Learner Perceptions of Construct-Centered Feedback on Oral Proficiency
Oral proficiency assessments typically elicit performances that may serve as the basis for an evaluation of proficiency but may also be used as the basis for more elaborate, learning-oriented feedback that can be useful to learners and teachers. In this c
- PDF / 377,578 Bytes
- 16 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 65 Downloads / 162 Views
Learner Perceptions of Construct-Centered Feedback on Oral Proficiency Jonathan Schmidgall
Abstract Oral proficiency assessments typically elicit performances that may serve as the basis for an evaluation of proficiency but may also be used as the basis for more elaborate, learning-oriented feedback that can be useful to learners and teachers. In this chapter, I discuss how descriptive comments from raters may be used to provide detailed feedback using a construct-centered approach: explicitly aligned with a relevant conceptualization of oral proficiency and reflecting different levels and dimensions of performance. I report the results of a small-scale study of learners’ perceptions of construct-centered feedback in the context of high-stakes oral proficiency assessment for international teaching assistants, and conclude with a discussion of how the construct-centered approach to feedback may be used by teachers to complement other approaches to feedback.
Introduction In this chapter, I focus on two issues that are major parts in Lyle Bachman’s work: the centrality and nature of the construct, and the consequences of test use (e.g., Bachman, 2007, 2013). Bachman’s work has consistently emphasized the importance of construct definition and the central role of the construct in test development and validation (e.g., Bachman, 1990, 1991, 2000, 2007, 2014; Bachman & Palmer, 1981, 1996, 2010). In his treatise on the history of approaches to construct definition in language assessment, Bachman (2007) differentiates two traditional focuses (ability/trait, and task/content) which gave rise to a third (interactionalist). The ability/trait focus emphasizes underlying language ability (or components thereof) while the task/content focus emphasizes contextual aspects of language performance (e.g., performance on specific tasks). The interactionalist focus, which can be further parsed into strong, moderate, and minimalist stances, combines both traditional focuses by emphasizing ability-in-context. One’s approach to defining the construct is critical because it has implications for assessment design and score interpretations, J. Schmidgall (B) Educational Testing Service, Princeton, NJ, USA e-mail: [email protected] © Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020 G. J. Ockey and B. A. Green (eds.), Another Generation of Fundamental Considerations in Language Assessment, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-8952-2_5
59
60
J. Schmidgall
and consequently, the use and impact of assessments (Bachman & Palmer, 2010). For example, for the use of an assessment to have a positive impact on teaching and learning, the construct should be defined and operationalized (i.e., implemented into scoring rubric and processes and task design) in a manner that promotes the good instructional practice and effective learning (Bachman & Palmer, 2010). In this study, I draw upon an interaction-focused approach to construct definition that emphasizes the language skills and abilities needed for a particular target language use domain, and a considerati
Data Loading...
