The Potential Influence of Online GDA on Reflective and Impulsive ESP Students’ Writing Accuracy and Their Attitude toward this Kind of Assessment

^[1]Maryam Mohammadi Sarab

^[2]Omid Tabatabaei*

^[3]Hadi Salehi

⁴Azizeh Chalak

Research Paper                                           IJEAP-2405-2044

Received: 2024-05-06                          Accepted: 2024-06-25                      Published: 2024-06-30

Abstract: This study aimed to investigate the effect of online group dynamic assessment (GDA) on the reflective and impulsive writing accuracy of ESP students, and their attitudes towards online GDA. The researcher selected 60 ESP students and they were divided into two groups, the experimental group (n=30) and the control group (n=30) with both reflective and impulsive students.  In the experimental group, the teacher explained how the online GDA sessions were conducted.  Each session, one descriptive writing topic was given to participants of this group and they had to write. Then, they received dialogic feedback in the context of Skype. After that the teacher gave graded oral and written feedback. Whenever each student failed to correct the error, the teacher provided more explicit feedback and asked another student to correct the error. This chain of tailored feedback continued and more students were asked to contribute until all grammatical errors were corrected. Participants in the control group continued in the conventional way. The results showed that online GDA had significantly positive effect on the writing accuracy of ESP students and that there was no significant difference between the writing accuracy of reflective and impulsive ESP students. In addition, the participants had positive attitudes towards using online GDA and considered it an effective method for improving writing. Pedagogical implications are recommended for ESP teachers, ESP students and syllabus designers.

Keywords: Dynamic Assessment, ESP Students, Group Dynamic Assessment, Online Context, Psychology

Introduction

In today's globalized world, where English is mainly utilized, being good at English is important for people wanting to expand their academic knowledge and for scholars in various fields. This is particularly true for scientists who need to publish their work in English (Swales, 1997). Within this context, it is imperative to recognize writing as a fundamental and productive competency, given the substantial role of written communication in facilitating effective interactions among language users. Hyland (2003) underscores the pivotal importance of adept writing skills in English, as they are instrumental in enabling individuals to communicate effectively on an international platform. Furthermore, Olshtain (2001) advocates for the systematic development of written communication skills among EFL learners throughout their educational journey.

Certainly, the acquisition of proficiency in second language (L2) writing is a formidable endeavor, characterized by inherent complexities inherent to the art of composition itself, which are further compounded when one ventures into the realm of L2 composition. Numerous EFL learners grapple with the intricate nuances of writing skills, often perceiving writing as an endeavor synonymous with mastering an extensive array of grammatical intricacies and a voluminous lexicon. It is crucial to underscore that writing constitutes an indispensable facet of the linguistic acquisition process, not only in L2 contexts but also in one's native language, where even proficient writers may encounter challenges (Nunan, 1999). However, EFL learners face significant challenges when trying to master writing in a foreign language. This task is complex since it includes understanding and utilizing a language different from their native one. Writing in a foreign language is more than just putting words on paper; it is an art form for expressing ideas, thoughts, and emotions. For many EFL learners, writing well is crucial, especially for academic success.

Within the realm of English Language Teaching (ELT), writing occupies a pivotal position as a foundational skill, indispensable for written communication. This skill predominantly hinges upon the interplay of two critical components: grammar and vocabulary (Chastain, 1988). Consequently, the development of proficient writing abilities is paramount for EFL learners, as it serves as a gateway to effective communication and success in the pursuit of academic endeavors within a foreign language context. Furthermore, the meticulous application of grammatical conventions stands as an essential facet of proficient writing, serving as a linchpin for effective communication. It is a well-acknowledged fact that individuals often encounter challenges when it comes to honing their writing skills in their native language. However, this challenge is compounded exponentially for L2 learners who grapple with the complexities of mastering a foreign linguistic medium. While it may be unrealistic to anticipate L2 learners attaining a pinnacle of grammatical precision, it remains imperative to prioritize the cultivation of writing accuracy as a fundamental aspect of their language development.

In the ever-evolving landscape of language education, the quest for effective methodologies to boost writing proficiency among learners of English for Specific Purposes (ESP) stands as a paramount challenge. Amidst this quest, the emergence of online Group Dynamic Assessment (GDA) emerges as a compelling avenue, promising to revolutionize the landscape of writing instruction. This study embarks on an exploration into the transformative potential of online GDA, delving into its impact on the writing accuracy of ESP students. Within the specialized realm of ESP, where language proficiency is intricately intertwined with domain-specific knowledge and communicative precision, the ability to wield the written word with precision and clarity holds unparalleled significance. As educators and researchers endeavor to cultivate this crucial skill, the traditional paradigms of assessment and instruction are undergoing a profound metamorphosis, propelled by the advent of digital technologies and dynamic assessment methodologies (Hyland, 2003).

Naturally, EFP students have difficulties with productive skills such as writing. With regard to ESP students' problems with writing in general and writing accuracy in particular, the use of Group Dynamic Assessment (GDA) in an online context can be seen as an effective method to meet the writing needs of ESP students. GDA is a group form of dynamic assessment. Dynamic assessment (DA) has become an important trend for researchers and theorists in recent years. DA is defined as an approach that concentrates on individual differences and their implications for instruction. It embeds intervention within the assessment process by incorporating proper forms of mediation that are sensitive to the individual's current abilities and subsequent performance, with the aim of promoting learner development (Lidz & Gindis, 2003). It is about the relationship between assessment and instruction. More specifically, DA focuses on the assessment process as well as the product. It attempts to modify student performance during testing by introducing material or instructions to elicit higher levels of performance (Embretson, 1987). The stated goal of DA is to modify student performance during the assessment itself (Lantolf & Poehner, 2010).

DA is based on Vygotsky's (1989) Sociocultural Theory of Mind (SCT), in particular his concept of the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD), which is based on his two important interrelated constructs: mediation and internalization. According to SCT, the responsiveness of individuals to support or mediation that is sensitive to their current level of ability reveals cognitive functions that are not yet fully developed. In addition, appropriate mediation enables individuals to go beyond their independent performance, which in turn stimulates further development (Vygotsky, 1998).

As a well-known proponent of GDA, Poehner (2009) argued that dyadic (one-to-one) and group-based DA follow the same principle of proposing mediation to learners to help them co-construct a ZPD; therefore, they are different in that group ZPD should be considered in GDA. Furthermore, Lantolf and Poehner (2010) argued that a teacher does not go through the full range of mediation prompts with one learner before starting again with the other learner. In contrast, the teacher's focus is on the whole class, calling on a particular learner to answer the given question and thus indicating to others that they should continue contributing. In the current study, the researcher conducted online GDA because at the time of conducting the study, it was the issue of COVID-19 pandemic and there was no other choice but to manage the classes in online platforms. For the current study, the researcher used Skype messenger.

