تعداد نشریات | 41 |
تعداد شمارهها | 1,129 |
تعداد مقالات | 9,669 |
تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 17,608,968 |
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 12,294,344 |
MALL-based Cumulative Group Dynamic Assessment in Remote Teaching: The Case of Distance Education in Iran | ||
Quarterly of Iranian Distance Education Journal | ||
دوره 4، شماره 2، اسفند 2022، صفحه 135-150 اصل مقاله (217.79 K) | ||
نوع مقاله: scientific-research | ||
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30473/idej.2023.66605.1136 | ||
نویسندگان | ||
Amir Ghajarieh* 1؛ Mohammad Amin Mozaheb2؛ Samira Mohajer3 | ||
1Assistant Professor, Department of TEFL, University of Ershad Damavand | ||
2Assistant Professor in TEFL, Language Center, Imam Sadiq University, Tehran, Iran | ||
3university of Ershad Damavand | ||
چکیده | ||
While various aspects of Group Dynamic Assessment (GDA) have been explored in previous studies, cumulative GDA in distance education is an under-researched area. This study aims to examine the effect of on teaching of cumulative GDA in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) settings with a focus on discourse markers. To this end, a mixed-methods design was adopted with speaking tasks of First Certificate in English (FCE) test and interviews used as the main instruments for collecting data in the quantitative and qualitative phases of this study. A total of 64 homogenized female EFL learners were randomly divided into experimental and control groups. Cumulative GDA instruction of discourse markers in the experimental group was conducted by a teacher well-trained in intervention workshops. The analysis of the data based on T-test and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) showed a positive effect of GDA on the test group. In the qualitative phase of the study, interviews were used as the tool to reveal the attitudes of ten participants in the experimental group who opted to attend interview sessions. The content analysis of the interview results revealed that they had varied attitudes towards online cumulative GDA, and dominantly favoured this teaching approach in distance learning. The results highlight the importance of Assessment for learning (AfL) over Assessment of Learning (AoL) in distance education. Findings have implications for policy, practice and research. | ||
کلیدواژهها | ||
Group Dynamic Assessment (GDA)؛ Online GDA؛ EFL learners؛ Speaking abilities؛ Distance education | ||
عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
ارزیابی پویای گروهی تجمعی مبتنی بر MALL در آموزش از راه دور: مورد آموزش از راه دور در ایران | ||
نویسندگان [English] | ||
امیر قاجاریه1؛ محمد امین مذهب2؛ سمیرا مهاجر3 | ||
1استادیار دانشکده آموزش زبان انگلیسی دانشگاه ارشاد دماوند | ||
2استادیار آموزش زبان انگلیسی ، مرکز زبان دانشگاه امام صادق علیهالسلام | ||
3کارشناسی ارشد دانشگاه ارشاد دماوند | ||
چکیده [English] | ||
در حالی که جنبههای مختلف ارزیابی پویای گروهی (GDA) در مطالعات قبلی مورد بررسی قرار گرفتهاند، GDA تجمعی در آموزش از راه دور یک حوزه مورد بررسی قرار نگرفته است. این مطالعه با هدف بررسی تأثیر بر آموزش GDA تجمعی در تنظیمات انگلیسی به عنوان یک زبان خارجی (EFL) با تمرکز بر نشانگرهای گفتمانی انجام شد. برای این منظور، یک طرح ترکیبی با تکالیف گفتاری آزمون First Certificate in English (FCE) و مصاحبه به عنوان ابزار اصلی جمعآوری دادهها در مراحل کمی و کیفی این مطالعه اتخاذ شد. در مجموع 64 دانش آموز زن همگن زبان انگلیسی به طور تصادفی به دو گروه آزمایش و کنترل تقسیم شدند. آموزش تجمعی GDA نشانگرهای گفتمان در گروه آزمایش توسط معلمی که در کارگاه های مداخله به خوبی آموزش دیده بود انجام شد. تجزیه و تحلیل داده ها بر اساس آزمون تی و تحلیل کوواریانس (ANCOVA) تأثیر مثبت GDA را بر گروه آزمایش نشان داد. در مرحله کیفی پژوهش، از مصاحبه به عنوان ابزاری برای آشکارسازی نگرش ده نفر از شرکت کنندگان در گروه آزمایش که شرکت در جلسات مصاحبه را انتخاب کردند، استفاده شد. تجزیه و تحلیل محتوای نتایج مصاحبه نشان داد که آنها نگرش های متفاوتی نسبت به GDA تجمعی آنلاین داشتند و عمدتاً از این رویکرد آموزشی در یادگیری از راه دور حمایت می کردند. نتایج اهمیت ارزشیابی برای یادگیری (AfL) را نسبت به ارزیابی یادگیری (AoL) در آموزش از راه دور نشان می دهد. یافته ها پیامدهایی برای سیاست، عمل و تحقیق دارند. | ||
