Assessing Spoken EFL Without a Common Rating Scale

Abstract

This study investigated teacher cognition and behavior in a high-stakes, English as a Foreign Language (EFL) school context where no common rating scale exists. 24 EFL teachers at the upper secondary level in Norway were asked to rate the performance of a student taking her oral English exam and to give an account of what kind of performance aspects they pay attention to in the rating process. The study showed that while the raters had the same general ideas of the constructs to be assessed, there were differences in how they perceived the relative importance of these constructs, particularly as regards topical knowledge. The study has implications for language teaching and assessment practices at the intermediate to upperintermediate levels (Common European Framework of Reference, level B1/B2), particularly with regard to the role of topical knowledge.

Improving Speaking Fluency in a Task-Based Language Teaching Approach: The Case of EFL Learners at PUNIV-Cazenga

“…The transcripts were then translated into English for the purpose of analysis. After being translated, the transcripts were repeatedly read to identify themes (Bøhn, 2015;Evans, 2012;Yayli, 2011), and some utterances were chosen to illustrate the learners' perspectives about being taught with the TBLT approach.…”

Metacognition in Language Learning and Teaching

“…10 limited vocabulary as a potential disadvantage for a number of students, it was deemed relevant to focus on strategies which could compensate for this deficiency. Moreover, as teacher raters are reported to value performance aspects such as range of linguistic resources and ability to provide extensive responses in the assessment of student performance (Bøhn 2015;Borger 2014), we found it appropriate to include achievement strategies which could help the students recount, describe and explain subject content. Hence, we chose the following CSs, using Dörnyei and Scott's (1997) and Rossiter's (2003) taxonomies:…”

“…The choice of CSs to be taught was made on the basis of a brief analysis of the students' communicative needs, as reported by their teachers, as well as research on what EFL instructors emphasise in their assessment of oral L2 English performance (Bøhn 2016). As the teachers mentioned Table 10.1 Overview of the use of CSs by students in the treatment group (n = 5).…”

Exploring Communication Strategy Use and Metacognitive Awareness in the EFL Classroom

“…The choice of CSs to be taught was made on the basis of a brief analysis of the students' communicative needs, as reported by their teachers, as well as research on what EFL instructors emphasise in their assessment of oral L2 English performance (Bøhn 2016). As the teachers mentioned limited vocabulary as a potential disadvantage for a number of students, it was deemed relevant to focus on strategies which could compensate for this deficiency.…”

“…As the teachers mentioned limited vocabulary as a potential disadvantage for a number of students, it was deemed relevant to focus on strategies which could compensate for this deficiency. Moreover, as teacher raters are reported to value performance aspects such as range of linguistic resources and ability to provide extensive responses in the assessment of student performance (Bøhn 2015;Borger 2014), we found it appropriate to include achievement strategies which could help the students recount, describe and explain subject content. Hence, we chose the following CSs, using Dörnyei and Scott's (1997) and Rossiter's (2003) taxonomies:…”