چکیده:
The present study chiefly aimed to compare two forms of dynamic assessment and standard assessment of EFL learners’ listening comprehension. 59 Iranian EFL learners were randomly assigned to three test administration groups and assessed on listening for main and supporting information in listening tasks. The first model of dynamic assessment was a form of scaffolding in which for any incorrect answer graded prompts were progressively presented to learners until they answered correctly. The second model of dynamic assessment was direct instruction of listening tasks. Learners in standard assessment group, however, completed the task independently without mediation. The results revealed statistically significant listening improvement in favor of dynamic-supported and dynamic-instructed assessment groups rather than standard assessment one. The findings of the study indicate that dynamic assessment can gain better insights into learners’ level of comprehension and their potential for future development and provide better learning effectiveness than those in statistic assessments.
خلاصه ماشینی:
The findings of the study indicate that dynamic assessment can gain better insights into learners’ level of comprehension and their potential for future development and provide better learning effectiveness than those in statistic assessment group.
For example, a growing number of studies have shown that DA can assist to promote reading and writing skills (Abbott, Reed, Abbott & Berninger, 1997; Anton, 2009; Birjandi & Ebadi, 2012; Dorfler, Golke & Artelt, 2009; Kozulin & Garb, 2002; Shrestha & Coffin, 2012), speaking ability (Anton, 2009), syntactic knowledge (Hasson, Dodd & Botting, 2012), and CALL-related learning (Shabani, 2012; Wang, 2010), help learners with learning disabilities (Barrera, 2003; Elleman, Compton, Fuchs, Fuchs & 5 Bouton 2011; Pena, Gillam, Malek, Ruiz-Felter, Resendiz, Fiestas & Sabel 2006), and decrease affective filters (Barr & Samuels, 1988; Bethge, Carlson & Wiedl, 1982).
The test-train-retest model of DA, furthermore, assisted in distinguishing learners who had language learning difficulties in vocabulary and synonym learning (Gutierrez-Clellen, Brown, Conboy, & Robinson-Zanartu, 1998; Pena, Iglesias, & Lidz, 2001).
The listening materials and listening tasks in the three groups 11 Iranian Journal of Applied Language Studies,Vol 6, No 2, 2014 were the same, but the methods used to assess learners were different.
983 58 19 Iranian Journal of Applied Language Studies,Vol 6, No 2, 2014 The results of Post Hoc Test demonstrated that both dynamic-supported (group 1) and dynamic-instructed (group 2) classes performed better as compared with standard assessment class (group 3) (see Table 7).