Advertisement

Introduction: State of the Art of Assessing Second Language Abilities

  • Sahbi HidriEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Second Language Learning and Teaching book series (SLLT)

Abstract

Assessing the language abilities has been given its momentum in second language assessment and evaluation. Assessing such constructs has also undergone different changes that emanated from one testing paradigm to another, starting with discrete, integrative and then communicative testing. Testing trends also shifted from norm-referenced to criterion-referenced testing, thus stressing the idea of assessing the language ability against a well-defined criterion. In this regard, high-stakes international tests, such as the IELTS, TOEFL, etc., have been investigating the different facets of this construct that keeps evolving to form a comprehensive view about including so many intertwined variables to define the construct of language ability. There is a necessity to measure the language ability in a very objective way by using statistical tests to preserve test usefulness and equity. This has been the major concern of the different testing psychometric theories.

References

  1. Alderson, C. (1990). Learner-centered testing through computers: Institutional issues in individual assessment. In J. A. L. de Jong (Ed.), Individualizing the assessment of language abilities (pp. 20–37). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd.Google Scholar
  2. Alderson, J. C. (2000). Assessing reading. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alderson, J. C. (2004). Foreword. In L. Cheng, Y. Watanabe, & A. Curtis (Eds.), Washback in language testing: Research contexts and methods. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  4. Alderson, J. C. (2005a). Diagnosing foreign language proficiency: The interfaces between learning and assessment. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  5. Alderson, J. C. (2005b). Exams reform teacher support. Retrieved from Projechttp://www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/projects/examreform/Google Scholar
  6. Alderson, J. C., & Clapham, C. (1992). Applied linguistics and language testing: A case study of the ELTS test. Applied Linguistics, 14(2), 149–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Alderson, J. C., & Wall, D. (1993). Does washback exist? Applied Linguistics, 14, 115–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Alderson, J. C., & Wall, D. (Eds.). (1996). Language testing-special issue on washback, 13, 3. Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
  9. Alderson, J. C., Clapham, C., & Wall, D. (1995). Language test construction and evaluation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Bachman, L. F. (1989). Language testing: SLA interfaces. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 9, 193–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Bachman, L. F. (1991). What does language testing have to offer? TESOL Quarterly, 25(4), 671–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bachman, L. F. (2004). Statistical analyses for language assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bachman, L. F. (2005). Building and supporting a case for test use. Language Assessment Quarterly, 2, 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bachman, L. F., & Cohen, A. D. (1998). Language testing-SLA interfaces: An update. In L. F. Bachman & A. D. Cohen (Eds.), Interfaces between second language acquisition and language testing research (pp. 1–31). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (2010). Language assessment in practice: Developing language assessment and justifying their use in the real world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Bailey, K. M., & Brown, J. D. (1996). Language testing courses: What are they? In C. H. Alister (Ed.), Validation in language testing modern languages in practice (pp. 236–258). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  19. Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2015). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  20. Brown, H. D. (2004). Language assessment: Principles and classroom practices. White Plains, NY: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  21. Brown, G. T. L. (2011). Teachers’ conceptions of assessment: Comparing primary and secondary teachers in New Zealand. Assessment Matters, 3, 45–70.Google Scholar
  22. Brown, G. T. L., & Gao, L. (2015). Chinese teachers’ conceptions of assessment for and of learning: Six competing and complementary purposes. Cogent Education, 2(993836), 1–19.  https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2014.993836.Google Scholar
  23. Brown, G. T. L., & Michaelides, M. (2011). Ecological rationality in teachers’ conceptions of assessment across samples from Cyprus and New Zealand. European Journal of Psychological Education, 26, 319–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Brown, G. T. L., Pishghadam, R., & Sadafian, S. S. (2014). Iranian university students’ conceptions of assessment: Using assessment to self-improve. Assessment Matters, 6, 5–33.Google Scholar
