Assessing students' oral proficiency: A case for online testing

Foreign Language Annals

Volumn 40, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 377-406

  Fall, Thekla ^a,d   Adair Hauck, Bonnie ^b   Glisan, Eileen ^c  

^a Pittsburgh Public Schools ^*  (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

^c INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^d Pittsburgh Public Schools   (United States)

Author keywords

ACTFL oral proficiency scale; Districtwide K 12 assessment; Large scale testing; Online assessment; Performance assessment; Proficiency assessment; Rating proficiency

Indexed keywords

EID: 35349030978     PISSN: 0015718X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1944-9720.2007.tb02865.x     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. ACTFL performance guidelines for K-12 learners. (1998). Yonkers, NY: American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages.
2. ACTFL proficiency guidelines. (1986). Hastings-on-Hudson, NY: American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages.
3. ACTFL proficiency guidelines-Speaking. (1999). Yonkers, NY: American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages.
4. ACTFL provisional proficiency guidelines. (1998). Hastings-on-Hudson, NY: American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages.
5. Adair-Hauck, B., & Pierce, M. (1998). Investigating the simulated oral proficiency interview (SOPI) as an assessment tool for second language oral proficiency. Pennsylvania Language Forum, LXX(1), 6-25.
6. Alderson, J. C., & Hamp-Lyons, L. (1996). TOEFL preparation courses: A study of washback. Language Testing, 13, 280-297.
7. American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. (2007). Summary of ACE credit recommendations. Retrieved March 17, 2007, from ACTFL Web site http://actfl.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3407
8. Bragger, J. D., & Rice, D. B. (1998). Connections: The national standards and a new paradigm for content-oriented materials and instruction. In J. Harper, M. Lively, & M. Williams (Eds.), The coming of age of the profession (pp. 191-217). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
9. Breiner-Sanders, K. E., Lowe, P., Miles, J., & Swender, E. (2000). ACTFL proficiency guidelines - Speaking, revised 1999. Foreign Language Annals, 33, 13-18.
10. Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition (CARLA). (2007). Minnesota proficiency assessments (MLPA). Retrieved March 15, 2007, from http://www.carla.umn.edu/assessment/MLPA/html
11. Chalhoub-Deville, M. (1997). The Minnesota Articulation Project and its proficiency-based assessments. Foreign Language Annals, 30(4), 492-502.
12. Clark, J. L. D., & Li, Y. (1986). Development, validation, and dissemination of a proficiency-based test of speaking ability in Chinese and an associated assessment model for other less commonly taught languages. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.
13. Clifford, R. T., & Swender, E. (Eds.). (2003). Special issue on oral proficiency testing [Special Issue]. Foreign Language Annals, 36(4).
14. Dandonoli, P., & Henning, G. (1990). An investigation of the construct validity of the ACTFL proficiency guidelines and oral interview procedure. Foreign Language Annals, 23, 11-22.
15. Donato, R., Antonek, J. L., & Tucker, G. R. (1994). A multiple perspectives analysis of a Japanese FLES program. Foreign Language Annals, 27, 365-378.
16. Donato, R., Antonek, J. L., & Tucker, G. R. (1996). Documenting a Japanese FLES program: Ambiance and achievement. Language Learning, 46, 497-528.
17. Donato, R., Tucker, G. R., Wudthayagorn, J., & Igarashi, K. (2000). Converging evidence: Attitudes, achievements, and instruction in the later years of FLES. Foreign Language Annals, 33, 377-393.
18. Fairfax County Public Schools, Virginia. (1999), PALS: Performance assessment for language students. Retrieved February 19, 2006, from http://www.fcps.edu/DIS/OHSICS/forlang/PALS/index.htm
19. Glisan, E., & Foltz, D. (1998). Assessing students' oral proficiency in an outcome-based curriculum: Student performance and teacher intuitions. Modern Language Journal, 82, 1-18.
20. Gonzalez Pino, B. (1989). Prochievement testing of speaking. Foreign Language Annals, 22, 487-496.
21. Hadley, A. O. (2001). Teaching language in context, 3rd ed. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
22. Higgs, T. V. (Ed.). (1984). Teaching for proficiency, the organizing principle. The ACTFL Foreign Language Education Series. Lincolnwood, IL: NTC/Contemporary Publishing Group.
23. Huebner, T., & Jensen, A. (1992). A study of foreign language proficiency-based testing in secondary schools. Foreign Language Annals, 25, 105-115.
