Writing assessment in higher education: Making the framework work

Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics

Volumn 2, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 1-15

  Callies, Marcus ^a   Zaytseva, Ekaterina ^a   Present Thomas, Rebecca ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BREMEN   (Germany)

^b VU UNIVERSITY AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Academic writing; Assessment; CEFR; Corpus linguistics; SLA

Indexed keywords

EID: 84979885349     PISSN: None     EISSN: 22117245     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1075/dujal.2.1.03cal     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Ackermann, K., Biber, D., & Gray, B. (2011). An academic collocation list. Paper presented at Corpus Linguistics 2011, 20-22 July 2011, Birmingham, UK.
2. Ackermann, K., De Jong, J.H.A.L., Kilgarriff, A., & Tugwell, D. (2011). The Pearson International Corpus of Academic English (PICAE). Proceedings of Corpus Linguistics 2011, Birmingham.
3. Ädel, A. (2006). Metadiscourse in L1 and L2 English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
4. Ädel, A. (2008). Involvement features in writing: do time and interaction trump register aware-ness? In G. Gilquin, S. Papp, & M.B. Diez-Bedmar (Eds.), Linking up contrastive and learner corpus research (pp. 35-53). Amsterdam: Rodopi.
5. Alderson, J.C. (2007). The CEFR and the need for more research. The Modern Language Journal, 91(4), 659-663.
6. Bachman, L.F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
7. Barker, F. (2010). How can corpora be used in language testing? In A. O’Keeffe, & M. McCarthy (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of corpus linguistics (pp. 633-645). New York: Routledge.
8. Biber, D., & Conrad, S. (2009), Register, genre, and style. Cambridge: CUP.
9. Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of spo-ken and written English. Harlow: Longman.
10. Callies, M. (2009). Information highlighting in advanced learner English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
11. Callies, M. (2013). Agentivity as a determinant oflexico-syntactic variation in L2 academic writing. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 18(3).
12. Callies, M., & Zaytseva, E. (this volume). The Corpus of Academic Learner English (CALE) — A new resource for the assessment of writing proficiency in the academic register.
13. Callies, M., Diez-Bedmar, M.B., & Zaytseva, E. (2012). Using learner corpora for testing and assessing L2 proficiency. Manuscript submitted for publication.
14. Carlsen, C. (2012). Proficiency level — A fuzzy variable in computer learner corpora. Applied Linguistics, 33(2), 161-183.
15. Coppieters, R. (1987). Competence differences between native and near-native speakers. Language, 63, 545-557.
16. Council of Europe (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
17. Council of Europe (2009). Relating language examinations to the Common European Framework of Reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment (CEFR): A manual. Strasbourg: Language Policy Division.
18. Dagneaux, E., Denness, S., & Granger, S. (1998). Computer-aided error analysis. System, 26, 163-174.
19. De Haan, P, & Van der Haagen, M. (this volume). Assessing the use of sophisticated EFL writ-ing: A longitudinal study.
20. De Keyser, R. (2005). What makes learning second language grammar difficult? A review of is-sues. Language Learning, 55(1), 1-25.
21. Department of Translation Studies, University of Tampere, Finland. (n.d.). What is ‘academic writing? Available from http://www.uta.fi/FAST/FIN/RESEARCH/acadwrit.html (ac-cessed 12 September 2012).
22. Diez-Bedmar, M.B. (2011). Spanish pre-university students’ use of English: CEA results from the University Entrance Exam. International Journal of English Studies, 11(2), 141-158.
23. Fulcher, G. (2004). Deluded by artifices? The Common European Framework and harmoniza-tion. Language Assessment Quarterly, 1(4), 253-266.
24. Fulcher, G., & Davidson, F. (2007). Language testing and assessment: An advanced resource book. New York: Routledge.
25. Granger, S. (2008). Learner corpora. In A. Lüdeling, & M. Kytö (Eds.), Corpus linguistics. An international handbook, vol. 1 (pp. 259-275). Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
26. Granger, S., Dagneaux, E., Meunier, F., & Paquot, M. (2009). The International Corpus of Learner English. Version 2. Handbook and CD-ROM. Louvain-la-Neuve: Presses Universitaires de Louvain.
27. Haapanen, P., McAnsh, S., Braidwood, E., & Hollingsworth, R. (this volume). UniTIE: Towards a transparent description of learning outcomes for academic writing.
