Performance of 2D versus 3D Topographic Representations for Different Task Types

AbstractThe study of pragmatic competence has gained increasing importance within second language assessment over the last three decades. However, its study in L2 language testing is still scarce. The aim of this paper is to research the extent to which pragmatic competence as defined by the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) has been accommodated in the task descriptions and rating scales of two of the most popular Oral Proficiency Interviews (OPIs) at a C1 level: Cambridge’s Certificate in Advanced English (CAE) and Trinity’s Integrated Skills in English (ISE) III. To carry out this research, OPI tests are first defined, highlighting their differences from L2 pragmatic tests. After pragmatic competence in the CEFR is examined, focusing on the updates in the new descriptors, CAE and ISE III formats, structure and task characteristics are compared, showing that, while the formats and some characteristics are found to differ, the structures and task types are comparable. Finally, we systematically analyse CEFR pragmatic competence in the task skills and rating scale descriptors of both OPIs. The findings show that the task descriptions incorporate mostly aspects of discourse and design competence. Additionally, we find that each OPI is seen to prioritise different aspects of pragmatic competence within their rating scale, with CAE focusing mostly on discourse competence and fluency, and ISE III on functional competence. Our study shows that the tests fail to fully accommodate all aspects of pragmatic competence in the task skills and rating scales, although the aspects they do incorporate follow the CEFR descriptors on pragmatic competence. It also reveals a mismatch between the task competences being tested and the rating scale. To conclude, some research lines are proposed.

Download Full-text

Pedagogical conditions of the development of language teachers’ professional communicative skills of written feedback

Tambov University Review Series Humanities ◽

10.20310/1810-0201-2020-25-189-48-57 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 48-57

Author(s):

Tatiana A. Ershova

Keyword(s):

Language Proficiency ◽

Language Teachers ◽

Written Feedback ◽

Structural Elements ◽

Communicative Skills ◽

Course Content ◽

Proficiency Level ◽

Structural Content ◽

Development Of Language ◽

Task Types

The concept of ‘‘written pedagogical feedback’’ is analyzed, its types are singled out. Four pedagogical conditions for the development of future language teachers’ professional com-municative skills of written feedback are singled out. The first pedagogical condition is the clear structure of the course content. This condition is formulated based on the didactic principle of modularity of the structural content of education. The structure of the course content aimed at the development of language teachers’ professional communicative skills of written feedback is outlined. The course content consists of three structural elements, each of them being broken down into component parts. The second pedagogical condition is the implementation of the principle of reliance on intersubject connections. The necessity of taking into account knowledge, skills, abilities and experience acquired by students in the course of study within the discipline ‘‘Foreign language’’ and disciplines of their professional cycle is explained. The third pedagogical condition is students’ language proficiency level being developed at B2 level according to Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) or higher. To formulate this condition, the analysis of ten CEFR scales with the skills which underlie the process of giving students written feedback after assessing their written works was carried out. The fourth pedagogical condition is the use of mono- and polyfunctional communicative tasks. The terms ‘‘exercise’’ and ‘‘task’’ in language teaching are analyzed, the task types that can be used to develop future teachers’ professional communicative skills of written feedback are identified.

Download Full-text

Predicting Patterns of Grammatical Complexity Across Language Exam Task Types and Proficiency Levels

Applied Linguistics ◽

10.1093/applin/amu059 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 37 (5) ◽

pp. 639-668 ◽

Cited By ~ 45

Author(s):

Douglas Biber ◽

Bethany Gray ◽

Shelley Staples

Keyword(s):

Proficiency Levels ◽

Grammatical Complexity ◽

Task Types

Download Full-text

Vocabulary usage among Asian EFL learners during speech: a corpus-based quantitative analysis of the effects of L1 type, L2 proficiency and task type

PSU Research Review ◽

10.1108/prr-01-2021-0003 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽

Author(s):

Shin'ichiro Ishikawa

Keyword(s):

Native Speaker ◽

Structural Complexity ◽

Task Type ◽

Sentence Length ◽

L2 Proficiency ◽

Content Type ◽

Efl Learners ◽

Novice Learners ◽

Type D ◽

Task Types

PurposeUsing a newly compiled corpus module consisting of utterances from Asian learners during L2 English interviews, this study examined how Asian EFL learners' L1s (Chinese, Indonesian, Japanese, Korean, Taiwanese and Thai), their L2 proficiency levels (A2, B1 low, B1 upper and B2+) and speech task types (picture descriptions, roleplays and QA-based conversations) affected four aspects of vocabulary usage (number of tokens, standardized type/token ratio, mean word length and mean sentence length).Design/methodology/approachFour aspects concern speech fluency, lexical richness, lexical complexity and structural complexity, respectively.FindingsSubsequent corpus-based quantitative data analyses revealed that (1) learner/native speaker differences existed during the conversation and roleplay tasks in terms of the number of tokens, type/token ratio and sentence length; (2) an L1 group effect existed in all three task types in terms of the number of tokens and sentence length; (3) an L2 proficiency effect existed in all three task types in terms of the number of tokens, type-token ratio and sentence length; and (4) the usage of high-frequency vocabulary was influenced more strongly by the task type and it was classified into four types: Type A vocabulary for grammar control, Type B vocabulary for speech maintenance, Type C vocabulary for negotiation and persuasion and Type D vocabulary for novice learners.Originality/valueThese findings provide clues for better understanding L2 English vocabulary usage among Asian learners during speech.

Download Full-text