The Zone of Proximal Development and the Genesis of Self-Assessment

Modern Language Journal

Volumn 96, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 610-622

  Poehner, Matthew E ^a  

^a PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84871647604     PISSN: 00267902     EISSN: 15404781     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2012.01393.x     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Alderson, J. C. (2005). Diagnosing foreign language proficiency. The interface between learning and assessment. London: Continuum.
2. Aljaafreh, A., & Lantolf, J. P. (1994). Negative feedback as regulation and second language learning the zone of proximal development. Modern Language Journal, 78, 465-483.
3. Black, P., & Williams, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 139-148.
4. Boud, D. J. (1990). Assessment and the promotion of academic values. Studies Higher Education, 15, 101-111.
5. Centeno-Cortés, B., & Jiménez-Jiménez, A. (2004). Problem-solving tasks a foreign language: the importance of the L1 private verbal thinking. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 14, 7-35.
6. Chen, Y.-M. (2008). Learning to self-assess oral performance English: A longitudinal case study. Language Teaching Research, 2, 235-262.
7. Gal'perin, P. Ya. (1967). On the notion of internalization. Soviet Psychology, 5, 28-33.
8. Gipps, C. V. (1994). Beyond testing: Towards a theory of educational assessment. London: Falmer Press.
9. Kozulin, A. (1998). Psychological tools: A sociocultural approach to education. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
10. Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2004). Dynamic assessment: Bringing the past into the future. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1, 49-74.
11. Little, D. (2005). The Common European Framework and the European Language Portfolio: Involving learners and their judgments the assessment process. Language Testing, 22, 321-336.
12. Little, D. (2007). Knowledge about language and learner autonomy. J. Cenoz & N. H. Hornberger (Eds.), Encylopedia of language and education. Knowledge about language (Vol. 6, pp. 247-260). Berlin: Springer.
13. Negueruela, E. (2003). A sociocultural approach to teaching and researching second languages: Systemic-theoretical instruction and second language development (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.
14. Orsmond, P., Merry, S., & Reiling, K. (2002). The use of exemplars and formative feedback when using student derived marking criteria peer and self-assessment. Assessment and Evaluation Higher Education, 27, 309-323.
15. Oscarson, M. (1997). Self-assessment of foreign and second language proficiency. I. C. Clapham & D. Corson (Eds.), The Encyclopedia of Language and Education (Vol. 7, pp. 175-187). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
16. Patri, M. (2002). The influence of peer feedback on self and peer assessment of oral skills. Language Testing, 19, 109-131.
17. Poehner, M. E. (2008). Dynamic assessment: A Vygotskian approach to understanding and promoting second language development. Berlin: Springer.
18. Poehner, M. E. (2009). Group dynamic assessment: Mediation for the L2 classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 43, 471-491.
19. Ross, S. (1998). Self-assessment second language testing: A meta-analysis and analysis of experiential factors. Language Testing, 15, 1-20.
20. Stiggins, R. J. (2001). Student-involved classroom assessment (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
21. Talyzina, N. (1981). The psychology of learning. Theories of learning and programmed instruction. Moscow: Progress.
22. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
23. Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). Thinking and speech. R. W. Rieber & A. S. Carton (Eds.), The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky. Problems of general psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 38-285). New York: Plenum.
24. Zuckerman, G. (2003). The learning activity the first years of schooling: The developmental path toward reflection. A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V. S. Ageyev, & S. M. Miller (Eds.), Vygotsky's educational theory cultural context (pp. 177-191). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.