Dynamic Assessment and EFL Learners' Writing Journey: Focus on DA Modalities and Writing Revision Types

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Department of Foreign Languages, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

2 Department of English, Imam Ali University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

In comparison with the four main language skills, the writing skill has revealed that students are struggling with writing problems mainly due to ineffective feedback. Under the insights of Vygotsky's Socio-cultural Theory (SCT), DA intended to combine instruction and assessment and warrant both instruction and feedback quality. The present quasi-experimental study tried to investigate the effectiveness of the interventionist DA modalities (i.e., authoritative and facilitative) in developing the writing revision types of a sample of 120 advanced Iranian EFL learners in the form of two experimental and one control group. They produced sample essays for both diagnostic and achievement purposes; but in the interim, each experimental group was exposed to specific DA-oriented interventions while the control group received its conventional non-dynamic mainstream of teaching writing revision types. Parametric statistical analyses (MANOVA and one-way ANOVA) run forurposes revealed interesting findings: 1) significant differences among the three groups in favor of DA-interventions; 2) significant difference of facilitative-DA modality over authoritative-DA modality; 3) significant differences with regard to Addition Deletion, and Substitution, 4) but no differences between the control group and the experimental groups in ‘Permutation’ were detected.

Keywords

References

Ableeva, R. (2008). The effects of dynamic assessment on L2 listening comprehension. In J.P. Lantolf and M. E. Poehner (Eds.) Sociocultural theory and the teaching of second languages. London: Equinox Press, 57-86.
Aghaebrahimian, A., Rahimirad, M., Ahmadi, A., & Alamdari, J. K. (2014). Dynamic assessment of writing skill in advanced EFL Iranian learners. ProcediaSocial and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 60–67.
Alavi, S. M., Dashtestani, R. & Mellati, M. (2021). Crisis and changes in learning behaviors: technology-enhanced assessment in language learning contexts. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 46(4), 461-474. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2021.1985977  
Alemi, M. (2015). The Impact of Dynamic Assessment on Iranian EFL Students’ Writing Self-Assessment. Teaching English Language, 9(1), 145-169. doi: 10.22132/tel.2015.53735
Allen, D. (1992). Oxford placement test 2 (New edition). Oxford University Press
Aljaafreh, A., & Lantolf, J. P. (1994). Negative feedback as regulation and second language learning in the zone of proximal development. Modern Language Journal, 78(4), 465–83.
Anton, M. (2003). Dynamic assessment of advanced foreign language learners. Paper presented at American Association of Applied Linguistics, Washington, D.C.
Barzegar, R., & Azarizad, R. (2014). Using dynamic assessment to improve L2 learners’ knowledge of grammar: Evidence from the tenses. In M. Pawlak, J. Bielak, & A. M. Wiertelak (Eds.), Classroom-oriented Research (pp. 219–227). Springer
Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford University Press.
Birhan, M. (2017). Determinants of Insurance Company Profitability in Ethiopia (Case Study on Nile Insurance, Dire Dawa Branch). International Journal of Scientific and Research Publication, 7(6), 761-767.
Black, P. J., & William, D. (2010). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Kappan, 92(1), 81-90.
Carless, D. (2006). “Differing Perceptions in the Feedback Process.” Studies in Higher Education 31 (2), 219–233. doi:10.1080/03075070600572132. 
Collie, R. J., Martin, A. J., & Curwood, J. S. (2016). Multidimensional motivation and engagement for writing: Construct validation with a sample of boys. Educational Psychology, 36(4), 771-791. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2015.1093607
Dann, R. (2014). Assessment as learning: Blurring the boundaries of assessment and learning for theory, policy, and practice. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 21(2), 149-166. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2014.898128
Ebadi, S., Ashtarian, S., & Yousefi, N. (2021). Dynamic Assessment Training and Mediational Strategies of EFL Student Mediators. Teaching English Language, 15(2), 95-126.
Ebadi, S., & Saeedian, A. (2019). Exploring L2 Learning Potential through Computerized Dynamic Assessment. Teaching English Language, 13(2), 51-78.
Farhadi, H., Jafarpour, A., & Birjandi, P. (1994). Language skills testing: From theory to practice. SAMT.
Ferris, D. & Hedgcock, S. J. (2005). Teaching ESL Composition: Purpose, Process, and Practice. Lawrence Erlbaum
Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Lapp, D. (2011). Coaching middle-level teachers to think aloud improves comprehension instruction and student reading achievement. The Teacher Educator, 46(3), 231-243. https://doi.org/10.1080/08878730.2011.580043
Forsythe, A., & Johnson, S. (2017). Thanks, but no-thanks for the feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(6), 78-89. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2016.1202190
