|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Deriving oral assessment scales across different tests and rater groups
Micheline Chalhoub-Deville
Ohio State University
The purpose of this study is to derive the criteria/dimensions underlying learners' L2 oral ability scores across three tests: an oral interview, a narration and a read-aloud. A stimulus tape of 18 speech samples was presented to three native speaker rater groups for evaluation. The rater groups included teachers of Arabic as a foreign language in the USA, nonteaching Arabs residing in the USA for at least one year and nonteaching Arabs living in their home country (Lebanon). Each of the raters provided a holistic score for every speech sample. Holistic scores were analysed using the INDSCAL multidimensional scaling model. Results showed that the nonmetric three-dimensional solution provided a good fit to the data. Both regression and speech sample analyses were employed to identify those dimensions. Additionally, subject weights indicated that the three rater groups were emphasizing the three dimensions differentially, thus demon strating that native speaker groups with varied backgrounds perceive the L2 oral construct differently. The study contends that researchers might need to reconsider employing generic component scales. A research approach that derives scales empirically according to the given tests and audiences, and according to the purpose of assessment, is recommended. Finally, replicating this study using other languages, L2 oral ability levels, tests and rater groups is suggested.
Language Testing, Vol. 12, No. 1,
16-33 (1995)
DOI: 10.1177/026553229501200102
 CiteULike  Complore  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
Y.-H. Kim
An investigation into native and non-native teachers' judgments of oral English performance: A mixed methods approach
Language Testing,
April 1, 2009;
26(2):
187 - 217.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. Llosa
Validating a standards-based classroom assessment of English proficiency: A multitrait-multimethod approach
Language Testing,
October 1, 2007;
24(4):
489 - 515.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Cumming, L. Grant, P. Mulcahy-Ernt, and D. E. Powers
A teacher-verification study of speaking and writing prototype tasks for a new TOEFL
Language Testing,
April 1, 2004;
21(2):
107 - 145.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Chalhoub-Deville
Second language interaction: current perspectives and future trends
Language Testing,
October 1, 2003;
20(4):
369 - 383.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Fulcher and R. M. Reiter
Task difficulty in speaking tests
Language Testing,
July 1, 2003;
20(3):
321 - 344.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. O'Sullivan, C. J. Weir, and N. Saville
Using observation checklists to validate speaking-test tasks
Language Testing,
January 1, 2002;
19(1):
33 - 56.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Douglas
Performance consistency in second language acquisition and language testing research: a conceptual gap
Second Language Research,
October 1, 2001;
17(4):
442 - 456.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. F. Bachman
Modern language testing at the turn of the century: assuring that what we count counts
Language Testing,
January 1, 2000;
17(1):
1 - 42.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. A. Upshur and C. E. Turner
Systematic effects in the rating of second-language speaking ability: test method and learner discourse
Language Testing,
January 1, 1999;
16(1):
82 - 111.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Brindley
Outcomes-based assessment and reporting in language learning programmes: a review of the issues
Language Testing,
January 1, 1998;
15(1):
45 - 85.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Chalhoub-Deville
Theoretical models, assessment frameworks and test construction
Language Testing,
March 1, 1997;
14(1):
3 - 22.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
