Attitudes and Actual Experiences of Iranian EFL Learners in Distance English Language Education

Badpa, Hamed; Alinouri, Leila

doi:10.22080/iselt.2025.30484.1149

Attitudes and Actual Experiences of Iranian EFL Learners in Distance English Language Education

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Hamed Badpa ¹
Leila Alinouri ²

¹ Ph.D. Student, Department of English Language and Literature, Faculty of Literature and Languages, Arak University, Arak, Iran

² Assistant Professor, Department of Foreign Languages, Isf.C., Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran

10.22080/iselt.2025.30484.1149

Abstract

The rapid growth of online learning in EFL education has outpaced research on how learners’ expectations align with their actual experiences, particularly in understudied contexts like Iran. This study addresses this gap by investigating whether Iranian upper-intermediate EFL learners’ pre-course expectations matched their post-course experiences in distance education, while also examining the unique role of instructor support, active learning, and learner autonomy in shaping these perceptions. Grounded in transactional distance theory (Moore, 1993), which emphasizes learner-instructor interaction and course structure as key mediators of satisfaction, the study employed a quantitative descriptive design using the validated Distance Education Learning Environments Survey (DELES). The DELES, which demonstrates strong reliability (Cronbach’s α > 0.85 for all subscales in prior EFL studies), was administered to 90 learners from three Arak language institutes via Google Forms at the start and end of their 12-week online courses. Convenience sampling ensured participants (aged 19-45) had sufficient English proficiency to engage with the instrument. Results revealed that while overall satisfaction exceeded expectations, significant discrepancies (p < .05, Mann-Whitney U test) emerged specifically in instructor support, active learning, and autonomy—factors critical for mitigating transactional distance in online EFL contexts. These findings extend prior work on technology-enhanced language learning by highlighting actionable strategies for Iranian online course designers: structured peer collaboration, scaffolded autonomy-building tasks, and synchronous instructor feedback loops. The study contributes original insights into how socio-educational contexts influence the implementation of global online learning models.

Keywords

Main Subjects

Copyright © 2025 The Author(s). Published by the Faculty of Persian Literature and Foreign Languages at the University of Mazandaran. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) license.

References

Afzali, K., & Astaraki, H. (2021). A multimodal analysis of Iranian EFL learners’ willingness to participate in collaborative tasks: A conversation analysis approach. Applied Research on English Language, 10, 167-190. https://doi.org/10.22108/are.2021.127378.1687

Aynas, N., & Aslan, M. (2021). The effects of authentic learning practices on problem-solving skills and attitude towards science courses. Journal of Learning for Development, 8(1), 146-161. https://doi.org/10.56059/jl4d.v8i1.482

Biggs, M. J. (2006). Comparison of student perceptions of classroom instruction: Traditional, hybrid, and distance education. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 7(2), 46-51.

Cirocki, A., Anam, S., & Retnaningdyah, P. (2019). Readiness for autonomy in English language learning: The case of Indonesian high school students. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 7(2), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.30466/ijltr.2019.120695

Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (2 ed.). Pearson.

Farahian, M., & Rajabi, Y. (2022). An investigation into the level of reflection and barriers to EFL teachers’ reflective practice. International Journal of Research in English Education, 7(2), 81-96. https://doi.org/10.52547/ijree.7.2.81

Fidalgo, P., Thormann, J., Kulyk, O., & Lencastre, J. A. (2020). Students’ perceptions on distance education: A multinational study. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(1), 18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00194-2

Golonka, E. M., Bowles, A. R., Frank, V. M., Richardson, D. L., & Freynik, S. (2014). Technologies for foreign language learning: A review of technology types and their effectiveness. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27(1), 70-105. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2012.700315

Hiver, P., Al-Hoorie, A. H., Vitta, J. P., & Wu, J. (2021). Engagement in language learning: A systematic review of 20 years of research methods and definitions. Language Teaching Research, 28(1), 201-230. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211001289

Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educause Review. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between-emergency-remote-teaching-and-online-learning

Howard, S. K., Tondeur, J., & Yang, J. (2022). What teachers want: Addressing teacher burnout post-COVID. Teaching and Teacher Education, 119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103815

Jalilinia, F. (2021). Iranian high school EFL learners’ attitude toward online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Languages and Language Teaching, 9(4), 23-40. https://doi.org/10.33394/jollt.v9i4.4225

Moore, M. G. (1993). Theory of transactional distance. In D. Keegan (Ed.), Theoretical principles of distance education (pp. 22-29). Routledge.

Naibaho, L. (2019). Teachers’ roles on English language teaching: A student-centered learning approach. International Journal of Research - Granthaalayah, 7(4), 206-212. https://doi.org/10.29121/granthaalayah.v7.i4.2019.892

Noel, L. (2009). National online learners’ priorities report. https://www.ruffalonl.com/wp-content/uploads/pdf/NatSatisfactionReportOnlineLearners09.pdf

Roach, V., & Lemasters, L. (2006). Satisfaction with online learning: A comparative study. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 5(3), 317-322. http://www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/pdf/5.3.7.pdf

Sadoughi, M., & Hejazi, S. Y. (2021). Teacher support and academic engagement among EFL learners: The role of positive academic emotions. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 70, 101060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.101060

Sahin, I. (2007). Predicting student satisfaction in distance education and learning environments. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 8(2), 113-119. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED496541.pdf

Selwyn, N. (2019). Education and technology: Key issues and debates (3 ed.). Bloomsbury Academic.

Stockwell, G., & Hubbard, P. (2013). Some emerging principles for mobile-assisted language learning.https://www.tirfonline.org/resource/2013-october-mall-some-emerging-principles-for-mobile-assisted-language-learning/

Vandergrift, K. E. (2002). The anatomy of a distance education course: A case study analysis. Online Learning Journal, 6(1), 76-90. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/7bd0/9a8119a5350595f7897e885ee591ecde3ae5.pdf

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

Walker, S. L., & Fraser, B. J. (2005). Development and validation of an instrument for assessing distance learning environments in higher education: The Distance Education Learning Environments Survey (DELES). Learning Environments Research, 8(3), 289-308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-005-1568-3

Watts, M. M. (2003). Taking the distance out of education. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2003(94), 97-104. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.105

Zou, D., Huang, Y., & Xie, H. (2021). Digital game-based vocabulary learning: Where are we and where are we going? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 34(5-6), 751-777. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2019.1640745