Journal of Language Horizons

Current Issue

By Issue

By Author

By Subject

Author Index

Keyword Index

About Journal

Aims and Scope

Editorial Board

Executive staff

Publication Ethics

Indexing and Abstracting

Related Links

FAQ

Journal Metrics

Peer Review Process

Journal Metrics

News

Guide for Authors

Ethics Commitment Form

Conflict of Interest

Publons Registration Guide

The Reviewer of the Journal in 2020

List of 2021 Reviewer

Reviewers 2022

The Impact of Computerized Group Dynamic Assessment on Iranian EFL Learners’ Listening Comprehension Across Gender

Document Type : Research article

Authors

1 Ph.D. Candidate, Department of English, Tonekabon Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tonekabon, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Department of English, Tonekabon Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tonekabon, Iran

Abstract

Framed in Vygotskian sociocultural theory, this study intends to examine whether computerized group dynamic assessment (GDA) through software has affected Iranian male and female learners’ listening comprehension ability. Data were collected through administration of listening comprehension pre- and post-tests among 140 participants divided into male and female learners in the experimental and control groups. There were 35 male and 35 female learners in each group of the study. Participants in the experimental groups were exposed to GDA in order to interactively work on the selected tasks of listening comprehension, and the teacher provided the necessary support as well. Quantitative analysis of the pre- and post-tests of listening comprehension among male and female groups was conducted through two-way analysis of variance and covariance. Results revealed that both male and female learners in the experimental groups significantly outperformed the learners in the control groups. However, there were not any significant differences between the gender groups’ listening comprehension ability in the experimental groups. Findings contributed to the effective employment of GDA through software in order to improve the learners’ listening comprehension ability, denoting that teachers are recommended to be aware of technological devices in paving an interactive way for learners to develop their language skills and sub-skills.

