Proficiency

Abstract

In this article we argue against a definitional approach to oral proficiency and in favor of a principled approach based on sound theoretical considerations. We first identify four problematic trends in the oral proficiency movement as it is currently conceived: the tail wagging the dog, false authenticity, premature institutionalization, and the psychometric posture. Thereafter, we offer the rudiments of a principled theory of oral proficiency, based on the theory of higher forms of human cognitive activity developed by the Vygotskyan school of psycholinguistics. The theory compels us to bring into focus such factors as open systems, the individual speaker, functional systems, and intersubjectivity. From this perspective, we argue that if the construct of oral proficiency is to have any significance at all for language teaching and testing, researchers must come to understand what it means for real speakers (natives as well as nonnatives) to interact with other real speakers in the everyday world of human activity rather than in the world circumscribed by language tests.

A systematic review of proficiency assessment methods in bilingualism research

“…Considering the above-mentioned questions, a few possible standards are suggested here, with the acknowledgment that proficiency assessment should depend on a particular study’s goals and that selection of a particular assessment is subject to a variety of linguistic, financial, and temporal constraints. Starting from the theoretical basis, authors would benefit from carefully considering the theoretical construct of proficiency (e.g., Hulstijn, 2015; Hyltenstam, 2016) and, particularly, avoiding the circular practice, whereby the construct of proficiency is defined by the measures of proficiency (e.g., Lantolf & Frawley, 1988). Rather, selection of the measure of proficiency should be related to the a priori conceptualization of the construct of proficiency, and the nature of the links between concept and operationalization should be made explicit.…”

“…From a theoretical perspective, among the most prominent critiques is the underdeveloped theoretical conceptualizations of proficiency that underlie proficiency assessments. As proficiency assessment has developed in tandem or ahead of theoretical conceptualizations of proficiency, some have argued that the conceptualization of proficiency is determined by existing proficiency assessment methods, rather than the other way around (e.g., Lantolf & Frawley, 1988), leading to questions about construct validity. Similarly, Menke and Malovrh (2021) highlight the fact that little empirical research has linked proficiency levels and assessments directly with well-documented developmental sequences (Hyltenstam, 2016), although such research is now beginning to emerge (for a review see Menke and Malovrh, 2021).…”

Teachers’ Strategies in Providing Scaffolding in English for Young Learners Classroom

“…Those interrelated areas, however, could not determine an objective measure of teachers' proficiency in the target language. In line with the statement, Lantolf and Frawley (1988) stated that it is difficult to construe proficiency as it is an open system, for that reason proficiency is also difficult to measure. Therefore, to decide whether or not one teacher is proficient relies upon the way this multifaceted construct is construed (Pasternak and Bailey, 2004).…”

“I don't know how to use words in Spanish”: Rosetta Stone and Learner Proficiency Outcomes

“…However, nowhere does the company define what learning a language truly entails. To be sure, the concept of language proficiency itself is notoriously difficult to define (e.g., Lantolf, ) and even more difficult to assess (e.g., Bachman, ; Bachman & Savignon, ; Lantolf & Frawley, ), but it remains the gold standard in language teaching and learning, and as educators and researchers we continue to strive for this goal. We tacitly understand that proficiency entails not just knowing words, phrases, and verb conjugations, but being able to put those together to form coherent meaning and to use that meaning appropriately to engage in real or realistic communication with other speakers of the language.…”