PLANNING FUTURE INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAMS THROUGH COMPUTERIZED L2 DYNAMIC ASSESSMENT

• Authors: Saman Ebadi , Abdulbaset Saeedian
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Dynamic Assessment (DA) is a postmodern notion in testing which sees instruction and assessment as inextricably mingled contending that learners will progress if provided with dynamic interactions. The main purpose of the study is to see if the scores generated by the computerized dynamic assessment (C-DA) which is grounded in Vygotsky’s theoretical framework in congruence with the concept of DA can lead to designing a syllabus which results in the participants’ reading comprehension development. In the present study, a total of 32 Iranian EFL undergraduates from a university in Iran were selected on the availability basis. The study made use of the interventionist approach (the same mediation for all individual learners) to DA due to a two-fold aim: being more economically-supported and owing to its feasibility in focusing on larger cohorts of individuals. Investigating the learners’ generated scoring profiles through CDA revealed that not only did the learners have varying problem areas but also they needed different amount of mediation for identical test items. These profiles reiterated the fact that learners with different zones of proximal development (ZPDs) require customized instructional programs to reflect their individualized needs.

Keywords

EN

instructional program; dynamic assessment; computerized dynamic assessment; interventionist DA

• Publisher: IATEFL Poland Computer Special Interest Group & University of Nicosia
• Journal: Teaching English with Technology
• Year: 2016
• Volume: 16
• Issue: 4
• Pages: 12-32

Contributors

author

Saman Ebadi

• Razi University

author

Abdulbaset Saeedian

• Razi University

References

• Ableeva, R. (2010). Dynamic Assessment of Listening Comprehension In Second Language Learning (Doctoral dissertation). Pennsylvania State University, University Park, USA.
• Aljaafreh, A., & Lantolf, J. P. (1994). Negative feedback as regulation and second language learning in the zone of proximal development. The Modern Language Journal, 78, 465-483.
• Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Kucan, L. (2013). Bringing Words to Life: Robust Vocabulary Instruction. New York: The Guilford Press.
• Birjandi, P., & Ebadi, S. (2012). Microgenesis in dynamic assessment of L2 learners’ socio-cognitive development via web 2.0. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 32, 34-39.
• Budoff, M. (1987). The validity of learning potential assessment. In C. S. Lidz (ed.), Dynamic Assessment: An Interactional Approach To Evaluating Learning Potential (pp. 53–81). New York: The Guilford Press.
• Frawley, W., & Lantolf, J. P. (1985). Second language discourse: A Vygotskyan perspective. Applied Linguistics, 6, 19-44.
• Gibbons, P. (2003). Mediating language learning: Teacher interactions with ESL students in a content-based classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 37(2), 247-273.
• Haney, M., & Evans, J. (1999). National survey of school psychologists regarding use of dynamic assessment and other nontraditional assessment techniques. Psychology in the Schools, 36(4), 295-304.
• Haywood, H., & Tzuriel, D. (2002). Applications and challenges in dynamic assessment. Peabody Journal of Education, 77(2), 40–63.
• Haywood, H. C., & Lidz, C. S. (2007). Dynamic Assessment in Practice: Clinical and Educational Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Kozulin, A., & Gindis, B. (2007). Sociocultural theory and education of children with special needs, from defectology to remedial pedagogy. In H. Daniels, M. Cole & J. V. Wertsch (eds.), The Cambridge Companion to Vygotsky (pp. 332-336). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Kozulin, A., & Garb, E. (2002). Dynamic assessment of EFL text comprehension of at-risk students. School Psychology International, 23(1), 112-127.
• Lantolf, J. P. (2009). Dynamic assessment: The dialectic integration of instruction and assessment. Language Teaching Journal, 42(3), 355-368.
• Lantolf, J. P. (2000). Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2013). The unfairness of equal treatment: Objectivity in L2 testing and dynamic assessment. Educational Research and Evaluation, 19(2-3), 141-157.
• Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2011). Dynamic assessment in the classroom: Vygotskian praxis for second language development. Language Teaching Research, 15(1), 11-33.
• Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2006). Sociocultural Theory and the Genesis of Second Language Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Lidz, C. S., & Gindis, B. (2003). Dynamic assessment of the evolving cognitive functions in children. In A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V. S. Ageyev, & S. M. Miller (eds.), Vygotsky’s Educational Theory in Cultural Context (pp. 99-116). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Mardani, M., & Tavakoli, M. (2011). Beyond reading comprehension: The effect of adding a dynamic assessment component on EFL reading comprehension. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 2(3), 688-696.
• Merriam, S. B. (1997). Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
• Nassaji, H., & Swain, M. (2000). A Vygotskian perspective on corrective feedback in L2: The effect of random versus negotiated help on the learning of English articles. Language Awareness, 9(1), 34-51.
• Pishghadam, R., Barabadi, E. (2012). Constructing and validating computerized assessment of L2 reading comprehension. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 15(1), 73-95.
• Pishghadam, R., Barabadi, E., & Kamrood, A. M. (2011). The differing effect of computerized dynamic assessment of L2 reading comprehension on high and low achievers. Journal of Language Teaching & Research, 2(6), 1353-1358.
• Poehner, M, E. (2008). Dynamic Assessment: A Vygotskian Approach to Understanding and Promoting L2 development. Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA: Springer Science & Business Media.
• Poehner, M. E. (2005). Dynamic Assessment of Oral Proficiency among Advanced L2 Learners of French (Unpublished dissertation). Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.
• Poehner, M. E., & Lantolf, J. P. (2005). Dynamic assessment in the language classroom. Language Teaching Research, 9, 233-265.
• Poehner, M. E., Zhang, J., & Lu, X. (2015). Computerized dynamic assessment (C-DA): Diagnosing L2 development according to learner responsiveness to mediation. Language Testing, 32(3), 337-357.
• Poehner, M. E., & Lantolf, J. P. (2013). Bringing the ZPD into the equation: Capturing L2 development during Computerized Dynamic Assessment (C-DA). Language Teaching Research, 17(3), 1-21.
• Poehner, M. E., & Lantolf, J. P. (2010). Vygotsky's teaching-assessment dialectic and L2 education: The case for dynamic assessment. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 17(4), 312-330.
• Shabani, K. (2012). Dynamic assessment of L2 learners’ reading comprehension processes: A Vygotskian perspective. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 32, 321-328.
• Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching disciplinary literacy to adolescents: Rethinking content-area literacy. Adolescent Literacy, 78(1), 40-59.
• Smagorinsky, P. (1995). The social construction of data: Methodological problems of investigating learning in the zone of proximal development. Review of Education Research, 65(3), 191-212.
• Snow, C. E. (2002). Reading for Understanding: Toward an R & D Program in Reading Comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.
• Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2002). Dynamic Testing. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Summers, R. (2008). Dynamic Assessment: Towards a Model of Dialogic Engagement (Doctoral dissertation). University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, USA.
• Tajeddin, Z., & Tayebipour, F. (2012). The effect of Dynamic Assessment on EFL learners’ acquisition of request and apology. The Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 4(2), 87-118.
• Tzuriel, D., & Shamir, A. (2002). The effects of mediation in computer assisted dynamic assessment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18, 21–32.
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and Society: The Development of Higher Mental Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
• Wells, G. (1998). Using L1 to master L2: A response to Anton and DiCamilla’s ‘socio-cognitive functions of L1 collaborative interaction in the L2 classroom’. Canadian Modern Language Review, 54(3), 343-353.
• Wertsch, J.V. (1985). Vygotsky and the Social Formation of Mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.