Testing Aptitude for Second Language Learning
- PDF / 129,416 Bytes
- 14 Pages / 439.37 x 663.307 pts Page_size
- 77 Downloads / 207 Views
TESTING APTITUDE FOR SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING
INTRODUCTION
In the past, second language (L2) aptitude research was conducted largely to better the placement and selection processes utilized by governmental language programs. Today, L2 aptitude is also assessed to diagnose and treat L2 learning problems (Ganschow, Sparks, and Javorsky, 1998; Sparks and Ganschow, 2001), to inform curricular design (Robinson, 2007; Sawyer and Ranta, 2001), and to see how other cognitive factors, such as working memory, which were not identified or assessed by earlier aptitude tests, are related to L2 learning (Erlam, 2005; Miyake and Friedman, 1998). Underlying this expanded research agenda is the understanding of the differences and similarities between general aptitude (intelligence) and specific components (or factors) of aptitude for language learning (Gardner and Lambert, 1965; Wesche, Edwards, and Wells, 1982; see also Dörnyei, 2005, pp. 45–47 for a recent discussion on L2 aptitude and intelligence). Although the exact nature of these factors is a current subject of theoretical and empirical debate, researchers agree that L2 aptitude is a subset of the cognitive abilities that are related to general intelligence, and that it is a key component of L2 learning success. There is also a current desire to understand L2 aptitude in terms of current communicative, task-based instructional contexts. H I S T O R I C A L O V E RV I E W
Since the 1950s, linguists have used L2 aptitude tests to predict success in the foreign language classroom (Carroll, 1981). The Modern Language Aptitude Test (MLAT, Carroll and Sapon, 1959), one of the tests first developed for such purposes, is still in use today (Carroll, 1981; Skehan, 1998, 2002). The MLAT, developed through a grant from the Carnegie Corporation, has been called the “benchmark test of FL aptitude” against which new measures must be compared (Grigorenko, Sternberg, and Ehrman, 2000, p. 397). It consists of a selection of 5 weakly-to-moderately intercorrelated test parts (out of 30 that were trialed) that were shown, through factor analyses, to predict L2 learning relatively well. Carroll concluded that there were four components of E. Shohamy and N. H. Hornberger (eds), Encyclopedia of Language and Education, 2nd Edition, Volume 7: Language Testing and Assessment, 81–94. #2008 Springer Science+Business Media LLC.
82
C H A R L E S S TA N S F I E L D A N D PA U L A W I N K E
language aptitude: phonetic coding ability, grammatical sensitivity, rote memory, and inductive language learning ability. Carroll’s MLAT does not directly test the fourth component, inductive language learning ability, because adding another part would make the overall test too lengthy, while the increase in predictive validity would be minimal. Carroll’s contributions to a theory of language aptitude were seminal and laid the foundation upon which current aptitude research can build, although there is a desire among researchers to revisit the long-standing construct of aptitude as defined by Carroll and to take a
Data Loading...