Ghahramani, D., & Azarizad, R. (2013). The effect of dynamic assessment on EFL process writing: Content and organization, [Electronic version]. International Research Journal of Applied and Basic Sciences, 4, 874-878
Han, Y., & Xu, Y. (2019). The development of student feedback literacy: the influences of teacher feedback on peer feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(5), 680-696. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1689545
Harmer, J. (2010). The practice of English language teaching, 4th ed., 5th impression.Pearson Longman
Hashemnezhad, H., & Hashemnezhad, N. (2018). A comparative study of product, process, and post-process approaches in Iranian EFL students' writing skill. Journal of Language Teaching & Research, 3(4), 722-730
Heron, J. (2001). Helping the client: A creative practical guide (5th ed.). London: Sage Publication.
Haywood, H. C., & Lidz, C. (2007). Dynamic assessment in practice. Clinical and educational applications. Cambridge University Press.
Isavi, E. (2012). The effect of dynamic assessment on Iranian L2 writing performance. Retrieved February 10, 2015, from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED530902
kheradmand Saadi, Z., & Razmjoo, S. A. (2017). Interactionist Dynamic Assessment in Academic Persuasive Writing: A Case of Two EFL Learners. Indonesian EFL Journal: Journal of ELT, Linguistics, and Literature, 3(1), 40-60.
Khodabakhsh, S., Abbasian, G., R., & Rashtchi, M. (2018). Incorporation of dynamic assessment models into developing language awareness and metacognitive strategy use in writing classes. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies, 5(4), 55-79
Khodabakhsh, S., Abbasian, G., R., Rashtchi, M., & Mowlaie, B. (2020). Developments of English language speaking skill, awareness and metacognitive strategy use in the light of dynamic assessment models. Journal of Teaching English Language, 14 (2), pp. 145-172
Khorami Fard, S., & Derakhshi, Z. (2019). On the role of dynamic assessment on promotion of writing linguistic accuracy among EFL learners: interventionist model, International Journal of Research in English Education, 4(2), 14-28
Khoshsima, H., Saed, A., & Mortazavi, M. (2016). The impact of interactionist dynamic assessment on explanation writing ability of intermediate EFL learners. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 4 (5), 183-189. DOI: 10.11648/j.ijll.20160405.13
Lam, R. (2014). Promoting self-regulated learning through portfolio assessment: Testimony and recommendations. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(6), 699-714. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.862211
Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2004). Dynamic assessment: Bringing the past into the future. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1, 49-74. https://doi.org/10.1558/japl.1.1.49.55872
Lidz, CS. (2002). Mediated learning experiences (MLE) as a basis for an alternative approach to assessment. School Psychology International, 23(1), 68–84.
Lidz, C. S., & Peña, E. D. (2009). Response to intervention and dynamic assessment: Do we just appear to be speaking the same language? Seminars in Speech and Language, 30(2), 121–134. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0029-1215719
Lyster, R., Saito, K., & Sato, M. (2013). Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms. Language Teaching, 46(1), 1-40. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444812000365
Matsuda, P. K. (1998). Situating ESL writing in a cross-disciplinary context. Written Communication, 15,99-121
Mellati, M., Alavi, S., & Dashtestani, R. (2022). Reduction of Errors in Writing Assignments: A Comparison of the Impact of Peer, Teacher, and Mixed Feedback (Research Paper). Iranian Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10(4), 152-166. Doi: 20.1001.1.24763187.2021.10.4.10.0
Mellati, M., Fatemi, M. A., & Motallebzadeh, K. (2013). The relationship between Iranian ELT instructors’ beliefs about language teaching and their practices in real classrooms. English Language Teaching; 6(4), 126-133. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/elt.v6n4p126
Mellati, M., & Khademi, M. (2014). Peer Evaluation in CMC Learning Environment and Writing Skill. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 3(5), 220-228. doi:10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.3n.5p.220
Mellati, M., & Khademi, M. (2015). The Impacts of distance interactivity on learners’ achievements in online mobile language learning: social software and participatory learning. International Journal of Web-Based Learning and Teaching Technologies (IJWLTT), 10(3), 19-35. http://doi.org/10.4018/ijwltt.2015070102
Mellati, M., & Khademi, M. (2018). Exploring teachers’ assessment literacy: impact on learners’ writing achievements and implications for teacher development. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 43(6). http://dx.doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2018v43n6.1
Mellati, M., & Khademi, M. (2020). MOOC-based educational program and interaction in distance education: long life mode of teaching. Interactive Learning Environments, 28(8), 1022-1035. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1553188