Furthermore, there are other factors that can affect the learning of ESP students. One of the important factors is the learning styles of ESP students. Learning styles can be categorized as a cognitive factor. In this regard, Shipman and Shipman (1985) classify learners as impulsive or reflective, based on their willingness to "pause and reflect on the accuracy of hypotheses and solutions in a situation of response uncertainty" (p. 25). In the same vein, Liu and Xu (2011) classified learning styles into three main groups, consisting of perceptual, cognitive and personality learning styles, and focused mainly on those styles that are also related to the process of language learning.

In the current study, the researcher administered an impulsive questionnaire to determine the impulsive and reflective ESP students in order to answer the research questions appropriately. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the effect of GDA in an online context on ESP students’ writing accuracy and their attitude towards group dynamic assessment with a focus on their learning styles. Given the aim of this study, the following research questions were addressed:

Research Question One: Does online GDA have any significant effect on impulsive and reflective ESP students’ writing accuracy?

Research Question Two: What are the attitudes of EFL learners towards group dynamic assessment?

Literature Review

Sociocultural Theory (SCT)

In general, DA is based on the SCT of Vygotsky (1978). He believed that the development of cognition is best understood within one's own culture and social context. According to this theory, learning can take place when people use some mediating tools, such as language, and they also help to shape their further awareness and knowledge. According to this theory, learning does not take place in the mind alone. The initial phase of knowledge formation takes place on the basis of a social plan through which people are involved in interaction, which can be followed by people's reflection on the basis of the newly co-constructed language in order to understand what they are doing.

This process can move and continue until people acquire new knowledge and use it independently in the other contexts and it is interpreted as 'internalization' (Lantolf & Thorne, 2006). This means that learning can move from the outside world to the inside of the brain and mind (Lantolf, 2000). When it comes to learning a new language, learners also need the help of other people to transfer a new task, and after internalizing this new task, they can perform activities independently. In fact, based on the SCT perspective, social interaction acts as a powerful tool that also mediates expansion and development.

Related Studies

Etemadi and Abbsian (2023) investigated the effects of DA on the writing journey of EFL learners. Their study concluded that DA had a significantly positive impact on the writing development of EFL learners, demonstrating the effectiveness of this assessment approach. The study highlighted how DA not only improved the learners' writing skills but also provided valuable insights into their progress and areas needing improvement. By integrating DA into their teaching methods, educators can better support the individual needs of EFL learners, ultimately leading to more effective language acquisition and enhanced writing proficiency.

Similarly, in another study, Masrul, Rasyidah, Yuliani, Nurmalina Erliana, and Wicakso (2023) examined the effect of DAon the writing skills of EFL learners. They utilized DA as the treatment method and concluded that it had a significantly positive impact on developing the writing skills of EFL learners. This further supports the effectiveness of DA in enhancing the writing abilities of students learning English as a foreign language.

In the same line, Kafipour and Khoshnood (2023) explored the effect of feedback through DA on EFL field-dependent and field-independent learners’ speaking skill development. The results of their study indicated that the participants of both groups performed better after receiving the treatment. In comparing two experimental groups, the outcomes reflected that the field-dependent group performed better. Speaking and writing are both considered as productive skills. Thus, it can be said that their findings can be also generalize to writing skill.

Similarly, Heshmat Ghaderijani, Namaziandost, Tavakoli, Kumar and Magizov (2021) investigated 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).  Their analysis indicated that C-DA and GDA could significantly enhance speaking CAF than the conventional non-DA instruction with C-DA being significantly better than GDA.

In alignment, Alemi, Miri, and Mozafarnezhad (2019) examined the effects of online concurrent GDA on boosting the grammatical accuracy of EFL learners. The outcomes of the study reflected that the group using GDA performed significantly better than the other groups. In fact, the effectiveness of GDA was proven, highlighting its potential as a valuable tool for improving grammatical accuracy in EFL learners.

In the same vein, Tabatabaei and Sarkeshikian (2018) investigated the possible effects of cumulative GDA on EFL learners’ writing accuracy. The researchers had two groups of the experimental and the control. They employed cumulative GDA as the treatment in the experimental group. The control group received no treatment. The findings of the writing posttest indicated that cumulative GDA had positive effects on the performances of the participants of the experimental group.

In the same vein, Ebadi and Yosefi (2018) examined the effects of GDA on the writing accuracy of EFL learners. They divided participants into two groups: an experimental group and a control group. The experimental group received GDA as the treatment, while the control group received no treatment. The results reflected that GDA had a positive effect on the writing accuracy of EFL learners, proving that this method can significantly boost the precision and correctness of their written English. This study adds to the growing body of evidence supporting the efficacy of dynamic assessment techniques in language education, particularly in improving specific aspects of language proficiency like grammatical and writing accuracy. By integrating GDA into their teaching strategies, educators can better address individual learner needs, facilitate more effective language development, and ultimately achieve better learning outcomes for their learners.

In the same way, Shabani (2018) explored the effects of GDA on the writing abilities of EFL learners. The researcher randomly assigned participants into two groups: an experimental group and a control group. The experimental group received GDA as the treatment, while the control group received no treatment. The outcomes of the current study showed that participants in the experimental group performed significantly better in their writing abilities compared to the students in the control group. This further underscores the effectiveness of GDA in boosting writing skills, reinforcing its value as a pedagogical tool in EFL education. The study highlights the potential of GDA to make easy significant improvements in learners' writing performance, making it a beneficial approach for language educators aiming to improve their students' writing proficiency.

Methodology

Participants

In the current study, the researcher used mixed method. She collected the required quantitative data by administering writing test as well as impulsive questionnaire. For qualitative section, the researcher used interview. To fulfil the aim of this study, the researcher selected male and female 60 undergraduate ESP students from Islamic Azad University, Gonbade Kavoos Branch. The participants were studying in the field of psychology. The researcher used convenience sampling method to select the participants. As the researcher teaches in this university, she and two of her colleagues were the teachers of these students. The participants included both male and female students and were aged between 20 and 27 years. The participants were studying at two levels, B.A. and M.A. To elicit the qualitative data, the researcher randomly interviewed 12 psychology ESP students of the experimental group.

