Dynamic Assessment as a Helping Hand for English Teachers: Computerized Assessment of transition Words or Phrases
Mahdi Nasiri, Hossein Vahid Dastjerdi and Mansoor Tavakkoli, Iran
Mahdi Nasiri is a PhD candidate of TEFL in Isfahan University. He is interested to research about language assessment and sociolinguistics. E-mail: Mahdinasiri1985@yahoo.com
Hossein Vahid Dastjerdi is an assistant professor of applied linguistics at the department of English language and literature, Faculty of foreign languages, University of Isfahan, Iran. His current research interests include testing, materials development, and translation, the metaphoricity of language, discourse analysis, pragmatics and critical discourse analysis. E-mail: h_vahid@yahoo.com
Mansoor Tavakkoli is an assistant professor at the department of English language and literature, Faculty of foreign languages, University of Isfahan, Iran. His research interests are second language acquisition, language teaching and assessment. E-mail: mr.tavakoli14@gmail.com
Menu
Abstract
Introduction
Transition words and phrases software
Concluding remarks
References
Dynamic assessment (DA) has recently provided an alternative to static types of assessment. Nonetheless, it is not considered as a replacement for previous versions of assessment, rather as a compliment. To give prominence to the effectiveness of DA in intact areas of language, the viability of DA has been used as a tool in different angles of language (Ableeva, 2008, Anton, 2009; Birjandi &Ebadi, 2010; Kozulin & Garb, 2001; Lantolf & Poehner, 2011). The effectiveness of dynamic assessment procedures not only targets learners but also benefits English teachers. In this study, the attempt has been made to introduce one of the unknown streets of dynamic assessment conducted on transition words/phrases of language learners through a computerized researcher – made software. In present study, it is strongly claimed that computerized dynamic assessment of transition words/phrases through hints will provide better outcomes than Non- dynamic measures. The implications of this study can inform English teachers, material designers, and even language learners. The advantages and disadvantages of the software mentioned will be scrutinized in the paper.
Keywords: Dynamic Assessment (DA), Transition words/phrases, computerized researcher - made software
L2 researchers have quite recently made their attempts to envision a monistic view of language instruction and assessment which is termed as Dynamic Assessment (DA) (Ableeva, 2008; Anton, 2009; Barabadi, 2010; Birjandi & Ebadi, 2010; Jacobs, 2001; Kozulin & Garb,2001; Lantolf, 2009, 2000; Lantolf & Poehner, 2011, 2004). This post-psychometric view of assessment is a direct opposition to the traditional psychometric views that give credit to a dualistic view of instruction and assessment. As far as Sociocultural Theory of mind (SCT), originated from the Russian psychologist Lev Vygotsky’s (1978) ideas, is concerned, DA researchers strongly support the idea that that dialectical combination of instruction and assessment in the form of a dynamic activity will bring about successful education. This, in fact, entails sensitivity to the learners’ Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) (see Vygotsky, 1978) during the assessment procedures, which is accomplished through the mediators’ painstaking intervention in terms of provision of appropriate hints, prompts and feedbacks.
Dynamic assessment (DA) having a long history is quite a new topic in second/foreign language learning and teaching. In fact, DA is based on Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory which, in a sense, accounts for the processes through which learning and development take place. English teachers should realize that DA is neither an assessment instrument nor a method of assessing, but a framework for conceptualizing teaching and assessment as an integrated activity of understanding learner potentialities by actively supporting their development.
DA-based studies have recently mushroomed in language learning/teaching contexts. An important fact to take into account is that to date lots of studies done in the realm of dynamic assessment have focused on its usefulness for learners, and the effectiveness of DA for language teachers has not been given priority. More attention is needed to be paid for the ease and convenience obtained from DA-based procedures for language teachers.
Those who are active in classroom teaching contexts as well as school psychologists are very familiar with both psychological tests which are given to determine the proficiency of students for a variety of learning settings and achievement tests which are popular to give detailed information about student learning outcomes. The fact is that both of these tests intend to improve student needs. But newly, the dynamic model of assessment and learning, however, represent a distinct type of assessment procedure which provides information very distinct from either of the current prevailing ones. The dynamic model of assessment mentioned intends to play a major role as an integral part of in helping both students and teachers learn how to assemble and use knowledge.
This study, being a computerized dynamic assessment test, dictates the pivotal role of Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) in language assessment field. The importance of CALL in the realm of language teaching is an undeniable fact. Today, CALL has facilitated the language learning process in many ways. The number of computer-based DA studies has been, and of course still is, increasing in every corner of the world.
As far as teachers are concerned, four critically important advantages for Computerized Dynamic Assessment (C-DA) are listed below:
- It can be simultaneously administered to a large number of learners
- Individuals may be reassessed as frequently as needed.
