10.57647/JNTELL.2025.0404.22

Iranian EFL Teachers’ and Learners’ Perceptions of Web-Based Dynamic Assessment (WDA) for Writing Skill

  1. Department of English, QaS.C., Islamic Azad University, Qaemshar, Iran
  2. Department of English Language and Literature, Am.C., Islamic Azad University, Amol, Iran

Received: 2025-10-01

Revised: 2025-10-29

Accepted: 2025-12-02

Published in Issue 2025-12-31

How to Cite

Taghipour Ahangar, E., Najafi Karimi, S., & Marzban, A. (2025). Iranian EFL Teachers’ and Learners’ Perceptions of Web-Based Dynamic Assessment (WDA) for Writing Skill. Journal of New Trends in English Language Learning (JNTELL), 4(4). https://doi.org/10.57647/JNTELL.2025.0404.22

PDF views: 149

Abstract

Web-based dynamic assessment (WDA) is a new approach for writing assessment that merges the elements of dynamic assessment with the potentials of web-based technologies. But, in spite of increasing popularity of technology use in writing education worldwide, having a glance at Iranian educational system shows that still traditional teaching methods and techniques are prevalent in teaching writing in many educational settings. This qualitative study aimed to explore Iranian EFL teachers’ and learners’ perceptions of WDA for writing skill using Grounded Theory Method (GTM). The participants included two groups of Iranian EFL teachers and learners who were selected through convenience sampling. The required data was collected through a semi-structured interview and an open-ended questionnaire. Data analysis was conducted through thematic analysis. According to the results, the following themes were extracted for Iranian EFL teachers’ perceptions of web-based dynamic assessment (WDA) for writing skill: Using E-Mail to Teach and Assess Students’ Writing Skill, Using Write & Improve to Teach and Assess Students’ Writing Skill, Using Word Vice to Teach and Assess Students’ Writing Skill, Using Google Docs to Teach and Assess Students’ Writing Skill, etc. Moreover, the following themes were extracted for Iranian EFL learners’ perceptions: Using Word Wall to Teach and Assess Students’ Writing Skill, Using Quill Bot to Teach and Assess Students’ Writing Skill, Using Social Networks Like Instagram, Eitaa, WhatsApp and Telegram to Teach and Assess Students’ Writing Skill, Using Screen Casting to Teach and Assess Students’ Writing Skill, etc. The results have some implications for EFL teachers, learners and curriculum planners.

Keywords

  • Assessment,
  • Dynamic assessment (DA),
  • Web-based dynamic assessment (WDA),
  • Writing

