Are two heads better than one? Pair work in L2 assessment contexts

Language Testing

Volumn 26, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 325-339

  Taylor, Lynda ^a   Wigglesworth, Gillian ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 68049124926     PISSN: 02655322     EISSN: 14770946     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0265532209104665     Document Type: Editorial

References (47)

1. Berry, V. (1997). Ethical considerations when assessing oral proficiency in pairs. In A. Huhta, V. Kohonen, L. Kurki-Suonio, & S. Luoma (Eds.), Current developments and alternatives in language assessment - Proceedings of LTRC 96 (pp. 107-123). Jyväskalä: University of Jyväskalä and University of Tampere.
2. Berry, V. (2000). An investigation into how individual differences in personality affect the complexity of language test tasks. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, King's College, University of London.
3. Berry, V. (2007). Personality differences and oral test performance. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
4. Bonk, W.J., & Ockey, G.J. (2003). A many-facet Rasch analysis of the second language group oral discussion task. Language Testing, 20, 89-110.
5. Bonk, W.J., & Van Moere, A. (2002, December). L2 group oral testing: The influence of shyness/extrovertedness and the proficiency levels of other group members on individuals' ratings. Paper presented at the AILA Congress, Singapore.
6. Bonk, W.J., & Van Moere, A. (2004, March). L2 group oral testing: The influence of shyness/outgoingness, match of interlocutors' proficiency level, and gender on individual scores. Paper presented at the Language Testing Research Colloquium, Temecula, California.
7. Brindley, G., & Wigglesworth, G. (1997) access: Issues in language test design and delivery Sydney: NCELTR.
8. Brown, A. (2003). Interviewer variation and the co-construction of speaking proficiency. Language Testing, 20, 1-25.
9. Brown, A. (2005). Interviewer variability in language proficiency interviews. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
10. Brown, A., & McNamara, T. (2004). "The devil is in the detail": Researching gender issues in language assessment. TESOL Quarterly, 38, 524-538.
11. Canagarajah, S. (2006). Changing communicative needs, revised assessment objectives: Testing English as an international language. Language Assessment Quarterly, 3, 229-242.
12. Chalhoub-Deville, M. (2003). Second language interaction: current perspectives and future trends. Language Testing, 20(4), 369-383.
13. Deville, C., & Chalhoub-Deville, M. (2006). Old and new thoughts on test score variability: Implications for reliability and validity. In M. Chalhoub-Deville, C. A. Chapelle, & P. Duff (Eds.), Inference and generalizability in applied linguistics: Multiple perspectives (pp. 9-25). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
14. Egyud, G., & Glover, P. (2001). Oral testing in pairs - a secondary school perspective. ELT Journal, 55(1), 70-76.
15. Foot, M.C. (1999). Relaxing in pairs. ELT Journal, 53(1), 36-41.
16. Fulcher, G. (2003). Testing second language speaking. Harlow: Pearson.
17. Galaczi, E. (2004). Peer-peer interaction in a paired speaking test: The case of the First Certificate in English. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York.
18. Galaczi, E. (2008). Peer-peer interaction in a speaking test: The case of the First Certificate in English examination. Language Assessment Quarterly, 5(2), 89-119.
19. Hawkey, R. (2004). A modular approach to testing English language skills: The development of the Certificates in English Language Skills (CELS) examinations. Cambridge: UCLES/Cambridge University Press.
20. He, A.W., & Young, R. (1998). Language proficiency interviews: A discourse approach. In R. Young & A. W. He (Eds.), Talking and testing: Discourse approaches to the assessment of oral proficiency (pp. 1-24). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
21. Iwashita, N. (1996). The validity of the paired interview format in oral performance assessment. Melbourne Papers in Language Testing, 5(2), 51-65.
22. Katona, L. (1998). Meaning negotiation in the Hungarian oral proficiency examination of English. In R. Young & A. W. He (Eds.), Talking and testing: Discourse approaches to the assessment of oral proficiency (pp. 239-267). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
23. nd ed.). Volume 7: Language testing and assessment (pp. 273-284). New York: Springer Science+Business Media LLC.
24. Lazaraton, A. (1996). Interlocutor support in oral proficiency interviews: The case of CASE. Language Testing, 13, 151-172.
25. Lazaraton, A. (2002). A qualitative approach to the validation of oral language tests. Cambridge: UCLES/Cambridge University Press.
26. Luoma, S. (2004). Assessing speaking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
27. May, L. (2006). An examination of rater orientations on a paired candidate discussion task through stimulated recall. Melbourne Papers in Language Testing, 11(1), 29-51.
28. McNamara, T.F. (1997). 'Interaction' in second language performance assessment: Whose performance? Applied Linguistics, 18(4), 446-466.
29. Morton, J., Wigglesworth, G., & D. Williams. (1997). Approaches to validation: evaluating interviewer performance in oral interaction tests. In G. Brindley & G. Wigglesworth (Eds.), access: Issues in language test design and delivery (pp. 175-196). Sydney: NCELTR.
30. Nakatsuhara, F. (2004). An investigation into conversational styles in paired speaking tests. MA dissertation, University of Essex.
31. Nakatsuhara, F. (2006). The impact of proficiency level on conversational styles in paired speaking tests. Cambridge ESOL Research Notes, 25.
32. Norton, J. (2005). The paired format in the Cambridge speaking tests. ELT Journal, 59(4), 287-296.
33. O'Sullivan, B. (2000). Exploring gender and oral proficiency interview performance. System, 28, 373-386.
34. O'Sullivan, B. (2002). Learner acquaintanceship and oral proficiency test pair-task performance. Language Testing, 19(3), 277-295.
35. Rea-Dickins, P. (2008). Classroom-based language assessment. In E. Shohamy & N. Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education (2nd ed.). Volume 7: Language testing and assessment (pp. 257-271). New York: Springer Science+Business Media LLC.
36. Ross, S., & Berwick, R. (1992). The discourse of accommodation in oral proficiency interviews. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14(2), 159-176.
37. Swain, M. (2001). Examining dialogue: Another approach to content specification and to validating inferences drawn from test scores. Language Testing, 18(3), 275-302.
38. Taylor, L. (2000). Investigating the paired speaking test format. Cambridge ESOL Research Notes, 2, 14-15.
39. Taylor, L. (2001). The paired speaking test format: Recent studies. Cambridge ESOL Research Notes, 6, 15-17.
40. Taylor, L. (2003). The Cambridge approach to speaking assessment. Cambridge ESOL Research Notes, 13, 2-4.
41. van Lier, L. (1989). Reeling, writhing, drawling, stretching and fainting in coils: Oral proficiency interviews as conversations. TESOL Quarterly, 23, 489-508.
42. Van Moere, A. (2006). Validity evidence in a university group oral test. Language Testing, 23, 411-440.
43. Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
44. Vygotsky, L.S. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
45. Weir, C.J. (2005). Language Testing and Validation. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
46. Wertsch, J.V. (1998). Mind as action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
47. Young, R., & Milanovic, M. (1992). Discourse variation in oral proficiency interviews. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14, 403-424.