Assessment and Practice in Educational Sciences 3092-717X In Press 2027 03 01 A Comparative Study of Reflective-Journal and Portfolio-Based Writing Instruction on Iranian EFL Learners’ Critical Thinking Skills A Comparative Study of Reflective-Journal and Portfolio-Based Writing Instruction on Iranian EFL Learners’ Critical Thinking Skills 1 15 10.61838/japes.303 EN Journal Article 2026 04 17 <p>This study aimed to compare the effects of reflective-journal writing instruction and portfolio-based writing instruction on the critical thinking skills of Iranian EFL learners. A quasi-experimental pretest–posttest non-equivalent group design was employed. The participants were 60 Persian-speaking, eleventh-grade EFL learners aged 16–17 years, selected through convenience sampling from a technical-vocational school in Tehran and assigned to reflective-journal and portfolio-based writing groups, with 30 learners in each group. Participants’ language proficiency was initially assessed using the 2022 Cambridge Preliminary English Test. Critical thinking was measured before and after the intervention using the Persian version of the 60-item Critical Thinking Self-Assessment Scale, covering interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation, and self-regulation. The reflective-journal intervention was structured according to Gibbs’ six-stage Reflective Cycle, whereas the portfolio-based intervention followed Hamp-Lyons and Condon’s collection, selection, and reflection framework. Both groups received 12 instructional sessions from the same instructor. Data were analyzed using repeated-measures analysis of variance and simple-effects analyses. Repeated-measures analysis revealed a significant overall change in critical thinking scores across time, F(1, 58) = 193.416, p = .001, partial η² = .769. A significant group-by-time interaction was also observed, F(1, 58) = 39.095, p = .001, partial η² = .403, indicating that the magnitude of improvement differed between the instructional conditions. Simple-effects analyses showed significant improvements following reflective-journal instruction, mean difference = 96.567, p &lt; .001, 95% CI [83.007, 110.127], and portfolio-based instruction, mean difference = 36.667, p &lt; .001, 95% CI [23.107, 50.227]. The reflective-journal group also significantly outperformed the portfolio-based group at posttest, mean difference = 61.367, p &lt; .001, 95% CI [32.749, 89.985]. Both instructional approaches effectively developed learners’ critical thinking skills; however, reflective-journal writing produced substantially greater gains, suggesting that continuous, structured metacognitive reflection may foster higher-order thinking more effectively than portfolio-based evaluation and revision alone.</p> https://journalapes.com/index.php/apes/article/download/303/302