The Integration of Dynamic Assessment in L2 Classroom: How Students Perceive it?

Widya Ratna Kusumaningrum, Prima Ferri Karma

Abstract


The present study focuses on the implementation of traditional diagnostic test for speaking skill in the form of an interview with no specific set of corrective procedure. However, it triggers more increasing worries on the significance of standardized test such as not being able to unlock students’ speaking potential. This study highlights on Dynamic Assessment (DA) based on the Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory (1978). Fundamentally, DA inserts mediation process such as prompts, hints, and leading questions in its interview process. This study compares the efficacy of Dynamic Assessment (DA) and the standardized diagnostic test/Non-Dynamic Assessment (NDA) in diagnosing and unlocking their potential. Using a quasi-experimental research with non-equivalent group design (NEGD), this study focused on four micro speaking skills including pronunciation, vocabulary, grammar, and fluency. The results suggested that the use of DA was able to identify their current speaking performance and uncover their speaking potential even if some were claimed to have the similar speaking level. While, the standardized test (NDA) emphasized only on the current performance and was not able to elicit their potential.


Keywords


standardized test; assessment

Full Text:

PDF

References


Ableeva, R, & Lantolf, JP. (2011). Mediated dialogue and the microgenesis of second language listening comprehension. Assessment in Education, 18, 133–149.

Feuerstein, R., Rand, Y., & Hoffman, M. B. (1979). The Dynamic Assessment of Retarded Performers. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.

Hessamy, G. & Ghaderi, E. (2014). The role of dynamic assessment in the vocabulary learning of Iranian EFL learners. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 645 – 652. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.463

Hidri, S. (2014). Developing and evaluating a dynamic assessment of listening comprehension in an EFL context. Language Testing in Asia, 4(4), doi:10.1186/2229-0443-4-4

Kellough, R. D., & Kellough, N. G. (1999). Secondary school teaching: A guide to method and resources planning for competence. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Kinginger, C. (2002) Defining the zone of proximal development in US foreign language education. Applied Linguistics, 23, 240-261.

Lantolf, J.P., & Poehner, M. (2011). Dynamic assessment in the classroom: Vygotskian praxis for L2 development. Language Teaching Research, 15(11), 11-33.

Poehner, M.E. (2008). Dynamic Assessment: A Vygotskian Approach to Understanding and Promoting L2 Development. University Park, PA: Springer.

Nimehchisalem, V. & Mat Hussin, N.I.S. (2018). Postgraduate students’ conception of language assessment. Language Testing in Asia, 8(11), 1-14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-018-0066-3.

William, D. (2011). What is assessment for learning? Studies in Educational Evaluation 37, 3–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2011.03.001

Vygotsky. L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Shrestha, P. & Coffin, C. (2012). Dynamic assessment, tutor mediation and academic writing development. Assessing Writing 17 (2012) 55–70




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21580/vjv7i23024

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2018 Vision: Journal for Language and Foreign Language Learning

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

 View My Stats

Vision: Journal for Language and Foreign Language Learning
English Language Education, Campus II
Faculty of Education and Teacher Training
Universitas Islam Negeri (UIN) Walisongo Semarang
Jl. Prof Hamka Ngaliyan Semarang, Jawa Tengah, Indonesia