- Reports of each leaner’s performance are automatically generated.
- Also we can have a profile for each test item in order to investigate the response pattern of all learners on the same item.
The disadvantage of computerized DA like other intervention approaches is related to the kind and quality of mediation it offers. Because the mediation is preplanned, no matter how rigorously it has been planned, it cannot be attuned to the very personal needs of the learners.
Computer-based DA can serve beneficial for English practitioners inside different classes. For instance, for assessing kindergarten children’s seriational thinking abilities, children can be given a series of shapes and be asked to tell them off according to one of the three dimensions: size, color and darkness. After this stage, mediation can be provided through collaboration of human-computer. The computer gives the pre-determined hints from most implicit to most explicit and human mediator gives additional support trying to be adaptable to their needs. Through such DA procedures, both human and computer mediation can be into account.
Another instance of computerized DA studies can be the microgenetic development of L2 through dynamic assessment via internet. To this end, two participants with the same ability, according to traditional static tests, can be present for the test. As far as dynamic assessment is concerned, they can differentiate between the students’ abilities in terms of their responsiveness to online mediation offered by the mediator through the net. The results of such procedures reveal that the students’ responsiveness for the time they spend on each question is significantly pertinent to their level of ZPD. The higher the ZPD, the less time they spend on tasks while interacting with the mediator.
This study is going to attract English teachers' attention to one of the neglected aspects of language, i.e. proper teaching/assessment of transition words/phrases, which either directly or indirectly affects text cohesion. It is crystal clear that there is no determined way of teaching transition words/phrases for teachers. In this study, it is intended to introduce a model of computerized software for dynamic assessment of transition words/phrases.
The computerized software
The software offered in this paper is called CDTTW which stands for ‘Computerized Dynamic Test of transition Words/Phrases’. This software package is able to dynamically test the transition words/phrases of the learners through providing them with predetermined hints in case they make a mistake. CDTTW will also provide teachers with two scores (dynamic and non-dynamic). The fact of the matter is that this software providing feedback is in line with the concept of ZPD.
Test Content Preparation
Standardized and valid tests for testing the participants’ knowledge of transition words/phrases, in this software, are borrowed from the exercises of the book ‘IELTS Objective’ Black (2006). The exercises used in this software have the ample potentiality of being converted into hints. An essential point to mention is the contextual nature of the exercises of the book IELTS Objective.
How does the software work?
In this software, transition words/phrases, in fact, are assessed in a contextual atmosphere of a standard cloze test. As for the time limits, a four-minute time span is allocated for answering each question; so, the total time is about 80 minutes. Ultimately, having completed the tests, scoring file will appear presenting two scores for each student (dynamic and non-dynamic). In a session, participants should be familiarized by the application and functionalities of these words/phrases and their capability in making a text cohesion by their teacher. Since the test is dynamic, and done by computer, a computer site having sufficient computers is needed. The program needs to be installed on every single computer. As noted earlier, for each question in the dynamic testing atmosphere, some hints are provided. These hints are arranged from the most implicit to the most explicit ones. Obviously, in the first hint provided, being the most implicit one, the aim is just to signal to the test takers that their answer is wrong and this way, they are given the opportunity to go back to the item and try it again. Accordingly, in the last hint test takers are provided with the right answer. Two examples of a dynamic test is provided below:
The software mechanism
The software package is designed in such a way to be run in any PC. Students have four minutes for each item. In case students cannot answer an item within four minutes, the software will automatically switch to the next item; as a result, the test takers will miss that item. A point important to be noted is that if a student gives a wrong answer to an item, the computerized software will provide him with some useful hints until he reaches the right answer in the fifth hint. As far as the test is over, a scoring file appears on the desktop. In every scoring file the information below will be stored.
- How is students' non-dynamic score measured? In the first try of the test takers, this score will be obtained and then calculated. Simply put, this score is exactly the same score which is gained through traditional versions of testing. So as to compare this score with that of dynamic score of the test, we calculated this score on a scale of 0 to 100 points; i.e. five points for each item.
- How is students' non-dynamic score measured? This score is calculated according to students’ use of hints. The procedure is in a way that the number of hints used by each test taker is subtracted from the total number of students' hints which is the score of 100. The case in point is that the number that is obtained by this subtraction is the real dynamic score. To take an example, if a student uses two hints for the first ten items of the test; i.e. two hints for every one of these items, this student's dynamic score will be the score 80 which is calculated by subtracting the number of all hints used by him (here 20 hints) from the overall score of 100. The non-dynamic score of the same student would be 50 due to the fact this student has had wrong answers for the first 10 items of the test, and only after receiving hints he was able to get to the right answers.
- The number of hints which were used in each item in this software. The software further takes into account those items which were for any reasons missed by test takers by marking the letter "M" in front of them. This mark indicates that test takers were not able to answer the items within four minutes.
