Research

My LING 530 artifact is a research proposal on the role of dynamic assessment in changing traditional testing beliefs based on the mastery of written forms. It is built on the essence of Vygotsky's Sociocultural Theory (SCT) of Mind. The theory forming the basis for the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) unveiled the distance between actual learning proficiency and potential learning development (Lantolf & Poehner, 2005). In this light, I attempted to question the role of dynamic assessments in differentiation and comprehensive measurement of the learner’s literacy. The proposal implemented a mixed-methods approach, including an inferential statistical analysis of pre- and post-test scores of reading comprehension. The R-bundle was proposed to examine the differences between the two dependent samples, the controlled group (n = 20) and the experimental group (n = 20). The qualitative analysis included a thematic investigation of the writing skills via Dedoose. Lastly, following a more humanizing approach in research, narrative inquiry of the students’ sense-making or knowledge construction of dynamic assessments was implemented (Ochs & Capps, 2001). The participants engaged in a process of narration about their learning experience and their dynamic interactions with classmates, teachers, and the environment. The findings of the research proposal may support the implementation of dynamic assessments as a shift from standardized measures of proficiency. Furthermore, the research proposal results may have a social impact, eliminating the gatekeeping purposes of the testing practices. Assumptions of the positive impact of dynamic assessment could help in raising awareness about the prescriptive notion of standardized assessment, eliminating its dichotomous presence as a political tool to perpetuate colonial ideologies.

My LING 611 artifact-- is an action research, exploring on the impact of conversation assessments on language learners of Arabic in higher education institution in the United States. The planning of actions to enhance the current situation is accompanied by observation and documentation of the results of these actions, reflecting the interplay between action and research as described by Burns (2005). The process can be characterized as a cycle of movements. In an attempt to shed light on test-takers’ voices in 300-level ARB classrooms, I investigated the impact of collaborative conversation assessments on 10 participants. The research attempted to answer questions regarding the test-takers’ perspectives on conversation assessments as evaluative tools and the impact of intervention techniques on the flow or the break of the conversation. The data collection approach entailed a mixed-methods design where a survey of closed and open-ended questions was implemented as the main data collection method. The research gained insights from 10 participants (n = 10) who have been indulged in Arabic language learning and conversation assessments for over a year. The dynamism and adaptability to numerous research contexts contributed to the flexibility of mixed-method design in longitudinal, cross-sectional, and interventionist research designs (McKinley & Rose, 2020). The findings of the research implied the efficiency of conversational assessments as evaluative tools, unraveling their benefits and drawbacks. Furthermore, it demonstrated the positive role of intervention in the test-taker’s scaffolding schemata. The positive attitudes towards conversation assessments could support their implementations as primary measures of language proficiency following principles of the socio-cultural theory of language acquisition, where interlocutor engage in meaningful co-construction of knowledge. While this study offers valuable insights into the efficacy of conversation assessments as authentic measures of language proficiency, it also underscores the necessity for further investigation of intervention strategies enhancing test-taker performance. To strengthen the generalizability of these findings, replication with a larger, more diverse participant pool is needed.

My last artifact is an article critique from LING 544—Second Language Acquisition. Kawafha and Al Masaeed's (2023) study on  “Multidialectal and Multilingual Translanguaging in L2 Arabic Classrooms: Teachers’ Beliefs vs. Actual Practices” projects a critical discrepancy between theory and practice in multilingual education. This study examined the interplay between the beliefs of L2 Arabic teachers (n = 11) and their classroom practices in Islamic independent schools in Sydney, NSW, Australia. A multidialectal and multilingual translanguaging lens was implemented as the main subject of investigation. Although most teachers advocated for minimal or no English in L2 Arabic classrooms, their use of English dominated aspects of instructions and teaching. As a language teacher, this mismatch was not surprising. In the shadow of new pedagogical calls that support translanguaging in L2 classrooms, it can be argued that a principled framework guiding the strategic and purposeful use of translanguaging in the L2 classroom is still needed. The meaning and practice of translanguaging as a pedagogy in the L2 classroom need to be defined for language teachers and practitioners in the field. 

Moreover, the study investigated the teachers' beliefs with regard to their multidialectal practices. The limited use of non-standard Arabic was supported by the majority of teachers (8/11), while a minority opposed any deviation from the standardized norm, disregarding the mutidialectical nature of the Arabic language. This division could be viewed in terms of language use vs. language usage. Which is more important: language in the textbook or language in the real world? This article critique posed many questions for me to explore in future research. As a firm believer in language as a communicative act, I believe that multilingual and multilingual practices in classrooms are vital to the development of the learners' linguistic repertoire and expression. However, I acknowledge the need for a principled and communicative framework that sheds light on implementing multilingual practices in the language classroom instead of merely celebrating them. While the teachers in the study demonstrated awareness of translanguaging as a concept, their ability to translate this knowledge into effective classroom practice remains a challenge.