Instruments

To answer the research questions properly, the researcher used (a) Oxford Quick Placement Test (OQPT), (see Appendix A) (b) Patton, Stanford and Barrat (1995) Impulsiveness Scale (1995) (see Appendix B), (c) Topic-based essay writings as pre-test and post-test and (d) Semi-Structured Interview Protocol.

Oxford Quick Placement Test (OQPT)

The OQPT is considered as a standard test that includes 60 multiple-choice items. By using this test, the researcher determined the general language ability of the participants. It is worth to mention here that OQPT is different with other placement tests since it not only test grammar and vocabulary of the candidates, but also it tests how they utilize that knowledge in a communicative context and in real-world situations. The selected participants were pre-intermediate since their scores fell between 30 and 39. The reliability of this test was calculated and it turned in to .89.

Patton, et al. Impulsiveness Scale (1995)

For determining whether the participants are reflective or impulsive, the researcher administered Patton, et al. impulsiveness scale (Patton, et al. 1995). In their study, Rastegar and Safari (2017) had used this questionnaire and it was assumed it is a valid scale. This scale included 30 items and the participants have to answer based on Likert scale from 1 “Rarely-Never”, 2 “Occasionally”, 3 “Often”, to 4 “Almost always/Always”. It is worth to mention here that the researcher used all sections of this scale and no section was omitted. The content validity of this questionnaire was confirmed by three TEFL experts. Moreover, the reliability of this scale was calculated and it reached to .86.

Topic-Based Essay Writings As Pretest And Posttest

The researcher selected two topics to measure writing ability of the participants before and after the intervention. The topics were selected based on the major of the ESP students. Since, in this study, the researcher selected ESP students from psychology major, two psychological topics were chosen, one as the pre-test and one as the post-test. These topics were chosen from the course books of the participants and they were proper for pre-intermediate learners. The students had to write an essay of 300-350 words. The genre of writing was cause and effect. In the current study, the researcher focused on writing accuracy.

Accuracy was measured by identifying the number of error-free clauses, which was then divided by the total number of clauses produced, and the resulting figure was multiplied by 100 (Khan, 2010; Skehan, & Foster, 1999). An error-free clause was one in which there was no error in syntax, morphology or word order. Errors in lexis were counted only if the word used was nonexistent in English, or indisputably inappropriate (Skehan, & Foster, 1997). High means indicate fewer numbers of errors and as a result better performance (Bamanger, 2014).

                                 Number of error-free clauses                 x100

                                 Total number of clauses

Semi-Structured Interview Protocol

To provide a complete answer to the third research question that explore the attitudes of ESP students towards online GDA, the researcher interviewed to 12 ESP psychology students who were members of the experimental group. Two TEFL university instructors approved the content validity of the interview protocol. Ten questions were asked.

Procedure

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of group dynamic assessment in an online context on EFL learners' writing accuracy and their attitude towards group dynamic assessment, focusing on their learning styles. For the purpose of this study, after administering QOPT (2018), the researcher selected 60 ESP students using convenience sampling method. They were undergraduate students of psychology at Islamic Azad University, Gonbade Kavoos Branch. After selecting the participants, the researcher divided them into two groups of experimental (n=30) and control (n=30). Before the start of the intervention, the Patton, et al. impulsivity scale (1995) was administered to the participants to determine whether they were reflective or impulsive. After this phase, the writing pretest was administered to two groups. The intervention was then started and lasted for ten sessions.

In the experimental group, the teachers gave the same topic as in the first experimental group. They had to write on the basis of the given topic. For this group the following steps were taken. First, the teacher informed them about how the online GDA sessions were conducted. The students in the online groups wrote on the same writing task at home; then they received dialogic feedback in the context of Skype. Specifically, one of the students shared her writing over Skype. Then the teacher gave her graded oral and written feedback. Whenever she failed to correct the error, the teacher gave more explicit feedback and asked another student to correct the error. This chain of tailored feedback continued and more learners were asked to contribute until all grammatical errors were corrected. The teacher then asked the participants to take 10 minutes to revise their own writing in the light of the interaction. Next, the other learner shared his/her own writing, which was then treated with the same approach to error correction. This interactive graded error correction, in which different students contributed simultaneously, was followed by a further ten minutes of self-correction. That is, students were asked to go back to their own writing and make further corrections if they could.

The same topics were given to the participants of the control group. The classes of the participants of this group like the experimental group were administered online and through Skype In each session, they had to write a 200-words essay based on the presented topic. Then, the teachers collected the students’ papers and corrected the errors in red and explained to them individually. This process went on with all the students in the class. After finishing the intervention, the researcher administered the same topic-based essay writings as the posttest to both groups. The classes of the participants of this group like the experimental group were administered online and through Skype. Moreover, the researcher administered the tests online and in electronic version. Finally, for eliciting qualitative data, the researcher interviewed to 12 ESP students who were members of the experimental group.

Data Analysis

The researcher sent the raw data to SPSS version .25. The researcher also used two-way ANCOVA in this study. Moreover, for measuring reliability, the researcher used Alpha Cronbach. For qualitative data, the researcher interviewed 12 ESP students and she recorded their voices. She analyzed their voices and elicited main themes.

Results and Discussion

Addressing the First Research Question

As presented in the previous sections, the main purpose of this study is to explore the potential influence of online GDA on reflective and impulsive ESP students’ writing accuracy and their attitude toward kind of assessment. As presented earlier in the method section of this study, Patton, et al. Impulsiveness Scale (Patton, et al. 1995) was performed on the participants of this study (N = 60) to determine their reflective and impulsive learning style since it was important to achieve the objectives of the study. Patton, et al. Impulsiveness Scale includes 30 item self-report questionnaire, containing Likert scale from 1 “Rarely-Never”, 2 “Occasionally”, 3 “Often”, to 4 “Almost always/Always”. According to the results of the scale summarized in Table 1, those students who scored 30 to 75 were named reflective learners (n = 26) in which there were 13 students in each experimental and control groups. And those with the range of 76 to 130 were labeled impulsive learners (n = 34) in which there were 17 students in each experimental and control groups.

Table 1

Results of Patton, et al. Impulsiveness Scale

To achieve the main goal of this study and answer the relevant research questions, two-way analysis of Covariance was performed to examine the effect of online group dynamic assessment on ESP students’ writing accuracy (quantitative results), and theme analysis was conducted to investigate the students’ attitude toward this assessment (qualitative results).

