Assessment of fluency in the Test of English for Educational Purposes

IF 2.2 1区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Language Testing Pub Date : 2023-03-13 DOI:10.1177/02655322231151384
P. Tavakoli, Gill Kendon, Svetlana Mazhurnaya, A. Ziomek
{"title":"Assessment of fluency in the Test of English for Educational Purposes","authors":"P. Tavakoli, Gill Kendon, Svetlana Mazhurnaya, A. Ziomek","doi":"10.1177/02655322231151384","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The main aim of this study was to investigate how oral fluency is assessed across different levels of proficiency in the Test of English for Educational Purposes (TEEP). Working with data from 56 test-takers performing a monologic task at a range of proficiency levels (equivalent to approximately levels 5.0, 5.5, 6.5, and 7.5 in the IELTS scoring system), we used PRAAT analysis to measure speed, breakdown, and repair fluency. A multivariate analysis of variance and a series of analyses of variance were used to examine the differences between fluency measures at these different levels of proficiency. The results largely replicate previous research in this area suggesting that (a) speed measures distinguish between lower levels (5.0 and 5.5) and higher levels of proficiency (6.5 and 7.5), (b) breakdown measures of silent pauses distinguish between 5.0 and higher levels of 6.5 or 7.5, and (c) repair measures and filled pauses do not distinguish between any of the proficiency levels. Using the results, we have proposed changes that can help refine the fluency rating descriptors and rater training materials in the TEEP.","PeriodicalId":17928,"journal":{"name":"Language Testing","volume":"40 1","pages":"607 - 629"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Language Testing","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02655322231151384","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The main aim of this study was to investigate how oral fluency is assessed across different levels of proficiency in the Test of English for Educational Purposes (TEEP). Working with data from 56 test-takers performing a monologic task at a range of proficiency levels (equivalent to approximately levels 5.0, 5.5, 6.5, and 7.5 in the IELTS scoring system), we used PRAAT analysis to measure speed, breakdown, and repair fluency. A multivariate analysis of variance and a series of analyses of variance were used to examine the differences between fluency measures at these different levels of proficiency. The results largely replicate previous research in this area suggesting that (a) speed measures distinguish between lower levels (5.0 and 5.5) and higher levels of proficiency (6.5 and 7.5), (b) breakdown measures of silent pauses distinguish between 5.0 and higher levels of 6.5 or 7.5, and (c) repair measures and filled pauses do not distinguish between any of the proficiency levels. Using the results, we have proposed changes that can help refine the fluency rating descriptors and rater training materials in the TEEP.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
教育英语测试的流利性评估
本研究的主要目的是调查在教育英语测试(TEEP)中,口语流利度是如何在不同水平的熟练程度中进行评估的。研究了56名考生在熟练程度范围内(大约相当于雅思评分系统中的5.0、5.5、6.5和7.5级)执行单一任务的数据,我们使用PRAAT分析来测量速度、故障和修复流畅性。多变量方差分析和一系列方差分析被用来检验这些不同熟练程度的流利度测量之间的差异。结果在很大程度上重复了该领域先前的研究,表明(a)速度测量区分较低水平(5.0和5.5)和较高水平(6.5和7.5),(b)沉默停顿的故障测量区分5.0和更高水平(6.5或7.5),以及(c)修复措施和填充停顿不区分任何熟练程度。利用这些结果,我们提出了一些改进建议,可以帮助改进TEEP中的流利度评分描述符和评分培训材料。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Language Testing
Language Testing Multiple-
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
9.80%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: Language Testing is a fully peer reviewed international journal that publishes original research and review articles on language testing and assessment. It provides a forum for the exchange of ideas and information between people working in the fields of first and second language testing and assessment. This includes researchers and practitioners in EFL and ESL testing, and assessment in child language acquisition and language pathology. In addition, special attention is focused on issues of testing theory, experimental investigations, and the following up of practical implications.
期刊最新文献
Can language test providers do more to support open science? A response to Winke Considerations to promote and accelerate Open Science: A response to Winke Evaluating the impact of nonverbal behavior on language ability ratings Sharing, collaborating, and building trust: How Open Science advances language testing Open Science in language assessment research contexts: A reply to Winke
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1