2018
DOI: 10.4018/ijcallt.2018040105
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Output Register Parallelism in an Identical Direct and Semi-Direct Speaking Test

Abstract: The present trend in developing and using semi-direct speaking tests has been supported by test developers and researchers' claim of their increased practicality, higher reliability and concurrent validity with test scores in direct oral proficiency interviews. However, it is universally agreed within the language testing and assessment community that interchangeability must be investigated from multiple perspectives. This study compared test taker output from a computer-based Aptis General speaking test and a… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 15 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Aptis’ monologic speaking, although widely used in computer-administered language tests, is vulnerable to the familiar criticism that results can be inconsistent between semi-direct, monologic tasks and face-to-face interviews (Laborda et al, 2017). An external study that compared computer-based Aptis General Speaking with an oral interview with identical items, however, found that interpersonal contextualization only slightly shifted register use across the direct and semi-direct tests (Quaid, 2018). In the case of Aptis Writing, however, there is evidence that addresses the fit between Aptis General tasks and selected EFL settings, for example, alignment with college writing tasks in Japan (Moore & Chan, 2018) and with Chinese college students’ language needs (Tang, 2017).…”
Section: Validity: Focusing On Aptis Generalmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Aptis’ monologic speaking, although widely used in computer-administered language tests, is vulnerable to the familiar criticism that results can be inconsistent between semi-direct, monologic tasks and face-to-face interviews (Laborda et al, 2017). An external study that compared computer-based Aptis General Speaking with an oral interview with identical items, however, found that interpersonal contextualization only slightly shifted register use across the direct and semi-direct tests (Quaid, 2018). In the case of Aptis Writing, however, there is evidence that addresses the fit between Aptis General tasks and selected EFL settings, for example, alignment with college writing tasks in Japan (Moore & Chan, 2018) and with Chinese college students’ language needs (Tang, 2017).…”
Section: Validity: Focusing On Aptis Generalmentioning
confidence: 99%