کلیدواژهها [English] | ||
ارزیابی پویا گروهی (GDA), GDA آنلاین, زبان آموزان زبان انگلیسی, توانایی های گفتاری, آموزش از راه دور | ||
مراجع | ||
Abdulaal, M. A. AD., Alenazi, M. H., Tajuddin, A. J. A., & Hamid, B. (2022). Dynamic vs. diagnostic assessment: Impacts on EFL learners’ speaking fluency and accuracy, learning anxiety, and cognitive load. Language Testing in Asia,12 (32). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-022-00179-0 Aijmer, K. (2002). English Discourse Particles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Alavi, S. M., Kaivanpanah, S., & Shabani, K. (2012). Group dynamic assessment: An inventory of mediational strategies for teaching listening. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 3(4), 27-58. Alemi, M., Miri, M., & Mozafarnezhad, A. (2019). Investigating the Effects of Online Concurrent Group Dynamic Assessment on Enhancing Grammatical Accuracy of EFL Learners.International Journal of Language Testing, 9(2), 29-43. Aljaafreh, A., & Lantolf, J.P. (1994). Negative feedback as regulation and second language learning in the zone of proximal development. The modern language journal, 78(4), 456-483 Badhoda, I., & Shabani, K. (2018). Response latency as a tool to study L2 learners’ ZPD, ZAD, and ongoing information processing. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 1(2), 1-16. Beaumont, C., O’Doherty, M., & Shannon, L. (2011). Reconceptualizing assessment feedback: A key to improving student learning? Studies in Higher Education, 36(6), 671–687. Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Longman. Birjandi, P., Estaji, M., & Deyhim, T. (2013). The impact of dynamic assessment on reading comprehension and metacognitive awareness of reading strategy use in Iranian high school learners. Iranian Journal of Language Testing, 3(2), 61-77. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77-101. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark V. L. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). SAGE. Ebadi, S., & Asakereh, A. (2017). Developing EFL learners’ speaking skills through dynamic assessment: a case of beginner and an advanced learner. Cogent education journal, 4(1). Farahani, F., & Moghadam, F. S. A. (2018). The Impact of cumulative group dynamic assessment on the learning of congruent and non-congruent collocations among Iranian intermediate EFL learners. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 7 (4), 21-36. Farangi, M. R., & Kheradmand Saadi, Z. (2017). Dynamic assessment or schema theory: The case of listening comprehension. Cogent Education, 4(1), 1312078. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186x.2017.1312078 Fung, L., & Carter, R. (2007). Discourse markers and spoken English: Native and learner use in pedagogical settings. Applied Linguistics, 28 (3), 410-439. Hidri, S. (2014). Developing and evaluating a dynamic assessment of listening comprehension in an EFL context. Language testing in Asia, 4(1), 1-19 Khandaghi Khameneh A & Fakhraee Faruji L. (2020). The Effect of teaching Discourse Markers (DMs) on speaking achievement among Iranian intermediate EFL learners. IJREE. 5 (4). Köroğlu, Z. C. (2019). Interventionist dynamic assessment’s effects on speaking skills testing: case of ELT teacher candidates. Advances in Language and Literacy Studies, 19(3). Kumaravadivelu, B. (2005). Understanding language teaching: From method to post-method. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. 