  25. Buck, G. (2001). Assessing listening. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Chalhoub-Deville, M. (1995). A contextualized approach to describing oral language proficiency. Language Learning, 45(2), 251–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Chalhoub-Deville, M. (1996). Deriving oral assessment scales across different tests and rater groups. Language Testing, 12(1), 16–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Chalhoub-Deville, M. (1997). Theoretical models, assessment frameworks, and test construction. Language Testing, 14, 3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Chalhoub-Deville, M. (2001). Task-based assessments: characteristics and validity evidence. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 210–228). Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
  31. Chalhoub-Deville, M. (2003). Second language interaction: Current perspectives and future trends. Language Testing, 20(4), 369–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Chalhoub-Deville, M., Chapelle, C., & Duff, P. (Eds.). (2006). Inference and generalizability in applied linguistics: Multiple research perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  33. Chapelle, C. (1998). Construct definition and validity inquiry in SLA research. In L. Bachman & A. Cohen (Eds.), Interfaces between second language acquisition and language testing research (pp. 32–70). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Chapelle, C. (1999). Validity in language assessment. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 19, 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Chapelle, C. (2006). L2 vocabulary acquisition theory: The role of influence, dependability and generalizability in assessment. In M. Chalhoub-Deville, C. A. Chapelle, & P. A. Duff (Eds.), Inference and generalizability in applied linguistics: Multiple perspectives (pp. 47–64). Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Chapelle, C., Grabe, W., & Berns, M. (1997). Communicative language proficiency: Definition and implications for TOEFL 2000 (TOEFL monograph series no. MS-10). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.Google Scholar
  37. Chapelle, C. A., Enright, M. K., & Jamieson, J. M. (Eds.). (2009). Building a validity argument for the Test of English as a Foreign Language. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group: New York and London.Google Scholar
  38. Cumming, A. H. (1996a). Introduction: The concept of validation in language testing. In C. H. Alister (Ed.), Validation in language testing modern languages in practice (pp. 1–14). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  39. Cumming, A. H. (Ed.). (1996b). Validation in language testing modern languages in practice. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  40. Cumming, A., & Mellow, D. (1996). An investigation into the validity of written indicators of second language proficiency. In C. H. Alister (Ed.), Validation in language testing modern languages in practice (pp. 72–93). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  41. Davies, A. (1990). Operationalizing uncertainty in language testing: An argument in favour of content validity. In J. A. L. de Jong (Ed.), Individualizing the assessment of language abilities (pp. 179–195). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  42. de Jong, J. A. L. (Ed.). (1990). Individualizing the assessment of language abilities. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  43. Douglas, D. (2000). Assessing language for specific purposes: Theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Ellis, R. (1990). Individual learning styles in classroom second language development. In J. A. L. de Jong (Ed.), Individualizing the assessment of language abilities (pp. 83–96). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  45. Fulcher, G. (2015). Re-examining language testing: A philosophical and social inquiry. London and. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  46. Henning, G. (1990). National issue sin individual assessment: The consideration of specialization bias in university language screening tests. In J. A. L. de Jong (Ed.), Individualizing the assessment of language abilities (pp. 38–50). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  47. Hidri, S. (2014). Developing and evaluating a dynamic assessment of listening comprehension in an EFL context. Language Testing in Asia, 4(4), 1–19.  https://doi.org/10.1186/2229-0443-4-4. Google Scholar
  48. Hidri, S. (2015). Understanding what assessment means to secondary and university teachers. Arab Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 19–43.Google Scholar
  49. Hidri, S. (2017a). Specs validation of a dynamic reading comprehension test for EAP learners in an EFL context. In S. Hidri & C. Coombe (Eds.), Evaluation in foreign language education in the Middle East and North Africa (pp. 315–337). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar
  50. Hidri, S. (2017b). Discrete point and integrative testing. In J. Liontas (Ed.), The TESOL Encyclopedia of english language teaching (Vol. 8, 1st ed.). Wiley Online Publication. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley/Blackwell Publishers.  https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118784235. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/book/10.1002/9781118784235/homepage/SampleContent.html
