Recent Empirical Studies of Paired Speaking Assessment: A General Survey

Yunhui Gou

doi:10.54097/v6y0e040

Authors

Yunhui Gou Graduate School of Education, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19104, USA

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54097/v6y0e040

Keywords:

Paired Speaking Assessment, Interactional Competence, Language Testing, Rater Cognition, Interlocutor Proficiency, Literature Review

Abstract

This literature review surveys empirical research on paired speaking assessment published between April 2012 and April 2022, following a narrative review procedure. Seventeen empirical studies retrieved from the University of Pennsylvania Franklin Library were analyzed and organized into two thematic groups: sources of variability in paired assessment (interlocutor effects, rater effects, and planning time) and paired assessment in use (rating scales, practicality, and the interactional skills test-takers display). The review finds that interlocutor proficiency does not consistently predict overall test scores but is closely associated with asymmetric interactional patterns, that raters attend to both verbal and non-verbal co-constructed features when scoring, and that planning time has a limited effect on holistic scores while still shaping discourse features. The review also highlights an ongoing gap between the theoretical construct of interactional competence and its practical operationalization in classroom and large-scale testing contexts. Implications for future rating-scale development and rater training are discussed.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] Ginther, A. (2012). Assessment of speaking. The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics.

https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal0068

[2] Kramsch, C. (1986). From language proficiency to interactional competence. The Modern Language Journal, 70(4), 366–372.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1986.tb05249.x

[3] Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. B. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics (pp. 269–293). Penguin.

[4] Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1–47.

https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/1.1.1

[5] Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford University Press.

[6] Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice: Designing and developing useful language tests (Vol. 1). Oxford University Press.

[7] Sun, D. (2014). From communicative competence to interactional competence: A new outlook on the teaching of spoken English. Journal of Language Teaching & Research, 5(5). https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.5.5.24.

[8] He, A. W., & Young, R. (1998). Language proficiency interviews: A discourse approach. In R. Young & A. W. He (Eds.), Talking and testing: Discourse approaches to the assessment of oral proficiency (Vol. 14, pp. 1–24). John Benjamins.

[9] Young, R. F. (2011). Interactional competence in language learning, teaching, and testing. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 426–443). Routledge.

[10] McNamara, T. F. (1996). Measuring second language performance. Addison-Wesley Longman.

[11] Folland, D., & Robertson, D. (1976). Towards objectivity in group oral testing. English Language Teaching Journal, 30, 156–167. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/XXX.2.156.

[12] Foot, M. C. (1999). Relaxing in pairs. Cambridge ESOL.

[13] Ducasse, A. M., & Brown, A. (2009). Assessing paired orals: Raters' orientation to interaction. Language Testing, 26(3), 423–443. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532209104668.

[14] May, L. (2009, 2011). [Reference details not present in the original manuscript — please supply the full citation for this source.].

[15] Bonk, W. J., & Ockey, G. J. (2003). A many-facet Rasch analysis of the second language group oral discussion task. Language Testing, 20(1), 89–110.

https://doi.org/10.1191/0265532203lt245oa

[16] Brown, A., & McNamara, T. (2004). The devil is in the detail: Researching gender issues in language assessment. TESOL Quarterly, 38(3), 524–538. https://doi.org/10.2307/3588349.

[17] Norton, J. (2005). The paired format in the Cambridge speaking tests. ELT Journal, 59(4), 287–297.

https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/cci054

[18] O'Sullivan, B. (2002). Learner acquaintanceship and oral proficiency test pair-task performance. Language Testing, 19, 277–295. https://doi.org/10.1191/0265532202lt206oa.

[19] Berry, V. (2007). Personality differences and oral test performance. Peter Lang.

[20] Davis, L. (2009). The influence of interlocutor proficiency in a paired oral assessment. Language Testing, 26(3), 367–396. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532209104667.

[21] Nakatsuhara, F. (2006). The impact of proficiency level on conversational styles in paired speaking tests. Cambridge ESOL Research Notes, 25, 15–20.

[22] Cooper, H., Hedges, L. V., & Valentine, J. C. (2019). The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis. Russell Sage Foundation.

[23] Ahmadi, A. (2016). Assessing English language learners' oral performance: A comparison of monologue, interview, and group oral test. Language Assessment Quarterly, 13(4), 341–358. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2016.1216472.

[24] Nyroos, L., Sandlund, E., & Sundqvist, P. (2017). Code-switched repair initiation: The case of Swedish eller in L2 English test interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 120, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.08.008.

