This study investigated the effects of a group of task factors on advanced English as a second language learners’ actual and perceived listening performance. We examined whether the speed, linguistic complexity, and explicitness of the listening text along with characteristics of the text necessary for task completion influenced comprehension. We also explored learners’ perceptions of what textual factors cause difficulty. The 68 participants performed 18 versions of a listening task, and each task was followed by a perception questionnaire. Nine additional students engaged in stimulated recall. The listening texts were analyzed in terms of a variety of measures, utilizing automatized analytical tools. We used Rasch and regression analyses to estimate task difficulty and its relationship to the text characteristics. Six measures emerged as significant predictors of task difficulty, including indicators of (a) lexical range, density, and diversity and (b) causal content. The stimulated recall comments were more reflective of these findings than the questionnaire responses.

This study investigated the relationship between second language (L2) listening and a range of task and listener characteristics. More specifically, for a group of 93 nonnative English speakers, the researchers examined the extent to which linguistic complexity of the listening task input and response, and speed and explicitness of the input, were associated with task difficulty. In addition, the study explored the relationship between L2 listening and listeners' working memory and listening anxiety. The participants responded to 30 multiple-choice listening items and took an English proficiency test. They also completed two working memory tasks and a listening anxiety questionnaire. The researchers analysed listening input and responses in terms of a variety of measures, using Cohmetrix, WebVocabProfiler, Praat, and the PHRASE list, in combination with expert analysis. Task difficulty and participant ability were determined by means of Rasch analysis, and correlational analyses were run to investigate the task and listener variables' association with L2 listening. The study found that L2 listening task difficulty correlated significantly with indicators of phonological, discourse, and lexical complexity and with referential cohesion. Better L2 listening performances were delivered by less anxious listeners and, depending on L2 listening measure, by those with a higher working memory capacity.

Alderson, Brunfaut and Harding (2014) recently investigated how diagnosis is practised across a range of professions in order to develop a tentative framework for a theory of diagnosis in second or foreign language (SFL) assessment. In articulating this framework, a set of five broad principles were proposed, encompassing the entire enterprise of diagnostic assessment. However, there remain questions about how best to implement these principles in practice, particularly in identifying learners' strengths and weaknesses in the less well-documented areas of SFL reading and listening. In this paper, we elaborate on the set of principles by first outlining the stages of a diagnostic process built on these principles, and then discussing the implications of this process for the diagnostic assessment of reading and listening. In doing so, we will not only elaborate on the theory of diagnosis with respect to its application in the assessment of these skills, but also discuss the ways in which each construct might be defined and operationalized for diagnostic purposes.

Diagnostic language assessment has received increased research interest in recent years, with particular attention on methods through which diagnostic information can be gleaned from standardized proficiency tests. However, diagnostic procedures in the broader sense have been inadequately theorized to date, with the result that there is still little agreement on precisely what diagnosis in second and foreign language learning actually entails. In order to address this problem, this article investigated how diagnosis is theorized and carried out in a diverse range of professions with a view to finding commonalities that can be applied to the context of language assessment. Ten semi-structured interviews were conducted with professionals from the fields of car mechanics, IT systems support, medicine, psychology and education. Data were then coded, yielding five macro-categories that fit the entire data set: (i) definitions of diagnosis, (ii) means of diagnosis, (iii) key players, (iv) diagnostic procedures, (v) treatment/ follow-up. Based on findings within these categories, a set of five tentative principles of diagnostic language assessment is drawn-up, as well as a list of implications for future research.

No abstract