References

  1. Ahmed, M.A.S. (2016). The effect of a flipping classroom on writing skill in English as a Foreign Language and students’ attitude towards flipping. US-China Foreign Language, 14 (2), 98-114. http://dx.doi.org/10.17265/1539-8080/2016.02.003
  2. Al-Ghrafy, A. M. G. (2018). From process teaching to process testing: A process-based module for EFL college writing assessment. Journal of Teaching and Teacher Education, 6(01), 47-58. https://doi.org/10.12785/jtte/060105
  3. Aliyyah, R. R., Rachmadtullah, R., Samsudin, A., Syaodih, E., Nurtanto, M., & Tambunan, A. R. S. (2020). The perceptions of primary school teachers of online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic period: A case study in Indonesia. Journal of Ethnic and Cultural Studies, 7(2), 90–109. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejecs/388
  4. Ary, D., Jacobs, L.C., Sorensen, C.K., & Walker, D. (2019). Introduction to research in education (9th ed.). Cengage Learning.
  5. Attali, Y. (2016). A comparison of newly-trained and experienced raters on a standardized writing assessment. Language Testing, 33(1), 99-115. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532215582283
  6. Barber, L., Bagsby, P., Grawitch, M., & Buerck, J. (2011). Facilitating self-regulated learning with technology. Teaching of Psychology, 38(4), 303-308.
  7. Besharati, F., & Ahmadi, A. (2017). Web-based versus face-to-face interactionist dynamic assessment in essay writing classrooms–a comparative study. The Journal of Language Learning and Teaching, 7(1), 1-29.
  8. Black, P. (2011). Dreams, strategies, and systems: Portraits of assessment past, present and future. Assessment in Education, 8(1), 66–85.
  9. 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 University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511840975.004
  10. Cumming, A. (2013). Assessing integrated skills. In A.J. Kunnan (Ed.), The companion to language assessment (pp. 216–229) Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118411360.wbcla131
  11. Dawson, P. (2015). Assessment rubrics: Towards clearer and more replicable design, research and practice. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(3), 347-360. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1111294
  12. Desouky, A. (2016). Effectiveness of using screencast feedback on EFL students’ writing and perception. English Language Teaching, 9 (8), 106-121.
  13. Dettori, G., & Persico, D. (2014). Influence of task nature on learner self-regulation in online activities. London: IGI Global.
  14. Ebadi, S., & Bashir, S. (2021). An exploration into EFL learners’ writing skills via mobile-based dynamic assessment. Education and Information Technologies, 26 (2), 1995-2016. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10348-4
  15. Ene, E., & Upton, T.A. (2018). Synchronous and asynchronous teacher electronic feedback and learner uptake in ESL composition. Journal of Second Language Writing, 41, 1-13.
  16. Estaji, M., & Safari, F. (2023). Learning-oriented assessment and its effects on the perceptions and argumentative writing performance of impulsive vs. reflective learners. Lang Test Asia, 13(31), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-023-00248-y
  17. Evmenova, A. (2018). Teacher perceptions of integrating technology in writing. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2018.1561507
  18. Fani, T., & Ghaemi, F. (2011). Implications of Vygotsky's zone of proximal development (ZPD) in teacher education: ZPTD and self-scaffolding. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 29, 1549-1554. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.396
  19. Fatehi Rad, N., & Atashdast, M. (2023). Investigating the effect of input-based and output based instruction through divergent and convergent tasks on Iranian EFL learners’ learning English idioms. Journal of English Language and literature Teaching, 2(1), 15-26.
  20. Fathi, A., & Asalrasouli, M. (2023). Developing high school EFL learners' autonomy through web-based dynamic assessment in Iran. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 11(45), 109-120. https://doi.org/10.30495/jfl.2023.703376
  21. Hosseini, H., & Ghonsooly, B. (2017). Integrating assessment and instruction: Dynamic assessment and its criticisms examined. Advanced Education, 3(7), 9-16. https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.84207
  22. Hyland, K. (2019). Contexts and issues in feedback on L2 writing. In K. Hyland, & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (pp. 1-22). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108635547.003
  23. Ikawati, L. (2020). Scaffolding in teaching writing. AL-TARBIYAH: Jurnal Pendidikan (The Educational Journal), 30(1), 48-58. https://doi.org/10.24235/ath.v30i1.6487
  24. Jalilzadeh, K., & Yeganehpour, P. (2021). The relationship between intermediate EFL students’ oral performance, communicative willingness, as well as emotional intelligence. The Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal, 21(2), 29-48.
  25. Khany, R., & Tazik, K. (2010). A comparative study of introduction and discussion sections of sub-disciplines of applied linguistics research articles. Journal of Applied Language Studies (JALS), 1(2), 97-122.
  26. Khodashenas, M. R., & Rakhshi, F. (2017). The effect of electronic portfolio assessment on the writing performance of Iranian EFL learners. International Journal of Research in English Education, 2(3), 67-77. https://doi.org/10.18869/acadpub.ijree.2.3.67
  27. Lantolf, J.P., & Poehner, M.E. (2011). Dynamic assessment in the classroom: Vygotskian Praxis for L2 development. Language teaching research, 15(11), 11-33. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168810383328
  28. Li, J., Link, S., & Hegelheimer, V. (2015). Rethinking the role of automated writing evaluation (AWE) feedback in ESL writing instruction. Journal of second language writing, 27, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2014.10.004
  29. Liu, H., Zhang, Y., & Jia, J. (2024). The design of guiding and adaptive prompts for intelligent tutoring systems and its effect on students’ mathematics learning. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies 17, 1379–1389. https://doi.org/10.1109/tlt.2024.3382000
  30. Ludvigsen, S., & Arnseth, H. C. (2017). Computer-supported collaborative learning. In E. Duval, M. Sharples, R. Sutherland (Eds.), Technology enhanced learning: Research themes (pp. 47-58). Springer Link. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02600-8_5
  31. Movahed Far, S., Abbasian, G. R., & Ameri, A. R. (2022). Computer-based dynamic assessment of EFL learners’ writing performance: Evidence from both cognitive and emotive domains. Journal of Language and Translation, 12(3), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.30495/ttlt.2022.692048
  32. Nambiar, D. (2020). The impact of online learning during COVID-19: students' and teachers' perspectives. The International Journal of Indian Psychology, 8(2), 783-793. http://dx.doi.org/10.25215/0802.094
  33. Nguyen, T., Ikeda, M., (2015). The effects of ePortfolio-based learning model on student self- regulated learning. Lap, 6(3), 197-209.
  34. Nystrand, M. (Ed.). (2023). What writers know: The language, process, and structure of written discourse. BRILL.
  35. Ofte, I. (2014). English academic writing proficiency in higher education: Facilitating the transition from metalinguistic awareness to metalinguistic competence. Acta Didactica Norge, 8(2), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.5617/adno.1142
  36. Poehner, M. E. (2008). Dynamic assessment: A Vygotskian approach to understanding and promoting second language development. Springer Publishing.
  37. Rassouli, M., & Abbasvandi, M. (2013). The effects of explicit instruction of grammatical cohesive devices on intermediate Iranian learners' writing. European Online Journal of Natural and Social Sciences, 2(2), 15-22.
  38. Rayani, E., & Fatehi Rad, N. (2023). A qualitative assessment of supervisors’ views towards examiners’ perceptions: Fair justice or not? International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 11(4), 161-168.
  39. Rezai, A., Naserpour, A., & Rahimi, S. (2022). Online peer-dynamic assessment: an approach to boosting Iranian high school students’ writing skills: a mixed-methods study. Interactive Learning Environments, 32(1), 306–324. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2022.2086575
  40. Saygili, K. E. (2021). Effects of learning-oriented assessment on students’ academic writing ability. Unpublished PhD dissertation. Yeditepe University.
  41. Seyed, F.S., & Tavassoli, K. (2023). The impact of learning-oriented assessment on EFL learners' vocabulary learning and retention in online classes. Journal of English Language and literature Teaching, 84-99.
  42. Shafiee Rad, H. (2021). Exploring use of mobile-mediated hybrid dynamic assessment in improving EFL learners’ descriptive writing skills. Computer-Assisted Language Learning, 22(1), 111-127. https://old.callej.org/journal/22-1/Rad2021.pdf
  43. Shaqaqi, M., & Soleimani, H. (2019). Effects of asynchronous and conventional paper-and-pen metalinguistic feedback on L2 learners' use of verb tense. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies 5(3), 55-72.
  44. Sherkuziyeva, N., Imamutdinovna Gabidullina, F., Ahmed Abdel-Al Ibrahim, K., & Bayat, S. (2023). The comparative effect of computerized dynamic assessment and rater mediated assessment on EFL learners’ oral proficiency, writing performance, and test anxiety. Language Testing in Asia, 13(1), 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-023-00227-3
  45. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Sage.
  46. Tuluk, A., & Yurdugül, H. (2020). Design and development of a web based dynamic assessment system to increase students' learning effectiveness. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 7(4), 631-656. https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.730454
  47. Vergara Cabarcas, L. K., Castellon Barrios, D. J., López Caraballo, J. L., Vásquez Rossi, C. A., & Becker Arroyo, E. A. (2022). Dynamic assessment approach in language teaching: A review. Zona Próxima, 30, 82–99. https://doi.org/10.14482/zp.30.371.3
  48. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
  49. Wang, X., & Mu, J. (2017). Flexible scripting to facilitate knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4020-7
  50. Wang, T. H., Sun, Y., & Huang, N. W. (2021). Implementation of web-based dynamic assessment in improving low English achievers’ learning effectiveness. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 36(8), 1450-1476. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2021.1998129
  51. Warschauer, M., & Ware, P. (2006). Automated writing evaluation: defining the classroom research agenda. Language Teaching Research, 10(2), 157-180. https://doi.org/10.1191/1362168806lr190oa
  52. Wertsch, J. V. (1985). Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Harvard University Press.
  53. Wu, C. H., Chen, Y. S., & Chen, T. G. (2017). An adaptive e-learning system for enhancing learning performance: Based on dynamic scaffolding theory. EURASIA journal of mathematics, science and technology education, 14(3), 903-913. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/81061
  54. Zhang, Z., & Crawford, J. (2024). EFL learners’ motivation in a gamified formative assessment: The case of Quizizz. Education and Information Technologies, 29(5), 6217-6239. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12034-7
  55. Zhang, Y., & Xi, J. (2022). Fostering self-regulated young writers: Dynamic assessment of metacognitive competence in secondary school EFL class. Language Assessment Quarterly, 20(1), 88-107. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2022.2103702