  51. Hidri, S. (2017c). Item analysis. In J. Liontas (Ed.), The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching (Vol. 8, 1st ed.). Wiley Online Publication. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley/Blackwell Publishers.  https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118784235. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/book/10.1002/9781118784235/homepage/SampleContent.html
  52. Hidri, S., & Coombe, C. (2017). Preface. In S. Hidri & C. Coombe (Eds.), Evaluation in foreign language education in the Middle East and North Africa (pp. v–xii). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Hughes, A. (2003). Testing for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Lado, R. (1961). Language testing. London: Longmans, Green and Co.Google Scholar
  55. Masters, G. N. (1990). Psychometric aspects of individual assessment. In J. A. L. de Jong (Ed.), Individualizing the assessment of language abilities (pp. 56–70). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  56. McNamara, T. (1996). Measuring second language performance. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  57. McNamara, T. F. (1997). “Interaction” in second language performance assessment: Whose performance? Applied Linguistics, 18(4), 446–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. McNamara, T. F. (2003). Looking back, looking forward: Rethinking Bachman. Language Testing, 20(4), 466–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Messick, S. (1988). The once and future issues of validity: Assessing the meaning and consequences of measurement. In H. Wainer & H. Braun (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 33–45). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  60. Messick, S. (1989). Meaning and values in test validation: The science and ethics of assessment. Educational Researcher, 18, 5–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Messick, S. (1994). The interplay evidence and consequences in the validation of performance assessments. Educational Researcher, 23(2), 13–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Milanovic, M., Saville, N., Pollitt, A., & Cook, A. (1996). Developing rating scales for VASE: Theoretical concerns and analyses. In C. H. Alister (Ed.), Validation in language testing modern languages in practice (pp. 15–38). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  63. Purpura, J. (2004). Assessing grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Read, J. (2002). The use of interactive input in EAP listening assessment. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 1, 105–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Shohamy, E., & McNamara, T. (Eds.). (2009a). Language tests for citizenship, immigration, and asylum (Special issue). Language Assessment Quarterly, 6(1).Google Scholar
  66. Shohamy, E., & McNamara, T. (2009b). Editorial. In E. Shohamy & T. McNamara (Eds.), Language tests for citizenship, immigration, and asylum (Special issue). Language Assessment Quarterly, 6(1), 1–5.Google Scholar
  67. Spolsky, B. (1990). Social aspects of individual assessment. In J. A. L. de Jong (Ed.), Individualizing the assessment of language abilities (pp. 3–15). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  68. Turner, C., & Upshur, J. (1996). Developing rating scales for the assessment of second language performance. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 13, 55–79.Google Scholar
  69. Turner, C., & Upshur, J. (2002). Rating scales derived from student samples: Effects of the scale maker and the student sample on scale content and student scores. TESOL Quarterly, 36(1), 49–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Tyndall, B., & Kenyon, D. M. (1996). Validation of a new holistic rating scale using Rasch multi-faceted analysis. In C. H. Alister (Ed.), Validation in language testing modern languages in practice (pp. 39–57). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  71. Wall, D., & Alderson, J. C. (1996). Examining washback: The Sri Lankan impact study. In C. H. Alister (Ed.), Validation in language testing modern languages in practice (pp. 194–221). Multilingual Matters: Clevedon.Google Scholar
  72. Weigle, S. C. (1994). Effects of training on raters of ESL compositions. Language Testing, 11, 197–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Weigle, S. C. (1998). Using FACETS to model rater training effects. Language Testing, 15(2), 263–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Weigle, S. C. (2002). Assessing writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Weigle, S. C., & Lynch, B. (1996). Hypothesis testing in construct validation. In C. H. Alister (Ed.), Validation in language testing modern languages in practice (pp. 58–71). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  76. Weir, C. J. (2005). Language testing and validation: An evidence-based approach. Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Human and Social Sciences of TunisTunisTunisia

Personalised recommendations