[25] Hüttner, J. (2014). Agreeing to disagree: 'Doing disagreement' in assessed oral L2 interactions. Classroom Discourse, 5(2), 194–215. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2014.912174.

[26] Galaczi, E., & Taylor, L. (2018). Interactional competence: Conceptualisations, operationalisations, and outstanding questions. Language Assessment Quarterly, 15(3), 219–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2018.1472776.

[27] Bennett, R. (2012). [Reference details not present in the original manuscript — please supply the full citation for this source.]

[28] Iwashita, N. (1999). The validity of the paired interview format in oral performance assessment. Melbourne Papers in Language Testing, 5(2), 51–66.

[29] Isaacs, T. (2013). International engineering graduate students' interactional patterns on a paired speaking test: Interlocutors' perspectives. In K. McDonough & A. Mackey (Eds.), Second language interaction in diverse educational settings (pp. 227–246). John Benjamins.

[30] Galaczi, E. D. (2008). [Reference details not present in the original manuscript — please supply the full citation for this source.]

[31] Hu, J. (2015). Interaction in assessment-oriented role play: A conversation analytic approach. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 38(4), 472–489. https://doi.org/10.1515/cjal-2015-0030.

[32] Artunç, E. K., & Hart, D. O. (2020). Interactional competence in paired speaking tests: A study on proficiency-based pairings. System, 89, 102194.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102194

[33] Ockey, G. J., & Chukharev-Hudilainen, E. (2021). Human versus computer partner in the paired oral discussion test. Applied Linguistics, 42(5), 924–944.

https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amab012

[34] Grubor, J. (2013). The construct of perceived L2 speaking proficiency in a paired testing format. Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics, 49(2), 185–203.

https://doi.org/10.2478/pscl-2013-0010

[35] Borger, L. (2019). Assessing interactional skills in a paired speaking test: Raters' interpretation of the construct. Apples – Journal of Applied Language Studies, 13(1), 151–174. https://doi.org/10.17011/apples/urn.nbn:se:su:diva-167453.

[36] Vo, S. (2021). Evaluating interactional competence in interview and paired discussion tasks: A rater cognition study. TESOL Journal, 12(2). https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.573.

[37] Sandlund, E., & Sundqvist, P. (2013). [Reference details not present in the original manuscript — please supply the full citation for this source.]

[38] Wang, H., & Song, F. (2015). Effects of strategic planning time on L2 paired oral test performance. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 38, 263–276. https://doi.org/10.1515/cjal-2015-0017.

[39] Nitta, R., & Nakatsuhara, F. (2014). A multifaceted approach to investigating pre-task planning effects on paired oral test performance. Language Testing, 31(2), 147–175.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532213514420

[40] Wang, L. (2015). Assessing interactional competence in second language paired speaking tasks (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Northern Arizona University.

[41] Ramazani, M., Behnam, B., & Ahangari, S. (2018). Psychometric characteristics of a rating scale for assessing interactional competence in paired-speaking tasks at micro-level. Journal of English Language Pedagogy and Practice, 11(23), 180–206.

[42] May, L., Nakatsuhara, F., Lam, D., & Galaczi, E. (2020). Developing tools for learning oriented assessment of interactional competence: Bridging theory and practice. Language Testing, 37(2), 165–188.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532219898092

[43] Ffrench, A. (2003). The change process at the paper level. Paper 5, speaking. In C. Weir & M. Milanovic (Eds.), Continuity and innovation: Revising the Cambridge proficiency in English examination 1913-2002 (pp. 367–471). Cambridge University Press.

[44] Becker, A., Matsugu, S., & Al-Surmi, M. (2017). Balancing practicality and construct representativeness for IEP speaking tests. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 2(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-017-0026-1.

[45] Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (2010). Language assessment in practice: Developing language assessments and justifying their use in the real world. Oxford University Press.

[46] East, M. (2015). Coming to terms with innovative high-stakes assessment practice: Teachers' viewpoints on assessment reform. Language Testing, 32(1), 101–120.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532214551646

[47] Galaczi, E. D. (2014). Interactional competence across proficiency levels: How do learners manage interaction in paired speaking tests? Applied Linguistics, 35(5), 553–574. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu011.

[48] Butler, Y. G., & Zeng, W. (2014). Young foreign language learners' interactions during task-based paired assessments. Language Assessment Quarterly, 11(1), 45–75.

https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2013.853060