Poehner, M. E., & Swain, M. (2016). L2 development as a cognitive-emotive process. Language and Sociocultural Theory, 3(2), 219–241.
Rassaei, E. (2015). Recasts, field dependence/independence cognitive style, and L2 development. Language Teaching Research19(4), 499-518.
Rivers, W. M. (2018). Teaching foreign language skills revised. University of Chicago Press.
Robinson, P. (2001). Individual differences, cognitive abilities, aptitude complexes, and learning conditions in second language acquisition. Second Language Research17(4), 368-392.
Rosenberg, M. J., & Abelson, R. P. (2017). Symbolic psycho-logic: A model of attitudinal cognition. In A. Pelinka (Ed.), Attitude change (pp. 86–115). Routledge.
Rundel, P. W. (2018).  California chaparral and its global significance. In E. C.  Underwood, H. D. Safford, N. A. Molinari & J. E. Keeley (Eds.), Valuing chaparral (pp. 1–27). Springer.
Safari, P., &Rashidi, N. (2015). Teacher education beyond transmission: Challenges and opportunities for Iranian teachers of English. Issues in Educational Research25(2), 187-198.
Sato, M. (2017). Interaction mindsets, interactional behaviors, and L2 development: An affective‐social‐cognitive model. Language Learning67(2), 249-283.
Scrivener, J. (2012). Classroom management techniques. Cambridge University Press.
Sert, O. (2015). Social interaction and L2 classroom discourse. Edinburgh University Press.
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford University Press.
Smith, R., & Rebolledo, p. (2018). A handbook for exploratory action research. British Council. Online.
Sternberg, R. J., & Sternberg, K. (2009). Cognitive psychology (6th ed.). Wadsworth, Cengage. Learning.
Ushioda, E., & Dörnyei, Z. (2017). Beyond global English: Motivation to learn languages in a multicultural world: Introduction to the special issue. The Modern Language Journal101(3), 451-454.
Waddington, J. (2017). Competency-Based ELT: Learning to learn through our storytelling circle. In M. Baker (Ed.), Proceedings of APAC-ELT Conference (pp. 16-28). McMillan.
Wang, X., Yang, D., Wen, M., Koedinger, K., & Rosé, C. P. (2015). Investigating how a student's cognitive behavior in MOOC discussion forums affect learning gains. In O.C. Santos, C. Romero, M. Pechenizkiy & M. Desmarais (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th international conference on educational data mining, Jun 26-29, 2015. (pp. 226-233). International Educational Data Mining Society.
Zabihi, R. (2018). The role of cognitive and affective factors in measures of L2 writing. Written Communication, 35(1), 32-57.
Zhang, Z. V., & Hyland, K. (2018). Student engagement with teacher and automated feedback on L2 writing. Assessing Writing, 36, 90-102.