The Comparative Effect of Dynamic and Negotiated Assessment on EFL learners’ Writing Complexity and Fluency
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 22023228 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Shirin Sardarianpour (Islamic Azad University Central Tehran Branch), Sholeh Kolahi (0000-0001-9255-2774, Islamic Azad University Central Tehran Branch) |
| Year | 2021 |
| Volume | 12 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 1 |
| Publication date | 2021-04-30 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Advances in Language and Literary Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2203-4714 • E-ISSN: 2203-4714 |
| Publisher | Australian International Academic Centre (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.7575/aiac.alls.v.12n.2.p.1 |
| OpenAlex | W3161536792 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
| References cited | 15 |
The purpose of the present study was to investigate the comparative effect of dynamic and negotiated assessment on EFL learners’ writing complexity and fluency. To this end, 72 female intermediate EFL participants, selected from a larger group of 103 learners based on their performances on a piloted PET, in Tak language institute in Dezfoul, Iran participated in the present study and received either dynamic assessment, negotiated assessment, or traditional instruction during a term. Both of the experiments were process-oriented; however, in the dynamic assessment, the negotiation was done through teacher’s provision of feedback wherein the negotiated assessment group peer-negotiation was encouraged. The participants’ writing complexity and fluency were measured both before and after the instruction through essay writing pre-treatment test and posttest in accordance with Larsen-Freeman’s (2006) T-Unit protocol. A Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) was run on the posttest scores to test the null hypotheses of the study, the results of which indicated that while dynamic assessment was significantly effective in improving writing complexity (p = 0.007 0.05). Learners, teachers, and syllabus designers who are engaged in the process of language pedagogy may use these results. Depending on the focus of their learning, i.e., fluency or complexity, they may choose the optimal choice between these two types of assessment
Corrective Feedback · Developmental psychology · Dynamic assessment · Fluency · Formative assessment · Mathematics education · Multivariate analysis of variance · Negotiation · Pedagogy · Syllabus · Writing assessment · Computer Science · Educational and Psychological Assessments · EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning · Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods · Psychology
Second language development in writing
Psychological Mechanisms Underlying Second Language Fluency
The Influence of Planning and Task Type on Second Language Performance
A five-dimensional framework for authentic assessment
Caf
A Framework for the Implementation of Task-based Instruction
Complexity, Accuracy, and Fluency in Second Language Acquisition
Towards an Organic Approach to Investigating CAF in Instructed SLA
Using Habermas to Evaluate Two Approaches to Negotiated Assessment
The use of self-assessment schedules in negotiated learning
Negotiated assessment and teacher learning
Our statistical intuitions may be misleading us
Applications and Challenges in Dynamic Assessment
Access Fluidity, Attention Control, and the Acquisition of Fluency in a Second Language
The Emergence of Complexity, Fluency, and Accuracy in the Oral and Written Production of Five Chinese Learners of English
| Unique citing works | 2 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0.5 |
| Citation span | 2022 - 2025 (4) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 2 |