According to Pallant (2013), ANCOVA is used when we have a two or more-groups pre-test/post-test design (e.g., comparing the impact of different interventions, taking before and after measures for each group). The scores on the pre-test are dealt as a covariate to control for pre-existing differences between the groups. In this study, there was one categorical independent variable i.e., online group dynamic assessment (Group), one categorical moderator variable (Learning style: reflectivity/impulsivity), and one continuous depended variable i.e., writing accuracy.

ANCOVA assumes that the following assumptions are met: no influence of treatment on covariate measurement, reliability of covariates, no strong correlations among covariates, linear relationship between dependent variable and covariate, and homogeneity of regression slopes. Since the covariates were measured prior to the treatment, they could not be influenced by the treatment. Therefore, this assumption was not violated. In addition, there was only one covariate (pre-test of writing accuracy) in each ANCOVA analysis. Therefore, the assumption of correlation among covariates was not applicable.

To check the assumption of the reliability of covariates, KR-21 was checked. Results showed that the covariate was measured reliably (r = .852). In order to do the analysis, the assumptions of linearity of the relationship between dependent variable and the covariate, and the homogeneity of regression slopes were also checked. Also, the results revealed that the linear relationship between post-test of writing accuracy and the covariate of writing accuracy was significant (F = 93.76, p < .001), therefore the linearity assumption was met. Besides, the results showed that the significant value associated with Levene’s test (.07) exceeded the selected significant level (.05) and so the homogeneity of variance assumption was not violated for writing accuracy scores in the two groups.

The next assumption relates to homogeneity of regression slopes. The results indicated that the significance level of the interaction (Group*Pre-test) between group and the pre-test of total writing accuracy, F_{(1, 54)} = 1.32, p = .26, p > .05, and between learning style and pre-test of total writing accuracy, F_{(1, 54)} = 1.25, p = .28, p > .05, was above .05 and, therefore, not statistically significant. This means that the pre-test and post-test of writing accuracy scores in the experimental and control groups as well as impulsive and reflective groups enjoyed the assumption of homogeneity of regression slopes.

As all assumptions were met, two-way ANCOVA was applied. Descriptive statistics for the writing accuracy scores in the experimental and control groups are summarized in Table 2. Table 2 demonstrate that in terms of pre-writing accuracy, the participants in the experimental group achieved the mean score of 63.53 (SD = 5.71) and those in the control group achieved the mean score of 61.60 (SD = 5.98). It seems that these two groups’ mean scores are not far from each other; however, the mean of writing accuracy in the experimental group (M = 70.20, SD = 5.44) is much higher than the control group (M = 64.33, SD = 5.31) on the post-test.

In addition, Table 2 shows that the writing accuracy mean score for reflective students are slightly greater than impulsive ones on both groups and both pre-test and post-test. For instance, in the experimental group, the pre-test writing accuracy means for reflective learners (M = 64.92, SD = 4.82) is slightly larger than the impulsive ones (M = 62.47, SD = 6.24). Similarly, on the posttest, reflective learners achieved the mean score of 71.77 (SD = 4.73) and impulsive ones achieved the mean score of 69.00 (SD = 5.77). The same pattern was observed for the reflective and impulsive groups in the control group.

Table 2

Descriptive Statistics of Writing Accuracy Scores by Group and Learning Style (Pre-test & Post-test)

Table 3 reports the results of the two-way ANCOVA. After adjusting for the writing accuracy scores on the pre-test, there was a significant difference among the writing accuracy means of the two groups of experimental and control on the post-test, F _{(1, 55)} = 27.03, p = .000, p < .05, partial eta squared = .33. In addition, as evident from Table 3, two-way ANCOVA results detected no significant effect for learning style, F _{(1, 55)} = .47, p = .84, p >.05, partial eta squared = .005); accordingly, it can be claimed that online group dynamic assessment, but not learning style (reflectivity & impulsivity) has the potential to improve ESP students’ writing accuracy.

Besides, according to the results shown in Table 3, there was no significant interaction effect between group and learning style (Group*Learning style), F _{(1, 55)} = 1.71, p = .20, p >.05, partial eta squared = .03. This clearly suggests that online group dynamic assessment improve both repulsive and impulsive learners’ writing accuracy similarly. Moreover, as it is observable in Table 3, there was a strong relationship between the pre-intervention and post-intervention scores on the total writing accuracy, F _{(1, 55)} = 86.91, p = .000. This means the writing accuracy scores gained on the pre-test affect the writing accuracy scores gained on the post-test. Additionally, Table 3 shows that the partial eta squared (effect size) value is .61.

Table 3

Tests of Between-Subjects Effects on Writing Accuracy

Addressing the Second Research Question

The purpose of the third research question was to explore the attitudes of the ESP students concerning the application of online group dynamic assessment. To fulfill this objective, the researcher selected 12 psychology ESP students from the first experimental group who received online group dynamic assessment as the intervention. The researcher interviewed them and recorded the participants’ voices. Afterward, she transcribed the recorded interviews for each ESP student and read transcriptions. Next, the codes were analyzed and some themes were extracted in order to answer the ninth research question properly.

The recorded voices were analyzed and 178 important statements were highlighted. Some examples of such important statements with their related formulated meanings are provided in Table 4. Indeed, each statement was analyzed carefully for deriving the intended meaning concepts behind it. 

Table 4
Selected Instances of Important Statements with their Formulated Meanings (ESP Students’ Attitude)

For deriving the final themes, the formulated meanings were analyzed. The purpose is that to get at larger categories signifying the main problems.  For example, in Table 5, from the formulated meaning “I like this technique (Online group dynamic assessment) since it is online and I have access to an abundance of information.”, “interest in online context and having access to an abundance of information” was drawn. In the other instance, as Table 5 indicates “Online group dynamic assessment is a good method for teaching writing to ESP students and students can make use of teacher’s support and feedback that she/he provides to other students’ composition”, the theme “usefulness of teacher’s support and feedback and ZPD” was derived.

Table 5

Instance of Four Theme Clusters with their Associated Formulated Meanings (ESP Students’ Attitude)

1. A) Interest in Online Context and Having Access to an Abundance of Information

Many ESP students stated that they liked online context (Skype) and it is considered as one of the important themes of the study.  They stated that when take part in online class the issue of place is not matter and they feel comfortable. Besides, they have access to authentic content at any time and any place.  In addition, in Skype, it is probable to save and document the information using cellphone or laptop and they can learn based on their own speed.  Furthermore, some ESP students believed that when they participate in online classes, they feel more comfortable. For example, they can sleep or each and there is no need to wear formal clothes.  In contrast, some of the interviewees stated some negative points concerning online learning such as Internet problem (speed and delay). They also believed that in face-to-face class, teachers supervised students and concentration is high. They also reported that in online classes, rate of cheating is high.  However, some of them reported negative points about online context, but they liked group dynamic assessment and they saw it as a useful method for reinforcing L2 learners’ writing skill.

