Introduction

Abstract

If only the then Dean of the School of Languages and Linguistics at Georgetown University had agreed to publish Carroll (1954) with its thorough summary of the earlier history and current state of language testing at the midcentury, perhaps we would have all had a clearer perspective where we came from. 2 Still alive, in spite of the doubts expressed by Carroll (Carroll, Carton, & Wilds, 1959); see Spolsky (2001).

Exploring How ELT Teachers Perceive and Practice English Language Assessment

“…Such a conceptualization deliberates assessment as a means to check the quality of the end-product (Barrios & Milla Lara, 2018;Tsagari et al, 2018). The research also indicates the negligence and the poor quality of language teacher training programs regarding assessment (Davies, 2008;Gan & Lam, 2020;Purpura, 2016;Spolsky, 2008;Vogt & Tsagari, 2014).…”

“…However, emphasizing issues related to language teaching methods and neglecting the assessment-related ones leaves professional teacher training programs incomplete. Such an incomplete perspective eventually impedes conceptualizing language education and assessment as the parts of a whole that complement each other (Inbar-Lourie, 2008;Levi & Inbar-Lourie, 2020;Spolsky, 2008). Furthermore, such a misconception may result in hypothesizing assessment as something secondary or something that can be handled by teachers with little or no training.…”

Responsibilities and opportunities in language testing with respect to historicized forms of socio-political discrimination: A matter of academic citizenship

“…In putting together this VSI, our searches of many key terms to identify work with respect to these issues yielded no articles. We see this result as indicative of (1) venues other than Language Testing (the journal is referred to henceforth as LT to contrast with references to the field of language testing) publishing this work and (2) underlying issues around the limited engagement in such social dimensions overall in the field (Spolsky, 2008). These decisions lead to a highly filtered focus that detrimentally excludes key social issues and their relevance to language testing as a field and its contribution to broader society.…”

O efeito retroativo do EPLIS nas percepções, atitudes e ações de professores e alunos de um curso de formação em controle de tráfego aéreo

“…Em suma, os estudos de Noble e Smith (1994), Scaramucci (1999), Cheng (1999), Qi (2004Retorta (2007, Gimenez (1999) Burrows (2001Burrows ( , 2004, ilustra a intermediação feita por esses participantes na determinação do efeito retroativo e reconhece que eles irão agir diferentemente ao impacto de um teste, influenciados por suas crenças, suposições e conhecimento. Burrows (2001Burrows ( , 2004 A demanda por um entendimento mais profundo, por parte de professores e outros envolvidos no processo de avaliação de línguas, das questões teóricas, práticas e sociais que permeiam o desenvolvimento e uso de testes (FULCHER, 2012;TAYLOR, 2009TAYLOR, , 2013SCARAMUCCI, 2016;QUEVEDO-CAMARGO; adveio do uso exponencial de exames nas últimas décadas, principalmente, como meio de elevar os padrões educacionais, com consequências graves para os envolvidos (SPOLSKY, 2008). No caso dos professores, essa necessidade se mostra ainda mais latente devido ao duplo papel que desempenham como facilitadores e avaliadores do processo de aprendizagem de línguas (SCARAMUCCI, 2006(SCARAMUCCI, , 2016INBAR-LOURIE, 2008a;SCARINO, 2013).…”