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: Cambridge University Press Lidz, C.S. (1991). Practitioner’s guide to dynamic assessment. New York: Guilford Press. Maguire, M., & Delahunt, B. (2017). Doing a thematic analysis: A practical, step-by-step guide for learning and teaching scholars. All Ireland Journal of Higher Education, 9(3), 3351–33514. McNamara, T, & Roever, K. (2006). Language testing: The social dimension. Oxford: Blackwell. McNamara, T. (2000). Language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Miri, M., Alibakhshi, G., Kushki, A., & Salehpour Bavarsad, P. (2017). Going beyond one-to-one mediation in zone of proximal development (ZPD): Concurrent and cumulative group dynamic assessment. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 3(1), 1–24. Moradian, M.R, & Baharvand, P. (2015). The effect of group dynamic assessment on raising young Iranian EFL learners' metacognitive awareness and listening comprehension. English Language Teaching, 2(3), 67-86. Nazari, B., & Mansouri, S. (2014). Dynamic assessment versus static assessment: A study of reading comprehension ability in Iranian EFL learners. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 10(2), 134-156. Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic Analysis: Striving to Meet the Trustworthiness Criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847 Ouden, M. D., Keuning, J, & Eggen, T. (2020). Fine-Grained assessment of children’s text comprehension skills. In Goldhammer, R. Scherer, & Greiff, S. (Eds.). (2020). Advancements in technology-based assessment: Emerging item formats, test designs, and data sources (pp. 171, 183). Frontiers Media SA. Peraza, P. G. (2019). Guidelines for conducting, transcribing, and analyzing interview. Retrieved from: https://csass.ucsc.edu/certification/peraza.pdf. Poehner, M. E. (2005). Dynamic assessment of oral proficiency among advanced L2 learners of French. The Pennsylvania State University. Poehner, M. E. (2009). Group dynamic assessment: Mediation for the L2 classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 43(3), 471-491. Rashidi, N., & Bahadori Nejad, Z. (2018). An investigation into the effect of dynamic assessment on the EFL learners’ process writing development. SAGE Open, 8(2), 215824401878464. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244018784643 Riazi, A. M. (2016). The Routledge encyclopedia of research methods in applied linguistics. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315656762 Shrestha, P., & Coffin, C. (2012). Dynamic assessment tutor mediation and academic writing development. Assessing Writing, 17,55-70. So, H. J., Jihyang, L., & E. Lee. (2021). Multi-layered ecological structure of blended learning in science and engineering education in Korea. In P. Lim, & Ch. R. Graham, (Eds.), Blended Learning for Inclusive and Quality Higher Education in Asia (pp. 171-194). Springer. Son, G., & Kim, S. (2017). The Potentials of Dynamic Assessment for the Development of English Speaking Performance: A microgenetic analysis. Retrieved from http://scholar. dkyobobook.co.kr/searchDetail. laf?barcode=4010025100380 Tabatabaee, M., Alidoust, M., & Sarkeshikian, A. H. (2018). The effect of interventionist and cumulative group dynamic assessments on EFL learners’ writing accuracy. Applied Linguistics Research Journal, 2(1), 1-13. Tarighat, S., & Khodabakhsh, S. (2016). Mobile-assisted language assessment: Assessing speaking. Computers in Human Behavior, 64, 409–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.07.014 Yakışıki, B. Y, & Çakır, A. (2017). Dynamic assessment of prospective English teachers’ speaking skills. European Journal of English Language Teaching, 2(1), 22–53.
| ||
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 336 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 388 |