The Impact of Interactionist Dynamic Assessment on Explanation Writing Ability of Intermediate EFL Learners
International Journal of Language and Linguistics
Volume 4, Issue 5, September 2016, Pages: 183-189
Received: Sep. 8, 2016; Accepted: Sep. 21, 2016; Published: Oct. 10, 2016
Views 2911      Downloads 106
Authors
Hooshang Khoshsima, English Language Department, Chabahar Maritime University, Chabahar, Iran
Amin Saed, English Language Department, Chabahar Maritime University, Chabahar, Iran
Mohammad Mortazavi, English Language Department, Chabahar Maritime University, Chabahar, Iran
Article Tools
Follow on us
Abstract
Dynamic assessment is an approach based on sociocultural theory of mind aimed to combine instruction and assessment in which learners’ development is simultaneously assessed and improved with regard to their Zone of Proximal Development. This study aimed to integrate principles of dynamic assessment in providing feedback with process-genre approach to teach explanation genre writing. The participants of the study (N=10) were male and female students majoring English translation for BA degree at Chabahar Maritime University. The results of independent samples t-test showed that the learners who were exposed to interactionist approach of DA, performed better than the control group in posttest. Findings of the study suggested that providing feedback through negotiation let students understand their problem and remove them better.
Keywords
Assessment for Learning, Formative Assessment, Dynamic Assessment, ZPD, Explanation Genre
To cite this article
Hooshang Khoshsima, Amin Saed, Mohammad Mortazavi, The Impact of Interactionist Dynamic Assessment on Explanation Writing Ability of Intermediate EFL Learners, International Journal of Language and Linguistics. Vol. 4, No. 5, 2016, pp. 183-189. doi: 10.11648/j.ijll.20160405.13
Copyright
Copyright © 2016 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
References
[1]
Afful, J. B. (2009). RHETORICAL ANALYSIS OF INTRODUCTIONS IN AN UNDERGRADUATE ENGLISH STUDIES COURSE. ESP World, www.esp-world.info, Issue 5 (26), Volume 8.
[2]
Aghaebrahimian, A., Rahimirad, M., Ahmadi, A., & Khalilpour Alamdari, J. (2014). Dynamic Assessment of Writing Skill in Advanced EFL Iranian Learners. Social and Behavioral Sciences 98, 60-67.
[3]
Alavi, S., & Taghizadeh, M. (2014). Dynamic Assessment of Writing: The Impact of Implicit/Explicit Mediations on L2 Learners’ Internalization of Writing Skills and Strategies. Educational Assessment, 19, 1-16.
[4]
Aljaafreh, A., & Lantolf, L. P. (1994). Negative Feedback as Regulation and Second Language Learning in the Zone of Proximal Development. The Modern Language Journal, 78, iv, 465-483.
[5]
Badger, R., & White, G. (2000). A process genre approach to teaching writing. ELT Journal Volume 54 (2), 153-160.
[6]
Carless, D. (2006). Differing perceptions in the feedback process. Studies in Higher Education, 31 (2), 219–233.
[7]
Chaisiri, T. (2010). Implementing a Genre Pedagogy to the Teaching of Writing in a University Context in Thailand. Language Education in Asia, 1 (1), 181-199.
[8]
Cole, M., John-Steiner, V., Scribner, S., & Souberman, E. (1978). Mind in Society, The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. London: Harvard University Press.
[9]
Ellery, K. (2008). Assessment for learning: A case study using feedback effectively in an essay-style test. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 33 (4), 421–429.
[10]
Ellis, R. (2009). Communication Skills Stepladders to Success for the Professional. Bristol: Intellect Ltd.
[11]
Furtak, E. M., & Ruiz-Primo, M. A. (2008, February 29). Making Students' Thinking Explicit in Writing and Discussion: An Analysis of Formative Assessment Prompts. Science Education, 799-824.
[12]
Ghahremani, D., & Azarizad, R. (2013). The Effect of Dynamic Assessment on EFL Process Writing: Content and Organization. International Research Journal of Applied and Basic Sciences, Vol. 4 (4), 874-878.
[13]
Handley, K., & Williams, L. (2009). From copying to learning: Using exemplars to engage students with assessment criteria and feedback. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education.
[14]
Hashemnezhad, H., & Faollahzadeh, F. (2015). The Immediate and Delayed Effect of Dynamic Assessment on the Improvementof Iranian EFL Learners’ Writing Performance. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 193-209.
