Effect of Interactionist and Interventionist Dynamic Assessments on Iraqi EFL Learners’ Writing Performance

Subject Areas :

Saad Mezher Karamallah ¹ , Mehdi Sarkhosh ²

1 - Department of English, Urmia State University, Urmia, Iran
2 - Urmia University

Received: 2024-03-12 Accepted : 2024-07-17 Published : 2025-01-19

Keywords: Dynamic Assessment, Writing Proficiency, Interactionist Approach, Interventionist Approach, Language Assessment,

Abstract :

This quantitative correlational study explored the effects of different types of dynamic assessment on the writing proficiency of Iraqi female EFL learners. Fifty-four upper-intermediate female students, aged 17-25, from the Global English Institute in Baghdad, Iraq, participated in the study. The participants were selected based on their performance in the Oxford Placement Test (OPT) and were subsequently divided into three groups: interactionist experimental, interventionist experimental, and control. The study employed several instruments, including a participation consent form, the OPT, a writing pre-test and post-test, and writing practices administered during the treatment phase. The intervention covered a full semester, with each group receiving tailored instructional strategies. The interactionist group focused on the Dynamic Mediation Process, while the interventionist group employed targeted interventions based on individual needs. The results, analyzed through pre- and post-tests, demonstrated the efficacy of dynamic assessment techniques in enhancing writing skills, suggesting their potential for broader application in EFL contexts.

References:

Abdolrezapour, P. (2017). Improving L2 reading comprehension through emotionalized dynamic assessment procedures. Journal of psycholinguistic research, 46(3), 747-770.
Alsamdani, H. A. (2010). The relationship between Saudi EFL students’ writing competence, L1 writing proficiency, and self-regulation. European Journal of Social Science, 16(1), 53-63.
Barjesteh, H., & Niknezhad, F. (2013). A Paradigm Shift Toward A New Philosophy of Assessment: Dynamic Assessment from A Critical Perspective. Indian Journal of Fundamental and Applied Life Sciences, 3(3), 526–535.
Birjandi, P., Daftarifard, P., & Lange, R. (2011). The effects of dynamic assessment on Rasch item and person hierarchies in second language testing. International Journal of Language Studies (IJLS), 5(1), 125-140.
Davin, K. J. (2011). Group dynamic assessment in an early foreign language learning program: Tracking movement through the zone of proximal development (Unpublished doctoral dissertation) University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburg.
Douglas, D. (2010). Understanding language testing. Abingdon: Hodder Education.
Elliott, J. G. (2003). Dynamic assessment in educational contexts: Purpose and promise. In C. S. Lidz & J. G. Elliot (Eds.), Dynamic assessment: Prevailing models and applications (pp. 713-740). New York, NY: Elsevier.
Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Emmons, R. A. (2003). Personal goals, life meaning, and virtue: Wellsprings of a positive life. In C. L. M. Keyes & J. Haidt (Eds.), Flourishing: Positive psychology and the life well-lived (pp. 105–128). American Psychological Association.
Félix-Brasdefer, J. C. (2007). Pragmatic development in the Spanish as a FL classroom: A cross-sectional study of learner requests.
Haywood, H. C., & Lidz, C. S. (2007). Dynamic assessment in practice: Clinical and educational applications. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Heidari, F. (2019). The effect of dynamic assessment of Toulmin model through teacher- and collective-scaffolding on argument structure and argumentative writing achievement of Iranian EFL learners. Iranian Journal of Applied Language Studies, 11(2), 81–100.
Irons, A., & Elkington, S. (2021). Enhancing learning through formative assessment and feedback. Routledge.
Kasper, G., & Roever, C. (2005). Developing pragmatic competence. Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning, 3(2), 317-334.
Köroglu, Z. Ç. (2019). Interventionist Dynamic Assessment's Effects on Speaking Skills Testing: Case of ELT Teacher Candidates. Advances in language and literary studies, 10(3), 23-31.
Kozulin, A., & Garb, E. (2002). Dynamic assessment of EFL text comprehension. School Psychology International, 23(1), 112-127.
Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2004). Dynamic assessment of L2 development: Bringing the past into the future. Journal of applied linguistics, 1(1), 23-37.
Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2011). Dynamic assessment in the classroom: Vygotskian praxis for second language development. Language Teaching Research, 15, 11-33.
Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2013). The unfairness of equal treatment: Objectivity in L2 testing and Dynamic Assessment. Educational Research and Evaluation, 19, 141–157 .
Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2014). Sociocultural theory and the pedagogical imperative in L2 education. Vygotskian praxis and the research/practice divide. London: Routledge.
Leung, C. (2007). Dynamic assessment: Assessment for and as teaching?. Language Assessment Quarterly, 4(3), 257-278.
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 University Press.
Lussier, C. M. & Swanson, H. L. (2005). Dynamic assessment: A selective synthesis of
the Experimental literature. In G. M. van der Aalsvoort, W. C. M. Resting, & A. J. J. M.
Ruijssenaars (eds.), Learning potential assessment and cognitive training: Actual research and perspectives in theory building and methodology (pp. 65-87). New York: Elsevier.
Murphy, R. (2011). Dynamic assessment, intelligence and measurement. London: John Wiley & Sons.
Poehner, M. E. (2007). Dynamic assessment of oral proficiency among advanced L2 learners of French. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Pennsylvania State University, University Park.
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.
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), 323-342.
Smit, U. (2010). English as a lingua franca in higher education: A longitudinal study of classroom discourse. De Gruyter Mouton.
Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2002). Dynamic testing: The nature and measurement of learning potential. Cambridge university press.
Struyven, K., Dochy, F., & Janssens, S. (2005). Students’ perceptions about evaluation and assessment in higher education: a review. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(4), 325-341.
Summers, R. (2008). Dynamic Assessment: Towards a Model of Dialogic Engagement (Doctoral dissertation). University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, USA.
Tabatabaei, S. & Bakhtiarvand, M. (2014). Application of Dynamic Assessment in Second and Foreign Language Teaching. International Journal for Teachers of English, 4(3), 1-14.
Taguchi, N. (2007). Corpus-informed assessment of comprehension of conversational implicatures in L2 English. TESOL quarterly, 43(4), 738-749.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Harvard university press.
Xiaoxiao, L., & Yan, L. (2010). A case study of dynamic assessment in EFL process writing, [Electronic version]. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 33, 24-40.