Document Type : Research Paper


Department of Teaching English Language and Linguistics, Razi University, Iran


Theoretically drawing on Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory of mind (SCT) and following a sequential exploratory mixed method design, this study probed into the impact of Group Dynamic Assessment (GDA) on the short and long-term Iranian high school students’ grammar ability. Also, a focus group interview was conducted to explore students’ attitudes toward concurrent GDA. This study used a convenient sample of 42 Iranian third-grade students in a private high school who prepared to participate in the Iranian University Entrance Exam (IUEE). The students of the two groups (i.e., GDA and Non-GDA) followed the same procedure (i.e., DIALANG test, pre-test, three conventional teaching sessions and one enrichment session, focus group interview (for GDA group), post-test and transcendence test). Quantitative findings using three independent sample t-tests and two repeated measure ANOVAs revealed that the GDA group significantly outperformed the non-GDA group regarding grammar ability and could apply them in more demanding circumstances. Besides, the thematic analysis of qualitative data showed that the concurrent GDA assisted students to improve their grammar ability. The study's findings highlight the importance of applying GDA as a mediational procedure that assists students in developing their grammar ability in L2 contexts. The findings of the study may assist L2 teachers to apply GDA procedure in their classrooms to save time for teaching and assessing grammatical structures.


Main Subjects

Abbasi, A., & Fatemi, M. A. (2015). On the effect of dynamic assessment on Iranian pre-intermediate EFL learners’ acquisition of English tenses. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 8(4), 222–236.
Abdelaziz, H. A., & Al Zehmi, O. (2021). E-cognitive scaffolding: does it have an impact on the English grammar competencies of middle school underachieving students? Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 36(1), 5-28. 1080/026805 13.2020.1774356.
Ableeva, R. (2010). Dynamic assessment of listening comprehension in L2 French [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. The Pennsylvania State University.
Afshari, H., Amirian, Z., & Tavakoli, M. (2020). Applying group dynamic assessment procedures to support EFL writing development: Learner achievement, learners' and teachers' perceptions. Journal of Writing Research, 11(3). 17239/jowr-2020. 11.03.02.
Alemi, M., Miri, M., & Mozafarnezhad, A. (2019). Investigating the effects of online concurrent group dynamic assessment on enhancing grammatical accuracy EFL learners. International Journal of Language Testing, 9(2), 29–43. 14279.html.
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), 465–483. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1994. tb02064 .x.
Anton, M. (2003, March). Dynamic assessment of advanced foreign language learners [Paper presentation]. The American Association of applied linguistics, Washington, D.C.
Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., Irvine, C. K. S., & Walker, D. (2018). Introduction to research in education. Cengage Learning.
Ashtarian, S., Ebadi, S., & Yousofi, N. (2018). Group Dynamic Assessment in an EFL Classroom: Do Secondary Interactants Benefit? Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics (IJAL), 21(2), 1-42.
Bachman, L., & Palmer, A. (2010). Language assessment in practice. Oxford University Press.
Bahramlou, K., & Esmaeili, A. (2019). The effects of vocabulary enhancement exercises and group dynamic assessment on word learning through lexical inferencing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 48(4), 889-901.
Bakhoda, I., & Shabani, K. (2017). Enhancing L2 learners' ZPD modification through computerized-group dynamic assessment of reading comprehension. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 13(1), 31-44. 17.1286350.
Beaumont, C., O’Doherty, M., & Shannon, L. (2011). Reconceptualising assessment feedback: a key to improving student learning? Studies in Higher Education, 36(6), 671–687.
Brown, A., & Ferrara, R. A. (1985). Diagnosing zones of proximal development. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), Culture, communication, and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives (pp. 273–305). Cambridge University Press.
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Creswell, J. W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative approaches to research (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Pearson Education.
Davin, K. J. (2011). Group dynamic assessment in an early foreign language learning program: Tracking movement through the zone of proximal development (unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Pittsburgh.
Davin, K. J. (2013). Integration of dynamic assessment and instructional conversations to promote development and improve assessment in the language classroom. Language Teaching Research, 17(3), 303-323. 482934.
Davin, K.J., & Donato, R. (2013). Student collaboration and teacher-directed classroom dynamic assessment: A complementary pairing. Foreign Language Annals, 46(1), 5-22. 111/flan.12012.
De Guerrero, M. C. M., & Villamil, O. S. (2000). Activating the ZPD: Mutual scaffolding in L2 peer revision. The Modern Language Journal, 84(1), 51–68.
Dornyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford University Press.
Ebadi, S. (2014). L2 private speech in online dynamic assessment: A sociocultural perspective. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 17(1), 49-70.
Ebadi, S., & Rahimi, M. (2019). Mediating EFL learners’ academic writing skills in online dynamic assessment using Google Docs. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 32(5-6), 527-555.
Estaji, M., & Ameri, A. F. (2020). Dynamic assessment and its impact on pre-intermediate and high-intermediate EFL learners’ grammar achievement. Cogent Education, 7(1), 1740040. 1080/2331186X.2020.1740040.
