The Use of Meta-Analysis

“The most conspicuous benefit of a meta-analysis is that it enables a summary of the individual

study results of the domain of interest while systematically reducing bias that is introduced by an

author’s judgment in traditional narrative reviews of literature.” (Jeon & Kaya, 2006, pp. 197-198)

This sentence caught my attention during reading last weeks materials. While visiting this class, we already looked at different research that helps us – as future English teachers – to better understand the meaning and the importance of teaching culture.

The concept of meta-analysis, however, was still new to me. Meta-analysis can be described as “a statistical technique for combining the findings from independent studies” (Crombie & Davis, 2009, p. 1). Learning about this type of research was meaningful, not only for that class, but for the whole course about pragmatics and teaching culture. As including cultural learning into ESL lessons is still relatively new, theories and beliefs about it still need more confirmation through new research. In order to teach culture effectively, educators are challenged to look at different research and learn from it for their own classroom instructions. The importance and opportunity of meta-analysis are grounded in its benefits of getting rid of bias, having results that are more precise and review methodology systematically (Crombie & Davis, 2009). Knowing about Meta-analysis can be very useful for ESL teachers, especially when comparing research about cultural teaching. New research should never be neglected by teachers, as its consideration can affect teaching methods and contents, which awakens among other things cultural awareness. Cultural awareness on both sides, among native and non-native speakers of a language, can lead to a better understanding of people from other cultures.

Furthermore, meta-analysis can be useful to come from specific research results about specific groups of people, to a more general conclusion. For example, the findings of a study conducted in the Philippines, combined with other studies from different places, can be generalized and be applied in Germany as well. Of course, meta-analysis also has its limitations, but the good aspects of meta-analysis are outstanding.

Crombie, L.K. & Davis, H.T. (2009). What is meta-analysis? Hayward Medical Communications. Retrieved from http://www.medicine.ox.ac.uk/bandolier/painres/download/whatis/Meta-An.pdf

Jeon, E. H. & Kaya, T. (2006). Effects of L2 instruction on interlanguage pragmatic development. In J. Norris & L. Ortega (Edrs). Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 165-212). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.

Dynamic Assessment

In this weeks reading the aspect of assessing culture was discussed, as well as assessing fairly in general. One of the terms mentioned was “dynamic assessment”. Dynamic assessment means that “the co-construction of performance is mediated by an expert who deliberately guides the student towards development” (Swain, Kinnear, & Steinman, 2011, p. 128). The authors mention that dynamic assessment is rooted in Vygotsky’s concept of the zone of proximal development – short ZPD (Swain, Kinnear, Steinman, 2011). In simple words, ZPD is the range of skills a person can perform with somebody’s help, but not yet on his/her own (Cherry, n. d.). The reading about this concept of ZPD was very meaningful for the discussion about assessing culture. Cultural assessment is more complicated than the assessment of other skills. As this course is focused on the cultural aspect of language learning and teaching, learning about the concept of ZPD is a real enrichment. Dynamic assessment is focused on the process, instead on being focused on production (Swain, Kinnear, & Steinman, 2011). For cultural learning the idea of dynamic assessment is much more reasonable than testing the production of a student. Learning about cultures and awakening more understanding and sensitivity for people from other cultures is much more a process than a result. Cultural learning is continuous all the time, which makes dynamic assessment the perfect tool for assessing students’ cultural learning.

Using dynamic assessment for cultural learning in Germany should be welcomed with open arms, as teachers are focused on new and effective ways of learning, teaching and assessing. The last years were shaped by modern and new ways, instead of focusing on traditional ways of teaching and learning.

Native and non-native speakers can benefit from using dynamic assessment. The concept of dynamic assessment is not limited to cultural teaching, but can be used for any skill or performance that students are supposed to master. The horizon of every student can be opened up more, when using dynamic assessment. The teacher has the possibility to catch the student exactly at the point he/she is at and lead him/her to a deeper understanding and development of his/her cultural skills, no matter if the learner is a non-native or native speaker.

Swain, M., Kinnear, P., & Steinman, L. (2011). Sociocultural theory in second language education: An introduction through narratives. Tonawanda, NY: Multilingua Matters.

Cherry, K. (n.d). What is the zone of proximal development? Retrieved from http://psychology .about.com/od/zindex/g/zone-proximal.htm