The Association between Dynamic Assessment of Grammar and Fluid Intelligence: A Case of Undergraduate EFL Students
https://doi.org/10.17583/rimcis.2018.3881
Keywords:
Downloads
Abstract
The present study examined the association between static assessment, dynamic assessment and fluid intelligence. A pool of 109 students majoring in English Language Teaching and Translation Studies took part in the study. Two major instruments of the study included Computerized Dynamic Grammar Test and Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices. The results of the study confirmed that the relation between static assessment of grammar and fluid intelligence as well as the relation between dynamic assessment of grammar and fluid intelligence were statistically significant. However, the relation between dynamic assessment of grammar and fluid intelligence was large. Finally, the results from the interviews revealed that ZPD and IQ are complementary and not contradictory. A practical implication for the students is that practicing fluid intelligence can improve their logical thinking by focusing on metacognitive strategies. Likewise, C-DA is a helpful source to develop effective learning strategies like directed attention, self-evaluation, and self-discovery strategies.
Downloads
References
Aljaafreh, A., & Lantolf, J. P. (1994). Negative feedback as regulation and second language learning in the zone of
Google Scholar Crossrefproximal development. The Modern Language Journal, 78, 465-483.
Google Scholar CrossrefAlavi, S. M., Kaivanpanah, SH., & Shabani, K. (2011). Group dynamic assessment: An inventory of mediationl strategies for teaching listening. The Journal of Teaching Language Skills (ITLS), 3 (4), 27-58.
Google Scholar CrossrefAntón, M. (2009). Dynamic assessment of advanced second language learners. Foreign Language Annals, 42(3),
Google Scholar Crossref-598.
Google Scholar CrossrefCattell, R. B. (1943). The measurement of adult intelligence. Psychological Bulletin, 40(3), 153–193.
Google Scholar CrossrefCattell, R. B. (1971). Abilities: Their structure, growth, and action. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Google Scholar CrossrefCattell, R. B. (1987). Intelligence: Its structure, growth, and action. New York: North Holland.
Google Scholar CrossrefCohen, J. (1992). Quantitative methods in psychology. Psychological Bulletins, 112 (1), 155-159.
Google Scholar CrossrefDavoudi, M., & Sadeghi, N. A. (2015). Use of fluid and crystallized intelligence theory to enhance prediction of
Google Scholar Crossreflearning foreign language grammar. International Journal of Linguistics, 7 (6), 69-78.
Google Scholar CrossrefDörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar CrossrefFeuerstein, R., Feuerstein, R.S., Falik, L. H. (2010). Beyond smarter: Mediated learning and the brain’s capacity to
Google Scholar Crossrefchange. New York: Teacher’s College Press.
Google Scholar CrossrefFlanagan, D. P., McGrew, K. S., & Ortiz, S. O. (2000). The Wechsler Intelligence Scales and Gf-Gc theory: A
Google Scholar Crossrefcontemporary approach to interpretation. United States: Allyn and Bacon.
Google Scholar CrossrefHunt, E. (1995). The role intelligence in modern society. American Scientist, 83(1), 356-369.
Google Scholar CrossrefLantolf, J. P., & Aljaafreh, A. (1995). Second language learning in the zone of proximal development: A
Google Scholar Crossrefrevolutionary experience. International Journal of Educational Research, 23,619-632.
Google Scholar CrossrefLantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2004). Dynamic assessment: Bringing the past into the future. Journal of Applied
Google Scholar CrossrefLinguistics, 1(1), 49-74.
Google Scholar CrossrefLong, M. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. DeBot, R. Ginsberge, &
Google Scholar CrossrefC. Kramsch (Eds.), Foreign language research in crosscultural perspective (pp. 39-52). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Google Scholar CrossrefModarresi, Gh., & Alavi, S. M. (2014). Designing and validating a test battery of computerized dynamic assessment
Google Scholar Crossrefof grammar. TELL, 14 (2), 1-29.
Google Scholar CrossrefMurphy, P. (2011). Dynamic assessment, intelligence and measurement. UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
Google Scholar CrossrefNassaji, H., & Swain, M. (2000). A Vygotskyan perspective towards corrective feedback in L2: The effect of
Google Scholar Crossrefrandom vs. negotiated help on the acquisition of English articles. Language Awareness, 9, 34-51.
Google Scholar CrossrefPishghadam, R., & Barabadi, E. (2012). Constructing and validating computerized dynamic assessment of L2
Google Scholar Crossrefreading comprehension. IJAL, 15 (1), 73-95.
Google Scholar CrossrefPishghadam, R. & Moafian, F. (2008). The role of Iranian EFL teachers’ multiple intelligences in their success in
Google Scholar Crossreflanguage teaching at high schools. Pazhuhesh-e-Zabanha-ye- Kha-reji, 42, 5-22.
Google Scholar CrossrefPoehner, M. E. (2008). Dynamic assessment: A Vygotskian approach to understanding and promoting L2
Google Scholar Crossrefdevelopment. Springer.
Google Scholar CrossrefPoehner, M. E., & Lantolf, J. P. (2013). Bringing the ZPD into the equation: Capturing L2 development during
Google Scholar Crossrefcomputerized dynamic assessment (C-DA). Retrieved June 2017 from: http://ltr.sagepub.com/content/early.
Google Scholar CrossrefRahmani J. (2008). The reliability and validity of Raven's progressive matrices test among the students of Aza Khorasgan University. Knowl Res ApplPsychol, 9(34), 61-74.
Google Scholar CrossrefRaven, J., Raven, J. C., & Court, J. H. (1998). Raven manual: Section 4, advanced progressive matrices. Oxford, UK: Oxford Psychologists Press Ltd.
Google Scholar CrossrefReynold, W., & Miller, G. (2003). Handbook of psychology (7th vol.). New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Google Scholar CrossrefStiggins, R. (2005). From formative assessment to assessment for learning: A path to success in standards-based
Google Scholar Crossrefschools. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(4), 324-328.
Google Scholar CrossrefTabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. 2001. Using multivariate statistics (4th ed.). New York: HarperCollins.
Google Scholar CrossrefValsiner, J. (2001). Process structure of semiotic mediation in human development. Human Development 44, 84-97.
Google Scholar CrossrefVernon, P. E. (1971). The structure of human abilities. London: Methuen.
Google Scholar CrossrefVygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society. US: President and Fellows of Harvard College.
Google Scholar CrossrefVygotsky, L.S. (1986). Thought and language, Newly revised and edited by A. Kozulin. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Google Scholar CrossrefYi-an, H. (2010). Multiple intelligences and foreign language learning: A case study in Taiwan. The International
Google Scholar CrossrefJournal of the Humanities, 8(4), 77-106.
Google Scholar CrossrefDownloads
Published
Almetric
Dimensions
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
All articles are published under Creative Commons copyright (CC BY). Authors hold the copyright and retain publishing rights without restrictions, but authors allow anyone to download, reuse, reprint, modify, distribute, and/or copy articles as the original source is cited.