Chapter 16
The role of grammatical development in oral assessment
Tests today are usually based on a communicative view of language, with less
focus on grammar. In this chapter, a study is presented that investigates whether there is a
difference in terms of grammatical development between a group of test-takers who passed and
a group who failed an oral language test. The study addresses theories of SLA and language
testing, i.e., Processability Theory and the model of Communicative Language Ability, the
construct of the test. Data from learners’ test performances were analysed using PT in order
to see whether there was a consistent relationship between the PT stage analysis and the
results derived from the test. The comparison shows a clear difference between the
test-takers who passed and those who failed in terms of grammatical development. This
implies a correlation between grammatical development and communicative competence in
general which may indicate that PT constitutes a useful basis for oral assessment.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Theoretical background
- 2.1Processability hierarchy of Swedish
- 2.2Communicative Language Ability
- 2.3Aim of the study and research questions
- 3.Design of the study
- 3.1The oral test
- 3.2The test-takers
- 3.3Methodology
- 4.Results
- 5.Discussion of the results
- 6.Conclusion
-
Notes
-
References
References (32)
Alderson, J. C.
(
1990)
Language testing in the 1990s: How far have we gone? How much further have
we to go? In
S. Anvian (Ed.),
Current developments in language testing (pp. 1–26). Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Alderson J. C.
(
2007)
The challenge of (diagnostic) testing: Do we know what we are
measuring? In
J. Fox,
M. Wesche,
D. Bayliss,
L. Cheng,
C. E. Turner &
C. Doe (Eds.),
What are we measuring? Language testing reconsidered (pp. 21–39). Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bachman, L. F.
(
1990)
Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S.
(
1996)
Language testing in practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bachman, L. F., & Cohen, A. D.
(
1998)
Language testing – SLA interfaces: An update. In
L. F. Bachman &
A. D. Cohen (Eds.),
Interfaces between second language acquisition and language testing
research (pp. 1–31). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bolander, M
(
1988)
Is there any order? On word order in Swedish learner
language.
Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 9(1-2), 97–113.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Butler, C.
(
1985)
Statistics in linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Canale, M., & Swain, M.
(
1980)
Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching
and testing.
Applied Linguistics 1(1), 1–47.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chapelle, C. A., Chung, Y.-R., Hegelheimer, V., Pendar, N. & Xu, J.
(
2010)
Towards a computer-delivered test of productive grammatical
ability.
Language Testing 27(4), 443–469.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Council of Europe
(
2001)
Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching,
assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Davies L., Brown, A., Elder, C., Hill, K., Lumley, T., & McNamara T.
(
1999)
Dictionary of language testing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press and UCLES.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Eklund Heinonen, M.
(
2005)
Godkänd eller underkänd? Hur processbarhetsteorin kan tillämpas vid muntliga
språktester av andraspråksinlärare [Pass or fail? Processability theory applied in oral
tests of second language learners] (FUMS Report 215). Uppsala: Uppsala University.
Eklund Heinonen, M.
(
2009)
Processbarhet på prov. Bedömning av muntlig språkfärdighet hos vuxna
andraspråksinlärare [
Processability in tests. Assessment of oral proficiency in
adult second language learners]. Uppsala: Department of Scandinavian Languages, Uppsala University.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ellis, R
(
2008)
Investigating grammatical difficulty in second language learning:
Implications for second language acquisition research and language testing.
International Journal of Applied Linguistics 18(1), 4–22.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Glahn, E., Håkansson, G., Hammarberg, B., Holmen, A., Hvenekilde, A., & Lund, K.
(
2001)
Processability in Scandinavian second language acquisition.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition 23(3), 389–416.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Granfeldt, J., & Ågren, M.
(
2014)
SLA developmental stages and teachers’ assessment of written French:
Exploring Direkt Profil as a diagnostic assessment tool.
Language Testing 31(3), 285–305.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hatch, E., & Lazaraton, A.
(
1991)
The research manual: Design and statistics for applied linguistics. New York, NY: Newbury House.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hulstijn, J. H.
(
2015)
Discussion: How different can perspectives on L2 development
be? Language Learning 65(1), 210–232.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hymes, D. H.
(
1972)
On communicative competence. In
J. B. Pride &
J. Holmes (Eds.),
Sociolinguistics (pp. 269–293). Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Håkansson, G., & Norrby, C.
(
2005)
Grammar and pragmatics. In
S. Foster-Cohen,
M. García-Mayo &
J. Cenoz (Eds.),
Eurosla Yearbook 5 (pp. 137–161). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Keßler, J.-U.
(
2007)
Assessing EFL-development online: A feasibility study of Rapid
profile. In
F. Mansouri (Ed.),
Second language acquisition research. Theory-construction and testing (pp. 119–143). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Keßler, J.-U., & Liebner, M.
Levelt, W. J. M.
(
1989)
Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
McNamara, T
(
1990)
Item response theory and the validation of an ESP test for health
professionals.
Language Testing 7(1), 52–75.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
McNamara, T
(
1996)
Measuring second language performance. London: Longman.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pienemann, M
(
1984)
Psychological constraints on the teachability of languages.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition 6(2), 186–214.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pienemann, M., & Håkansson, G.
(
1999)
A unified approach towards the development of Swedish as L2: A
processability account.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition 21(3), 383–420.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Purpura, J. E.
(
2004)
Assessing grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rahkonen, M., & Håkansson, G.
(
2008)
Production of written L2-Swedish – Processability or input
frequencies? In
J.-U. Keßler (Ed.),
Processability approaches to second language development (pp. 135–161). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rimmer, W.
(
2006)
Measuring grammatical complexity: The Gordian knot.
Language Testing 23(4), 497–519.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (1)
Cited by 1 other publications
Keßler, Jörg‐U. & Anke Lenzing
2022.
Grammar in Foreign and Second Language Classes. In
The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching,
► pp. 1 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 june 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.