1 |
Validation of a large-scale task-based test: functional progression in dialogic speaking performance ; Task-based language teaching and assessment: Contemporary reflections from across the world
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
2 |
The design and validation of an online speaking test for young learners in Uruguay: challenges and innovations
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
4 |
Video-conferencing speaking tests: do they measure the same construct as face-to-face tests?
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
5 |
How much does test-takers’ listening proficiency matter in oral interview tests?
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
6 |
The impact on candidates of examiner interventions in oral interview tests
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
7 |
Comparing rating modes: analysing live, audio, and video ratings of IELTS Speaking Test performances
|
|
|
|
Abstract:
This mixed methods study compared IELTS examiners’ scores when assessing spoken performances under live and two ‘non-live’ testing conditions using audio and video recordings. Six IELTS examiners assessed 36 test-takers’ performances under the live, audio, and video rating conditions. Scores in the three rating modes were calibrated using the many-facet Rasch model (MFRM). For all three modes, examiners provided written justifications for their ratings, and verbal reports were also collected to gain insights into examiner perceptions towards performance under the audio and video conditions. Results showed that, for all rating criteria, audio ratings were significantly lower than live and video ratings. Examiners noticed more negative performance features under the two non-live rating conditions, compared to the live condition. However, richer information about test-taker performance in the video mode appeared to cause raters to rely less on such negative evidence than audio raters when awarding scores. Verbal report data showed that having visual information in the video-rating mode helped examiners to understand what the test-takers were saying, to comprehend better what test-takers were communicating using non-verbal means, and to understand with greater confidence the source of test-takers’ hesitation, pauses, and awkwardness. ; This research was funded by the IELTS Partners: British Council, IDP: IELTS Australia, and Cambridge Assessment English under the IELTS Joint Funded Research Programme (Round 19). ; 18m embargo
|
|
Keyword:
academic speaking; English language testing; language testing; oral test; speaking; Subject Categories::X162 Teaching English as a Foreign Language (TEFL)
|
|
URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2020.1799222 http://hdl.handle.net/10547/624465
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
8 |
Examiner interventions in oral interview tests: what are the listening demands they make upon candidates?
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
9 |
Assessment of candidates' interactional competence using group oral tests
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
11 |
Analysing multi-person discourse in group speaking tests: how do test-taker characteristics, task types and group sizes affect co-constructed discourse in groups?
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
12 |
Effects of pre-task planning on paired oral test performance: a case of beginning EFL learners
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
13 |
Effects of the number of participants on group oral test performance
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
14 |
The IELTS Speaking Test: what can we learn from examiner voices?
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
15 |
Academic speaking: does the construct exist, and if so, how do we test it?
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
17 |
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
|
|
18 |
Development of empirically driven checklists for learners’ interactional competence
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
19 |
Validating speaking test rating scales through microanalysis of fluency using PRAAT
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
20 |
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
|
|
|
|