DYNAMIC ASSESSMENT OF PROSPECTIVE ENGLISH TEACHERS’ SPEAKING SKILLS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46827/ejel.v0i0.494Keywords:
socio-cultural theory, zone of proximal development, dynamic assessment, mediationAbstract
This study aims to investigate the effects of dynamic assessment on improving ELT learners of English as a foreign language at a large state university. The researchers followed the pre-test—treatment—post-test procedure in the study. The test type used in the assessment procedures was ‘Retelling Story Test’ type in which learners were provided with authentic news stories and expected to narrate the event in the story. The study involves both quantitative and qualitative data analysis. The statistical data were analyzed by Mann Whitney U- Test and Wilcoxon Sign Test. As for the qualitative data, responses to a student evaluation form were analyzed at the end of the whole procedure. The researchers found significance in the performances of control and experiment groups after the treatment program implemented for the latter group. The students also in the experiment group were able to maintain their success in transfer tests applied after the post-tests. Students were observed to be less dependent on the teacher’s mediation in transfer tests, which proved the power of interactions in the students’ Zone of proximal development. Furthermore, the qualitative data obtained from the student evaluation form revealed that learners found the assessment procedure beneficial.
Article visualizations:
References
Ableeva R. (2008). The Effects of Dynamic Assessment on L2 Listening Comprehension. In Lantolf, J.P., & Poehner, M. (Eds.), Socio-cultural theory and the teaching of second languages (pp. 57-86). London: Equinox Press.
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, (pp. 465–483).
Antón, M. (2009). Dynamic assessment of advanced second language learners. Foreign Language Annals, 42 (3), pp. 576-598
Bachman, L. F. and Palmer, A. S. (1996) Language Testing in Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press. In: Fulcher, G. (Ed.). Testing Second Language Speaking. London: Longman
Baleghizadeh, S. (2010). Focus on form in an EFL communicative classroom. Research on Youth and Language. 4(1). Pp.119-128.
Retrieved from: http://www.novitasroyal.org/Vol_4_1/baleghizadeh.pdf
Brown, A., & Ferrara, R.A. (1985). Diagnosing zones of proximal development. In Wertsch J. V., (Ed.), Culture, Communication and Cognition. Vygotskian Perspectives. pp. 273–305. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Campione, J.C., & Brown, A.L. (1987). Linking dynamic assessment with school achievement. In C.S. Lidz (Ed.), Dynamic assessment: An interactional approach to evaluating learning potential (pp. 82-115). New York: Guilford.
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Appied Linguistics, 1(1), pp. 1-47.
Dunn, W., & Lantolf, J.P. (1998). Vygotsky‘s Zone of Proximal Development and Krashen‘s i + 1 and the ZPD: Incommensurable constructs; incommensurable theories. Language Learning, 48, pp. 411-442.
Elliot, J. (2010). Dynamic assessment in educational setting: realizing potential. Educational Review, 55 (1), pp.15-32. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00131910303253
Elliot, J. (2003). Dynamic Assessment in Educational Settings: realising potential. Educational Review, 55, pp. 221-231.
Feuerstein, R., & Rand, Y., & Hoffman, M.B. (1979). The dynamic assessment of retarded performers: the learning potential assessment device, Dynamic assessment in the classroom theory, instruments, and techniques. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.
Feuerstein, R., & Rand, Y., & Hoffman, M.B., & Miller, R. (1980). Instrumental enrichment. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.
Feuerstein, R., & Rand, Y., & Jensen, M.R., & Kaniel, S. & Tzuriel, D. (1987). Prerequisites for Assessment of learning Potential: The LPAD Model. In C. S.
Lidz (Ed.), Dynamic Assessment: An Interactional Approach to Evaluating Learning Potential (pp. 35 51). New York: The Guilford Press.
Feuerstein, R., & Rand, Y., & Rynders, J.E. (1988). Don’t accept me as I am. Helping retarded performers excel. New York: Plenum.
Feuerstein, R., & Falik, L., & Rand, Y., & Feuerstein R.S. (2003). Dynamic assessment of cognitive modifiability. Jerusalem: ICELP Press.
Haywood, H.C., & Brown, A.L., & Wingenfeld, S. (1990). Dynamic approaches to psychoeducational assessment. School Psychology Review,19, pp. 411–22.
Haywood, H. C., & Lidz, C.S. (2007). Dynamic Assessment in Practice: Clinical and Educational Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hirai, A., & Kozumi, R. (2009). Development of a Practical Speaking Test with a Positive Impact on Learning Using a Story Retelling Technique. Language Assessment Quarterly. 6 (2), pp.151-167.
