Computerized Group Dynamic Assessment and Listening Comprehension Ability: Does Self-Efficacy Matter?
Abstract
The present study investigated the effect of group dynamic assessment (DA) through software on Iranian intermediate EFL learners’ listening comprehension ability. The main question of the study was whether dynamic assessment via CoolSpeech software had any effect on the listening comprehension ability of learners with high and low self-efficacy. To find the answer, 80 Iranian intermediate learners were selected from among a population of 120, based on their scores on a placement test. A self-efficacy questionnaire was then used to assign selected participants into two experimental groups as low self-efficacious experimental group (n=20) and high self-efficacious experimental group (n=20), as well as two control groups, each containing 20 participants. Next, a pretest of listening comprehension ability was administered to all groups, and no significant difference between their mean scores was observed. After a period of two months, during which the experimental groups received treatment of dynamic assessment through CoolSpeech software and the control groups received a placebo, a posttest of listening comprehension was administered to all groups. The data analysis results revealed that the participants in high self-efficacious experimental group achieved significantly better scores than the other groups. However, in the second experimental group, no significant change was observed, and participants in the second experimental group did not significantly outperform the control group. It was concluded that the group dynamic assessment method via software could have a significant effect on the listening comprehension ability of EFL learners with high self-efficacy.
Downloads
References
Alavi, S. M., & Taheri, P. (2014). Examining the role of dynamic assessment in the development and assessment of listening comprehension. English Language Teaching (ELT), 1(2), 23-40.
Alodail, A. (2014). Impact of technology (power point) on students' learning. International Interdisciplinary Journal of Education, 3(4), 200-206.
Apperson, J. M., Laws, E. L., & Scepansky, J. A. (2006). An assessment of student performances for power point presentation structure in undergraduate courses. Computers and Education, 47(1), 1-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.04.003
Arnold, J., & Brown, H. D. (1999). A map of the terrain. In J. Arnold (Ed.), Affect in language learning (pp. 1-24). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
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. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14744/alrj.2018.36844
Bernhardt, S. (1997). Self-efficacy and second language learning. The NCLRC Language Resource, 1(5), 1-13.
Berry, J. M., West, R. L., & Dennehey, D. M. (1989). Reliability and validity of the Memory Self-Efficacy Questionnaire. Developmental Psychology, 25(5), 701-713. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.25.5.701
Bingham, S., & Larson, E. (2006). Using CALL as the major element of study for a university English class in Japan. The JALT Journal, 2(3), 39-52.
Brookhart, S. M., & DeVoge, J. G. (1999). Testing a theory about the role of classroom assessment in student motivation and achievement. Applied Measurement in Education, 12(4), 409-425. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/S15324818AME1204_5
Chapelle, C. A. (1999). Technology and language teaching for the 21st century. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium on English Teaching. The Crane.
Coiro, J., & Dobler, E. (2007). Exploring the online reading comprehension strategies used by sixth-grade skilled readers to search for and locate information on the Internet. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(2), 214-257. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.42.2.2
Coleman, J. A. (2005). CALL from the margins: Effective dissemination of CALL research and good practices. ReCALL: The Journal of EUROCALL, 17(1), 18-31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344005000315
Corbeil, G. (2007). Can power point presentations effectively replace textbooks and blackboards for teaching grammar? Do students find them an effective learning tool? CALICO Journal, 24(3), 631-656.
Doordinejad, F.G., & Afshar, H. (2014). On the relationship between self-efficacy and English achievement among Iranian third grade high school students. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 6(4), 461-470.
Drasgow, F., & Olson-Buchanan, J.B. (1999). Innovations in computerized assessment. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ehrman, M. E. (1996). An exploration of adult language learning motivation, self-efficacy and anxiety. In R. L. Oxford (Ed.), Language learning motivation: pathways to the new century (pp. 23-46). The University of Hawaii Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Centre.