1. B) Usefulness of Teacher’s Support and Feedback (ZPD)

Some ESP students stated that using group dynamic assessment was useful since support and feedback of teachers to composition of other students assisted them to correct their mistake and have better outcome. Some of them reported that they had some problems in some parts of their composition, when teacher provided feedback to similar problems in other compositions, they made use of it and they corrected their errors. They also stated that this method assisted them to avoid such errors in the next writings. They also believed that this method (group dynamic assessment) motivates them for reinforcing their writing. They recommended that teachers use of this method even in face-to-face classes. It could be said that ESP students had positive attitude toward online GDA.

1. C) Effectiveness of Group Dynamic Assessment (Group Work)

Some ESP students reported that when they work in group, it assists them to do their work better. They believed that such method in somewhat can reduce their anxiety and stress. They stated that receiving feedback of teacher on compositions of other students assisted them to enhance their writing as well. Besides, they believed that group discussion is seen as the effective way of learning. They think method such as group dynamic assessment can provide graduated feedback and they can perform better in comparison to when they do not receive such feedback. It refers to issue of ZPD.

1. D) Making Fun Atmosphere as Well as Enhancing Confidence

Some ESP students reported that online group dynamic assessment was an effective and fun method. They reported they never felt boring in this class and they motivated to write better and high quality. Besides, they reported that in such classes, they had more self-confidence since they could ask questions from teacher comfortably. They believed that fun environment of class, lead students have positive attitude and motivation concerning learning and they do not get boring.

Discussion

As for theoretical background, in ESP pedagogical settings, writing skill is important for ESP students and they need to master this skill in order to meet their needs in academic and professional contexts (Magnan, 2008). Given the theoretical and empirical background, one way to reinforce writing skill of ESP student is to employ GDA in the class.  In this method, GDA follow the same principle and present mediation to learners to assist them co-construct a ZPD, but the difference between individual DA and GDA is that GDA considers the ZPD of the group. In this regard, Lantolf and Poehner (2004) stated that “one area of interest concerns the use of interactive procedures with groups of learners rather than individuals” (p. 7). Moreover, Panahi, Birjandi, and Azabdaftari, (2013) pointed out that “feedback within DA is a meditational strategy at the teacher’s disposal at the revising stage of the writing process to provide students with support tailored to their ZPDs” (p. 8). Generally, GDA consists of understanding the group not only based on the given context for the individual's performance, but also it regards the social context in its own right that could be supported to behave in a way that further the current capabilities of each member. The main theory behind GDA is sociocultural theory (SCT) by Vygotsky (1978). Based on SCT, learning can be replace when people utilize some mediating tools, such as language, and they also assist to shape their further awareness and knowledge.

According to this theory, learning does not happen in the mind alone. The first phase of knowledge formation happens on the basis of a social plan through which people are taken part in interaction, which can be followed by people's reflection on the basis of the newly co-constructed language in order to find out what they are doing.

Since the study was conducted to investigate the effect of online GDA on ESP students’ writing accuracy and their attitudes towards GDA and found the effectiveness of online GDA on writing accuracy of ESP students it confirms results of several related studies. Literature (e.g. Heshmat Ghaderijani, et al. 2021; Tabatabaei & Sarkeshikian, 2018) in general confirmed GDA has positive effect on writing skill of L2 learners. In the current study, the results indicated that online GDA had positive effect on writing accuracy of ESP students and there was no significant difference between reflective and impulsive ESP students. Back to literature, the outcomes of the following studies are confirmed when comparing with the results of the current study. In term of writing accuracy, Ebadi et al. (2018) also found that GDA had a positive effect on EFL learners' writing accuracy. Shabani’s (2018) outcomes can be aligned to the findings of the current study, in that using GDA can have positive effect on writing accuracy of EFL learners. In line with the findings of the current study, Alemi, et al. (2019) investigated the effects of concurrent online group dynamic assessment on improving EFL learners' grammatical accuracy. The findings of their study, similar to the findings of this study, indicated that group dynamic assessment had a significant positive effect on EFL learners' writing accuracy.

In contrast to the outcomes of the current study, Chen (2021) examined the relationship between reflective-impulsive cognitive styles and EFL learners' oral proficiency. He concluded that learning style plays a role in students' oral performance. Learners with different learning styles have great differences in their performance. Reflective learners were better at speaking. Speaking like writing is considered to be the most productive. While answering the fourth research question of the current study, it was found that learning style had no significant effect on the writing accuracy of ESP students.

The efficacy of DA in boosting language skills expansion among EFL learners has been a subject of considerable research interest. The studies conducted by Etemadi and Abbasian (2023) and Masrul et al. (2023) recommend valuable insights into the effect of DA on the writing proficiency of EFL learners. Both studies reached a similar conclusion, proving a significantly positive effect of DA on reinforcing EFL learners' writing skills. These outcomes corroborate the notion that DA serves as an effective intervention for making easy the writing journey of EFL learners. Moreover, Kafipour and Khoshnood (2023) extended the investigation into the effects of DA by exploring its influence on the speaking skill development of EFL learners, particularly among field-dependent and field-independent learners. The findings of their study reflected that both groups exhibited improvement in speaking skills following the DA treatment. Interestingly, the field-dependent group proved superior performance compared to the field-independent group. This underscores the potential transferability of DA's benefits from speaking to writing skills development, as both speaking and writing are regarded productive skills in language acquisition.

 The findings of these studies collectively highlight the multifaceted effect of DA on language skills acquisition among EFL learners. By providing tailored and interactive feedback, DA recommends a dynamic approach to assessing and boosting language proficiency. The positive findings observed across different linguistic modalities, consisting of writing and speaking, underscore the versatility and effectiveness of DA as an instructional instrument in language education. Moreover, the consistent findings across various studies boost the robustness of the evidence supporting the effectiveness of DA in promoting language skills expansion. These outcomes have critical implications for language educators and curriculum designers, recommending the integration of DA methodologies into language teaching practices to optimize learning results among EFL learners.

Collectively, these studies underscore the potential of DA and GDA as a pedagogical instrument to augment EFL learners' linguistic competence, particularly in writing domains. As educators continue to seek innovative approaches to address the diverse needs of language learners, the insights gleaned from these investigations offer valuable pathways toward effective language instruction and proficiency development.

