Interaction in the oral proficiency interview

Johnson, Marysia

doi:10.1075/prag.10.2.03joh

Cited by 26 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Shohamy (1994) argues that insights from discourse analysis provide a significant contribution to defining the construct of speaking in oral tests in general. Likewise, van Lier (1989) The bulk of research on test-taker discourse analysis in oral assessment has been conducted in the context of the oral interview and has investigated ways in which features observed in oral proficiency interviews are different or similar to conversation (e.g., Johnson, 2000;Lazaraton, 1996;Young & He, 1998). Research has also examined variational features among interviewers and their potential impact on test-taker performance (e.g., Brown, 2003;Cafarella, 1997;Ross & Berwick, 1992).…”

Section: Discourse Studies In Oral Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Examination of Rater Orientations and Test-Taker Performance on English-for-Academic-Purposes Speaking Tasks

Brown

Iwashita

McNamara

2005

ETS Research Report Series

115

162

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

)test development efforts. As part of the foundation for the development of the next generation TOEFL test, papers and research reports were commissioned from experts within the fields of measurement, language teaching, and testing through the TOEFL 2000 project. The resulting critical reviews, expert opinions, and research results have helped to inform TOEFL program development efforts with respect to test construct, test user needs, and test delivery. Opinions expressed in these papers are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or intentions of the TOEFL program.These monographs are also of general scholarly interest, and the TOEFL program is pleased to make them available to colleagues in the fields of language teaching and testing and international student admissions in higher education.The TOEFL 2000 project was a broad effort under which language testing at Educational Testing Service ® (ETS ® ) would evolve into the 21st century. As a first step, the TOEFL program revised the Test of Spoken English™ (TSE ® ) and introduced a computer-based version of the TOEFL test. The revised TSE test, introduced in July 1995, is based on an underlying construct of communicative language ability and represents a process approach to test validation. The computer-based TOEFL test, introduced in 1998, took advantage of new forms of assessment and improved services made possible by computer-based testing, while also moving the program toward its longer-range goals, which included:• the development of a conceptual framework that takes into account models of communicative competence a research program that informs and supports this emerging framework a better understanding of the kinds of information test users need and want from the TOEFL test a better understanding of the technological capabilities for delivery of TOEFL tests into the next century Monographs 16 through 20 were the working papers that laid out the TOEFL 2000 conceptual frameworks with their accompanying research agendas. The initial framework document, Monograph 16, described the process by which the project was to move from identifying the test domain to building an empirically based interpretation of test scores. The subsequent framework documents, Monographs 17-20, extended the conceptual frameworks to the domains of reading, writing, listening, and speaking (both as independent and interdependent domains). These conceptual frameworks guided the research and prototyping studies described in subsequent monographs that resulted in the final test model. The culmination of the TOEFL 2000 project is the next generation TOEFL test that will be released in September 2005.As TOEFL 2000 projects are completed, monographs and research reports will continue to be released and public review of project work invited. TOEFL Program Educational Testing Service iii AbstractThis report documents two coordinated exploratory studies into the nature of oral English-foracademic-purposes (EAP) proficiency. Study I used verbal-report methodology to examine...

show abstract

Section: Discourse Studies In Oral Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Examination of Rater Orientations and Test-Taker Performance on English-for-Academic-Purposes Speaking Tasks

Brown

Iwashita

McNamara

2005

ETS Research Report Series

115

162

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While some training materials refer to the OPI as a conversation, the title – the Oral Proficiency Interview – and subsequent research shows that the OPI is not a typical conversation but an interview. Johnson (2000) conducted research on ILR OPIs, which supported work by Johnson and Tyler (1998), Ross (1992), Ross and Berwick (1992), van Lier (1989) and others and showed that the OPI is not a conversation but an interview. While the very name of the OPI acknowledges that it is, in fact, an interview, it may be difficult to generalize results of an OPI to other language uses and speech events.…”

Section: Current Controversiesmentioning

confidence: 66%

Oral Proficiency Assessment: Current Approaches and Applications for Post‐Secondary Foreign Language Programs

Malone

Montee

2010

Language and Linguist. Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Changes to oral proficiency instruction and assessment in post‐secondary foreign language programs grew out of the proficiency movement of the 1970s and 1980s. The Oral Proficiency Interview (OPI) became the major approach to oral proficiency assessment in the United States. Initially developed for government use, the OPI was originally rated according to the Interagency Language Roundtable Guidelines. Over time, the ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines‐Speaking were developed for use with the OPI in academic settings, particularly at the post‐secondary level. In this paper, we discuss the strengths and limitations of the OPI and identify current controversies related to its use at the post‐secondary level. In addition, we explore new approaches to oral proficiency assessment, including computer‐mediated oral proficiency testing. We also examine the expected proficiency outcomes for foreign language students at different levels, an area that has been little researched. Finally, we recommend ways to increase the formal use of oral proficiency assessment and establish and publicize realistic expectations of outcomes for programs, instructors and students.

show abstract

“…Although there has been criticism of the instrument's validity and reliability (Bachman, 1998; Henning, 1992; Johnson, 2000; Tschirner & Heilenman, 1998; Yoffe, 1997), the ACTFL and others indicate that this a reliable and valid instrument (ACTFL, 2008; Halleck, 1992; Huebner & Jensen, 1992; Meredith, 1990). The American Council on Education (ACE) recognizes the OPI and uses it for awarding college credit to students (ACTFL, 2008).…”

Section: Instrument 1: Actfl Opimentioning

confidence: 99%

Students With Learning Disabilities and AD/HD in the Foreign Language Classroom: Supporting Students and Instructors

Leons

Herbert

Gobbo

2009

Foreign Language Annals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores why students with learning disabilities and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (AD/HD) struggle with the foreign language curriculum and how their difficulties manifest themselves in the classroom setting. Findings of a three‐year, federally funded study that sought to combine expertise in the field of learning disabilities with expertise in the field of language teaching are presented. Discussion includes how accommodations for students with learning disabilities and AD/HD often miss the mark, and which teaching practices have been identified as supporting student learning.

show abstract

Interaction in the oral proficiency interview

Abstract: This article reports on the findings of a discourse analysis study whose purpose was to provide answers to the following research question:What kind of speech event is the OPI? Is it more like an everyday, friendly conversation, an interview, or something else?

Cited by 26 publications

References 32 publications

An Examination of Rater Orientations and Test-Taker Performance on English-for-Academic-Purposes Speaking Tasks

An Examination of Rater Orientations and Test-Taker Performance on English-for-Academic-Purposes Speaking Tasks

Oral Proficiency Assessment: Current Approaches and Applications for Post‐Secondary Foreign Language Programs

Students With Learning Disabilities and AD/HD in the Foreign Language Classroom: Supporting Students and Instructors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About