This document discusses measures of oral and written language assessment. It describes assessing language competence by measuring comprehension, expression, phonology, semantics, morphology, syntax and pragmatics. Specific tests mentioned include the TOWL-4, TOLD-P:4, TOLD-I:4 and OWLS, which measure skills like vocabulary, spelling, sentence structure, and comprehension through subtests. The document outlines considerations for assessing oral versus written language and describes methods of language observation including spontaneous, imitation, and elicited responses.
21st century language and literacy assessment_DepEd UrdanetaGemz Baltazar
This is a discussion related to the reading program implemented at DepEd Urdaneta City-- the SCRIBE (Systematic and Comprehensive Reading Interventions in Building Excellence) Reading Program.
A Brief History on the Approaches to
Language Testing
In the 1950s, an era of behaviorism and special
attention to constrastive analysis, testing focused on
specific language elements such as the phonological,
grammatical, and lexical contrasts between two
languages.
Between the 1970s and 1980s, communicative theories
of language brought with them a more integrative view of
testing in which specialists claimed that the whole of
communicative event was considerably greater than the
sum of its linguistic element (Clark, 1983; Brown, 2004: 8)
Definition of Language Testing
According to Oller (1979, 1-2), a language testing is a
device that tries to assess how much has been learned
in a foreign language course, or some part of a course
by learners.
According to Brown (2004: 3), a language testing is a
method of measuring a person’s ability, knowledge, or
performance in a given domain.
It is an important part in English Language Teaching. It helps the teachers to make an effective test as well as to take the testing system to new height.
Types of tests: proficiency, achievement, diagnostic, placement
Types of testing: direct vs indirect tests, discrete point vs integrative tests, criterion-referenced vs norm-referenced tests, objective vs subjective tests
Language Testing Techniques:
Direct Testing vs. Indirect Testing
Discrete Testing vs. Integrative Testing
Norm-Referenced Testing vs. Criterion-Referenced Testing
Objective Testing vs. Subjective Testing
21st century language and literacy assessment_DepEd UrdanetaGemz Baltazar
This is a discussion related to the reading program implemented at DepEd Urdaneta City-- the SCRIBE (Systematic and Comprehensive Reading Interventions in Building Excellence) Reading Program.
A Brief History on the Approaches to
Language Testing
In the 1950s, an era of behaviorism and special
attention to constrastive analysis, testing focused on
specific language elements such as the phonological,
grammatical, and lexical contrasts between two
languages.
Between the 1970s and 1980s, communicative theories
of language brought with them a more integrative view of
testing in which specialists claimed that the whole of
communicative event was considerably greater than the
sum of its linguistic element (Clark, 1983; Brown, 2004: 8)
Definition of Language Testing
According to Oller (1979, 1-2), a language testing is a
device that tries to assess how much has been learned
in a foreign language course, or some part of a course
by learners.
According to Brown (2004: 3), a language testing is a
method of measuring a person’s ability, knowledge, or
performance in a given domain.
It is an important part in English Language Teaching. It helps the teachers to make an effective test as well as to take the testing system to new height.
Types of tests: proficiency, achievement, diagnostic, placement
Types of testing: direct vs indirect tests, discrete point vs integrative tests, criterion-referenced vs norm-referenced tests, objective vs subjective tests
Language Testing Techniques:
Direct Testing vs. Indirect Testing
Discrete Testing vs. Integrative Testing
Norm-Referenced Testing vs. Criterion-Referenced Testing
Objective Testing vs. Subjective Testing
Second Language Acquisition related to testing model in Finland, and its implications for designing future technology for innovative testing generations to come.
Exploring the Effect of the Self-Directed English Learning on the English Spe...engedukamall
Kim, J. (2014, September). Exploring the Effect of the Self-Directed English Learning on the English Speaking Test Scores of Korean College Students. Paper presented at the meeting of KAMALL Annual Conference 2014, Seoul, Korea.