24. Indiana University of Pennsylvania. (2007). Course credit by OPI. Retrieved March 16, 2007, from http://www.iup.edu/spanish/proficiency.shtm
25. Liskin-Gasparro, J. E. (1982). ETS oral proficiency testing manual. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
26. Liskin-Gasparro, J. E. (2003). The ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines and the Oral Proficiency Interview: A brief history and analysis of their survival. Foreign Language Annals, 36, 483-490.
27. Magnan, S. S. (1986). Assessing speaking proficiency in the undergraduate curriculum: Data from French. Foreign Language Annals, 19, 429-438.
28. Magnan, S. S. (1987). Rater reliability of the ACTFL Oral Proficiency Interview. Canadian Modern Language Review, 43, 267-276.
29. Malone, M. E. (2003). Research on the Oral Proficiency Interview: Analysis, synthesis, and future directions. Foreign Language Annals, 36, 491-497.
30. Moeller, A., & Reschke, C. (1993). A second look at grading and classroom performance: Report of a research study. Modern Language Journal, 77, 163-169.
31. National Standards in Foreign Language Education Project. (1996). Standards for foreign language learning: Preparing for the 21st century. Yonkers, NY: Author.
32. National Standards in Foreign Language Education Project. (1999). Standards for foreign language learning in the 21st century, 2nd ed. Yonkers, NY: Author.
33. O'Malley, J. M., & Valdez Pierce, L. (1996). Authentic assessment for English language learners: Practical approaches for teachers. New York: Addison-Wesley.
34. Pittsburgh Public Schools, Pennsylvania. (2004). Seven best practices for world language instruction. Pittsburgh: Author.
35. Shohamy, E., Gordon, C., Kenyon, D. M., & Stansfield, C. W. (1989). The development and validation of a semi-direct test for assessing oral proficiency in Hebrew. Bulletin of Hebrew Higher Education, 4, 4-9.
36. Shrum, J. L., & Glisan, E. (2005). Teacher's handbook: Contextualized language instruction, 3rd ed. Boston: Thomson Heinle.
37. Stansfield, C. W. (1996). Test development handbook: Simulated Oral Proficiency interview (SOPI). Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.
38. Stansfield, C. W., & Kenyon, D. M. (1992). The development and validation of a simulated oral proficiency interview. Modern Language Journal, 76, 129-141.
39. Stansfield, C. W., & Kenyon, D. M. (1993). Development and validation of the Hausa speaking test with the ACTFL proficiency guidelines. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 4, 5-31.
40. Stansfield, C. W., & Kenyon, D. M. (1996). Simulated oral proficiency interviews: An update. ERIC Digest (May). Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED395501)
41. Stansfield, C. W., Kenyon, D. M., Paiva, D., Doyle, F., Ulsh, I., & Cowles, M. A. (1990). Development and validation of the Portuguese Speaking Test. Hispania, 73, 641-651.
42. Steinmeyer, G. (1984). Oral proficiency interviews at Amherst Regional High School: Report of a pilot project. Unterrichtspraxis, 27, 330-334.
43. Surface, E. A., & Dierdorff, E. C. (2003). Reliability and the ACTFL Oral Proficiency Interview: Reporting indices of interrater consistency and agreement for 19 languages. Foreign Language Annals, 36, 507-519.
44. Swain, M. (1984). Large-scale communicative language testing: Case study. In S. J. Savignon & M. S. Berns (Eds.), Initiatives in communicative language teaching: A book of readings (pp. 185-201). Reading: MA: Addison-Wesley.
45. Swender, E. (Ed.). (1999). ACTFL Oral Proficiency interview tester training manual. Yonkers, NY: American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages.
46. Swender, E. (2003). Oral proficiency testing in the real world: Answers to frequently asked questions. Foreign Language Annals, 36, 520-526.
47. Thompson, I. (1995). Interrater reliability of the ACTFL oral proficiency interview in five European languages: Data from English, French, German, Russian, and Spanish. Foreign Language Annals, 28, 407-422.
48. Tucker, G. R., Donato, R., & Antonek, J. L. (1996). Documenting growth in a Japanese FLES program. Foreign Language Annals, 29, 539-550.
49. U.S. Department of Education. (2003). Accountability. Retrieved February 19, 2006, from http://www.ed.gov/nclb/accountability/index.html?src=ov
50. Wiggins, G. (1994). Toward more authentic assessment of language performances. In C. Hancock (Ed.), Teaching, testing, and assessment: Making the connection (pp. 69-85). Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Company.
51. Wiggins, G. (1998). Educative assessment. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.