In the componential approach to modelling reading ability, a number of contributory factors have been empirically validated. However, research on their relative contribution to explaining performance on second language reading tests is limited. Furthermore, the contribution of knowledge of syntax has been largely ignored in comparison with the attention focused on vocabulary. This study examines the relative contribution of knowledge of syntax and knowledge of vocabulary to L2 reading in two pilot studies in different contexts -a heterogeneous population studying at the tertiary level in the UK and a homogenous undergraduate group in Japan -followed by a larger main study, again involving a homogeneous Japanese undergraduate population. In contrast with previous findings in the literature, all three studies offer support for the relative superiority of syntactic knowledge over vocabulary knowledge in predicting performance on a text reading comprehension test. A case is made for the robustness of structural equation modelling compared to conventional regression in accounting for the differential reliabilities of scores on the measures employed.

No abstract

The Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) posits six levels of proficiency and defines these largely in relation to empirically derived difficulty estimates based on stakeholder perceptions of what language functions expressed by ‘Can-do’ statements can be successfully performed at each level. Though also containing much valuable information on language proficiency and advice for practitioners, in its present form the CEFR is not sufficiently comprehensive, coherent or transparent for uncritical use in language testing. First, the descriptor scales take insufficient account of how variation in terms of contextual parameters may affect performances by raising or lowering the actual difficulty level of carrying out the target ‘Can-do’ statement. In addition, a test’s theory-based validity - a function of the processing involved in carrying out these ‘Can-do’ statements - must also be addressed by any specification on which a test is based. Failure to explicate such context and theory-based validity parameters - i.e., to comprehensively define the construct to be tested - vitiates current attempts to use the CEFR as the basis for developing comparable test forms within and across languages and levels, and hampers attempts to link separate assessments, particularly through social moderation.

Test-task validation has been an important strand in recent revision projects for University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate (UCLES) examinations. This article addresses the relatively neglected area of validating the match between intended and actual test-taker language with respect to a blueprint of language functions representing the construct of spoken language ability. An observation checklist designed for both a priori and a posteriori analysis of speaking task output has been developed. This checklist enables language samples elicited by the task to be scanned for these functions in real time, without resorting to the laborious and somewhat limited analysis of transcripts. The process and results of its development, implications and further applications are discussed.