Keywords

References
  1. Abdolrezapour, P. (2019). Applying computer-mediated active learning intervention to improve L2 listening comprehension. Applied Research on English Language, 8(4), 511-530. http://dx.doi.org/10.22108/are.2019.115355.1424
  2. Ableeva, R. (2008). The effects of dynamic assessment on L2 listening comprehension. In J. P. Lantolf & M. Poehner (Eds.), Socio-cultural theory and the teaching of second languages (pp. 57-86). Equinox Press.
  3. Ahmadi Safa, M., & Beheshti, S. (2018). Interactionist and interventionist group dynamic assessment (GDA) and EFL learners' listening comprehension development. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 6(3), 37-56. https://doi.org/10.30466/IJLTR.2018.120600
  4. Alderson, J. C., & Bachman, L. F. (2003). Series editors preface. In G. Buck, Assessing listening (pp. x-xi). Cambridge University Press.
  5. Alshenqeeti, H., & Grami, G. M. A. (2019). Dynamic assessment in the EFL classroom: The case of listening comprehension. Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies, 5(4) 1-11. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajess/2019/v5i430160
  6. Anton, M. (2009). Dynamic assessment of advanced second language learners. Foreign Language Annals, 42(3), 576-598. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2009.01030.x
  7. Archer, J. C. (2010). State of the science in health professional education: Effective feedback. Medical Education, 44, 101-108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03546.x
  8. Ashraf, H., Motallebzadeh, K., & Ghazizadeh, F. (2016). The impact of electronic-based dynamic assessment on the listening skill of Iranian EFL learners. International Journal of Language Testing, 6(1), 24-32. https://www.ijlt.ir/article_114420.html
  9. Baxter, J.  (2003). Positioning gender in discourse. Palgrave.
  10. Borchelt, N. (2007). Cognitive computer tools in the teaching and learning of undergraduate calculus. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 1(2), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2007.010212
  11. Brookhart, S. M. (2008). Feedback that fits Educational Leadership, 65(4), 54-59. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ781221
  12. Cameron, D. (2005). Language, gender, and sexuality: Current issues and new direction. Applied Linguistics, 26(4), 482-502. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ami027
  13. Cutting, L. E., & Scarborough, H. S. (2006). Prediction of reading comprehension: Relative contributions of word recognition, language proficiency, and other cognitive skills can depend on how comprehension is measured. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10(3), 277-299. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532799xssr1003_5
  14. Douglas, D. (2010). Understanding language testing. Hodder Education. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532210373604
  15. Elfi, E. (2019). CALL: The use of Winnerclass Professionals V. 3.0 software in teaching listening. PROCEEDING IAIN Batusangkar, 3(1), 105-110. https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.2.5.977-988
  16. Ghahremani, D. (2013). The effects of implementing summative assessment, formative assessment and dynamic assessment on Iranian EFL learners’ listening ability and listening strategy use. Journal of Language and Translation, 3(1), 59-68. http://ttlt.azad.ac.ir/article_514741.html
  17. Godwin-Jones, R. (2011). Emerging technologies autonomous language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 15(3), 4-11. https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu
  18. Guk, I., & Kellogg, D. (2007). The ZPD and whole class teaching: Teacher-led and student-led interactional mediation of tasks. Language Teaching Research, 11(3), 281-299. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168807077561
  19. Harlen, W. (2006). On the relationship between assessment for formative and summative purposes. In J. Gardner (Ed.), Assessment and learning (pp. 61-80). Sage.
  20. Haywood, H. C., & Lidz, C. S. (2007). Dynamic assessment in practice: Clinical and educational applications. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282909347604
  21. Hidri, S. (2014). Developing and evaluating a dynamic assessment of listening comprehension in an EFL context. Language Testing in Asia, 4(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1186/2229-0443-4-4
  22. James, M. (2008). Assessment and learning. In S. Swaffield (Ed.), Unlocking assessment: Understanding for reflection and application (pp. 20-35). Routledge.
  23. Jones, M. G., & Brader-Araje, L. (2002). The impact of constructivism on education: Language, discourse, and meaning. American Communication Journal, 5(3), 1-10. https://ac-journal.org/journal/vol5/iss3/special/jones.pdf
  24. Kennedy, K., Chan, J., Fok, P., & Yu, W. (2008). Forms of assessment and their potential for enhancing learning: Conceptual and cultural issues. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 7(3), 197-207. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ814321
  25. Khoshsima, H., & Mozakka, Z. (2017). The effect of computer-assisted language learning on Iranian upper-intermediate EFL learners’ listening skill. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 4(2), 81-91. http://www.jallr.com/index.php/JALLR/article/view/520
  26. Lam, R., & Lee, I. (2010). Balancing the dual functions of portfolio assessment. ELT Journal, 64(1), 54-64. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccp024
  27. Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2004). Dynamic assessment of L2 development: Bringing the past into the future. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 49-72. https://doi.org/10.1558/japl.v1.i1.49
  28. Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. (2008). Dynamic assessment. In N. Hornberger (Ed.), The encyclopedia of language and education: Language testing and assessment (pp. 273-285). Cambridge University Press.
  29. Lebedeva, M. Y., Koltakova, E. V., Khaleeva, O. N., & Rusetskaya, M. N. (2016). Computer-assisted language learning for the development of listening skills: A case study of pre-university Russian as a foreign language. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 6(1), 257-265. http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.6n.1p.257
  30. Lee, I., & Coniam, D. (2013). Introducing assessment for learning for EFL writing in an assessment of learning examination-driven system in Hong Kong. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(1), 34-50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.11.003
  31. Mashhadi Heidar, D. (2016). ZPD-assisted introduction via web 2.0 and listening comprehension ability. English for Specific Purposes World, 49(17) 1-17. http://esp-world.info/Articles_49/Heidar.pdf
  32. Mashhadi Heidar, D., & Afghari, A. (2015). The effect of dynamic assessment in synchronous computer-mediated communication on Iranian EFL learners’ listening comprehension ability at upper-intermediate level. English Language Teaching, 8(4), 14-23. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v8n4p14
  33. McKeough, A., & Lupart, J. L. (2013). Toward the practice of theory-based instruction: Current cognitive theories and their educational promise. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  34. Nachoua, H. 2012. Computer-assisted language learning for improving students’ listening skill. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 69, 1150-1159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.12.045
  35. Poehner, M. E. (2005). Dynamic assessment of oral proficiency among advanced L2 learners of French [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Pennsylvania State University, University Park.
  36. Poehner, M. E. (2009). Group dynamic assessment: Mediation for the L2 classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 43(3), 471-491. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2009.tb00245.x
  37. Poehner, M. E., & Lantolf, J. P. (2010). Vygotsky's teaching-assessment dialectic and L2 education: The case for dynamic assessment. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 17(4), 312-330. https://doi.org/10.1080/10749030903338509
  38. Park, K. (2014). Corpora and language assessment: The state of the art. Language Assessment Quarterly, 11(1), 27-44. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2013.872647
  39. Rahimi, M., Kushki, A., & Nassaji, H. (2015). Diagnostic and developmental potentials of dynamic assessment for L2 writing. Language and Sociocultural Theory, 2(2), 185-208. https://doi.org/10.1558/lst.v2i2.25956
  40. Roohani, A., Jam, B., Yeganeh, S., & Domakani, M. R. (2018). The effect of dynamic assessment on L2 learners’ listening comprehension. Bellaterra Journal of Teaching & Learning Language & Literature, 11(4), 59-70. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/jtl3.751
  41. Sehati, S., & Khodabandehlou, M. (2017). Effect of power point enhanced teaching (visual input) on Iranian Intermediate EFL learners' listening comprehension ability. Journal of Educational Issues, 3(2), 29-42. https://doi.org/10.5296/jei.v3i2.12323
  42. Shepard, L. (2001). The role of classroom assessment in teaching and learning. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 1066-1101). American Educational Research Association.
  43. Vahdat, S., & Eidipour, M. (2016). Adopting CALL to improve listening comprehension of Iranian junior high school students. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(8), 1609-1617. http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0608.13
  44. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. Readings on the Development of Children, 23(3), 29-39. https://oerafrica.org/sites/default/files/L%20&%20L%20reader_section%20one-reading_4.pdf
  45. Vygotsky, L. S. (1998). The problem of age. In R. W. Rieber (Ed.), The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky (pp. 187-205). Plenum. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-1655-8
  46. Walsh, C. (2001). Gender and discourse: Language and power in politics, the church and organizations. Longman.
  47. Zeng, W., Huang, F., Yu, L., & Chen, S. (2018). Towards a learning-oriented assessment to improve students’ learning: A critical review of literature. Educational Assessment, Evalua­tion and Accountability, 30(3), 211-250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-018-9281-9
Journal of Language Horizons
Volume 6, Issue 1 - Serial Number 11
May 2022
Pages 205-224
Files
Share
How to cite
Statistics