[15]
Huot, B. (2002). (Re)Articulating writing assessment: Assessment for teaching and learning. Utah: Utah State University Press.
[16]
Hyland, K. (2003). Second Language Writing. New York: Cambridge University Press.
[17]
Isavi, E. (2012). The Effect of Dynamic Assessment on Iranian L2 Writing Performance. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED530902.
[18]
Johns, A. M. (2002). Genre in the Classroom, Multiple Perspective. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, In.
[19]
Kozulin, A., & Grab, E. (2002). Dynamic Assessment of EFL Text Comprehension. SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY INTERNATIONAL. Retrieved from http://www.researchgate.net/publication/247718407.
[20]
Kozulin, A., Gindis, B., Ageyev, V. S., & Miller, S. M. (2003). Vygotsky’s Educational Theory in Cultural Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[21]
Kumaravadivelu, B. (2008). Understanding Language Teaching. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
[22]
Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[23]
Lee, I. (2007). Feedback in Hong Kong Secondary Writing Classrooms: Assessment for Learning or Assessment of Learning? Assessing Writing, 180-198.
[24]
Lingzhu, J. (2009). Genre-based Approach for Teaching English Factual Writing. Major Articles, Year 11; Issue 2. Retrieved from www.hltmag.co.uk/apr09/mart02.htm.
[25]
Looney, J. (2005). Formative Assessment: Improving Learning in Secondary Classrooms. paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
[26]
Luu, T. T. (2011). Teaching Writing Through Genre-based Approach. BELT Journal, Porto Alegre, V. 2, N. 1, 121-136.
[27]
Malakul, K., & Bowering, M. (2006). The application of Genre Theory to improve Academic English Writing Courses. (pp. 328-334). Edith Cowan University, Perth Western Australia: Proceedings of the EDU-COM 2006 International Conference.
[28]
MIAO, T., & Lv, M. (2013). Dynamic Assessment in ESL Writing Classroom. ICETMS, 676-679.
[29]
Moss, C. M., & Brookhart, S. M. (2009). Advancing Formative Assessment in Every Classroom, a guide for instructional leaders. USA: ASCD publications.
[30]
Murphy, R. (2011). Dynamic Assessment, Intelligence and Measurement. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
[31]
Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006, april). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31, 199-218.
[32]
Poehner, M. E. (2008). A Vygotskian Approach to Understanding and Promoting L2 Development. Pennsylvania: Springer.
[33]
Poehner, M. E., & Lantolf, J. P. (2005). Dynamic Assessment in the Language Classroom. Language Teaching Research, 233-265.
[34]
Ramaprasad, A. (1983). On the definition of feedback. Behavioral Sciences, 28 (1), 4-13.
[35]
Richards, J. C., & Renandya, W. A. (2002). Methodology in Language Teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press.
[36]
Shrestha, P., & Coffin, C. (2012). Dynamic assessment, tutor mediation and academic writing development. Assessing Writing, 55-70.
[37]
Sperling, M. (1996). Revisiting the Writing-Speaking Connection: Challenges for Research on Writing and Writing Instruction. Review of Educational Research, Vol. 66, No.1, 53-86.
[38]
Stern, L. A., & Solomon, A. (22–41). Effective faculty feedback: The road less traveled. Assessing Writing, 11 (1), 2006.
[39]
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre Analysis. English in Academic and Research Setting. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[40]
Taras, M. (2005). Assessment - Summative and Formative - Some Theoretical Reflections. British Journal of Educational Studies, 466-478.
[41]
Ur, P. (2009). A Course in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[42]
Walker, M. (2009). An investigation into written comments on assignments: Do students find them usable? Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 34 (1), 67–78.
[43]
Weaver, M. R. (2006). Do students value feedback? Student perceptions of tutors’ written responses. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 31 (3), 379–394.
[44]
Wiliam, D. (2011). What is Assessment for Learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 3-14.
[45]
Xiaoxiao, L., & Yan, L. (2010). A Case Study of Dynamic Assessment in EFL Process Writing. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistis, 24-40.
[46]
Yan, G. (2005). A Process Genre Model for Teaching Writing. English Teaching Forum, Vol. 43, No. 3, 18-26.
ADDRESS
Science Publishing Group
1 Rockefeller Plaza,
10th and 11th Floors,
New York, NY 10020
U.S.A.
Tel: (001)347-983-5186