Diagnosing L2 Receptive Vocabulary Development Using Dynamic Assessment: A Microgenetic Study

Document Type: Research Paper

Authors

1 University of Sistan and Baluchestan

2 Chabahar Maritime University

Abstract

The present study is an attempt to shed light on the effect of Dynamic Assessment (DA) on diagnosing and developing the receptive vocabulary abilities of upper-intermediate learners learning English as a foreign language. Fifty L2 leaners participated in the First Certificate in English test and completed Vocabulary Knowledge Scale. Out of 50 students, ten learners who were identified as being homogenous and were not familiar with the new vocabularies volunteered to participate in individualized tutoring sessions. Reading texts were used to make learners familiar with the target words and cloze passages were administered to assess learners’ receptive vocabulary. Mediation was provided using the interactionist approach to DA and learners’ responsiveness to mediation were studied in a microgenetic approach. The qualitative data were then coded in terms of task completion along with errors and struggles and transformed into quantitative data for analysis. The actual, mediated and transfer scores were reported to analyze learners’ Zone of Actual Development (ZAD), and the degree of the internalization of mediation. Findings of the study revealed that to have a complete picture of learners’ abilities, actual scores are not self-sufficient. Mediated scores are vital to diagnose learners’ areas of difficulties and to promote learners’ receptive vocabulary knowledge. The information from transfer scores also uncovers evidence of learning and data from Learning Potential Score (LPS) predict how learners probably respond to future instruction. Findings of the study indicate that DA is promising in presenting a fine-grained diagnosis of learners’ receptive vocabulary development while also suggesting information related to future teaching and learning.

Keywords


Ableeva, R. (2010). Dynamic assessment of listening comprehension in L2 French (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The Pennsylvania State University. University Park, PA.

Alderson, J. C., Brunfaut, T., & Harding, L. (2014). Towards a theory of diagnosis in second and foreign language assessment: Insights from professional practice across diverse fields. Applied Linguistics, 36(2), 236-260.

Alony, S., & Kozulin, A. (2007). Dynamic assessment of receptive language in children with Down syndrome. International Journal of Speech-language Pathology, 9(4), 323-331.

Bengeleil, N. F., & Paribakht, T. S. (2004). L2 reading proficiency and lexical inferencing by university EFL learners. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 61(2), 225-249.

Budoff, M. (1987). The validity of learning potential assessment. In C.S. Lidz (Ed.), Dynamic assessment: An interactional approach to evaluating learning potential (pp. 53–81). New York: Guilford Press.

Burton, V. J., & Watkins, R. V. (2007). Measuring word learning: Dynamic versus static assessment of kindergarten vocabulary. Journal of Communication Disorders, 40(5), 335-356.

Cambridge English Language Assessment Center (2013). Principles of good practice: Quality management and validation in language assessment. Retrieved from http://www.cambridgeenglish.org/research-and-validation/quality-and-accountability/

Campione, J., & Brown, A. (1987). Linking dynamic assessment with school achievement. In C. S. Lidz (Ed.), Dynamic assessment: An international approach to evaluating learning potential (pp. 82–115). New York: The Guilford Press.

 

Feuerstein, R., Rand, Y., & Hoffman, M., B. (1979). The dynamic assessment of retarded performers: The learning potential assessment device, theory, instruments, and techniques. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.

Feuerstein, R., Rand, Y., & Rynders, J., E. (1988). Don’t accept me as I am. Helping retarded performers excel. New York: Plenum.

Kapantzoglou, M., Restrepo, M., A., & Thompson, M. S. (2012). Dynamic assessment of word learning skills: Identifying language impairment in bilingual children. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 43(1), 81-96.

Kozulin, A., & E. Garb. (2002). Dynamic assessment of EFL text comprehension of at risk students. School Psychology International, 23(1), 112-127.

Kunnan, A., J., & Jang, E., E. (2009). Diagnostic feedback in language assessment. In M. H. Long & C. J. Doughty (Eds.), The handbook of language teaching (pp. 610–627). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Luria, A. R. (1961). Study of the abnormal child. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry: A Journal of Human Behavior, 31, 1–16.

Meara, P. (1980). Vocabulary acquisition: A neglected aspect of language learning. Language Teaching and Linguistics, 13(4), 221-246.

Poehner, M. E. (2005). Dynamic assessment of oral proficiency among advanced L2 learners of French (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The Pennsylvania State University. University Park, PA.

Poehner, M. E., & Lantolf, J. P. (2005). Dynamic assessment in the language classroom. Language Teaching Research, 9(3), 233-265.

Poehner, M. E., & Lantolf, J. P. (2013). Bringing the ZPD into the equation: Capturing L2 development during computerized dynamic assessment. Language Teaching Research, 17(3), 323–342.

Poehner, M. E., Zhang, J., & Lu, X. (2015). Computerized dynamic assessment (C-DA): Diagnosing L2 development according to learner responsiveness to mediation. Language Testing, 32(3), 337-357.

Schmitt, N. (2000).Vocabulary in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Shabani, K. (2014). The Effects of computerized instruction of vocabulary through hypertexts on L2 learners’ cognitive functioning. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 149, 868-873.

Sternberg, R., & Grigorenko, E. (2001). All testing is dynamic testing. Issues in Education, 7, 137–170.

Taghizadeh, M., & Bahrami, V. (2014). Dynamic assessment of Iranian EFL learners’ lexical inferencing ability: The interactionist approach. IJLLALW, 5(4), 310-321.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). Thinking and speech. In R. W. Rieber & A. S. Carton (Eds.): The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky, vol. 1: Problems of general psychology (pp. 37-285). New York: Plenum.

Wolter, J. A., & Pike, K. (2015). Dynamic assessment of morphological awareness and third-grade literacy success. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 46(2), 112-126.

Wesche, M., & Paribakht, T., S. (1996). Assessing second language vocabulary knowledge: Depth versus breadth. Canadian Modern Language Review, 53(1), 13-40.