Construct in Assessments of Signed Language

2021 ◽  
pp. 251-260
Author(s):  
Tobias Haug
Keyword(s):  
Adult Learners ◽  
Language Assessment ◽  
Vocabulary Knowledge ◽  
Language Test ◽  
Language Tests ◽  
Signed Language

Descriptions of test constructs in second signed language assessment, such as vocabulary knowledge, are rare and far from receiving the attention by the field of signed language test research that they deserves. Detailing the construct in second signed language assessment poses a challenge for obvious reasons: only very few published studies on signed language tests for adult learners are available, and none of them focuses on construct-related issues. Equally, there is a shortage of operationally used test instruments accessible for review. In this chapter, published studies on second signed language assessment will be reviewed, focusing specifically on construct representation; tests that are used for hiring and promotion are discussed and an example of how to define the construct for a signed language test is discussed.

scholarly journals The Russian Language Test: Towards Assessing Text Comprehension

2019 ◽  
pp. 231-247
Author(s):  
Kathryn McCarthy ◽  
Danielle McNamara ◽  
Marina Solnyshkina ◽  
Fanuza Tarasova ◽  
Roman Kupriyanov
Keyword(s):  
Language Proficiency ◽  
Text Comprehension ◽  
Main Idea ◽  
Initial Study ◽  
Russian Language ◽  
Vocabulary Knowledge ◽  
Language Test ◽  
Text Quality ◽  
Language Tests ◽  
The Russian Language

Reading comprehension relies on a variety of complex skills that are not effectively assessed by existing Russian language tests. At the same time, Russian textbooks are criticized both for their low text quality and high text complexity. This study addresses issues of Russian language proficiency and comprehension assessment with the development of the Russian Language Test (RLT). The RLT was constructed to measure proficiency relevant to textbook comprehension, such as grammar and vocabulary knowledge, establishing propositional meaning and inferencing. Results from this initial study including 81 fifth-grade and 94 ninth-grade students confirm that students struggle with grammatical inferences and identifying the main idea in a text. Additionally, three standardized Russian exams, VPR, OGE, EGE are analyzed, affording an overview of the testing system for the Russian language from the elementary through high school education levels. This study demonstrates promise for the use of the RLT as a language proficiency assessment and provides a broad context for understanding the current state of Russian language tests for native speakers.

Introduction

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Tobias Haug ◽  
Wolfgang Mann ◽  
Ute Knoch
Keyword(s):  
Adult Learners ◽  
Language Assessment ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
Young Learners ◽  
Signed Language ◽  
Insight Into

The first part of this chapter provides an overview of how the idea of this edited volume on spoken and signed language assessment came about. The chapter also gives an insight into the different histories of spoken and signed language assessment and test research with their different backgrounds and contexts. It shows that very little interaction between signed and spoken language assessment communities exist so far. The second part of this chapter outlines the structure and the 12 themes that are addressed in this volume. While themes 1–6 focus one the assessment of young learners, the themes 7–12 focus on the assessment of adult learners....

Discussion of Issues Related to Spoken and Signed Language Test Design for L1 Children

2021 ◽  
pp. 41-48
Author(s):  
Shula Chiat ◽  
Rosalind Herman ◽  
Katherine Rowley ◽  
Penny Roy
Keyword(s):  
Critical Reflection ◽  
Language Assessment ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
Test Design ◽  
Specific Recommendation ◽  
Language Experience ◽  
Language Abilities ◽  
Language Tests ◽  
Signed Language ◽  
The Common

This chapter is a joint discussion of key items related to the development of spoken language tests (Chapter 1.1) and signed language tests (Chapter 1.2) for L1 children and the ways in which they have been addressed. We highlight the common issues and challenges in spoken and signed language assessment as well as the differences, e.g., availability of tests. In so doing, we consider how experience with spoken language assessment—for example, the development of methods for assessing language abilities that are independent of language experience—may inform test development in signed language. We also consider how awareness of issues in signed language assessment may increase awareness of similar issues that are easily overlooked in spoken language assessment—for example, the range of communication contexts and partners that children regularly encounter—and stimulate critical reflection on the use of language tests in general. One specific recommendation the chapter has for developers of signed language tests in the future is to consider areas that are unique to signed communication and critical to signing children’s language development.

