The use of interactive input in EAP listening assessment

Journal of English for Academic Purposes

Volumn 1, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 105-119

  Read, John ^a  

^a VICTORIA UNIVERSITY OF WELLINGTON   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 23444438531     PISSN: 14751585     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1475-1585(02)00018-8     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2. Basturkmen, H. (2002). Negotiating meaning in seminar-type discussion and EAP. English for Specific Purposes, 21, 233-242.
3. Biber, D. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4. Biber, D., Conrad, S., Reppen, R., Byrd, P., & Helt, M. (2002). Speaking and writing in the university: a multidimensional comparison. TESOL Quarterly, 36, 9-48.
5. Buck, G. (2001). Assessing listening. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
6. Chiang, C. S., & Dunkel, P. (1992). The effect of speech modification, prior knowledge, and listening proficiency on EFL lecture listening. TESOL Quarterly, 26, 345-374.
7. Coniam, D. (2001). The use of audio or video comprehension as an assessment instrument in the certification of English language teachers: a case study. System, 29, 1-14.
8. Douglas, D., & Nissan, S. (2001). Developing listening prototypes using a corpus of spoken academic English. Paper presented at the Language Testing Research Colloquium, St. Louis, MO.
9. Flowerdew, J. (Ed.). (1994). Academic listening: research perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
10. Freedle, R., & Kostin, I. (1999). Does the text matter in a multiple-choice test of comprehension? The case for the construct validity of TOEFL's minitalks. Language Testing, 16, 2-32.
11. Ginther, A. (2001). Effects of the presence and absence of visuals on performance on TOEFL CBT listening-comprehensive stimuli. TOEFL Research Report, 66. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
12. Groot, P. J. M. (1975). Testing communicative competence in listening comprehension. In R. L. Jones, & B. Spolsky (Eds.), Testing language proficiency. Arlington, VA: Center for Applied Linguistics.
13. Gruba, P. (1993). A comparison study of audio and video in language testing. JALT Journal, 16, 85-88.
14. Gruba, P. (1997). The role of video media in listening assessment. System, 25, 335-345.
15. Inbar-Lourie, O. (1987). The effect of text and question type on achievement in listening comprehension tests in English as a Foreign Language. Unpublished Master's thesis, Tel-Aviv University.
16. Jensen, C., & Hansen, C. (1995). The effect of prior knowledge on EAP listening test performance. Language Testing, 12, 99-119.
17. Nissan, S., DeVincenzi, F., & Tang, K. L. (1996). An analysis of factors affecting the difficulty of dialogue items in TOEFL listening comprehension. TOEFL Research Report, 51. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
18. Progosh, D. (1996). Using video for listening assessment: opinions of test-takers. TESL Canada Journal, 14, 34-44.
19. Schmidt-Rinehart, B. C. (1994). The effects of topic familiarity on second language listening comprehension. Modern Language Journal, 78, 179-189.
20. Sherman, J. (1997). The effect of question preview in listening comprehension tests. Language Testing, 14, 185-213.
21. Shohamy, E., & Inbar, O. (1991). Validation of listening comprehension tests: the effect of text and question type. Language Testing, 8, 23-40.
22. Simpson, R. C., Briggs, S. L., Ovens, J., & Swales, J. M. (2000). The Michigan corpus of spoken academic English. Ann Arbor, MI: The Regents of the University of Michigan [Available online at www.lsa.u-mich.edu/eli/micase/ micase.htm].
23. Tapper, J. (1996). Exchange patterns in the oral discourse of international students in college classrooms. Discourse Processes, 22, 25-55.