28. Haines, K., Schmidt, N., Jansma, P., & Lowie W (this volume). EMBEDding the CEFR in academic writing assessment: A case study in training and standardization.
29. Hawkins, J.A., & Buttery, P. (2010). Criterial features in learner corpora: Theory and illustrations. English Profile Journal, 1(1), 1-23.
30. Hawkins, J.A., & Filipovic, L. (2012). Criterial features in L2 English: Specifying the reference lev-els of the Common European Framework. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
31. Heaney, H. (this volume). Fleshing out CEFR descriptors at C1 and above for the assessment of academic writing in departments of English at Austrian universities.
32. Hughes, A. (2003). Testingfor language teachers (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
33. Hulstijn, J.H. (2007). The shaky ground beneath the CEFR: Quantitative and qualitative dimen-sions of language proficiency. Modern Language Journal, 91(4), 663-667.
34. Mc Crostie, J. (2008). Writer visibility in EFL learner academic writing: A corpus-based study. ICAME Journal, 32, 97-114.
35. Messick, S. (1989). Meaning and values in test validation: The science and ethics of assessment. Educational Researcher, 18(2), 5-11.
36. Mukherjee, J. (2005). The native speaker is alive and kicking — Linguistic and language-peda-gogical perspectives. Anglistik, 16(2), 7-23.
37. Mukherjee, J. (2009). The grammar of conversation in advanced spoken learner English: Learner corpus data and language-pedagogical implications. In K. Aijmer (Ed.), Corpora and language teaching (pp. 203-230). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
38. Neff, J., Bunce, C., Dafouz, E., Gallego, J., Rica, J.P., Gems, M., & McCabe, A. (2008). The ques-tion of descriptors for academic writing in the European language framework: A critical view. Kalbotyra, 59(3), 213-221.
39. Neff van Aertselaer, J., & Bunce, C. (2011). The use of small corpora for tracing the development of academic literacies. In F. Meunier, S. De Cock, G. Gilquin, & M. Paquot (Eds.), A taste for corpora (pp. 63-84). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
40. North, B. (2000). The development of a common framework scale of language proficiency. Theoretical studies in second language acquisiton, vol. 8. Brussels: Peter Lang.
41. Ortega, L., & Byrnes, H. (2008). The longitudinal study of advanced L2 capacities: An introduc-tion. In L. Ortega, & H. Byrnes (Eds.), The longitudinal study of advanced L2 capacities (pp. 3-20). New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis.
42. Present-Thomas, R., Weltens, B., & De Jong J. H. A. L. (this volume). Defining proficiency: A comparative analysis of CEF level classification methods in a written learner corpus.
43. Shohamy, E. (2006). Rethinking assessment for advanced language proficiency. In H. Byrnes, H. Weger-Guntharp, & K.A. Sprang (Eds.), Educating for advanced foreign language capacities: Constructs, curriculum, instruction, assessment (pp. 188-208). Georgetown: Georgetown University Press.
44. Taylor, L., & Barker, F. (2008). Using corpora for language assessment. In E. Shohamy, & N.H. Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education, 2nd edition, volume 7: Language testing and assessment (pp. 241-254). New York: Springer.
45. Thaiss, C.J., & Zawacki, T.M. (2006). Engaged writers, dynamic disciplines: Research on the aca-demic writing life. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.
46. Thewissen, J. (2012). Accuracy across proficiency levels and L1 backgrounds: Insights from an error-tagged EFL learner corpus. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Université catholique de Louvain, Belgium.
47. Thomas, M. (1994). Assessment of L2 proficiency in second language acquisition research. Language Learning, 44(2), 307-336.
48. Thomas, M. (2006). Research synthesis and historiography: The case of assessment of second language proficiency In J.M. Norris, & L. Ortega (Eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 279-298). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
49. Verheijen, L., Los, B., & De Haan P. (this volume). Information structure: The final hurdle? — The development of syntactic structures in (very) advanced Dutch EFL writing.
50. Wulff, S., & Gries, S.Th. (2011). Corpus-driven methods for assessing accuracy in learner production. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Second language task complexity (pp. 61-87). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
51. Zheng, Y., & Mohammadi, S. (this volume). An investigation into the writing construct(s) mea-sured in Pearson Test of English Academic.