Language Assessment Literacy in Second Signed Language Assessment Contexts

2021 ◽  
pp. 383-393
Author(s):  
Eveline Boers-Visker ◽  
Annemiek Hammer
Keyword(s):  
Sign Language ◽  
Language Proficiency ◽  
First Language ◽  
Language Assessment ◽  
Special Focus ◽  
Language Programs ◽  
Language Tests ◽  
Signed Language ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Language Assessments

There are growing numbers of students who enroll sign language programs. Most of them are hearing students whose first language is in the aural-oral modality. Learning signed language challenges them to communicate via the visual-manual modality; a process that is known to be demanding (Kemp, 1998). Therefore, in instruction it is essential to monitor this process by means of effective and efficient assessment (Miller et al., 2008). Rather remarkably, there are only a few tests developed to assess students’ proficiency in sign language. This implies that most instructors, who are involved in sign language teaching, have to develop tests and assessments themselves. Complicating factor, however, is that most instructors are not specifically trained on this topic, i.e. their knowledge and skills to evaluate or design language tests is limited. In this chapter, we will bring issues to view that are involved with the design of sign language assessments. Sign language proficiency can be broken down into two components: the visual receptive and manual expressive component. The assessment of these components will be discussed in the context of validity, reliability, authenticity, impact and practicality. We aim to provide a comprehensive matrix of issues in test design, with special focus on the pitfalls one may encounter in using or developing sign language tests for production as well as receptive skills. The matrix is a first attempt to provide a knowledge base on sign language assessment that might be helpful for instructors to become more literate on the subject matter.

Language Test Content

1983 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert E. Owens ◽  
Martha J. Haney ◽  
Virginia E. Giesow ◽  
Lisa F. Dooley ◽  
Richard J. Kelly
Keyword(s):  
Test Item ◽  
Language Assessment ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Language Test ◽  
Speech Language Pathologists ◽  
Diagnostic Aid ◽  
Item Content

This paper examines the test item content of several language assessment tools. A comparison of test breadth and depth is presented. The resultant information provides a diagnostic aid for school speech-language pathologists.

Nonword Repetition and Child Language Impairment

1998 ◽  
Vol 41 (5) ◽  
pp. 1136-1146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Dollaghan ◽  
Thomas F. Campbell
Keyword(s):  
Language Impairment ◽  
Language Intervention ◽  
Nonword Repetition ◽  
School Age Children ◽  
Language Test ◽  
Likelihood Ratios ◽  
Language Tests ◽  
Traditional Language ◽  
High Degree ◽  
Repetition Task

A brief, processing-dependent, nonword repetition task, designed to minimize biases associated with traditional language tests, was investigated. In Study 1, no overlap in nonword repetition performance was found between a group of 20 school-age children enrolled in language intervention (LI) and a group of 20 age-matched peers developing language normally (LN). In Study 2, a comparison of likelihood ratios for the nonword repetition task and for a traditional language test revealed that nonword repetition distinguished between children independently identified as LI and LN with a high degree of accuracy, by contrast with the traditional language test. Nonword repetition may have considerable clinical utility as a screening measure for language impairment in children. Information on the likelihood ratios associated with all diagnostic tests of language is badly needed.

Language Tests, Language Policy, and Citizenship

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kellie Frost ◽  
Tim McNamara
Keyword(s):  
Immigration Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Language Test ◽  
Immigrant Communities ◽  
Language Tests ◽  
Highly Skilled Migrants ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Changing Role ◽  
Significant Attention

The role of language tests in immigration policy has attracted significant attention in recent years as the disruptive effects of globalisation are felt. Much of the research has focused on the situation in Europe, where societies that were traditionally not countries of immigration now have significant and increasing immigrant communities. Less attention has been paid to countries of immigration such as Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States, which have sometimes encouraged immigration and have found it easier to embrace various forms of multiculturalism, despite some inevitable tensions. This chapter provides an account of the complex and rapidly changing role that language test scores have played in immigration policies favouring highly skilled migrants in Australia, and draws on Foucault’s discussion of the function of examinations to explore the impact of these changes on the lives of individuals subjected to the policies.

