An Investigation into the Effect of Online Group Dynamic Assessment on EFL Learners' Grammar Achievement
محورهای موضوعی : Journal of Studies in Learning and Teaching English
Giti Komeishi
1
(
ELT Department, Roudehen Branch, Islamic Azad University, Roudehen, Iran
)
Hamidreza Fatemipour
2
(
1ELT Department, Roudehen Branch, Islamic Azad University, Roudehen, Iran
)
کلید واژه: EFL learners, Grammar achievement, Online Group dynamic assessment.,
چکیده مقاله :
The academic discourse surrounding Dynamic Assessment (DA) acknowledges its significance within the realm of language testing, yet expresses reservations regarding its practicability when applied to larger groups of individuals. The aforementioned limitation of dynamic assessment has prompted the utilization of Online Group Dynamic Assessment (GDA). Regarding the role of GDA and English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners’ problems with grammar learning, the present study attempted to investigate the effect of GDA on EFL learners’ grammar achievement. To this end, 70 students participated in this experimental research and were given the Oxford Placement Test (OPT). As a result, a total of 52 participants were chosen through a selection process involving the OPT with subsequent random assignment to both the experimental and control groups. Subsequently, a grammar test was administered as a pretest for both groups. The former were taught through online GDA through Adobe Custom while the latter had their own conventional method of explicit instruction. After 10 sessions of treatment instructions, both groups sat for the grammar posttest, parallel to the pretest. The application of the independent samples t-test revealed that there were significant differences in the post-test grammar achievement between the participants in the experimental group and the control group. Specifically, the individuals in the experimental group exhibited superior performance compared to their counterparts in the control group. The results of this study can shed light on the effectiveness of GDA, in grammar achievement among Iranian learners. In line with these findings, some implications for language stakeholders were provided.
The academic discourse surrounding Dynamic Assessment (DA) acknowledges its significance within the realm of language testing, yet expresses reservations regarding its practicability when applied to larger groups of individuals. The aforementioned limitation of dynamic assessment has prompted the utilization of Online Group Dynamic Assessment (GDA). Regarding the role of GDA and English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners’ problems with grammar learning, the present study attempted to investigate the effect of GDA on EFL learners’ grammar achievement. To this end, 70 students participated in this experimental research and were given the Oxford Placement Test (OPT). As a result, a total of 52 participants were chosen through a selection process involving the OPT with subsequent random assignment to both the experimental and control groups. Subsequently, a grammar test was administered as a pretest for both groups. The former were taught through online GDA through Adobe Custom while the latter had their own conventional method of explicit instruction. After 10 sessions of treatment instructions, both groups sat for the grammar posttest, parallel to the pretest. The application of the independent samples t-test revealed that there were significant differences in the post-test grammar achievement between the participants in the experimental group and the control group. Specifically, the individuals in the experimental group exhibited superior performance compared to their counterparts in the control group. The results of this study can shed light on the effectiveness of GDA, in grammar achievement among Iranian learners. In line with these findings, some implications for language stakeholders were provided.
Alavi, S. M., Kaivanpanah, S., & Shabani, K. (2011). Group dynamic assessment: An inventory of mediational strategies for teaching listening. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 3(4), 27-58.
Alemi, F., Circella, G., Mokhtarian, P., & Handy, S. (2019). What drives the use of ride hailing in California? Ordered probity models of the usage frequency of Uber and Lyft. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 102(2), 233-248.
Badhoda, I., & Shabani, K. (2018). Response latency as a tool to study L2 learners’ ZPD, ZAD, and ongoing information processing. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 1(2), 1-16.
Birjandi, P., Estaji, M., & Deyhim, T. (2013). The impact of dynamic assessment on reading comprehension and metacognitive awareness of reading strategy use in Iranian high school learners. Iranian Journal of Language Testing, 3(2), 61-77.
Burston, J. (2015). Twenty years of MALL project implementation: A meta-analysis of learning outcomes. ReCALL, 27(1), 4-20.
Cam, L., & Tran, T. M. T. (2017). An evaluation of using games in teaching English grammar for first year English-majored students at Dong Nai Technology University. International journal of learning, teaching and educational Research, 16(7), 55-71.
Chen, C. H., Koong, C. S., & Liao, C. (2022). Influences of integrating dynamic assessment into a speech recognition learning design to support students’ English speaking skills, learning anxiety and cognitive load. Educational Technology & Society, 25(1), 1-14.
Duso, E.M. (2007). Dalla teoria alla pratica: la grammatica nella classe di italiano L2. Roma: ARACNE editrice.