- The total time spent on the test is another dimension of the software.
The role of transition words as a pivotal element in text cohesion is an undeniable fact. The primary goal of this paper is to find new ways of instructing and assessing transition words/phrases for English teachers by wearing new spectacles. The suggestions of this paper recommend teachers to incorporate DA into their classroom context.
There are a couple of reasons for gaining successful results in this study:
(a) Approximately all of the test takers will benefit from the hints in different percentages and manners. Most DA researchers claim that traditional (non-dynamic) tests are not capable of visualizing the whole picture of the test takers’ potentialities that is both intramental and intermental, is verified. The important point about DA studies is that while traditional (non-dynamic) tests can only account for the intramental, self-regulated, and fully-internalized abilities of the test takers, the dynamic test can address not only these abilities but also the abilities that are intramental and other-regulated. That is to say, from a Vygotskyan viewpoint, non-dynamic tests can only account for the learners’ ZAD (Zone of Actual Development) whereas dynamic tests are responsible for both ZAD and ZPD.
(b) The change of test takers’ scores from a non-dynamic to a dynamic test cannot be only related to the learners’ ZPD. The case in point is that some non-intellective factors such as lack of motivation, fear of failure, inattentiveness can be the origin of the test takers’ wrong choice in their first attempt. In other words, even thought the first hint is independent of the nature of the grammatical point, it helps the learners overcome these non-intellective factors that may cause them lose the whole score in a non-dynamic test.
Overall, the following points can be gained for teachers by implementing DA in their contexts:
- Dynamic assessment procedures in an analogy with non- dynamic assessment procedures are more effectual for the development of learners’ transition words/phrases.
- DA proves to create better atmosphere for language teachers to teach transition words/knowledge than NDA.
- CDTTW will pave the way for better teacher practices in the classroom context.
- Teachers can benefit from both traditional and DA based procedures for the purpose of transition words/phrases, resulting in a better situation.
- DA can provide teachers with tools to reconceptualize their assessments of transition words/phrases in particular and text cohesion in general.
The results of this study will inform English language teachers who are involved in advanced writings. A good deal of teachers’ problems with regard to the familiarity and even development of learners with transition words/phrases will be solved; as a result, learners will come up with more coherent and cohesive texts in their future writing performances. Next, the combination of DA procedures with NDA ones can act as a complementary task for the development of different aspects of language learning and teaching. So, as the importance of DA is clear for all (Fox, 2008), language practitioners should embark on this business. An important point to be researched in future studies is to scrutinize the competency of learners for the use of transition words/phrases in both spoken and written productions through DA. Aspects of frequency and complexity of transition words/phrases in writing is a ripe field of research for researchers.
Ableeva, R. (2008). The effects of dynamic assessment on L2 listening comprehension. In J. P. Lantolf & M. E. Poehner (Eds.), Sociocultural theory and the teaching of second languages (pp.57-86). London: Equinox.
Anton, M. (2009). Dynamic assessment of advanced second language learners. Foreign Language Annals. 42 (3). 576-598.
Barabadi, E. (2010). Designing Computerized Dynamic Assessment of L2 Reading Comprehension of Iranian University Students and its Comparison with Static Test of L2 Reading comprehension. Unpublished thesis. Ferdowsi University of Mashhad.
Black, M., & Sharp, W. (2006). IELTS Objective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Birjandi, P., & Ebadi, S. (2010). Exploring Learners’ Microgenetic Development in L2 Dynamic Assessment via Online Web 2.0 Technology. Paper presented in IELTI5, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
Fox, J. (2008). Alternative assessment, In E. Shohamy (ed.), The Encyclopedia of language and education (vol. 7): Language testing and assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 273–285
Jacobs, E. L. (2001). The effects of adding dynamic assessment components to a Computerized preschool language screening test. Communication Disorders Quarterly 22 (4), 217–226.
Kozulin, A. & Garb, E. (2001). Dynamic assessment of EFL text comprehension of at-risk students. School Psychology International 23, 112–127.
Lantolf, J. P. (Ed.). (2000). Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
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. (2004). Dynamic assessment of L2 development: Bringing the past into the future. Journal of Applied Linguistics 1, 49–74.
Lantolf, J. P. & Poehner, M. E. (2011). Dynamic assessment in the classroom: Vygotskian praxis for second language development. Language Teaching Research, 15(1), 11-23.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds.). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Please check the Methodology and Language for Secondary Teachers course at Pilgrims website.
Please check the Teaching Advanced Students course at Pilgrims website.
Please check the ICT - Using Technology in the Classroom – Level 1 course at Pilgrims website.
Please check the ICT - Using Technology in the Classroom – Level 2 course at Pilgrims website.
|