[Abstract]
Most Korean adult learners of English desire to achieve a high level of
English speaking proficiency because they value communicative competence in
their various work places. To obtain this goal, Self-Directed English Learning
(SDEL) supported through multimedia has great potential to help English
learners manage their learning process. This presentation explored the effect
of the capability of Korean college students to utilize SDEL on their English
speaking proficiency. Both the English speaking test and the SDEL
Questionnaire were administered by means of computer and mobile
technologies.
At the beginning of the spring of 2014, 90 students responded to the
online SDEL Questionnaire at a university in Daejeon, Korea. They also took
the computer based English Speaking and Writing Test (ESWT). The pertinent
information of these participants is as follows: 37 males and 53 females, ages
ranging from 20 to 30 years old, all possessing diverse English levels, and all
of whom were TESOL majors.
The questionnaire was developed by means of the Google Docs survey.
The ten features of self-directedness are: (1) interpersonal ability, (2)
self-esteem, (3) self-confidence, (4) anxiety with English, (5) goals, (6)
motivation, (7) self-directedness, (8) information process ability, (9)
self-understanding, and (10) overall level. They were measured using seven
scales. Most students filled out the online questionnaire with their
smartphones. In addition, the learners were required to practice their English
speaking using two multimedia English programs. These were DynEd and
Reading Assistant. DynEd is a conversation program or application, while
Reading Assistant is an online read aloud program. The students were
required to study English with the speaking programs for up to 200 hours as part of their graduation requirement as stipulated by their department. The
seven scoring criteria of the ESWT include (1) task completion, (2) coherence,
(3) pronunciation, (4) fluency, (5) language use, (6) grammar, and (7) overall
scores. They were rated using five scales including 0.5 units. Two raters rated
the speech samples after receiving appropriate rater training. [....]
Vocabulary is one of the important aspects that need to be taken into account by English teachers. Even if you knew all about grammatical rules of English you would never be able to use them without a knowledge of words. Vocabulary is the basic tool for shaping and transmitting meaning (Olmos, 2009).
2. Assessing Language Competence
• When assessing language skills, it is important
to break language down into processes and
measure each one
– Language appears in written and verbal format
• Comprehension
• Expression
– Normal levels of comprehension ≠ normal
expression
– Normal levels of expression ≠ normal
comprehension
3. Terminology: Language as Code
• Phonology:
– Hearing and discriminating word sounds
• Semantics:
– Understanding vocabulary, meaning, and concepts
• Morphology and syntax:
– Understanding the grammatical structure of
language
• Supralinguistics and pragmatics:
– Understanding a speaker’s or writer’s intentions
4. Assessing Oral and Written Language
• Why?
– Ability to converse and express thoughts is desirable
– Basic oral and written language skills underlie higher-order
skills
• Considerations in assessing oral language
– Cultural diversity
• Differences in dialect are different, but not incorrect
– Disordered production of primary language or dialect should be
considered when evaluating oral language
• Are the norms and materials appropriate?
