Abstract
This chapter discusses teacher mediation and learner reciprocity in view of my research on dynamic assessment (DA) of academic writing for business studies in distance education. A detailed account of both teacher mediation and learner reciprocity is presented. Drawing on Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory, the chapter explores business studies students’ zones of proximal development in relation to their academic writing across two DA sessions. It offers a set of strategies for practitioners and researchers in academic writing pedagogy and assessment as revealed by the data. By doing so, it demonstrates the power of DA to reveal students’ microgenetic development as conceptualised by Vygotsky (see Lantolf in Sociocultural theory and second language learning, Oxford university press, Oxford, 2000; Wertsch in Vygotsky and the social formation of mind, Harvard university press, Cambridge, MA, 1985).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Ableeva, R. (2010). Dynamic assessment of listening comprehension in second language learning. Ph.D., Pennsylvania State University. Retrieved from http://etda.libraries.psu.edu/theses/approved/WorldWideIndex/ETD-5520/index.html.
Ableeva, R. (2018). Understanding learner L2 development through reciprocity. In J. P. Lantolf, M. E. Poehner & M. Swain (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of sociocultural theory and second language development (pp. 266–281). New York, NY: Routledge.
Aljaafreh, A., & Lantolf, J. P. (1994). Negative feedback as regulation and second language learning in the Zone of Proximal Development. Modern Language Journal, 78(4), 465–483.
Carless, D. (2006). Differing perceptions in the feedback process. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 219–233.
Chaiklin, S. (2003). The zone of proximal development in Vygotsky’s analysis of learning and instruction. In A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V. S. Ageyev, & S. M. Miller (Eds.), Vygotsky’s educational theory in cultural context (pp. 39–64). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Coffin, C., & Hewings, A. (2005). Engaging electronically: Using CMC to develop students’ argumentation skills in higher education. Language & Education: An International Journal, 19(1), 32–49.
Crossouard, B., & Pryor, J. (2009). Using email for formative assessment with professional doctorate students. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(4), 377–388.
Daniels, H. (2007). Pedagogy. In H. Daniels, M. Cole, & J. V. Wertsch (Eds.), The Cambridge companion to Vygotsky (pp. 307–331). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Davin, K. J., Herazo, J. D., & Sagre, A. (2016). Learning to mediate: Teacher appropriation of dynamic assessment. Language Teaching Research, 21(5), 632–651. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168816654309.
Dawson, P., Henderson, M., Mahoney, P., Phillips, M., Ryan, T., Boud, D., et al. (2019). What makes for effective feedback: Staff and student perspectives. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(1), 25–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1467877.
Haywood, H. C., & Lidz, C. S. (2007). Dynamic assessment in practice: Clinical and educational applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hyatt, D. F. (2005). ‘Yes, a very good point!’: A critical genre analysis of a corpus of feedback commentaries on Master of Education assignments. Teaching in Higher Education, 10(3), 339–353.
Hyland, K. (2013). Student perceptions of hidden messages in teacher written feedback. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 39(3), 180–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2013.06.003.
Kozulin, A. (2003). Psychological tools and mediated learning. In A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V. S. Ageyev, & S. M. Miller (Eds.), Vygotsky’s educational theory in cultural context (pp. 15–38). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lantolf, J. P. (2000). Introducing sociocultural theory. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 1–26). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
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., & Thorne, S. L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lillis, T. M., & Scott, M. (2007). Defining Academic Literacies Research: Issues of epistemology, ideology and strategy. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 4(1), 5–32.
Lund, A. (2008). Assessment made visible: Individual and collective practices. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 15(1), 32–51.
Mutch, A. (2003). Exploring the practice of feedback to students. Active Learning in Higher Education, 4(1), 24–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787403004001003.
Poehner, M. E. (2005). Dynamic assessment of oral proficiency among advanced L2 learners of French. Ph.D., Pennsylvania State University.
Poehner, M. E. (2008). Dynamic assessment: A Vygotskian approach to understanding and promoting L2 development. New York: Springer.
Poehner, M. E., & Swain, M. (2016). L2 development as cognitive-emotive process. Language and Sociocultural Theory, 3(2), 219–241.
Shrestha, P. N., & Coffin, C. (2012). Dynamic assessment, tutor mediation and academic writing development. Assessing Writing, 17(1), 55–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2011.11.003.
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2002). Talking it through: Two French immersion learners’ response to reformulation. International Journal of Educational Research, 37(3–4), 285–304.
Sweeny, S. M. (2010). Writing for the instant messaging and text messaging generation: Using new literacies to support writing instruction. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 54(2), 121–130.
Valsiner, J. (2001). Process structure of semiotic mediation in human development. Human Development, 44(2), 84–97.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Walker, M. (2009). An investigation into written comments on assignments: Do students find them usable? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(1), 67–78.
Warschauer, M., & Ware, P. D. (2008). Learning, change, and power: Competing discourses of technology and literacy. In J. Coiro, K. M., C. Lankshear, & D. J. Leu (Eds.), Handbook of research on new literacies (pp. 215–240). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic inquiry: Towards a sociocultural practice and theory of education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wertsch, J. V. (1985). Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wertsch, J. V. (2003). Commentary on: Deliberation with computers: exploring the distinctive contribution of new technologies to collaborative thinking and learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 39(8), 899–904.
Wertsch, J. V. (2007). Mediation. In H. Daniels, M. Cole, & J. V. Wertsch (Eds.), The Cambridge companion to Vygotsky (pp. 178–192). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Williams, C., & Beam, S. (2019). Technology and writing: Review of research. Computers & Education, 128, 227–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.024.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Shrestha, P.N. (2020). Teacher Mediation, Learner Reciprocity and Academic Writing Development. In: Dynamic Assessment of Students’ Academic Writing. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55845-1_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55845-1_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-55844-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-55845-1
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)