Kozulin, A. & Garb, E. (2002). Dynamic assessment of EFL text comprehension of at risk students. School Psychology International, 23, pp. 112–127.
Retrieved from: http://spi.sagepub.com/content/23/1/112
Lantolf, J. (2000). Introducing sociocultural theory. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 1-26). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lantolf, J.P. (2002). Applied Linguistics. In K. Malkjaer (Ed.), The linguistics encyclopedia (pp.22-26). London Routledge.
Lantolf, J.P. & Aljaafreh, A. (1995). Second language learning in the zone of proximal development: a revolutionary experience. International Journal of Educational Research, 23, pp. 619–632.
Lantolf, J.P. (2007a). Sociocultural source of thinking and its relevance for second language acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10 (1), pp. 31–33.
Lantolf, J.P. (2007b). Conceptual knowledge and unstructured second language learning: a socio-cultural perspective. In S. Fotos & H. Nassaji (Eds.), Form Focused Instruction and Teacher Education: Studies in Honor of Rod Ellis (pp.35-54) Oxford: Oxford University press.
Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2004). Dynamic assessment of L2 development: bringing the past into the future. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1 (2), pp. 49-72. In Lantolf J. P., & Poehner M. E. (Eds.) (2008). Sociocultural theory and the teaching of second languages, London, Equinox.
Lantolf, J.P., & M. Poehner (2010). Dynamic assessment in the classroom: Vygotsky’s praxis for second language development. Language Teaching Research, 15 (1), pp.11-33.
Retrieved from: http://ltr.sagepub.com/content/15/1/11
Lantolf, J. P., & M. Poehner (2008). Dynamic assessment. In N. Hornberger (General Ed.) The Encyclopedia of Language and Education, vol. 7: Language Testing and Assessment, E. Shohamy (Ed.), (pp. 273-285). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lantolf, J.P., & Thorne, S. (2006). Sociocultural Theory and the Genesis of Second Language Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2006). Dynamic assessment in the foreign language classroom a teacher's guide. University Park, PA: CALPER.
Lidz, C.S. (2010). Book review: M.E. Poehner, Dynamic Assessment: A Vygotskian approach to understanding and promoting L2 development. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 9(1), pp. 87-88.
Lidz, C.S. & Elliott, J.G. (2006). Use of dynamic assessment with gifted students. Gifted Education International, 21, 151-161.
Lidz, C.S. & Gindis, B. (2003). Dynamic assessment of the evolving cognitive functions in children. In Kozulin, A., & Gindis, B., & Ageyev, V.S., & Miller, S.M. (Eds.), Vygotsky’s educational theory in cultural context. pp. 99–118. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Long, M. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K.de Bot, R. Ginsberg, and C. Kramsch (eds.), Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 39-52.
Luoma, S. (2004). Assessing Speaking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Muranoi, H. (2000). Focus on form through interaction enhancement: Integrating formal instruction into a communicative task in EFL classrooms. Language Learning, 50, 617–673.
Ohta, S. A. (2005). Interlanguage pragmatics in the zone of proximal development. System. 33(3) pp. 503-517. Retrieved from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0346251X05000436
Poehner, M.E. (2005). Dynamic assessment of advanced L2 learners of French. (Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation). The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.
Poehner, M.E. (2008). Dynamic Assessment: A Vygotskian Approach to Understanding and Promoting Second Language Development. Berlin: Springer Publishing.
Poehner, M. E. (2009) Group Dynamic Assessment: Mediation for the L2 Classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 43 (3), 471-491.
Poehner, M. E., & Lantolf, J.P. (2005). Dynamic assessment in the language classroom. Language Teaching Research, 9, 233-265. Retrieved from: http://ltr.sagepub.com/content/9/3/233151
Schegloff (n.d). Transcript conventions.
Retrieved from http://www.asanet.org/journals/spq/transcriptions.cfm
Sternberg, R.J. and Grigorenko, E.L. (2002). Dynamic testing. The nature and measurement of learning potential. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Underhill, N. (1987). Testing Spoken Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Valsiner, J., & van der Veer, R. (1993). The encoding of distance: the concept of the zone of proximal development and its interpretations. In Cocking, R.R.,&
Renninger, K.A., (Eds.), The development and meaning of psychological distance, pp. 35–62. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Vygotsky, L.S. (1987). Thinking and Speech. In The Collected Works of L. S.
Vygotsky. Vol. 1. Problems of General Psychology. In R. W. Rieber & A. S. Carton (Eds.). New York: Plenum.
Wertsch, J.V. (1985). Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wertsch, J.V. (1984). The zone of proximal development: Some conceptual issues. In Rogoff, B, and J. V.Wertsch, (Eds.). Children's learning in the "zone of proximal development" (pp.7- 18). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
