Co-constructed interaction in a paired speaking test: The rater's perspective

The definition and operationalization of interactional competence in speaking tests that entail co-construction of discourse is an area of language testing requiring further research. This article explores the reactions of four trained raters to paired candidates who oriented to asymmetric patterns of interaction in a discussion task. Through an analysis of candidate discourse combined with rater notes, stimulated verbal recalls, rater discussions and scores awarded for interactional effectiveness, the article examines the extent to which raters compensate or penalize candidates for their role in co-constructing asymmetric interactional patterns. The article argues that key features of the interaction are perceived by the raters as mutual achievements, and it further suggests that the awarding of shared scores for interactional competence is one way of acknowledging the inherently co-constructed nature of interaction in a paired speaking test.

[1]  Janna Fox.  Biasing for the Best in Language Testing and Learning: An Interview With Merrill Swain , 2004 .

[2]  Merrill Swain,et al.  Examining dialogue: another approach to content specification and to validating inferences drawn from test scores , 2001 .

[3]  Carsten Roever,et al.  Language testing: The social dimension , 2006 .

[4]  Elinor Ochs,et al.  Co-Construction: An Introduction , 1995 .

[5]  Lianzhen He,et al.  A corpus-based investigation into the validity of the CET-SET group discussion , 2006 .

[6]  Cyril J. Weir,et al.  Language Testing and Validation , 2005 .

[7]  Jeff Connor-Linton,et al.  TALKING AND TESTING: DISCOURSE APPROACHES TO THE ASSESSMENT OF ORAL PROFICIENCY.Richard Young and Agnes Weiyun He (Eds.). Amsterdam: Benjamins, 1998. Pp. x + 395. NLG 138 cloth. , 2000, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[8]  Tom Lumley,et al.  The effect of interlocutor and assessment mode variables in overseas assessments of speaking skills in occupational I settings , 1997 .

[9]  Annie Brown,et al.  Interviewer style and candidate performance in the IELTS oral interview , 1998 .

[10]  Ildikó Csépes.  Measuring Oral Proficiency through Paired-Task Performance , 2009 .

[11]  J. Norton,et al.  The paired format in the Cambridge Speaking Tests , 2005 .

[12]  Michael C. Foot.  Relaxing in pairs , 1999 .

[13]  Tim McNamara,et al.  ‘Interaction’ in second language performance assessment: Whose performance?1 , 1997 .

[14]  L Taylor,et al.  THE PAIRED SPEAKING TEST FORMAT: RECENT STUDIES , 2001 .

[15]  Lyn May.  Assessment of oral proficiency in EAP programs : a case for pair interaction , 2000 .

[16]  K. Ikeda.  The Paired Learner Interview: A Preliminary Investigation Applying Vygotskian Insights , 1998 .

[17]  Annie Brown,et al.  Interviewer variation and the co-construction of speaking proficiency , 2003 .

[18]  Micheline Chalhoub-Deville,et al.  Second language interaction: current perspectives and future trends , 2003 .

[19]  P. Glover,et al.  Readers respond. Oral testing in pairs - secondary school perspective , 2001 .

[20]  Glenn Fulcher,et al.  Testing Second Language Speaking , 2003 .

[21]  Annie Brown,et al.  Interviewer Variability in Oral Proficiency Interviews , 2005 .

[22]  Claire J. Kramsch.  From Language Proficiency to Interactional Competence , 1986 .

[23]  Michael C. Foot.  Reply to Saville and Hargreaves. , 1999 .

[24]  T. McNamara.  Measuring Second Language Performance , 1996 .

[25]  D. Eignor,et al.  Speaking Framework: A Working Paper , 2000 .

[26]  N. Storch.  An investigation into the nature of pair work in an ESL classroom and its effect on grammatical development , 2001 .