Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Language Testing
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Xiaoming Xi
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Evaluating analytic scoring for the TOEFL® Academic Speaking Test (TAST) for operational use

Xiaoming Xi

Educational Testing Service, xxi{at}ets.org

This study explores the utility of analytic scoring for TAST in providing useful and reliable diagnostic information for operational use in three aspects of candidates' performance: delivery, language use and topic development. One hundred and forty examinees' responses to six TAST tasks were scored analytically on these three aspects of speech. G studies were used to investigate the dependability of the analytic scores, the distinctness of the analytic dimensions, and the variability of analytic score profiles. Raters' perceptions of dimension separability were obtained using a questionnaire. It was found that the dependability of analytic scores averaged across six tasks and double ratings was acceptable for both operational and practice settings. However, scores averaged across two tasks and double ratings were not reliable enough for operational use. Correlations among the analytic scores by task were high but those between delivery and topic development were lower. These results were corroborated by raters' perceptions. When averaged across tasks or task types, correlations among the analytic scores were very high, and the profiles of scores were flat. The utility of analytic scoring is discussed, considering both score dependability and whether analytic scores provide diagnostic information beyond that provided by holistic scores.

Language Testing, Vol. 24, No. 2, 251-286 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/0265532207076365
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?