– Developmental considerations
• Be aware of development norms for language acquisition
5. Assessing Oral and Written Language
• Considerations in assessing written language
– Form and Content
• Penmanship
• Spelling
• Style
– May be best assessed by evaluating students’
written work and developing tests (vocabulary,
spelling, etc.) that parallel the curriculum
6. Methods for Observing Language
Behavior
• Spontaneous language
– Record what child says while talking to an adult or playing with
toys
– Prompts may be used for older children
– Analyze phonology, semantics, morphology, syntax, and
pragmatics
• Imitation
– Require children to repeat words, phrases, or sentences
produced by the examiner
– Valid predictor of spontaneous production
– Standardized imitation tasks often used in oral language
assessment instruments
• Elicited language
– A picture stimulus is used to elicit language
7. Methods for Observing Language
Behavior
Advantages and disadvantages of each method
Spontaneous
•Advantages
• Most natural indicator
of everyday language
performance
• Informal testing
environment
•Disadvantages
• Not a standardized
procedure (more
variability)
• Time-intensive
Imitation
•Advantages
• Comprehensive
• Structured and
efficient administration
•Disadvantages
• Auditory memory may
affect results
• Hard to draw
conclusions from
accurate imitations
• Boring for child
Elicited language
•Advantages
• Interesting and
efficient
• Comprehensive
•Disadvantages
• Difficult to create
valid
measurement
tools
8. Specific Oral and Written Language Tests
• Test of Written Language – Fourth Edition
(TOWL-4)
• Test of Language Development: Primary –
Fourth Edition (TOLD-P:4)
• Test of Language Development: Intermediate
– Fourth Edition (TOLD-I:4)
• Oral and Written Language Scales (OWLS)
9. Test of Written Language – Fourth
Edition (TOWL-4)
• General
– Norm-referenced
– Designed to assess written language competence
of students between the ages of 9 and 17
– Two formats
• Contrived
• Spontaneous
11. TOWL-4
• Scores
– Raw scores can be converted to percentile or
standard scores
– Three composite scores and one overall score
• Contrived writing
• Logical sentences
• Spontaneous writing
• Overall writing
12. TOWL-4
• Norms
– Three age ranges: 9-11, 12-14, and 15-17
– Distribution approximates nationwide school-age population for
2005; however, insufficient data are presented to confirm this
• Reliability
– Variable data for internal consistency, stability, and inter-scorer
agreement
– 2 composites reliable for making educational decisions about
students
• Validity
– Content, construct, and predictive validity evidence is presented
– Validity of inferences drawn from data is somewhat unclear
13. Test of Language Development:
Primary – Fourth Edition (TOLD-P:4)
• General
– Norm-referenced, untimed, individually
administered test
– 4-8 years of age
– Used to:
• Identify children significantly below their peers in oral
language
• Determine specific strengths and weaknesses
• Document progress in remedial programs
• Measure oral language in research studies
14. TOLD-P:4
• Subtests
– Picture vocabulary
– Relational vocabulary
– Oral vocabulary
– Syntactic understanding
– Sentence imitation
– Morphological completion
– Word discrimination
– Word analysis
– Word articulation
• Scores
– Raw scores converted to:
• Age equivalents, percentile
ranks, subtests scaled scores,
and composite scores
– Composite scores
• Listening
• Organizing
• Speaking
• Grammar
• Semantics
• Spoken language
15. TOLD-P:4
• Norm population
– 1,108 individuals across 4 geographic regions
– Sample partitioned according to the 2007 census
• Reliability
– Adequate estimates of reliability
• Coefficient alpha
• Test-retest
• Scorer difference
• Validity
– Adequate content, construct, and criterion-related
validity evidence
16. Test of Language Development:
Intermediate – Fourth Edition (TOLD-I:4)
• General
– Norm-referenced, untimed, individually
administered test
– 8-17 years of age
– Used to:
• Identify children significantly below their peers in oral
language
• Determine specific strengths and weaknesses
• Document progress in remedial programs
• Measure oral language in research studies
17. TOLD-I:4
• Subtests
– Sentence combining
– Picture vocabulary
– Word ordering
– Relational vocabulary
– Morphological
comprehension
– Multiple meanings
• Norm population
– 1,097 students from 4
geographic regions
– Sample partitioned according
to the 2007 census
• Scores
– Raw scores converted to:
• Age equivalents, percentile
ranks, subtests scaled scores,
and composite scores
– Composite scores
• Listening
• Organizing
• Speaking
• Grammar
• Semantics
• Spoken language
19. Oral and Written Language Scales
(OWLS)
• General
– Norm referenced, individually administered
assessment of receptive and expressive language
– 3-21 years of age
• Subtests
– Listening comprehension
– Oral expression
– Written expression
20. OWLS
• Norm population
– 1,985 students matched to 1991 census data
• Scores
– Raw scores converted to:
• Standard scores, age equivalents, normal-curve
equivalents, percentiles, and stanines
• Scores generated for each subtest, an oral language
composite, and for a written language composite
21. OWLS
• Reliability
– Sufficient internal and test-retest reliability for
screening, but not for making important decisions
about individual students
• Validity
– Adequate criterion-related validity