scholarly journals Evaluating Language Assessments From an Ethics Perspective: Suggestions for a New Agenda

JLTA Journal ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (0) ◽  
pp. 3-13
Author(s):  
Antony John KUNNAN
Keyword(s):  
Language Assessments

The Mediating Effect of Language on the Development of Cognitive and Affective Theory of Mind

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Felicity J Bigelow ◽  
Gillian M Clark ◽  
Jarrad Lum ◽  
Peter Gregory Enticott
Keyword(s):  
Theory Of Mind ◽  
Social Functioning ◽  
Middle Childhood ◽  
Cognitive Empathy ◽  
Mediating Effect ◽  
Language Abilities ◽  
Language Assessments ◽  
Empathic Ability ◽  
The Relationship

Theory of mind (ToM) development is critical to effective social functioning and appears to depend on complementary language abilities. The current study explored the mediating influence of language on the development of cognitive and affective ToM. 151 children aged between 5-12 years completed ToM (cognitive and affective) and language assessments, and parents provided ratings of their child’s empathic ability. Results showed that language mediated the relationship between age and both cognitive and affective ToM, but not parent-reported cognitive empathy. Examination of younger and older subgroups revealed that language mediated cognitive and affective ToM differently across developmental periods. Findings highlight the dynamic role that language plays in the development of both cognitive and affective ToM throughout early and middle childhood.

Programming language assessments using the program profiles

1985 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 80-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivan Sklenar
Keyword(s):  
Programming Language ◽  
Language Assessments

Developing individualized feedback for listening assessment: Combining standard setting and cognitive diagnostic assessment approaches

2021 ◽  
pp. 026553222199547
Author(s):  
Shangchao Min ◽  
Lianzhen He
Keyword(s):  
Large Scale ◽  
Standard Setting ◽  
Diagnostic Assessment ◽  
Efl Learners ◽  
Cognitive Diagnostic Assessment ◽  
Item Level ◽  
Language Assessments ◽  
Individualized Feedback ◽  
Proficiency Classifications ◽  
Acceptable Reliability

In this study, we present the development of individualized feedback for a large-scale listening assessment by combining standard setting and cognitive diagnostic assessment (CDA) approaches. We used the performance data from 3358 students’ item-level responses to a field test of a national EFL test primarily intended for tertiary-level EFL learners. The results showed that proficiency classifications and subskill mastery classifications were generally of acceptable reliability, and the two kinds of classifications were in alignment with each other at individual and group levels. The outcome of the study is a set of descriptors that describe each test taker’s ability to understand certain level of oral texts and his or her cognitive performance. The current study, by illustrating the feasibility of combining standard setting and CDA approaches to produce individualized feedback, contributes to the enhancement of score reporting and addresses the long-standing criticism that large-scale language assessments fail to provide individualized feedback to link assessment with instruction.

The Relationship Between Oral Language and Reading in English-Only, Proficient Bilingual, and Emergent Bilingual Adolescents

2019 ◽  
pp. 112-132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Becky H. Huang
Keyword(s):  
Language Proficiency ◽  
Oral Language ◽  
English Language ◽  
English Language Proficiency ◽  
Emergent Bilinguals ◽  
English Only ◽  
Adolescent Groups ◽  
Language Assessments ◽  
Reading Measures ◽  
The Relationship

The chapter examined the English language and reading outcomes and the relationship between language and reading for two bilingual adolescent groups (Proficient Bilinguals and Emergent Bilinguals) and their English-only peers (n = 78 total). Participants completed a variety of English language assessments, and their scores from a standardized accountability reading assessment were collected from their teachers. Results from the study showed that Proficient Bilinguals performed comparably to their English-only peers in all language and reading measures, suggesting that simply being bilingual does not detract from adolescents' English language proficiency. Furthermore, the relationships between oral language and reading differed as a function of participants' English language proficiency. Oral language skills correlated with reading for both bilinguals and English-only adolescents, but the relationships were more robust for bilinguals than for English-only adolescents. Finally, the relationship between speech production and reading was significantly only for Emergent Bilinguals and not for Proficient Bilinguals.

Discussion of Issues Related to Score Use and Interpretation of First Spoken and Signed Language Assessments

2021 ◽  
pp. 75-84
Author(s):  
Patrick Boudreault ◽  
Bernard Camilleri ◽  
Charlotte Enns
Keyword(s):  
Normative Data ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
First Language ◽  
Standardized Assessments ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
Target Populations ◽  
Signed Language ◽  
Heterogenous Group ◽  
Language Assessments ◽  
The Difference

A standardized assessment of spoken languages will collect data from native, monolingual speakers, thus establishing the range of receptive and/or expressive abilities of children across different ages. Similarly, normative data for standardized assessments of signed language are established by collecting data from native signing deaf children. Where the difference arises is the way in which the normative data relate to the target populations and the individuals within those populations who are being assessed. While standardized assessments of spoken language are normed on and predominantly intended for use with native speakers of that language, standardized assessments of signed language are intrinsically designed for use with a heterogenous group of children, of whom only a minority have the opportunity of learning signed language as their native language. In this chapter, key items related to score use and interpretation in first language (L1) assessment that were presented in Chapters 2.1 and 2.2 will be jointly discussed by the authors.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document