Learners at the same proficiency level differ in responsiveness to mediation, with Sarah needing less explicit help than Dena¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · qualitativer2·q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Evidence quality · No study behind this claim is a peer-reviewed article with a DOI: it rests on a source with no registered publication record (a web page, book or unpublished report). It is kept because 4 design pages cite it; treat it as a lead to check, not an established finding.
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? In DA1, Sarah was more responsive to mediation for modals than Dena and could take responsibility for her performance with less explicit help. → Ebadi 2016
Evidence¶
Ebadi 2016¶
Ebadi, S. (2016). Exploring DIALANG's Diagnostic Feedback in Online L2 Dynamic Assessment. Teaching English with Technology, 16(1), 41-58. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1135925
q2 · i? · qualitative · r2
LRE analysis from DA1 shows Sarah noticed and corrected a modal error after red highlighting and justified her correction, reaching level 3 of internalization; the author notes "Sarah was more responsive to mediation for modals than Dena" in their first encounter with the problem.
"Sarah was more responsive to mediation for modals than Dena. Aljaafreh and Lantolf (1994) argue that a learner who is able to produce a particular structure in response to less explicit forms of mediation is developmentally more advanced"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Dynamic assessment reflects young children's learning potential more accurately than static tests, especially with minority and learning disabled children — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
- Learners placed at the same CEFR level by DIALANG differ in their ZPDs, which DIALANG's non-dynamic feedback does not capture — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
- Interactionist DA mediation in SCMC reveals learners' microgenetic movement through internalization levels within the ZPD — a broader claim this one bears on
- The ZPD is falsely equated with Krashen's i+1 and with scaffolding in second language studies — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
learners-differ-in-mediation-responsiveness |
title |
Learners at the same proficiency level differ in responsiveness to mediation, with Sarah needing less explicit help than Dena |
description |
Learners at the same proficiency level differ in responsiveness to mediation, with Sarah needing less explicit help than Dena |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2016 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-09-27 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — ebadi-2016 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.