Dynamic Assessment: A Humanistic Approach of Learners’ Writing Proficiency from a Vygotskian Perspective

Yıl 2015, Cilt: 36 Sayı: 3, 960 - 967, 13.05.2015

Ayda Rahmani

Öz

Abstract. “Through others, we become ourselves”. Vygotsky (1978). Dynamic Assessment which stems from Vygotsky’s ideas, challenges the conventional and traditional views on teaching and assessment by arguing that instruction and assessment should be unified. The present study is an investigation of a DA-based instruction of L2 writing proficiency. For this purpose an OPT (Oxford Placement Test) was given to a total of 80 Iranian EFL learners. Then, 40 of them who were considered as intermediate learners were selected for the purpose of the study. The participants were randomly divided into two groups i.e. an experimental group and a control group. Both groups were pretested prior to the study; the participants underwent a static and a dynamic assessment. Then, the experimental group received the treatment in the form of DA-based instruction (i.e. aided instruction such as prompting, cueing, explaining and mediating within the assessment) for ten sessions while the control group received a normal practice of writing proficiency (non-DA instruction and assessment). After ten sessions, both groups were post tested i.e. once again, the participants underwent a static and a dynamic assessment. Then the results of the posttests were subjects of statistical analysis (independent-samples t-test). The results indicated that the experimental group did better than the control group and there is a significant difference between the mean scores of the experimental group who were exposed to a DA-based instruction and the control group who received a normal practice of writing proficiency i.e. a placebo. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

Dynamic Assessment, ZPD, mediation, writing proficiency

Kaynakça

• Ellis, R. (1994), The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Feuerstein, R and et al (1979). The Dynamic Assessment of Retarded Performers.
• Glenview, Illinois: Scott Foresman. Feuerstein, R & et al (1991). Mediated learning experiences: Theoretical psychological and learning implications. London: Freund.
• Krashen, S (1981). Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. Oxford: Pergamon.
• Lantolf, J. (ed), (2000), Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning. Oxford,
• Oxford University Press. Lantolf, J. (2000). Introducing Sociocultural Theory in Lantolf, J. (ed),: Sociocultural
• Theory and Second Language Learning. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Lawrence, D (1988). Enhancing Self-Esteem in the Classroom. London:Chapman.
• Lidz, C (1987). Dynamic Assessment. London: Guilford Press.
• Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the Communicative Classrooms. Cambridge:
• Cambridge University Press. Pine, G and Boy (1977). Learner Centered Teaching: a humanistic view. Denver, Colorado: Love Publishing Co.
• Poehner, M.E. (2008). Dynamic Assessment: A Vygotskian approach to understanding and promoting second language development. Berlin: Springer Publishing.
• Stake, R.E (1995). The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
• Sternberg, R.J. , & Grigorenko, E.L. (2002). Dynamic testing: the nature and measurement of learning potential. Cambridge: University of Cambridge.
• Swain, M (2000), The Output Hypothesis and Beyond: Mediating Acquisition through
• Collaborative Dialogue’ in J. Lantolf (ed): Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and Language. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
• Vygotsky, L (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
• Vygotsky, L. (1981). ‘The Genesis of Higher Mental Functions’ in J. Wertsch (ed): The Concept of Activity in Soviet psychology. Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe.
• Williams, M and Burden, R (2000). Psychology for Language Teachers. A Social
• Constructive Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.