Concluding Remarks

First, the researcher tried to find out whether online GDA has a significant effect on ESP students' writing accuracy. After conducting the treatment, it became clear that online GDA had a significant positive effect on EFL learners' writing accuracy. Given the statistical results of the current study, it could be said that ZPD-sensitive feedback could be useful enough to scaffold ESP students to increase their writing accuracy. It could also be said that the findings of the current study are in line with one of the maxims of Vygotsky's sociocultural theory (SCT). According to this theory, learners learn better when learning takes place in a social context.  If such criteria are met, online GDA would also be useful in the conventional context. In this regard, it could be said that the non-GDA feedback, although helpful to some extent, is not effective enough to help ESP students and L2 learners to "identify the deficiencies in their current knowledge and then move towards independent use of it in new contexts" (Alemi, et. al, 2019, p. 40). In fact, it could be argued that untailored and non-dialogical feedback, unlike graded feedback, cannot provide sufficient support for ESP students to become more autonomous. In addition, when teachers provide non-dialogic feedback, it causes students to be dependent on the teacher, thus limiting their movement towards autonomous task performance (Alemi, et. al, 2019).

Regarding the role of learning styles in mastering writing accuracy, the results showed that learning styles had no significant effect on ESP students' writing accuracy. Furthermore, there was no significant difference between the writing accuracy of reflective and impulsive ESP students of both groups. In addition, the participants had significantly positive attitudes towards online GDA and they considered it an effective method for improving ESP students' writing skills. First, and most importantly, ESP teachers in psychology can benefit from the findings of the current study by providing their ESP students with graded and dialogical feedback regarding their students' ZPDs. Furthermore, ESP teachers are recommended to conduct some parts of their classes, such as writing, in an online context, since the feedback presented by the teacher or other peers can remain in the online context. Thus, students can refer to it and learn from it on some occasions. In addition, teacher educators can be the beneficiaries of the current study and use its findings to make teachers aware of the benefits of conducting some sessions online. In fact, teacher educators can incorporate the findings of this study into in-service and pre-service courses and inform teachers how using an online social network can help them not only save more time but also increase the effectiveness of feedback sessions.

ESP teachers can make use of the findings of the current study. They can use cooperative-based techniques to improve their students' writing accuracy. Furthermore, based on Vygotsky's SCT, learners can learn better in cooperative contexts. Nowadays, social networks are at the service of people and they can provide a group platform where many activities of learners will remain. It helps students who have difficulties or who are absent to have access to reliable sources. ESP students can use the findings of the current study to improve their writing skills in general and their writing accuracy in particular. In light of the findings of the current study, the effectiveness of online cooperative error detection and online group dynamic assessment on psychology ESP students has been demonstrated.  Therefore, ESP students can use cooperative-based techniques to improve their writing. They can also learn about the use of social networks such as Skype for pedagogical purposes. Furthermore, ESP students can devote some time to working on their essays in online contexts. That is, rather than construing applications such as Skype, ESP students can see them as invaluable learning tools that provide valuable opportunities for dialogic analysis of their writing. In this way, they can learn not only from their teachers but also from their peers.

Curriculum designers and materials developers can also use the results to encourage ESP teachers and students to benefit from cooperative-based techniques such as group dynamic assessment and cooperative error detection in online contexts. They should consider the use of social networks such as Skype for pedagogical purposes. By using such networks, ESP students can work in groups and access their content at any time. It is seen as a kind of graded prompt. In line with the curriculum designers, university managers need to be aware of the benefits of using group dynamic assessment and collaborative error detection in online contexts. By using such techniques, all ESP students try to participate in essay writing. In addition, positive changes can occur when teachers adapt their teaching methods towards a more student-centered approach.

Concerning the limitations of this study, some suggestions for further studies are provided. There is need to conduct longitudinal studies to investigate the long-term effects of online GDA on ESP students' writing accuracy. This would help determine if the benefits of GDA are sustained over time. Moreover, other study can be done to compare the effectiveness of online GDA with other assessment methods like traditional assessment, peer assessment, or automated feedback instruments, in boosting writing accuracy among ESP students. Additionally, one study can be done to examine the effect of online GDA on writing accuracy in different ESP contexts like business English, medical English, or technical English, to see if the effectiveness varies across different fields of study.

Acknowledgements

I am thankful to all of those with whom I have had the pleasure to work during this.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

We declare that we do not have any conflicts of interest to declare.

Funding Details

This study did not receive any funding from any agency.

References

Alemi, M., Miri, M., & Mozafarnezhad, A. (2019). Investigating the effects of onlineconcurrent group dynamic assessment on enhancing grammatical accuracy of EFLlearners. International Journal of Language Testing, 9(2), 28-43.https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1299313.pdf

Brave Jovanocich.file:///C:/Users/pc/Downloads/tpls,+10-3.pdf

Chastain, K. (1988). Developing second-language skills (3rd Edition). San Diego: Harcourt

Ebadi, S., Yousofi, N., & Ashtarian, S. (2018). Group dynamic assessment in an EFLclassroom: Do secondary interactants benefit? Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics(IJAL), 21(2), 1-42.https://ijal.khu.ac.ir/browse.php?a_id=2934&sid=1&slc_lang=fa

Etemadi, S. H., & Abbasian, G.-R. (2023). Dynamic assessment and EFL learners' writingjourney: Focus on DA modalities and writing revision types. Teaching EnglishLanguage, 17(1), 53-79.https://doi.org/10.22132/TEL.2022.162923

Feuerstein, R., & Feuerstein R. S. (2001). Is dynamic assessment compatible with thepsychometric model? In A. S. Kaufman & N. L. Kaufman (Eds.), Specific learningdisabilities and difficulties in children and adolescents: Psychological assessment andevaluation (pp. 218-246). New York: CUP.

Heshmat Ghaderijani, B., Namaziandost, E., Tavakoli, M., Kumar, T., & Magizov, R.(2021). The comparative effect of group dynamic assessment (GDA) andcomputerized dynamic assessment (C-DA) on Iranian upper-intermediate EFLlearners’ speaking complexity, accuracy, and fluency (CAF). Language Testing inAsia, 11(25), 2-20.file:///C:/Users/pc/Downloads/s40468-021-00144-3.pdf

Hyland, K. (2003). Genre-based pedagogies: A social response to process. Journal ofSecond Language Writing, 12, 17-29.https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1060374302001248

Kafipour, R., & Khoshnood, A. (2023). Effect of feedback through dynamic assessment on EFL field-dependent and field-independent learners’ speaking skill development. Frontiers in Education, 8(1), 1-10.https:///C:/Users/pc/Downloads/feduc-08-1049680.pdf

Khan, S. (2010). Strategies and spoken production on three oral communication tasks: Studyof high and low proficiency EFL learners (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).University at Autònoma de Barcelona.