Gerard, R. W. (Ed.). (1967). Computers and education. McGraw Hill.
Gersten, R., Fuchs, L. S., Williams, J. P., & Baker, S. (2001). Teaching reading comprehension strategies to students with learning disabilities: A review of research. Review of Educational Research, 71,279-320. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543071002279
Gorban Doordinejad, F., & Afshar, H. (2014). On the relationship between self-efficacy and English achievement among Iranian third grade high school students. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 6(4), 461-470.
Hambleton, R. K. (1996). Advances in assessment models, methods, and practices. In D. C. Berliner, & R.C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 889-925). American Council on Education/Macmillan.
Hashemi Shahraki, S., Ketabi, S., & Barati, H. (2015). Group dynamic assessment of EFL listening comprehension: Conversational implicatures in focus. International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, 4(3), 73-89. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5861/ijrsll.2014.955
Hill, K., & Sabet, M. (2009). Dynamic speaking assessments. TESOL Quarterly, 43, 537-545. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27785036.
Hosseini, S. M. H. (2007). ELT in higher education in Iran and India: A critical view. Language in India, 7, 1-11. http://www.languageinindia.com/dec2007/eltinindiaandiran.pdf.
Jahangard, A. (2007). Evaluation of EFL materials taught at Iranian public high schools. The Asian EFL Journal, 9(2), 130-150. https://www.asian-efl-journal.com/main-journals/evaluation-of-efl-materials-taught-at-iranian-public-high-schools.
Kennedy, M. M. (2005). Inside teaching: How classroom life under-mines reform. Harvard University Press.
Koura, A. A., & Al-Hebaishi, S. M. (2014). The Relationship between multiple intelligences, self-efficacy and academic achievement of Saudi gifted and regular intermediate students. Educational Research International, 3(1), 48-70.
Kulik, J. A., Bangert, R. L., & Williams, G. W. (1983). Effects of computer-based teaching on secondary school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(1), 19-26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.75.1.19
Lau, R. W. H., Yen, N. Y., Li, F., & Wah, B. (2014). Recent development in multimedia e-learning technologies. World Wide Web,17, 189-198. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11280-013-0206-8
Lave J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.
Lidz, C. S., & Gindis, B. (2003). Dynamic assessment of the evolving cognitive functions in children. In A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V.S.Ageyev & S. M. Miller (Eds.), Vygotsky's educational theory in cultural context (pp. 99-116). Cambridge University Press.
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. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v8n4p14
Mashhadi Heidar, D. (2016). ZPD-assisted introduction via web 2.0 and listening comprehension ability. English for Specific Purposes World, 49(17).
Mills, N., Pajares, F., & Herron, C. (2006). A reevaluation of the role of anxiety: Self-efficacy, anxiety, and their relation to reading and listening proficiency. Foreign Language Annals, 39(2), 276-294.
Minick, N. (1987). The development of Vygotsky's thought: An introduction. In R.W. Reiber & A. S. Carton (Eds.), The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky: Problems of general psychology (pp. 17-36). Plenum Press.
Mohammadi, E., & Mirdehghan, S. S. (2014). A CMC approach to teaching phrasal-verbs to Iranian EFL senior high school students: The case of blended learning. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 1174-1178. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.531
Nation, I. S. P., & Newton, J. (2009). Teaching ESL/EFL speaking and listening. Routledge.
Nutta, J. (2013). Is computer-based grammar instruction as effective as teacher directed grammar instruction for teaching L2 structures? CALICO Journal, 16(1), 49-62.
Oliver, R. (1999). Exploring strategies for online teaching and learning. Distance Education, 20(2), 240-254.
Pajares, F. (2000). Self-efficacy beliefs and current directions in self-efficacy research. http://www.emory.edu/EDUCATION/mfp/effpage.html.
Poehner, M. E. (2005). Dynamic assessment of oral proficiency among advanced L2 learners of French [Unpublished doctoral thesis]. The Pennsylvania State University.
Poehner, M. E. (2008). Dynamic assessment. A Vygotskian approach to understanding and promoting L2 development. Springer International Publishing.
Poehner, M. E. (2009). Dynamic assessment as a dialectical framework for classroom activity: Evidence from second language (l2) learners. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 8(3), 252-268. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1891/1945-8959.8.3.252
Poehner, M. E., & Lantolf, J. P. (2005). Dynamic assessment in the language classroom. Language Teaching Research, 9, 233-265. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1191/1362168805lr166oa
Puakpong, N. (2008). An evaluation of a listening comprehension program. In F. Zhang & B. Barber (Eds.), Handbook of research on computer-enhanced Language acquisition and learning. IGI Global.
Rahimi, A., & Abedini, A. (2009). The interface between EFL learners' self-efficacy concerning listening comprehension and listening proficiency. Novitas-Royal, 3(1), 14-28.
Rahimi, M., & Hosseini, F. K. (2011). The impact of computer-based activities on Iranian high-school students' attitudes towards computer-assisted language learning. Procedia Computer Science, 3, 183-190. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2010.12.031
Razmjoo, S. A., & Riazi, M. (2006). Is communicative language teaching practical in the expanding circle? A case study of teachers of Shiraz high schools and institutes. Journal of Language and Learning, 4(2), 144-171.
Reeves, T. C. (2000). Alternative assessment approaches for online learning environments in higher education. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 23(1), 101-111. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2190/GYMQ-78FA-WMTX-J06C
Rubin, J. (1995). An overview to a guide for the teaching of second language listening. In D. J. Mendelsohn, & J. Rubin (Eds.), A guide for the teaching of second language listening (pp. 7-11). Dominie Press, Inc.
Shabani, K., Alavi, S. M., & Kaivanpanah, S. (2012). Group dynamic assessment: An inventory of mediational strategies for teaching listening. The Journal of Teaching Language Skills (JTLS), 30(4), 27-58.
Shabani, K., Khatib, M., & Ebadi, S. (2010). Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development instructional implications and teachers' professional development. English Language Teaching Journal, 3(4), 237-248. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v3n4p237
Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2002). Dynamic testing. The nature and measurement of learning potential. Cambridge University Press.
Thiagarajan, S. (1999). Formative evaluation in performance technology. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 4(2), 22-24.
Vandergrift, L., & Goh, C. C. M. (2012). Teaching and learning second language listening: Metacognition in Action. Taylor & Francis.
Vandergrift, L., & Goh, C. C. M. (2012). Teaching and learning second language listening: Metacognition in action. Routledge.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. 1984a. Sobranie Sochinenii, Tom chetvertyi: Detskaya psikhilogii[collected works (vol. 4: Child psychology). Izdatel'stvo Pedagogika.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1998). Infancy. In R. W. Rieber (Ed.), The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky (pp. 207-241). Plenum Press.
Wang, Y. H. (2016). Promoting contextual vocabulary learning through an adaptive computer-assisted EFL reading system. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32, 291-303. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12132
Warschauer, M., & Healey, D. (1998). Computers and language learning: An overview. Language Teaching, 31, 57-71.
Warschauer, M., & Healey, D. (1998). Computers and Language Learning: An overview Published online by Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444800012970
Yildirim, A. G. O. (2008). Vygotsky's sociocultural theory and dynamic assessment in language learning. Anadolu University Journal of Social Sciences, 8(1), 301-308.
Yusof, N. A., & Saadon, N. (2012). The Effects of Web-based Language Learning on University Students' Grammar Proficiency. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 67, 402-408.
Zhao, Y. (2003). Recent developments in technology and language learning: A literature review and meta-analysis. CALICO Journal, 21(1), 7-27. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24149478.
Copyright (c) 2020 National Research University Higher School of Economics
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the Copyright Notice.
