{"title":"理解二语习得研究中的熟练程度评估实践:来自研究者信念和实践的见解","authors":"Hae In Park, Megan Solon, Kwangmin Lee","doi":"10.1017/s0272263125101058","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>While much discussion has focused on what researchers do and should do in second language proficiency assessment, less attention has been given to why persistent trends continue. This study investigated second language acquisition (SLA) researchers’ beliefs, reported practices, and decision-making rationales regarding proficiency assessment. Using an online survey, we collected responses from 111 SLA researchers. Findings revealed that while researchers generally endorsed recommended methodological standards, practical constraints—such as time, accessibility, and ease of administration—frequently influenced their reported practices. A consistent belief–practice gap emerged across several key areas. Notably, reduced redundancy tests were rated favorably for both validity and practicality, reflecting a growing shift toward efficient, validated tools. These findings suggest that although methodological awareness is high, practical barriers continue to challenge the adoption of more rigorous proficiency assessment practices in SLA research.</p>","PeriodicalId":22008,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Second Language Acquisition","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Understanding proficiency assessment practices in SLA research: Insights from researcher beliefs and practices\",\"authors\":\"Hae In Park, Megan Solon, Kwangmin Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/s0272263125101058\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>While much discussion has focused on what researchers do and should do in second language proficiency assessment, less attention has been given to why persistent trends continue. This study investigated second language acquisition (SLA) researchers’ beliefs, reported practices, and decision-making rationales regarding proficiency assessment. Using an online survey, we collected responses from 111 SLA researchers. Findings revealed that while researchers generally endorsed recommended methodological standards, practical constraints—such as time, accessibility, and ease of administration—frequently influenced their reported practices. A consistent belief–practice gap emerged across several key areas. Notably, reduced redundancy tests were rated favorably for both validity and practicality, reflecting a growing shift toward efficient, validated tools. These findings suggest that although methodological awareness is high, practical barriers continue to challenge the adoption of more rigorous proficiency assessment practices in SLA research.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22008,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in Second Language Acquisition\",\"volume\":\"3 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in Second Language Acquisition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263125101058\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Second Language Acquisition","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263125101058","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Understanding proficiency assessment practices in SLA research: Insights from researcher beliefs and practices
While much discussion has focused on what researchers do and should do in second language proficiency assessment, less attention has been given to why persistent trends continue. This study investigated second language acquisition (SLA) researchers’ beliefs, reported practices, and decision-making rationales regarding proficiency assessment. Using an online survey, we collected responses from 111 SLA researchers. Findings revealed that while researchers generally endorsed recommended methodological standards, practical constraints—such as time, accessibility, and ease of administration—frequently influenced their reported practices. A consistent belief–practice gap emerged across several key areas. Notably, reduced redundancy tests were rated favorably for both validity and practicality, reflecting a growing shift toward efficient, validated tools. These findings suggest that although methodological awareness is high, practical barriers continue to challenge the adoption of more rigorous proficiency assessment practices in SLA research.
期刊介绍:
Studies in Second Language Acquisition is a refereed journal of international scope devoted to the scientific discussion of acquisition or use of non-native and heritage languages. Each volume (five issues) contains research articles of either a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-methods nature in addition to essays on current theoretical matters. Other rubrics include shorter articles such as Replication Studies, Critical Commentaries, and Research Reports.