A Comparative Study of the Effects of Two Approaches of Dynamic Assessment on the Reading Comprehension of Iranian EFL Learners

Jila Naeini

doi:10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.4n.2p.54

Abstract

The aim of this study was to examine and compare the impact of two Dynamic Assessment (DA) approaches, that is, Feuerstein’s Mediated Learning Experience (MLE) and Brown’s Graduated Prompt (GP) on Iranian EFL learners’ reading comprehension. Therefore, a mixed methods approach consisting of a semi-structured interview, a pretest, an intervention program, a posttest, and a transfer test was applied to assess and compare the efficacy of two DA approaches. One hundred and two EFL learners taking a General English course at Islamic Azad University were assigned to two experimental groups (MLEG and GPG) and one comparison group (CG). The participants in the MLEG took part in the MLE, and the participants in the GPG participated in the GP intervention program. The results of the qualitative as well as the aggregate and disaggregated quantitative data analyses indicated that both intervention approaches of DA were effective in enhancing the learners’ reading comprehension.

Highlights

Dynamic Assessment (DA) originally came almost about half a century ago as a reaction to dissatisfaction with traditional methods of assessment
The quantitative methods were used in order to investigate the “product” of reading comprehension whereas the qualitative methods targeted at the “process” of reading comprehension which involves the report of the results of the grounded analyses of the data collected during the semi structured-interview and the intervention programs carried out in the present study
The results indicate the mean and the standard deviation of the transfer test (M =15.58, SD = 3.75; M = 13.91, S= 3.02; M = 6.61, SD =2.08), comparing with their mean score and SD in the posttest (M = 13.73, SD = 3.80; M = 12.00, S= 2.86; M = 8.25, SD =2.76) for the MLEG, the GPG and the comparison group (CG), respectively, the MLEG and the GPG’s mean scores promoted significantly from the posttest to the transfer test

Summary

Introduction

DA originally came almost about half a century ago as a reaction to dissatisfaction with traditional methods of assessment. As Cioffi and Carney (1983) argue, standard assessment procedures are not sufficient for estimating students’ learning potential. They pin point that these assessment tools will not help instructors to identify the conditions under which students can be assisted to make progress. Measuring students’ current performance level cannot provide assessors with enough information about learners’ potential ability. Brown and French (1979) believe that learning potential is identified and assessed through applying the zone of proximal development (ZPD). In Vygotsky’s ZPD theory, by offering appropriate forms of mediation, development of learners’ mental functions can be intervened and guided grounding in DA

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion