Group homogeneity enhances dynamic assessment efficacy in L2 English genitive learning: preliminary evidence from integrating computerized and group DA

Despite growing interest in computerized dynamic assessment (C-DA) and group dynamic assessment (G-DA) in recent years, their integration, particularly regarding how group composition informed by learners’ Zones of Proximal Development (ZPDs) affects outcomes, has not received due attention. This preliminary study investigates the integration of C-DA and G-DA for teaching L2 English genitives, exploring whether homogeneous grouping diagnosed by learning potential scores (LPSs) in C-DA influences efficacy. Sixty-three second-year English majors at a university in central China were divided into high-, middle-, and low-scoring groups based on a C-DA pre-test. Focusing on the middle-scoring group (n = 26), we further classified learners by their LPSs into a homogeneous (mid-LPSs, n = 9) and a heterogeneous (mixed-LPSs, n = 9) experimental group receiving G-DA, and a control group (n = 8) receiving traditional presentation, practice and production (PPP) instruction. Results indicated that the homogeneous experimental group made greater learning gains and LPSs growth than both the heterogeneous group and the control group. Our findings suggest that LPS may serve as a practical indicator for diagnosing ZPDs, and that LPS-homogeneous grouping could potentially enhance the efficacy of G-DA in this context. Integrating C-DA and G-DA with attention to LPS-based group homogeneity is a promising approach to optimizing L2 grammar learning.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Language Testing in Asia
Published
2026-03-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-026-00447-3
Primary Topic
Educational and Psychological Assessments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Group homogeneity enhances dynamic assessment efficacy in L2 English genitive learning: preliminary evidence from integrating computerized and group DA

Language Testing in Asia
Educational and Psychological Assessments
article

Group homogeneity enhances dynamic assessment efficacy in L2 English genitive learning: preliminary evidence from integrating computerized and group DA

article en

Abstract

Despite growing interest in computerized dynamic assessment (C-DA) and group dynamic assessment (G-DA) in recent years, their integration, particularly regarding how group composition informed by learners’ Zones of Proximal Development (ZPDs) affects outcomes, has not received due attention. This preliminary study investigates the integration of C-DA and G-DA for teaching L2 English genitives, exploring whether homogeneous grouping diagnosed by learning potential scores (LPSs) in C-DA influences efficacy. Sixty-three second-year English majors at a university in central China were divided into high-, middle-, and low-scoring groups based on a C-DA pre-test. Focusing on the middle-scoring group (n = 26), we further classified learners by their LPSs into a homogeneous (mid-LPSs, n = 9) and a heterogeneous (mixed-LPSs, n = 9) experimental group receiving G-DA, and a control group (n = 8) receiving traditional presentation, practice and production (PPP) instruction. Results indicated that the homogeneous experimental group made greater learning gains and LPSs growth than both the heterogeneous group and the control group. Our findings suggest that LPS may serve as a practical indicator for diagnosing ZPDs, and that LPS-homogeneous grouping could potentially enhance the efficacy of G-DA in this context. Integrating C-DA and G-DA with attention to LPS-based group homogeneity is a promising approach to optimizing L2 grammar learning.

Language Testing in AsiaVol. 16(1)
Wuhan University of Technology (CN), Wuhan University (CN)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Educational and Psychological Assessments
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.