Kazemi, N., & Tavassoli, K. (2020). The comparative effect of dynamic diagnostic assessment on EFL learners’ speaking ability. Research in English Language Pedagogy, 8(2), 223-241.
Kukulska‐Hulme, A., Lee, H., & Norris, L. (2017). Mobile learning revolution: Implications for language pedagogy. In: Chapelle, Carol A. and Sauro, Shannon (Eds.), The Handbook of Technology and Second Language Teaching and Learning (pp. 217-233) Oxford: Oxford Wiley & Sons.
Lai, C., & Zheng, D. (2018). Self-directed use of mobile devices for language learning beyond the classroom. ReCALL, 30(3), 299-318. doi:10.1017/S0958344017000258.
Lantolf, J. P. (2006). Sociocultural theory and L2: State of the art. Studies in second language acquisition, 28(01), 67-109.
Lantolf, J. P. (2009). Dynamic assessment: The dialectic integration of instruction and assessment. Language Teaching, 42(3), 355-368.
Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2011). Dynamic assessment in the classroom: Vygotskian praxis for L2 development. Language Teaching Research, 15(1), 11-33.
Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of L2 development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Loewen, S., Crowther, D., Isbell, D. R., Kim, K. M., Maloney, J., Miller, Z. F., & Rawal, H. (2019). Mobile-assisted language learning: A Duolingo case study. ReCALL, 31(3), 293-311.
Mehri, E., & Amerian, M. (2015). Group dynamic assessment (GDA): the case for the development of control over the past tense. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 4(5), 11-20.
Miri, M., Alibakhshi, G., Kushki, A., & Salehpour Bavarsad, P. (2017). Going beyond one-to one mediation in zone of proximal development (ZPD): concurrent and cumulative group dynamic assessment. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 3(1), 1-24.
Mirzaei, A., Leonardi, S. G., & Neri, G. (2016). Detection of hazardous volatile organic compounds by metal oxide nanostructures-based gas sensors: A review. Ceramics International, 42(14), 15119-15141.
Moradian, M. R., & Kogani Baharvand, P. (2015). The effect of group dynamic assessment on raising young Iranian EFL learners' metacognitive awareness and listening comprehension. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies, 2(3), 86-67.
Moradian, M., Asadi, M., & Azadbakht, Z. (2019). Effects of concurrent group dynamic assessment on Iranian EFL learners’ pragmatic competence: A case of requests and refusals. Research in Applied Linguistics, 10(2), 106-135.
Newby, D. (2003). Cognitive communicative theory of pedagogical grammar. Habilitationsschrift: Karl-Francens University of Graz,Austria
Pileh Roud, L. F., & Hidri, S. (2021). Toward a sociocultural approach to computerized dynamic assessment of the TOEFL iBT listening comprehension test. Education and Information Technologies, 26(4), 4943–4968. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10498-z.
Poehner, M. (2009). Group dynamic assessment: Mediation for the L2 classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 43(3), 471-491.
Poehner, M. E. (2008). Dynamic assessment: A Vygotskian approach to understanding and promoting second language development. Berlin: Springer Publishing.
Poehner, M. E., & Lantolf. J. P. (2005). Dynamic assessment in the language classroom. Language Teaching Research, 9(3), 233-265. doi:10.1191/1362168805lr166oa.
Poehner, M. E., & Infante, P. (2017). Mediated development: A Vygotskian approach to transforming second language learner abilities. Tesol Quarterly, 51(2), 332-357. doi: 10.1002/tesq.308.
Rezaee, A. A., Alavi, S. M., & Razzaghifard, P. (2019). The impact of mobile-based dynamic assessment on improving EFL oral accuracy. Education and Information Technologies, 24(5), 3091-3105.
Rosell-Aguilar, F. (2018). Twitter as a formal and informal language learning tool : From potential to evidence. In F. Rosell-Aguilar, T. Beaven, & M. Fuertes Gutiérrez (Eds.), Innovative Language Teaching and Learning at University: Integrating Informal Learning into Formal Language Education, (pp.99-106).Dublin Irland .
Shabani, K. (2018). Group dynamic assessment of L2 learners' writing abilities. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 6(1), 129-149.
Tabatabaee, M., Alidoust, M., & Sarkeshikian, A. H. (2018). The effect of interventionist and cumulative group dynamic assessments on EFL learners’ writing accuracy. Applied Linguistics Research Journal, 2(1), 1-13.
Zhou, C. (2018). Teaching model of college English grammar in intensive reading course. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 18(6), 2617-2632. doi:10.12738/estp.2018.6.162.
