Comparing Technology-Based and Conventional Assessment in Maritime English for Bridge Communication Competency
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
One of the essentials for safe navigation, particularly when interacting with other vessels, pilots, and Vessel Traffic Services (VTS), is effective communication on the ship’s bridge. As the institution that produces seafarers, Maritime Education and Training (MET) plays an important role in preparing cadets’ communication skills to communicate clearly and accurately in operational situations using Maritime English. Nevertheless, assessing the cadets’ communication competence is more likely to be done through conventional classroom-based methods, which may not fully reflect the real communication demands on the bridge. This study intended to compare technology-based assessment and conventional classroom-based methods in assessing cadets’ Maritime English skills related to bridge communication competency. The study employs a crossover experimental design involving fifty cadets from a maritime vocational program. The participants were assessed using two methods: technology-based and conventional classroom-based in listening, speaking, and reading. The study found that technology-based assessment produced significantly higher scores in listening and speaking, while no significant difference was observed in reading. Thus, the study indicates that technology-based assessment may be more effective for evaluating productive language skills essential for real-time bridge communication. Furthermore, cadets reported positive perceptions regarding the practicality and objectivity of technology-based assessment. The study suggests that a practical approach that integrates technology-based assessment into Maritime English is more effective for evaluating cadets’ readiness to perform communication tasks on the bridge. The findings may have contributed to improvements in assessment practices in Maritime Education and Training programs that prepare future seafarers for safe and effective maritime communication.
Article Details
Issue
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
References
[1] J. Yin, R. U. Khan, M. Afzaal, R. Nawaz, X. Shanshan, and A. Jamal, “A fuzzy bayesian quantitative risk assessment for language and communication induced accidents in maritime operations,” Ocean Coast. Manag., vol. 259, p. 107449, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2024.107449.
[2] R. Ahmmed, B. S. Sinha, D. R. Khan, and D. M. Islam, “A needs analysis of maritime English language skills for Bangladeshi seafarers to work on-board ships,” Mar. Policy, vol. 119, p. 104041, 2020, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2020.104041.
[3] J.-U. Schröder-Hinrichs, E. Hollnagel, M. Baldauf, S. Hofmann, and A. Kataria, “Maritime human factors and IMO policy,” Marit. Policy Manag., vol. 40, May 2013, doi: 10.1080/03088839.2013.782974.
[4] K. Aylward, A. Johannesson, R. Weber, S. N. MacKinnon, and M. Lundh, “An evaluation of low-level automation navigation functions upon vessel traffic services work practices,” WMU J. Marit. Aff., vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 313–335, 2020, doi: 10.1007/s13437-020-00206-y.
[5] J. Frittelli, “Ship navigation in harbors: Safety issues,” Congressional Research Service, the Library of Congress, 2008.
[6] I. Faradillah, “Need Analysis On Teaching Maritime English For Nautical Students At Poltekpel Surabaya: Current Practices And Future Directions,” Berajah J., vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 111–120, 2025.
[7] D. Abimanto, R. Hartono, and S. Wahyuni, “Bridging the Contextual Realism Gap: A Learning Analytics Model for STCW-Compliant Maritime English Training,” Elsya J. English Lang. Stud., vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 298–311, 2025.
[8] A. Merzifonluoğlu and A. T. Tulgar, “The effect of technology-supported language learning on communication competencies,” Erzincan Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Derg., vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 524–537, 2023.
[9] S. N. Veettil and M. Singh, “The Integration of Technology-assisted Assessment in esl (English as a second Language) Instruction”.
[10] L. T. X. Cao, H. Van Nguyen, and H. P. Bui, “Technology-assisted task-based second language assessment for learning,” in Innovations and applications of technology in language education, Auerbach Publications, 2024, pp. 130–146.
[11] A. Aprizawati, R. Romadhoni, and B. Budhisantoso, “Development of Smart Assessment System For Evaluating Maritime English Competence Using Machine Learning,” AL-ISHLAH J. Pendidik., vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 1076–1091, 2026.
[12] D. Ratnaningsih, “Enhancing students’ speaking skills using ChatGPT application in ESP maritime English learning,” JEES (Journal English Educ. Soc., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 186–197, 2025.
[13] K. Komari, L. Yulianingsih, U. L. Hanum, and E. Paranoan, “The Impact of English Language Proficiency on Career Opportunities in the Maritime Industry,” Educ. J. Pendidikan, Pengajaran, dan Pembelajaran, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 13–23, 2026.
[14] A. Dhanan, “Using Innovative Technologies in the Process of Teaching Maritime English,” Int. J. Educ. Dev., vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 61–68, 2024.
[15] N. Yunitri et al., “Metode penelitian eksperimental,” J. Kesehat., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 67–79, 2024, [Online]. Available: https://jurnal.stikesbethesda.ac.id/index.php/jurnalkesehatan/article/view/453
[16] L. Saputri and M. Mardiati, “Desain Penelitian Quasi Eksperimen Dalam Penelitian Pendidikan: Kajian Pustaka,” J. Serunai Mat., vol. 17, no. 2, 2025.
[17] R. Agustianti et al., Metode penelitian kuantitatif dan kualitatif. Tohar Media, 2022.
[18] A. Adil et al., “Metode penelitian kuantitatif dan kualitatif: Teori dan praktik,” Jakarta Get Press Indones., vol. 17, 2023.