Feuerstein, R., Rand, Y., & Rynders, J. E. (1988). Don’t Accept Me as I Am. Helping Retarded Performers Excel. Plenum
Ghahderijani, B. H., Namaziandost, E., Tavakoli, M., Kumar, T., & Magizov, R. (2021). The comparative effect of group dynamic assessment (GDA) and computerized dynamic assessment (C-DA) on Iranian upper-intermediate EFL learners’ speaking complexity, accuracy, and fluency (CAF). Language Testing in Asia, 11(1), 1-20. .1186/s40468-021-00144-3.
Haney, M., & Evans, J. (1999). National survey of school psychologists regarding use of dynamic assessment and other nontraditional assessment techniques. Psychology in the Schools, 36(4), 295-304. 07)36:4%3C295::AIDPITS 3%3E3.0.CO;2-G.
Kamali, M., Abbasi, M., & Sadighi, F. (2018). The effect of dynamic assessment on L2 grammar acquisition by Iranian EFL learners. International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies, 6(1), 72-78. 72.
Kao, Y. T. (2020). A Comparison Study of Dynamic Assessment and Nondynamic Assessment on EFL Chinese Learners' Speaking Performance: Transfer of Learning. English Teaching & Learning, 44(3), 255-275.
Khatib, F., & Chalak, A. (2022). Utilizing scaffolding strategies to improve Iranian intermediate EFL students’ grammatical knowledge. Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Translation Studies, 7(1), 61-80. 2022.326326.1144.
Khodi, A., Alavi, S. M., & Karami, H. (2021). Test review of Iranian university entrance exam: English Konkur examination. Language Testing in Asia, 11(1), 1-10. 186/s40468-021-00125-6.
Kozulin, A., & Garb, E. (2002). Dynamic assessment of EFL text comprehension. School Psychology International, 23(1), 112-127. 1177%2F0143034302023001733.
Lantolf, J. P. (2000). Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford university press.
Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2010). Dynamic assessment in the classroom: Vygotskian praxis for second language development. Language Teaching Research, 15(1), 11–33. 10.1177/1362168810383328.
Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2011). Dynamic assessment in the classroom: Vygotskian praxis for second language development. Language Teaching Research, 15(1), 11–33. 1177/1362168810383328.
Mackey, A., & Gass, S. M. (2016). Second language research: Methodology and design. Routledge.
Majdedin, M., Nabizadeh, A., & Taghinejad, A. (2015). Investigating learners’ grammatical English relative pronouns through the interactionist model of dynamic assessment based on a sandwich format. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 9(1), 57–66.
Malmeer, E., & Zoghi, M. (2014). Dynamic assessment of grammar with different age groups. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4(8), 1707–1713. tpls.4.8.1707-1713.
Mehri, E., & Amerian, M. (2015). Group dynamic assessment (G-DA): The case for the development of control over the past tense. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 4(5), 11-20.
Mohammadi Moghadam, M. (2015). Effects of mediation on an EFL learner’s grammar development: A case study of an EFL beginner student. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 192, 101–106.
Petrovsky, A. V. (1985). Studies in psychology. The collective and the individual. Moscow: Progress.
Pileh Roud, L. F., & Hidri, S. (2021). Toward a sociocultural approach to computerized dynamic assessment of the TOEFL iBT listening comprehension test. Education and Information Technologies, 26(4), 4943-4968.
Poehner, M. E. (2007). Beyond the test: L2 dynamic assessment and the transcendence of mediated learning. The Modern Language Journal, 91(3), 323–340. 2007.00583.x.
Poehner, M. E. (2008). Dynamic assessment: a Vygotskian approach to understanding and promoting second language development. Berlin: Springer;
Poehner, M. E., & Lantolf, J. P. (2013). Bringing the ZPD into the equation: Capturing L2 development during computerized dynamic assessment (C-DA). Language Teaching Research, 17, 323–342.
Poehner, M. E., Zhang, J., & Lu, X. (2015). Computerized dynamic assessment (C-DA): Diagnosing L2 development according to learner responsiveness to mediation. Language Testing, 32(3), 1–21.
Poehner, M.E. (2009). Group dynamic assessment: Mediation for the L2 classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 43(3), 471-491. 10.1002/j.1545-7249.2009.tb00245.x.
Purpura, J. E. (2004). Assessing grammar (Vol. 8). Cambridge University Press.
Randall, T. S., & Urbanski, K. (2023). Development of a Computerized Dynamic Assessment Program for Second Language Grammar Instruction and Assessment. Language and Sociocultural Theory, 10(1), 50-81. 21006.
Rassaei, E. (2021). Implementing mobile-mediated dynamic assessment for teaching request forms to EFL learners. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 1-31 588221. 2021.1912105.
Razavipour, K., & Rezaee, A. (2017). Group dynamic assessment of EFL learners’ grammar: A microgenetic development approach. The Iranian EFL Journal, 13(2), 6-2.
Riazi, A. M. (2016). The Routledge encyclopedia of research methods in applied linguistics. Routledge.
Sharafi, M., & Sardareh, S. A. (2016). The effect of dynamic assessment on elementary EFL students’ L2 grammar learning. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 3(3), 102–120.
Sohrabi, S., & Ahmadi Safa, M. (2020). Group dynamic assessment and EFL learners’ oral production, motivation, and classroom anxiety. English Teaching & Learning, 44(4), 353-376.
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.
Van der Veen, C., Dobber, M., & van Oers, B. (2016). Implementing dynamic assessment of vocabulary development as a trialogical learning process: A practice of teacher support in primary education schools. Language Assessment Quarterly, 13(4), 329-340. 434303.2016.1235577.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, M A: Cambridge University Press.
Wagoner, B. (2009). The experimental methodology of constructive microgenesis. In: J. Valsiner, P. Molenaar, N. Chaudhary, & M. Lyra (Eds.), Handbook of dynamic process methodology in the social and developmental sciences (pp. 99–121). Springer.