Learning Potential and the Dynamic Assessment of L2 Chinese Grammar through Elicited Imitation
Issue: Vol 3 No. 1 (2016)
Journal: Language and Sociocultural Theory
This article outlines an approach to evaluating second language grammatical learning potential through dynamic assessment of elicited imitation. Focus is on the design of a sandwich format dynamic assessment in which learners engage in a pretest of independent performance, followed by a mediation phase in which instructional support is provided, and then a retest of independent performance. The assessment centers on learners’ responsiveness to support as measured by gains made between the pretest and the retest and the calculation of a learning potential score. We report on a small-scale implementation of the test with four intermediate-level and two elementary-level university learners of Chinese and their emerging comprehension of, and ability to produce, progressive and experiential aspect constructions. Results show significant gains with large effect sizes following mediation, which is one indication that the assessment was successful in evaluating learning potential.
Author: Haomin (Stanley) Zhang, Rémi A. van Compernolle
Aljaafreh, A. and Lantolf, J. (1994). Negative feedback as regulation and second language learning in the zone of proximal development. Modern Language Journal 78 (4), 465–483. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1994.tb02064.x
Budoff, M. (1987). The validity of learning potential assessment. In C. S. Lidz (Ed.), Dynamic Assessment: An Interactional Approach to Evaluating Learning Potential: 53–81. New York: Guilford Press.
Cronbach, L. J., and Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52 (4), 281–302. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0040957
Davin, K. J., Troyan, F. J., and Hellmann, A. L. (2014). Classroom dynamic assessment of reading comprehension with second language learners. Language and Sociocultural Theory, 1 (1), 1–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1558/lst.v1i1.1
Erlam, R. (2006). Elicited imitation as a measure of L2 implicit knowledge: An empirical validation study. Applied Linguistics, 27 (3), 464–491. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/aml001
Erlam, R. (2009). Elicited oral imitation as a measure of implicit knowledge. In R. Ellis, S. Loewen, C. Elder, R. Erlam, J. Philp, and H. Reiders. Implicit and Explicit Knowledge in Second Language Learning and Teaching: 65-93. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Feuerstein, R., Rand, Y., and Hoffman, M. (1979). Dynamic Assessment of Retarded Performers. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.
Feuerstein, R., Rand, Y., and Rynders, J. E. (1988). Don’t Accept Me as I am. Helping Retarded Performers Excel. New York: Plenum. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-6128-0
Haywood, H. C., and Lidz, C. S. (2007). Dynamic Assessment in Practice. Clinical and Educational Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Holzman, L. (2009). Vygotsky at Work and Play. London: Routledge.
Kozulin, A., and Garb, E. (2002). Dynamic assessment of EFL text comprehension of at-risk students. School Psychology International 23 (1), 112–127. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0143034302023001733
Lantolf, J. P., and Poehner, M. E. (2004). Dynamic assessment: Bringing the past into the future. Journal of Applied Linguistics 1 (1), 49–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1558/japl.18.104.22.168872
Lantolf, J. P., and Poehner, M. E. (2014). Sociocultural Theory and the Pedagogical Imperative in L2 Education: Vygotskian Praxis and the Research/practice Divide. London: Routledge.
Pienemann, M. (1998). Language Processing and Second Language Development: Processability Theory. John Benjamins Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/sibil.15
Poehner, M. E., and Lantolf, J. P. (2013). Bringing the ZPD into the equation: Capturing L2 development during computerized dynamic assessment (C-DA). Language Teaching Research 17 (3): 323–342. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1362168813482935
Poehner, M. E., and van Compernolle, R. A. (2011). Frames of interaction in Dynamic Assessment: Developmental diagnoses of second language learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice 18 (2), 183–198. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2011.567116
Poehner, M. E. (2009). Group dynamic assessment: Mediation for the L2 classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 43 (3) , 471–491. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2009.tb00245.x
Poehner, M. E. (2011). Validity and interaction in the ZPD: Interpreting learner development through dynamic assessment. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 21 (2), 244–263. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2010.00277.x
Sternberg, R. J. and Grigorenko, E. L. (2002). Dynamic Testing. The Nature and Measurement of Learning Potential. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
van Compernolle, R. A., and Zhang, H. (2014). Dynamic assessment of elicited imitation: A case analysis of an advanced L2 English speaker. Language Testing, 31, 395–412. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0265532213520303
Vinther, T. (2002). Elicited imitation: A brief overview. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 12 (1), 54–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1473-4192.00024
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978) Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Mental Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Zhang, Y. (2005). Processing and formal instruction in the L2 acquisition of five Chinese grammatical morphemes. In M. Pienemann (Ed.), Cross-linguistic Aspects of Processability Theory: 155–177. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/sibil.30.07zha