EVALUATING SPEAKING SKILLS
Article Sidebar
Это произведение доступно по лицензии Creative Commons «Attribution» («Атрибуция») 4.0 Всемирная.
Main Article Content
Аннотация:
At all levels of education, students must be able to communicate effectively. Without well developed communication skills, children run the risk of falling behind their peers or becoming emotionally overwhelmed or withdrawn at school. You can give objective grades in a speaking class. Just use the following criteria as you evaluate your students’ speaking abilities, and you can give them helpful feedback as to their language learning and also a fair and well earned grade.
Ключевые слова:
Article Details
Как цитировать:
Библиографические ссылки:
Alderson, J. C. (1991). Bands and scores. In J. C. Alderson & B. North (Eds.), Language testing in the 1990s: The communicative legacy (pp. 71–86). London, England: Macmillan.
American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) (2009) Testing for Proficiency. The ACTFL Oral Profi ciency Interview. Retrieved December 1, 2009 from http://www.actfl .org/ i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3348
Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford,
England: Oxford University Press.
Brooks, L. (2009). Interacting in pairs in a test of oral profi ciency: Co-constructing a better performance. Language Testing, 26(3), 341–66.
Brown, A. (1993). The role of test-takers’ feedback in the test development process: Test-takers’ reactions to a tape-mediated test of profi ciency in spoken Japanese. Language Testing, 10(3), 277–301.
Brown, A. (1995). The effect of rater variables in the development of an occupation-specific performance test. Language Testing, 12(1), 1–15.
Brown, A. (2003). Interviewer variation and the co-construction of speaking proficiency. Lguage Testing, 20(1), 1–25.
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1–47.
Chalhoub-Deville, M. (1995). Deriving oral assessment scales across different tests and ratergroups. Language Testing, 12(1), 16–21.
Chalhoub-Deville, M., & Wigglesworth, G. (2005). Rater judgment and English language speaking proficiency. World Englishes, 24(3), 383–91.
Clark, J. L. D. (1979). Direct vs. semi-direct tests of speaking ability. In E. J. Briere & F. B Hinofotis (Eds.), Concepts in language testing: Some recent studies (pp. 35–49). Washington, DC: TESOL.
Council of Europe. (2001). The common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, and assessment. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Retrieved April 13, 2011 from http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/source/Framework_EN.pdf
Crocker, L., & Algina. J. (1986). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Group/Thomson Learning.
Ducasse, A. M., & Brown, A. (2009). Assessing paired orals: Raters’ orientation to interaction. Language Testing, 26(4), 423–43.
Figueras, N., & Noijons, J. (Eds.). (2009). Linking to the CEFR levels: Research perspectives. Arnhem, Netherlands: Cito/EALTA.
Fulcher, G. (1996). Does thick description lead to smart tests? A data-based approach to rating scale construction. Language Testing, 13(2), 208–38.
Ginther, A., Dimova, S., & Yang, R. (2010). Conceptual and empirical relationships between temporal measures of fl uency and oral English profi ciency with implications for automated scoring. Language Testing, 27(3), 379–99.
Hasselgreen, A. (2005). Testing the spoken English of young Norwegians: A study of test validity and the role of “smallwords” in contributing to pupils’ fl uency. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
He, A. W., & Young, R. (1998). Lauage profi ciency interview: A discourse approach. In R. Young & A. W. He (Eds.), Talking and testing: Discourse approaches to the assessment of oral profi ciency (pp. 1–26). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.