Lantolf, J. P. (2009). Second language learning as a mediated process. Language Teaching,33, 79-96.https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/language-teaching/article/abs/second-language-learning-as a-mediated-process/6C26938756D56549B35B1549BFA286CE

Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2010). Dynamic assessment in the classroom: Vygotskianpraxis for second language development. Language Teaching Research, 15(1), 11-33.https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1362168810383328

Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2004). Dynamic assessment of L2 development: Bringingthe 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 secondlanguage development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Lidz, C. S., & Gindis, B. (2003). Dynamic assessment of the evolving cognitive functions inchildren. In A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V. Ageyev, & S. Miller (Eds.), VygotskyEducational theory in cultural context (pp. 99-119). Cambridge, UK: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Liu, Y., & Xu, Y. (2011). Inclusion or exclusion? A narrative inquiry of a languageteacher’s identity experience in the ‘new work order’ of competing pedagogies.Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(3), 589-597.https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0742051X10001885

Masrul, B., Rasyidah, U., Yuliani, S., Nurmalina, A., Erliana, S., & Wicakso, B. (2023). Theimplementation of dynamic assessment in EFL learners’ writing. World Journal ofEnglish Language, 13(5), 191-199.https://eprints.umm.ac.id/id/eprint/346/2/Masrul%20Rasyidah%20Yuliani%20Nurmalina%20Erliana

Nunan, D. (1999). Second language teaching and learning. Boston: Heinle Thomson.

Olshtain, E. (2001). Functional tasks for mastering the mechanics of writing and going justbeyond. Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language, 3, 207-232.https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=

Pallant, J. (2013). SPSS survival manual. (5th ed.). A step by step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS. Maidenhead: Open University Press/McGraw-Hill.

Panahi, P., Birjandi, P., & Azabdaftari, B. (2013). Toward a sociocultural approach to feedback provision in L2 writing classrooms: the alignment of dynamic assessment and teacher error feedback. Language Testing in Asia, 3(13). 1-10.

Patton, J. H., Stanford, M. S., & Barratt, E. S. (1995). Factor structure of the BarrattImpulsiveness Scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 51(6), 768–774.

Poehner, M.E. (2008). Dynamic assessment: A Vygotskian approach to understanding andpromoting second language development. Berlin: Springer.

Poehner, M. E. (2009). Group dynamic assessment: Mediation for the L2 classroom. TESOLQuarterly, 43(3), 471-491.https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2009.tb00245.x

Shabani, K. (2018). Group dynamic assessment of L2 learners' writing abilities. IranianJournal of Language Teaching Research 6(1), 129-149.https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1165517.pdf

Shipman, S., & Shipman, V. C. (1985). Chapter 7: Cognitive styles: Some conceptual,methodological, and applied issues. Review of Research in Education, 12(1), 229-291.https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.3102/0091732X012001229

Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1997). Task type and task processing conditions as influences on foreign language performance. Language Teaching Research, 1(3), 185-211.https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/136216889700100302

Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1999). The influence of task structure and processing conditions onnarrative retellings. Language Learning, 49(1), 93-120.https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-9922.00071

Swales, J. M. (1997). Occluded genres in the academy: The case of the submission letter. InE. Ventola & A. Mauranen (Eds.), Academic writing: Intercultural and textual issues(pp. 45-58). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Tabatabaei, M., & Sarkeshikian, A. H. (2018). The effect of interventionist and cumulativegroup dynamic assessments on EFL learners’ writing accuracy. Applied LinguisticsResearch Journal, 2(1), 1-13.https://mjltm.org/article-1-117-en.pdf

Vygotsky, L. S. (1989). Mind in society: The development of higher psychologicalprocesses. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1998). The Problem of Age. In the collected works of L. S. Vygotsky. Vol.5. child psychology. R. W. Rieber (Ed.). New York: Plenum.

Appendix A

 Oxford Quick Placement Test - Version 2

This test is divided into two parts:

Part One (Questions 1 – 40)

Part Two (Questions 41 – 60)

Name: …………………………………………………………………………

Date: …………………………………………………………………………

Do not start this part unless told to do so by your test supervisor.

Time: 30 minutes

Questions 1 – 5

Part 1

• Where can you see these notices?
• For questions 1 to 5, mark one letter A, B or C on your Answer Sheet.

Questions 6 – 10

• In this section you must choose the word which best fits each space in the text below.
• For questions 6 to 10, mark one letter A, B or C on your Answer Sheet.

Scotland

Scotland is the north part of the island of Great Britain. The Atlantic Ocean is on the west and the North Sea on the east. Some people (6) .................. Scotland speak a different language called Gaelic.

There are (7) .................. five million people in Scotland, and Edinburgh is (8) .................. most famous city.

Scotland has many mountains; the highest one is called ‘Ben Nevis’. In the south of Scotland, there are a lot of sheep. A long time ago, there (9) .................. many forests, but now there are only a (10) ....................

Scotland is only a small country, but it is quite beautiful.

6        A on                      B in                       C at

7        A about                  B between               C among

8        A his                      B your                    C its

9        A is                       B were                   C was

10      A few           B little                    C lot

Questions 11 – 20

• In this section you must choose the word which best fits each space in the texts.
• For questions 11 to 20, mark one letter A, B, C or D on your Answer Sheet.

Alice Guy Blaché

Alice Guy Blaché was the first female film director. She first became involved in cinema whilst working for the Gaumont Film Company in the late 1890s. This was a period of great change in the cinema and Alice was the first to use many new inventions, (11) .................. sound and color.

In 1907 Alice (12) ................... to New York where she started her own film company. She was (13) .................. successful, but, when Hollywood became the centre of the film world, the best days of the independent New York film companies were (14) ................... . When Alice died in 1968, hardly anybody (15) .................. her name.

11      A bringing              B including    C containing D supporting

12      A moved                 B ran            C entered                D transported

13      A next          B once          C immediately D recently

14      A after                   B down         C behind                 D over

15      A remembered         B realized      C reminded             D repeated

UFOs – do they exist?

UFO is short for ‘unidentified flying object’. UFOs are popularly known as flying saucers, (16) ................. that is often the (17) ................. they are reported to be. The (18) .................. "flying saucers" were seen in 1947 by an American pilot, but experts who studied his claim decided it had been a trick of the light.

