INDIVIDUAL VS. PAIRED FORMATS OF ORAL PROFICIENCY EXAM: DOES IT MATTER IN TERMS OF SCORES AND PREFERENCE?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46827/ejfl.v0i0.1425کلمات کلیدی:
speaking assessment, oral proficiency, assessment formatsچکیده
The purpose of this preliminary study is to examine whether there is a relationship between the achievement scores and two different test formats used in speaking assessment – paired or individual. The study also attempts to explore the test takers’ preferences pertaining to the test formats employed and the reasons behind. The participants of this study are 25 freshman students studying in the English Language Teaching department of a well-known state university in Turkey. The data used in the quantitative analysis comes from the grades scored by the same cohort of students in two oral proficiency exams conducted within the scope of course assessment during the regular exam period of the program. Secondly, the qualitative data was obtained from the semi structured interviews carried out with 14 of the 25 students immediately after the paired speaking test. The interview questions specifically sought to reveal how the participants felt about the paired format of speaking test, how they would compare this format to the individual format, and if they were given the chance which format they would prefer and why. We have come to see that students got better scores in the paired speaking test format that we designed in the form of paired discussion in comparison to the individual format where the test takers’ interlocutor is the course lecturer. The difference in the mean scores obtained in the two different formatted exams was found statistically significant. Our qualitative findings showed that the majority of the students liked and supported the practice of being paired.
Article visualizations:
مراجع
Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Berry, V. (2004). A study of the interaction between individual personality differences and oral performance test facets. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. King’s College, University of London, UK.
Birjandi, P., & Bagherkazemi, M. (2011). From Face-to-Face to Paired Oral Proficiency Interviews: The Nut is Yet to be Cracked. English Language Teaching, 4(2), p169.
Bonk, W. J., & Van Moere, A. (2004). L2 group oral testing: The influence of shyness/outgoingness, match of interlocutors’ proficiency level, and gender on individual scores. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Language Testing Research Colloquium, Temecula, California
Brooks, L. (2009). Interacting in pairs in a test of oral proficiency: Co-constructing a better performance. Language Testing, 26, 341-366.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative. Prentice Hall
Davis, L. (2009). The influence of interlocutor proficiency in a paired oral assessment. Language Testing, 26(3), 367-396.
Egyud, G., & Glover, P. (2001). Readers respond. Oral testing in pairs-secondary school perspective. ELT journal, 55(1), 70-76.
Foot, M. C. (1999). Relaxing in pairs. ELT Journal, 53(1), 70-76.
Galaczi, E. D. (2008). Peer-peer interaction in a speaking test: The case of the First Certificatein English examination. Language Assessment Quarterly, 5, 89–119.
Galaczi, E. (2014). Interactional competence across proficiency levels: How do learners manage interaction in paired speaking tests? Applied Linguistics, 35(5), 553-574.
Grice,H . P. (1975).L ogica nd conversation. InP. Cole & J.M organ( Eds.), Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts (pp. 41-58).N ew York:A cademic Press
Ikeda, K. (1998). The paired learner interview: A preliminary investigation applying Vygotskyan insights. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 11(1), 71-96.
Iwashita, N. (1998). The validity of the paired interview in oral performance assessment Melbourne Papers in Language Testing, 5(2), 51-65.
Kanga, K. N. (2012). Individual and paired oral proficiency testing: A study of learners' preference (Order No. 1517174). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (1039138663). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1039138663?accountid=7181
MacAndrew, R., & Martínez, R. (2001). Taboos and issues. Language Teaching Publications.
Norton, J. (2005). The paired format in the Cambridge speaking tests. ELT, 59(4), 287-297.
O’Sullivan, B. (2002). Learner acquaintanceship and oral proficiency test pair-task performance. Language Testing, 19(3), 277-295.
van Lier, L. (1989). Reeling, writhing, drawling, stretching and fainting in coils: Oral proficiency interviews as conversation. TESOL Quarterly, 23(3), 489-508.
Van Moere, A. (2013). Paired and group oral assessment. In C. A. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 1-4). Oxford, England: Wiley-Blackwell
Weber, R. P. (1990). Basic content analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications
دانلودها
چاپ شده
شماره
نوع مقاله
مجوز
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
