21 |
Applying the socio-cognitive framework: gathering validity evidence during the development of a speaking test ; Lessons and Legacy: A Tribute to Professor Cyril J Weir (1950–2018)
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
22 |
Development of empirically driven checklists for learners’ interactional competence
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
23 |
Validating speaking test rating scales through microanalysis of fluency using PRAAT
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
24 |
Interactional Competence measured in group oral tests: how do test-taker characteristics, task types and group sizes affect co-constructed discourse in groups?
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
26 |
Researching metadiscourse markers in candidates’ writing at Cambridge FCE, CAE and CPE levels
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
27 |
Effects of pre-task planning time on paired oral test performance
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
28 |
Aspects of fluency across assessed levels of speaking proficiency
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
29 |
Towards a model of multi-dimensional performance of C1 level speakers assessed in the Aptis Speaking Test
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
30 |
Developing tools for learning oriented assessment of interactional competence: bridging theory and practice
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
32 |
Researching L2 writers’ use of metadiscourse markers at intermediate and advanced levels
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
33 |
Aspects of fluency across assessed levels of speaking proficiency
|
|
|
|
Abstract:
Recent research in second language acquisition suggests that a number of speed, breakdown, repair and composite measures reliably assess fluency and predict proficiency. However, there is little research evidence to indicate which measures best characterize fluency at each assessed level of proficiency, and which can consistently distinguish one level from the next. This study investigated fluency in 32 speakers’ performing four tasks of the British Council’s Aptis Speaking test, which were awarded four different levels of proficiency (CEFR A2-C1). Using PRAAT, the performances were analysed for various aspects of utterance fluency across different levels of proficiency. The results suggest that speed and composite measures consistently distinguish fluency from the lowest to upper-intermediate levels (A2-B2), and many breakdown measures differentiate between the lowest level (A2) and the rest of the proficiency groups, with a few differentiating between lower (A2, B1) and higher levels (B2, C1). The varied use of repair measures at different levels suggest that a more complex process is at play. The findings imply that a detailed micro-analysis of fluency offers a more reliable understanding of the construct and its relationship with assessment of proficiency. ; The British Council Assessment Research Awards and Grants programme 2016
|
|
Keyword:
language assessment; language testing; speaking; X162 Teaching English as a Foreign Language (TEFL)
|
|
URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12620 http://hdl.handle.net/10547/623352
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
34 |
Researching L2 writers’ use of metadiscourse markers at intermediate and advanced levels
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
35 |
The role of the L1 in testing L2 English ; Ontologies of English. Conceptualising the language for learning, teaching, and assessment
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
36 |
The discourse of the IELTS Speaking Test : interactional design and practice
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
37 |
Exploring the use of video-conferencing technology in the assessment of spoken language: a mixed-methods study
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
38 |
Exploring performance across two delivery modes for the same L2 speaking test: face-to-face and video-conferencing delivery: a preliminary comparison of test-taker and examiner behaviour
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
39 |
Exploring performance across two delivery modes for the IELTS Speaking Test: face-to-face and video-conferencing delivery (Phase 2)
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
40 |
Investigating examiner interventions in relation to the listening demands they make on candidates in oral interview tests ; Emerging issues in the assessment of second language listening
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
|