Even people experienced at watching the sky, (19) ................. as pilots, report seeing UFOs. In 1978 a pilot reported a collection of UFOs off the coast of New Zealand. A television   (20) ................. went up with the pilot and filmed the UFOs. Scientists studying this phenomenon later discovered that in this case they were simply lights on boats out fishing.

Questions 21 – 40

• In this section you must choose the word or phrase which best completes each sentence.
• For questions 21 to 40, mark one letter A, B, C or D on your Answer Sheet.

21      The teacher encouraged her students .................... to an English pen-friend.

            A should write        B write                   C wrote                  D to write

22      They spent a lot of time .................... at the pictures in the museum.

            A looking              B for looking       C to look             D to looking

23      Shirley enjoys science lessons, but all her experiments seem to .................... wrong.

           A turn           B come                   C end           D go

24      .................... from Michael, all the group arrived on time.

           A Except                 B Other                  C Besides                D Apart

25      She .................... her neighbor’s children for the broken window.

          A accused                B complained C blamed                D denied

26      As I had missed the history lesson, my friend went ................. the homework with me.

             A by           B after                    C over          D on

27      Whether she’s a good actress or not is a .................... of opinion.

             A matter                B subject                C point                   D case

28      The decorated roof of the ancient palace was .................... up by four thin columns.

            A built                   B carried                    C held          D supported

29      Would it .................... you if we came on Thursday?

           A agree                   B suit                     C like D fit

30      This form .................... be handed in until the end of the week.

            A doesn’t need        B doesn’t have         C needn’t           D hasn’t got

31      If you make a mistake when you are writing, just .................... it out with your pen.

A cross                   B clear                   C do                       D wipe

32      Although our opinions on many things .................... , we’re good friends.

A differ                  B oppose                 C disagree               D divide

33      This product must be eaten .................... two days of purchase.

A by                      B before                 C within                 D under

34      The newspaper report contained .................... important information.

A many                  B another                C an                       D a lot of

35      Have you considered .................... to London?

A move                  B to move               C to be moving         D moving

36      It can be a good idea for people who lead an active life to increase their ....................  of vitamins.

A upturn                 B input                   C upkeep                D intake

37      I thought there was a ..................... of jealousy in his reaction to my good fortune.

A piece                   B part                     C shadow                D touch

38      Why didn’t you ..................... that you were feeling ill?

A advise                 B mention               C remark                 D tell

39      James was not sure exactly where his best interests .....................

A stood                  B rested                  C lay                      D centered

40      He’s still getting .................... the shock of losing his job.

A across                 B by                       C over                    D through

Part 2

Do not start this part unless told to do so by your test supervisor.

Questions 41 – 50

• In this section you must choose the word or phrase which best fits each space in the texts.
• For questions 41 to 50, mark one letter A, B, C or D on your Answer Sheet.

The tallest buildings – SKYSCRAPERS

Nowadays, skyscrapers can be found in most major cities of the world. A building which was many (41) ……………….. high was first called a skyscraper in the United States at the end of the 19^th century, and New York has perhaps the (42) …………….. skyscraper of them all, the Empire State Building. The (43) ……………….. beneath the streets of New York is rock, (44) ……………….. enough to take the heaviest load without sinking, and is therefore well-suited to bearing the (45) ……………….. of tall buildings.

41      A stages                 B steps                   C stories           D levels

42      A first-rate              B top-class              C well-built       D best-known

43      A dirt           B field                    C ground                 D soil

44      A hard                    B stiff           C forceful               D powerful

45      A weight                 B height                  C size           D scale

SCRABBLE

Scrabble is the world’s most popular word game. For its origins, we have to go back to the 1930s in the USA, when Alfred Butts, an architect, found himself out of (46) ……………….. . He decided that there was a (47) ………………. for a board game based on words and (48) ………………. to design one. Eventually he made a (49) ………………. from it, in spite of the fact that his original (50) ………………. was only three cents a game.

Questions 51 – 60

• In this section you must choose the word or phrase which best completes each sentence.
• For questions 51 to 60, mark one letter A, B, C or D on your Answer Sheet.

51      Roger’s manager ................... to make him stay late if he hadn’t finished the work.

           A insisted                B warned               C threatened      D announced

52      By the time he has finished his week’s work, John has hardly ................... energy left for the weekend.

A any           B much                   C no                       D same

53      As the game .................... to a close, disappointed spectators started to leave.

A led            B neared                 C approached           D   drew

54      I don’t remember .................... the front door when I left home this morning.

            A   to lock     B   locking          C   locked              D   to have locked

55      I .................... to other people borrowing my books: they always forget to return them.

          A   disagree              B   avoid                 C dislike                 D object

56      Andrew’s attempts to get into the swimming team have not .................... with much success.

           A   associated          B   concluded C   joined      D   met

57      Although Harry had obviously read the newspaper article carefully, he didn’t seem to have.................... the main point.

          A   grasped               B   clutched   C   clasped              D   gripped

58      A lot of the views put forward in the documentary were open to .................... .

        A   enquiry                 B   query                 C   question   D   wonder

59      The new college .................... for the needs of students with a variety of learning backgrounds.

           A deals                   B supplies               C furnishes              D caters

60      I find the times of English meals very strange – I’m not used ................ dinner at 6pm.

         A to have                  B to having             C having                 D have

Answer sheet

1 B                        16 A                       31 A                       46 B

2 B                        17 B                       32 A                       47 A

3 A                        18 C                       33 C                       48 B

4 B                        19 D                       34 D                       49 D

5 C                        20 A                       35 D                       50 C

6 B                        21 D                       36 D                       51 C

7 A                        22 A                       37 D                       52 A

8 C                        23 D                       38 B                       53 D

9 B                        24 D                       39 C                       54 B

10 A                      25 C                       40 C                       55 D

11 B                       26 C                       41 C                       56 D

12 A                       27 A                       42 D                       57 A

13 C                       28 C                       43 C                       58 C

14 D                       29 B                       44 A                       59 D

15 A                       30 C                       45 A                       60 B

The test ranking is as follows:

Appendix B: Patton, et al. (1995)’s Impulsiveness Scale

[1] PhD candidate of TEFL, maryam.mohammadi.sarab@gmail.com; English Department, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran.

[2] Associate Professor of TEFL (Corresponding Author), tabatabaeiomid@yahoo.com; English Department, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran.

[3] Assistant Professor of TEFL, hadisalehi1358@yahoo.com; English Department, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran.

[3]Professor of Applied Linguistics azichalak@gmail.com; Department of English Language, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran.