Effects of Concurrent Group Dynamic Assessment on Iranian EFL Learners’ Pragmatic Competence: A Case of Requests and Refusals

Document Type: Research Article

Authors

1 Department of English Language, Faculty of Language and Literature, Lorestan University, Khorramabad, Iran

2 Department of English Language, Aligudarz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Aligudarz, Iran

Abstract

Pragmatic competence is one of the most important components of successful communication; also, it is the most difficult aspect of SLA. This study aimed to explore the effects of concurrent group dynamic assessment (G-DA) on Iranian EFL learners’ learning of requests and refusals, following a mixed method design. In the experimental part of the study, 2 intact classes were homogenized by a pretest, with 24 written discourse completion tasks (WDCTs), carried out by the participants as the treatment. Concurrent G-DA group received calibrated feedback, whereas the nondynamic assessment (N-DA) group was explicitly provided with pertinent assistance without considering their zone of proximal development (ZPD). Additionally, for the sake of a qualitative study, all the dialogues between the teacher and pairs of students under investigation were audiorecorded while they were receiving the treatment. Finally, a WDCT posttest was administered to both groups. Results of the analysis of the data, using t test, showed that the G-DA group performed significantly better than the N-DA group. Also, the qualitative microgenetic analysis of the dialogues between the learners and their teacher indicated the effectiveness of concurrent G-DA in learning requests and refusals, thus corroborating the efficiency of dynamic assessment (DA) in pragmatic instruction. Implications and applications are discussed in this study.

Keywords


Allami, H., & Naeimi, A. (2011). A cross-linguistic study of refusals: An analysis of pragmatic competence development in Iranian EFL learners. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 385-406.

Al-Shboul, Y., Maros, M., &Yasin, M.  S.  M.  (2012). The appropriateness in advice-giving from a cross-cultural perspective. Arab World English Journal, 3(3), 106-122.

Amarien, N. (1997). Interlanguage pragmatics: A study of refusal strategies of Indonesian speaker speaking English. TEFLIN Journal, 8(1), 1-144. ‏

Azizi Abarghoui, M.  (2012). A comparative study of refusal strategies used by Iranians and Australians. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(11), 2439-2445.

Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2001). Evaluating the empirical evidence: Grounds for instruction in pragmatics? In K. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp.11-32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2010).  Exploring the pragmatics of interlanguage pragmatics: Definition by design. In A. Trosborg (Ed.), Handbook of pragmatics: Pragmatics across languages and cultures (pp. 219-260). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Billmyre, K. (1990). The effect of formal instruction on the development of sociolinguistic competence: The performance of compliments. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.

Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G.  (1989). Investigating cross-cultural pragmatics: An introductory overview. In S. Blum-Kulka, J. House, & G. Kasper (Eds.), Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies (pp. 1-34). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.

Bou-Franch, P., & Garcés-Conejos, P.  (2003). Teaching linguistic politeness: A methodological proposal. IRAL, 41, 1-22.

Bouton, L. (1994). Conversational implicature in the second language: Learned slowly when not deliberately taught. Journal of Pragmatics, 22, 157-167.

Brown, D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. San Francisco State University: Longman.

Brown, H. D. (2007).  Principles of language learning and teaching. USA: Pearson Publication.

Brown, P., & Levinson, S.  (1987). Politeness: Some universals of language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1-47.

Cheng, T. P. (2015). Notes on the second language pragmatic instruction. Hitotsubashi Journal of Arts and Sciences, 56, 69-79.

Eslami, Z. R., & Ahn, S. J.   (2014). Motivation, amount of interaction, length of residence, and ESL learners’ pragmatic competence. Applied Research on English Language, 3(1), 9-28

Farrokhi, F., & Atashian, S.  (2012). The role of refusal instruction in pragmatic development. World Journal of Education, 2(4), 85-93.

Félix-Brasdefer, J. C.  (2010). Intralingual pragmatic variation in Mexico City and San José, Costa Rica: A focus on regional differences in female requests. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(11), 2992-3011.

Gutiérrez, K. D. (2008). Developing a sociocritical literacy in the third space. Retrieved April 18, 2018, from the World Wide Web: onlinelibrary.wiley.com

Han, T., & Burgucu-Tazegül, A. (2016).  Realization of speech acts of refusals and pragmatic competence by Turkish EFL learners. The Reading Matrix, 16(1), 161-178.

Hassani, R., Mardani, M., & Hossein, H.  (2011). A comparative study of refusals: Gender distinction and social status in focus. The International Journal Language Society and Culture, 32, 37-46.

Haywood, H. C., & Lidz, S. C. (2007). Dynamic assessment in practice: Clinical and educational applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

House, J. (1996). Developing pragmatic fluency in English as a foreign language: Routines and metapragmatic awareness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 225-252.

Jalilifar, A. (2009). Request strategies: Cross-sectional study of Iranian EFL learners and Australian native speakers. English Language Teaching, 2(1), 46-61.

Kasper, G.  (2001). Four perspectives on L2 pragmatic development. Applied Linguistics, 22(4), 502-530.

Kasper, G., & Rose, K. R. (1999). Pragmatics and SLA. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 19, 81-104. ‏

Kasper, G. (1997). Can pragmatic competence be taught? Retrieved April 10, 2018, from the World Wide Web: http://www.nflrc.hawaii.edu/NetWorks/NW06/>

Kasper, G., & Blum-Kulka, S. (1993). Interlanguage pragmatics: Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kasper, G., & Rose, K.  (2003). Pragmatic development in a second language. Malden, MA/Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.

Kasper, G., & Rose, K.  R. (2002).  Pragmatic development in a second language. Oxford: Blackwell.

Khodareza, M.  R., & Lotfi, A.  R. (2012).  Interlanguage pragmatics development: Iranian EFL learners’ interpretation and use of speech acts. Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research, 2(9), 9235-9243.

Kim, H.  (2016). An investigation into EFL learners’ perception towards L2 pragmatic instruction. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(3), 452-462.

Kim, J. (1995). Requests and Korean ESL learners. Working Papers in Educational Linguistics, 11(2), 67-82.

Kondo, S. (2008). Effects on pragmatic development through awareness-raising instruction: Refusals by Japanese EFL learners. Investigating Pragmatics in Foreign Language Learning, Teaching and Testing, 153-177.‏

Kubota, M. (1995). Teachability of conversational implicature to Japanese EFL learners. IRLT Bulletin, 9, 35-67.

Lantolf, J. P. (1996). SLA theory building: Letting all the flowers bloom. Language Learning, 46(4), 713-749.

Lantolf, J. P. (2009). Dynamic assessment: The dialectic integration of instruction and assessment. Language Teaching, 42(3), 355-368.

Lantolf, J. P., & Aljaafreh, A. (1995). Second language learning in the zone of proximal development: A revolutionary experience. International Journal of Educational Research, 23(7), 619-632.

Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2004). Dynamic assessment of L2 development: Bringing the past into the future. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 49-72. ‏

Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2006). Dynamic assessment in the foreign language classroom: A teacher’s guide. University Park, PA: CALPER Publications.

Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner M. E. (2008). Sociocultural theory and the teaching of second languages. London: Equinox.

Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2011). Dynamic assessment in the classroom: Vygotskian praxis for L2 development. Language Teaching Research, 15(11), 11-33.

Lavelli, M., Pantoja, A.  P.  F., Hsu, H. C., Messinger, D., & Fogel, A.  (2005). Using microgenetic designs to study change processes. In D. M. Teti (Ed.), Handbook of research methods in developmental science (pp. 40-65). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.

Li, R., Suleiman, R., & Sazalie, A. (2015). An investigation into Chinese EFL learners’ pragmatic competence. Journal of Language Studies, 15(2), 101-118.

Lidz, C. (1987). Dynamic assessment. New York: Guilford Press.

Lin, M.  F. (2014). An interlanguage pragmatic study on Chinese EFL learners’ refusal: Perception and performance. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 5(3), 642-653.

Liu, C. N.  (2007). Pragmatics in foreign language instruction: The effects of pedagogical intervention and technology on the development of EFL learners’ realization of request. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Texas A&M University.

Mahani, S. T. (2012). A cross-sectional study of Iranian EFL learners’ realization of request speech acts. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Eastern Mediterranean University.

Mehri, E., & Amerian, M. (2015). Challenges to dynamic assessment in second language learning. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 5(7), 1458-1466. ‏

Merghati, S. V., & Ahangari, S. (2014). Dynamic assessment of pragmatics: The impact of dynamic assessment on EFL Learners’ interlanguage pragmatic development. Basic Research Journal of Education Research and Review, 1(4), 13-21.

Mirzaei, A., & Esmaeili, M.  (2013). The effects of planned instruction on Iranian L2 learners’ interlanguage pragmatic development. Iranian Journal of Society, Culture, and Language, 1(1), 89-100.

Moaveni, H. T. (2014). A study of refusal strategies by American and international students at an American university. Unpublished master’s thesis, Minnesota State University, Mankato.

Mohebali, Sh., & Salehi, N.  (2011). The relationship between Iranian EFL students’ language proficiency and their cross-cultural speech act knowledge. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(2), 378-384.

Morrow, C. (1996). The pragmatic effects of instruction on ESL learners’ production of complaint and refusal speech acts. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, State University of New York.

Nemati, M., & Arabmoradi, A.  (2014). Development of interlanguage pragmatic competence: Input- and output-based instruction in the zone of proximal development. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4(2), 262-270.

Norouzian, R., & Eslami, Z.  (2016). Critical perspectives on interlanguage pragmatic development. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 20(1), 25-50.

Ohta, A. (2000). Rethinking interaction in SLA: Developmentally appropriate assistance in the zone of proximal development and the acquisition of L2 grammar. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 51-78). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ohta, A. S. (2005). Interlanguage pragmatics in the zone of proximal development. System, 33, 503-517.

Olshtain, E., & Cohen, A. (1990). The learning of complex speech act behavior. TESOL Canada Journal, 7, 45-65.

Poehner, M. E. (2005). Dynamic assessment of oral proficiency among advanced L2 learners of French. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University, Pennsylvania. ‏

Poehner, M. E. (2007). Beyond the test: L2 dynamic assessment and the transcendence of mediated learning. The Modern Language Journal, 91, 323-340.

Poehner, M. E. (2008). Dynamic assessment: A Vygotskian approach to understanding and promoting L2 development. Berlin: Springer Publishing.

Poehner, M. E. (2009). Group dynamic assessment: Mediation for the L2 classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 43(3), 471-491. ‏

Poehner, M.  E., & Lantolf, J. P. (2005). Dynamic assessment in the language classroom. Language Teaching Research, 9(3), 233-265. ‏

Razavi, A., & Tabatabaei, O. (2014). The effect of dynamic and nondynamic assessment on acquisition of apology speech act among Iranian EFL learners. Journal of Academic and Applied Studies (Special Issue on Applied Sciences), 4(8), 1-20.

Rose, K. R. (2005). On the effects of instruction in interlanguage pragmatics. System, 33, 385-399.

Rose, K. R. & Kasper, G. (2001). Pragmatics in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Saadatmandi, M., Modarres Khiabani, Sh., & Pourdana, N.  (2018). Teaching English pragmatic features in EFL context: A focus on request speech acts. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 8(7), 829-835.

Sahragard, R., & Javanmardi, F. (2011). English speech act realization of refusals among Iranian EFL Learners. CCSENET, 7(2), 181-198.

Sanaeifar, S. H., & NafarzadehNafari, F.  (2018). The effects of formative and dynamic assessments of reading comprehensions on intermediate EFL learners’ test anxiety. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 8(5), 533-540.

Senowarsito, I.  (2013). Politeness strategies in teacher-student interaction.  TEFLIN Journal, 24(1), 82-96.

Shirazi, M., Ahmadi, S.  D., & Gholami, M. A.  (2016). The effect of using video games on EFL learners’ acquisition of speech acts of apology and request. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(5), 1019-1026.

Skidmore, D. (2006). Pedagogy and dialogue. Cambridge Journal of Education, 36(4), 503-514. 

Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2002). Dynamic testing: The nature and measurement of learning potential. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Swain, M.  (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In J. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 97-114). Oxford: Oxford University Press. 

Swain, M. (2006). Languaging, agency, and collaboration in advanced language proficiency. In H. Byrnes (Ed.), Advanced language learning: The contribution of Halliday and Vygotsky (pp. 95-108). London: Continuum.

Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 16(3), 371-391.

Taguchi, N. (2006). Analysis of appropriateness in a speech act of request in L2 English. Pragmatics, 16, 513-533.

Taguchi, N. (2017). Interlanguage pragmatics. In A. Barron, P. Grundy, & G. Yueguo (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of pragmatics (pp. 153-167). New York: Routledge.

Taguchi, N., & Roever, C.  (2017). Second language pragmatics. New York: Oxford University Press.

Tajeddin, Z., & Hosseinpur, R.  (2014). The impact of deductive, inductive, and L1-Based consciousness-raising tasks on EFL learners’ acquisition of the request speech act. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 6(1), 73-92.

Tajeddin, Z., & Tayebipour, F. (2012). The effect of dynamic assessment on EFL learners’ acquisition and apology. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 4(2), 87-118.

Takimoto, M. (2006). The effects of explicit feedback on the development of pragmatic proficiency. Language Teaching Research, 10, 393-417.

Tanck, S. (2002). Speech acts sets of refusal and complaints: A comparison of native and nonnative English speakers’ production. Retrieved March 18, 2017, from the World Wide Web: http://www.american.edu/tesol/wptanck.pdf#search

Thomas. J. (1983). Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 91-112.

Ueda, M. (2006). A corpus-based study of Japanese EFL learners’ request strategies. Journal of Language Studies, 10, 281-300.

van Compernolle, R. A., & Williams, L. (2012). Promoting sociolinguistic competence in the classroom zone of proximal development. Language Teaching Research, 16, 39-60.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. USA: MIT Press.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher mental process. USA: Harvard University Press.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). Thinking and speech. In R. W. Rieber & A. S. Carton (Eds.), The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky: Problems of general psychology (Vol. 1; pp. 37-285). New York: Plenum Press.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1998). The problem of age. In R. W. Rieber (Ed.), Collected works of L. S. Vygotsky: Child psychology (Vol. 5; pp. 187-205). New York: Plenum.

Wells, G. (1992). The centrality of talk in education. In K. Norman (Ed.), Thinking voices: The reader of the national oracy project (pp. 20-38). London: Hodder and Stoughton.

Wilson, D. (2017). An investigation into the comprehensive development of L2 pragmatic development in the EFL classroom: A case of advanced Sebian EFL learners. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Surrey, England.