Cover not available
Discussion published In:
Describing and assessing interactional competence in a second language: Special issue of the journal of Applied Pragmatics 5:2 (2023)
Edited by Emma Betz, Taiane Malabarba and Dagmar Barth-Weingarten
[Applied Pragmatics 5:2] 2023
► pp. 289–296
Discussion

Testing and CA

The test makers’ perspective – a discussion paper

ORCID logo | The University of Melbourne
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The test makers’ perspective on testing IC
    • 2.1The practicality challenge
    • 2.2The value-add of IC
  • 3.The way forward
  • References
Published online: 24 February 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ap.00019.roe
References (24)
References
Almeida, S., & Fernando, M. (2017). Making the cut: Occupation-specific factors influencing employers in their recruitment and selection of immigrant professionals in the information technology and accounting occupations in regional Australia. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 28 (6), 880–912. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (2010). Language assessment in practice. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1 1, 1–47. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dai, D. W. (2022). Design and validation of an L2-Chinese interactional competence test [Unpublished doctoral thesis]. The University of Melbourne.
Ebel, R. L. (1964). The social consequences of educational testing. Proceedings of the 1963 invitational conference on testing problems (pp. 130–143). Educational Testing Service.Google Scholar
ETS (2010). Linking TOEFL iBT scores to IELTS scores. Educational Testing Service.Google Scholar
Huth, T. (2021). Conceptualizing interactional learning targets for the second language curriculum. In S. Kunitz, O. Sert, & N. Markee (Eds.), Emerging issues in classroom discourse and interaction: Theoretical and applied CA perspectives on pedagogy (pp. 359–382). Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Malone, M. E., & Montee, M. (2014). Stakeholders’ beliefs about the TOEFL iBT test as a measure of academic language ability. ETS research report No. RR-4-42. Educational Testing Service. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
May, L., Nakatsuhara, F., Lam, D., & Galaczi, E. (2020). Developing tools for learning oriented assessment of interactional competence: Bridging theory and practice. Language Testing, 37 (2), 165–188. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ockey, G. J., & Chukharev-Hudilainen, E. (2021). Human versus computer partner in the paired oral discussion test. Applied Linguistics, 1–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
OET (2022). Taking the speaking sub-test. [URL]
O’Hagan, S., Pill, J., & Zhang, Y. (2016). Extending the scope of speaking assessment criteria in a specific-purpose language test: Operationalizing a health professional perspective. Language Testing, 33 (2), 195–216. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oxford University Press (2018). Wide Angle. OxfordGoogle Scholar
Pekarek Doehler, S. (2019). On the nature and the development of L2 interactional competence: State of the art and implications for praxis. In M. R. Salaberry & S. Kunitz (Eds.), Teaching and testing L2 interactional competence: Bridging theory and practice (pp. 25–59). Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pill, J. (2016). Drawing on indigenous criteria for more authentic assessment in a specific-purpose language test: Health professionals interacting with patients. Language Testing, 33 (2), 175–193. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roever, C. (2022). Teaching and testing second language pragmatics and interaction: A practical guide. Routledge.Google Scholar
Roever, C., & Dai, W. (2021). Interactional competence and language testing. In M. R. Salaberry & R. Burch (Eds.), Assessing speaking (pp. 23–49). Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roever, C. & Ikeda, N. (2022). What scores from monologic speaking tests can(not) tell us about interactional competence. Language Testing, 39 (1), 7–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roever, C., & Kasper, G. (2018). Speaking in turns and sequences: Interactional competence as a target construct in testing speaking. Language Testing, 35 (3), 331–355. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Salaberry, R., & Burch, R. (Eds.) (2021). Assessing speaking in context: Expanding the construct and its applications. Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Sato, T., & McNamara, T. (2019). What counts in second language oral communication ability? The perspective of linguistic laypersons. Applied Linguistics, 40 (6), 894–916. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stivers, T. (2015). Coding social interaction: A heretical approach in conversation analysis? Research on Language and Social Interaction, 48 (1), 1–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Youn, S., & Burch, R. (Eds). (2020). Where conversation analysis meets language assessment [Special issue], Papers in Language Testing and Assessment, 9 (1).Google Scholar
Zechner, K., & Evanini, K. (Eds.). (2020). Automated speaking assessment: Using language technologies to score spontaneous speech. Routledge.Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Lam, Daniel M K
2024. Worked examples for peer interaction: a feedback and learning resource. ELT Journal DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 august 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.