Mellati, M., Khademi, M. & Abolhassani, M. (2018). Creative interaction in social networks: Multi-synchronous language learning environments. Education & Information Technology, 23, 2053-2071. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9703-9
Mellati, M., Khademi, M. & Shirzadeh, A. (2015). The relationships among sources of teacher pedagogical beliefs, teaching experiences, and student outcomes. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 4(2), 177-184. http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.4n.2p.177
Mellati, M., Zangoei, A., & Khademi, M. (2015). Technology integration: EFL learners’ level of anxiety and their performance in writing tests. International Journal of Social Sciences & Education, 5(2), 240-252.
Min, H. T. (2008). Reviewer stances and writer perceptions in EFL peer review training. English for Specific Purposes 27, 285-305.
Murillo-Zamorano, L. R., & Montanero, M. (2017). Oral presentations in higher education: a comparison of the impact of peer and teacher feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(1), 138-150. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1303032
Naeini, J., Duvall, E. (2012). Dynamic Assessment and the Impact on English Language Learners' Reading Comprehension Performance. Language Testing in Asia, 2(2), 22-41
Nakanishi, C. (2007). The Effects of Different Types of Feedback on Revision, the Journal of Asia TEFL, 4(4), pp. 213-244
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
Poehner, M. E, & Lantolf, J. (2005). Dynamic assessment in the language classroom. Language Teaching Research, 9, 233–265.
Poehner, M. E. (2009). Group dynamic assessment: Mediation for the L2 classroom, TESOL Quarterly, 43(3), 471-491. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2009.tb00245.x
Richards, J. C. (2008). Teaching listening and speaking from theory to practice. Cambridge University Press.
Sadeghi, K., & Khanahmadi, F. (2011). Dynamic assessment of L2 grammar of Iranian EFL learners: The role of mediated learning experience. International Journal of Academic Research, 3(2), 931-936.
Shabani, K. (2018). group dynamic assessment of l2 learners' writing abilities. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 6(1), 129-149.
Shrestha, P. (2012). Dynamic assessment and academic writing: evidence of learning transfer? In Janus moment in EAP: Revisiting the past and building the future, BALEAP Biennial Conference 2013, University of Nottingham.
Shrestha, P. & Coffin, C. (2011). Dynamic assessment, tutor mediation and academic writing development. Assessing Writing, 17, 55-70
Skipper, Y., & Douglas, K. (2015). The influence of teacher feedback on children’s perceptions of student-teacher relationships. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(3), 276-288. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12070
Tajabadi, A., Ahmadian, M., Dowlatabadi, H., & Yazdani, H. (2020). EFL learners' peer negotiated feedback, revision outcomes, and short-term writing development: The effect of patterns of interaction. Language Teaching Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820951207
Tajeddin, Z., & Tayebipour, F. (2012). The effect of dynamic assessment on EFL learners’ acquisition and apology. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 4(2), 87-118.
Vafaei, P. (2011). Dynamic assessment: A dialectical integration of assessment and instruction, teachers' college. Columbia University Working Papers in TESOL & Applied Linguistics, 11(1), 63-66.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Walker, M. (2015). The quality of written peer feedback on undergraduates’ draft answers to an assignment, and the use made of the feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 40(2), 232-247. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.898737
Zare, M., Barjesteh, H., & Biria, R. (2021). Enhancing EFL Learners' Reading Comprehension Skill through Critical Thinking-Oriented Dynamic Assessment. Teaching English Language, 15(1), 189-214. doi: 10.22132/tel.2021.133238
Zarei, G. R., & Khazaie, S. (2011). Is Short Term Memory (STM) modality and gender specific: A study of cell-phone assisted EFL vocabulary learning. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 30, 680-684.
Zarrinabadi, N., & Saberi Dehkordi, E. (2021). The effects of reference of comparison (self-referential vs. normative) and regulatory focus (promotion vs. prevention) feedback on EFL learners’ willingness to communicate. Language Teaching Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211013618
Zhang, Y. H. (2008). The theoretical construction of a dynamic assessment mode in Chinese tertiary EFL writing class with online teaching and scoring systems. CALL-EJ, 14(2), 38-50.
Zhang, Y. H. (2010). Constructing Dynamic assessment mode in college English writing class. Journal of PLA University of Foreign Languages 1, 46-50
Zhang, Z., & Hyland, K. (2018). Student engagement with teacher and automated feedback on L2 writing. Assessing Writing, 36, 90-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2018.02.004
Teaching English Language
Volume 17, Issue 1
January 2023
Pages 53-79

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 15 December 2022
  • Accept Date: 15 December 2022

Share

How to cite

Statistics