The Handbook of Language Assessment Across Modalities

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Assessment ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
Assessment Literacy ◽  
Signed Language ◽  
Key Issues ◽  
Relevant Field ◽  
The Common ◽  
New Perspective ◽  
First Time

In Language Assessment Across Modalities: Paired-Papers on Signed and Spoken Language Assessment, volume editors Tobias Haug, Wolfgang Mann, and Ute Knoch bring together—for the first time—researchers, clinicians, and practitioners from two different fields: signed language and spoken language. The volume examines theoretical and practical issues related to 12 topics ranging from test development and language assessment of bi-/multilingual learners to construct issues of second-language assessment (including the Common European Framework of Reference [CEFR]) and language assessment literacy in second-language assessment contexts. Each topic is addressed separately for spoken and signed language by experts from the relevant field. This is followed by a joint discussion in which the chapter authors highlight key issues in each field and their possible implications for the other field. What makes this volume unique is that it is the first of its kind to bring experts from signed and spoken language assessment to the same table. The dialogues that result from this collaboration not only help to establish a shared appreciation and understanding of challenges experienced in the new field of signed language assessment but also breathes new life into and provides a new perspective on some of the issues that have occupied the field of spoken language assessment for decades. It is hoped that this will open the door to new and exciting cross-disciplinary collaborations.

Discussion of Issues Related to Assessment of Signed or Spoken Language Development in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder

2021 ◽  
pp. 145-152
Author(s):  
Amy Kissel Frisbie ◽  
Aaron Shield ◽  
Deborah Mood ◽  
Nicole Salamy ◽  
Jonathan Henner
Keyword(s):  
Language Development ◽  
Developmental Disorders ◽  
Language Assessment ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
Autism Spectrum ◽  
Pragmatic Language ◽  
Signed Language ◽  
Pragmatic Language Skills ◽  
Language Assessments ◽  
Hearing Children

This chapter is a joint discussion of key items presented in Chapters 4.1 and 4.2 related to the assessment of deaf and hearing children on the autism spectrum . From these chapters it becomes apparent that a number of aspects associated with signed language assessment are relevant to spoken language assessment. For example, there are several precautions to bear in mind about language assessments obtained via an interpreter. Some of these precautions apply solely to D/HH children, while others are applicable to assessments with hearing children in multilingual contexts. Equally, there are some aspects of spoken language assessment that can be applied to signed language assessment. These include the importance of assessing pragmatic language skills, assessing multiple areas of language development, differentiating between ASD and other developmental disorders, and completing the language evaluation within a developmental framework. The authors conclude with suggestions for both spoken and signed language assessment.

Discussion on Scoring Issues in Second Signed or Spoken Language Assessment

2021 ◽  
pp. 329-332
Author(s):  
Tobias Haug ◽  
Ute Knoch ◽  
Wolfgang Mann
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Nonverbal Communication ◽  
Rasch Analysis ◽  
Language Assessment ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
Rater Training ◽  
Signed Language ◽  
Language Assessments ◽  
New Research

This chapter is a joint discussion of key items related to scoring issues related to signed and spoken language assessment that were discussed in Chapters 9.1 and 9.2. One aspect of signed language assessment that has the potential to stimulate new research in spoken second language (L2) assessment is the scoring of nonverbal speaker behaviors. This aspect is rarely represented in the scoring criteria of spoken assessments and in many cases not even available to raters during the scoring process. The authors argue, therefore, for a broadening of the construct of spoken language assessment to also include elements of nonverbal communication in the scoring descriptors. Additionally, the importance of rater training for signed language assessments, application of Rasch analysis to investigate possible reasons of disagreement between raters, and the need to conduct research on rasting scales are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document