Assessing Teachers' Language Proficiency

The question of what language skills and competence are required of teachers, in order to be able to deliver lesson content appropriately and effectively, has been the subject of considerable debate given the growing numbers of non-native teaching professionals employed in contexts where the medium of instruction is not their mother tongue. On the one hand, there is a view that a teacher should be native-like or have complete control of the language that is the medium of instruction, the object of instruction, or both; on the other hand, it is argued that teacher language proficiency standards should be defined in relation to the particular context of instruction and in light of what is realistic given available training resources. The chapter demonstrates how these competing views play out by reviewing a variety of models for assessing the language proficiency of teachers as operationalized in the USA, the UK, Australia, Hong Kong, Brazil, and elsewhere. The models range from those that characterize the teacher proficiency construct in general linguistic terms to others that conceive of it as context specific, and as hence requiring performance-based tasks and assessment criteria that mirror the target language use domain in very particular ways; for example, by requiring the test candidate to assume the role of the teacher when undertaking test tasks, or by assessing the teacher in the actual classroom situation. Contexts considered include higher education, with its demand for international teaching assistants capable of delivering high-level subject content in a manner that is intelligible and acceptable to students, and school foreign language classrooms, where metalinguistic knowledge or knowledge about the target language can be considered part of the assessment construct. The chapter also considers issues of policy surrounding the delivery of teacher language tests or assessments and their impact on educational systems. Keywords: Assessment methods; Classroom assessment; Language for specific purposes

[1]  P. Morris,et al.  Educational reform and policy implementation in Hong Kong , 2003 .

[2]  Sun Hee Kim,et al.  Language choices and pedagogic functions in the foreign language classroom: a cross-linguistic functional analysis of teacher talk , 2005 .

[3]  Catherine Elder,et al.  How do subject specialists construe classroom language proficiency? , 1993 .

[4]  C. Elder,et al.  Health Professionals' Views of Communication: Implications for Assessing Performance on a Health-Specific English Language Test. , 2012 .

[5]  Leo Van Lier,et al.  Reeling, Writhing, Drawling, Stretching, and Fainting in Coils: Oral Proficiency Interviews as Conversation , 1989 .

[6]  L. Grant.  Testing the language proficiency of bilingual teachers: Arizona's Spanish proficiency test , 1997 .

[7]  David Coniam,et al.  High-Stakes Testing and Assessment , 2007 .

[8]  James P. Lantolf,et al.  Oral‐Proficiency Testing: A Critical Analysis , 1985 .

[9]  Patricia A. Duff,et al.  How Much Foreign Language Is There in the Foreign Language Classroom , 1990 .

[10]  Lyle F. Bachman,et al.  The Evaluation of Communicative Language Proficiency: A Critique of the ACTFL Oral Interview , 1986 .

[11]  Kate Menken.  From policy to practice in the Multilingual Apple: bilingual education in New York City , 2011 .

[12]  Y. Butler.  What Level of English Proficiency Do Elementary School Teachers Need to Attain to Teach EFL? Case Studies from Korea, Taiwan, and Japan. , 2004 .

[13]  V. Cook,et al.  Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages , Inc . ( TESOL ) Going beyond the Native Speaker in Language Teaching , 2007 .

[14]  L. Shulman.  Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform , 1987 .

[15]  Michael D. Guerrero.  Spanish Academic Language Proficiency of Bilingual Education Teachers: Is There Equity? , 1999 .

[16]  E. Nemtchinova.  Host Teachers' Evaluations of Nonnative‐English‐Speaking Teacher Trainees—A Perspective from the Classroom , 2005 .

[17]  Carol Lynn Moder,et al.  Testing Language and Teaching Skills of International Teaching Assistants: The Limits of Compensatory Strategies. , 1995 .

[18]  Richard Cullen.  Incorporating a language improvement component in teacher training programmes , 1994 .

[19]  Stephen Andrews,et al.  Teacher Language Awareness and the Professional Knowledge Base of the L2 Teacher , 2003 .

[20]  C. Elder.  Assessing the language proficiency of teachers: are there any border controls? , 2001 .

[21]  Barbara J. Hoekje,et al.  Communicative Competence and the Dilemma of International Teaching Assistant Education. , 1992 .

[22]  Xiaoming Xi,et al.  INVESTIGATING THE CRITERION-RELATED VALIDITY OF THE TOEFL® SPEAKING SCORES FOR ITA SCREENING AND SETTING STANDARDS FOR ITAS , 2008 .

[23]  Jill C. Murray,et al.  Test candidates’ attitudes and their relationship to demographic and experiential variables: The case of overseas trained teachers in NSW, Australia , 2012 .

[24]  George Kamberelis.  Producing of Heteroglossic Classroom (Micro)cultures Through Hybrid Discourse Practice , 2001 .

[26]  David Coniam,et al.  Ten years on: The Hong Kong Language Proficiency Assessment for Teachers of English (LPATE) , 2013 .

[27]  W. Littlewood,et al.  First language and target language in the foreign language classroom , 2009, Language Teaching.

[28]  P. Glenwright.  Grammar Error Strike Hard: Language Proficiency Testing of Hong Kong Teachers and the Four "Noes" , 2005 .

[29]  C. Cobb,et al.  Verbal Ability and Teacher Effectiveness , 2005 .

[30]  Rafael Salaberry,et al.  Revising the revised format of the ACTFL Oral Proficiency Interview , 2000 .

[31]  Micheline Chalhoub-Deville,et al.  Theoretical models, assessment frameworks and test construction , 1997 .

[32]  T. Wright,et al.  Second language teacher education: Review of recent research on practice , 2010, Language Teaching.