Feedback

While the potential of Dynamic Assessment (DA) and its variants (Computerized Dynamic Assessment (CDA) and Group Dynamic Assessment (GDA)) for EFL classrooms has been recognized, there is a lack of research on its practical implementation compared to the well-established field of Summative Assessment (SA). Thus, the objective of this qualitative study was to investigate the evolving perspectives of EFL teachers concerning the integration of DA and SA within their classrooms. To achieve this, 50 EFL teachers in Iran were recruited through convenience sampling to complete an online open-ended questionnaire. The primary purpose was to explore their familiarity with, perceptions of practicality for, and preferences regarding DA and SA. Additionally, a sub-group of volunteer participants was requested to provide narratives detailing their real-world classroom experiences using DA and SA. Content and thematic analysis of the responses revealed that the majority of participants were familiar with DA, with the most commonly employed type being GDA. While DA was predominantly viewed as a form of feedback, SA was still seen as a more formal means of classroom assessment. Consequently, it is highly recommended that EFL teachers exploit the advantages of both assessment approaches in order to ensure more equitable decisions concerning students' abilities.

Higher levels of student engagement are positively linked to higher learning achievement. However, enhancing student engagement in underprivileged and crowded educational contexts, specifically where high-tech tools are not available can cause a major challenge for teachers. The current study attempts to enhance students’ engagement in their learning by incorporating mini white-boards (MWs) as low-tech response systems. To this end, in a time-series design, an instruction-feedback cycle via mini white-boards was manipulated over a semester. Ten 10th-grade students, all from similar low socio-economic backgrounds and living in rural areas, participated in this study. Data were collected through observing students’ behaviors using engagement checklists. An attitude questionnaire was also administered to assess students' perceptions of using mini white-boards in their learning context. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize individuals’ engagement patterns across the study period. Additionally, a mixed-effects model was employed to account for individual variability and to assess the effects of the intervention on students’ engagement over time. The results indicated that using mini white-boards caused significant improvements in students’ overall engagement and attitude. The findings suggest that using low-tech solutions in low socio-economic settings can foster student engagement by allowing real-time feedback, collaborative interaction, and personalized participation.

This study compared the impact of interactive meta-linguistic feedback on the learning and retention of grammatical structures among Iraqi EFL learners. The study used a quasi-experimental design with 62 intermediate-level male students separated into three groups: one receiving interactive meta-linguistic feedback, another receiving traditional meta-linguistic feedback, and a control group that received no feedback. Pre-tests, immediate post-tests, and delayed post-tests were used to assess participants' knowledge of the following grammatical structures: present perfect, present perfect continuous, future, and future perfect. The results showed that interactive meta-linguistic feedback greatly improved both grammatical structure learning and retention when compared to other types of input. This study emphasizes the significance of feedback in language acquisition and proposes that interactive approaches may be more effective in promoting grammatical accuracy among EFL learners. This study compared the impact of interactive meta-linguistic feedback on the learning and retention of grammatical structures among Iraqi EFL learners. The study used a quasi-experimental design with 62 intermediate-level male students separated into three groups: one receiving interactive meta-linguistic feedback, another receiving traditional meta-linguistic feedback, and a control group that received no feedback. Pre-tests, immediate post-tests, and delayed post-tests were used to assess participants' knowledge of the following grammatical structures: present perfect, present perfect continuous, future, and future perfect.