第二语言流利度评估

IF 4 2区 文学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Parvaneh Tavakoli
{"title":"第二语言流利度评估","authors":"Parvaneh Tavakoli","doi":"10.1017/s0261444824000417","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Investigating speech fluency has, for a long time, been at the core of second language (L2) studies, as fluency is believed to epitomise successful acquisition of L2, characterise effective communication, elucidate the complex process of acquisition, and predict L2 speakers' proficiency. The significance attributed to fluency in these areas explicates the research attention paid to it over the past decades. An important area of development in this regard is L2 assessment in which fluency is recognised as a key underlying construct of spoken language ability by international language tests (e.g., IELTS, TEEP, APTIS) and language benchmarks (e.g., CEFR). Many high-stakes tests of English and other languages include fluency in their rating scales, with the earliest on record tracing back to the 1930s – the College Board's English Competence Examination (1930) in America. Including fluency as a fundamental aspect of speaking ability in the rating scales, rating descriptors, and rater training materials, either as an independent criterion or combined with others (e.g., delivery), has become common practice in language testing over the past decades. What has made assessment of fluency even more appealing to researchers and test providers in recent years is the objectivity and reliability of its measurement and its compatibility with the technological developments in automated assessment of speaking. Fluency is now largely recognised as a construct that can be efficiently and reliably assessed in automated assessment of spoken language ability and used to predict proficiency (de Jong, 2018*; Ginther et al., 2010*; Kang &amp; Johnson, 2021*; Tavakoli et al., 2023).</p>","PeriodicalId":47770,"journal":{"name":"Language Teaching","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment of second language fluency\",\"authors\":\"Parvaneh Tavakoli\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/s0261444824000417\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Investigating speech fluency has, for a long time, been at the core of second language (L2) studies, as fluency is believed to epitomise successful acquisition of L2, characterise effective communication, elucidate the complex process of acquisition, and predict L2 speakers' proficiency. The significance attributed to fluency in these areas explicates the research attention paid to it over the past decades. An important area of development in this regard is L2 assessment in which fluency is recognised as a key underlying construct of spoken language ability by international language tests (e.g., IELTS, TEEP, APTIS) and language benchmarks (e.g., CEFR). Many high-stakes tests of English and other languages include fluency in their rating scales, with the earliest on record tracing back to the 1930s – the College Board's English Competence Examination (1930) in America. Including fluency as a fundamental aspect of speaking ability in the rating scales, rating descriptors, and rater training materials, either as an independent criterion or combined with others (e.g., delivery), has become common practice in language testing over the past decades. What has made assessment of fluency even more appealing to researchers and test providers in recent years is the objectivity and reliability of its measurement and its compatibility with the technological developments in automated assessment of speaking. Fluency is now largely recognised as a construct that can be efficiently and reliably assessed in automated assessment of spoken language ability and used to predict proficiency (de Jong, 2018*; Ginther et al., 2010*; Kang &amp; Johnson, 2021*; Tavakoli et al., 2023).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47770,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Language Teaching\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Language Teaching\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0261444824000417\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Language Teaching","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0261444824000417","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

长期以来,研究语言流利性一直是第二语言研究的核心,因为人们认为,流利性是二语习得成功的缩影,是有效沟通的特征,阐明了复杂的习得过程,并预测了二语使用者的熟练程度。流利性在这些领域的重要性说明了过去几十年来对它的研究关注。在这方面发展的一个重要领域是第二语言评估,在国际语言测试(如雅思,TEEP, APTIS)和语言基准(如CEFR)中,流利性被认为是口语能力的关键基础结构。许多高风险的英语和其他语言测试都将流利度纳入其评分范围,最早的记录可以追溯到20世纪30年代——美国大学理事会的英语能力考试(1930年)。在过去的几十年里,在语言测试中,将流利度作为口语能力的一个基本方面纳入评分量表、评分描述符和评分培训材料中,无论是作为一个独立的标准,还是与其他标准(如交付)相结合,都已经成为一种普遍的做法。近年来,使流利度评估对研究人员和测试提供者更具吸引力的是其测量的客观性和可靠性,以及它与口语自动评估技术发展的兼容性。流利性现在在很大程度上被认为是一种结构,可以在口语能力的自动评估中有效可靠地进行评估,并用于预测熟练程度(de Jong, 2018*;Ginther et al., 2010*;康,约翰逊,2021 *;Tavakoli et al., 2023)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessment of second language fluency

Investigating speech fluency has, for a long time, been at the core of second language (L2) studies, as fluency is believed to epitomise successful acquisition of L2, characterise effective communication, elucidate the complex process of acquisition, and predict L2 speakers' proficiency. The significance attributed to fluency in these areas explicates the research attention paid to it over the past decades. An important area of development in this regard is L2 assessment in which fluency is recognised as a key underlying construct of spoken language ability by international language tests (e.g., IELTS, TEEP, APTIS) and language benchmarks (e.g., CEFR). Many high-stakes tests of English and other languages include fluency in their rating scales, with the earliest on record tracing back to the 1930s – the College Board's English Competence Examination (1930) in America. Including fluency as a fundamental aspect of speaking ability in the rating scales, rating descriptors, and rater training materials, either as an independent criterion or combined with others (e.g., delivery), has become common practice in language testing over the past decades. What has made assessment of fluency even more appealing to researchers and test providers in recent years is the objectivity and reliability of its measurement and its compatibility with the technological developments in automated assessment of speaking. Fluency is now largely recognised as a construct that can be efficiently and reliably assessed in automated assessment of spoken language ability and used to predict proficiency (de Jong, 2018*; Ginther et al., 2010*; Kang & Johnson, 2021*; Tavakoli et al., 2023).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Language Teaching
Language Teaching Multiple-
CiteScore
7.10
自引率
2.80%
发文量
46
期刊介绍: Language Teaching is the essential research resource for language professionals providing a rich and expert overview of research in the field of second-language teaching and learning. It offers critical survey articles of recent research on specific topics, second and foreign languages and countries, and invites original research articles reporting on replication studies and meta-analyses. The journal also includes regional surveys of outstanding doctoral dissertations, topic-based research timelines, theme-based research agendas, recent plenary conference speeches, and research-in-progress reports. A thorough peer-reviewing procedure applies to both the commissioned and the unsolicited articles.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信